Constitutional Court of South Africa Case No. CCT 23/10 In the Matter Between: THE CITIZEN 1978 (PTY) LIMITED
And ROBERT JOHN MCBRIDE
And LARA JOHNSTONE
First Amicus Curiae
THE FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION INSTITUTE
Second Amicus Curiae
THE SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL EDITORS FORUM
Third Amicus Curiae
Subject to ‘Declaratory Order’: Ubuntu Brief of Amicus Curiae Lara Johnstone, Bushido Dischordian Futilitarian, In Support Of: Radical Honesty Common Sense Population Policy Social Contract Interpretations of Promotion of National Unity & Reconciliation Act, 34 of 1995 Andrea Muhrrteyn1
June 182, 2010
PO Box 5042, George East, 6539 Cel: (071) 170 1954 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
See: AA: A Purposive Sui Generis Absurd Necessity: Legal Interpretation: Decoding: SumMary Brincibia In 2002, the established Phi Day, or Golden Ratio Day (GRD), was June 18th, based on the number 0.6180339.... This was presumably chosen because f is elegantly enough 1 more than its reciprocal, as f = 1 + (1/f). Therefore 1/f, or F, has the same decimal nonrepeating irrational form, but doesn’t include the leading 1 to the left of the decimal. This yields 0.618..., the first three digits of which apply nicely to the Gregorian calendar as 6/18, June 18th.
Constitutional Court # 23-10 Human Consciousness Rule-of-Law Freedom Charter “I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason and intellect; has intended us to forego their use” – Galileo Galilei
Brincibia SumMary of a Bushido Dischordian Futilitarian
Lysistrata Tsedeq Rule-of-Five Eco-Family Consciousness
If the only ultimate check on the growth of population is misery, then the population will grow until it is miserable enough to stop its growth. If something else, other than misery and starvation, can be found which will keep a prosperous population in check, the population does not have to grow until it is miserable and starves, and it can live ecologically and lovingly, and be stably prosperous. To advocate for human rights, peace & social justice; while ignoring their ecological basis -- a stable human population at the eco-system’s long term carrying capacity -- is intellectual dishonesty & hypocrisy.
Mentem Non Fornam, Plus Pollere Andrea Alciato (January 12, 1492 – 1550), commonly known as Alciati (Andreas Alciatus), was an Italian jurist and writer. He is regarded as the founder of the French school of legal humanists. He displayed great literary skill in his exposition of the laws, and was one of the first to interpret the civil law by the history, languages and literature of antiquity, and to substitute original research for the servile interpretations of the glossators. He published many legal works, and is most famous for his Emblemata, a collection of short Latin verse texts and accompanying woodcuts. His Emblema CLXXXIX states:
Mentem non formam plus pollere.
Intelligence matters, not beauty
The accompanying woodcut displays a fox, entering the store-room of a theatrical producer, where he finds an actor’s mask, skilfully shaped, so finely fashioned that the spirit alone was missing, in all else it seemed alive. Taking it up, the fox addressed it: ‘What a head is this, but it has no brain!’
Lutheran Interests of the Amici Curiae Martin Luther (10 Nov 1483 – 18 Feb 1546) was a German priest and professor of theology who initiated the Protestant Reformation. Strongly disputing the claim that freedom from God's punishment of sin could be purchased with money, he confronted indulgence salesman Johann Tetzel with his Ninety-Five Theses in 1517. Luther objected to a saying attributed to Johann Tetzel that ‘As soon as the money is received in the church’s coffers, the sinners soul is released from hell.’ Luther disagreed and said that since forgiveness was God's alone to grant, those in the church who sold Ssale of indulgences in A Question to a indulgences promising God’s forgiveness and salvation in Mintmaker, woodcut by Jörg Breu the return for its purchase were in error. He became Elder of Augsburg, circa 1530. convinced that the church was corrupt in its ways and had lost sight of what he saw as several of the central truths of Christianity. Luther also preached that Matthew 16:18 does not confer on popes the exclusive right to interpret scripture, and that therefore neither popes nor church councils were infallible. They could also make mistakes. His refusal to retract all of his writings at the demand of Pope Leo X in 1520 and the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V at the Diet of Worms in 1521 resulted in his excommunication by the pope and condemnation as an outlaw by the emperor. Luther's followers are called Lutherans. Luther’s translation of the Bible into the language of the people (instead of Latin) made it more accessible, causing a tremendous impact on the church and on German culture. It fostered the development of a standard version of the German language, added several principles to the art of translation, and influenced the translation into English of the King James Bible.
Sui Generis Critical Literacy Legal Interpretation AA. A PURPOSIVE SUI GENERIS ABSURD NECESSITY
A. NECESSITY: I AM NOT SURE OF MY EXISTENCE,BUT I AM SURE OF MY INTENTIONS
Critical Literacy’s role in Purposive Legal Interpretation
Secrecy and Deception as Strategic & Tactical Meme’s of Conquer & Multiply Memeplexes
Political Necessity of Freedom of Speech: ‘TRC was a fraudulent PR publicity stunt’
Civil Disobedience Free Speech Necessity Defence
‘I am, therefore I think’ Common Law Reasonableness Test Skills & Competencies
‘I am, therefore I think’ Common Law Radical Hon(our)sty Reasonableness Test Skills
Dr. Blanton vs. SA’s Political & Media Elite: ‘TRC was a fraudulent PR publicity stunt’
Population Policy Common Sense: Exponential Functions, Eco-Laws & Eco-Literacy: Limited World, Limited Rights
Lysistrata Tsedeq: Ecolaw 101: Laws of Sustainability
Radical Honesty Law of Limited Competition Code: ‘I am not sure of my existence, but I am sure of my intentions’
Practicing Radical Honesty: Being Specific about Anger & Methodology of Forgiveness
Judicial Enquiry: Simple Justice Tribal Consciousness
BB. SUI GENERIS ‘DIGNITY: RIGHT TO PSYCHO-INFANCY ‘ DECEPTION B. DIGNITY: RIGHT TO PSYCHO-INFANCY DECEPTION
Dignity: Abstract conceptual belief in a Existential Self
Philosophical Concepts of Self: ‘I think, therefore I am’ et al
Sui Generis: Word Stays the Same, Meaning Changes?
Sui Generis (I think, I am Unique) Meme Dream
Respondents ‘Dignity’ Meme not Sui Generis,
C.C. CORP-ABSTRACTISM JUST WARHOOD DECEPTION C. RIGHT TO ‘FREE SPEECH’ PROPAGANDA PROFITS DECEPTION
Corporations Intentions: Power and Profit
How Corporations Became Cogito Ergo Sum People!
Corporate News as Discourse
News Reports & the Reproduction of Memeplexes
Engineering of Consent: Adult Citizens to Infant Consumers & Cultural Commodification
‘If it Bleads, It Leads,’ Editorial Maxim
How and Why Journalists Avoid Population-Environment Connection
Freedom of the Press vs. Intellectual Prostitutes
DD BRINCIBIA JUST WAR MEMEPLEX SUMMARY
D. GREAT TRIBAL FORGETTING: SALVATION FROM LAW OFLIMITED COMPETITION
The Truth About All Cultures & Their Mythologies
Judaism X Manifesto Mythology: Divine Law of Melchizedek – Ecological War
Eve’s Mission Impossible: Cracking the Lebensraum Right-to-Breed Code
An ABC’s of Ecology Systems Approach to a Sui Generis Agriculture Mythology When did We become We?
Identity and Dignity in Ubuntu Mythology
Black Liberation Mythology and Black Power
Liberating Black Victim Theology
Black Liberation Theology: Kairos & Reconciliation
EE. RADICAL UBUNTU HONESTY INTERESTS OF AMICI
EA. SOCIO-LEGAL-POLITICAL ILLEGETIMACY OF TRC SOCIAL CONTRACT
Cultures of Secrecy: Unconscious and Conscious Secrets
Definitions : Fundamental Concepts Not Defined
Did Amnesty mean Amnesty, or was legal meaning changed?
Was Truth and Reconciliation Seen to be Done?
Rainbow Truths: Were all Contextual Struggle Violence Truths Told?
Cold War Ethno-Cultural Psychological Warfare
FF: TSEDEQ LOVE THEOREM INTEREST OF AMICI
F: TRC SECRET: APARTHEID: A JUST WAR FOR DEMOGRAPHIC SURVIVAL FROM MARXIST SWART GEVAAR
Population Explosion Concerns During Apartheid
Population Pressures & Apartheid Political Fears
Does Africa have an Overpopulation Problem?
Apartheid, the Struggle, Just War Doctrine & Competitive Exclusion Principle
Radical Honesty Analysis: TRC ACT written by People who can’t, or don’t know how to handle their anger, forced SA’s to make Politically Correct Agreements, while still angry
AA: A Purposive Sui Generis Absurd Necessity: ‘With Guerrylla-Law Gone, any Hope for Man?’ Kambei Shimada: As a matter of fact, I'm preparing for a tough war. It will bring us neither money nor fame. Want to join? Shichirōji: Yes! Kambei Shimada: Maybe we die this time. Shichirōji: (smiles) ---- Seven Samurai, an epic film about the extinction of the Samurai culture
Absurdity, n. A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion. “The Paradox of the Court, also known as the counterdilemma of Euathlus, is a very old problem in logic stemming from ancient Greece. It is said that the famous sophist Protagoras took on a pupil, Euathlus, on the understanding that the student pay Protagoras for his instruction after he had won his first case (or: if and only if Euathlus wins his first court case). Some accounts claim that Protagoras demanded his money as soon as Euathlus completed his education, others say that Protagoras waited until it was obvious that Euathlus was making no effort to take on clients and still others assert that Euathlus made a genuine attempt but that no clients ever came. In any case, Protagoras decided to sue Euathlus for the amount owed. Protagoras argued that if he won the case he would be paid his money. If Euathlus won the case, Protagoras would still be paid according to the original contract, because Euathlus would have won his first case. Euathlus, however, claimed that if he won then by the court's decision he would not have to pay Protagoras. If on the other hand Protagoras won then Euathlus would still not have won a case and therefore not be obliged to pay. The TRC Matrix Reality question is: who is right/superior?; a zero-sum game, of superior/inferior, right/wrong, win/loose for protagonists, and $$ win-win for their lawyers. The Futilitarian Brincibia SumMary Question is: Why and how do citizens lack the capability for ‘my word is my honour’ agreements, and/or lack the integrity and honour to uphold them, and/or to confront each other with their resentments face-to-face to resolve their disagreement like wo/men, with a commitment to attaining sincere forgiveness, and a new appreciation for each others integrity as honourable wo/men? A win-win for protagonists, their relationship & the nations social contract.
a: Legal Interpretation: Decoding: SumMary Brincibia: First Amici proceeds along the following principle of legal interpretation, “All law is interpretation. A lawyer uses words inherently imprecise, and when a law is applied to the fact of a new situation what lawyers do is interpret the code words to deem them appropriately or inappropriately applied to the case at hand. To view the law means to understand interpretation. Law has more to do with Critical Literacy Studies than it probably has to do with anything else.” -- Professor David Skover, Professor of Law, Seattle University Another perspective of interpretation if we use the Founding Father, procreation concept is that the Truth and Reconciliation Social Contract, gave birth to the Bill of Rights. It was the Sui Generis legal source or origin, the legal father, providing the family ‘Do’s and Donts’ guidelines for children, so they can grow up to be citizens. Assuming the political marriage was one of socio-political adults, the next question is what were the Political Mummy and Daddy’s marriage motives: children to love and cherish towards constitutional republic citizen adulthood, or children as slaves and cannon fodder proles, to manipulate and exploit for personal, political and economic gain? What Founding Fathers and Macho3 Monotheistic Religions sometimes negligently or intentionally ignore or forget is that the majority of Humans (Homo) are not biological hermaphrodites, like our friendly ecological friends the earthworms; i.e. an animal or plant that has reproductive organs normally associated with both male and female sexes. The majority of Homo’s are biologically either male or female, and require a balanced loving home environment to nurture their political (male) and ecological (feminine) balance. It is not possible for Homo’s to biologically procreate without the other, and biological procreation is not always consensual based on love, in many cultures, as it is in the Radical Honesty Tribe. So what were the motivational foundations of South Africa’s TRC SOCIAL CONTRACT group political marriage? What is their motherhood and fatherhood philosophy? According to German psychoanalyst, Erich Fromm limbic motherly love is unconditional love , the mother loves her children not because they please her, but because they are her children. Mothers love is mercy and compassion (In Hebrew rachamim, the root of which is rechem, the womb). This does not mean she is not honest with them, it just means she does not make them outlaws in her heart. Fatherly love, on the contrary, is conditional; it depends on the achievements and good behaviour of the child. Fathers love is justice5. The deepest yearning of human beings seems to be a constellation between these two poles, mercy and justice, feeling and thought, nature and intellect, united in synthesis and balance. 4
A Founding Mothers limbic love for her children would be to teach them to grow up to be responsible citizens. Hence she would Radical Ubuntu with them using legal code words in a fun educational way. The code words are not State Secret of National Security Importance to protect Founding Father Daddy’s Fragile Macho Ego, but an enjoyable kinaesthetic learning
See: D.3: Eve’s Mission Impossible: Cracking the Lebensraum Right-to-Breed Code 09-08-11: Legal Argument Encl: TrinityLoveEcoFamily Mothers Limbic Love Connection: Reptilian vs. Limbic Brain Love and Intimacy 5 09-08-11: Legal Argument Encl: TrinityLoveEcoFamily : Fathers Love for Justice 4
experience. For true wisdom is in confronting the reality of the depth of our ignorance, how much we don’t know, we don’t know; how many secrets we hide from ourselves. Grace Llewellyn, the author of Teenage Liberation Handbook: How To Quit School and Get a Real Education6, writes: "When my brother Ned and I were about 8 and 9 or so we got into secret codes and ciphers. We spent hours memorizing arcane stuff about alphabets (English and otherwise), writing our own reference books, encoding messages for each other to decipher. We quickly exhausted the information in the children's library, so we went upstairs to the adult section for the first time in our lives. I'll never ever forget that day and my feeling that I'd infiltrated a vast, mysterious palace full of hidden treasure.”
b: SKWorm & SQWorm Necessity Decoders Mantra: If we were to ask S.K. Worm, (S.K. stands for "Scientific Knowledge." But you can call me Skworm, as in squirm around and wiggle all over the place.), who is the Nicomachean twin of ‘SQworm (which stands for Esquire Worm7, the legal apprentice of Chief Knight Protagorus8), s/he would probably give us the following clues to decode SumMary Brincibia. SumMary: Sum refers to mathematics, frequently a male strength; whereas Mary is a female principle: Mary means ‘wise woman’ or ‘lady’. It is a Greek form of the Hebrew Miriam or Mariamme, and was the most popular woman's name at the time of Jesus. SUM (I): The title word "Sum" refers to the Latin for "I am," as in Cogito ergo Sum. Cogito ergo sum (French: Je pense donc je suis; English: "I think, therefore I am"), often mistakenly stated as Dubito ergo cogito ergo sum (English: "I doubt, therefore I think, therefore I am"), is a philosophical statement in Latin used by René Descartes, which became a fundamental element of Western philosophy. The simple meaning of the phrase is that if someone is wondering whether or not they exist, that is in and of itself proof that they do exist (because, at the very least, there is an "I" who is doing the thinking). 9
6 The Teenage Liberation Handbook: How to Quit School and get a Real Life and Education, by Grace Llewellyn, Lowry House. Grace Llewellyn is a former middle school English teacher, the director of Not Back to School Camp, the founder of the Genius Tribe Resource center and mailorder catalogue, and the editor of two other books on unschooling. She is also a member of the Radical Honesty Futilitarian Tribe. 7 Esquire (abbreviated Esq.) is a term of British origin (ultimately from Latin scutarius in the sense of shield bearer via Old French "esquier"). An unofficial title of respect, having no precise significance, it is used to denote a high but indeterminate social status.Esquire is cognate with the word squire, which originally meant an apprentice or assistant to a knight. "Esquire" is today the most junior grade of membership. "In the U.S., usually applied to lawyers, women as well as men; in Britain, applied to a commoner considered to have gained the social position of a gentleman." Although Esquire is the English translation of the French Ecuyer, the latter indicated legal membership in the nobilities of ancien régime France and contemporaneous Belgium, whereas an esquire belongs to the British gentry rather than to its nobility. Ecuyer in French (11th to 14th century) means Horseman, or Squire, i.e. a Knight, or a knight in training (Squire), age 14 to 21. In the United States, the suffix Esq. is most commonly encountered in use among individuals licensed to practice law. This usage applies to both male and female lawyers. While some jurisdictions within the U.S., such as California, expressly indicate that "Esq." is for use by lawyers only, the term was assumed by the legal profession, and not granted to it by any governmental authority. 8 See: AA: A Purposive Absurd Necessity: ‘With Guerrylla-Law Gone, any Hope for Man?’ 9 Descartes's original statement was "Je pense donc je suis," from his Discourse on Method (1637). He wrote it in French, not in Latin, thereby reaching a wider audience in his country than that of scholars. He uses the Latin "Cogito ergo sum" in the later Principles of Philosophy (1644), Part 1, article 7: "Ac proinde hæc cognitio, ego cogito, ergo sum, est omnium prima & certissima, quæ cuilibet ordine philosophanti occurrat." (English: "This proposition, I think, therefore I am, is the first and the most certain which presents itself to
Although the idea expressed in Cogito ergo sum is widely attributed to Descartes, he was not the first to mention it. Plato spoke about the "knowledge of knowledge" (Greek νόησις νοήσεως - nóesis noéseos) and Aristotle explains the idea in full length: But if life itself is good and pleasant (...) and if one who sees is conscious that he sees, one who hears that he hears, one who walks that he walks and similarly for all the other human activities there is a faculty that is conscious of their exercise, so that whenever we perceive, we are conscious that we perceive, and whenever we think, we are conscious that we think, and to be conscious that we are perceiving or thinking is to be conscious that we exist... (Nicomachean Ethics, 1170a25 ff.) SUM (+): Sum can also mean Summation10. As such it means many things, for those with critical literacy skills, Winston Smith’s ‘sum’ in George Orwell’s 1984, is an important consideration for the importance of authority to recognize factual mathematical truths: “Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows” According to Professor Albert Bartlett, “The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function.”11 SUM (RU):, sumu, sumon, and somon (sumd, sumuud) are a type of administrative district used in China, Mongolia, and Russia. SUM (MU): Sum in Mongolia (Mongolian: сум, arrow, sometimes rendered as soum or from the Russian form - as somon, or translated as district) is a second level administrative subdivision of Mongolia. The Aimags of Mongolia are divided into 329 sums. On average, each sum administers a territory of 4,200 km² with about 5,000 inhabitants, primarily nomadic herders. It has total revenues of 120 Million Tögrög, 90 % of which come out of national subsidies. Each sum is again subdivided into bags (sometimes rendered as baghs). Most bags are of an entirely virtual nature. Their purpose is to sort the families of nomads in the sum into groups, without a permanent human settlement. So we can conclude there many definitions for the word SUM. Same with Mary. MARY (Φ,φ): Mary Magdalene came from a town called Magdala, on the western side of the Sea of Galilee. Mary Magdalene led a group of women who were prominent followers of Jesus of Nazareth. The idea of women as primary witnesses does not seem very startling to people in the 20th century, but it was a revolutionary concept at the time. The testimony of women was not given the same weight as men's, either personally or in a court of law. When the Christian stories described Mary Magdalene and other women as the first witnesses of the Resurrection, they said something important about the status of women within Christianity. Other Mary’s include: Mother of Jesus, Queen Mary I of England (Bloody Mary) or other Mary Queens from England, Scotland, Denmark, Portugal, Hungary, Mary Circus Elephant, etc. whoever conducts his thoughts in order".). At that time, the argument had become popularly known in the English speaking world as 'the "Cogito Ergo Sum" argument', which is usually shortened to "Cogito" when referring to the principle virtually everywhere else. 10 Summation is the operation of combining a sequence of numbers using addition; the result is their sum or total. An interim or present total of a summation process is termed the running total. 11 See: [A]  Population Policy Common Sense: Exponential Functions, Eco-Laws & Eco-Literacy: Limited World, Limited Rights
BRINCIBIA is another Hermaphrodite combination of Principia, and the Story of B. Principia Discordia is a Discordian religious text written by Greg Hill (Malaclypse The Younger) and Kerry Thornley (Omar Khayyam Ravenhurst). It was originally published under the title "Principia Discordia or How The West Was Lost" in a limited edition of 5 copies in 1965. The name, meaning "The Principles of Strife", deviates from correct Latin which would read Principia Discordiæ. The Principia is widely regarded as one of the most important Discordian works ever written. The Principia describes the Discordian Society and its Goddess Eris, as well as the basics of the POEE denomination of Discordianism. It features typewritten and handwritten text intermixed with clip art, stamps, and seals appropriated from other sources, possibly in violation of copyright laws. While the Principia is full of literal contradictions and unusual humor, it contains several passages which propose that there is serious intent behind the work, for example a message scrawled on page 00075: "If you think the PRINCIPIA is just a ha-ha, then go read it again." BB: The Story of B acts as a halfway point between Ishmael, a telepathic gorilla and Beyond Civilisation, the New Tribal Revolution. Jared Osborne is a Laurentian priest, who is sent by his superiors to Europe to investigate an itinerant preacher who has been stirring up trouble. The preacher is known to her followers as "B", but her enemies say she's the "Antichrist". Pressed for a judgment, Osborne is driven to penetrate B's inner circle where he soon finds himself an anguished collaborator in the dismantling of his own religious foundations. The Great Forgetting is the term B uses to describe an occurrence during the formative millennia of our civilization. What was forgotten is that there was a time when people lived without civilization and were sustained by hunting and gathering rather than by animal husbandry and agriculture. By the time history began to be written down, thousands of years had passed since abandoning the hunter-gatherer lifestyle and it had been assumed that people had come into existence farming. B argues that our knowledge and worldview today would be greatly altered had the foundation thinkers of our culture known there was history beyond the beginning of civilization. When Paleontology uncovered 3 million years worth of human generations, making it untenable that humanity, agriculture, and civilization all began at roughly the same time, our worldview was still not affected. So catching up on all that mythological history to get a balanced Rainbow History Mythology is quite a lengthy process. A continual theme through B’s teachings is that population growth is dependent upon food production, with increases in food production leading to increases in population. SKWorm and SQWorm’s Identities in the Brincibia are those of Valentine Casey and U.S. Christmas, in the western South of Heaven, West of Hell; who live by the principle of: “I am not sure of my existence, but I am sure of my intentions”. They are an incorruptible Sherrif and his Native American Deputy Partner who wears dresses, who aren’t quite sure if they are in heaven or hell, or somewhere in between; but wherever they are, they don’t like corrupt bullies.
A final note of wisdom from Concourt SumMary’s Legal Decoders: Valentine SKworm and SQWorm Christmas are also sort of legal Clover anarchists. This is a result of the depth of their Critical Literacy ignorance. What this means is that where or when the reader finds themselves in doubt in navigating the unravelling of the Truth Religious Circus Legal Matrix, to recite the mantra: “I am not sure of my existence, but I am sure of my intentions”. Confronting the Taker Truth Religious Circus Matrix means you confront the reality that justice in the Taker Legal Matrix is simply a matter of luck, which is why those with an experience of Tribal Justice, prefer Leaver Tribal Codes of Honour.
c: V. SKworm & ‘SQ Christmas Legal Analysis: Social Trap Valentine SKworm and SQWorm Christmas are of the opinion that ‘Dignity: Right-toSycophancy’ and ‘Corporate Media:Right-toPropaganda Profits’ is behaviour which could be described by the psychological term ‘social trap’; since both parties want Sui Generis (I think, I am Unique) reinforcement of their Taker Legal Matrix rights, and both ignore the law of limited competition and the law of stability (to promote the goal of stability, a law must take cognizance not only of the act but also of the state of the system at the time the act is performed12). Social trap is a term used by psychologists to describe a situation in which a group of people act to obtain short-term individual gains, which in the long run leads to a loss for the group as a whole. Examples of social traps include overfishing, the near-extinction of the American bison, energy "brownout" and "blackout" power outages during periods of extreme temperatures, the overgrazing of cattle on the Sahelian Desert, and the destruction of the rainforest by logging interests and agriculture. The term social trap was first introduced to the scientific community by John Platt's 1973 paper in American Psychologist,13 building upon the concept of the "tragedy of the commons" in Garrett Hardin's pivotal article in Science (1968),14 Platt and others in the seminar applied behavioral psychology concepts to actions of people operating in social traps. By applying the findings of basic research on "schedules of operant reinforcement" (B.F. Skinner 1938, 1948, 1953, 1957; Keller and Schoenfeld, 1950), Platt recognized that individuals operating for short-term positive gain ("reinforcement") had a tendency to overexploit a resource, which led to a long-term overall loss to society.
12 Stalking the Wild Taboo, by Garrett Hardin: Part 4:Competition: (20) Competition, a Tabooed Idea in Sociology; (21) The Cybernetics of Competition; (22) Population, Biology and the Law; (23) Population Skeletons in the Environmental Closet; (24) The Survival of Nations and Civilisations 13 Platt, J. (1973) Social Traps, American Psychologist, 28, 641-65 14 Hardin, G. (1968) The Tragedy of the Commons, Science, 162, 1243-1248
A. Necessity: 'I am not sure of my existence, but I am sure of my intentions’ ‘Lawyers are either social engineers, or they are parasites. Social Engineer Lawyers aim to eliminate the difference between what the laws say and mean, and how they are applied; whereas legal parasites aim to entrench their parasitism from the difference between what the laws say and mean, and the application of such differences to their parasitic benefit.’ -- Prof. Charlie Houston, Howard Law School mentor of Justice Thurgood Marshall15
A.1: Critical Literacy Role in Purposive Legal Interpretation Amici submits the enquiry into the socio-political-legal legitimacy of the TRC SOCIAL CONTRACT can be ascertained by means of applying Critical Literacy skills to Purposive Legal Interpretation. What were the conscious and subconscious memeplexes, the religious, cultural etc. beliefs that motivated the legislators of the TRC SOCIAL CONTRACT? Were Parliaments intentions with the legislation to apply crisis management skills to implement legislation which could focus on the root causes of the political violence, thereby being serious and sincere about peace, social justice and providing for the legal foundation for truth and reconciliation? Purposive Legal Interpretation: In Pepper v. Hart  AC 593, the House of Lords held that courts now take a purposive approach to interpreting legislation, and to find what Parliament intended, all sources including Hansard (records of debates in Parliament before an Act is passed). Lord Griffiths stated (617),
15 Simple Justice: The History of Brown v. Board of Education, by Richard Kluger. Professor Houston and Simple Justice are quoted more extensively by Defendant in 11 June 2004: An Essay on Proudly South African Parasite Hypocrisy: Fraudulent ‘Rehabilitation’ Boomerang: Correctional Services Prison Policies as a Major Intentional Source of New South Africa’s ‘Kaffirs’ AKA ‘Criminals
â€œMy Lords, I have long thought that the time had come to change the self-imposed judicial rule that forbade any reference to the legislative history of an enactment as an aid to its interpretation. The ever increasing volume of legislation must inevitably result in ambiguities of statutory language which are not perceived at the time the legislation is enacted. The object of the court in interpreting legislation is to give effect so far as the language permits to the intention of the legislature. If the language proves to be ambiguous I can see no sound reason not to consult Hansard to see if there is a clear statement of the meaning that the words were intended to carry. The days have long passed when the courts adopted a strict constructionist view of interpretation which required them to adopt the literal meaning of the language. The courts now adopt a purposive approach which seeks to give effect to the true purpose of legislation and are prepared to look at much extraneous material that bears upon the background against which the legislation was enacted. Why then cut ourselves off from the one source in which may be found an authoritative statement of the intention with which the legislation is placed before Parliament? Critical Literacy: Critical literacy is the ability to read texts in an active, reflective manner in order to better understand power, inequality, and injustice in human relationships. For the purposes of critical literacy, text is defined as a â€œvehicle through which individuals communicate with one another using the codes and conventions of societyâ€?.16 Accordingly, songs, novels, conversations, pictures, movies, etc. are all considered texts. The development of critical literacy skills enables people to interpret messages in the modern world through a critical lens and challenge the power relations within those messages. Teachers who facilitate the development of critical literacy encourage students to interrogate societal issues and institutions like family, poverty, education, equity, and equality in order to critique the structures that serve as norms as well as to demonstrate how these norms are not experienced by all members of society. Consequently, Critical Literacy is an instructional approach that advocates the adoption of critical perspectives toward text. Critical literacy encourages readers to actively analyze texts and it offers strategies for uncovering underlying messages. There are several different theoretical perspectives on critical literacy that have produced different pedagogical approaches to teaching and learning. All of these approaches share the basic premise that literacy requires the literate consumers of text to adopt a critical and questioning approach. Context is not merely its setting in time and place. "Context refers to the multitude of factors which shape the meaning of a text within the social framework of its reading. This framework may include particular ideas about the text's history, but is also powerfully shaped by competing beliefs and practices in the present. (Moon, 1992). This means that the context is constantly shifting and that the nature of the reader, and the time that it is read, are significant. Context suggests that the 'meaning' or reading of a text is determined by a huge range of social, cultural, time, composer, reader factors. 16 1.Robinson, E., & Robinson, S. (2003). What does it mean? Discourse, Text, Culture: An Introduction. Sydney: McGraw-Hill Book Company, p. 3.
Discourse refers to all the language associated with a particular life experience or identity construct (e.g. race, social class, gender, sexuality, age, etc.). Hence one can have the discourse of school or the family or childhood that is closely related to the related sociocultural identities. Discourses overlap and constantly change. One can belong to a wide and ever changing number of discourses, such as Radical Honesty, Dischordian, a political party, a chess club, or Poker player group, and they all can affect the way one makes meaning of texts. The language features can include the words (lexicons I of the discourse ego for school - timetable, parade, etc,. the way words are expressed, the exclusive jargon, the operating power structures in the language etc.).
A.2: Secrecy and Deception as Strategic & Tactical Meme’s of Conquer and Multiply Memeplex “The major reason, I think, has to do with cultures of secrecy.” Secrets, however, are also political currency. Secrets are power. The obstruction appears to be a mix of disinterest, incompetence, but above all officialdom's enduring love of secrecy for its own sake. Concealment is the trademark of secret policemen. Not democracy.” -- The Secret Files that Still Haunt South Africa ***** Secret keeping is a psychological process of considerable importance if only for its ubiquity. But, while everyone keeps secrets, little has been written about it. It is a topic of special significance to psychoanalysts for two reasons: (1) analysis deals with the personal secrets that people hide from one another and from themselves, and (2) the process of the patient laying his consciously held secrets and later his previously unconscious secrets at the feet of the judging and reacting analyst can be regarded as the central process of psychoanalytic therapy (Rangell, 1968).17
a: Tactical Meme to Deny Competitors Fully Informed Decision-Making. Secrecy or furtiveness is the practice of hiding information from certain individuals or groups, perhaps while sharing it with other individuals. That which is kept hidden is known as the secret. Secrecy is often controversial, depending on the content of the secret, the group or people keeping the secret, and the motivation for secrecy. Secrecy by government entities is often decried as excessive or in promotion of poor operation; excessive revelation of information on individuals can conflict with virtues of privacy and confidentiality. Zoology and Sociology:
Margolis, G.J. (1974). The Psychology of Keeping Secrets. Int. R. Psycho-Anal., 1:291-296.
