When it comes to human behavior, things only change for the better when there is a lucid and unobstructed perception of what's going on.
Self-destructive behavior patterns only go away when there's a lucid and unobstructed perception of the previously unconscious psychological dynamics which were driving them.
Victims of abuse only end their abusive relationships when they obtain a lucid and unobstructed perception of the abusive dynamics as they truly are.
Toxic social dynamics like racism, sexism and homophobia only begin moving toward health when society collectively begins gaining a lucid and unobstructed understanding of how disordered and damaging those dynamics really are.
It only becomes unacceptable to have a totalitarian monarch who tortures and executes people without trial, murders anyone who speaks ill of him, and rules by divine right when society begins collectively gaining a lucid and unobstructed awareness of how ridiculous, unjust and unacceptable such models of government are.
Whether you're talking about individuals or humanity in its entirety, the story of human progress has always been a story of moving from blindness to seeing. From unawareness to awareness. From the lights in the room being off to the lights being switched on.
There is no progress without clear seeing. We cannot move in the direction of health and harmony if we cannot lucidly perceive the ways in which we are still sick and dysfunctional. We can't move forward if we're unaware of the specific ways in which we are stuck in place.
Most of us, on some level, want things in our world to change for the better. Some few others want things to stay the same, because the status quo happens to be treating them quite well thank you very much. The struggle between the deep desire of the many for healthy change and the corrupt desire of the few to maintain the status quo is the struggle between turning the lights on and keeping them off. Between wanting to become aware of the various ways we are stuck so that we can move forward, and wanting the light of awareness as far away from our stuck points as possible.
The struggle for our species, which is really the struggle for our very survival, is therefore between the many who desire truth and the few who desire confusion. We've got numbers and truth on our side, but they have power, wealth, and a remarkable knack for psychological manipulation.
We see this struggle playing out in many ways in our world right now. Between propaganda and those trying to learn and share the truth. Between the push for internet censorship and the fight against it. Between government secrecy and freedom of information. Between the campaign to imprison WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange for exposing US war crimes, and the campaign to free him.
On Monday January 4th a UK judge will be ruling on whether or not to allow the process of Assange's extradition to the United States to move forward. It's important for opponents of this extradition to be aware that the fight will not end at this time; there's still a gruelling appeals process to go through which could take 18 to 24 months or longer in the likely event that the incredibly biased judge overseeing the case rules against Assange.
So as we prepare for the next stage in this fight, it's important for us to be perfectly clear what's at stake here.
It is absolutely true that this case will have far-reaching implications for press freedoms around the world. The imperial narrative managers have been toiling for years to frame the persecution of Julian Assange as something other than what it is, but in reality this case is about whether the most powerful government in the world is allowed to extradite journalists anywhere on earth who expose its malfeasance. Whether or not the United States should be allowed to imprison journalists for exposing its war crimes.
If the US succeeds in normalizing the legality of extraditing any journalist anywhere in the world who exposes its wrongdoing, there will be a worldwide cooling effect on national security journalism which will greatly impede humanity's ability to form a lucid and unobstructed understanding of what's going on in the world. The largest power structure on earth will have succeeded in not just turning the lights off in the room, but in uninstalling the light switch.
There is no legal case in the world right now where the struggle for lucid and unobstructed seeing has so much on the line. For this reason, this isn’t just about journalism: we really are collectively deciding the fate of our species with our response to the prospect of Assange's extradition.
Are we going to allow the most powerful government on the planet to set a legal precedent which allows it to obstruct truth around the entire world? Or are we going to oppose this tooth and claw?
Are we going to allow power to remain corrupt and unaccountable? Or are we going to insist on our right to know what's going on?
Are we going to let them keep the lights off? Or are we going to turn them on?
Are we going to let the bastards lock us into an omnicidal, ecocidal status quo while they drive us at a rapidly accelerating pace toward extinction and dystopia? Or are we going to move toward the kind of lucid and unobstructed perception of our situation which will allow us to progress into a healthy world?
These are the questions that we are in the process of answering together. I hope we can get everyone to very seriously consider what they want their own answer to be.
Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, throwing some money into my tip jar on Patreon or Paypal, purchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my new book Poems For Rebels or my old book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.
How fucking prescient
and so bloody imminent
was that insightful scrawl
on a yellow brick wall…
Merry Crisis and a Happy New Fear
in retrospect, it would appear
that the scrawl artist was spot on
but let’s not forget that the contagion
not Covid, but the really dangerous one
that we should collectively shun
is the prevailing, engineered system
of endless, structural mayhem
designed with cruel deliberation
to run on fear and deprivation
allowing limitless accumulation
by the few, sans any real opposition.
So, the only New Year’s wish from me
Is that the many wake up and smell the coffee
join the resistance, become the resistance
to systemic oppression, stop sitting on the fence.
Fight for every dissident, political prisoner and whistleblower
Truth is a most potent weapon against oppressors in power
And a fundamental truth we can’t pretend not to see
is that all of us are in prison till Assange is free.
Hari Chathrattil, 31 December 2020
There is no doubt that under the present unjust circumstances, defending the status quo is siding with globalist totalitarianism. However, are there not other circumstances when defending the status quo (conservatism) is good? Suppose we have a society in which wage earners are paid 100% of the value they create, where "surplus value" is not captured by an elite? Suppose in that society wealth achieved through such labor is protected, but wealth is not allowed to influence politics and corrupt the government? Would not conservatism be good?
Even today, some conservative values are good. There's a lot of evil in America's past, which needs to be acknowledged and rooted out, but there's also a lot of good in American's past and values that should be conserved or restored (usually thought of as reactionary, but what if those lost values were just and good). Change is not ALWAYS good, though I dare say there are more things in the US and Western culture that need to change than there are that should be preserved or restored.
I fear that assuming change is always good and preservation always bad is a bit divisive. What would be wrong in restoring US industrial capabilities, restoring jobs recently lost?