Broadening Wisdom

[Rhett]

.

At the beginning of the year 2000 i bought a share in a newly formed land-sharing co-operative, and have been involved in its development ever since. Over the last year i have been establishing the site i own on it, and have been attending to the community's ills.

Since my arrival 12 months ago i have been speaking and writing out of necessity for a sane and fair existence in the co-op. We have one member in particular that is very rotten. He put forth beneficial visions and time and energy from 2001 to 2003, but used it to secure a position of absolute power, pushing people around, and out, as he chose. He then lost some degree of face and was replaced, but after a short break worked to regain what he had lost.

Just after i arrived he achieved this, as well as re-admitting a previous member that soon performed as his 'thug'. Seeing how depraved they were i saw no future for myself in the co-op unless i made amends. After a long process i saw need for us to give the thug the choice to either sort himself out or be expelled, a decision which will be discussed this sunday at meeting. Under threat of losing his thug our chief protagonist recently posted writings at our community focal point, and it is these that i have responded to.

There is so much more for me to say to fill in the picture, but thankfully much of it has already been written. In time i may compile it and make it available.


Here it is;


Mudgebah – The year that was 2005 – Written by a sane person


As an involved and responsible member of Mudgebah i have chosen to respond to a recent proliferation of propaganda, despite the material being presented to a minority, most sans the name of the author. Given how easily people’s base natures can be appealed to and how easy it is in today’s society for psychopathic individuals to prosper and hold power, i consider it important that i upturn the twisted views expressed. I hope that many can resonate with its portrayal of the truth. I hope that you are not too comfortable and weak to look after our present and future.


I shall start by addressing the material titled “The year that was 2005”.

The author begins by highlighting the higher than normal turnover of co-op administrators, in attempt to paint the current board and community as dysfunctional, and create an opening within you for his manipulation and power motives. I refute his tenuous hypothesis. Yes, there has been dysfunction amongst the administrators and board, severe levels of dysfunction and destruction, but this has been within and resulting from the actions of the author and his friends. We are going much better now because they are no longer in positions of responsibility and influence. As much as this community is continuing to be affected by the psychoses of the author, by no means is it entirely dysfunctional. There have actually been some very beneficial performances, more so of late. My picking up the pieces of the treasury and bringing it close to excellence, and my social reform, and Roy’s handling of the secretary’s role are possibly the most important and commendable of them. We are slowly lifting the community out of the mud.

Most members of Mudgebah are divided socially into two camps, and the impropriety is coming from one of them. That impropriety and unconscious behaviour is the main dividing element at play, and the main blockage to our renewel. That camp is led by the author, whose actions have been detrimental to the co-operative for a number of years. His side launches unceasing tribal warfare in an effort to appease their insecurities, whilst the other works for the best of all despite being under constant vicious attack. How noble they are indeed. The author and his people define themselves through blind opposition to the groups around them. They are mindlessly antagonistic, scratching for an identity in a world of people that are ever so much like them.

We have indeed had three secretaries during 2005, firstly Tony, who was sacked and smeared for Craig and Larry’s political gain, replaced in-house by Michael, who acted inappropriately then dropped-out showing little commitment. Tony was then exonerated and reinstated, putting in a strong performance as usual and despite not being given a handover, then at the AGM Roy took over and has shown similar dedication, fulfilling the role in no uncertain manner.

In respect to the treasury, we first had Larry and Ken. Ken put what effort he could into sorting out the treasury but perhaps understandably neglected to take it over from Larry (as he should have) given how great that task would be. Larry then quit in April to the tune of a petty personality clash with Tony, and did his darn best to make life hard for myself who took it over, scrambling and deleting records, cover-ups, set-ups, temporarily and permanently withholding information, inadequate record-keeping, etc. At the AGM at my suggestion and encouragement John took on the treasury, but could not handle the pressure of the job in the battleground environment that Mudgebah is, being attacked in a calculated manner in his weak spots by unscrupulous members. Tony then took over, showing once again how responsible he is.

In January Tony was our tractor co-ordinator, but was shafted from the role in a similar manner as he was the secretary’s role. Justin was appointed and showed us how to be as self-serving as possible, then quit in wild histrionics when we tried to help him do it properly and fairly. Tony then took it back on and tried to clean up the mess amid considerable subversive pressure. At the AGM Steve accepted the role but put in a mixed performance, installing a small but usable shed on the one hand, whilst neglecting to address maintenance, unpaid usage and training on the other. He then quit for no stated reason, seemingly preferring instead to complete his house. Marcus graciously put up his hand.

