Overreaction and Tyranny

“Overreaction is reasonable in the face of plausible tyranny”

There has never been an action that has not remained
Its seeds are the color in which the tapestry of the very universe is painted
Do not let them tell you that which you are and do fall into the void
For this is the serpent’s trick, to annihilate you, forever and always
Though such a thing cannot be done, it can be believed
Believe it not Dearest, for when we glance into the limitless night, and the stars shine like a silver sheet-there art thou, and so it is with all things, and so accept such Truth and walk forth brazenly
In remembrance of what must be done

In every life there comes a point in which we must face the existential question. What this means, to most, is “what does it mean to exist?”, “what does it mean to exist as me?” or something like this. That this happens individually, whether in some great, cataclysmic way, or quietly though no less deep, is irrelevant. That one takes upon themselves some mantle of self-determination is not the necessary outcome, to be sure, one can also acquiesce (though this requires their perpetual self-determination to deny it) to norms and this is probably the more true, if in regards to the most common.

Societies have to do this as well. Though, again, this affirmation of norms must be a constant by individuals, and enough individuals to give the imagery of a mass rather than a collection of affirmations of individuals. The reason it must be constant is the underlying Truth that all things are perpetually dynamic and the imagery of permanence is false both in the literal observations, let us say a Mountain, and in the social observations of ‘norms’. What overlay this dynamism is the social contract. It has to have the acquiescence, in the sense of a populace who believes in the Norms, or forced collusion (socially, economically, justice, and pure naked violence) in a populace that could resist, these can also go hand in hand with there being various constituents to every society.

There comes a time in the age of a Society where it must confront this existential question overtly. We are in one of those times. The power of dominance wishes, in one degree, to keep us asleep and those are the cries of, “You are overreacting,” “Women already have rights protected.”, “You’re just mad because…” These may come from our friends, or people we know, but if we examine their own lives there is typically a strong vested interested in keeping norms as they are. That these norms are not always interests in the sense that they will be ‘benefitted’ in a material way is true. The benefit, of, let's say, white women who voted for Mr. Trump (53% in fact) is that, in part, they do not have to align with what dominant society has deemed as ‘bad’ to put it simply; the people of color, the gays, the poor (even though they may be poor-the deep shame that this society puts on poverty is a crippling thing). They do not have to examine their own privilege and marginalization, and by denying their own marginalization, though it occurs blatantly, they can ignore their own privilege and subsequent responsibility. For that is what the Existential Question demands, really, is to understand “From which I come From” and then, “To what am I responsible”. If the answer is that “I come from that which is imputed/given” then the answer the the second is, “I am responsible in re-affirming the dominant norm”. If you suffer from marginalization then you have to be able to couch these imputed, dominant systems as a ‘permanent’ structure and that endurance becomes a badge of honor (this is different, but similar, to the apathy of despair practiced by marginalized communities spoken of in the post The Activists Checklist), but is worn in the remembrance of enduring a dominant system by your own choice, not the badge worn for the resilience born in confrontation with the systems of annihilation.

In the face of the overt systems of annihilation, those that would destroy that which is humane, the basis for that which we measure our humanity, be they commandments to love our neighbor, or realizations of the ineffable nature of Self and Other that then arises the responsibility for opposing that which opposes this realization of ineffability, there can be no overreaction. The overt nature of oppression, be it slavery or genocide, be it the beginnings to the direction of these things, be they decisions where our human mind can determine plausible destinations that rhyme with these atrocities, we must absolutely push to the furthest measure of our abilities. For, we must know, Tyranny does not sleep, and when it moves from its subversive, covert, dog-whistle methods into the hissing hydra, it is no time to forget or to rest, for it will not.

Activist Checklist to Go! Part 1

1. “Overreaction is reasonable in the face of plausible Tyranny”

Let them see you now, the doubt that fills you is the void that must be filled with your duty
It has been laid fallow for too long and it must be picked up in full measure now
All systems are contracts in which parties must agree to
This, you must remember, for they cannot rule without your consent
Once this is realized One can seek out the Two
And together they remake that which was always malleable but
Which They expended so much in order to perpetrate its inherent indominatibility
But forget not that malleability is not benevolent nor wicked
And They too know this and seek to exploit it

Wait no more, for sloth is not Their fault

They will come for you in 4 ways.  And they are coming overtly and in strength. These are the 4 ways in which they will come for you. The first they differentiate you morally/ethically (biologically), second they will try to make you illegal, third they will systematically attack you economically, and finally they will resort to overt violence. That all of these are forms of violence is true, that all of these can, in some circumstances change position is also true, but these are the major ways in which a dominant system will attack movements of full recognition, and I wrote them in large general descriptions. Also, in general we must understand, from all marginalized communities, that at heart of the matter, it is the cry of recognition of the full humanity of people. That these (the cries), in many ways, are systemically and are overlapping, in different ways is true too, but the catalyst to all of them is the thrust toward full recognition, and the thrust in the other direction, by dominance, is toward partial human status. We see this in the ‘one drop’ rules, the anti-interracial marriage laws, the racial laws determining citizenship, etc.