Animals, including humans (in some cases), conceal the location of themselves and their den or nest from predators for example by using camouflage. Squirrels bury nuts, hiding them, and they try to remember their locations later. Humans attempt to consciously conceal aspects of themselves from others due to shame, or from fear of rejection, loss of acceptance, or loss of employment, or to retain power. On a deeper level, humans attempt to conceal aspects of their own self which they are not capable of incorporating psychologically into their conscious being. Families sometimes maintain "family secrets", obliging family members never discuss disagreeable issues concerning the family, either with those outside the family and sometimes even within the family. Many "family secrets" are maintained by using a mutually agreed-upon construct (an official family story) when speaking with outside members. Agreement to maintain the secret is often coerced through "shaming" and reference to family honor. The information may even be something as trivial as a recipe.
b: Game Theory: Competition: Secret Intentions Keeping one's strategy secret is important in many aspects of game theory; although there are exceptions such as Radical Hon(our)sty Games; because our Game is about the relationship, not about winning/losing, superiority/inferiority, right/wrong, etc; but that does not mean we are ignorant of the culture of secrecy competition of other games. In Stalking the Wild Taboo, by Garrett Hardin: Part 4: Competition: (20) Competition, a Tabooed Idea in Sociology; (21) The Cybernetics of Competition; (22) Population, Biology and the Law; (23) Population Skeletons in the Environmental Closet; (24) The Survival of Nations and Civilisations, he deals with the concept of Competition, a process that is inescapable in societies living in a finite resource world. Game Theory brought us the doctrine of Military Strategy and Nuclear Cold War acronym, known as: MAD: Mutually Assured Destruction; which is similar to Radical Hon(our)sty cause in our Game ego’s are assured of their mutual destruction, and from there relationships of intimacy and friendship and honest are founded, and in fact sometimes the process can indeed appear to be for those who are attached to conformity to be slightly MAD. In Game Theory a Zero-Sum Game is one in which the losses of one person are exactly counterbalanced by the gains of others, such as Poker, the balance is zero. In a Non Zero Sum game the losses and gains are not zero, like Russian Roulette. Non Zero Games come in two varieties benign and malign. A game where academics share their scientific research and all benefit from sharing information is generally positive, like Radical Honesty.
c: Poker & Russian Roulette Mens Rea: Guilty Om-Gasm Mind In criminal law, mens rea – the Latin term for "guilty mind"18 – is usually one of the necessary elements of a crime. The standard common law test of criminal liability is usually expressed in the Latin phrase, actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, which means "the act does not make a person guilty unless the mind be also guilty". Thus, in jurisdictions with due 18
Elizabeth A. Martin, ed. (2003), Oxford Dictionary of Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press, ISBN 0198607563
process, there must be an actus reus accompanied by some level of mens rea to constitute the crime with which the defendant is charged. Quite simply therefore mens rea refers to the mental element of the offence that accompanies the actus reus. In some jurisdictions the terms mens rea and actus reus have been superseded by alternative terminology. In Australia for example the elements of all federal offences are now designated as "fault elements" (mens rea) and "physical element" (actus reus). This terminology was adopted in order to replace the obscurity of the Latin terms with simple and accurate phrasing.
d: Wild Bill Hickok, Aces and Eights, Texas Hold’Em Poker Mens Rea: Nobody in Poker denies that the motives of all the poker players are to win; hence they participate in a culture of secrecy regarding their intentions. It is however not a secret that they have secret predator intentions; for the purpose of winning; i.e. to conquer the other players money. All are transparent about their Conquer Motivations. It is not a secret, and nobody is under any illusions that all the other Poker Players are in Predator Mode. Deception is part of their Conquer strategy; if one Poker Player wanted the rules amended, he could find a group of players who played a different type of Poker with different rules; Texas Hold Em; or Pot Limit. But no Poker Player can force another player to participate in a Texas Hold Em game, when the player prefers the rules of Pot Limit. Imagine you went to play a Poker Game, but the guys playing poker refused to tell you whether they were playing in accordance to Texas Hold Em rules, or Pot Limit rules. You would determine that there was a culture of secrecy regarding the application of Poker Rules, and assume the plausibility that the culture of secrecy existed as a result of corruption; i.e. they were withholding information for fully informed decision making; so as to benefit from such confusion; and to subsequently apply whichever rules they wanted to impose, for their benefit.
e: Amici’s Guilty DeerHunter Russian Roulette Om-Gasm Mind: OM stands for Operation Mindf**k. It is an ongoing Discordian project to challenge existing assumptions and provoke critical and creative thought. It is most often manifested as a decentralized campaign of civil disobedience, activism, art movements, performance and guerrilla art, culture jamming, graffiti and other vandalism, practical jokes, hoaxes, reality hacking, chaos magic, words of power, trolling and anything else that is believed to bring about social change through disrupting paradigms and thus forcing the victim to question the parameters of one's reality tunnel. The Golden Apple Corp's latest project: GASM stands for Golden Apple Seed Mission. It's a Discordian meme which indicates a project needs assistance. It's a call to action for Discordians and any friend of the free-thinking lunatic fringe. As stated in Affidavit of Brad Blanton, Ph.D, evidencing the legal, psychological, and socio-political ‘citizens privilege’, Nuremberg Principles skills and competencies of Individual Responsibility, required for acts of civil disobedience to perceived
illegitimate authority; and their application to the common law ‘reasonableness test’19 filed as Expert Witness Affidavit in High Court, W.C. # 19963-09 First Amici does not consider her mind to be who she is. First Amici does not consider Justices, Applicants, Respondents, other Amicis’ or their lawyers minds to be who they are. Amici’s considers her being, who notices first and learns second, the observer-in-the-moment-alive-right-now-only being, to be who she is; not her thoughts in her mind. First Amici is a fully alive, healthy person who raises hell all the time, is not polite, offends people, hurts people’s feelings, and also stays with people while they work through the feelings, committed to their being and at war with their minds. First Amici refuses to submit to the minds of others or even to her own mind. She rules her own life to create a life from being, which is to say, out of love, using her mind, not being used by it. For the love of being, she chooses to be a destroyer of minds, incessantly, endlessly, and perhaps fruitlessly, but it is her own sweet damned choice! As Kierkegaard20 said, "A person who relates to another person and relates also to that relationship relates thereby to God." The name of the TRC SOCIAL CONTRACT, or the Acts that founded it, imply that ‘truth’ and ‘forgiveness’ are the highest goals upon which the social contract are founded. Hence that implies that acting in accordance of such goals, is acting in accordance with the highest goals of the social contract. To act on behalf of truth, and to act on behalf of forgiveness and reconciliation would be to embody the spirit of the social contract, in your words and actions; in your total being. It would be to make the social contract alive in the relationships of citizens; to create meaning to the words, in the minds and hearts of men.
19 Use of ‘reasonableness test’ is in accordance to Essex Fire Service Safety Partnership’s Legal: Common Law Definition of Reasonable Test and Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee  1 WLR 582;  2 All ER 118: Generally, the standard of care/foresight a person is expected to attain is an objective standard derived from what a reasonable person would do under the same circumstances. 'Where you get a situation which involves the use of some special skill or competence, then the test…is not the test of the man on the top of a Clapham omnibus, because he has not got this special skill. The test is the standard of the ordinary skilled man exercising and professing to have that special skill.' ‘The man on the Clapham omnibus’, is in legal speak, 'the reasonable person'. This is a phrase that was first used by Sir Charles Bowen, QC (later Lord Bowen). (Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase & Fable, 16th Edition, 1995) The man on the Clapham omnibus/the man in the street means the average ordinary English person (Oxford Guide to British & American Culture, 1999) Bolam -v- Friern Hospital Management Committee  1 WLR 582;  2 All ER 118: Professional Negligence: “Where some special skill is exercised, the test for negligence is not the test of the man on the Clapham omnibus, because he has not got this special skill. The test is the standard of the ordinary skilled man exercising or professing to have that special skill.” 20 Søren Aabye Kierkegaard (5 May 1813 – 11 November 1855) was a Danish philosopher, theologian, and psychologist. Kierkegaard strongly criticised both the Hegelianism of his time and what he saw as the empty formalities of the Danish National Church. Much of his philosophical work deals with the issues of how one lives, focusing on the priority of concrete human reality over abstract thinking and highlighting the importance of personal choice and commitment. His psychological works explore the emotions and feelings of individuals when faced with life choices. As part of his philosophical method, inspired by Socrates and the Socratic dialogues, Kierkegaard's early work was written under various pseudonymous characters who present their own distinctive viewpoints and interact with each other in complex dialogue. He assigns pseudonyms to explore particular viewpoints in-depth, which may take up several books in some instances, and Kierkegaard, or another pseudonym, critiques that position. Thus, the task of discovering the meaning of his works is left to the reader, because "the task must be made difficult, for only the difficult inspires the noble-hearted". Subsequently, scholars have interpreted Kierkegaard variously as, among others, an existentialist, neo-orthodoxist, postmodernist, humanist, and individualist. Crossing the boundaries of philosophy, theology, psychology, and literature, he is an influential figure in contemporary thought.
A.3: Political Necessity of Freedom of Speech: ‘TRC was a fraudulent PR publicity stunt’ “In a government of laws, existence of the government would be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. . . . Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means—to declare that the government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal—would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this court should resolutely set its face.” -- Justice Louis Brandeis, Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 485 (1928) (Brandeis, J., dissenting). Since at least March 2002, First Amici submitted Lawful Honest Legitimate Evidentiary Documents, with Accurate, Timely, Precise, Usable, and Reliable Information; in the exercise of Amici’s and South African citizen’s rights; to various State and Media Officials; on the following Issues of Concern: The South African Government is not seriously and sincerely committed to the TRC-RSA Social Contract; because if it was, it would not be intentionally, deliberately and sometimes maliciously, Ignoring and avoiding any all attempts to independently and Impartially Enquire and Substantiate the validity of the Evidence for: i.
The Iatrogenic Origins of AIDS; namely that AIDS is a Biological Warfare Depopulation Virus;21
Population Policy Common Sense, namely that Overpopulation -- i.e. the consequences of Exponential Population Growth Policies -- colliding with scarce and depleting resources, causes and exacerbates Crime, Violence, Unemployment, Poverty, Homelessness, Racism, etc.22
The impending socio-cultural and economic Malthusian DieOff consequences of Peak Oil, namely Peak Fertilizer, Peak Money, Peak Arable Land, Peak Food; of which the current “economic crisis” is simply the Preview Attraction French Lily Pond Tipping Point, to potentially disastrous Financial, Tragedy of the Commons Nuclear Terrorism and Resource War consequences;23
State v. Johnstone: CT-CAS 1340/7/07 & 17/1384/07 & 14/1198/08:Legal Argument: Chronology of Facts # 01-07 (Pages: 02-29), and Annexure A 1-9: Brief Statement of Defendant: Justification Defence: Political Necessity: Overview of Evid. Doc (Page 07-10) [Iatrogenic Origin of AIDS Theory and Evidentiary Documentation:  Iatrogenic AIDS Origins Questions; [II] Iatrogenic Theory: AIDS/HIV: Intro to Retrovirology; Foreign Plant Derived Substances as Stimulants; Immunosuppression: Entry & Control of Foreign DNA into Cell’s; Immunosuppression : Foreign DNA: Pathogenic Fungi/Bacteria: Mycoplasma; Means, Motive & Opportunity; Conclusion’ [III] Evidentairy Docs] 22 State v. Johnstone: CT-CAS 1340/7/07 & 17/1384/07 & 14/1198/08: Legal Argument: Chronology of Facts # 01-07 (Pages: 02-29), and Annexure A 1-9: Brief Statement of Defendant: Justification Defence: Political Necessity: Overview of Evid. Doc (Page 07-10) [Notice of Legal & Political Delivery: Elimination of Executive Authorities Plausible Deniability: Iatrogenic Origins of AIDS Theory (i) Documentation, (ii) Investigation, & (iii) Disclosure Case GSH 20/2003] 23 State v. Johnstone: CT-CAS 1340/7/07 & 17/1384/07 & 14/1198/08: Legal Argument: Chronology of Facts # 01-07 (Pages: 02-29), and Annexure A 1-9: Brief Statement of Defendant: Justification Defence: Political Necessity: Overview of Evid. Doc (Page 07-10) [DATA DVD: 18 July 2006 :: PeakOil_RSA :: Briefing Paper: Press Release: Official Request the Ministry of Intelligence Evaluate South Africa’s current policy position on: -- (1) Peak Oil; (2) Implementation of Mitigation Measures for Peak Oil; & (3) Option of Adopting The Oil Depletion
How the ANC’s Prison and Criminal Justice Policies, are -- negligently or intentionally, -- creating and fostering crime, violence, hate, unemployment, homelessness, racism and criminality, on a massive scale24
Abbreviated First Amici’s argument can be narrowed down to the ‘TRC was a fraudulent PR publicity stunt’; based on primarily the following two socio-pol-legal arguments: [A] Only a sincere and serious specific, clear and unambiguous Truth and Forgiveness Social Contract25, unequivocally understood and practiced by the common man can ever contribute to sincere and serious reconciliation and the reconstruction of any violent and conflict ridden society; and [B] any legislation or jurisprudence which professes to advocate on behalf of human rights, peace and social justice, while ignoring their ecological basis – a stable human population at slightly less than the eco-systems carrying capacity – is endorsing and practicing legal dishonesty and hypocrisy; i.e. fraud. It is legislation and jurisprudence that is deliberately indifferent to the laws of sustainability.
The primary argument in the 18 June 2002 to 18 July 2007, Political Necessity Freedom of Speech Trial in George: CAS 572/02; GSH 20/2003; which later became HC-WC Appeal A 69604, issues were: Political Necessity Disclosure of: (i) AIDS is a biological warfare depopulation virus; (ii) Root Cause of Terrorism is Overpopulation; (iii) Exponential Population Increases colliding with Finite Depleted and Scarce Resources exacerbate Terrorism; (iv) Political Policies encouraging Population Growth, and Economic and Religious Policies encouraging Population Growth exponentially increase the factors contributing to current and future terrorism; (v) Peak Oil, Peak Arable Land, Peak Water, Peak Food indicate Exponential ‘French Lilly Pond Tipping Point’ of humanity overshooting resource limitations, with potentially disastrous consequences; (vi) Political Necessity of urgently educating citizens on importance and exponential future benefits of loving zero and negative growth procreation population policies. Correspondence and efforts to determine the South African Governments policy:
a: Iatrogenic (Manmade) Origins of Aids Info: SA Leaders: An article in Sechaba, the Official Journal of the ANC in exile, published in London in November 1988, under the title ‘AIDS and the Imperialist Connection’26 questioned the African origin of the AIDS virus, and suggested that the AIDS virus may have been developed for genocidal purposes ‘in the secrecy of the laboratories of many imperialist countries.’ --
Protocol as a mitigation measure to educate the public & top-level decisionmakers on the issue of Peak Oil and mitigations measures required to deal with Peak Oil | Cover Letter to Min. of Intelligence: Briefing Paper: Is Gross Mismanagement of the Nation’s Energy Policy an Impeachable Offense?] 24 State v. Johnstone: CT-CAS 1340/7/07 & 17/1384/07 & 14/1198/08: Annexure A 1-9: Brief Statement of Defendant: Justification Defence: Political Necessity: Overview of Evid. Doc (Page 07-10) [An Essay on Proudly South African Parasite Hypocrisy: Fraudulent ‘Rehabilitation’ Boomerang: Correctional Services Prison Policies as a Major Intentional Source of New South Africa’s ‘Kaffirs’ AKA ‘Criminals’] 25 PDF: http://www.scribd.com/doc/20520279/AA-01-d-09-08-11-Population-Policy-Common-Sense-Truth-Forgiveness-Social-Contract 26 Nxumalo J. AIDS and the imperialist connection. Sechaba Sept.1988 [R.W. Johnson says it was in November]
South Africa's Brave New World: The Beloved Country since the End of Apartheid, by R. W. Johnson In Sept. 2000, Minister of Health, Mrs Tshabalala-Msimang circulated to Provincial Premiers and Health Ministers a chapter of William Cooper’s, Behold a Pale Horse; which alleges that HIV was specifically devised by the worlds ruling elite to reverse population growth. -- South Africa's Brave New World: The Beloved Country since the End of Apartheid, by R. W. Johnson “We [The Nelson Mandela Foundation] are aware of the [20,000 US Government Scientific] documents [documenting that AIDS is manmade as a Biological Warfare Depopulation Agent]. They Mean Nothing To Us, our World is Not Ruled by the United States. We Have Our Own Scientific Ways of Doing Things in South Africa.” -- Official Verbal Statement by Nelson Mandela & Nelson Mandela Foundation Spokesperson, Ms. Zelda Le Grange, on 11 October 2002 (in response to ‘Are the NM Foundation aware of the 20,000 US Special Virus Cancer Program27 Scientific experiments, documenting that AIDS is a manmade Biological Warfare Depopulation Virus) 28 The Dept. of Defence: Surgeon General conducted an investigation of the Iatrogenic Origins of AIDS Theory at the request of Lara Johnstone. The record of this Investigation is currently Top Secret/Restricted -- Restricted: 29 August 2003: Dept of Defence: Office of Surgeon General, Iatrogenic AIDS Origins Theory SA National Defence Force: Receipt Form for Top Secret/Restricted Doc’s
Documents submitted to Politicians and Courts include excerpts from Dr. Horowitz book:
b: Emerging Viruses: Aids and Ebolo: Nature, Accident or Intentional? According to Credo Mutwa, AIDS in Africa - A Man Made Disease29, AIDS is a man-made disease. As his evidence, he cites, “Dr. Len Horowitz's monumental book Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola: Nature, Accident Or Intentional? for a wealth of documentation placing Dr. Gallo, longtime head of the National Institute of Health (NIH) and National Cancer Institute's (NCI) Section on Cellular Control Mechanisms, at center stage in the AIDS arena. Evidence suggests he created the AIDS virus about a decade before "discovered" it.” According to Dr. W. John Martin, a Professor of Pathology at the University of Southern California, & the Director of the Center for Complex Infectious Diseases in Rosemead, CA, former director of the Viral Oncology Branch of the FDA's Bureau of Biologics (now Center for Biologics, Evaluation and Research), the government's principal human vaccines agency: “In writing Emerging Viruses, Dr. Horowitz has bravely questioned the extent to which scientific research and lax government oversight may have contributed to the present and 27
State Origin: The Evidence of the Laboratory Birth of AIDS: A Shocking Collection of Evidence and Court Documents from Graves vs. The President of the United States: U.S. Supreme Court Case No. 00-9587; (ii) Department of Defense Appropriations for 1970: Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives, Ninety-First Congress, on 09 June 1969; (iii) U.S. Special Virus Program, Progress Reports # 9, August 1972, (Pg: 431); # 10, August 1973 (Pg: 406); # 11 August 1974 (Pg: 547); # 13 August 1976 (Pg: 461); # 14 June 1977 (Pg: 439); # 15 June 1978 (Pg: 417); Division of Cancer Cause and Prevention, National Cancer Institute; U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Office, National Institutes of Health 28 14 Jan 2004: Notice of Legal and Political Delivery: Elimination of Executive Authorities Plausible Deniability: Iatrogenic Origins of AIDS Theory. 29 AIDS in Africa - A Man Made Disease, by Credo Mutwa, taken from a telephone interview from Spectrum News and Bbibliotecapleyades [http://khemet.co.uk/credo1.html]
coming plagues. In considering the recent genesis of HIV and the Ebola viruses, Dr. Horowitz's book has explored three areas of great general and scientific interest: 1) the history of intensive research into the viral causes of cancer wherein readers can become familiar with the many, now questionable, virus transmission experiments, 2) the CIA and Department of Defense efforts to develop and defend against biological weapons of germ warfare. Here Dr. Horowitz should be especially congratulated for presenting well researched little known facts that, though highly disturbing, are an important piece of history that may also bear heavily on the emergence of new viruses, and 3) vaccine production. Clearly, as anyone who reads this book will conclude, there is a great need for more open dialogue concerning the past and present risks inherent in the production of live viral vaccines.”
Documents submitted to Politicians and Courts include excerpts from Dr. Graves’ book:
c: State Origin: Evidence of Laboratory Birth of Aids: “Birth Rates Must Come Down More Quickly Or Current Death Rates Must Go Up. There Is No Other Way.” -- Robert McNamara, Worldbank President, 1970 In State Origin: The Evidence of the Laboratory Birth of AIDS: A Shocking Collection of Evidence and Court Documents from Graves vs. The President of the United States: U.S. Supreme Court Case No. 00-9587 30 Boyd Graves, writes: “Author Graves provides the irrefutable “missing link,” the 1971 AIDS research logic Flow Chart. It is the linkage of over 20,000 scientific papers which conclusively prove a “candidate” virus was developed and mass produced. His book provides an overview of many of these scientific papers, who the scientists were, and all the experiments, from the following original NCI documents:
U.S. Special Virus Program, Progress Report # 9, August 1972, Division of Cancer Cause and Prevention, National Cancer Institute; U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Office, National Institutes of Health (pp 431)
U.S. Special Virus Program, Progress Report # 10, August 1973, Division of Cancer Cause and Prevention, National Cancer Institute; U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Office, National Institutes of Health (pp 406)
U.S. Special Virus Program, Progress Report # 11, August 1974, Division of Cancer Cause and Prevention, National Cancer Institute; U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Office, National Institutes of Health (pp 547)
State Origin: The Evidence of the Laboratory Birth of AIDS: A Shocking Collection of Evidence and Court Documents from Graves vs. The President of the United States: U.S. Supreme Court Case No. 00-9587; National Organisation for the Advancement of Humanity & Zygote Media.
U.S. Special Virus Program, Progress Report # 13, August 1976, Division of Cancer Cause and Prevention, National Cancer Institute; U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Office, National Institutes of Health (pp 461)
U.S. Special Virus Program, Progress Report # 14, June 1977, Division of Cancer Cause and Prevention, National Cancer Institute; U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Office, National Institutes of Health (pp 439)
U.S. Special Virus Program, Progress Report # 15, June 1978, Division of Cancer Cause and Prevention, National Cancer Institute; U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Office, National Institutes of Health (pp 417)
Documents submitted to Politicians and Courts include excerpts from National Cancer Institute; U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Office, National Institutes of Health: U.S. Special Virus Program, Progress Reports, such as the 1971 AIDS research Logic flow chart, which links the 20,000 scientific papers; or the 1972 US-USSR Cold War Biological Warfare Agreement, where Dr. Robert Gallo (the discoverer of AIDS) of the NCI, traded the most advanced methods and materials in field of molecular biology, bacteriology & virology during the Cold War, including “large scale production of human virus” with the Soviets. Information included the statement by Dr. Gallo, to Dr. Horowitz that, these scientific US Special Virus Program experiments he was conducting to mix viruses from animals, quite possible, even probably could have contributed to HIV:
Dr. L. Horowitz:
Is there a possibility that these type of experiments (as conducted by the Special Virus Cancer Program), where hybrids were being created might have given rise to the HIVs?” Dr. Robert Gallo: .... Yeah that's possible.... not impossible. I can't even say its improbable, that some viruses mixed could contribute to HIV... [July 30,1996] -- Excerpt from Iatrogenic AIDS Origins Theory doc’s, delivered to SA Min of Health, Surgeon General, AIDS Law Project, and Anglo American Medical Consultant, via Democratic Party: Mr. T. Leon’s Office; c/o & via: Mayor of George, Mr. Swart.
d: US-USSR Cold War Biological Warfare Agreement (1972): US-USSR Agreement Under Which Biological Weapons Including the Most Advanced Cancer Viruses Were Traded During the Cold War; Page 36-39; U.S. Special Virus Program, Progress Report # 15, June 1978, Division of Cancer Cause and Prevention, National Cancer Institute; U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Office, National Institutes of Health (Pgâ€™s: 417)
Above agreement (pg 35), includes partial list of researchers (pg 37 â€“ 39), including Dr. Robert Gallo (the discoverer of AIDS) of the NCI, all who traded the most advanced methods and materials in field of molecular biology, bacteriology & virology during the Cold War.
Dr. Robert Gallo (the discoverer of AIDS) of the NCI, who traded the most advanced methods and materials in field of molecular biology, bacteriology & virology during the Cold War, including “large scale production of human virus” with the Soviets, appears on Pg. 39.
Dr. L. Horowitz:
Is there a possibility that these type of experiments (as conducted by the Special Virus Cancer Program), where hybrids were being created might have given rise to the HIVs?” Dr. Robert Gallo: .... Yeah that's possible.... not impossible. I can't even say its improbable, that some viruses mixed could contribute to HIV... [July 30,1996] -- Excerpt from Iatrogenic AIDS Origins Theory doc’s, delivered to SA Min of Health, Surgeon General, AIDS Law Project, and Anglo American Medical Consultant, via Democratic Party: Mr. T. Leon’s Office; c/o & via: Mayor of George, Mr. Swart.
A.4: Civil Disobedience Free Speech Necessity Defence So, what I cannot understand is, if Apartheid was ‘evil’ and a ‘crime against humanity’; how is it that the ANC Officials who know about the Iatrogenic Origins of AIDS; who know that if birth rates are not reduced additional Iatrogenic Biological Warfare depopulation viruses shall be possibly be created to reduce the overpopulation National Security problem, that Military Officials are tasked to deal with. Cancer, Gulf War Syndrome, AIDS and SARS did not appear out of nowhere! If we are serious about Truth and co-creating a society based on honesty, and peace, and social justice and human rights, then surely we should be addressing the root causes of these problems? As noted by a very wise Investigative Journalist, Michael Ruppert: “One cannot expect to follow the recipe for roadkill stew and produce a crème brulee” Similarly, we cannot expect to follow a political and psychological recipe for roadkill stew violence and abuse in families; and think it will produce peace and social justice and human rights in communities, cities or a nation? Psychology that produces abuse, violence, neglect, resentment in families and individual relationships will do the same for communities and nations. Either we are serious about Truth telling and Reconciliation and addressing Crisis Management Root cause problem solving, or we are spectacularly deceiving ourselves. Intentionally deceiving yourself is not a loving or kind act. To deliberately lie to yourself and to another, while pretending to care about each other, is extremely abusive and manipulative. In certain instances it could be psychopathic. Furthermore to attempt to certify and institutionalize anyone who suggests it may be a good idea to make an impartial enquiry and who is committed to resolving issues by means of sincere truth-telling and forgiveness, indicates the distinct plausibility that no original intention towards truth telling and forgiveness ever existed; it was just one big fraudulent PR publicity stunt. On 07/07/07, First Amici informed various SA Government Officials that it appeared they had no commitment or interest in Root Cause Crisis Management Problem Solving, no concern for Population Policy Common Sense and sincere Truth and Reconciliation; and that she would submit the court documents to the US Navy Judge Advocate General’s Office (JAG 07-146) for record-keeping and posterity purposes. The information was relayed to the six SA Government Officials via, Mrs. Patricia de Lille, to whom previous legal documentation had been sent, detailing the Iatrogenic (Manmade) Origins of AIDS, via Mr. Tony Leon’s office. First Amici personally telephoned Mrs. De Lille on her cell phone to inform her personally of the legal documents delivered to her Office, Mrs. De Lille got furious and provided the First
Amici with her honest furious opinion. First Amici was not insulted by Mrs. De Lille’s remarks at all, she simply wanted a final answer from Mrs. De Lille: Was Mrs. De Lille seriously and sincerely committed to the TRC SOCIAL CONTRACT, and if so, to addressing the population policy issues, and AIDS Iatrogenic Origins by means of sincere Truth and Forgiveness? Yes or No? Mrs. De Lille refused to give First Amici a clear honest answer; and slammed the phone down with ‘Fuck You, Fuck Your Racist [Military Intelligence[ document] . First Amici then concluded the possibility that Mrs. De Lille would prefer to endorse the Iatrogenic Origins of AIDS; while pretending to be concerned about people who had AIDS; i.e. lying to them about the origins of AIDS, and how and why it was created. First Amici then sent Mrs. De Lille and the six SA Gov. ANC Officials five Political Necessity Civil Disobedience SMS text messages, at 15:23; 15:32 and 18:32 hrs, on 10 July; and at 10:23 and 11:32 hrs on 16 July 2007. The SMS text messages included the word ‘Kaffir’; in its etymological critical literacy meaning: “to know the truth, and deliberately conceal the truth”. Mrs. De Lille filed criminal charges, alleging the SMS’s to be ‘insults to her dignity’ (crimen injuria31). Subsequent thereto; First Amici was (a) illegally arrested, without a valid arrest warrant by Insp. Christian in Capetown (18 July 2007); (b) denied right to appear in court within 24 hours of arrest (19 July 2007); (c) illegally detained for 33 days in Pollsmoor prison (18 July – 22 Aug 2007); (c) denied right to information (alleged Arrest Warrant, which is still considered ‘Top Secret’ by SAPS) to defend her rights (18 July 2007 to present); (d) denied impartial investigating Officer, Prosecutor and Magistrate (18 July to present); (e) framed in court by Investigating Officer and Prosecutor who intentionally withhold critical evidence of innocence (cellphone conversations with Mrs. De Lille) from the court; (f) framed by Magistrate who believed Mrs de Lille’s of not knowing First Amici, contrary to all legal documents provided to Magistrate, and information about telephone discussion with Mrs. De Lille prior to sending the SMS’s; (g) denied valid legal internationally recognized Political Necessity defence; (h) denied the expert witness evidentiary testimony of Dr. Leonard Horowitz32 and Dr. Brad Blanton33; (i) denied right to not be found guilty of an act that is ‘lawful’ (i.e. as per ‘reasonableness’ test); (j) denied right to withdraw formal admissions if Prosecution breach the ‘Formal Admission/Plea’ Agreement; (k) denied right not to be sentenced to a suspended prison sentence for an act that the law says is ‘lawful’; (l) denied right to file a complaint with the police documenting her persecution by Mrs. De Lille and the NPA, for the SAPS investigation. For eight years the SA Media totally ignored the trial in the Magistrates Court, the Appeal to the High Court, the refusal of the NPA to place the matter on the roll in the High Court. The First Amici was not violent, and was not a member of the AWB, or some organisation which the media could malign; she was just a member of the non-violent Radical Honesty culture, who are motivated by Practicing Radical Honesty and sincere forgiveness. Really not
Crimen Injuria & Reasonableness: a fundamental prong of determining the unlawfulness of Crimen Injuria, is what is called ‘the criterion of reasonableness’. This is an objective test; and it requires the conduct complained of to be tested against the prevailing norms of society, in order to determine whether such conduct can be classified as wrongful 32 Affidavit of Leonard George Horowitz evidencing the Origin of AIDS sourcing from Hepatitus B Vaccine experiments conducted by Agents and Agencies of the Federal Government of the United States of America and the Merck Pharmaceutical Company; in terms of Criminal Procedure Act 51, of 1977: § 213: Proof of Written Statement by Consent; & § 171 & 172: Evidence on Commission 33 Affidavit of Leonard George Horowitz evidencing the Origin of AIDS sourcing from Hepatitus B Vaccine experiments conducted by Agents and Agencies of the Federal Government of the United States of America and the Merck Pharmaceutical Company; in terms of Criminal Procedure Act 51, of 1977: § 213: Proof of Written Statement by Consent; & § 171 & 172: Evidence on Commission
of concern to South Africans only interested in politically correct truths, and fake pretend forgiveness. The only news article’s the First Amici are aware of, were:
SAPA: Woman defies court over rude De Lille SMSs, by ‘Staff Writer’, 19 July, 2007
Rassistiese SMS'e was glo in kodetaal: Vrou van George se aan hof sy het nie gedink OD-leier sal aanstoot neem nie; Rozanne Els; Die Burger; 9 Julie 2009
Vrou in hof oor ‘SMS-rassisme’; Rozanne Els, Die Burger; 10 Julie 2009
The only article which mentioned the First Amici’s contextual motives for the SMS text messages, was Die Burger of 9 July, with the statement: “Dié dokumente het verband gehou met studies oor die oorsprong van MIV/vigs.” The entire rest of the article dealt with the ‘racism’ of the SMS’s. According to the South African Media: It is ‘racist’ to send an SMS to a politician with the word “Kaffir (To Know the Truth and deliberately conceal the truth); but nothing is said about a Politician who Knows the truth about the Iatrogenic Manmade Biological Warfare Origins of AIDS, and who remains silent about it. Not one article mentioned that the First Amici has been submitting information about the Iatrogenic Origins of AIDS to South African Politicians, for eight years. Information such as the August 1972 Flow Chart (US Special Virus Program) Progress Report # 9 (Fold In Chart): The Coordination of Every Experiment in the Development of Aids, which links the 20,000 scientific papers which conclusively prove that a “candidate” virus was developed and mass produced. If Apartheid was a ‘crime against humanity’; what is the Biological Warfare Origin of AIDS? Or are we only concerned with crimes against Humanity against white Afrikaners, not White Liberal Americans; who provide South African politicians with billions of Rands in AIDS funding? Why am I the only person who thinks that is extremely Hypocritical? Is it Politically Correct to require Justice to be impartial to Afrikaners, even if some of them can be pains in the ass? Is justice and the rule of law and fairness only to be provided to those we agree with, or those who provide us with millions in donations and funding, or those whose ideas we agree with; but not to those we disagree with, or prefer to scapegoat and hate? Why is ‘Free Speech’ only important when it applies to the Media; when the Media – who are aware of 20,000 scientific documents that document the distinct possibility, no probability (as stated by the main scientist who participated in the experiments) that those experiments created AIDS – want to accuse Robert McBride of being a murderer for blowing a bomb in Durban that killed less than 10 people. According to USAID: HIV/AIDS: Frequently Asked Questions
“Almost 5,500 people die every day due to AIDS. AIDS caused 2 million deaths in 2008. An estimated 25 million people have died from HIV-related causes since the beginning of the pandemic. As of 2008, approximately 14 million children had lost one or both parents due to HIV/AIDS.” But Robert McBride is a murderer, the scum of the earth, for killing three people! The same media have nothing to say about South African Politicians who are aware of the Iatrogenic Origins of AIDS, which according to USAID kills 5,500 people per day!! If we assume a Boeing 747 to hold a maximum 524 passengers, then that is equivalent to 10 Boeing 747’s crashing every single day, and all the passengers dying! And what about the Free Speech rights of non-violent civil disobedience protestors on behalf of Truth and sincere Forgiveness? They are simply irrelevant, Insane, or Racist! In Civil Disobedience and the Necessity Defence34, John Alan Cohan describes the Civil Disobedience Free Speech Necessity as follows: Freedom of expression in a free society includes freewheeling public dissent on controversial political issues of the day. Civil disobedience is a form of protest that, while usually peaceful, involves violating the law—usually by trespassing on government property, blocking access to buildings, or engaging in disorderly conduct. Civil disobedience has been called “the deliberate violation of law for a vital social purpose.”35 In their day in court, civil disobedients have at times sought to interpose the necessity defense to justify their conduct. The necessity defense asserts that breaking the law was justified in order to avert a greater harm that would occur as a result of the government policy the offender was protesting. Protestors will seek to invoke the necessity defense not so much to gain acquittal from the relatively minor charges, but to advance the more important objective of publicly airing the moral and political issues that inspired their act of civil disobedience. There is the hope of gaining notoriety for a cause by discussing it in court, and “educating” the jury about political grievances or other social harms. The strategy is meant to appeal to a higher principle than the law being violated—the necessity of stopping objectionable government policies—and to let the jury have an opportunity to weigh their technically illegal actions on the scales of justice. Acquittal is of course hoped for in the end but may be quite low on the protestors’ list of priorities. The necessity defense is attractive to reformers who practice civil disobedience because it allows them to deny guilt without renouncing their socially driven acts. It offers a means to discuss political issues in the courtroom, a forum in which reformers can demand equal time and, perhaps, respect. Moreover, its elements allow civil disobedients to describe their political motivations. In proving the imminence of the harm, they can demonstrate the urgency of the social problem. In showing the relative severity of the harms, they can show the seriousness of the social evil they seek to avert. In establishing the lack of reasonable alternatives, they can assault the unresponsiveness of those in power in dealing with the problem and prod them to action. And in presenting evidence of a causal relationship, they can argue the importance of individual action in reforming 34 Civil Disobedience and the Necessity Defense, by John Alan Cohan, J.D. Loyola Law School; B.A. University of Southern California; Pierce Law Review. 35 Howard Zinn, Disobedience and Democracy: Nine Falacies on Law and Order 39 (1968)
society. Thus, the elements of the necessity defense provide an excellent structure for publicizing and debating political issues in the judicial forum.36 The goal of describing their political motivations to the jury, and implicitly to the media, is subject to numerous hurdles inherent in the necessity defense. In most instances, as we will see, courts will rule as a matter of law that the actors have failed in the offer of proof regarding the elements of the necessity defense so that the jury rarely is given the chance to weigh in on the matter. On the other hand, if the defense is allowed, the jury is called upon to weigh controversial political issues and to function as the “conscience of the community.” “Reflected in the jury’s decision is a judgment of whether, under all the circumstances of the event and in the light of all known about the defendant, the prohibited act, if committed, deserves condemnation by the law.”3 In cases where judges have been persuaded to allow the necessity defense, juries have, often enough, delivered not guilty verdicts Definition of Civil Disobedience John Rawls defines civil disobedience as “a public, nonviolent, conscientious yet political act contrary to law usually done with the aim of bringing about a change in the law or policies of the government.”37 A more comprehensive definition of civil disobedience is: Civil disobedience is an act of protest, deliberately unlawful, conscientiously and publicly performed. It may have as its object the laws or policies of some governmental body, or those of some private corporate body whose decisions have serious public consequences; but in either case the disobedient protest is almost invariably nonviolent in character.38 Broadly construed, civil disobedience may be directed toward a law or policy of the government, or toward a corporate entity whose policy is the subject of protest. Civil disobedients hope that their conduct makes a dramatic appeal to the conscience of the community, affects public awareness of a particular social issue, and motivates citizens to demand change in certain policies. Civil disobedience is a singular hallmark of a free country: We must recognize that civil disobedience in various forms, used without violent acts against others, is engrained in our society and the moral correctness of political protestors’ views has on occasion served to change and better our society. Civil disobedience has been prevalent throughout this nation’s history extending from the Boston Tea Party and the signing of the Declaration of Independence, to the freeing of the slaves by operation of the Underground Railroad in the mid-1880’s. More recently, disobedience of “Jim Crow” laws served, among other things, as a catalyst to end segregation by law in this country, and violation of selective service laws contributed to our eventual withdrawal from the Viet Nam War.39 Civil disobedience differs from other forms of peaceful protest in that there is a technical violation of the law such as trespass, blocking of public access, or disorderly conduct; and 36 Steven M. Bauer & Peter J. Eckerstrom, The State Made Me Do It: The Applicability of the Necessity Defense to Civil Disobedience, 39 STAN. L. REV. 1173, 1176 (1987). 37 John Rawls, A Theory of Justice 364 (1971) 38 Carl Cohen, Civil Disobedience: Conscience, Tactics, and the Law 39–40 (1971) (emphasis omitted); see Blacks Law Dictionary 223 (5th ed. 1979) (defining civil disobedience as “a form of lawbreaking employed to demonstrate the injustice or unfairness of a particular law and indulged in deliberately to focus attention on the allegedly undesirable law”). 39 United States v. Kabat, 797 F.2d 580, 601 (8th Cir. 1986) (Bright, J., dissenting).