Now onto our newsletter co-ordinators. We started with Astrid, who dropped off in concert with Michael, and since then all newsletters have been produced by either Marcus or myself. Christine was appointed newsletter co-ordinator at the AGM but quickly showed her personal attachment to Justin by attempting to subvert proper process and communications to members, and in shame chose to quit. She later quit from the directorship, in denial of Justin’s destructiveness.

As you can see a number of directors have quit, and in most cases thank god and good providence for that. Or thank me. It is those people that we need to draw attention towards in order to determine how this co-op can move forward if they remain so compromised.

The author then tries to generate interest in the community from non-local members, suggesting that the community may be in dire straits by the time they move here if they do not involve themselves soon. I do hope they heed his call, and help us deal with the people that are causing our dire straits, most pertinently the author himself.

The author then disparages written communication because others have used it to thwart his manipulations, and urges members to visit him and his crew in person so they can lie to you and not be held accountable for it. All while you stroll through their garden. I well know how much and how often they lie to people because i often come across people that have been set up, poor cherubs. They are in ever so much of a mess after being spun a story that appeals to their desires yet places them in stark contrast to reality. They become the pawns of these psychopaths, destroying on their behalf whilst being destroyed themselves. The author attempts to clear himself and others from their misdeeds by showing people their garden, putting on a smile, and laughing on cue, as if they have done nothing. How conniving, shallow and materialistic.

Nearing the end of his piece i see reason to respond to a point made regards the present board members putting in ‘many proposals and ideas grounded in fear and paranoia’. Considering the events that have occurred here in 2005 it is only sensible for there to be proposals that are preventative of future occurrences, and considering the magnitude of the events i am surprised to see that only a small proportion of the proposals are in fact focused on such. The only proposal i see based on fear and paranoia was put by one of the authors cohorts.

To respond to the final point, that reads “Don’t worry if you’re not ‘financially active’ – come and be active as a member of your co-operative!”, well, what do i need to say that is not already obvious. These people do not wish to pay because they are users, and so oppositional and power-hungry they’ll do anything, even starve the co-op of funds and a future, in an attempt to appeal to the base element and gain popularity. How cheap.



I shall now move on to the material titled “Mudgebah; Your Community, Your Future, Your Choice”.

Quote: “Over the last few months many of us living out here on the land have become increasingly concerned about the way Mudgebah is developing and feel it is time to encourage other members towards the possibility of a more positive vision for our future here. Following the publication of that disgusting diatribe, “The Mudgebah Grumble” several of us elected to step down from office bearer’s positions and in the spirit of democracy let others offer their services. Since then we have sat back and watched proceedings gradually slide downhill to a point where the entire Mudgebah Co-op Land Sharing community could be in danger of collapsing completely.”

Knowing the true course of events, i disagree with the analysis offered. However, i do not wish to refute the author’s preferences, they are his own as he has chosen. For him it would be a positive step for this co-op to once again be dominated by the drug trade, threats of violence and harassment.
Where i disagree most forcefully is the author’s statement that he and his clique “sat back and watched proceedings”. A quick read through the documents produced during this period reveals numerous acts of terrorism, and even those are merely the tip of the iceberg. Social chaos and friction has been repeatedly induced through highly distorted versions of events passed via private conversation and ‘victim appeals’ at community meetings.
As for the author’s opinion that proceedings are ‘sliding downhill towards a point of complete collapse’, i fail to see any evidence of that. Only if the current members keeping it afloat tire of continued bullshit such as this and the effects it has on people that they must mend, will the co-op be in danger of collapse at the hands of the author. However, i predict that the author will be extracted from the property in a straight jacket before such time comes to pass.


Moving on, i quote: “Since the introduction of the road levy (see resolution 7 for this GM) we have seen a gradual reduction in our base of financially active members and this has led to a “tyranny of the minority”. The co-op is now in the hands of a few who are deciding our fate at so called “community” meetings.”

