Rebuilding America (part 1)

"The modern American family is the smallest and most barren family that has ever existed. ... Many (of us) have never had the least sense of family. I remember sitting down to Christmas dinner 18 years ago in a communal house ... with about 12 others my own age, all of whom had no place they wished to go home to. That house was my first discovery of harmony and community with fellow beings. ... But more, these gatherings have been people spending more time with each other....and without tv, they know each other better than most American families .... it becomes possible to predict the emergence of groups who live by mutual illumination, who have seen themselves as of one mind and one flesh -- the "single eye" of the heretical English Ranters; the meaning of sahajiya, "born together," -- the name of the latest flower of the Tantric community tradition in Bengal ....

"Even in centers of 19th century materialism there were dedicated seekers -- some within Christianity, some in the arts, some within occult circles.Witness William Butler Yeats. My own opinion is that we are now experiencing a resurfacing (in a specifically "American" incarnation) of the Great Subculture ..... This subculture of illuminati has been a powerful undercurrent in all higher civilizations ... In the West, it has been represented largely by a string of heresies starting with the Gnostics, and on the folk level by "witchcraft." ...This view has been harshly suppressed in the past as threatening to both Church and the State. Today, on the contrary, these values seem almost biologically essential to the survival of humanity.

It is actually one of the possible futures open to us. To those who stubbornly argue "it's against human nature," we can only patiently reply that you must know your own nature before you can say this. Those who have gone into their own natures deeply have, for thousands of years now, been reporting that we have nothing to fear if we are willing to train ourselves, to open up, explore and grow."

-Gary Snyder; Earth House Hold; 1968

producing dysfunctional americans-the fundie way-
free thinking is a sin

They gather together and avoid the world because they want their lives to be filled with Glory of God, which can only be done by living their lives according to God's Will.

They often have large families that live closely together. The children are highly supervised and home schooled. Their friends, if they're allowed to socialize, live the same lifestyle and believe the same things. It's a very intimate arrangement.

It makes it that much easier for the patriarch to control the family unit.

strictly literal sense, or restrict the possibilities to the previous errors in thinking of others, that is indeed true. You are correct in saying that there are examples that include a patriarchal control; likewise, there are numerous examples with no patriarchal control. If we take the the writings of Lewis Henry Morgan, which were based on the family patterns of the Iroquois -- who were matriarchal -- we see that there are many possibilities available to us. (Engels' based the foundation of his "Orgins of the Family, Private Property and the State" on Morgan's "Ancient Society.")

The other issue you raise, regarding a withdrawal from the greater society, is also but one option. It generally starts out positive, then becomes negative. It runs the risk of "the Choosen People" foolishness, and that always invites illusion.

We have other options. Just one example: the "values" issue played a significant role in this election. The democratic left was painted as a group with no religious or spiritual values; in fact, we are viewed by the conservative right as being hostile to religion. We could take a look at how this plays on DU. Clearly, a significant disagreement occures on most threads regarding religion/spirituality on this forum. Perhaps rather than focusing on what separates us, we need to practice focusing on that which we have in common.

I suspect all of us believe that little children should be fed and clothed. That can be a religious belief; it can be a spiritual belief; and atheists are just as likely to believe it. When we make the conscious effort to concentrate on what we have in common, rather than be distracted by the insignificant things that divide us, we can become immune to the republican's tactics.

Obviously, this type of thinking will only appeal to a small number of DUers to begin with. The idea would not be to separate, but to try to expand on what we all may share in common. There is strength in unity; that strength can be the power to, as Jesus taught, be the yeast that helps society to rise to new potentials.

part II.


dp

I was sort of hoping more people might read this. Maybe it's too soon after the election.

more, please!

equal sides of the same coin.

Toss the coins out there Waterman.

dp

to note that in the two days since the election, we have had a number of people on DU post information about the growing divide that they have experienced with parents, siblings, spouses, co-workers, neighbors, and people that they are in close contact in their daily life. We are experiencing a huge cultural divide, which I think combines many of the conflicts of the 1860s and 1960s. But the distinctions are not so clear-cut. It's not as simple as race, religion, or economics .... although those issues are all involved.

Snyder's book hinted at what was the best potential in the counter culture in that era. It's no coincidence that the people who really were able to reach a religious or spiritually-based higher ground in the 1960s tend to be involved -- deeply -- in the progressive politics of today. It doesn't mean that they still dress or wear their hair the same way, (though they might) because they can own a business and still hold the same values they did 35 years ago.

The internet allows people to experience some of the sense of community that Snyder writes about. DU is a good example: my guess is that many of us know more about each other's political, cultural, and spiritual values than do many modern families. In '68, at the end of the industrial age, the family sructure was still "nuclear." Our high-tech society has the splintered and fractured family systems, which fit the needs of the business world as well as the nuclear family fit the industries, or as the extended family fit the agricultural society, or the clan/tribe fit hunters & gatherers. We witness the progression in isolation experienced by members of each; the price our society pays can be measured most accurately by examining how little our society invests in the very young and the very old.

It's no surprise that the families that we identify as "conservative republican" cling to a sterile form of "christianity" that does not allow for individual experience. I'm all for respecting the experiences of the tribal people who herded sheep in the Middle East 2500 years ago, but I think that we need to consciously make a reconnection to that energy force that supports life on earth .... all life on earth .... no matter what name we want to apply to it. We need to experience it, and realize that life force is not "dead."

I do not believe that the conservative republican social structure has much potential for offering that experience. They are only dimly aware at best that the old stories in that good book involve the rural tribes trying to break free of the restrictive oppression of the kings of the urban centers. George Bush defines what they were religiously opposed to.

Perhaps we need to redefine society ... including redefining our goals. When we focus on what our goals should be, we may find other tactics available to us to survive the onslaught that is going to occure, as evidenced by what we have seen in the past 48 hours.