the violation is part of the effort to garner public attention to the cause. Ordinary forms of peaceful protest may simply involve peaceful picketing, circulating petitions, forming of rallies, and the like, in which proper police permits are obtained and there are no violations of the law. Historic Instances of Civil Disobedience Of course, civil disobedience is something of a democratic tradition. ….. As early as 1635, American colonists were persecuted for direct civil disobedience in refusing to obey certain laws by reason of conscience.40 Acts of direct civil disobedience to the English crown were the hallmark of the American Revolution, including the Boston Tea Party.41 Opposition to slavery involved numerous kinds of direct civil disobedience, including aiding and abetting runaway slaves. In 1846, Henry David Thoreau wrote his famous and influential essay, On the Duty of Civil Disobedience, in which he gave a cogent argument on the necessity of direct civil disobedience: Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once? .... Of course if the media were concerned about Free Speech, we could hold an honest conversation about the population policy issues that motivated those who created AIDS, and thereby adopt an Adult Crisis Management Policy that addresses problems at their root causes. Such a public conversation with and by citizens and Government may even result in legislation which actually incorporate the principle of ecological carrying capacity into ideas such as social justice, peace and human rights. But these are alien concepts to lawyers, politicians, journalists and editors who think that everyone should have the Inalienable ‘Right to Breed’, but you need Licence to Own a Gun, a Licence to Drive a Car, a Licence to Practice Law, a television licence, a credit licence, a licence to earn a living, a university exemption licence, a licence to fish, a licence to hunt, a liquor licence, a business licence, a marriage licence. So we are stuck with many black Africans believing AIDS to have originated from Witches, Witchdoctors encouraging baby-rape as a cure; many of those who suspect it to be manmade, expressing their rage and fury by raping white farmers, and so the vicious lies and deception roadkill recipe, provides exactly what the recipe says it will: roadkill rape, murder, hate, violence, spiritual insecurity, etc. What do people expect military officials to do, who are seriously concerned about the national security implications of overpopulation colliding with scarce resources? Name one problem in the entire history of humankind that has been solved by sticking your head in the sand; and denying reality and refusing to confront the problem at its roots? One?
William P. Quigley, The Necessity Defense in Civil Disobedience Cases: Bring in the Jury, 38 NEW ENG. L. REV. 3, 18 (2003) Quigley, supra note 10, at 21; see, e.g., Power of the People: Active Nonviolence in the United States 15 (Robert Cooney & Helen Michalowski eds., 1977). In 1635, the General Court of Massachusetts banished Roger Williams for criticizing the Puritan clergy’s persecution of people of conscience and for insisting that the land still belonged to Native Americans. See id. Anne Hutchinson was banished in 1638 for publicly insisting that conscience was a higher authority than law. See id. At 15–16. The Society of Friends, a pacifist group, was banned from Massachusetts from 1654 to 1661; a law in 1657 imposed a fine of 100 pounds on anyone who brought a Quaker into the territory. See id. In 1658, a Quaker named Richard Keene was fined and beaten for refusing to be trained as a soldier. See id. at 18. 41 Quigley, supra note 10, at 21.
e: Blessed are the Vigilant that Readeth: Conscientious Safe Sex Can Avoid Aids “If you ask me why is there more AIDS in Africa and I say because Africans f—- more, what’s your reaction?” —Elizabeth Pisani, epidemiologist, quoted in Why We Are Losing the War on AIDS, The Sunday Herald, May 4, 2008. “AIDS would be brought under control only if Africans restrain their sexual cravings.”— Dr. Yuichi Shiokawa, 10th International AIDS Conference, Yokohama, August 1994. “Let me be very blunt: The heterosexual transmission of AIDS is, in Africa, a function of truly pathological promiscuity. So this is really a violence issue—not the same violence we deal with in Boston, where teenagers stab and shoot each other, but the violence of African men who are killing themselves, and killing African women and children, with pathological promiscuity.”—Rev. Eugene Rivers, Silence Is Death, The Boston Review, April/May 1999. “Sex, love and disease do not mean the same thing to Africans as they do to West Europeans [because] the notion of guilt doesn’t exist in the same way as it does in the JudeoChristian culture of the West.”—Professor Nathan Clumeck of the Universite Libre in Brussels, Le Monde section of The Manchester Guardian Weekly, Dec. 14, 1993. “Many men in Africa take their women in a brutal way, so that some heterosexual activity regarded as normal by them would be closer to rape by our standards and therefore be likely to cause vaginal lacerations through which the AIDS virus could gain entry into the bloodstream.”—“Reassuring News About AIDS: A Doctor Tells Why You May Not Be at Risk,” Cosmopolitan magazine, January 1988. In AIDS in South Africa: Why the Churches Matter42, Sarah Ruden writes: “Ironically, a disproportionate amount of the credit goes to conservative black churches with no AIDS programs and no specific AIDS message -- the churches regularly accused of having their heads in the sand. Most black churchgoers belong to these denominations. (The Zionist Church alone has 3.9 million members; this single institution keeps nearly one out of ten South Africans relatively safe from the new plague.) Lucy is a 26-year-old who attends the Gospel Church of Power in Guguletu, a squatter settlement near Cape Town. She said her church had nothing to say about AIDS. No one in the church had AIDS. All its members were very strict about marriage.”
AIDS in South Africa: Why the Churches Matter, by Sarah Ruden, The Christian Century, May 17, 2000, Christian Century Foundation.
A.5: ‘I am, therefore I think’ Common Law Reasonableness Test Skills & Competencies In Practicing Radical Honesty, Dr. Blanton describes the importance of sincere forgiveness and its consequences in changing the statistics of the Stanley Milgram studies of Obedience, which found that Eichmann Obedience proclivities were in 92% of us! The key to individuality, integrity, and individual freedom has something to do with forgiveness, which involves getting over anger. That is done in the public domain, in community, and it is the pathway to freedom for individuals and the key to free societies. It is the way the statistics from Stanley Milgram's experiments get changed. Learning forgiveness, as an individual skill, by practice in getting over anger in the context of a community of friends, is an absolutely necessary prerequisite to creating a world that works for everyone. To be an individual who operates independently of authority and according to compassion, you need to learn the fundamental skills of getting mad and getting over it. Once you gain experience of getting mad and sincere forgiveness, you learn skills of noticing. You learn to notice even your mind. You notice that ‘I think, therefore I am’ is erroneous; and you begin to know “I am, therefore I think”. You notice yourself thinking. Your thoughts are just thoughts, not ‘me’. You become a being with a mind (I am, therefore I think) rather than a mind with a being (I think, therefore I am) as your culture has taught you all your life, and a whole new world of possibility opens up. In Affidavit of Brad Blanton, Ph.D, evidencing the legal, psychological, and socio-political ‘citizens privilege’, Nuremberg Principles skills and competencies of Individual Responsibility, required for acts of civil disobedience to perceived illegitimate authority; and their application to the common law ‘reasonableness test’43 filed as Expert Witness Affidavit in High Court, W.C. # 19963-09; Dr. Blanton explains what happens in cultures of obedience; how and why studies show that 92% of citizens lack the psychological and emotional skills for non-violent disobedience to perceived illegal authority. Brief Description of the Milgram Experiment: [19.] The Milgram experiment was a series of social psychology experiments conducted by Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram, which measured the willingness of study
43 Use of ‘reasonableness test’ is in accordance to Essex Fire Service Safety Partnership’s Legal: Common Law Definition of Reasonable Test and Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee  1 WLR 582;  2 All ER 118: Generally, the standard of care/foresight a person is expected to attain is an objective standard derived from what a reasonable person would do under the same circumstances. 'Where you get a situation which involves the use of some special skill or competence, then the test…is not the test of the man on the top of a Clapham omnibus, because he has not got this special skill. The test is the standard of the ordinary skilled man exercising and professing to have that special skill.' ‘The man on the Clapham omnibus’, is in legal speak, 'the reasonable person'. This is a phrase that was first used by Sir Charles Bowen, QC (later Lord Bowen). (Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase & Fable, 16th Edition, 1995) The man on the Clapham omnibus/the man in the street means the average ordinary English person (Oxford Guide to British & American Culture, 1999) Bolam -v- Friern Hospital Management Committee  1 WLR 582;  2 All ER 118: Professional Negligence: “Where some special skill is exercised, the test for negligence is not the test of the man on the Clapham omnibus, because he has not got this special skill. The test is the standard of the ordinary skilled man exercising or professing to have that special skill.”
participants to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts that conflicted with their personal conscience. [20.] Milgram devised the experiments in response to the question raised by Hannah Arendt, in her coverage of the war crimes trial of Adolf Eichmann. Eichmanns defence was that he should not be held personally responsible for a crime against mankind because he was doing his duty in the social system of which he was a part. His lawyers said a court might judge the social system as criminal, but not the person doing their duty within that social system. This argument was rejected. Eichmann’s adjudicators concluded that he was individually responsible for the crimes he committed, regardless of the social system of which he was a part, and he was executed. [21.] Arendt then raised the question which fascinated Milgram: Was Adolf Eichmann some unusual deviant, some sadistic exception to common humanity, or was he just a bureaucrat? What he actually did was shuffle papers in an office and make phone calls and give orders. Was he normal? [22.] The Milgram experiment was designed to simulate the conditions in which Eichmann operated, and to determine how many individuals would – like Eichmann – follow orders and be obedient to the system in which they operated; and how many would practice civil disobedience and refuse to be obedient to perceived illegal authority. Milgram’s experiment revealed that a significant majority of the population – 65%, like Eichmanns millions of accomplices – merely follow orders, irrespective whether the orders violate their deepest moral beliefs; only 35 % possessed the skills and competencies for civil disobedience. [23.] Furthermore, when individuals could share the responsibility or blame, with just one other person, 92% of individuals would, like Eichmann, cooperate with authority; and refrain from civil disobedience; and only 8% possessed the skills and competencies for civil disobedience. [24.] In Perils of Obedience, Yale and Harvard University social psychologist, Dr. Stanley Milgram summarised his ‘Eichmann’ Obedience experiment, as follows: “The legal and philosophic aspects of obedience are of enormous importance, but they say very little about how most people behave in concrete situations. I set up a simple experiment at Yale University to test how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist. Stark authority was pitted against the subjects [participants] strongest moral imperatives against hurting others, and, with the subjects [participants] ears ringing with the screams of the victims, authority won more often than not. The extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of an authority constitutes the chief finding of the study and the fact most urgently demanding explanation. Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work
become patently clear and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority.” [25.] The relevant questions then become, what are the resources: the emotional, psychological, and socio-political skills and competencies, that: A. the 37% possess, when individually confronting perceived illegal authority; and B. the 8% possess, refusing the given opportunity, from an ideological or social peer, to share the blame, with them; and individually confront perceived illegal authority.
A.6: ‘I am, therefore I Think’ Common Law Radical Hon(our)sty Reasonableness Test Skills In Affidavit of Brad Blanton, Ph.D, evidencing the legal, psychological, and sociopolitical ‘citizens privilege’, Nuremberg Principles skills and competencies of Individual Responsibility, required for acts of civil disobedience to perceived illegitimate authority; and their application to the common law ‘reasonableness test’44Dr. Blanton suggests the following guidelines to determine the reasonableness of ‘I am, therefore I think’ Radical Hon(our)sty Free Speech civil disobedient acts. Dr. Blanton confirms that those ‘Kaffir’ SMS’s were not about black politicians, but about politicians obedient to cultures of secrecy, who know the truth, but intentionally cover it up. First Amici’s ‘Mens Rea’ intentions were to Co-Create a Radical Honesty Truth and Forgiveness Social Contract for South Africa; on behalf of Freedom of Speech and Truth and Forgiveness. A. Were her alleged criminal acts, a result of her Radical Honesty cultural religious practice, such as: I. Was her act a general attitude of disrespect for the minds of the plaintiffs, including her own? II. Does Lara consider her mind to be who she is? III. Does Lara consider the Plaintiff’s mind to be who she is? IV. Or, does Lara consider the Plaintiff’s being who grew the mind, the one who notices first and learns second, the observer-in-the-moment-alive-right-now-only being, to be who she is?
44 Use of ‘reasonableness test’ is in accordance to Essex Fire Service Safety Partnership’s Legal: Common Law Definition of Reasonable Test and Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee  1 WLR 582;  2 All ER 118: Generally, the standard of care/foresight a person is expected to attain is an objective standard derived from what a reasonable person would do under the same circumstances. 'Where you get a situation which involves the use of some special skill or competence, then the test…is not the test of the man on the top of a Clapham omnibus, because he has not got this special skill. The test is the standard of the ordinary skilled man exercising and professing to have that special skill.' ‘The man on the Clapham omnibus’, is in legal speak, 'the reasonable person'. This is a phrase that was first used by Sir Charles Bowen, QC (later Lord Bowen). (Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase & Fable, 16th Edition, 1995) The man on the Clapham omnibus/the man in the street means the average ordinary English person (Oxford Guide to British & American Culture, 1999) Bolam -v- Friern Hospital Management Committee  1 WLR 582;  2 All ER 118: Professional Negligence: “Where some special skill is exercised, the test for negligence is not the test of the man on the Clapham omnibus, because he has not got this special skill. The test is the standard of the ordinary skilled man exercising or professing to have that special skill.”
V. Is Lara a fully alive, healthy person who raises hell all the time, is not polite, offends people, hurts people’s feelings, and also stays with people while they work through the feelings, committed to their being and at war with their minds? VI. Does she refuse to submit to the minds of others or even to her own mind? VII. Does she rule her own life and create a life from being, which is to say, out of love, using her mind, not being used by it? VIII. For the love of being, does Lara choose to be a destroyer of minds, incessantly, endlessly, and perhaps fruitlessly, but it is her own sweet damned choice? IX. Is Lara’s Radical Honesty Religious Map and Religious Attitude (Fromm: To Have or To Be), that of being courageous enough to express her truth, her whole truth, and nothing but her truth, to the person she is in disagreement with, to their face, not behind their back, with the commitment to remain in the conversation, with them; until sensate forgiveness has sincerely occurred? X. If it is so determined that Lara’s Radical Honesty Religious Map and Attitude, is as aforementioned, would it not be impossible for Lara to have formed the mens rea intention to insult the Plaintiff; since her intention was to respect the Plaintiffs being, while being at war with the Plaintiff’s mind; and to remain in the conversation until sensate forgiveness had sincerely occurred? B. Were her alleged criminal acts, a result of her Bushi Honourable Way of the Warrior cultural religious practice, such as: I. Was her act partially motivated by her loathing of underhand dealings and crooked undertakings? II. Was her act motivated to intellectually engage and the Plaintiffs in an exploration of knowledge and character? III. Ultimately was her act motivated to experientially engage the Plaintiffs in an exploration of Co-Creating a Radical Honesty Truth and Forgiveness Social Contract for South Africa
C. Were her alleged criminal acts, a result of her Dischordian cultural religious practice: I. Was her act an Operation Mindfuck: Golden Apple Seed Mission (OMGASM): Meme Hack? II. Did her Operation Mindfuck – an act of deliberate hyperbole and exaggeration -- manifest as a decentralized campaign of civil disobedience, activism, culture hacking, reality hacking or anything else that is believed to bring about social change through disrupting paradigms and thus forcing the victim to question the parameters of her reality tunnel? III. If a meme is a contagious idea –- like for example, the word ‘kaffir’ – that replicates like a virus, passed on from mind to mind; and memes function the same as genes and viruses do; propagating through communication networks and contact between people; did her meme hack take the existing meme ‘kaffir’; and alter it, to express a point of view not intended or inherent in the original, or even opposite to the original; and thus show the unreasonable and arbitrary nature of the ‘kaffir’ meme?
A.7: Dr. Blanton vs. SA’s Political & Media Elite: ‘TRC was a fraudulent PR publicity stunt’ To summarize, in Affidavit of Brad Blanton, Ph.D, evidencing the legal, psychological, and socio-political ‘citizens privilege’, Nuremberg Principles skills and competencies of Individual Responsibility, required for acts of civil disobedience to perceived illegitimate authority; and their application to the common law ‘reasonableness test’45 Dr. Brad Blanton – Radical Honesty author, ‘Dr. Truth’ psychologist and ‘Honesty in Politics’ Candidate for US Congress in 2004 and 2006 – stated under oath; that: If South Africa does not value non-violent civil disobedience free speech dissent, as one of its hallmarks; then it is not a democratic country. Hon. Mrs. De Lille and the NPA Senior Prosecutor conducted a political and legal prosecution and persecution campaign against the defendant (First Amici). The law of crimen injuria is a law so ridiculous; it appears to date back to a belief in curses from witchdoctors. Put differently, any society that values the principle of 'crimen injuria' (I think, I am unique); is one that values protecting the right of people with fragile ego's to not be offended as more important, than protecting the right of Galileo's and Voltaire's to offend. The South African government are deliberately and intentionally punishing defendant for practicing her culture and religion of Radical Honesty: non-violently telling another the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth; with a commitment to remaining in the conversation until sincere forgiveness has occurred. The South African government are deliberately and intentionally denying defendant her right to a defence; and ignoring the justification and accuracy of her non-violent civil disobedience political necessity defence. That there is a significant difference between posed forgiveness and real forgiveness and that this difference is almost always avoided by politicians, including South Africa’s alleged Truth and
45 Use of ‘reasonableness test’ is in accordance to Essex Fire Service Safety Partnership’s Legal: Common Law Definition of Reasonable Test and Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee  1 WLR 582;  2 All ER 118: Generally, the standard of care/foresight a person is expected to attain is an objective standard derived from what a reasonable person would do under the same circumstances. 'Where you get a situation which involves the use of some special skill or competence, then the test…is not the test of the man on the top of a Clapham omnibus, because he has not got this special skill. The test is the standard of the ordinary skilled man exercising and professing to have that special skill.' ‘The man on the Clapham omnibus’, is in legal speak, 'the reasonable person'. This is a phrase that was first used by Sir Charles Bowen, QC (later Lord Bowen). (Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase & Fable, 16th Edition, 1995) The man on the Clapham omnibus/the man in the street means the average ordinary English person (Oxford Guide to British & American Culture, 1999) Bolam -v- Friern Hospital Management Committee  1 WLR 582;  2 All ER 118: Professional Negligence: “Where some special skill is exercised, the test for negligence is not the test of the man on the Clapham omnibus, because he has not got this special skill. The test is the standard of the ordinary skilled man exercising or professing to have that special skill.”
Reconciliation politicians. Put differently: S. Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation was not real & sincere; but fake & posed; a political fraud committed against SA citizens. First Amici contacted 140 of SA’s political, academic and media elite, to inform them of Dr. Blanton’s statements, and to request a comment regarding among others whether they (a) objected to First Amici’s legal and political persecution and prosecution, (b) endorsed or supported First Amici’s right to Radical Honesty Freedom of Speech (i.e. shared with a commitment to remaining in conversation until sincere forgiveness had occurred). The responses from South Africa’s political and media elite to Dr. Blantons aforementioned allegations, and First Amici’s Freedom of Speech rights, are as follows:
a: Media Editors, Station Manager & News Editors: Sowetan Sun: Editor: Charles Mogale: 26 February 2010 “I have taken the time to read Dr Blanton's offering and regret that I am not able to offer any opion on his views. I do not feel aptly qualified to proffer any opinion as, you will appreciate, ours is a tabloid publication which does not cover the subjects Dr Blanton raises.”46 Beeld: Editor: Tim du Plessis: 25 February 2010 “Kindly be informed that I am not going to comment on the questions/issues raised in you letter. There will be no further correspondence or liaison in this matter.”47 3rd Degree: Exec. Producer: Deborah Patta: 03 March 2010 “3rd degree is an investigative current affairs programme not a public elected body with a responsibility to comment on issues. All comment from e.news and current affairs falls under the head of news as pointed out in a previous e-mail.”48 Business Day: Editor: Peter Bruce, 23 February 2010: “I didn't read all of it, because it was so long and so demented. So, I don't have any reply or any comment. I don't want to have anything to do with it. Sorry”49 Daily News: Editor: Alan Dunn: 25 February 2010
Correspondence: Mr. Charles Mogale, Sowetan Sun: Request Sowetan Sunday World Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Nonviolent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. Correspondence: Mr. Tim du Plessis, Editor: Beeld: Request Beeld’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity 48 Correspondence: Ms. Deborah Patta, 3rd Degree: Request 3rd Degree Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 49 Correspondence: Mr. Peter Bruce, Business Day: Request Business Day’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 47
“Mr Alan Dunn, Editor, Daily News, will not be commenting on Free Speech Legal Issue. Any response on the Huntley case will be in our editorial column.”50 10-02-22-Daily-News-Editor-Alan-Dunne Mail and Guardian: Editors: Keith Nichols & Mathew Burbidge: 22 February 2010 Mr. Nichols stated that he had “No Comment” to the issues raised by American politician and author, Dr. Brad Blanton’s allegations of South African State’s Political and legal prosecution and persecution of non-violent civil disobedience Free Speech dissenter in South Africa. Asked whether it would be fair to say whether Mr. Nichols choice not to make any comment on the issue, demonstrated that he did not care about the Free Speech issues raised, he said he was not going to comment. Asked whether it would be fair to conclude that his statement of No Comment, reflected that he did not care about a South African citizen's being politically and legally prosecuted and persecuted. He again responded that he was not going to comment, with “I am not going to comment on that, okay,” and put down the phone.51 Saturday Star: Editor: Brendan Seery: 26 February 2010 “I would much prefer deliberate indifference.” “Deliberate Indifference: Brendan Seery (Editor: Saturday Star) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Saturday Star is deliberately indifferent.”52 702 Radio: Station Manager: Ms. Pheladi Gwangwa: 01 March 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Pheladi Gwangwa (Station Manager, Radio 702) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Radio 702 is deliberately indifferent.”53 Die Burger: Editor: Henry Jeffereys: 27 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Henry Jeffreys (Editor, Die Burger) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit
Correspondence: Mr. Alan Dunne, Daily News: Request Daily News Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. Correspondence: Mail & Guardian: Mr. K Nichols & M Burbidge: Request Mail & Guardian’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 52 Correspondence: Saturday Star: Mr. Brendan Seery: Request Saturday Star Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 53 Correspondence: Radio 702: Station Manager: Ms. Pheladi Gwangwa: Request 702 Radio’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 51
one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Die Burger is deliberately indifferent.”54 Cape Argus: Editor: Chris Witfield: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Chris Witfield (Editor, Cape Argus) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and your fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Cape Argus is deliberately indifferent.”55 Cape Times: Editor: Alide Dasnois: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Alide Dasnois (Editor, Cape Times) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Cape Times is deliberately indifferent.”56 The Citizen: Editor: Martin Williams: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Martin Williams (Editor, The Citizen) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and your fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, The Citizen is deliberately indifferent.”57 City Press: Editor: Ferial Haffajee: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Ferial Haffajee (Editor, City Press) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, City Press is deliberately indifferent.”58 Daily Maverick: Brkic Branco: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Brkic Branco (Editor, Daily Maverick) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Daily Maverick is deliberately indifferent.”59 Daily Sun: Editor: Themba Khumalo: 02 March 2010
Correspondence: Die Burger: Mr. Henry Jefferys: Request Die Burger Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 55 Correspondence: Cape Argus: Mr. Chris Witfield: Request Cape Argus & Weekend Argus Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 56 Correspondence: Cape Times: Ms. Alide Dasnois: Request Cape Times Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 57 Correspondence: The Citizen: Mr. Martin Williams: Request The Citizen Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 58 Correspondence: City Press: Ms. Ferial Haffajee: Request City Press Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 59 Correspondence: Daily Maverick: Mr. Brkic Branco: Request Daily Maverick’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity.
“Deliberate Indifference: Themba Khumalo (Editor, Daily Sun) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Daily Sun is deliberately indifferent.”60 Daily Dispatch: Editor: Andrew Trench: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Andrew Trench (Editor, Daily Dispatch) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Daily Dispatch is deliberately indifferent.”61 E-News: Head of News: Patrick Conroy: 04 March 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Patrick Conroy (Head of E-News) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, E-News is deliberately indifferent.”62 Financial Mail: Editor: Barney Mthombothi: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Barney Mthombothi (Editor, Financial Mail) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Financial Mail is deliberately indifferent.”63 Finweek: Editor: Colleen Naude: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Colleen Naude (Editor, Finweek) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Finweek is deliberately indifferent.”64 George Herald: Editor: Mandi Botha: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Mandi Botha (Editor, George Herald) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit
Correspondence: Daily Sun: Mr. Themba Khumalo: Request Daily Sun Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. Correspondence: Daily Dispatch: Andrew Trench: Request Daily Dispatch Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 62 Correspondence: E-News: Head of News: Mr. Patrick Conroy: Request E-News Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 63 Correspondence: Financial Mail: Editor: Mr. Barney Mthombothi: Request Financial Mail Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 64 Correspondence: Finweek: Editor: Ms. Colleen Naude: Request Finweek Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 61
one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, George Herald is deliberately indifferent.”65 The Herald: Editor: Jeremy McCabe: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Jeremy McCabe (Editor, The Herald) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, The Herald is deliberately indifferent.”66 Independent on Saturday: Editor: Trevor Bruce: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Trevor Bruce (Editor, Independent on Saturday) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Independent on Saturday is deliberately indifferent.”67 Pretoria News: Editor: Zingisa Mkhuma: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Zingisa Mkhuma (Editor, Pretoria News) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Pretoria News is deliberately indifferent.”68 Rapport: Editor: Lisa Albrecht: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Lisa Albrecht (Editor, Rapport) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Rapport is deliberately indifferent.”69 SA Press Association: Editor: Mark van der Velden: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Mark van der Velden (Editor, SA Press Association) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, SAPA is deliberately indifferent.”70 Sowetan: Editor: Bongani Keswa: 03 March 2010 65
Correspondence: George Herald: Ms. Mandi Botha: Request George Herald Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 66 Correspondence: The Herald: Mr. Jeremy McCabe: Request The Herald’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 67 Correspondence: Ind. on Saturday: Mr. Trevor Bruce: Request Independent on Saturday Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 68 Correspondence: Pretoria News: Ms. Zingisa Mkhuma: Request Pretoria News Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 69 Correspondence: Rapport: Ms. Lisa Albrecht: Request Rapport Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 70 Correspondence: Editor: Mr. Mark van der Velden: Request SAPA Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity.