It is true that there has been a reduction in active members since the introduction of the road levy, but the reasons for that are not so clear cut as you indicate. Many have not paid because you have convinced them not to in an effort to undermine the current board and the visionary member that instigated the levy. Not so hard a task as it’s a direct appeal to the base element. You have stated numerous times in private that you do not care for the SEPP 15 DA, and indeed, seem to prefer to thumb your nose at council and form a rebel stronghold. That is not the preference of the majority, so it is you that is corrupting the fate of our community. In an effort to hide this motive you actually put your hand up voting for the imposition of the road levy. A quick check of the minutes of this meeting reveals this fact.


Quote: “However reading through the minutes of any of these meetings reveals very little evidence that this current board’s time or energy is directed toward the idea of community. When they’re not threatening our members with forfeiture of their share they are engaging in campaigns of vilification against other members, while allocating funds to projects which line their own pockets. One current board member has already been given $600 of your money as a reward for maligning the ex-treasurer. At some of these meetings hours seem to be taken up with this same board member’s personal issues about his neighbour followed by discussions, with the apparent acquiescence of the board, on how he can continue to persecute this member. Is this what you, as a member believes the board was elected to do?”

My idea of community, which is backed by all successful communities throughout time, includes behaviour mindful of others and the good of all. Where behaviour contrary to this is present it is entirely community building to attend to it, to whatever extent is required, otherwise there will quickly be no community. As it is a stated preference of this co-op to obtain a SEPP 15 DA, and the road works to Illa-Langi need be done for this to occur, it follows that the members at these meetings will place focus on getting the road levy paid. Accusing me of getting paid $600 to malign the ex-treasurer is outright defamation. I was paid $600 to take the treasury from a pile of shit to something nearing excellence, only limited by the time available to me. I was not paid for the normal and current business of the time. I was paid $30 to write the report of what i did and found, which included plenty of dark spots. If these works were done by an external professional the cost would have been around $16 000. The auditor charges out at $143 per hour, times 120 hours, equals approx $16 000. There have been two lightning rods in this community in recent time, two centres for the discharge of the views and attitudes of the two camps. All issues between Justin and myself are both community social issues and co-op process issues. Even a casual analysis of the accounts of these strikes reveals a community basis, whether they related to or stemming from the working relationship between a co-ordinator and treasurer/director, or director and recalcitrant member, or whatever. Indeed we have lost what relationship we had due to the community’s needs.


Quote: “Further reading of these minutes shows only scant references to anything to do with the progress of the SEPP 15 DA or the roads to which you’ve all been asked to contribute. Over a year ago two reports in regard to our Illa-Langi access road were prepared by private consultants, on one of which $1000 of your money was spent. This access road is vital to the finalization of our DA approval, yet these reports have sat in the files ever since and have never been tabled for approval or work to proceed at any meeting.”

Poor chap, cognition and logic seem well beyond him. A look at the minutes of recent meetings reveals titbits of information from the council in regards our DA. It is by no means the fault of the members attending these meetings that we have not received a fulsome response from council on our DA. Indeed, i personally wonder whether council is delaying due to reports of the problems occurring here on Mudgebah. If that is stalling them then you, Mr Author, are directly to blame. I also wonder about your influence on Lyall, a member of the co-op that has been involved in the DA yet has been uncontactable and uncompliant since your annexure of him. As has been stated road works are not currently being instigated to Illa-Langi because sufficient funds are yet to be attained, and because we are waiting for a clear and detailed response from council. I shall also note that responsibility for these reside with the roads committee and DA committee, not the board or community meetings per se. Your comments reek of sour grapes and snottishness considering your choice to not contribute to these committees.



And now for the material titled “Mudgebah Co-op the year that was 2005 – a response by Craig”

Craig notes that his piece was largely extracted (and modified) from “Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors” by Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan.


Quote: “WARNING: The following document may disturb you. In a few reported cases, the readers’ mental well-being was affected and some serious thinking was induced.”

Seems we have clear acknowledgment that Craig finds thinking a form of mental disturbance. I see that ties in with his preference to use other’s material rather than try to think for himself.


As a preface to the remainder of my reply i note that Craig has titled his piece ‘a response’, yet neither does he indicate what it is a response to, nor does he make any definite points about anything, rendering it rather meaningless. The reader is thus forced to either discard his piece, or construe it with aid of hearsay or personal experience of events at Mudgebah. It shows a frightened approach, a hope of flitting away without scratch.