Apathy and despair are the tools of the Master
The way that we subvert our own actions

1. We have been conditioned through marginalization and privilege in their permanence of the dominant system. We believe it to be inherent rather than a contract because of this we fall into the apathy of despair.
1. How the ‘feeling’ will arise in the person trying to Raise Up will be the feelings of ridiculousness, the feeling of the uselessness for actions against the Leviathan, when one has been normed, taught, educated in a system the emotional reaction to step out of it is analogous to a fish that leaves its school, the wildebeest that leaves its herd, it is a feeling of deep vulnerability. This is why you must seek the Two. This feeling will be more pronounced in the more privileged, in the less privileged to the Wretched of the Earth, it arises as a deep dread of impending doom, this arises from the extrapolation of lived experience in a dominant system-but increased in orders of degree. We know that movements toward the self-determination of marginalized peopled does not go unpunished. We see this imputed by dominant systems throughout history such as the bit that women who ‘spoke to much’ had to wear, or the torture of slaves for minor infractions, to what the War on Drugs enacted-it was to force acquiescence to the system.
2. Apathy of Despair
1. This arises in two general ways
1. If you have had the privilege of a formal education then this apathy is born of the mistake of seeing systems of dominance as inherently real.
1. The arrogance that arises from this is that which arises in those that believe that they can see the ‘truth’ but others cannot. Their inaction is  ‘supported’ by oceans of words that justify their inaction and position of apathy. This is the flipped side of the coin of the apathetic dominant participator who participates in the dominant cultural norms because they believe the system to be real and revel in their active participation of it.
2. The second is those who have not had the privilege to a formal education which forms an apathy of endurance
1. Endurance is arisen as the only option despite how oppressive the system gets. Many times the oppression and endurance to it is shown as a measure of acceptance of divine decree. It does not take into effect the nature of Dominance which uses (as stated in the Letters of Discontent) faith (not Faith) to subjugate (though Faith can liberate). At heart, those who fall under this category, believe in the inherency of the oppressive system and uses prodigious strength to endure. Even when the systems no longer seeks to just oppress but annihilate.
1. Great fear is the usual outcome of this, especially by those who have children who have class migrated or children have (or are on the path to) that seek liberation. They both have the fear of the consequences of systemic blowback and that of divine retribution.
1. This group becomes immensely powerful once aggregated because they have this developed strength of endurance. Once the malleability of systems is forced to be able to be witnessed, they are nigh unstoppable-this is why peasant lead revolutions are so powerful (ask China)

I will write in the next post above how to “Overreact” to “Plausible Tyranny” with suggestions. This was just a brief way to be able to intellectually and emotionally check oneself and where we are at. If you want I can send you a more detailed essay called the Letters of Discontent that outline these and more.

Be Well
Guru Dorje

Joy in the Struggle

...What did you think, that joy / was some slight thing?-Mark Doty’s Visitation

When I work with people who both navigate and dominate systems, as most of us have opportunities to do, when I work with those who are marginalized and are oppressed by systems, as most of us have the opportunities to experience, there comes upon me, often, a sense of disembodiment. It arises from my experience of having, throughout my life, been the Stranger, and having never been brought to heel as the Neighbor. This Stranger lives within me, too, an embodied Spirit, who is attached to the embodied Spirit of the Neighbor, in many ways, like some tumor that has grown veins to attach to the body proper. But these highways of intersection are no measure of their similarity as they are forgotten and never minded, it is the the bulk that is experienced, the heap of oddities and unmatched corners.

In this way, that I wish to speak to you, is the idea of Joy, in this world, in this experience, this subversive nature of being, this tumor in this existence. Like much, in this particular world, we have made the mistake of words and inherency, we have mistaken words for Reality rather than an expression of a reality. I have written of this before, I do not want to hash it out again, but in short it is the belief that, in this case, there must be a choice between Joy and Suffering. I capitalize Suffering here, because I am writing this for those who have reached a place where the satellite view of the individual reveals an ‘absurdity’ that is the chaotic, meaningless, interactions of ‘life’ which themselves is evidence of an uncaring world. These are the ones who gasp at the leviathan that breaches the dark and bemoans the depth, breadth, of the ocean and offers its Will to the beast that inhabits such a place. They are left with, only, the arrogance of ‘sight’-They Suffer. This arrogance, is matched by those that also believe in the Ocean and Leviathan, but they swim with the beast, they mimic the beast, and revel in their ability to shame and ridicule those on the shore, they swing their terrible tails and giggle as the waters pull Them into the deeps whether they are the ones that Suffer or suffer.
Joy, to these men, is a trifling, a trinket, that in the commerce of the Arrogant is a glass bead to the golden coins of invasion and annihilation. Joy is the effect of a sucker’s bet and can be had only by the fools and the ignorant, and, unlike what you may have thought I’d point to, they are right, as Joy is often thought of.