“Deliberate Indifference: Bongani Keswa (Editor, Sowetan) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Sowetan is deliberately indifferent.”71 The Star: Editor: Moegsien Williams: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Moegsien Wiliams (Editor, The Star) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, The Star is deliberately indifferent.”72 Sunday Independent: Editor: Makhudu Sefara: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Makhudu Sefara (Editor, Sunday Independent) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Sunday Independent is deliberately indifferent.”73 Sunday Times: Editor: Ray Hartley: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Ray Hartley (Editor, Sunday Times) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Sunday Times is deliberately indifferent.”74 Sunday Tribune: Editor: Philani Mgwaba: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Philani Mgwaba (Editor, Sunday Tribune) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Sunday Tribune is deliberately indifferent.”75 Volksblad: Editor: Ainsley Moos: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Ainsley Moos (Editor, Volksblad) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or
Correspondence: Sowetan: Mr. Bongani Kheswa: Request Sowetan Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. Correspondence: The Star: Mr. Moegsien Williams: Request The Star’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 73 Correspondence: Sunday Ind.: Mr. Makhudu Sefara: Request Sunday Independent Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Nonviolent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 74 Correspondence: Sunday Times: Mr. Ray Hartley: Request Sunday Times Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 75 Correspondence: Sunday Tribune: Ms. Philani Mgwaba: Request Sunday Tribune Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Nonviolent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity 72
more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Volksblad is deliberately indifferent.”76
b: Political Parties & Gov. Departments African Christian Democratic Party: Rev. Kenneth Meshoe: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Rev. Kenneth Meshoe (Leader, African Christian Democratic Party) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, ACDP is deliberately indifferent.”77 African National Congress: Pres. Zuma & Sec. Gen. Mantashe: “Deliberate Indifference: President Zuma and Sec. General Mantashe, and the ANC are deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, the ANC are deliberately indifferent.”78 Congress of the People (COPE): Mr. Lekota & Shilowa: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Mr. Lekota and Shilowa (Leaders, Congress of the People) are deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, COPE is deliberately indifferent.”79 Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities: Rev. Wesley Mabuza: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Rev. Wesley Mabuza (Commission for the Promotion and Protectio of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities) is 76
Correspondence: Volksblad: Mr. Ainsley Moos: Request Volksblad Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. Correspondence: ACDP: Rev. Kenneth Meshoe: Request ACDP’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 78 Correspondence: ANC: Pres. Zuma & SG Mantashe: Request ANC Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 79 Correspondence: COPE: Mr. Lekota & Shilowa: Request Congress of the People’s (COPE) Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 77
deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, the Commission is deliberately indifferent.”80 DA: Helen Zille: 11 March 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Helen Zille (Leader, Democratic Alliance) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, the DA is deliberately indifferent.”81 Freedom Front Plus: Dr. Pieter Mulder: 08 March 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Dr. Pieter Mulder (Leader, Freedom Front Plus) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Freedom Front Plus is deliberately indifferent.”82 Inkatha Freedom Party: Chief Buthelezi: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Mangosuthu Buthulezi (Leader, Inkatha Freedom Party) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, IFP is deliberately indifferent.”83 Public Protector: Adv. Thulisile Madonsela: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Adv. Thulisile Madonsela (Public Protector) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Public Protector is deliberately indifferent.”84 United Democratic Movement: Bantu Holomisa: 11 March 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Bantu Holomisa (Leader, United Democratic Movement) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and
Correspondence: Rev. Wesley Mabusa: Request Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 81 Correspondence: DA: Ms. Helen Zille: Request Democratic Alliance’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 82 Correspondence: FF +: Dr. Pieter Mulder: Request Freedom Front Plus’ Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 83 Correspondence: IFP: Chief Buthelezi: Request Inkatha Freedom Party’ (IFP’s) Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Nonviolent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 84 Correspondence: Public Protector: Adv. Madonsela: Request Public Protector’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Nonviolent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity.
prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, UDM is deliberately indifferent.”85
c: Non-Profit Human Rights Related Org’s: Afriforum: CEO’s: Kallie Kriel & Alana Bailey: 24 February 2010 “AfriForum's policy is to submit our own comments. You thus do not have any mandate to submit any comment on our behalf. AfriForum is taking on the government of Zimbabwe in court tommorrow and launched a legal aid fund on Monday. We are using our full capacity to address these issues, thus the statement that we could not adhere to you request. I am dissapointed by the way you are trying to abuse our response re our busy schedule, to try and force us into a comment. I regard our correspondence with you as closed.” – Kallie Kriel “Thank you very much for the email. Unfortunately we are extremely busy at the moment and will not be able to respond to this.” – Alana Bailey [Response to questions requesting clarification of comment; has been ‘Deliberate Indifference’]86 Afrikanerbond: Exec. Dir.: Jan Bosman: 05 March 2010 With reference to your letter of 20 February 2010 as well as several follow-up letters pertaining to the same matter. We do not have the means or the ability to answer on all the issues raised in your letter or to give counter arguments on the supporting documents provided. That said we will limit our response as follows. Section 16 of the Constitution provides as follows: “(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, which includes (a) freedom of the press and other media; (b) freedom to receive or impart information or ideas; (c) freedom of artistic creativity; and (d) academic freedom and freedom of scientific research. (2) The right in subsection (1) does not extend to(a) propaganda for war; (b) incitement of imminent violence; or (c) advocacy of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender, or religion, and that constitutes incitement to cause harm.” With the above in mind we are of the opinion that one must realise that freedom of speech includes the right to offend within reasonable limits and that when in doubt – rather not abuse or misuse freedom of speech. 85
Correspondence: UDM: Mr. Bantu Holomisa: Request UDM’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. Correspondence: Afriforum: Mr. Kriel & Ms. Bailey: Request Afriforum/Solidariteit’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Nonviolent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity.
In short: We support the adage “With great freedom comes great responsibility. In reviewing all the information available to us we cannot support your call for freedom of speech. Our contention is that your communication can border on hate speech with reference to the K** word as this word is offensive. We are of the opinion that the tone of language used in your communication is insensitive, hurtful and harmful. We believe that there is an onus on all South Africans to refrain from making undesirable remarks which allude in a disparaging manner to race, gender and the like. In view of the spirit and intention as well as the constitutional imperative of nation building, we will not condone the use of any language which is undesirable. [Response to questions requesting clarification of comment; has been ‘Deliberate Indifference’]87 F.W. de Klerk Foundation & Center for Constitutional Rights: Adv. N. de Havilland: 05 March 2010 “The goals of the Centre for Constitutional Rights (the Centre) are to promote the values, rights and principles in the Constitution; to monitor developments, including draft legislation that might affect the Constitution; to inform people and organisations of their constitutional rights; and to assist people and organisations to claim their rights. The Centre is a unit of the F W de Klerk Foundation, which is a registered non-profit organisation. South Africa is a constitutional democracy which observes and protects the full spectrum of human rights, including the rights to freedom of expression and dissent. Its record, in this regard, is recognized nationally and internationally, inter alia by the respected human rights organization Freedom House in New York. We support both Ms de Lille’s right not to be harassed and not have her dignity impaired and Dr Blanton’s right to freedom of expression, provided that it does not amount to propaganda for war, incitement of imminent violence, or advocacy of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion, and that constitutes incitement to cause harm. We do not agree with the original decision of the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board to grant Mr Brandon Huntley refugee status on the grounds that he “was a victim [of persecution] because of his race rather than a victim of criminality, who presented clear & convincing proof of state & security forces’ inability or unwillingness to protect him.” Neither do we agree with the views expressed in the affidavit by Dr Brad Blanton Ph.D that is quoted in your letter. Accordingly, we regret that we cannot assist you with this matter.” [Response to questions requesting clarification of comment; has been ‘Deliberate Indifference’]88
Correspondence: Afrikanerbond: Mr. Jan Bosman: Request Afrikanerbond’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. Correspondence: FW de Klerk: Adv. De Havilland: Request Center for Constitutional Rights’ Off. Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity.
Nelson Mandela Foundation: Chairperson of the Board: Prof. Jakes Gerwel; CEO: Mr. Achmat Dangor; Spokesperson, Ms. Zelda Le Grange: 28 February 2010 “Having consulted our principals, we do not believe we should comment on your initiative. We do want to state that we do not believe in the concept of White refugees.” [Response to questions requesting clarification of comment; has been ‘Deliberate Indifference’]89 SA Inst. of Race Relations: Mr. John Kane-Berman & Mr. Franz Cronje: 24 February 2010 “We are not in a position to comment on your letters.”90 Black Sash: National Director: Marcella Naidoo: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Marcella Naidoo (National Director, Black Sash) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Black Sash is deliberately indifferent.”91 Ctr Study of Violence & Reconciliation (CSVR): Ex. Dir. Adele Kirsten: 01 March 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Adele Kirsten (Exec. Dir., Center for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, CSVR is deliberately indifferent.”92 Freedom of Expression Institute: Exec. Dir. Melissa Moore: 11 March 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Melissa Moore and the Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI) are deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, the FXI are deliberately indifferent.”93 Human Science Research Council: CEO: Dr. Olive Shisana: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Dr. Olive Shisana (CEO, Human Science Research Council) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and
Correspondence: Nelson Mandela: Gerwel, Dangor, Le Grange: Request Nelson Mandela Fnd Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. Correspondence: SAIRR: Kane Berman & Cronje: Request SA Inst Race Relation Off. Comment on Race Relations Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 91 Correspondence: Black Sash: Ms. Marcella Naidoo: Request Black Sash’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 92 Correspondence: CSVR: Ms. Adelle Kirstin: Request CSVR’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 93 Correspondence: FXI: Ms. Melissa Moore: Request Freedom of Expression Institute’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Nonviolent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 90
prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, HSRC is deliberately indifferent.”94 Inst. for Global Dialogue: Exec. Dir.: Dr. Garth Le Pere: 27 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Dr. Garth Le Pere (Exec. Dir., Inst. for Global Dialogue) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, Inst. for Global Dialogue is deliberately indifferent.”95 SANGONET: Exec. Dir.: Dave Barnard: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: David Barnard (Exec. Dir., SA NGO Network) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, SANGONET is deliberately indifferent.”96 UCT: Social Justice Coalition & TAC: Gavin Silber & Nathan Geffen: 26 February 2010 “Deliberate Indifference: Nathan Geffen & Gavin Silber (UCT Social Justice Coalition & TAC) are deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, we are deliberately indifferent.”97
Location of Vatican-Nazi Death Camps in Poland Have Hidden Meaning
Correspondence: HSRC: Dr. Olive Shisana: Request HSRC’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. Correspondence: Inst. Global Dialogue: Dr. Le Pere: Request Institute for Global Dialogue’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 96 Correspondence: SANGONET: Mr. David Barnard: Request SANGONET’s Official Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty expression of Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 97 Correspondence: Treatment Action Campaign & SJC: G. Silber & N. Geffen: Request Social Justice Action & TAC Off. Comment on Free Speech Legal Issue: Non-violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty Dissent to Politically Correct Tyrannical Insanity. 95
A.8: Population Policy Common Sense: Exponential Functions, Carrying Capacity Limits & the Laws of Sustainability “The point of population stabilization is to reduce or minimize misery.” -- Roger Bengston, founding board member, World Population Balance
a: Eco-Law: Thought Shalt Not Transgress Carrying Capacity Prophets In Protection, Yes. But Against Whom? For Whom? 98, Garrett Hardin warns in The Social Contract, that the “ecologist’s “And then what?” needs to be applied to one of the most ancient of the commandments in the Bible: “Be fruitful and multiply.” Other things being equal, fast multipliers win out over slow ones. Circumstances have changed now, but most ethnic groups continue to follow the biblical advice just cited. We are thus laying the ground for the great tragedy that would follow from transgressing the carrying capacity of the earth, unless we somehow find the wisdom and ability to come to grips with the situation. There may not be much time, but we do not have too many other choices.”
Presidential – Ounce of Prevention is worth a Pound of Cure President Richard Nixon: “We must help break the link between spiraling population growth and poverty. ...Where they have been tried, family planning programs have largely worked. ...Many prolife advocates ...contend that to condone abortion even implicitly is morally unconscionable. Their view is morally shortsighted. ...if we provide funds for birth control ...we will prevent the conception of millions of babies who would be doomed to the devastation of poverty in the underdeveloped world.” — Richard M. Nixon, Seize the Moment (Simon & Schuster, 1992)99 President Lyndon B. Johnson: “The hungry world cannot be fed until and unless the growth of its resources and the growth of its population come into balance. Each man and woman - and each nation - must
Protection, Yes. But Against Whom? For Whom?, by Garrett Hardin, The Social Contract, Fall 2001. National Security Study Memorandum 200: World Population Growth and U.S. Security, by Stephen D. Mumford; The Social Contract, Winter 1992 - 93 99
make decisions of conscience and policy in the face of this great problem.” -- Lyndon B. Johnson
Christian – Argumentum Ab Aucoritate Fortis Simum Est in Lege100 Tertullian, Father of Christian Church and Monatist: In the fourth century A.D., one of the Fathers of the Christian church, Tertullian, a Montanist101 preached the social contract counsels of strict ascetism and chastity, warning his flock to transform the human condition of their sexuality from the ‘state of nature’, to one constrained by ethical conscience. He clearly warned how in a world addicted to warlike breeding, excess populations were culled either by mother nature’s plagues or ‘Conquer and Multiply’ Power addicts resource wars, as proverbial cannon fodder. In a book review102 of the The Ostrich Factor: Our Population Myopia, Garrett Hardin writes that Tertullian shocked many traditionalists over the centuries, in a passage where he asked, why is the human population so vast [perhaps 150 million at that time] that we are a burden to the earth, which can scarcely provide for our needs? In a short passage of De Anima, Tertullian explained the very real value of events that are customarily viewed with dismay. What most frequently meets our view (and occasions complaint), is our teeming population: our numbers are burdensome to the world, which can hardly supply us from its natural elements; our wants grow more and more keen, and our complaints more bitter in all mouths, whilst Nature fails in affording us her usual sustenance. In very deed, pestilence, and famine, and wars, and earthquakes have to be regarded as a remedy for nations, as the means of pruning the luxuriance of the human race....” Implicitly, Tertullian was thinking in terms of limits and carrying capacity. The paramount assumption of practical population theory (toward the expression of which both Tertullian and Malthus were struggling) can be added to an Ecological Decalogue: “Thou shalt not transgress the carrying capacity.” Tertullian and Malthus only implied this 11th Commandment. Civilization, if it is to survive, must someday frankly bow to its wisdom.
His Royal Highness Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh: “...When the Bible says that man shall have “dominion” over God's creation, the choice is between understanding dominion as in “having power over,” or dominion as “having responsibility for.”” -- Interview with HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh
100 Argumentum ab auctoritate fortissimum est in lege means reasoning from authority is most valid in law. An argument supported by authority carries the greatest weight in law. This is because arguments from authorities form part of informal logic. Normally, when a person has little knowledge of a certain matter, the person depends on the knowledge of an expert in the issue. To support a proposition authoritative arguments supporting it make courts believe it to be true. 101 Montanism was an early Christian movement of the early 2nd century, named after its founder Montanus. It spread rapidly to other regions in the Roman Empire at a time before Christianity was generally tolerated or legal. Some have drawn parallels between Montanism and modern Pentecostalism (which some call Neo-Montanism). Tertullian, a foremost Latin church writer before he converted to Montanism, is the most widely known Montanist. 102 Book review - The Ostrich Factor, by Garret Hardin (The Ostrich Factor: Our Population Myopia, Oxford Univ. Press, 1999)
Anglican: “Thou Art a Priest Forever After the Order of Melchizedek103 Reverend Thomas Malthus: The Reverend Thomas Robert Malthus FRS, was an Anglican clergyman who thought that the dangers of population growth would preclude endless progress towards a utopian society: “The power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man”. Malthus saw this situation as divinely imposed to teach virtuous ecological procreation behaviour. Many of those whom subsequent centuries sometimes term "evolutionary biologists" read him, notably Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace, for each of whom Malthusianism became an intellectual stepping-stone to the idea of natural selection.104 Public Affairs Commission of the Anglican General Synod of Australia: In a discussion paper prepared by the Public Affairs Commission of the Anglican General Synod of Australia, Key Issues for Australia’s future in the global context and actions for us to take105, they shared their concerns on the issues of climate change, overpopulation, nuclear war and consumption: “Resolutions from the Lambeth Conference of 1998 reaffirm the Biblical vision of Creation as a “web of inter-dependent relationships bound together in the Covenant which God has established with the whole earth and every living being”. Among others they recommend: fostering integration in thinking about problems, recognising that pressure linked to increases in population is the fundamental cause of them, and question and work against the assumption that there has to be population growth in order to maintain economic growth as a prerequisite for human wellbeing. There is a universal moral imperative to save the Creation, based on both religion and science. Those living today will either avoid mass extinction, or allow it to happen. To fulfill our responsibility to future Australians and to the Creation, especially given the serious environmental problems faced by this country, we need to call on the Federal Government to place economic policy firmly in the overall framework of environmental management and well-being, not the other way around, and to recognize that population policy is necessary to achieving balance; and encourage the Government to contribute further to restraining global population growth through the UN Fund for Population Activities and other appropriate international channels.106
Vatican Green Pope’s Cross of Papal Infallibility In Pope: Insatiable Consumption Depleting Earth’s Resources107, Green Pope Benedict XVI, warns about insatiable consumption:
103 "Melchizedek - Ecological War" is an excerpt from Yakov Rabinovich's Stairway to Nowhere: There is, for instance, a Hebrew word for ecological balance, and one of the most commonly occurring words in the Bible: tsedeq. It is translated, perfunctorily, as "righteousness," because to translate it fully and fairly, with its dazzling range of meanings, would have revealed an unacceptable degree of "paganism" in the Bible. At root, it means "rainfall in due proportion," and meanings like "rightness," "justice" and "righteousness" arose as extensions and expansions of the original meaning. This is no surprise. For the archaic societies of the ancient near east, important concept words are always deeply rooted in the realities of physical life; Abstractions, even for things like colors, don't enter the vocabulary of Hebrew until well into period A.D. World in Balance. 104 The Feast of Malthus: Living within Limits, by Garrett Hardin, The Social Contract, Spring 1998 105 Key Issues for Australia’s future in the global context and actions for us to take, A discussion paper prepared by the Public Affairs Commission of the Anglican General Synod of Australia, February 2009 106 Thou Shalt Not Breed:Anglicans, by Josh Gordon, The Age, Australia, May 9, 2010 107 Pope: ‘Insatiable Consumption’ Depleting Earth’s Resources, Associated Press, 17 July 2008
Some of you come from island nations whose very existence is threatened by rising water levels; others from nations suffering the effects of devastating drought,” the pope said, referring to global warming. He noted that during his more than 20-hour flight from Rome to Sydney he had a bird’s eye view of a vast swath of the world that inspired awe and introspection. Perhaps reluctantly we come to acknowledge that there are also scars which mark the surface of our earth: erosion, deforestation, the squandering of the world’s mineral and ocean resources in order to fuel an insatiable consumption,” he said. In The Life and Death of NSSM 200: How the Destruction of Political Will Doomed a U.S. Population Policy108, Dr. Mumford, details the in-depth role of the Vatican to scuttle America’s population policies; from how the Reagan Administration altered its foreign aid program to comply with the Vatican insistence on an outright ban on use of foreign aid funds for the performance or promotion of abortions, its Bishops ‘Pastoral Plan’ on the issue of abortion, and its effect; and much more; as a result of the Vatican’s Cross of Papal Infallibility. He writes: The Church still derives enormous power from the claim of infallibility. "Paul VI laid aside his tiara" writes Hasler. "Both his successors, John Paul I and John Paul II, dispensed with the throne and crown. But the pope's claim to infallibility has remained, and hence so has their position of power. For power was the issue in 1870..."] But, if the essential foundation of the Church laid by the dogma of infallibility is destroyed, faith collapses and the whole Church will crumble. For this reason, it is imperative to the Vatican that this dogma be protected. Hasler describes in two paragraphs why infallibility was important to both the leadership and their followers. "...in the Middle Ages there was a conspicuous trend to look for an infallible authority, whether it be pope or council, to buttress the great edifice of the Catholic system. Its original religious power had been lost, and yet the entire social structure still rested on religion as much as ever. Behind the perfectly intact facade doubts and uncertainty began to spread. Signs of disintegration became apparent in philosophy and theology. The old spontaneity and unquestioning naturalness of the faith were largely gone. The quest for infallibility looks like a desperate attempt to recover a lost sense of security. The endeavor to shore up doctrinal structures was unusually momentous because religion still played such a unique part in most people's lives. Their personal happiness depended on it, first of all in this world, and still more in the next. The great majority of the population had neither the skill nor the desire to judge questions of faith: They wanted to rely on authorized teachers. This only heightened the power and influence of the religious elite, which held the fate of so many in its hand. This arrangement thoroughly suited the mutual interest of both groups. Only those who could offer certainty in matters of salvation would be of any use to the people of that time. And so it didn't sound like blasphemy when men of the Church appeared, claiming they had been given all power in heaven as well as on earth (Boniface VIII). 108 The Life and Death of NSSM 200: How the Destruction of Political Will Doomed a U.S. Population Policy, by Stephen D. Mumford; Center for Research on Population and Security, 1996 (Library of Congress Catalog 96-70965)
The promoters of the infallibility dogma believed that by raising the pope's authority to its upward limit they could gradually break society of its liberal and democratic tendencies. A bishop of that day describes the advocates' position, "The great evil of our day is that the principle of authority lies prostrate. Let us strengthen it in the Church and we shall save society." Stated one supportive newspaper of the day: "The infallible pope must counteract and cure the prevailing abuses of unbridled freedom of the press, thanks to which journalists daily spread lies and calumny."
African Arbor Dum Crescit; Lignum Cum Crescere Nescit109 Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) & Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi: According to 1992/93 Race Relations Survey110 by SA Institute of Race Relations: The Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) also espoused a policy of sustainable development, saying that it would plan development to meet the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. The IFP also believed there was a need to control population growth so that there was a balance between family size and available resources.” In Eve’s Seed: Masculine Insecurity, Metaphor, and the Shaping of History111, Robert McElvaine, writes: At the end of December, 2005, a New York Times article reported on a new South African law placing limits on virginity testing in this nation. During the debate over the law, Zulu leaders described virginity tests as “a revered tradition.” King Goodwill Zwelithini Zulu called the tests “an umbilical cord between modern Zulus and their ancestors.” In 2004, then Deputy President Jacob Zuma endorsed virginity tests “as a way to shield African values against the corrosive effects of Western civilization.”112 The question that must be asked is why such traditions and values of ancestors arose. There is, of course, nothing unique to Africa about male insistence on female virginity— or about the many other traditions that consign women to positions of subordination. We are all aware of the horrible treatment of women under the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, for example. But there is nothing unique to Islam about male insistence on the subordination of and male control over women and their bodies. The problem with the misogynistic rulers of the regimes that most mistreat women is often said to be that they are religious fanatics. This is true, but we need to be careful that we properly identify what their religion is. It is not Islam. Rather, it is what Woody Allen’s character in his 2001 movie, The Curse of the Jade Scorpion identified as his religion: “insecure masculinity.” Insecure masculinity is a malady that has been a— perhaps the—major force in many of the horrors of history—and one that Christians and Jews should realize is also deeply imbedded in their religions. 109
Arbor dum crescit; lignum cum crescere nescit - A tree while it grows, wood when it cannot grow. Cooper, C et. al., Race Relations Survey 1992/93, (Johannesburg: South African Institute of Race Relations) 1993. http://www.nelsonmandela.org/omalley/index.php/site/q/dat/SAIRR%20Survey%201992-93.pdf 111 Eve’s Seed: Masculine Insecurity, Metaphor, and the Shaping of History, by Robert S. McElvaine, Department of History, Millsaps College, Jackson, Mississippi 112 Women’s Rights Laws and African Custom Clash, New York Times, 30 December 2005, by Sharon LaFraniere. 110
That insecure masculinity is an important part of our religions should not be surprising, because it is imbedded in almost all aspects of our culture—including, most significantly, our language. It is, I believe, a primary source of what Sigmund Freud referred to as civilization’s discontents.
A Vis-and-Ramin113 Persian Miracle In YouthQuake: Population, fertility and environment in the 21st Century, John Guillebaud of Optimum Population Trust, reports that: Iran succeeded in halving its Total Fertility Rate (TFR) in just eight years, from a family size of 5.2 children in 1988 to 2.6 in 1996. This was through a conscious government decision in 1987, after a census, to reduce the country’s rapid population growth rate in order to aid its development. Iran’s reproductive health success story occurred in part through the removal of obstacles to women choosing to control their fertility, including perceived religious obstacles through Islam, which Iran’s own religious scholars issued edicts or fatwas to refute. A second key factor was ensuring an efficient supply chain of a good range of contraceptives through a countrywide network of “health houses”. Importantly, this was a voluntary “two-child” population policy, yet the rate of decrease in Iran’s TFR was just as fast as that of China, whose “one-child” policy began in 1980.”
Mencken – Licence to Breed DieOff – Monkeylaw Prophets Michael C. Ruppert, Editor From the Wilderness: “It is not possible to continue infinite consumption and infinite population growth on a finite planet. It is therefore crucial that human beings begin to openly and honestly discuss the issue of population and commit to reducing it through means that are as humane as possible lest through our resistance to doing so, nature takes the matter into its hands and reduces population in ways that are horrific and unimaginable. Unless a fundamental change is made-and quickly-the only available option is collapse and implosion; the bursting of the human population bubble; or, as people in the Peak Oil movement call it-the Dieoff.” -- The Wall Street Journal sat down with Michael Ruppert114 to discuss oil, Wall Street and the “imminent collapse of human industrialized civilization.” Michael Coetzee, Deputy Editor, The Citizen,: In Licence to Breed115Michael Coetzee writes: While it may indeed often be an inconvenience to obtain them, licences play a very useful role in regulating the ownership and use of dangerous and potentially lethal tools such as vehicles and firearms.
113 Vis & Ramin is one of the world’s great love stories. It was the first major Persian romance, written in Farsi in rhyming couplets, by the Persian poet, Fakkradhin Gorgani between 1050 and 1055 AD (about 1,046 years ago) in Iran. This romantic long poem, with a total of about 22,000 lines, is a masterpiece of classical Persian literature today, and was probably also the source for the tale of Tristan and Isolde, which first appeared in Europe about a century later. 114 Confronting Collapse: The Crisis of Energy and Money in a Post Peak Oil World, by Michael C. Ruppert 115 Licences to Breed, by Michael Coetzee, Citizen, 12 August 2009 http://www.citizen.co.za/index/article.aspx?pDesc=102734,1,22
Few would deny that it’s a good idea people should obtain licences before being allowed to pilot a few tons of metal down the highway at 120km/h, or that it should be ascertained whether someone has a criminal record or is mentally unstable before they are allowed to own and carry a lethal weapon. It seems there is pretty much a consensus that when it comes to things that have the possibility to injure, kill or in any other way negatively impact the lives of people or society in general, regulation is desirable. “Considering this, there is one sort of licence that is conspicuous by its absence: a licence to breed. It is only common sense that this is a field of human activity that should be tightly regulated, yet the unemployed, uneducated idiot who is incapable of looking after a child considers it an inalienable right to bequeath on the world more of his genetic legacy. And make no mistake, stupid people love to breed – people with low IQs have more children than those with high IQs. A lack of intelligence is unfortunately no impediment to impregnating someone or to being impregnated, and human offspring seem to have the uncanny ability to survive even the most incompetent of parents. What this means is that the world population is slowly getting dumber and dumber as those of lower intelligence continue to multiply like rabbits, out breeding their intelligent and educated counterparts. The future does not look bright. Or rich, for that matter, since the poor also have more children, never mind the fact that they are incapable of feeding them. “The previous examples focused on the effect that unrestricted breeding has on society as a whole, but what about the effect this has on the children themselves, forced to grow up in an abusive environment? …. the unrestricted right to procreate also means that a violent, emotionally unstable person who we would not trust with a car or a gun is allowed to have children and be their primary caregiver. Even the SPCA checks out prospective dog owners and their property before allowing them to adopt an animal. But when it comes to people, it seems we have no such concerns over their physical or emotional well-being. A system that requires prospective parents to demonstrate the necessary material means and parenting knowledge to look after children before being allowed to procreate would be the ideal solution to the problem. Unfortunately, uncontrolled breeding has left humanity far too stupid to implement something of the sort. Others population articles worried about Overpopulation include: Population Bomb ‘ticks louder than climate’116 Population Explosion Threatens to Trap Africa in Cycle of Poverty, The Guardian Thou Shalt Not Breed:Anglicans, by Josh Gordon, The Age, Australia, May 9, 2010 High birthrate threatens to trap Africa in Cycle of Poverty, Guardian, UK Muslim Europe: demographic time bomb transforming our continent, Telegraph Pregnant (Again) and Poor, by Nicholas D. Kristof, New York Times; 4 April 2009
Population Bomb ‘ticks louder than climate’, The Canberra Times, Australia; 22 July 2008, by Rosslyn Beeby
b: Zhivago Fifth Law – I Freed a Thousand Slaves, I could have Freed a Thousand More, if Only they Knew they were Slaves117 “It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men.” Frederick Douglass118
“Are we really going to be able to give these extra people jobs, homes, health care and education?” -- Official in Uganda’s Ministry of Finance, discussing population growth in The Guardian, August 25, 2006119 “The Lysistrata goals are not an exclusive ‘sex strike’; but a TrinityLove Eco-Family Sex Strike; namely a commitment by women to refuse to participate in sexual conduct that may result in unwanted children. That an honourable woman and an honourable man, do not procreate unwanted children. Procreating unwanted children into this world is not honourable conduct, and is not loving to the child. Anyone who wants to honourably state that they ‘want’ children means that they must mean what they say. They prepare for the conception of a ‘wanted’ child, by making an emotional, psychological, sexual, financial and spiritual commitment to the mother/father of their intended child. They spend significant time and emotional, psychological, spiritual and financial resources discussing and planning for the conception of the child, and the child’s future! That is loving honourable procreation, that is bringing a child into this world, that is loving. People who behave in such a manner, as a result of a cultural choice, can honestly say that their culture loves children.” -- [Д♠] Lysistrata120 4 Deerhunter121 Bushido122 TrinityLove EcoFamily SexStrike Oath123
117 Harriet Tubman was an African-American abolitionist,and Union spy during the American Civil War. After escaping from slavery, into which she was born, she made thirteen missions to rescue over seventy slaves using the network of antislavery activists and safe houses known as the Underground Railroad, & helped recruit for John Brown’s attack on Harpers Ferry. 118 Frederick Douglass (born Frederick Augustus Washington Bailey, circa 1818 – February 20, 1895) an American abolitionist, women's suffragist, editor, orator, author, statesman, minister and reformer. Escaping from slavery, he made strong contributions to the abolitionist movement, and achieved a public career that led to his being called "The Sage of Anacostia" and "The Lion of Anacostia". Douglass is one of the most prominent figures in African American and United States history. He was fond of saying, "I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong." 119 Population Explosion Threatens to Trap Africa in Cycle of Poverty, The Guardian, 25 August; Rice, X. 2006; High birthrate threatens to trap Africa in Cycle of Poverty, Guardian, UK; 1 September 2006, by Xan Rice 120 Lysistrata is one of the few surviving plays written by the master of Old Comedy, Aristophanes. Originally performed in classical Athens, in 411 BC, it is a comic account of one woman's extraordinary mission to end The Peloponnesian War. The play is notable for its exposé of sexual relations in a male-dominated society and for its use of both double entendre and explicit obscenities. The idea that Lysistrata could unite women to end the war would have set up the audience for a traditional battle between the sexes. However, there are also serious ideas to be found in Lysistrata’s speeches. Aristophanes uses a woman to bring peace, but in doing so, he is pointing out to men that they have failed in their efforts to settle the war. With the failure of men, women are the only remaining hope for peace. The theme of war and women’s efforts to invoke love as a replacement for war works as well in the twenty first century as they did in the late fifth century B.C. 121 The Deer Hunter meditates and explores the moral and mental consequences of war violence and politically-manipulated patriotism upon the meaning of friendship, honour, and family in a tightly-knit community and deals with controversial issues such as drug abuse, suicide, infidelity and mental illness, preparing for two rites of passage: marriage and military service. 122 Bushido is also referred to the Eight Virtues of the Samurai. The Value of Honour: Honour is one of the best-known values in Japanese history to those in the West. Centuries after it became a central theme in Japanese culture, it is still considered to encompass honesty, courage, and respect. 123 Defendants Radical Hon(our)sty: Commitment Offer to Plaintiff in State (P. de Lille v. Johnstone) HC-WC: # 19963-09: The Defendant’s invitation to help co-create and participate in HARTSTARH ReJuneVation Disclosure: an Eight Day CoCreating a Radical Honesty Truth & Forgiveness Social Contract for S. Africa Course led by Dr. Brad Blanton, Taber Shadburne and Greg Small; to be held at Robben Island, ASAP, subsequent to the resolution of these court proceedings
c: Exponential Fx: Population & Economic Growth “The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function.” -- Dr. Albert A. Bartlett, Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of Colorado; World Population Balance Board of Advisors In various Arithmetic of Growth and Living within Limits articles124 by Professors Al Bartlett and Garrett Hardin, explain the basic principles of exponential functions, which can be applied to population, economics, fiat currency, resource depletion, etc. An exponential function describes the size of anything that is growing steadily, over a fixed period of time: eg. 5% per year. To calculate the doubling time, i.e. how long it would take to grow 100%; you take the number 70, divide it by the percent growth per unit time: 70 ÷ 5; and you find the doubling time: 14 years. So a population of 500 people, growing at 5% per year, will grow to 1,000 people in 14 years. An important aspect to remember is that the growth in any doubling time is greater than the total of all preceding growth. That means that in those 14 years, more people were born in that village, than the total of people born in that village since the beginning of time. It also means that at 5% population growth, every 14 years that village will need to double the number of hospitals, schools, prisons, water sewage plants, universities, dams, etc; to provide the same level of services to its 5% growing population. Economic growth refers to the exponential growth of the use of a resource; i.e. the rate at which resources are being depleted. Some resources are renewable and others are finite. Once you understand the principles of exponential functions, you unequivocally understand that economic and population growth are on a collision course with finite and depleting resources.