Quote: “Ethnocentrism is the belief that our group (whichever it happens to be) is at the focus of everything good and true, the centre of the social universe. We do things the way they were meant to be done.
Xenophobia is the fear and hatred of strangers. Their behaviour is wrong headed or weird or abominable. They do not have the same respect for life that we do. And anyway, they are out to get us! “Us against them” again.
Ethnocentrism and xenophobia are extremely common amongst birds and mammals. If some stranger who means harm to both of us confronts us, then we are motivated to put aside whatever differences lie between us, and together deal with the common enemy. Our chance – as individuals and as a group – of surviving an attack is greatly improved if we make common cause with our fellows.”

The example given is not of ethnocentrism or xenophobia, as there is indication of a genuine cause for concern. The example is of a logical and reasonable response to the “stranger who means harm to both of us”.



Quote: “The existence of common enemies make the social machinery purr.”

This is sometimes the case and sometimes not. In groups of ‘animals’ that are warlike the presence and focus upon a common enemy will in some manner improve the local social climate, as they will cease their hostilities with each other. In groups that are relatively harmonious, the presence of a “stranger who means harm to both of us” will only create a drain on the social machinery.


Quote: “Those groups that incline to xenophobic paranoia might gain a cohesive advantage over groups that are initially more realistic and carefree. If you’ve exaggerated the threat, at least you’ve reduced internal tensions in your group; and if the threat is greater than estimated, your preparedness is higher. As long as the social costs stay within reasonable bounds, it may become a successful survival strategy. So there is a kind of contagion about xenophobia.”

I have seen you, Craig, utilise and exhibit xenophobic paranoia. Having personally been exposed to you presenting overstated and falsified versions of events, and having come across numerous people that you have used this technique to set-up, i have seen you at times to have gained social advantage. And your techniques have a certain contagion amongst your followers and victims, who i have also seen exhibiting this strategy. Indeed, i wrote about this in the much lauded “Mudgebah GrrRumble”.

Here is a quote from the GrrRumble that was a response to an article you printed in the March 2005 newsletter; “Looking now at the next article, the "Director's Report by Craig Singlemean", it most definitely isn't a balanced and clear report of the friction that occurred, and why it occurred, at the February board meeting. And interestingly, neither does it purport to be. It is unashamedly a vitriolic attack upon certain members in an attempt to discredit their standing in the community, done under the auspices of it being an important effort to 'prevent further instances of abuse' - the occurrence of which Craig neglects to give us any details of. The "report" is obviously very selective and biased, with a number of specific inclusions, exclusions, and suggestions, done so as to give the reader a certain impression. Like a magician he tries to deceive the reader; to lead them to believe a version of events - through suggestion - that didn't actually occur. He rarely openly states the impressions he attempts to weave upon the reader so as to leave little trace for investigative enquiry, and because his primary aim is to instil an emotional bias in the reader against the so named perpetrators. Interestingly, one of Craig's greatest joys in life is magic, which is none other than the art of deception.”


Quote: “If you were to journey into the abstract world of population genetics, gene frequency and evolution of life on this planet you will see this basic survival strategy (incomplete isolation) crop up time and time again. In short, this is: form small semi-isolated groups as the sub-structure of larger populations; encourage ethnocentrism and xenophobia, in other words – devise your own culture. Behavioural differences eventually lead to genetic differences, and vice versa....
So next time you hear a raving demagogue counselling hatred for other, slightly different group of humans, for a moment at least see if you can understand there problem: They are heeding an ancient call that – however dangerous, obsolete and maladaptive it may be today – once benefitted our species.”

It seems from this that you are awakening, but i remain unconvinced given your recent actions. This well describes the animal cunning you have inherited and are attempting to pass on to future generations.


Quote: “Finally a quote Erasmus Darwin (Charles’s Grandfather) “He who allows oppression – shares the crime.”

Unfortunately we not only have people too expedient, confused and cowardly to counter oppression, but also a large contingent that repeatedly fails to correctly identify it, yourself included Craig.