Joy is the forgetfulness, the willful ignorance of Being, as we know it, it is the usurpation of, let us say, pleasure for Happiness. That they Can, pleasure and happiness, arise together does not mean they are inextricably linked. Any glance into those who have born horrific physical pain and, who have, within this suffering expressed an almost unimaginable happiness, can prove the ability to cleave these two.

The error lay in fundamental ideas of Reality, that we think because we Suffer, that there is an Ocean, that Leviathans and their Near Twins stalk those waters, makes it that we must, in the end, be bereft of Joy, if we Know. We believe that knowing is mutually exclusive to Joy. This is not so.

Perhaps it is because I am not of the West but live within the West, and there are deep philosophical differences at the core, though most of it overlaps. We can see this in the common understanding of Camus’ “Absurd” though he did not like that title nor Existentialist, and rather frowned on the idea of a meaningless world, that said, he is thought of as a person that showed the absurdity of life, that we care so much for our lives in an uncaring world. And I can understand this through the lens of this society that is so powerfully Self focused. And, even as I say this, the typical societal mind goes to the idea of a non-self focused society but in the lens of an nihilistic annihilation of the self which is also a symptom of the wrong view.

I have found useful is to draw a diagram. Usually I use a triangle with where the top point is usually being open, then I show that the base is also permeable. This self is rested upon what Camus calls the ‘absurd’ but it is not ‘absurd’ in the sense that it does not have an expression; much like how Chaos Theory does not fit the common definition of Chaos. I like to use the Ineffable for the Absurd when I look at it, it takes into account the perpetual dynamism of nature, but this dynamism, in itself, is not permanent or cannot be because of its very nature, though, it can be expressed to be ‘permanent’ because of its perpetual changing-this is hard to express because perpetual dynamism thwarts the ability to define which needs to have permanent variables. This dynamism is the basis for the malleability of the world in which we inhabit. How this world is formed is through the base of the triangle, which are our values/principles/whatever you call your initial premise of Right and Wrong. The Nature of nature moves from the ineffable to the effable through this pathway which from these initial premises arrives at materialized, systemic structures. I am not saying that there are not Physical Law of the universe but I am saying that Humans (and perhaps Animals, my biology is not deep enough to have studied this) do not experience the world through these Laws, we experience them through our principles. This does not mean that our Experience is less than, just as the physical laws produce a myriad, perhaps uncountable (and now the research on multiverses and the possible infinite amount of Physical Laws and universes) expressions of them, so to our Experiences do too. That the Human Being (and perhaps others) live in an expressed Universe does not diminish its ineffable worth and value, just as this expression does not diminish that of Physical Laws, in fact, they are of the same cloth. If we are scientists and believe in the atomistic, material causal chain, that leads up to Human thought we see that the Physical Laws were precursors to this Human expression. They are not separate, they are together, inexpressibly linked, just as that which is Ineffable must produce (because of its dynamism), and must be the root of Systems because of its malleability.

This brings us back to Joy. Joy is an expression of an Authentic life, a full and aware life, of which we see a difference between the Western and Eastern traditions; whereas Kant, says that the Noumena cannot be experienced and is the realm of the Divine, the East says that it can be experience though not expressed in exactitude (because of its Nature of dynamism), and in this an awareness can be achieved for transcendence. But this is beside the point, really, even in the Western sense it can be pressed deeply against, this boundary. That this boundary can be known as a person without sight would know the contours of a face, and if this face were a map the reason speaks of a leap of faith for Reason will have met its conclusion and fulfillment.

Joy is to be had not despite the Suffering that is the Nature of living, but because of it, within it. The Ineffable is the Nature of things, the Human expression is that which comes about from our principles that arise from this confrontation with this Ineffable, if what we see is chaos and coldness, then our expressions will be of this; if, instead, we see the malleability and Freedom of Nature, then our expressions arise from the Imagination of the perfect (perfect Love, etc). That Joy in its real forms arises in all of our lives, in part, the beautiful form, the touching service, is, to me, evidence, circumstantial to be sure, that the Freedom of Nature is authentically expressed as Loving, and that despite our idolatrous fancy of the Coldness of Nature it still arises, is again evidence of its validity.

Joy is not the slip of a thing, weak or a symptom of ignorance, it is the subversive expression of Truth, and absolutely is a tool of resistance to dominant norms. It is not separate from our understanding or Truth, in fact it is an effect of understanding and Truth. It should not be run from, nor sought after like some bauble, but it should be lived in our own journeys toward our most authentic expressions of our duties. And, I have found, as we do this it arises more frequent in our duties, sometimes in those small ways that one would not think of, the moss in the crook of a winter bare bush, the person who bends down to pick up litter not their own, or in things we deem big, like resistance in the face of tyranny. It is the Time we are in that tells us which we should do. And only in picking up this mantle are we able to express this type of full Joy rather than the pale similitude that we take for it, if we take it at all.