124 Arithmetic of Growth: Methods of Calculation, Population and Environment (March, 1993); (ii) Arithmetic of Growth: Methods of Calculation, II, Population and Environment (January, 1999); (iii) Arithmetic, Population and Energy: Sustainability 101; (iv) Living within Limits: Ecology, Economics, and Population Taboos: Growth: Real and Spurious, by Garrett Hardin, Oxford University Press (1995)
d: Benefits of Slow or Zero Population Growth “We have been God-like in our planned breeding of our domesticated plants and animals, but we have been rabbit-like in our unplanned breeding of ourselves.” -- Arnold Joseph Toynbee In the Population Action International (PAI) Factsheet Fewer or More? The Real Story of Global Population125, they state that: “Slow or zero population growth in poor and developing countries reduces the burden on already strained financial and natural resources, thereby improving service delivery of clean water, and basic health care for their citizens. Widely spaced births and smaller family size allows families and governments to invest more in each child—helping to ensure access to education and health care. Over time, this raises household and government savings, and improves productivity, raising living standards. In the PAI Factsheet How Shifts to Smaller Family Size Contributed to the Asian Miracle126, they explain how fertility decline creates economic opportunities: “Research indicates that shifts to smaller family sizes and slower rates of population growth played a key role in the creation of an educated workforce, the accumulation of household and government savings, the rise in wages, and the growth of investments in manufacturing technology in the Asian Tigers. This is further explained in a PAI brochure What You Need to Know to Apply for U.S. Government Funding for Community-Based Projects Linking Reproductive Health and Natural Resource Management127: ‘In Sub-Sahara Africa rural women and men in control of their own reproduction tend to improve their ability to manage multiple other aspects of their lives: their ability to learn new farming techniques, to gain functional literacy, literacy, or simply to become better stewards of the water, soil, forests and fish on which their lives depend. Fatalism about the future recedes when couples learn that they can make their own decisions about childbearing, rather than leave these decisions to God or fate. And meagre incomes can go further when new arrivals in a family are the result of conscious choices rather than random chance. The process of reproduction decision-making, also tends to improve both gender relations and the status of women generally.’ In the PAI Factsheet: How Population Growth Affects Hunger in the Developing World128, state that a UN Food and Agricultural Organisation 2005 report concludedt: “The goal of achieving food security will be made more difficult if population growth rates cannot be reduced.”
Fewer or More? The Real Story of Global Population, by Population Action International FactSheet How Shifts to Smaller Family Size Contributed to the Asian Miracle, FactSheet by Population Action International What You Need to Know to Apply for U.S. Government Funding for Community-Based Projects Linking Reproductive Health and Natural Resource Management, An Unofficial Guide, by Population Action International 128 How Population Growth Affects Hunger in the Developing World, FactSheet by Population Action International 126 127
e: Eco-Numeracy: Carrying Capacity & 11th Commandment “With complete freedom in reproduction, conscientious people will be eliminated.” -- Garrett Hardin, The Feast of Malthus: Living within Limits129 In Ethical Implications of Carrying Capacity130, Garrett Hardin defines carrying capacity of a particular area as “the maximum number of a species that can be supported indefinitely by a particular habitat, allowing for seasonal and random changes, without degradation of the environment and without diminishing carrying capacity in the future”. In From Shortage to Longage: Forty Years in the Population Vineyards131, he further clarifies the total impact equation of carrying capacity on a particular area: “Impacts of a population on the environment are of two sorts: the reduction of wanted resources and the addition of unwanted wastes. The fundamental equation connecting the variables can be expressed in simple words: Total impact = (per capita impact) x (population size). Unless the limitedness of carrying capacity is admitted there is little point in counting the number of living bodies. When we come to the human species the concept of carrying capacity must be enlarged to that of the cultural carrying capacity. Human beings are not content to live at the lowest possible level of resource exploitation, though that would maximize the size of the human population. “In a “state of nature,” i.e., when there are no inputs of food from the outside and the people are dependent only on their own productivity, an excess of population is soon corrected by excess mortality. For thousands of years local overpopulation was rectified in this way. When an ecological moralist proposes an Eleventh Commandment of Ecology, “Thou shalt not transgress the carrying capacity,” he is trying to improve the quality of life over a long period of time. Carrying Capacity is an absolute necessity for honest ecological accounting; it is the bottom line of ecological accounting.132 According to Hardin: (a) a laissez-faire birth control (B.C.) policy + No Social Welfare, would provide for an equilibrium carrying capacity; whereas laissez-faire (B.C.) within a welfare state, results in Runaway Growth, and ultimately greater misery. Legislators can have either, but not both; if welfare policies are
The Feast of Malthus: Living within Limits, by Garrett Hardin, The Social Contract, Spring 1998 Ethical Implications of Carrying Capacity, by Garrett Hardin, 1977 131 From Shortage to Longage: Forty Years in the Population Vineyards, by Garrett Hardin, Population and Environment, Vol. 12, No. 3. Spring 1991 132 Perpetual Growth: The Next Dragon Facing Biology Teachers, by Garrett Hardin, National Association of Biology Teachers Address on 10 November, 1990. 130
too precious to be abandoned; they will have to introduce limits to the right to breed133. Right to Breed, and/or Welfare, Human Rights, Peace and Social Justice legislation must include serious clauses that every human born constitutes a draft on all aspects of the environment: food, air, water, forests, beaches, wildlife, scenery, solitude, contributing to resource depletion and the economic and social costs of crowding; i.e. local, national and international resource wars; or be ruled unconstitutional.
f: Tragedy of the Commons: Limited World, Limited Rights “What people think is what they do. Its corrolary: To change what people do, change what they think.” -- Quinn’s Guerrilla Civilisation Law In Tragedy of the Commons134 Garrett Hardin refers to a Limited World, Limited Rights135 legal dilemma in which multiple individuals, acting independently and solely and rationally consulting their own self-interest, will ultimately deplete a shared limited resource even when it is clear that it is not in anyone's long-term interest for this to happen. Harden predicts that the tragic problem of human population growth’s overuse of the carrying capacity of the commons can only be solved with a change in human values or ideas of morality. He accuses the legal and political nanny welfare state of providing financial incentives to procreate poverty stricken voting cannon-fodder for the power-greedy welfare parasite elite: “If each human family were dependent only on its own resources; if the children of improvident parents starved to death; if, thus, overbreeding brought its own “punishment” to the germ line--then there would be no public interest in controlling the breeding of families.” Hardin also refers to Lifeboat Ethics136 as another metaphor for the application of the logic of the commons.137 The problem of the commons has been evaded in the exploitation of all from fisheries to rain-forests to the question of human populations. “Both require for their rational resolution a clear understanding of the concept of carrying capacity and a willingness to fashion laws that take this concept into account.”138 Stating that the right to food and the right to breed are unqualified, unquantified Godgiven/ translegal rights is a form of fatalism of the most extreme sort. Conversely if every right must be evaluated in the total system of rights operating in a world that is limited, then we inevitably conclude that no right is absolute. Our world is a limited world, hence rights are also limited. The legal and political meaning of the population problem means that the greater the population, the greater must be the limitation of individual rights139. To put the matter bluntly, real population control requires that the individualistic rights asserted by the descendants of Locke and Smith must be significantly curtailed. “You can’t have free immigration and a welfare state.” To invite the overly fertile into a prosperous country to share in welfare riches is to pursue a policy of national suicide. (And, if generalized for the entire world, a policy of species suicide.) Individualism rightly enjoys 133 From Shortage to Longage:Forty Years in the Population Vineyards, by Garrett Hardin, Population and Environment, Vol. 12, No. 3. Spring 1991 134 Tragedy of the Commons, by Garret Hardin, Science, 1968 135 Limited World, Limited Rights, by Garrett Hardin, Rights and Liberties, Society, 17 May/June 1980 136 Lifeboat Ethics: the Case Against Helping the Poor, by Garrett Hardin, Psychology Today, September 1974 137 Carrying Capacity: As an Ethical Concept, by Garrett Hardin, The Social Contract, Fall 2001 138 Ethical Implications of Carrying Capacity, by Garrett Hardin, 1977 139 Limited World, Limited Rights, by Garrett Hardin, Rights and Liberties, Society, 17 May/June 1980
such high prestige that the reader may resent any suggestion that individual desires must sometimes be curbed for the good of the community. But think of bankrobbing. If the individual could get away with it he might well adopt this occupation; but if everyone robs, everyone pays for the robbing — and the individual is thwarted after all. Consciences vary. In a community in which there is complete freedom in reproduction, conscientious people will be eliminated: this is a particular example of the “competitive exclusion principle.” 140 When predators, disease and other population controls external to a species become much enfeebled, individual freedom must be infringed upon. The community must then take over the function formerly performed by external forces. Community interest takes precedence over individual desires. Coercion is essential, but in a democracy it should be only a coercion by laws which are agreed to by the majority. The necessary formulaic statement of democratic individualism is this: mutual coercion, mutually agreed upon. 141 Rights and Responsibilities142 must go together; asserting inalienable rights while ignoring or denying responsibilities must be exposed as hypocrisy, if not fraud.143 We will make no progress with population problems, which are a root cause of both hunger and poverty, until we deglobalize them. Populations, like potholes, are produced locally and, unlike atmospheric pollution, remain local — unless some people are so unwise as to globalize them by permitting population excesses to migrate into the better-endowed countries. Marx’s formula, “to each according to his needs,” is a recipe for national suicide. We are not faced with a single global population problem, but, rather, with about 180 separate national population problems. All population controls must be applied locally; local governments are the agents best prepared to choose local means. Means must fit local traditions. For one nation to attempt to impose its ethical principles on another is to violate national sovereignty and endanger international peace. The only legitimate demand that nations can make on one another is this: “Don’t try to solve your population problem by exporting your excess people to us.” All nations should take this position. For example: There is no talk in China of a woman’s “right” to reproduce or of married couples’ “right to privacy.” Decision-making is the right of the production group because the whole group has a budget to meet. The women of a production group meet together and decide as a group who shall and who shall not have babies during the year. The environment is seen as the possession of the group; littering it (with anything) is not a right of the individual.144
g: Right to Breed in Limited World: Breeds Misery & Starvation “The rich get richer, and the poor get children.” – F. Scott Fitzgerald If the only ultimate check on the growth of population is misery and starvation; then the population will grow until it is miserable enough to stop its growth. Any technical improvement can only relieve misery for a while, for so long as misery is the only check on population, the [technical] improvement will enable population to grow, and will soon enable 140
The Feast of Malthus: Living within Limits, by Garrett Hardin, The Social Contract, Spring 1998 The Feast of Malthus: Living within Limits, by Garrett Hardin, The Social Contract, Spring 1998 Who Benefits? Who Pays?, by Garrett Hardin, Filters Against Folly (1985) 143 Living on a Lifeboat, by Garrett Hardin, 1974, BioScience, Vol 24(10), & Social Contract, Fall 2001 144 There is no Global Population Problem, by Garrett Hardin, The Social Contract, Fall 2001 141 142
more people to live in misery than before. The final result of [technical] improvements, therefore, is to increase the equilibrium population which is to increase the total sum of human misery.145 Rapid population growth creates a severe drag on rates of economic development otherwise attainable, sometimes to the point of preventing any increase in per capita incomes. In addition to the overall impact on per capita incomes, rapid population growth seriously affects a vast range of other aspects of the quality of life important to social and economic progress in the LDCs. 146 Adverse economic factors which generally result from rapid population growth include: * reduced family savings and domestic investment; * increased need for large amounts of foreign exchange for food imports; * intensification of severe unemployment and underemployment; * the need for large expenditures for services such as dependency support, * education, and health which would be used for more productive investment; * the concentration of developmental resources on increasing food production to ensure survival for a larger population, rather than on improving living conditions for smaller total numbers.147
h: Ecology and Private Property “Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility.” – The Devils Dictionary In Protection, Yes. But against Whom? For Whom?, Hardin states that to be ecologically acceptable, the concept of property must weld privilege and responsibility together. He who benefits from the products must accept responsibility for the by-products. This is a shocking idea for people brought up on a simpler view of “private property.”148
i: Lords of Poverty & Exponential Misery Poverty, n. A file provided for the teeth of the rats of reform. The number of plans for its abolition equals that of the reformers who suffer from it, plus that of the philosophers who know nothing about it. Its victims are distinguished by possession of all the virtues and by their faith in leaders seeking to conduct them into a prosperity where they believe these to be unknown. -- The Devils Dictionary The demoralizing effect of charity on the recipient has long been known. "Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach him how to fish and he will eat for the rest of his days." So runs an ancient Chinese proverb. The former has no perception of poverty as a process, 145
Population Policy Common Sense: Exponential Functions and the Laws of Sustainability [HC-WC # 19963-09] National Security Council, NSSM 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests, Washington, DC December 10, 1974 147 National Security Council, NSSM 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests, Washington, DC December 10, 1974 148 Protection, Yes. But Against Whom? For Whom?, by Garrett Hardin, The Social Contract, Fall 2001. 146
only of poverty as a state149. Malcolm X once said: “The white liberal differs from the white conservative only in one way: the liberal is more deceitful than the conservative. The liberal is more hypocritical than the conservative. Both want power, but the white liberal is the one who has perfected the art of posing as the Negro’s friend and benefactor; and by winning the friendship, allegiance, and support of the Negro, the white liberal is able to use the Negro as a pawn or tool in this political “football game” that is constantly raging between the white liberals and white conservatives.” One of the most strategic methods of fostering millions of Africans into abusive codependent relationships to corporate greed for political power is their use of poverty150 as a state to be remedied by aid, either from international welfare aid organisations151 or multinational corporations (Feeding the World's Hungry Millions: How It Will Mean Billions for U.S. Business152). The result: According to Kenyan economist, James Shikwati, in “For God’s Sake, Please Stop the AID”153, the increased total sum of African human misery. For a quarter of a century international philanthropy has been largely guided by optimistic laissez faire doctrines, and now there are a billion more poor people than there were when we started trying to save the world. Belief in poverty as a process dies hard. One is reminded of Bertrand Russell's cynical aphorism: “Men would rather die than think. Some do.”
j: Fx & Carrying Capacity: French Riddle of Lily Pond “‘Smart growth’ destroys the environment. ‘Dumb growth’ destroys the environment. The only difference is that ‘smart growth’ does it with good taste. It's like booking passage on the Titanic. Whether you go first-class or steerage, the result is the same.” -- Dr. Albert A. Bartlett, Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of Colorado; World Population Balance Board of Advisors When most people talk about "growth" in our country, they consider it a completely positive and necessary thing, essential for maintaining the vitality and health of our economy and society. Our society's most revered economic indicators are all based on this fundamental idea: that continuing growth is vital for the health and preservation of our economy and country. In fact, growth is pretty much the only thing they measure! However, natural scientists (such as biologists, chemists, and physicists) know that this assumption must be false. In order for growth to continue forever, we would need an infinite amount of space, energy, and other resources to keep the growth going... and those resources are not infinite. So what happens to steady growth in a limited space?154
Rewards of Pejoristic Thinking, by Garrett Hardin 1977 Finding Balance – Forests and Family Planning in Madagascar, Produced by Population Action International, Written and Directed by Daniele Anastasion. This award-winning documentary journeys to the edge of a rapidly disappearing world, where population growth continues to fuel the cycle of poverty and deforestation. 151 The Lords of Poverty: The Power, Prestige, and Corruption of the International Aid Business, by Graham Hancock; and The Road to Hell: The Ravaging Effects of Foreign Aid and International Charity, by Michael Maren 152 Lifeboat Ethics: the Case Against Helping the Poor, by Garrett Hardin, Psychology Today, September 1974 153 “For God's Sake, Please Stop the Aid!” – James Shikwati, Der Spiegel Interview with African Economics Expert 154 Population Policy Common Sense: Exponential Functions and the Laws of Sustainability: » » Understanding Exponential Growth: Bacteria in a Bottle 150
In this riddle, the lily pond has a potentially virulent lily that apparently will double in size each day. If the lily grows unchecked it will cover the entire pond in 30 days, choking off all other forms of life in the water by the time it covers the entire pond. If a skeptic waited until 50% of the pond was covered before taking any remedial action to save the pond, when would he act? The answer: on the 29th day of the month! But by then, it would be too late.155 Another frequently analogy for describing exponential growth, is that of a virus in a bottle, as done in Understanding Exponential Growth: Bacteria in a Bottle156 Doubling Time and Resource Consumption When our consumption of a resource (energy, for instance) grows steadily, the doubling time takes on an even scarier meaning: during that time we use up more of the resource than in all of history before that time! When and How Will We Stop Growing? The question we face is not whether we'll stop growing, but how soon and under what conditions. The sooner we can stop growing, the better chance we have of avoiding worldwide famines and other catastrophes.
k: Youth Bulge Battle: Social Unrest & Violence from Idle Young Men In The Shape of Things to Come: Why Age Structure Matters to a Safer More Equitable World157; a report from Population Action International, provides details about how large populations of idle young men do, and will likely change the world… for the worse: The Shape of Things to Come presents evidence that certain age structures in populations can support governments’ efforts to create and maintain political stability, and that others can impede such efforts. The report does not argue that these demographic structures and their dynamics directly cause development failures or successes. Yet the influence of age structure on a state’s progress toward democracy, on the risk of an outbreak of civil conflict and on economic development is both significant and quantifiable. Key Findings: Population age structure has significant impacts on countries’ stability, governance, economic development and social well-being. Very young and youthful age structures are most likely to undermine countries’ development and security. Between 1970 and 1999, 80 percent of all civil conflicts that caused at least 25 deaths occurred in countries in which 60 percent or more of the population was under age 30. During the 1990s, countries with a very young structure were three times more likely to experience civil conflict than countries with a mature
Revisiting the Limits to Growth: Could the Club of Rome Have Been Correct, After All?, Mat Simmons; CEO – Simmons & Co. Intn’l Population Policy Common Sense: Exponential Functions and the Laws of Sustainability [HC-WC: # 19963-09] The Shape of Things to Come: Why Age Structure Matters to a Safer More Equitable World; by Elizabeth Leahy with Robert Engelman, Carolyn Gibb Vogel, Sarah Haddock and Tod Preston, Population Action International 156 157
age structure. Nearly 90 percent of countries with very young structures had autocratic or weakly democratic governments at the end of the 20th century. Countries with a mature age structure, in which more than 55 percent of the population is above age 30, have generally been the most stable, democratic and highly developed. In the 1980s, none of these countries experienced civil conflict, and in the 1990s, only two did. More than 80 percent of countries with mature structures over the time period analyzed have been full democracies. Countries with a mature population have low rates of economic growth. But because they typically also have very high national incomes, so far this slower expansion has not had major repercussions. Recommendations, among others, include: National education programs should be targeted at reducing cultural discrimination of women; reducing families’ preference for sons, which can lead to sex-selective abortion and neglect of female children; campaigning against sexual violence; and ending exclusive male control over decisions regarding sex and fertility. Policies and programs should be tailored to countries’ specific population dynamics in order to sustain and expand the opportunities that progress along the demographic transition has already created in many countries, and encourage their expansion to the rest of the developing world. For example, industrial countries with aging populations should not let oldage pension and health care costs take resources away from investments in youth. In The Effects of ‘Youth Bulge’ on Civil Conflicts158, Lionel Beehner provides a Council on Foreign Relations Backgrounder backgrounder report, to aforementioned The Shape of Things to Come report: Between 1970 and 1999, 80% of civil conflicts occurred in countries where 60% of the population or more were under the age of thirty… Today there are sixty-seven counties with youth bulges, of which sixty of them are experiencing social unrest and violence.” – Council on Foreign Relations What other factors contribute to youth-bulge-related violence? Rapid urbanization. This migration pattern plays an important role because cities across the developing world lack the infrastructure, resources, or jobs to accommodate the influx of rural workers. This creates ripe conditions for black-market activities, which in turn often foster gangs and paramilitary groups. Heightened expectations among job seekers. The abundance of skilled labor with degrees but no jobs can foment social unrest. “There is a dire mismatch between the skill sets companies are seeking and what most regional high schools and colleges are producing,” writes Coleman about the Middle East. “The result is an explosive combination of millions of young people with high expectations and no hope of fulfilling their dreams.” A corollary to this problem, adds Gavin, is globalization and the images beamed across the world on American television. “We’re exporting this hyper version of material success,” she says.
The Effects of ‘Youth Bulge’ on Civil Conflicts, by Lionel Beehner, Council on Foreign Relations Backgrounder; April 27, 2007
Environmental stresses. Youth bulges often lead to degradation of forests, water supplies, and arable land. This can create conflicts over scarce resources and generate antigovernment sympathies. This is a common characteristic of sub-Saharan Africa. In a Population Action International Report: The Security Demographic – Population and Civil Conflict After the Cold War159, they report on the dynamics of human population – rates of growth, age structure, distribution and more – which influence when and where warfare will next occur: The findings of this report suggest that the risks of civil conflict (deadly violence between governments and non-state insurgents, or between state factions within territorial boundaries) that are generated by demographic factors may be much more significant than generally recognized, and worthy of more serious consideration by national security policymakers and researchers. Its conclusions — drawn from a review of literature and analyses of data from 180 countries, about half of which experienced civil conflict at some time from 1970 through 2000 — argue that: Recent progress along the demographic transition — a population’s shift from high to low rates of birth and death — is associated with continuous declines in the vulnerability of nation-states to civil conflict. If this association continues through the 21st century, then a range of policies promoting small, healthy and better educated families and long lives among populations in developing countries seems likely to encourage greater political stability in weak states and to enhance global security in the future. In many other countries, however, the predominance of young adults constitutes a social challenge and a political hazard. This is particularly the case when employment opportunities are scarce and large numbers of young men feel frustrated in their search for status and livelihood. The evidence that a large proportion of young people is associated with the outbreak of political violence and warfare is among the best documented in the literature on population and conflict. The Trouble with Men: Why are youth bulges so often volatile? The short answer is: too many young men with not enough to do. When a population as a whole is growing, ever larger numbers of young males come of age each year, ready for work, in search of respect from their male peers and elders. Typically, they are eager to achieve an identity, assert their independence and impress young females. While unemployment rates tend to be high in developing countries, unemployment among young adult males is usually from three to five times as high as adult rates, with lengthy periods between the end of schooling and first placement in a job. Are young males more prone to violence than older men, or than women? The preponderance of social research suggests that they are. Men account for about 90 percent of arrests for homicide in almost all countries surveyed. All over the world, young men (in this case, defined as aged 15 to 34) are responsible for more than three-quarters of violent crimes. Youth and Warfare: A wealth of historical studies indicates that cycles of rebellion and military campaigns in the early modern and modern world tended to coincide with periods when young adults comprised an unusually large proportion of the population. There are several variations to this hypothesis. In the late-1960s, historian Herbert 159 The Security Demographic – Population and Civil Conflict After the Cold War, by Richard Cincotta, Robert Engelman and Daniele Anastasion, Population Action International
Moller observed that unusually chaotic periods in modern European history often followed several decades of rapid population growth. Moller hypothesized that the surge of young men entering adulthood contributed to under-employment, low wages, social discontent, and in some states, cycles of rebellion and repression. The wealthiest states enlisted the glut of restive young men into their armies, and then employed them at low wages and great danger to wrest territory from their continental neighbors and build overseas empires. Countries with more than 40 percent of young adults in the population of adults were 2.3 times as likely to experience an outbreak of civil conflict as countries with smaller proportions during the 1990s. These youth-bulge countries are in the developing world, where youth unemployment rates are generally three to five times that of adults. Our analysis of the 1990s suggests that countries with high urban population growth rates— above 4 percent per year—were about twice as likely to experience civil conflict as those countries below that benchmark. John Guillebaud is emeritus professor of family planning and reproductive health at University College, London he is the former medical director of the Margaret Pyke Centre for Family Planning, a consultant to the World health Organisation and other international bodies and the author of seven books and 300 other publications on birth control, reproductive health, population and sustainability In a 2007 report by Guillebaud, YouthQuake: Population, fertility and environment in the 21st Century160, he warns about the “Youthquake” facing the world: i.e. the biggest generation of adolescents and teenagers in its history – a with major social, political and demographic implications. The Earth faces a future of rising populations and growing strains on the planet. Whatever else the future holds, significant population increase is inevitable and the current UN forecast of 9.2 billion by 2050 – itself a 40 per cent increase on the 6.7 billion in 2007 – may turn out to be an underestimate. The environmental damage resulting from population increase is already widespread and serious, ranging from climate change to shortages of basic resources such as food and water. By 2050, humanity is likely to require the biological capacity of two Earths. Without action, longages of humans – the prime cause of all shortages of resources – may cause parts of the planet to become uninhabitable, with governments pushed towards coercive population control measures as a regrettable but lesser evil than conflict and suffering. The Earth is facing a future of rising populations and increasing damage to its lifesupport systems. It is also confronting the biggest generation of adolescents and teenagers in its history – a “youthquake” with major social, political and demographic implications. These challenges together demand a response from governments, not least in the UK, which for the fi rst time recognises the crucial role of human numbers in both social and environmental policy-making. Together, these challenges demand a response from governments which recognises the important role of human numbers in policy-making. Every country – not merely those in the developing world – would benefit from a national population policy that takes 160
YouthQuake: Population, fertility and environment in the 21st Century, by John Guillebaud, Optimum Population Trust, 2007
environmental sustainability into account. In the UK this would cover initiatives to reduce teenage pregnancies – including new guidelines for the media – encouragement for parents to “stop at two” children, resistance to calls for an increase in the birth rate and national recognition that continuous population growth is highly undesirable and, ultimately, impossible. Far from panicking about “baby shortages”, almost every country can welcome fertility rates at or slightly below replacement level.
l: Population Pressures, Resource Scarcity & Violence “If the only ultimate check on the growth of population is misery and starvation; then the population will grow until it is miserable enough to stop its growth.” Kenneth Bouldings, Dismal Theorem In The Life and Death of NSSM 200: How the Destruction of Political Will Doomed a U.S. Population Policy, Dr. Stephen Mumford , reports that: The February 1993 issue of Scientific American contains an article by Thomas F. Homer-Dixon, Jeffrey H. Boutwell and George W. Rathjens titled, Environmental Change and Violent Conflict.161 This article reports on a study which documents that the predictions of NSSM 200 are already occurring around the world. The authors state, “Within the next 50 years, the human population is likely to exceed nine billion, and global economic output may quintuple. Largely as a result of these trends, scarcities of renewable resources may increase sharply. The total area of highly productive agricultural land will drop, as will the extent of forests and the number of species they sustain. Future generations will also experience the ongoing depletion and degradation of aquifers, rivers and other bodies of water, the decline of fisheries, further stratospheric ozone loss and, perhaps, significant climatic change. As such environmental problems become more severe, they may precipitate civil or international strife. To examine whether these problems are currently causing civil or international strife, the authors assembled a team of 30 researchers to review a set of specific cases. Their findings were then summarized: "The evidence that they gathered points to a disturbing conclusion: scarcities of renewable resources are already contributing to violent conflicts in many parts of the developing world. These conflicts may foreshadow a surge of similar violence in coming decades...
161 Environment, Scarcity, and Violence, by Thomas F. Homer-Dixon; also published as article Environmental Change and Violent Conflict, in Scientific American, February 1993
The article examines case-studies of violent conflicts that are attributed to overpopulation by researchers from four continents: the migration of millions from Bangladesh to India which led to brutal ethnic conflicts; the persistent conflict in the Philippines driven by the desperate poverty caused by overpopulation; severe shortages of ground water in the Jordan River basin which are leading to conflict between Israelis and Palestinians; destruction of ecologically sensitive territories in South Africa which is forcing a migration to violent urban squatter settlements; expanding population in Senegal and Mauritania which spurred a violent conflict in the Senegal River Basin; similar factors which have stimulated the growth of the Maoist Shining Path rebels in Peru; the irreversible clear-cutting of forests and loss of soil which has led to violent social strife in Haiti, and which in turn has caused the exodus of boat people. There are many other examples.162
m. Overpopulation, Resource Scarcity, Youth Bulge & Terrorism “...even if successful, voluntary family planning programs cannot be expected to resolve the world population dilemma. Even in the more developed countries, and notably in the United States, surveys show couples desiring more children than are necessary for replacement... Thus we cannot rely on the self-interested choices of individual couples to meet society's needs. The only acceptable goal is zero rate of growth because any rate of growth continued long enough leads to astronomical figures. Given existing preferences in family size, governments must go beyond voluntary family planning. To achieve zero rate of population growth governments will have to do more than cajole; they will have to coerce”. ~ US. Dept. of State Population Officer ~ Public Report of the Vice Presidents Task Force on Combatting Terrorism163 concludes that a fundamental root cause of terrorism is the collision of youth bulge overpopulation with scarce, depleted and finite resources; namely too many idle young people fighting over too few and depleting resources. Profile of a Terrorist The motivations of those who engage in terrorism are many and varied, with activities spanning industrial societies to underdeveloped regions. Fully 60 percent of the Third World population is under 20 years of age; half are 15 years or less. These population pressures create a volatile mixture of youthful aspirations that when coupled with economic and political frustrations help form a large pool of potential terrorists.”