Let’s now talk about permaculture people

As i have come to understand it permaculture principles originally centred on permanent forms of agriculture, but were later expanded to a broader heading, that of permanent culture. To those people exhibiting a genuine permaculture orientation i would attribute the character qualities of foresight, clarity, consistency, non-attachment, observing, thinking, truthfulness, altruism, dedication, and masculinity. Shame i’ve met so few, if any of them. I find there are many that join the permaculture bandwagon yet only see and value a portion of it, a portion that in the overall picture may not be much better than a conventional lifestyle and attitude. Only through sustained thinking, through giving up all that one has taken for granted and held as basis for one’s very existence, does one have chance of making genuine inroads into a true permaculture mindset and practice.

This level of practise takes the individual far beyond conventional horizons, far beyond notions of gain and loss, father and mother, life and death, happy and sad, beautiful and ugly, leaving the mind free to follow reason and reason alone. If nature shows a coveting of resources, benevolence is sought, if nature shows harm, pure motives are sought, and so on. Dryness only exists in relation to wetness, abundance only exists in relation to poverty. Light follows dark like dark follows light, and the moon is another phenomena like any other.


Written by Rhett on 2/01/06.


.

[Kevin Solway]

I'm not so sure that permaculture has anything to do with truth and wisdom - at least, I don't think that was its intention.

Ideally everything should relate to truth and wisdom - like agriculture, forestry, business, etc. But in reality, they don't.

My understanding was that Mollison and his forebears intended "permaculture" to be truthful in relation to plant and food production, but didn't extend it much beyond that.

[williamashley]

How is one to know anything if they cannot be sure?

If one says they are unsure then all that is left backing that wisdom is luck or falicy.

I am not to say what is true, what is left is to decide what is posible?

Is this another way of making a prophet?

If one knows, then are they alive?

If one does not know, then are they anything more then dead to something else.


What is truth? What is wisdom.

Is it a personal experience or a social experience?

Is rhetorical definition of semantic qualities anything more then satisfaction on the pursuit, really though what is valued so much as to denote agreement of occurance, other then it being. What is true wisdom other then fullfillment of predefinition.

To say one is out of touch with reality would be to define a totalitarian model, everything is interconnected and everything is seperate, there are opposables and absolutes. Ultimatey in a psychosocial model there is the physicalist modaity and the more so existentialist modality.

All I know that the key wisdom is live and let live. Be master of yourself but cause no harm. Ethics is key.


Agriculture is a basis of the basis of materialist interactionism.. the requirement to foster and have interactive live symbiosis with the enviroment. The difference between a agriculture system or a H&Ging system is simplly that one you tend and the other you seek. Civilization itself is tending, it is fundamentalism in many ways, it is the physicalism. Existentialists are seekers who have found. Those englightened existentialists. Of course tenders have the tendancy to tend seekers as well because tenders being physicalists make everything a physicalism including other persons. Bah.

Forestry is the same as agriculture but tends to be much slower.

business itself is not a physicalism alone it is an ethical post socialism based upon derivitives of states of war and the political assosiations in the civil conflict.

If you understand interactionism then you understand the theory of everything.

Of course i recognize that ksolway is a site admin, so perhaps inside his head reality isn't sane and in that case I don't know what I'm talking about.

As for permaculture, yes, resource management is wealth creation. If you value the health of the natural environment, very much 'the primal' wealth, that is if you are the outdoorsy type more so then the breath through ventalators floating through space type as a vactation to the corrosive photon flooder industrial rock.

Long post, I geuss I'm just not intellectual enough to understand what the author is attempting to point out. Or is it a red sweater post?

All good of course, it sounded like you read a book about time sharing property? ( I don't read much... was it a good read?)

[Kevin Solway]

How is one to know anything if they cannot be sure?

You can be sure.

Is it a personal experience or a social experience?

All experience is personal.

To say one is out of touch with reality would be to define a totalitarian model

Nature itself is totalitarian, is it not? It decides everything for you.

All I know that the key wisdom is live and let live.

If a bacterial disease is killing our bodies, then we are justified in taking antibiotics to kill the bacteria. There is no moral requirement for us to "let live".

[Rhett]

.

I'm not so sure that permaculture has anything to do with truth and wisdom - at least, I don't think that was its intention.

Ideally everything should relate to truth and wisdom - like agriculture, forestry, business, etc. But in reality, they don't.

My understanding was that Mollison and his forebears intended "permaculture" to be truthful in relation to plant and food production, but didn't extend it much beyond that.