162 The Life and Death of NSSM 200: How the Destruction of Political Will Doomed a U.S. Population Policy (Chapter 6: Why Did Our Political Will Fade Away?), by Stephen D. Mumford; Center for Research on Population and Security, 1996 (Library of Congress) 163 Public Report of the Vice-President’s Task Force on Combatting Terrorism, February 1986.
n. Overpopulation: Threat to National Security “Which is the greater danger - nuclear warfare or the population explosion? The latter absolutely! To bring about nuclear war, someone has to DO something; someone has to press a button. To bring about destruction by overcrowding, mass starvation, anarchy, the destruction of our most cherished values-there is no need to do anything. We need only do nothing except what comes naturally - and breed. And how easy it is to do nothing.” -- Dr. Isaac Asimov, biochemist and science writer164 The Kissinger Report, also known as National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications for Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests, commissioned by President Nixon, and authorized into law by President Gerald Ford, in National Security Council, National Security Decision Memorandum 314165 on November 26, 1975, states: There is a major risk of severe damage [caused by continued rapid population growth] to world economic, political, and ecological systems and, as these systems begin to fail, to our humanitarian values [Executive Summary].” 166 The sense of near emergency is electric: “...world population growth is widely recognized within the government as a current danger of the highest magnitude calling for urgent measures [Page 194]. ...it is of the utmost urgency that governments now recognize the facts and implications of population growth, determine the ultimate population sizes that make sense for their countries and start vigorous programs at once to achieve their desired goals [Page 15]. “Rapid population growth in less developed countries has been mounting in a social milieu of poverty, unemployment and underemployment, low educational attainment, widespread malnutrition, and increasing costs of food production. These countries have accumulated a formidable "backlog" of unfinished tasks. They include economic assimilation of some 40 percent of their people who are pressing at, but largely remain outside the periphery of the developing economy; the amelioration of generally low 164 In this 1966 interview he predicted that world population would reach 6 billion around 2000. Most leaders dismissed his prediction as outrageous. Population passed 6 billion in 1999. 165 National Security Council, National Security Decision Memorandum 314, Washington, DC, November 26, 1975. 4 pp. [NSSM 200 made public policy by President Gerald Ford; Ch. 4: The Life and Death of NSSM 200, by S. Mumford] 166 National Security Study Memorandum 200: World Population Growth and U.S. Security, by Stephen D. Mumford; The Social Contract, Winter 1992 - 93
levels of living; and in addition, accommodation of annually larger increments to the population. The accomplishment of these tasks could be intolerably slow if the average annual growth rate in the remainder of this century does not slow down to well below the 2.7 percent projected, under the medium variant, for LDCs with market economics. How rapid population growth impedes social and economic progress is discussed in subsequent chapters.”[Page 32] The threat to security briefly summarized, “...population factors are indeed critical in, and often determinants of, violent conflict in developing areas. Segmental (religious, social, racial) differences, migration, rapid population growth, differential levels of knowledge and skills, rural/urban differences, population pressure and the spatial location of population in relation to resources — in this rough order of importance — all appear to be important contributions to conflict and violence... Clearly, conflicts which are regarded in primarily political terms often have demographic roots. Recognition of these relationships appears crucial to any understanding or prevention of such hostilities [Page 66]. “Where population size is greater than available resources, or is expanding more rapidly than the available resources, there is a tendency toward internal disorders and violence and, sometimes, disruptive international policies or violence” [Page 69]. In developing countries, the burden of population factors, added to others, will weaken unstable governments, often only marginally effective in good times, and open the way to extremist regimes” [Page 84]. Ted Koppel, Nightline documentary: CIA & Pentagon's Perspective on Overpopulation & Resource Wars167, (2000) Public Law 91-190: National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (83 Stat. 852). NEPA is a United States environmental law that established a U.S. national policy promoting the enhancement of the environment and also established the President's Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). In effect it said that all future interventions in the environment would be evaluated by the principle of “Guilty until proven innocent,” a reversal of the assumption of English law. World Population Plan of Action; Adopted by consensus of the 137 countries represented at the UN World Population Conference at Bucharest, August 1974 Public Law 91-213: An Act to establish a Commission on Population Growth and the American Future; 91st Congress, S. 2701; March 16, 1970 Population and the American Future: The Report of the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future; John D. Rockefeller 3rd, March 27, 1972
CIA & Pentagon's Perspective on Overpopulation & Resource Wars, Nightline with Ted Koppel, (2000)
A.9: Lysistrata Tsedeq: Eco-Law 101: Laws of Sustainability “Tsedeq comes from a Semitic word meaning to be firm, straight, “like steel,” a determined integrity that goes to one's core. In Arabic, this means that one is fully developed, balanced and mature. Although tsedeq is often translated to mean “judgment,” this does not mean evil retribution or a legal kind of judgment, but justice and righteousness, which incorporates right living.” “Unlike plagues of the dark ages or contemporary diseases we do not understand, the modern plague of overpopulation is soluble by means we have discovered and with resources we possess. What is lacking is not sufficient knowledge of the solution but universal consciousness of the gravity of the problem and education of the billions who are its victim.” -- Martin Luther King Jr. I have always been fascinated by the law of reversed effort. Sometimes I call it the “backwards law”. When you try to stay on the surface of the water, you sink; but when you try to sink you float… which immediately calls to mind an ancient and much neglected saying, “Whosoever would save his soul shall lose it. This [brief] maintains that this insecurity is the result of trying to be secure, and that, contrariwise, salvation and sanity consist in the most radical recognition that we have no way of saving ourselves. 168
a: Tsedeq169: World in Balance, Ecologically & Politically According to: Melchizedek - Ecological War, an excerpt from Yakov Rabinovich's Stairway to Nowhere: “Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek." In ancient Rome one was declared an outlaw with this formula: "he shall be denied fire and water," that is, one was to be refused all the simple necessities of human existence, such as firewood and drinking water, which nature offers free to all. By slow degrees of degradation we have been brought to where we buy clear water by the bottle and pay a week's wages to heat a modest home for a month. In some ways we're far worse off than Rome's outlaws, who at least breathed clean air! And we don't even seem to realize that, when every element -- earth, air, fire and water -- is fouled around us and offered back at a price, we're outlaws and warred upon. As always, organized religion has failed us. The most forward-looking bureaucrats of the Book, in a desperate last-ditch effort to make themselves presentable, may now try to show they care about the planet. But in fact, the official scriptures, by the official reading, have nothing useful to say. The Quran of the mullahs views nature only as a demonstration of God's fine qualities: Nature's value is purely intellectual, and it isn't even meant to last. Everything's to be effaced on the imminent Last Day. Official
The Wisdom of Insecurity: A message for an Age of Anxiety, by Alan M. Watts Tsedeq comes from a Semitic word meaning to be firm, straight, "like steel," a determined integrity that goes to one's core. In Arabic, this means that one is fully developed, balanced and mature. Although tsedeq is often translated to mean "judgment," this does not mean evil retribution or a legal kind of judgment, but justice and righteousness, which incorporates right living, 169
Christianity is similarly eager for the end, when irreparably fallen nature will be improved into a paved city, the New Jerusalem. Conventional Judaism has a sane relation to nature, but a neutral and pragmatic one with nothing to add to the ecology debate. Yet religion is indeed what we need to mobilize forces for the earth, and we have to seize back the scriptures from their unworthy stewards. Those who have translated and interpreted the scriptures for us have been men of conventional faith, whose piety censored and misrepresented the texts. But the great prophets of our shared traditions, Moses, Isaiah, Jesus and Mohammed, were archetypal dissidents, in every way alien to the committees that have translated them into English from the time of King James and George Sales on to the present day. There is, for instance, a Hebrew word for ecological balance, and one of the most commonly occurring words in the Bible: tsedeq. It is translated, perfunctorily, as "righteousness," because to translate it fully and fairly, with its dazzling range of meanings, would have revealed an unacceptable degree of "paganism" in the Bible. At root, it means "rainfall in due proportion," and meanings like "rightness," "justice" and "righteousness" arose as extensions and expansions of the original meaning. This is no surprise. For the archaic societies of the ancient near east, important concept words are always deeply rooted in the realities of physical life. Abstractions, even for things like colors, don't enter the vocabulary of Hebrew until well into period A.D. We'll get a clearer understanding of how tsedeq evolved by examining the parallel Egyptian world ma'at. It comes from the verb ma-a which originally meant "to rightly measure," and referred to the resurveying of the fields after the Nile's floodwaters withdrew each spring. The existence of private property depended on an accurate ma-a of the silt-covered land. There is a large choice of glyphs with the same phonetic value in Egyptian, so the ones which are chosen can often signify a word's meaning. Ma-a is spelled with a mound of earth emerging from under floodwaters, a scythe, and an arm. This notion of rightness, evidently grew right out of the well-worked riverside acres. The word was early on made an abstract feminine noun, Ma-at, which means rightness both in the agricultural and moral sense. Israel depended on rainfall as Egypt did on the Nile's flooding. Like ma'at, tsedeq came to take on a more general sense, but it evolved in ways far more profound and meaningful for us than ma'at. The genius of the Hebrews was to always adopt the best poetic and religious conceptions of their neighbors, but then deepen them with moral meaning. It was the chief god of the farming Canaanites, the storm god Baal, who guaranteed tsedeq, rainfall and crop growth. The Hebrews, who adopted so many features from this Canaanite Zeus, took over tsedeq as well, but enlarged it to create a view of the moral and natural worlds as inseparable. (Very unlike us Americans, who see ecological devastation as not a crime, but merely a pity.) The word tsedeq, in its fullest sense, can mean "world in balance" both ecologically and politically. The eighty-fifth psalms says: He's quick to save those who regard him with awe, his glory shines across their country like sunlight,
fairness and generosity meet in how God treats a just people, the balance of the scales of justice, the balance of nature (tsedeq) coincide, sweetly they meet, like a kiss, the land brings forth abundant wheat, abundant honesty beneath a sky clear as a conscience. If God will grant us the power to be good, the land will give us good things. The ecological balance of the ancient near east was not the exclusive responsibility of the gods. The king, as vice-regent of the sky god, guaranteed his people the benevolence of earth and sky. The kings of Israel were monarchs on this sacerdotal model with a special moral dimension, as we see in the seventy-second psalm, a coronation hymn: O God, make the king just! May his sons after him maintain the world in balance (tsedeq), may he make society fair and give the poor their rights so the hills and valleys can bring forth their crops, the fair return for fairly paid work. Let the king defend the rights of the poor, protect the impoverished, let him crush and humble those who cheat the people, O king, do this and you'll be more glorious to your people than the sun, more splendid than the moon, remembered from age to age, you will be like the autumn rain that renews the mown fields after harvest, like the heavy rains of winter that soak the dry land to its depths. In the days of such a king, good men, perfect men, will flourish, and abundance will be unaltering beneath the changing moons. The god of the Hebrews appropriated not only specialized vocabulary from the Canaanites, but myths and images too. One can see something parallel in Milton's Paradise Lost, where the God of the Bible is sometimes referred to as "Jove," and Hesiod's battle of the titans was adapted to become the war of the rebel angels. The most important Canaanite myth Yahweh absorbed was that of Baal, the god of rain, who is every year defeated by Mot, the god of death and drought. Each autumn Baal returns with the autumn rains, to restore tsedeq. Isaiah, Habakkuk, Joel, Hosea, and Nahum all draw on this myth for their apocalyptic poems. Melchizedek appears for the first time in Genesis 14, in a scene set around 1800 B.C. Abraham has just rescued his nephew Lot, captured during a war between the city-states immediately south of Jerusalem. Returning victorious from battle, Abraham is acknowledged as ruler of the region by Melchizedek, king of Jerusalem. Melchizedek, petty king of a then inconsiderable Jerusalem, doubtless existed, though the name is actually a title. It means "I acknowledge the kingship of the god (Baal) who brings the rainfall." Names on this pattern, compounded with the word tsedeq, and
indicating that this was a sacred king who magically represented the storm god in state rituals, were common among Canaanite sovereigns. A few centuries later Joshua will encounter another king of Jerusalem whose name is Adonizedek, which is identical, except that the word for lord (adon) is used instead of that for king (melek). The Hebrews saw themselves as a continuation of Canaanite civilization, just as the Germanic barbarians who became the kings of Europe saw themselves as the heirs of Rome. The Hebrew kings were all Melchizedeks, just as the Tsars and Kaisers were Caesars. And in the course of time Melchizedek became, as Caesar has in European literature, an independent mythological figure. The Dead Sea Scrolls, the first-century A.D. library of the Essenes discovered in 1947, contains a scroll of Melchizedek. The Essenes practised a pure form of communism, and their scroll, written in the context of Israel's struggle against Roman domination, describes Melchizedek as an eschatological hero who will fairly redistribute property, defeat the armies of evil, and sound the ram's horn to announce abolition of all debts (the Jubilee). The scroll is valuable because it shows that the Melchizedek myth was drawn on as an important source of spiritual strength in Israel's struggle to the death against the Roman Empire. A struggle which was obviously anti-imperialist, and from the viewpoint of the Essenes, anti-capitalist. So important a part of the national mythology was Melchizedek, that Paul acknowledges him in his letter to the Hebrews, written at roughly the same time as the Melchizedek scroll (though of course Paul is only mentioning Melchizedek to bolster the prestige of Jesus): â€œHis name, in the first place, means "king of righteousness"; next, he is king of Salem, that is, "King of Peace." He has no father, no mother, no lineage; his years have no beginning, his life no end. He is like the son of God. He remains a priest for all time.â€? There is an Apocalypse of Mechizedek, preserved in the fourth-century A.D. library of Gnostic manuscripts found in Nag Hammadi, Egypt, in 1945. This book contains revelations made to Mechizedek by various angelic messengers. The fourth-century Cypriot bishop Epiphanius, in his book Against the Heresies, tells us enough to confirm that there was a Mechizedekian Christian sect and that the book from Nag Hammadi is theirs. We are called to use the concept of tsedeq (world in balance) to bring to the ecological struggle powers which are only unleashed by religious belief. In doing this we are entitled to the name of Melchizedek. The title of the old Canaanite priest-kings who guaranteed the land's tsedeq was more fully understood by Old and New Testament period prophets. It came to be the title of a royal warrior who defends sacred ecology and resists the forces of capital. The Gnostic Melchizedek of Nag Hammadi further deepens the figure into a one whose ultimate heroic act is that of achieving self-awareness: the understanding that he is the Melchizedek, that he has the annointed King, the Messiah, the Christ, within him. We are all called to this new order or mystical chivalry, the Order of Melchizedek. Kingship is a powerful metaphor and has a long tradition of democratization and esoteric
reinterpretation. The Stoics, who made it their ideal to live in accord with nature, secundam naturam, used to say that only the wise man deserves to be called a king, solus sapiens rex. This is the sort of kingship I have in mind, a gnostic one, that need only be realized to be made real, a royalty that can be shared by all, like that of Tennyson's Arthur: But when he spake and cheered his Table Round With large, divine, and comfortable words, Beyond my tongue to tell thee - I beheld From eye to eye through all their Order flash A momentary likeness of the King . . . This is the kingship of which Isaiah spoke, a royal defense of the whole natural world. His vision begins with the vindication of an injured tree, and expands into universal harmony of human with human and with every other species.
Reflections on Sustainability, Population Growth & the Environment170 Population Growth Destroys Democracy In an interview (Moyers 1989) Bill Moyers asked Isaac Asimov171: What happens to the idea of the dignity of the human species if this population growth continues at its present rate? Asimov responded: “It will be completely destroyed. I like to use what I call my bathroom metaphor: if two people live in an apartment and there are two bathrooms, then both have freedom of the bathroom. You can go to the bathroom anytime you want to stay as long as you want for whatever you need. And everyone believes in freedom of the bathroom; it should be right there in the Constitution. But if you have twenty people in the apartment and two bathrooms, no matter how much every person believes in freedom of the bathroom, there is no such thing. You have to set up times for each person, you have to bang on the door, "Aren't you through yet?" and so on.” Asimov concluded with the profound observation: In the same way, democracy cannot survive overpopulation. Human dignity cannot survive [overpopulation]. Convenience and decency cannot survive [overpopulation]. As you put more and more people onto the world, the value of life not only declines, it disappears. It doesn't matter if someone dies, the more people there are, the less one person matters.” [emphasis added] War and peace
170 Reflections on Sustainability, Population Growth, and the Environment, by Albert Bartlett, Ph.D., Paper first published in Population & Environment, Vol. 16, No. 1, Sep 1994, pp. 5-35; (1998) 171 Democracy Cannot Survive Overpopulation, by Albert Bartlett, Ph.D., Population & Environment, Vol. 22, No. 1, Sep 2000, pgs. 63-71
At the local or state levels, there is an interesting parallel between the promotion of growth (unsustainability) and the promotion of war, both of which can be very profitable for high level people but are very expensive for everyone else. The waging of war is the sole enterprise of large military establishments. Even the meanest mind knows what has to be done to win a war; "One has to beat the opponent," after which one can have a large party to celebrate the victory, pass out the medals, and then start preparing for the next war. Promoting community growth is quite similar. The promotion of growth is the sole enterprise of large municipal and state establishments, both public and private. It does not take much of a mind to know that victory in the growth war requires that your community beat competing communities to become the location of new factories. Campaigns and battles are planned and, when a factory comes, there is a large party to celebrate the victory and pass out the awards. Then the community warriors start fighting for even more new factories. In contrast, winning the peace is quite different. Even the best minds don't know for sure the best way to "win the peace." Compared to the groups that promote war, the public agencies that are devoted to maintaining peace are miniscule. In the effort to maintain peace, there is no terminal point at which a party is in order where all can celebrate the fact that, "We won the peace!" Winning the peace takes eternal vigilance. Protecting the community environment from the ravages of growth is quite parallel. The best minds don't know for sure the best way to do it. There are few public establishments whose sole role is to preserve the environment. One can postpone assaults on the environment, but by and large, it takes eternal vigilance of concerned citizens, who, at best, can only reduce the rate of loss of the environment. There is no terminal time at which one can have a party to celebrate the fact that, "We have saved the environment!" A healthy economy For some time, the economy in the U.S. has been said to be "healthy." During this time studies shown that the economic gap between the well-to-do and the poor has been increasing. This allows us to say that "healthy economy" is one in which people with large incomes find that their incomes are rising more rapidly than their costs, while people with low incomes find that their incomes are rising less rapidly than their costs. Injustice and inequity The series of big city riots of the recent decades are symptoms of a deep-seated illness (injustice and inequity) that we have ignored too long. The illness is certainly made worse by the rapid population growth that consumes public and private resources in order to give generous returns to investors, with minimal benefits going to help the low income people who are adversely affected by the growth. The public financial resources that are needed to pay the costs of population growth come at the expense of all manner of community programs that are essential for improving education, justice, and equity. Injustice and inequity breed unrest and discontent. When a condition of instability is reached, things can happen with surprising speed. We were all stunned by the swiftness of the fall of the Soviet Union. Global trade
As we enter an era of expanded global trade, we need to know that technology has made it easy to conduct trade over long distances, and this ease of trade serves to block out our recognition of the concept of "carrying capacity." Especially if their peoples are unsophisticated, these other places with which we trade with such ease, are used to provide an "away" from which we can get the resources we need, and to which we can later throw our trash. Technology and trade combine to interfere with our understanding of the concept of limits.
Laws Relating to Sustainability Let us be specific and state that both "Carrying Capacity" and "Sustainable" imply "for the period in which we hope humans will inhabit the earth." This means "for many millenia." Many prominent individuals have given postulates and laws relating to population growth and sustainability.
The Two Postulata of Thomas Malthus The reverend Thomas Malthus used these two assumptions as the basis of his famous essay two hundred years ago. First, That food is necessary to the existence of man. Secondly, That the passion between the sexes is necessary and will remain nearly in its present state. (Appleman, 1976)
Garrett Hardins Three Laws of Human Ecology These three laws of human ecology were given by Garrett Hardin. (Hardin 1993) These are fundamental, and need to be known and recognized by all who would speak of sustainability. First Law: "We can never do merely one thing." This is a profound and eloquent observation of the interconnectedness of nature. Second Law: "There's no away to throw to." This is a compact statement of one of the major problems of the "effluent society." Third Law: The impact (I) of any group or nation on the environment is represented qualitatively by the relation: I=PAT Here P is the size of the population, A is the per-capita affluence, measured by percapita annual consumption, and T is a measure of the damage done by the technologies that are used in supplying the consumption. Hardin attributes this law to Ehrlich and Holdren. (Ehrlich and Holdren 1971) The suggestion may be made that Hardin's Third Law is too conservative. The Third Law suggests that I varies as Pn where n = 1.
There are situations where the impact of humans increases more rapidly than linearly with the size P of the population. In these cases, n > 1.
Bouldings Three Theorems These theorems are from the work of the eminent economist Kenneth Boulding. (Boulding 1971) First Theorem: "The Dismal Theorem"- If the only ultimate check on the growth of population is misery, then the population will grow until it is miserable enough to stop its growth. Second Theorem: "The Utterly Dismal Theorem" - This theorem states that any technical improvement can only relieve misery for a while, for so long as misery is the only check on population, the [technical] improvement will enable population to grow, and will soon enable more people to live in misery than before. The final result of [technical] improvements, therefore, is to increase the equilibrium population which is to increase the total sum of human misery. Third Theorem: "The moderately cheerful form of the Dismal Theorem" - Fortunately, it is not too difficult to restate the Dismal Theorem in a moderately cheerful form, which states that if something else, other than misery and starvation, can be found which will keep a prosperous population in check, the population does not have to grow until it is miserable and starves, and it can be stably prosperous. Boulding continues: Until we know more, the Cheerful Theorem remains a question mark. Misery we know will do the trick. This is the only sure-fire automatic method of bringing population to an equilibrium. Other things may do it. In another context, Boulding observed that: â€œThe economic analysis I presented earlier indicates that the major priority, and one in which the United Nations can be of great utility, is a world campaign for the reduction of birth rates. This, I suggest, is more important than any program of foreign aid and investments. Indeed, if it is neglected, all programs of aid and investment will, I believe, be ultimately self-defeating and will simply increase the amount of human misery.â€? (Boulding 1971, p. 361)
Abernathyâ€™s Axiom Motivation, rather than differential access to modern contraception is a major determinant of fertility. Individuals frequently respond to scarcity by having fewer children, and to perceived improved economic opportunity by having more children. Contrary to the demographic transition model, economic development does not cause
family size to shrink; rather, at every point where serious economic opportunity beckons, family size preferences expand. (Abernethy 1993b) A) Foreign aid conveys to the recipients the perception of improving economic wellbeing, which is followed by an increase in the fertility of the recipients of the aid. B) Migrations from regions of low economic opportunity to places of higher economic opportunity result in an increase in the fertility of the migrants that persists for a generation or two.
Laws, hypotheses, observations and predictions relating to sustainability The Laws, Hypotheses, Observations, and Predictions that follow are offered to define the term "sustainability." In some cases these statements are accompanied by corollaries that are identified by capital letters. They all apply for populations and rates of consumption of goods and resources of the sizes and scales found in the world in 1998, and may not be applicable for small numbers of people or to groups in primitive tribal situations. These Laws are believed to hold rigorously. The Hypotheses are less rigorous than the laws. There may be exceptions to some, and some may be proven to be wrong. Experience may show that some of the hypotheses should be elevated to the status of laws. The Observations may shed light on the problems and on mechanisms for finding solutions to the problems. The Predictions are those of a retired nuclear physicist who has been watching these problems for several decades. The lists are but a single compilation, and hence may be incomplete. Readers are invited to communicate with the author in regard to items that should or should not be in these lists. In many cases, these laws and statements have been recognized, set forth, and elaborated on by others.
Laws Relating to Sustainability First Law: Population growth and / or growth in the rates of consumption of resources cannot be sustained. A) A population growth rate less than or equal to zero and declining rates of consumption of resources are a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for a sustainable society. B) Unsustainability will be the certain result of any program of "development," that does not plan the achievement of zero (or a period of negative) growth of
populations and of rates of consumption of resources. This is true even if the program is said to be "sustainable." C) The research and regulation programs of governmental agencies that are charged with protecting the environment and promoting "sustainability" are, in the long run, irrelevant, unless these programs address vigorously and quantitatively the concept of carrying capacities and unless the programs study in depth the demographic causes and consequences of environmental problems. D) Societies, or sectors of a society, that depend on population growth or growth in their rates of consumption of resources, are unsustainable. E) Persons who advocate population growth and / or growth in the rates of consumption of resources are advocating unsustainability. F) Persons who suggest that sustainability can be achieved without stopping population growth are misleading themselves and others. G) Persons whose actions directly or indirectly cause increases in population or in the rates of consumption of resources are moving society away from sustainability. (Advertising your city or state as an ideal site in which to locate new factories, indicates a desire to increase the population of your city or state.) H) The term "Sustainable Growth" is an oxymoron. Second Law: In a society with a growing population and / or growing rates of consumption of resources, the larger the population, and / or the larger the rates of consumption of resources, the more difficult it will be to transform the society to the condition of sustainability. Third Law: The response time of populations to changes in the human fertility rate is the average length of a human life, or approximately 70 years. (Bartlett and Lytwak 1995) [ This is called "population momentum." ] A) A nation can achieve zero population growth if: a) the fertility rate is maintained at the replacement level for 70 years, and b) there is no net migration during the 70 years. During the 70 years the population continues to grow, but at declining rates until the growth finally stops. B) If we want to make changes in the total fertility rates so as to stabilize the population by the mid - to late 21st century, we must make the necessary changes before the end of the 20th century. C) The time horizon of political leaders is of the order of two to eight years. D) It will be difficult to convince political leaders to act now to change course, when the full results of the change may not become apparent in the lifetimes of those leaders.
Fourth Law: The size of population that can be sustained (the carrying capacity) and the sustainable average standard of living of the population are inversely related to one another. (This must be true even though Cohen asserts that the numerical size of the carrying capacity of the Earth cannot be determined, (Cohen 1995)) A) The higher the standard of living one wishes to sustain, the more urgent it is to stop population growth. B) Reductions in the rates of consumption of resources and reductions in the rates of production of pollution can shift the carrying capacity in the direction of sustaining a larger population. Fifth Law: Sustainability requires that the size of the population be less than or equal to the carrying capacity of the ecosystem for the desired standard of living. A) Sustainability requires an equilibrium between human society and dynamic but stable ecosystems. B) Destruction of ecosystems tends to reduce the carrying capacity and / or the sustainable standard of living. C) The rate of destruction of ecosystems increases as the rate of growth of the population increases. D) Population growth rates less than or equal to zero are necessary, but are not sufficient, conditions for halting the destruction of the environment. This is true locally and globally. Sixth Law: (The lesson of "The Tragedy of the Commons") (Hardin 1968): The benefits of population growth and of growth in the rates of consumption of resources accrue to a few; the costs of population growth and growth in the rates of consumption of resources are borne by all of society. A) Individuals who benefit from growth will continue to exert strong pressures supporting and encouraging both population growth and growth in rates of consumption of resources. B) The individuals who promote growth are motivated by the recognition that growth is good for them. In order to gain public support for their goals, they must convince people that population growth and growth in the rates of consumption of resources, are also good for society. [ This is the Charles Wilson argument: if it is good for General Motors, it is good for the United States.] (Yates 1983) Seventh Law: Growth in the rate of consumption of a non-renewable resource, such as a fossil fuel, causes a dramatic decrease in the life-expectancy of the resource. A) In a world of growing rates of consumption of resources, it is seriously misleading to state the life-expectancy of a non-renewable resource "at present rates of consumption," i.e., with no growth. More relevant than the life-expectancy of a resource is the expected date of the peak production of the resource, i.e. the peak of the Hubbert curve. ( Hubbert 1974)
B) It is intellectually dishonest to advocate growth in the rate of consumption of non-renewable resources while, at the same time, reassuring people about how long the resources will last "at present rates of consumption." (zero growth) Eighth Law: The time of expiration of non-renewable resources can be postponed, possibly for a very long time, by: i) technological improvements in the efficiency with which the resources are recovered and used ii) using the resources in accord with a program of "Sustained Availability," (Bartlett 1986) iii) recycling iv) the use of substitute resources. Ninth Law: When large efforts are made to improve the efficiency with which resources are used, the resulting savings are easily and completely wiped out by the added resources consumed as a consequence of modest increases in population. A) When the efficiency of resource use is increased, the consequence often is that the "saved" resources are not put aside for the use of future generations, but instead are used immediately to encourage and support larger populations. B) Humans have an enormous compulsion to find an immediate use for all available resources. Tenth Law: The benefits of large efforts to preserve the environment are easily canceled by the added demands on the environment that result from small increases in human population. Eleventh Law: (Second Law of Thermodynamics) When rates of pollution exceed the natural cleansing capacity of the environment, it is easier to pollute than it is to clean up the environment. Twelfth Law: (Eric Sevareid's Law); The chief cause of problems is solutions. (Sevareid 1970) A) This law should be a central part of higher education, especially in engineering. Thirteenth Law: Humans will always be dependent on agriculture. (This is the first of Malthus' two postulata.) A) Supermarkets alone are not sufficient. B) The central task in sustainable agriculture is to preserve agricultural land. The agricultural land must be protected from losses due to things such as: i) Urbanization and development
ii) Erosion iii) Poisioning by chemicals Fourteenth Law: If, for whatever reason, humans fail to stop population growth and growth in the rates of consumption of resources, Nature will stop these growths. A) By contemporary western standards, Nature's method of stopping growth is cruel and inhumane. B) Glimpses of Nature's method of dealing with populations that have exceeded the carrying capacity of their lands can be seen each night on the television news reports from places where large populations are experiencing starvation and misery. Fifteenth Law: In every local situation, creating jobs increases the number of people locally who are out of work. Sixteenth Law: Starving people don't care about sustainability. A) If sustainability is to be achieved, the necessary leadership and resources must be supplied by people who are not starving. Seventeenth Law: The addition of the word "sustainable" to our vocabulary, to our reports, programs, and papers, to the names of our academic institutes and research programs, and to our community initiatives, is not sufficient to ensure that our society becomes sustainable. Eighteenth Law: Extinction is forever.
Hypotheses Relating to Sustainability 1) For the 1998 average global standard of living, the 1998 population of the Earth exceeds the carrying capacity of the Earth. (Pimentel 1994) [Cohen (1995) would probably debate this.] 2) For the 1998 average standard of living in the United States, the 1998 population of the United States exceeds the carrying capacity of the United States. (Abernethy 1993a), (Giampietro and Pimentel 1993) 3) The increasing sizes of populations that result from population growth are the single greatest and most insidious threat to representative democracy. 4) The costs of programs to stop population growth are small compared to the costs of population increases. 5) For society as a whole, population growth never pays for itself. [This is a consequence of the Tragedy of the Commons.]
A) In the U.S. in general, the larger the population of a city, the higher are the municipal per-capita annual taxes. B) Sales taxes generated by a large shopping center in a small town may make it appear that growth of the shopping center has earned more than its public costs, but these earnings are at the expense of the areas surrounding the town. 6) The time required for a society to make a planned transition to sustainability on its own terms, so it can live within the carrying capacity of its ecosystem, increases with increases in i) the size of its population ii) the rate of growth of its population iii) the society's average per-capita rate of consumption of new resources. 7) The rate (S) at which a society can improve the average standard of living of its people is directly related to the rate of application of new technologies (T) and is inversely related to the rate of growth (R) of the size of the population (the fractional increase per unit time), by a relation with the general properties of the equation, S=T-AR+B where A and B are positive constants. A) In places in the world in 1998, the value of R (the rate of growth of population) is so large that it is causing S to be negative. Said in other words: a) Population growth competes with and slows down the rate of improvement of the average standard of living and may cause the average standard of living to decline. In other words: b) Population growth interferes with economic growth. 8) Social stability is a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for sustainability. A) Human freedoms depend on social stability. B) Armed conflict (war) cannot be a part of a sustainable society. 9) Social stability tends to be inversely related both to population size and density. 10) The per-capita burden of the lowered standard of living that generally results from population growth and from the decline of resources, falls most heavily on the poor. 11) When populations are growing, the rate of growth of the fraction of the population that is poor exceeds the rate of growth of the fraction of the population that is wealthy. 12) Environmental problems cannot be solved or ameliorated by increases in population or by increases in the rates of consumption of resources. A) All environmental problems would be easier to solve if the population were smaller and / or if the rates of consumption of resources were smaller.
13) Problems of shortages of non-renewable resources cannot be solved or ameliorated by population growth. 14) Regional efforts to solve problems caused by population growth will only enlarge the problems if population growth in the region is not halted. 15) In general, neither the environment nor agriculture can be enhanced or even preserved through compromises. A) Compromises and accommodations between the immediate needs of people and the long-term needs of the environment will generally be resolved in favor of people at the expense of the environment, as though people can exist independent of the environment. For the most part, compromises only reduce the rate of destruction of the environment or they increase the elegance with which the environment is destroyed. B) Compromises between the demands of urban / industrial growth and agriculture will always result in the conversion of agricultural land to urban and industrial uses. The reverse conversion never happens. 16) The fractional rate of destruction of the environment that results from human activities will always exceed the fractional rate of increase of our knowledge and understanding of the environment. A) Every decision affecting the environment will have to be made with less than full knowledge of the risks and consequences of the decision. B) Much of our knowledge of the environment has come from the study of past mistakes. C) It will always be possible for persons to argue for the delay of the implementation of corrective measures to save or preserve the environment, by claiming that our information about the problems is incomplete. 17) By the time overpopulation and shortages of resources are obvious to most people, the carrying capacity has been exceeded. It is then almost too late to think about sustainability. A) It is difficult to know what to do once one realizes that the population of a society is too large. B) Long-range thinking, planning, and leadership, carried out with a full recognition of the laws of nature, is most urgently needed. 18) For countries with large populations, importing non-renewable natural resources demonstrates unsustainability: exporting non-renewable natural resources reduces the ultimate sustainable standard of living and / or the carrying capacity of the exporting country. 19) When a society is living at the limit with regard to renewable resources such as food or water, small fluctuations in the supply can have large negative effects on the society.
20) Because of the growing universal nature of world trade, the concept of "carrying capacity" is difficult to apply to a nation or region. A) Sustainability is a global problem. B) However, the approach to sustainability must be sought on the local and national levels. C) If a local official speaks of his / her community being sustainable, it probably is not true. 21) Sustainable agriculture cannot be based on large annual energy inputs from fossil fuels, particularly petroleum. i) "The food system consumes ten times more energy than it provides to society in food energy." (Giampietro and Pimentel 1993) 22) Irrigation of farmland, as it has been practiced throughout history and up to the present time, cannot be sustained. (Abernethy 1993a, p. 136) i) The lands become poisoned with salts. 23) Hydroelectric power generated from reservoirs created by construction of large dams, cannot be sustained. i) The reservoirs fill with silt.
Observations Relating to Sustainability 1) In order to moved toward a sustainable society, the first and most important effort that must be made is to stop population growth. This will require the initiation of major comprehensive educational, technical, and outreach programs in the areas of social responsibility, family planning, contraception, immigration, and resource use. To get things right, these programs must focus on the goal of stopping population growth and should not be diluted by omitting references to the numbers involved in understanding population growth. The greater the degree to which the carrying capacity has been exceeded, the more probable it is that coercion will become a factor in these programs. 2) The food chain is nature's equilibrium mechanism. It functions to prevent unlimited expansion of populations of flora and fauna. Primitive human societies were able to maintain approximately constant populations and to live within the carrying capacity of their ecosystems. The methods they used to maintain approximately constant populations were often cruel and inhumane. Technology has given many people the feeling that, through our own efforts, we are exempt from the cruel constraints of limited carrying capacities. 3) Ancient civilizations have vanished, in part because they grew too large and their size exceeded the carrying capacity of the ecosystems on which they depended for support.
a) Education notwithstanding, civilizations today show considerable tendency to repeat the mistakes of earlier civilizations, but on a much larger scale. b) Growing international trade allows the developed countries to draw on the carrying capacity of the entire earth, often at the expense of underdeveloped countries. 4) The complete era of the use of fossil fuels by humans will be a vanishingly short fraction of the span of human existence on the Earth. (Hubbert 1974) 5) The supplies of all non-renewable resources will effectively expire when the costs (in cash, in energy, in ecological and societal disruption) of making available a quantity of the resource exceed the value of the quantity of the resource. 6) Comprehensive educational, technical, and outreach programs in the areas of efficient use of resources will be needed in order to help achieve sustainability. 7) A major use of technology is, and has been, to accommodate the growth of populations, and to remove the recognition of the importance of living within the carrying capacity of the environment. (See Boulding's "Utterly Dismal Theorem" and Eric Sevareid's Law) A) This use of technology has had the effect of encouraging population growth. B) This use of technology inhibits an approach to sustainability. C) An essential condition for sustainability is that technology be redirected toward the improvement of the quality of life, especially for those whose quality of life is now low, and away from its present use to increase the quantity of life.
Technical Predictions Relating to Sustainability 1) Peak world production of petroleum will probably happen before the year 2020. Peak production of coal and oil shale, may occur in the 21st Century. Other fossil fuels probably will not be available in globally significant quantities for more than a few decades into the 21st Century. 2) If replacements can be found for fossil fuels, especially for petroleum, it will require major technological breakthroughs. 3) Technological progress in the future is much more likely to be characterized by incremental advances than by breakthroughs, especially in the field of sources of energy. 4) The probability is very small that technological developments will produce new sources of energy in the next century, sources not already known in 1998, that will have the potential of supplying a significant fraction of the world's energy needs for any appreciable period of time.
5) The larger the global total daily demand for energy, the smaller is the probability that a new energy source or technology will be found that will have the potential of being developed sufficiently to meet an appreciable fraction of the global daily energy demand for any extended period of time. 6) The larger the global total daily demand for energy, the longer is the period of time that will be required for a new energy technology to be developed to the point where it will have the capacity of meeting an appreciable fraction of the global daily energy demand. 7) In the event that science and technology find a new source of large quantities of energy, the probability is high that the new source will be technologically very complex, with the result that it will be extremely costly to bring globally significant quantities of the new energy to the marketplace. 8) Children born in 1990 will not live to see 10% of the energy consumed in the U.S. generated by terrestrial nuclear fusion. (Bartlett 1990) 9) There will always be popular and persuasive technological optimists who believe that population increases are good, and who believe that the human mind has unlimited capacity to find technological solutions to all problems of crowding, environmental destruction, and resource shortages. A) These technological optimists are usually not biological or physical scientists. B) Politicians and business people tend to be eager disciples of these technological optimists. 10) Because population growth is only one of the factors that drives up the cost of living, the rate of increase of the cost of living will probably be larger than the rate of increase of population. 11) The rate of increase of the cost of living will be greater than the rate of increase of family income for a majority of families. This is what is called a "healthy economy."
Political Predictions Relating to Sustainability 1) Local and regional business and political leaders will continue to spend much of their working time trying to attract new industries and populations to their areas, and to spend a prominent few minutes a week complaining and wondering what to do about the consequent increases in taxes, pollution, congestion, crime, costs, etc. 2) Local and regional political and business leaders will continue to use the circular arguments of self-fulfilling predictions in order to generate local population growth. The circular argument proceeds as follows: i) Quantitative projections of the "inevitable" future population growth in the area are made.
ii) Plans are made to expand the municipal or regional infrastructure to accomodate the predicted growth. iii) Bonds are issued to raise money to pay for the planned expansions of the infrastructure, and the infrastructure is expanded. iv) The bonds must be paid off on a schedule that is based on the projections of population growth. v) The political and business leaders will do everything in their power to make certain that the projected population growth takes place, so that the bonds can be paid off on schedule. vi) When this results in the needed population growth, the leaders who predicted the population growth will speak loudly of their foresight. vii) Go back to i) and repeat. 3) Some political and business leaders will continue to want to throw away all manner of toxic waste by dumping the waste on the lands of low-income or underdeveloped people, in the U.S. or abroad. 4) Some business leaders will want to continue to manufacture hazardous materials whose sale in the U.S. is prohibited, so that these materials can be sold abroad. 5) Business and political leaders will continue to find it more attractive to promote growth than to promote sustainability. A) It is easy to talk about sustainability. B) It is difficult to make realistic constructive progress toward sustainability C) Business and political leaders are not attracted to the concept of limits as implied by the term "carrying capacity." 6) In the U.S., political "conservatives" will continue to be liberal in their policy recommendations in regard to rapid exploitation and use of the earth's renewable and non-renewable resources, with complete confidence that technology will be able to solve all of the consequent problems of shortages, pollution, and environmental degradation. Political "liberals" will continue to urge people to conserve and to protect the environment, to recycle, to use energy more efficiently, etc., i.e., to be conservative. 7) Entrepreneurs and politicians will continue to use the term "sustainable" for their own personal advantage in promotion of enterprises and programs, whether or not these enterprises and programs are sustainable or contribute to the creation of a sustainable society. 8) Many members of the academic research and education programs that focus on sustainability issues such as air pollution, global warming, etc. will continue their old ways of generating high per capita levels of pollution.
9) Many Americans will continue to deny the seriousness of the population problem in America and will focus their attention on population problems elsewhere. They may be motivated in this by their reluctance to accept the fact that immigration accounts for roughly half of the present growth of the population of the United States. 10) Many Americans will continue to believe that the environment in the U.S. can be preserved without the need of addressing the population growth in the U.S. 11) Many people who are active in matters relating to population problems will continue their efforts to ignore and to urge others to ignore the quantitative aspects of the population problem. They will continue to claim that the problems will be more effectively addressed if we focus our efforts on such worthy causes as population growth in other countries, foreign aid, human rights, justice, equity, education of women, the consumption of resources, the distribution of food, etc. Some will even claim that slow growth and sustainability are compatible. 12) Reports containing the word "sustainable" in their titles will continue to be produced at all levels of government, and these reports will continue to ignore population growth as the greatest threat to sustainability. 13) There will always be those who reject all limits to growth.
So where do we go from here? The challenge of making the transition to a sustainable society is enormous, in part because of a major global effort to keep people from recognizing the centrality of population growth to the enormous problems of the U.S. and the world. The immediate task is to restore numeracy to the population programs in the local, national and global agendas. On the local and national levels, we need to work to improve social justice and equity On the community level in the U.S., we should work to make growth pay for itself. On the national scale, we can hope for leaders who will recognize that population growth is the major problem in the U.S. and who will initiate a national dialog on the problem. With a lot of work at the grassroots, our system of representative government will respond. On the global scale, we need to support family planning throughout the world, and we should generally restrict our foreign aid to those countries that make continued demonstrated progress in reducing population growth rates.
A.10: Radical Honesty Law of Limited Competition Code: ‘I am not sure of my existence, but I am sure of my intentions’ ‘What I am trying to help people with these days is the terror and uncertainty of going insane. As happened before, I am also undergoing a terrifying experience I need help as much as the people I am attempting to serve: I think I am going sane. I am engaging people in conversations to see what we can work out together, to support each other in being sane in an insane world. Please, either bring me back to normal or come with me. Let's do what we can to help each other. All the poor crazy people, driven to distraction out there, but pretending everything is O.K., need our help too. I participate in support groups for sanity; I have met the enemy and they are me.’ -- Brad Blanton, Ph.D.; Pope of the Futilitarian Church PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY: RH – for me -- emphasizes among others that true Intellectual, Political, Psychological, Emotional and Spiritual Freedom is a result of taking personal responsibility for my life as a creator; a pejoristic thinker172. Freedom is the choice to consciously enter into the social contract with my fellow Futilitarians, to be personally responsible for my life. To practice RH is to ‘have the capacity to lie and consciously choose not do it.’ It is to insist on clear language, even if it offends. It is to refuse to be deliberately vague, ambiguous and fake in the hope of being liked. It is the ‘ability to control others and by choice not do it’. It is to require transparency of ourselves in all our relationships, particularly on issues we may feel embarrassed about, or which we previously attempted to hide, so as to project a false image of who we are. CLARITY OF LANGUAGE: We emphasise the importance of clarity of language in problem solving, focusing on specifics and details, and avoiding where possible living in abstractions173. We say that in the world of events there are always three aspects of the truth. There is (1) what occurs or occurred, (2) the story about what occurred, and (3) the meaning made out of the story of what occurred. The most abstract level, the meaning made out of the story that occurred, is the sales pitch that most of us are calling reality. What most of us call reality is just a story about reality or a story we have about the story. Hence we fully comprehend that “abstracted too many levels from its source, language maroons us in a factitious fantasy world, an unconscious story that turns us into its victims.”174 This focus on language of specifics is of fundamental importance to resolve misunderstandings, anger, hate, fury and fear. In problem solving, we focus on using succinct language and identifying the root causes of our problems; which is predicated upon the belief that problems are best solved by attempting to correct or eliminate the root cause, as opposed to merely addressing the obvious symptoms.175 PERSONAL IDENTITY: HONOUR AND TRANSPARENCY: Our sense of identity, integrity and love for ourselves, is no longer a result of external opinion about how ‘successful’ we are 172
Rewards of Pejoristic Thinking, by Garrett Hardin 1977 Abstract, Concrete, General, and Specific Terms, John Friedlander, Assoc. Prof., English Dept. SW Tennessee Comm Coll. The Ubiquitous Matrix of Lies, by Charles Eisenstein 175 Two Cultures – or Three Filters? On being ecolate as well as literate and numerate, Garrett Hardin, Social Contract, 1999 173 174
at climbing the two-faced arse-creeping hypocrites retrace ladder; but about how honest we are with ourselves and others. It is about the quality of our relationships with our family, friends and colleagues. It is about being totally ‘naked’ about who we are; instead of acquiring ever greater skills to pretend to be whom we consider we should be with any given friend or colleague. For us: to be ‘respected’ is no longer false and sycophantic fake praise out of fear for our socio-economic or political status; but to be ‘respected’ enough by someone who is willing to contact us to confront us with their totally unvarnished truthful opinion about who they think we are, and the ultimate respect, is for them to be committed to remaining in such conversation with us, until true forgiveness had been reached. The highest respect and honour we provide each other is to tell each other our unvarnished truth about our thoughts, feelings and ideas, and to be committed to remaining in such conversation until sincere forgiveness has been reached by both parties. FORGIVENESS: PATH TO REASON, FAIRNESS, LOVE & JOY: We believe the key to forgiveness is honesty, and the secret to meanness is lying; that most of us are trapped into lying by the way our cultures raised us in the systematic instruction of lying, the disease of moralism, and political correctness, etiquette and diplomacy. Our parents and teachers communicated that the highest value a person could hold was to perform well, or at least to appear to perform well. We learned never to be satisfied with anything less than perfection and always to pretend that everything is okay and improving. Who we are, we were told, is our performance. With such a stress on performance, our whole lives became an act. Then, maintaining and enhancing the act captured all our attention and we began slowly starving to death for lack of the nurturance that comes from commonplace experience. Almost all of us have been poisoned by such pretense, few of us grow beyond that. We lie like hell all the time to maintain our systematically indoctrinated image of who we are. Telling the truth can help you start to notice how you poison yourself, how you feel as a result, and how you maintain the social structures around you to keep the nausea that comes with maintaining the act. Telling the truth is hard to do, because it is so contrary to our conditioning. People might get their feelings hurt, or get offended or shocked or unbearably relieved. But if neither you nor they run away, and you stay with your experience, on the other side of that short-term breaking of the taboo is great freedom and love for each other. Telling the truth is hard, but covering up is harder on you and harder to live with than the truth. Being isolated within our own internally-judging minds is what most of us suffer and die from. The rescue from our mind's oppression comes through authentic contact and honest sharing with other human beings. We don’t particularly care whether our RH cult is inferior or insane; as long as it works for us, by providing us with the space to be ourselves, to be true to who we are, and to be sincere in our relationships, to explore what it means to be a human, alive on earth, at this time. WE WANT WHAT WORKS FOR ME AND YOU: For us Freedom means taking 100% personal responsibility for who we are, our choices, our mistakes, our dreams, our fears, particularly our anger and appreciations. Furthermore we prefer creative responsibility to passive victimhood in the expression of our preferences. For example: In expressing our
preferences, we take responsibility for the fact “I want…”, as opposed to ‘You are obliged to give me…..., because …..’. Where we find someone who shares our wants, our agreements are based on preference, not obligation. Where others do not share our wants, we commit to remaining in the conversation to explore ideas to determine whether we share any other similar ‘wants’; even if it is just the want for an honest radical honesty friend, who never lives to us. For example, one Radical Honesty couple have an agreement that when they argue they are allowed to physically hit each other. In Radical Honesty our concern is whether they are both consciously happy with such agreement and if their agreement works for them. If they participate in their beating fist-fights in private, then we support them to do what works for them. Whether their choice to beat each other up is superior to ours not to beat each other up, is irrelevant! We think that any individual has the right to make their own choices about their own bodies, and where their choices require the involvement of another, to find someone who consciously consents, out of want, to participate in such conduct. Consequently our emphasis is on 100% honest and transparent communication, decisionmaking and agreements that work for the individuals involved; not on whether their choices live up to our choices, or whether our choices are superior to their choices. Our emphasis is hence not on superiority/inferiority and right vs. wrong, or about coercing others to buy our particular propaganda story, because it is ‘right’ or ‘superior’, but to share it with them, quite simply because it works for us, and may, or may not, work for them. But they wouldn’t know, unless they tried it. REVOLUTION OF CONSCIOUSNESS: SECURITY IS IN BEING WHO WE ARE, NOT WHO WE THINK WE NEED TO PRETEND TO BE: Our ‘liberation struggle’ is to liberate ourselves from the dictatorship of attachment to the ego-beliefs about our identity. We use ‘beliefs’ like toilet paper. If applying the ideology of communism works for consenting adults at Delancey Street Foundation then we support ‘communism’ in that particular circumstance, not because it is ‘right’, but because ‘it works’ for that particular circumstance, for those people. Our criteria: ‘does the belief work’ for the participants, who consciously consent. Our liberation of consciousness is the liberation from being coerced to being blindly obedience to any religious, political or racial authority176. We are psycho-emotionally capable of Gandhian non-violent resistance177; i.e. Stanley Milgram’s studies of obedience found that between 65-92% of society178 are blindly obedient to authority. Unlike Fanonstein ‘liberation by violence’, our experience is that physical violence is not central to liberation; but the skills of getting mad and getting over it, of being able to sincerely forgive, are central to individual liberation from ego-identity beliefs.179 176 Dr. Brad Blanton: The Work of Stanley Milgram: Suffering as Attachment to Belief; is a chapter excerpted from Dr. Blanton’s book, Practicing Radical Honesty. The issues prominently feature in (i) Affidavit of Brad Blanton, Ph.D, evidencing the legal, psychological, and socio-political ‘citizens privilege’, Nuremberg Principles skills and competencies of Individual Responsibility, required for acts of civil disobedience to perceived illegitimate authority; and their application to the common law ‘reasonableness test’; HC-WC # 19963-09; and subsequent thereto in (ii) 21 March 2010: Educate to Liberate: Human Consciousness Rule-of-Law Freedom Charter: White Refugee Guerrilla Law Social Science Enquiry Report: 140 of SA Political, Academic and Media Elite, say ‘No Thanks’ to the ‘Rule-of-Law. 177 Affidavit of Brad Blanton, Ph.D, evidencing the legal, psychological, and socio-political ‘citizens privilege’, Nuremberg Principles skills and competencies of Individual Responsibility, required for acts of civil disobedience to perceived illegitimate authority; and their application to the common law ‘reasonableness test’; HC-WC # 19963-09 178 21 March 2010: Human Consciousness Rule of Law Freedom Charter Report: White Refugee Guerrilla-Law Social Science Enquiry: Rule-of-Law vs. No Rules at All, Freedom to Be Responsible vs. Freedom from Responsibility, Power vs. Force and Consciousness vs. Belief: 140 of SA’s Political, Media & Academic Elite say ‘No Thanks’ to Rule-of-Law 179 Practicing Radical Honesty, by Brad Blanton, Ph.D.; (ii) Population Policy Common Sense: Truth and Forgiveness Social Contract: Being Specific About Anger and Forgiveness
We have found that once people have the courage to take responsibility for honest relationships they do, in fact, lead happier more spiritually secure lives; secure in being true to who they are, knowing they are honest and honourable. They also tend to find each other and begin to demand honesty not only from other individuals but from official institutions. They become advocates for building systems of ongoing institutional transformation through telling the truth -- in business, corporations, in families, in government and even in politics. “I LOVE YOU, AND BECAUSE I LOVE YOU, I WOULD SOONER HAVE YOU HATE ME FOR TELLING YOU THE TRUTH, THAN LOVE ME FOR TELLING YOU LIES”180 LEADERSHIP While we suffer from Mistaken Ego-Mind Identity we do not know, or forgot:  Lying is the primary source of most human stress;  Stress is caused by the mind of the individual suffering from stress, not by circumstances;  Most suffering is generated by the tendency of the mind to moralize and judge, and to mistake belief for reality;  Most of us suffer from the fundamental problem of mistaken identity – we tend to identify with our judgements & criticisms of ourselves & others & believe or judging minds to be who we are Freedom from the foolish notion that our fundamental identity is a judge and critic gives us the possibility of living our lives according to our preferences rather than the “shoulds” our minds generate. Once people complete the undoing of their past lies and get “current” by telling the truth, they must continually reground themselves in the present moment, to stay current. The daily practices, as the world's great wisdom traditions have always taught, all have to do with noticing. Our new identity as the Noticer rather than the performer grows on you. The Noticer takes charge of the mind rather than the reverse. Belief is distinguished from reality. An individual is born. As we grow in our Radical Hon(our)sty practice we realize that the answers to many of our questions has something to do with continuing to grow. And continuing to grow seems more and more to require shedding our mind and outdated culture like a snake shedding his skin. The path goes like this: first we recognize and then transcend the limiting beliefs of our own minds, stop being victims of our own and our cultures’ ignorant and outdated prejudices, and accept full responsibility for the quality of our present and future lives. Once we get beyond the paradigm of beliefs that has been limiting us, and are restored to our true identity as beings in our bodies right here and now, we have to put our minds to work doing something other than worrying and criticizing. We do this because we have learned that if we don't give our minds work to do designing the future, they will convert remembered experience into limiting beliefs all over again. To keep our concepts about reality from recapturing the here-and-now space of the experience of reality, we assign our minds the task of bringing into being a future we envision. Unless the work that we give our minds keeps them busy, we will go back to judging ourselves according to the old-fashioned and inappropriate values of the past and believing that who we are is the judge-and-victim game. We have to give our minds something to chew on or they chew on us. Step One: Get Over It
180 Pietro Aretino (1492-1556) was an Italian author, playwright, poet and satirist, who wrote among others: the satirical pamphlet entitled The Last Will and Testament of the Elephant Hanno, about the death of Pope Leo X’s pet.
Nobody is going to be able to make up for how you got treated as a child. No one owes you compensation for your suffering. The scars are not going to go away, and the odds are you can't be fixed anyway. It turns out that no matter how good a listener your therapist is, your whining about how your parents didn't do it right, and how nobody has done a good enough job since then, isn't going to help you lead a better life. You need to accept what skills and scars you have and live in the present and look to the future. Once you accept that being a victim is an impotent protest and a waste of your life and energy, you have a chance to do something about it. One of the first things you do is go back and confront your parents and ex-spouses and begrudged people from the past and complete with them, forgive them, acknowledge them, and turn yourself loose from your story about you and them. Express your resentment and get over it. Express your appreciation and get over it. Then, articulate and confirm value differences that are real, and be separate individuals and still be related in the context of forgiveness. Get over it. Primarily, we are each victimized by one thing only: the limiting perspective of our own minds. Formerly limiting perspectives, once transcended, can be used to construct a better life. You can create the life you want using the equipment you have. Your neuroses, your limiting beliefs, your defenses, your paranoia, and your hypersensitivity can all become useful tools once your perspective on them changes. Step Two: Noticing the Difference between Sensate Feeling and Thoughts About Feeling. Thoughts are not Feelings, they are simply Thoughts. When we become skilled in noticing and describing what is going on inside our bodies right now, we can then practice noticing what is going on in the world outside of ourselves right now. Finally, we develop our ability to pay attention until we become capable of noticing what is going on in our own minds right now. In other words, our skill in noticing what is going on within the confines of our own skin, and our skill in noticing what is going on outside of our bodies, moment by moment, can eventually be applied to our ability to notice our own thoughts as they arise. After becoming skilled in noticing, we begin to become identified with our ability to notice. Who we consider ourselves to be is the Noticer, the perceiver who is consistently there, which includes but is not limited to the perception, thought, or sensation that may arise. We have perceptions, sensations, and thoughts but they are not our primary identity. Our ego is not our primary identity. Our sensate being is our primary identity. Likewise, we are not our biography. We still have a biography but it is not our primary identity. Though we still perform, we no longer identify with our performance as who we are, we use our minds rather than being used by our minds181. We are a Revolution of Consciousness. The skill to be gained to climb the ladder of consciousness being, the skill and courage to take personal responsibility, to share and to grow our relationships to create the future we envision. It is taking responsibility for knowing that the secret of living a good life is learning to live happily, by consciously living within our truth and forgiveness social contract limits.
What Heretics Are For, by Garrett Hardin, The Social Contract, Fall 2001
A.11: Practicing Radical Honesty: Being Specific About Anger and Metholody of Forgiveness The following are excerpts from Practicing Radical Honesty182, on being specific about Anger and the methodology of Forgiveness: Radical Honesty About Anger The main thing that keeps us attached to beliefs at lower levels of consciousness is our inability to forgive—which is our inability to get over belief about how things should or shouldn't be—which is the source of anger. So let's learn about anger. If cultural transcendence is necessary to contact reality, and culture resides in the minds of individuals, and other participants in the culture disagree with any change because of attachment to the cultural values they have learned, both internal and external conflict are inevitable. This means anger is inevitable. Anger cannot be avoided; it has to be gone through and gotten over. Getting over being mad, or finding the capacity for forgiveness, is absolutely necessary for both individual personal growth and cultural change. So one of the most critical questions to be answered for any person willing to grow beyond their cultural provincialism is: How do you get over being mad? Not Catharsis, Just Full Disclosure Radical honesty is a powerful process by which people can make corrections in the mind's distorted and only partly conscious map of the world. By sharing secret memories, thoughts, and models—by putting into the public domain among friends what had been hidden and defended—we have a chance to break free of the paradigm of limiting beliefs that we developed in the past. These are the beliefs to which we are emotionally attached; the ones our minds defend as though we ourselves are threatened. The paradigms that allowed us to survive as children within the family within the culture must be transcended so we can thrive as adults. We do not give up attachments without a lot of practice. Central to that practice is the process of getting mad and getting over it. There is great freedom in releasing the heavy load of pretense—and the uniquely distorted view of life made necessary by the vicissitudes of how we were raised. Not only is there freedom, but space is created for true intimacy with current friends and lovers, through forgiveness of begrudged caregivers from the past. To do that, we have to get mad
182 Practicing Radical Honesty: How to Heal the Past, Live in the Present and Build the Future, with a Little Help from Your Friends, by Brad Blanton
at them and get over it by going through it with them, if they are alive, or with the assistance of a skillful therapist or trainer if they are dead. Getting free of the tyranny of the human mind is the first step in the process of becoming a creator. Creators change cultures and families from dysfunctional to functional. We focus on honesty about anger because it is the linchpin to learning to be free from domination by the mind. Freedom from domination by the mind for individuals and then families and then small communities and then larger communities is the key to creating a new functional culture. Developing skill in detachment through learning how to get over anger that comes from attachment and consequently loosening the attachment is as critical to social change as it is to personal growth. Getting Over Being Mad There is a specific technology for getting over being mad. Getting over being mad is called forgiveness. It is not easy to do. Essentially you have to get mad in the presence of the person you are mad at, be present to your experience in your body while being mad, be specific and not abstract about what you are mad about, and stay in touch with the experience and the person and the conversation until you are not mad anymore. Our minds, as well as a lot of experts, tell us to avoid this at all costs. Most of us, most of the time, would rather just stay mad and think about it and invent categories full of negative judgment for the rotten jerks who made us mad and look for further proof that we are right and they are wrong. It's more fun and it's easier to do. Unfortunately, the "easy" way is the one most damaging to ourselves and others and it doesn't work. The only way to get over the depression and anxiety and fury and physical illness caused by this way of avoidance is to get a prescription from psychiatrists or other physicians for drugs that help you avoid feelings. The drug companies are always there to serve, with lots of variety and plenty of support and lots of good advice and tons of alternative "mother's little helpers." If that doesn't work, illegal painkillers of various kinds are easily obtained. The old paradigm is powerful in keeping itself in charge and the opiates for the people are plentiful. Furthermore, there is lots of advice by experts who will be concerned for your welfare and willing to fix your upset with many congenial old paradigm explanations and things you can do to avoid dealing with your anger. You have heard of or tried many of these ways, I am sure. But let me just review a few of the phony solutions to anger. If anyone has ever told you that you can forgive someone by just deciding to forgive them, that person was wrong. If you believe you can forgive someone by just deciding to, you're sadly mistaken and you have fooled yourself out of getting over your anger. If you think you can forgive someone you are mad at by praying, thinking, writing letters and sending them, writing letters and not sending them, doing "therapy," talking to someone else about it, "acting out" in a protective environment, beating pillows, shouting at other folks, becoming "spiritual" or "attaining enlightenment" or any of the other methods of avoidance of face-to-face forgiveness that millions of minds have derived as a way to avoid the work of forgiveness and the experience of forgiveness, you are likewise, like all of them, still delusional and still angry.
Seriously, the way you get over being so serious about what you are angry about is to face it and face the person you are mad at if they are still on this earth and work through it until it gets funny. If the person is dead, there are other ways to forgive them without digging them up, but those ways don't work if you are engaged in a conspiracy with your therapist to avoid contact and honest sharing of your anger with the living people you are mad at. Being Specific and Getting Face-to-Face About Resentments We have been taught all our lives to abstract from our experience to be able to take control of the experience. This absolutely does not work when you are mad. When you abstract from your experience when you are mad, you displace your anger by redirecting it to the emotional support of an idea that makes you right and the other person wrong. If you want to get over being mad, you have to come back down from the principle, to the experience of being madâ€”away from the general principle and in the direction of the specific events that preceded the abstraction. You have to say to the person's face, what the person did or said that made you mad. Forget about explaining why. You don't know why, anyway. Drop the explanation. Just resent them for what they did and don't justify anything. You are petty. We all are. You are crazy. We all are. Go ahead and be petty and crazy and do it out loud and magnify the experience. Getting through the experience of anger by getting into the experience of anger is accomplished with a simultaneity of contact with the other person and one's own experience in the body at the moment of speaking the resentment. Staying present with the person you resent and to the sensations in your body that you associate with resentment, while being completely willing to experience the resentment and communicating it contactfully to the person being resented, results in the resentment going away. You use the phrase, "I resent you forâ€Ś" and name the specific behavior committed or words said (and perhaps tone of voice used) by the person, while looking the person in the eye and speaking directly to them in a voice with pitch and volume appropriate to the degree of resentment. In this moment, you are describing something simple that occurred that both of you can remember (rather than an abstract interpretation of right or wrong or good or evil.) This allows you to stay focused on your sensate experience rather than paying attention to your own explanation. Your explanation is just your mind's paranoid way of trying to ensure its survival. As satisfying as righteousness is, we have to give it up. We might have to play it up in the process of giving it up. So if you want to go on a righteous tirade, go on it, but don't quit there. Keep going until you get specific about exactly what got you so damned mad. We have to do this to get to where we can play with each other again. We do this to get over taking our violated expectations too seriously. We do this to be more powerful in creating together a life of play and service for each other. Get mad and get over it. Forgive and go on and create. This process is critical to transcendence of belief. The methodology of Forgiveness: How to Deal with Anger Author and teacher and life experimenter Sam Keen says, "We human beings are Homo Hostilus, the hostile species, the enemy-making animal. We are driven to fabricate an enemy
as a scapegoat to bear the burden of our denied enmity." The way we can own what we are attempting to disown by blaming and categorizing and attacking others is to do it out loud in front of them and get over it. A famous war story tells of a platoon of soldiers who had been fighting together as a unit for some time. One night, an enemy soldier lobbed a grenade into their midst. For a few seconds everyone froze. Suddenly, a private dove on the grenade with his helmet. It detonated under him. The man was destroyed, but the other men were saved by his heroism. One outstanding characteristic of human beings is that they are sometimes willing to sacrifice their lives to save others. Such acts of courage are honored, as they should be, as the highest expression of love. But one of the greatest tragedies possible is great courage wasted. Many of us deal with anger in much the same way as the private in the story deals with the grenade. We consider anger a life-threatening experience. Anger wells up in us, seemingly from out of nowhere, and we imagine it will injure everyone we love if we let it go off. Without even thinking, we smother the anger the way the private smothered the grenade. We sacrifice ourselves to protect our friends and family. What makes meaningless sacrifices look like heroism is ignorance. History is full of pitiful, wonderful, pathetic heroes who sacrificed their lives to save those they loved from some imagined threat that seemed real at the time but turned out not to be. The tragedy of the useless sacrifice of life has been around for as long as human beings have been around and will remain central to the definition of humanity until we learn to create ourselves differently. Our greatest heroism, our willingness to surrender life itself for our loved ones, and our greatest tragedy, the mistaken and useless sacrifice of our own and others' lives for meaningless causes, are central to the tragic joke we are. Nowhere is the waste of courage and love better demonstrated than in everyday cases of the unsung heroes of anger. In every case, the hero is a fool. His courage is wasted. The hero's fear of the devastating effect of anger is entirely unrealistic. He or she overestimates the destructive power of anger and feels that it must be controlled even if it means sacrificing his or her life. What is even worse is that the poor fool dies over and over again, a little piece at a time. Anger is not a grenade. Anger is merely an experience, made up of sensations. Many of us consider ourselves to be heroes and heroines when we are just damned fools. Only the people who live with such heroic fools seem to recognize them for what they are. Such recognition exacerbates the problem, for nothing makes your average fool more angry than having to live with a useless ingrate who doesn't appreciate the heroic sacrifices that have been made for his or her benefit. To make things worse, the "useless ingrate" usually sees himself or herself as another unappreciated hero, sacrificing self-expression for the health of the relationship. As we accumulate resentment for not being appreciated for sacrificing our lives to protect others, our acts of love and courage become poisoned memories. The person who loved you and whom you used to love becomes the biggest pain of your life. Fifty-three percent of people who get married in the United States get divorced. That is not the worst of it. The worst is, of the forty-seven percent remaining, most of those
relationships are angry people tolerating each other and suppressing hostility. They are miserable people who are more terrified of being alone than of living in the misery they know and are familiar with. The contrast between self-perception and perception by others stands out clearly in my work with couples and families, in which I am privy to the ongoing arguments between martyr-heroes and hero-martyrs. People really get mad when they're resented for withholding angerâ€”something for which they feel they should be appreciated. But, contrary to popular belief, people always resent being withheld from and lied to, even if it was done for their own protection. Withheld anger destroys relationships by sucking the aliveness out of them. For aliveness to be restored, both to the relationships and the individual, anger must be expressed and fully experienced. When you experience an experience, it goes away. When you resist experiencing an experience, it persists. It stays and takes new form and elaborates itself and fuels the collection of further evidence of the malice and badness of the scapegoat who made you mad in the first place. Direct and Indirect Expressions of Anger How does a person in the habit of suppressing anger learn to express it? Expressing anger takes practice and is a process that improves over time. The way anger is expressed has everything to do with the outcome of an argument. When anger is expressed in such a way that both people are fully present to the experience, the anger eventually goes away, and the people have a new opening in their relationship. Anger is universal, but methods of expression vary. The continuum of expression ranges from murder to total suppression and cover-up. The continuum can be divided into two parts, indirect expression and direct expression. All indirect forms of expressing anger are dysfunctional, sick and stupid. Many direct forms fail as well. Many people have tried to express anger directly at one time or another but have given up because, as some have said, "It only seems to make things worse." It does make things worse for a short time, but much better over the long run. When people don't get good results from the direct expression of anger, the odds are the anger wasn't completely expressed. Probably one or both people were mad, but trying to be decent and fair at the same time. We all know and can sympathize with the dilemma. Trying to be fair and mad at the same time turns out to be ridiculous and feeds the fury. Trying to be constructive while wanting to destroy is a real dilemma, a division of energy between opposing goals, and confusing. Divided expression doesn't work. This self-opposition with regard to expressing anger is what perpetuates anger. To express anger fully, we must give up most of our constraints on it. We must inhibit killing and physical violence. But we must be willing to be angry rather than decent and fair, because angry, rather than decent and fair, is what we presently are. After we are angry, we may be decent and fair, but we will never be authentically angry or authentically fair while we are struggling to be both at once. Anger is Universally Human; Ways of Handling Anger Are Culturally Varied It is human to feel angry, just as it is human to feel love, desire, or fear.