The people that myself and others are finding grossly deficient are heavily attached to a narrow and common view of permaculture, and wrote another piece tacked all over the place inviting people to tour their permaculture gardens. That is why i wrote the last section. They think they're okay, in fact great people because they have built good food growing systems. They parade their gardens as elixirs of all, as symbols of success. Like most people they are very small minded. They hardly see character, and what they do see they try to squash and deny. They are in fact very socially unsustainable.

As i indicated permaculture did have its origins in plant and food production, but has been extended well beyond that, to the point where some of its protagonists are venturing into philosophy. Its a very open book thus far in these realms.

I have some appreciation for Bill Mollison though he is rather attached to life. He's a wild thinking guy that will enter a room full of influencial people and challenge their attachments, and has spoken openly about his disregard for women. His understanding of causality in respect to human settlements and nature generally is far above that of most.

Unfortunately, Bill's original offsider, David Holmgren, prefaced a recent book with wads of postmodernist crap. I suspect that Bill would be highly unapproving of this. Mr Author (Craig), who is actually a close neighbour of mine, lapped it up.

I had very little time in which to write my response and got a bit tired by the end. My thinking was that it would be clear that i was defining my personal understanding of what brings about permanent culture, permanent wise culture preferably. Certainly, it would be clear to the 'permaculturists' that would be reading my piece that i was not talking conventional permaculture, and they know i am not personally attached to permaculture or even speak much about it.

So perhaps i have created somewhat of a mash, but i'll think about it some more before forming a fulsome view. My response is obviously highly contextual, making more sense when presented in concert with the other documents i have written.

.

[Rhett]

.

Are you on drugs William?

.

[williamashley]

Should I be?

Can I save that as a posible defence?


Actualy I'm a tea totaler. But I am eating stew, if drugs are chemicals and the world is made of atoms and molecules to some degree, then would that not be to say were are drugs?

[williamashley]

I wonder if I'm a peper or a downer or a hallucieonygen

[Rhett]

.

I wonder if I'm a peper or a downer or a hallucieonygen

Looking at what you've written, e.g. "All I know that the key wisdom is live and let live. Be master of yourself but cause no harm. Ethics is key", i'd say just a typical egotist, drugging himself with fanciful notions of existence.

I noticed a mind kind-of ripping itself apart, lashing out one-liners to avoid sustained focus.

.

[williamashley]

I'm the one line master. I'm so quotable, they run out of paper.

Nah, I'm only anguishing when the needle goes up the buttox or they strap me down to tight, or stop feeding me my vegan diet.

I'm relatively at peace with life now, went through the, depression and anguish part in life, now I'm more the why am I bitter type, I know bitterness doesn't solve anything, if I ain't gonna kill them why not be productive elsewhere.

[williamashley]

To say one is out of touch with reality would be to define a totalitarian model

Nature itself is totalitarian, is it not? It decides everything for you.

That is a submisive imperative. One can say we suckle or we are indeed nature itself. The roman wolf comes to mind as a metaphore.

All I know that the key wisdom is live and let live.

If a bacterial disease is killing our bodies, then we are justified in taking antibiotics to kill the bacteria. There is no moral requirement for us to "let live".

[/quote]

ohhh, ok, that is a good one, personally, I don't take antibiotics. They are proven to be damaging except in life threatening positions. I'm a firm beleiver in health that when it is time to die it is time to die. I think that in many ways science is a perversion of a natural order, but it is the way it is, I'm not so much a ludite. I don't so much see ones own death as logical either, so I have no fear to self preservation. I do beleive in increase of wealth though and enjoyment of life, livelyhood through a healthy physical body is part of that. Morality is a self absolute, do right, however, morality leads to social death due to the requirement for difference in a society. Are we to be g-d alone, or practice ethics in a world of division. Why create a world of difference only to die. True that is the faith but are we to be a solitary monotheism or a socialite.

[Kevin Solway]

I'm a firm beleiver in health that when it is time to die it is time to die.

When it is time for you to die, it is most certainly time for you to die. By definition.

Are we to be a solitary monotheism or a socialite.

If you think for yourself you will be the former. But if you let society do your thinking for you, you will be the latter. By definition.

[williamashley]

And if they are the same?

[LooF]

be both.

[Rhett]

.

And if they are the same?

That cannot be.

There is only purity, or dissipation.

.