Anger is not in itself a problem. Children periodically get mad, raise hell, and get over it. Sometimes they win and get their way and sometimes they lose, but they usually get over it. Adults, however, persist in using learned ways of handling anger that don't work. This attachment to fruitless strategies is the problem, more than the anger itself. Anger is bound to happen to all human beings from being little, less strong, and dependent on others for a long, long, time. It seems like it takes forever to get big. All children get mad in all cultures. Some babies are fussier than others to start with, but all babies are in for disappointment as they grow older. The older they grow, the more disappointments they experience. And they protest angrily. Parental response to these early instances of protest is the start of long-term cultural conditioning. Some cultures are angrier than others. Some cultures do a poorer job of responding to natural anger than others. As soon as we become capable of having expectations, we become capable of protesting not having them met. As Norman O. Brown points out in Life Against Death, if being neurotic is protesting against the world being as it is, neurosis is built in to growing up. The definition of a neurotic is someone who incessantly demands, in a rigid stylized form, that the world be other than it is. We are all neurotic from time to time. We earn the label only through persistence over time. If someone gets drunk a few times she hasn't yet qualified as an alcoholic, but if she persists she earns the right to the category. On numerous occasions, and at all stages of growing up, all of us behave neurotically. Whether we adopt the neurotic protest as a stand in life, as an incessant theme, and as a way of being, depends on a lot of factors, the most important of which is how we handle the anger that comes with disappointed expectations. In our culture, when we are older we still experience anger, but we no longer permit ourselves to be angry and to express anger at the same time. Therefore, we don't get over it as quickly as we did when we were younger. We learn, in the course of growing up, after getting punished for anger and losing a few battles, that it is smarter to hide our anger than to express it. We are raised to believe that we should get angry only at certain times, at certain people, and only if we are "right." Because we all get angry all the time, at the wrong people, at the wrong times, and for the wrong reasons, we learn early in life that the way to deal with this unwanted anger is to keep it hidden. The best thing to do with anger, we are taught, is to lie about it. Maybe if we act like it isn't there, it will go away. Maybe we can just "get over it." Unfortunately, avoidance doesn't work. We cannot avoid unwanted experiencesâ€”like sexual excitement and angerâ€”at the wrong times toward the wrong people just by thinking we shouldn't be having them. Denial, the most primitive and least effective defense against these feelings, stubbornly persists even though it never works. When we deny anger, the way we perceive the world and the way we conceive of the people in it become distorted. The rest of our lives are colored by the distorted perception of the world resulting from the stockpile of denied and withheld anger. The little nests of morality tales about anger that make up our Judeo-Christian-Greek culture, that our children learn from fairy tales and schooling, don't help them to handle anger. Rather, they help them to be inauthentic, neurotic, deceptive, alienated, lying, miserable people. Displacement
When anger is not expressed directly, it is expressed indirectly. So it gets expressed but not experienced. If anger is not expressed directly, it is not experienced directly. Unless you experience anger in the body and acknowledge the experience, the anger does not complete itselfâ€”does not discharge, subside, and go away. When anger is expressed indirectly, in ways that are calculated to avoid the experience of anger, anger gets stored up rather than dissipating. The experience of anger is converted to thoughts about the resented personâ€” judgments, complaints, conclusions, and imaginary conversations. When you are preoccupied with thoughts about someone toward whom you are angry, you become distracted. "You're driving me to distraction!" my mother used to say. Forgetting agreements, standing people up, mildly criticizing most of another's behavior, having accidents, making mistakes, accidentally saying things to hurt others, and forgetting people's names are all indirect expressions of anger. Anger of this kind is dangerous, much more so than the short-term explosive kind. This is the form of anger with which we have been poisoned and with which we continue to poison our children. This form of anger accumulates and is the direct cause of physical abuse in our society. As difficult as it may be for our minds to accept, the direct expression of resentment works better than the suppression of anger to protect ourselves and each other from damage by anger. When we communicate our resentment to the person we resent, the anger dissipates more completely in the moment of expression and shortly thereafter. The anger may get cranked up to a higher pitch than seems reasonable in many small arguments, but the intensity of the experience allows the heat out where it can cool. Often the intensity is because of a number of associated events from the past where anger was not handled sufficiently, making the current expression part of a healing process that frees the angry person from limitations imposed and anger denied in the past. People can get over being mad if they face resentment one instance at a time. People who are willing to do that with each other are a gift to each other. They contribute to each other's liberation and healing of wounds from the past. Even if the person toward whom we are angry doesn't change, agree to change, or apologize, we can still forgive that person for our own benefit. Forgiveness always benefits the forgiver more than the forgiven. The extreme alternative to this one-step-at-a-time approach is to be a mass murderer, like the youngest kid to make Eagle Scout in Boy Scout history, get good grades, always be nice, become a good Marine and then go up in the tower at the University of Texas and shoot to kill everybody in sight for two hours. I was on the campus in Austin, Texas, when that extra good boy killed and injured all those people. Displaced anger is the problem of the age. The people who died on battlefields in the twentieth century all died in the defense of some principle of rightness. Most of them were just kids. Most of them were being obedient and righteous. Most of them were scared. Most were angry, they thought, at some common enemy of the time in the socially approved way. Most of them were fighting to save their loved ones from some ignorant imaginary threat that probably could have been fixed by the honest expression of resentment between one or two people, or at worst, by killing only one or two people. Most of them were adolescents ganging together in a common cause of righteous murder to protect their parents who taught them to
handle their anger that way. These kids, who were polite to their mothers and obedient to their fathers, were pitiful ignorant heroes, and the sacrifice of their lives was a waste. So this is what happens with anger: as children grow, they are constantly overpowered, cared for, and controlled; childhood expressions of anger against stronger adults are punished, either overtly or covertly. Or worse, the angry expressions are condescendingly moralized about. As children, we do the best we can to copy approved ways of dealing with anger to avoid getting punished for it. The result, at least in our culture, is that most people don't express anger directly. It's not that they don't know they're angry or that they won't talk about their anger; they do and they will. Most people, however, won't express their resentment in person to the person at whom they are angry. Instead, they gossip, complain, criticize, fantasize about telling the person off, and let it out in other indirect ways. Suppression and displacement to ideals, indignation, and judgments (against others and ourselves) usually work well enough that by the time we males reach eighteen years of age and some elder idiot tells us to kill some people to defend some principle, we run right out and do it. Undoing the Learned Suppression of Anger Overcoming completely the learned suppression of anger is, I think, a futile objective. We have been too well trained to lie. Some people do become less angry, and less crippled by denial, through psychotherapy and some workshops and trainings. Some people come to terms with their anger and acknowledge its influence on their lives to a greater degree and become less helpless when they do get angry. Some people get over being depressed from suppressing anger. Others don't have much luck with it. Everyone who experiments with telling the truth about anger at least finds out that people don't die if you tell them you resent them for something they said or did. In fact, more often than not, when people tell the truth about their feelings, relationships get better, even if the truth is about hatred. The transition from being a foolish hero or heroine to being free of the fear of anger is a therapeutic process you can engage in by agreement with people with whom you have committed relationships. Expressing resentment directly is a requirement for creating an authentic relationship between two human beings instead of an entanglement of two minds. Agreeing to tell the truth about anger in a committed relationship is a way to get over some of the damage and suffering that comes from how you were raised. It is a way of losing your mind and coming to your senses and experiencing yourself as a being, rather than as a jumble of morals gleaned from whatever your sad story may be. It is a way of growing beyond primitive foolishness to a more advanced form. Telling the Truth About Anger for the Sake of Forgiveness Telling the truth about anger means making a present-tense statement about your experience, while angry, to the person with whom you are angry. No one can have much luck getting over anger-sickness unless they can tell the truth about their experience in the present and in the presence of the person they are mad at. I'm not saying you should tell the truth to be a good or better person. This is not meant as a moral principle, but as a functional guideline. Telling the truth about your anger lets you function better in a pragmatic way, achieving your goals and enjoying the process, instead of feeling driven by
forces beyond your control. When you are willing to have an experience be as it is, prior to categorizing the experience as "good" or "bad," and you don't waste all your energy trying to avoid or lie about the experience, you have a choice about how you can respond to that experience. One of the hallmarks of suppressed anger is helplessness. You can detect the language of helplessness in such phrases as,
"They made me."
"It's no use."
"It doesn't really matter," and
"You just don't understand."
Power is assigned to forces outside the speaker. Power on the part of the speaker is disowned. The following example of a couple's interaction in my office illustrates an angry client being directed to make a present-tense statement about her experience, rather than remaining lost in her mind. THERAPIST:
"Anne, I want you to look at David and tell him what you resent him for."
(looks at David and then back at the therapist) "He never listens to me. I can't talk to him about anything important and he has no interest in my life."
"Look at David and tell him, not me."
(looks at David and reddens) "You never listen to me. I can't talk to you." (She looks back at the therapist for approval.)
"Yeah, right. I do listen to you." (Anne glances at her husband, then makes a "See what I mean?" gesture to the therapist.)
"Anne, first of all, I want you to keep looking at David, not at me, and allow yourself to remain in touch with him even if you start to feel uncomfortably angry. Secondly, be more specific. Complete the sentence 'I resent you for…' with something he actually said or did."
"I'm not angry; I'm just upset about not being listened to. He treats me like a child and I'm sick of putting up with it."
"You're lying. You are angry, and you're unwilling so far to experiment with your anger to see what would happen if you were direct, instead of indirect and poisonous, in your expression of it. If you could tell him directly and expressively what you resent him for, you may find that you feel less helpless and less dominated by David."
"I knew you'd take his side! You're just like a prosecuting attorney putting a rape victim on trial. I don't need to spend two hours and all this money to be berated; I can stay home and get that for free." (David has been reacting throughout this exchange with dramatic sighs, scowls, and derisive laughter. Anne now turns to face him.)
"I resent you for laughing at me, you…you…pig!" (Tears have welled up in her eyes.)
"Good! Keep going!"
(holding out her hand for a tissue) "I can't…it makes me cry and I don't want to cry." (She attempts to control her tears; she closes her eyes, blows her nose, and then covers her face with her hands. After a moment, she lifts her head and faces David again.) "I resent you for laughing at me just now. I resent you for laughing at me whenever I'm serious. I resent you for…for…for never listening to me." (They stare at each other. Anne has stopped crying. Her face is red and blotchy; her body is rigid; her breathing is rapid. David looks serious now, and his jaw muscles work. He is just perceptibly nodding.)
"Good, Anne. What do you feel in your body right now?"
(takes a deep breath) "Okay."
"'Okay' is an evaluation. I want a description of what you are feeling in your body."
"I'm tense all over. My…my…I'm breathing fast. My hands are shaking."
"Your face is red."
(shouting) "F_ _ _ YOU!"
(loudly) "F_ _ _ YOU!!" (They look at each other, furious .)
"Good. David, you'll get your turn to express all your resentment, but I want to focus on Anne and have her complete hers first. Anne, keep going; you're doing great. Staying in touch with your experience in your body, tell David specifically what you resent him for."
"I resent you for telling me my face was red. I resent you for NOT LISTENING TO ME, YOU ARROGANT SONOFABITCH!" (She throws her tissue at him.)
"Good! What specific things has he said or done that you interpreted as him not listening to you?"
(pauses, considers) "He turns on the TV when I'm in the middle of saying something to him. I can be saying that Martians are invading and the kitchen is on fire, and he'll go, 'Wait a sec, it's third down.'"
"When did he last do this?"
"Um…Monday, I came home from work and I was telling him how upset I was about not getting this project that he knew was so important to me and he totally ignored me!"
"Jesus, Anne, you started talking to me right in the middle of a game and it was an important part and I just asked you to wait until the commercial to tell me!"
(to Therapist) "Do you think it's too much to ask a husband to stop watching a football game for a few minutes to pay attention to his obviously distraught wife?"
"You purposely bring up these melodramas when I'm in the middle of something!"
"Wait, wait. You're both getting sidetracked into trying to prove, and get me to adjudicate, the rightness of your cases. Instead of focusing on the legality of your position, I want you to focus on your anger and your experience and express your anger without having to justify it. Anne, tell David you resent him for what he did Monday night and make it good and loud and direct and without justification.
(takes a deep breath, turns back to David) "I resent you for turning to the football game as I was talking to you about my project!"
"What do you notice in your experience?"
"I'm feeling sort ofâ€Ścharged up. Tingling."
"Say the same resentment again, with more expression."
"I resent you for watching the football game while I was talking to you about not getting my project!" (She stops, looking at David, breathing more quickly. She leans forward.) "I RESENT YOU FOR WATCHING THAT STUPID FOOTBALL GAME WHILE I WAS TRYING TO TELL YOU SOMETHING!!!!" she shouts, rising out of her chair. (She is shaking; her hair is flying; her fists are clenched. She sits back down, panting.)
"What do you notice?"
"I feel a lot of energy. I'm certainly not crying anymore." She laughs.
"What's so funny?"
"I don't know. Partly it feels good just to let loose. Partly, I'm laughing because I just realized that my mother used to complain to my dad all the time for the same thing. It's like it's the same stinkin' football game from thirty years ago, still on." (She laughs again.)
The point of this work is clear. With patience and repetition, the client learns to be mad and pay attention to what she experiences in her body at the same time. Anne eventually got in touch with her experience of resentment, and after a while got over it. What came out after she wasn't so mad at David anymore was her resentment of her father for ignoring her, for iving her advice, for being cold when she made less than perfect grades, for criticizing her boyfriends, and so on. The anger that she was denying by claiming helplessness resulted in her saying she "couldn't" talk to her husband. The anger had a history in her belief about "not being able" to talk to her father. Later, she had a dialogue with an empty chair in which she imagined her father was sitting. She switched sides back and forth, becoming at one time her father and another time herself. In this imaginary situation, she
told her father all the things she resented him for quite expressively and then played him telling her his resentments. Later on in therapy, she agreed to spend three days with her father, and tell him her resentments, and stay in touch with her experience. She went on vacation with David and both her parents. When she came back from that trip, she was elated. She said, "When I left there, I was willing and even excited by the prospect of seeing my father again the next time we can get together. For the first time I can remember, I thought something other than, 'Well, I got through that visit.' While we were still at the beach with my parents, David and I talked about our relationship and about my relationship with my father. We argued some, and we both cried some. We came up with some new ground rules for our marriageâ€”including telling the truth to each other, particularly about things we are mad about. One night, he and my dad and mom and I stayed up until 2:30 in the morning talking about everything, including what makes us mad at each other, but also about what we appreciate and a bunch of other stuff. We had a great time!" Admitting Being Upset, Denying Being Angry Generally, people are willing to admit that they feel "upset," but not that they are angry. We remember the adage, "If you can't say anything nice about someone, don't say anything at all." Forget that. Do the reverse. And, when expressing anger, you'll do better when you overstate the case. Since we too often underplay anger, we need to overplay our expression. Most of us don't know how to identify clearly what anger feels like inside our bodies. We attend to our many racing thoughts, focusing on the rightness or wrongness of the conversation we just had instead of tuning in to our experience in the moment. We ignore our racing heart and the flush of heat in our face and the tension building in our shoulders and the tightening of our stomachs. When we do acknowledge these feelings, we do so only at an abstract level that subsumes too much experience. We say we are "upset" about some general set of behaviors on someone else's part. Even acknowledging "upset" is a first step; some of us deny even that. The second step is admitting that our "upset" is anger. The third step is speaking resentments specifically and in contact with one's own body and the eyes of the other person. Other Clues About the Ongoing Denial of Anger Lots of behaviors indicate anger. If you gossip about someone to someone else, you are angry. You haven't completely expressed your resentment to that person you gossiped about. Another tip-off is breaking your word while trying not to. When you find yourself "trying," struggling, striving without any results, look for whom you are trying to please: you are probably mad at them. Another clue is self-condemnation. Instead of condemning yourself and calling yourself a rotten, weak, or stupid person, ask yourself, "Whom am I mad at?" Don't let yourself off the hook with the rationalization, "I'm just mad at myself." This is worthless. You postulate two people, "I" and "myself," who are mad at each other. You can only be mad at yourself if you are schizophrenic. "Roses are red. Violets are blue. I'm schizophrenic and so am I." Put the two pieces back together and discover whom you are mad at. When you have a choice of being mad at someone else or mad at yourself, always pick someone else, dummy. Most people think selfcondemnation is a virtue; it's not.
Another hint of hidden anger is perfectionism. People who are proud of being perfectionists and for whom hardly anything is ever good enough are angry at someone else. "Love your neighbor as yourself" doesn't mean that you are supposed to lie about anger; it means to tell the petty, unreasonable, unjustifiable truth—good and loud and direct so you can authentically get over it so you can love that neighbor for real again, not phony it up and talk about how nice they are while lying through your teeth. Try treating other people as poorly as you treat yourself. At times, being honest about your anger is the only way you have of sharing who you are. Love is sharing what you have, even if you're having a fit. Telling the truth is loving your neighbor. Stupid Questions, Dumb Ideas, and Inane Rationalizations People ask me, "Why do I have to express my anger directly to another person? Isn't it possible to just forget about it or just understand the other person's situation and forgive him?" The answer is no. You cannot forgive someone else without expressing your resentment directly to her or him. We can all make up plenty of legitimate-sounding reasons for continuing to avoid or withhold from the resented person.
"There's no point in bringing it up again. It's over. And, besides, I'm not angry anymore." (Then why do you keep thinking about it? Why do you keep bringing it up?)
"I believe in forgiveness." (As if "believing" in forgiveness could make you forgive somebody when you haven't.)
"She probably didn't mean what she said. She just had a really bad day." (As if you could reason yourself out of the experience of being angry.)
"I can't even remember what I was mad about." (Meaning, "I'd rather not remember so I don't have to feel uncomfortable.")
"I think I do the same things that I accuse him of doing, so I can't really blame him." But you do blame him.)
"She has many other wonderful qualities. I don't want to harp on the negatives." (So you lose touch with your appreciation of her soon after you lose touch with your resentment.)
All these explanations sound forgiving and noble, which they would be if they were experiences rather than ideas. The problem is not that these ideas are inaccurate or wrong. The problem is that ideas about forgiveness are not forgiveness. They don't even help. What you are left with is the experience of resentment and the concept of forgiveness—and a deteriorating relationship. These explanations are generated by your mind so that you can avoid the experience of anger. As you are saying or thinking these thoughts, you are busying yourself to avoid feeling anger. Forgiving someone with whom you are angry—actually experiencing forgiving him— only happens after you tell him what he did or said that you resent. Only when you allow yourself to experience and express anger openly will it disappear. Thinking and deciding what to do about the person only serves to suppress the anger. Even though you think the anger is over, it will manifest itself in other ways. Your communication will be less honest and spontaneous; you may be more critical of him; you may find being with him more physically
tiring, may forget appointments with him, and may find yourself inexplicably angry at him more and more. After a while, your friendship may feel more superficial than before and you may not like spending as much time with him as you used to. If you live with the person, you may feel a difference in the quality of time you spend together. You may notice that you'd rather stare at the television than look into his eyes. Before long, you are living in a sad country song, crying in your beer alone full of nostalgia about "what once was but kin never be agin." It takes a lot of courage to change this. You must be willing for things to get worse before they get better. My Anger May Not Be Right Most resentments are irrational, unreasonable, stupid, and based on incomplete information. Making a successful case for how your resentment is "right" and how the other person is "wrong" isn't the solution; it's the problem. We human beings are all selfish and unfair and it's worse than useless to pretend we aren't. It is common for children to resent a younger sibling for being the baby of the family. Is that the baby's fault? Did the baby choose to be born last in the family? It seems unfair to resent people for things over which they have no control. We're all unfair. It's unreasonable to resent younger siblings, whom we also love, for getting more attention than we do, but the truth is that we still resent them. It's unreasonable to resent parents for growing old, babies for crying, men for being men, or women for being women or loved ones for dying. But we do. We all do. Our decision not to express our resentment is based on a deeply held belief that our anger has to be justified, righteous, and legitimate. It doesn't. To be free of anger, we have to give up this belief and allow our resentments and other people's resentments to be expressed even if they are completely irrational. One of the reasons that getting over the loss of a loved one takes a long time is the refusal of people to admit that they are furious at the dead person for dying. It doesn't make sense to hate someone for dyingâ€”they didn't do it on purpose. We do hate them, though. Every one of us hates people we love who die on us. We are psychological beings and not logical beings. We are humans, not Vulcans like Mr. Spock of Star Trek. So, when you tell the truth about your resentments, you may look like a fool. Well, you are a fool! At least if you admit it you will be in good company. One thing for sure is this: the biggest fools of all are the ones wasting their lives pretending not to be fools. Fairness versus Forgiveness Many of us are concerned about fairness and use the principle of fairness as our primary rationalization for withholding anger. Advanced instruction in this principle creates lawyers who are miserable people. Divorces handled by lawyers often result in children shot back and forth like missiles between hostile camps. If you force yourself to be fair while still angry, you are a fool, and any agreements you make in such a state won't work for you. Judges and lawyers ignore this fact. Judges and lawyers exist for people who can't handle their anger. A judge tells you what to do, based on what he or she thinks is fair, whether you like it or not, because you haven't been able to work things out on your own. There is a better way to fight that turns out to be equitable in the long run, even though it may look uncivilized and unfair in the beginning. It might not seem fair to express
what seems like intense resentment for petty reasons in the beginning, but the advantages become clear by the time the argument is over. Things turn out fairly when, and only when, people get over being angry. The result of experimenting with this kind of interaction is very dramatic. The major benefit of expressing your anger completely to someone is that, afterward, you can forgive him or her. The reason for forgiving your enemies is not for their benefit but for your own benefit. Holding grudges against other people doesn't hurt them; it doesn't even bother them much â€”in fact, it even pleases them if they are still mad at you. It's not in your enlightened self-interest to hold grudges, regardless of whether it bothers the person you hate or not. Unless you develop the capacity to do what it takes to forgive other people, you can't tell your story from reality, you can't forgive yourself, and you stay trapped in moral condemnation in your mind. Your body stays tied in knots and susceptible to illness and you can be sure of a bad life and lousy relationships with anyone else you pair The "Dangerous Practical Consequences" Rationalization You might protest, "The reasons I have for not expressing anger deal with real consequences that might ensue if I blew up at someone. For instance, I might lose my job." Yes, you might. However, there is a greater possibility that by not expressing your anger, you will sabotage your relationship with your boss or coworkers to the point where you may as well quit, or will end up quitting or getting fired. Perhaps you start missing days, making mistakes, or just being more interested in making the boss or coworkers wrong than in supporting them, him, or her. Maybe you withhold your enthusiasm a little. The job will become less satisfying, and the rewards of keeping your job will be far outweighed by the aggravation of having to put up with these people. This will occur in direct relation to how much you feel you have to withhold your anger when you are at work. In addition to less satisfaction and poorer performance, the hidden costs include reduced physical health and repercussions in your family life. I am not encouraging you to lose your job, nor am I encouraging you to keep it. You probably won't lose it; in fact, your relationship with your boss and your coworkers will probably improve if you confront them. But even if there is a risk you will lose it, be aware of the costs of hanging on to it. Usually, what happens is you get a lifeless, depressing job and an unhappy family life for your effort. Eventually, even that tradeoff doesn't work. We have an oversupply of cowards with lousy, dead, depressing jobs and lousy, dead, depressing family lives. We don't need any more. Don't volunteer for that job. Damaged heroes with misdirected courage abound. I have coached a lot of people through conflicts at work in private industry and the government, and many of my clients have climbed to the top of their professions. What seems clear to me is that people don't often advance by simply hoping for the best and behaving themselves. A lot of people waste their time being well-behaved employees, avoiding the risk of telling the truth about resentment, hoping for advancement. The people who actually get to the top are both more nasty and more loving. They are not good little passive-aggressive obedient people. They are more likely to be trouble. Maybe some of them got kicked upstairs because more passive people couldn't stand putting up with them
anymore. Some got promoted because they stopped being willing to stand around and gossip about who was to blame for their unhappiness. By not expressing resentment directly, many people bring about the result they were trying to avoid in the first placeâ€”they stay stuck or lose their jobs. Through carefulness and politeness and good behavior, they choke themselves down to being bored, burdensome, stressed-out, miserable, pathetic people nobody wants to be around. Unless they are civil servants, some of these people do lose their jobs. Some remain working for the government as paperweights. I am attempting to answer all the objections to being honest about anger that have come up in arguments with people from our culture with me before. Keep reading; we're almost through. Will Telling the Truth About Anger Destroy Our Relationship? Many of us won't express anger with a loved one. We believe that if we expressed our resentment, it would destroy our relationship and our beloved would leave us. But without the freedom to tell the truth about our experience, our relationships inevitably suffer. When we express only our appreciation and withhold our anger, we lose our ability to be fully present with the ones we love, and, sooner or later, we become less able to appreciate them. This is often why relationships end and families break up. Repressing anger to control other people's behavior (in this case, to keep them from leaving) is ultimately what leads to our inability to make contact with them. Repressed anger blocks the flow of love and creativity that we once experienced around them, and generates a flurry of thoughts for us to get caught up in. The more we are caught up in our thoughts, the less present we are to the other person and to what is happening in our own moment-to-moment experience. Once you start getting more honest with yourself about your judgmental, angry mind, you find yourself confronting this question: "How can I express my resentment in such a way that I strengthen, rather than destroy, my relationships with others?" There are ways of expressing anger that work, and there are ways of expressing anger that make the situation worse. The ways that work the best make things worse for a while, and better later. These are the ones you want. Most people express anger ineffectively, and then, when they see how uncomfortable the situation has become, decide that it's best to leave those feelings hidden. Their conclusion is incorrect. It is best to learn how to fight so that the air between you and the other person is cleared. When you have "cleared the air," you are free to relate in a brand-new way to that person rather than to your ideas about the person. My Anger is Too Explosive: I Might Hurt Someone In the beginning, an attempt to change the habit of smothering anger can be explosive. The backed-up fund of resentment is released in a torrent. The first blow-up seems like a nuclear explosion, both because of its magnitude and because it contrasts so dramatically with former politeness. After a little practice, the explosions become like conventional bombs, then like dynamite, and then like firecrackers. The eventual goal is to have hundreds of tiny explosions a minute, like an internal combustion engine. This anger is good fuel to burn; it's what makes Sammy run. What usually happens without a good guide through the initial explosive experiences is that the person runs away from the experience. For this reason, the progression down the
path from "explosion" to "engine" doesn't occur. If a therapist or coach or friend can support an angry person to stay with the experience of being angry even a few seconds longer with each explosion, the cure for phony heroics can begin. Paying attention to the experience you are feeling in your body while angry is the key to learning how to use anger rather than having anger use you. Phony Explosiveness One has to look and listen carefully to distinguish between a phony expression of anger and an authentic one. A noisy expression of anger is not always the truth. The overexpression of anger can also be a form of lying, or a way of covering over other feelings, like grief. Some loudmouthed people are angry all the time. They are loud and intimidating about it to cover over other feelings. This coverup anger, even though intensely expressed, never decreases or subsides because it is a phony expression in the first place, usually hiding grief or hurt feelings or fear of intimacy. An Experimental and Experiential Approach to Curing Anger Sickness Look into your own experience of what happens to you when you get angry. Think of someone with whom you are presently angry. If you can't think of anyone, then think of someone whom you don't particularly like. What is it that you don't like about that person? Perhaps you feel that this person is a snob or pushy or dishonest or crude or insensitive. If you contacted that person and told him forthrightly what you didn't like about him and quit there, chances are it would not improve your relationship. Don't stop with that. The purpose of expressing your anger directly instead of indirectly is to get in touch with the source of your own judgments. By the time a person decides that he doesn't like someone, he is already one step removed from his anger. When asked if we are angry, many of us manifest this being-removed-from the anger, saying, "I'm not angry, I just don't like him (her) very much," or "I just don't feel he's the kind of person that I want to be around." But these judgments are founded on one or more very specific incidents about which we were angry at one time. We may not be consciously lying, because we may not be experiencing that anger right now. The form our anger presently takes is that of judgments, evaluations, and other thoughts. The specific incident may be hard to recall at first, but invariably, judgments are based on something that the person specifically said or did that we resented. The person didn't necessarily say or do anything obviously offensive. Maybe he just said "hello" and you didn't like the way he said it. Perhaps what he did reminded you of someone else or of some earlier event in your life you are only partly conscious of. (Remember Sally and Rags from chapter two about the reactive mind?) The rightness or wrongness of what someone said or did is irrelevant. It may be more related to a previously stored record than to current reality anyway. Your anger is unreasonable and unfair. Let it stay that way. Trying to make it seem reasonableâ€”trying to make the resented person wrong is the source of all the judgments. Strained relations between people are not based on evaluation, "vibes," or "not liking the way they are" as much as on specific eventsâ€”what they at one time said or did. The evaluations, dislike, and explanations come later.
When you can identify what these specific things are, you are in a better position to express your resentment and heal your relationship with that person. We are all more petty and selfish than we are willing to admit. When we are willing to admit our petty anger, we get over it faster and we have less of it in the future. The process of forgiveness involves the following six minimal requirements, none of which may be skipped. 1. You have to tell the truth about the specific behavior you resent, to the person, faceto-face; 2. You have to be verbally and vocally unrestrained with regard to volume and propriety; 3. You have to pay attention to the feelings and sensations in your body and to the other person as you speak; 4. You have to express any appreciations for the person that come up in the process, with the same attention to your feelings and to the other person as when you are expressing resentments; 5. You have to stay with any feelings that emerge in the process, like tears or laughter, regardless of any evaluations you may have about how it makes you look; and let the tears or laughter or pain or anger not be interrupted by your mind until they go naturally to completion; 6. You have to stay with the discussion until you no longer feel resentful of the other person. Then, and only then, are you ready to talk about the future, make arrangements for the future, or make any agreements. Any lawyer, priest, psychotherapist, or other patrolman who tells you differently about this is full of crap. Any diplomat, bureaucrat, democrat, labor leader, company executive, head of government, husband, wife, son, or daughter who attempts to do other than this is likewise full of it.
A.12: Judicial Enquiry: Simple Justice Tribal Consciousness No psychologist worth their degree should go around suggesting that Daddy can beat Mommy pink, purple and blue day in and day out, and everyone should tell the Jones that the family is one happy rainbow family! Should the Chief Justices decide Radical Honesty Truth and Forgiveness is worthwhile exploring183; we will go through hell, but beyond that hell there will be a better future. Do we have the courage to confront the hell together? Perhaps the following foreign law Supreme Court ruling may be useful, to enable whatever Judicial Activism the Justices consider appropriate on behalf of sincere Free Speech, Dignity, Truth and Forgiveness. 183 S v Hoho (493/05)  ZASCA 98;  1 All SA 103 (SCA) ; 2009 (1) SACR 276 (SCA) (17 September 2008) :  The importance of the right to freedom of expression has often been stressed by our courts.39 Suppression of available information and of ideas can only be detrimental to the decision-making process of individuals, corporations and governments. It may lead to the wrong government being elected, the wrong policies being adopted, the wrong people being appointed, corruption, dishonesty and incompetence not being exposed, wrong investments being made and a multitude of other undesirable consequences. It is for this reason that it has been said â€˜that freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society and is one of the basic conditions for its progress and the development of manâ€™.40
By learning to practice truth-telling and experiencing sincere forgiveness we will learn to shed the delusional system that tells us life has a particular meaning, or that we must be careful to avoid symbolic dangers, or we should compete to overcome our adversaries, or be polite above all else, or maintain our belief in God or God will die, or any of the thousands of outdated, misleading, and actually damaging beliefs of any kind that people have been selling as reality in our culture for centuries—when we get over attachment to the image or the illusion of who we are, then we get to create some new illusions for the future. We don't have any choice not to live by illusions, but we can choose which illusions we live into. It is our given destiny to be delusional. It's out of these illusions of a possible future that we live the creative and intentional life, and that we heal the damage done by our previous attachments to beliefs that don't work anymore and haven't for a long time In The Living U.S. Constitution184, Padover and Landynski write: How to reconcile judicial review with majority rule has been a basic issue, at times a critical one, in our polity. In 1938 Justice Stone, in the famous footnote 4 to U.S. v. Carolene Products185, articulated a justification for judicial activism in the field of individual rights when he suggested that, unlike challenges to “ordinary commercial transactions,” “there may be narrower scopes for operation of the presumption of constitutionality when legislation appears on its face to be within specific prohibition of the Constitution… The same were true with regard to “legislation which restricts [the] political processes” or is directed at “discrete and insular” (i.e. vulnerable) minority groups; these situations might call for a “more searching judicial enquiry. In other words, ordinarily the political system is adequate to defend individual liberties. When it is not, the Courts role must be redefined to allow for broader judicial review as a substitute for the political review, which these groups are unable to effectively obtain. In effect the court, should appoint itself as a surrogate legislature, judicially awarding the legislative bargains it believes these groups would themselves have struck were they politically influential. In such circumstances, judicial activism becomes defensible as a safeguard for democratic principles, for the Court can be seen as aiding democracy rather than blocking it, as giving expression to the political process rather than negating it.” In Simple Justice: The History of Brown v. Board of Education, Dr. Frederic Wertham186, testified as an expert witness, on the law as an educational measure: “… I don’t think that laws are only there to tell people what to do or what not to do; I think laws are one of the best educational measures we have, and I think if this law were changed… it would be a very great educational factor, and I think many adults would say, “What? They changed the law? They must have something.” I think the law very often is ahead of the people.”
The Living U.S. Constitution, by Saul K. Padover; Revised by Jacob W. Landynski; Third Revised Edition (Pg 64) United States v. Carolene Products Co. , 304 U.S. 144 (1938) Dr. Frederick Wertham was a Bavarian born, clinical psychologist, educated at Kings College in London, the University of Munich, and elsewhere. He was the first European psychologist to accept blacks (including the famed attorney Clarence Darrow) – often for free – for psychological counselling and therapy. He was one of the only European psychologists to contribute two or more evenings a week, to free psychological counselling to blacks, at the LaFargue Clinic, in Harlem. 185 186