On Skeleg Michael

On Skeleg Michael

God,
what is this white martyrdom you've called me to?
One would never know the Skeleg Michael that I live on
unless they paid close attention.
At least the ancient Irish monks
gained fondness in distance
as people of the day were eventually drawn
to their beautiful crucible of rock, grass and wind.
There, the ancient monks had aloneness but not, in the end, anonymity.
Here, in this city of Los Angeles,
I experience an even purer and harsher form of aloneness.
Like an ocean full of water I can't drink,
this city of Los Angeles
is full of people whose company I can't enjoy,
whose bosom isn't home or anything close to it.
It is a city
of disjointed, competing buildings and fractious cultures,
and yet, it is a city, more than any other,
that still has enough liminal space in its margins
for me to walk with God
on an isle of my own identity.

And so my thoughts return to Skeleg Michael,
where I could wake every morning
and see God's unvarnished reflection
in the mist of waves atomized against the rocks.
Here, in this city,
I must squint to see God's reflection in a 7-11 strip mall.
On Skeleg Michael,
I could live in my uninterupted thoughts--
interupted only by the churning of physical survival
and a vague void within me for companionship.
Here, this city is always trying to intrude on my thoughts
with its unchangeable channel of advertisements
and glances that invite me
to join the fleeting, empty approval
of a vast, ephemeral community of people
who confront their aloneness
with disposable products and disposable thrills.

So I must count pleasant moments
that are afforded me by way of
fleeting moments of connection
with motley, unexpected people.
In a laugh with a co-worker,
in a polite interchange with a stranger,
in an occasional, wholesome glance exhanged with another,
in a pleasant conversation with a neighbor
whose name I won't long remember,
sparse moments of connection occur
with fellow city-dwellers
who hail from the other sides of vast cultural seas.

And yet,
even these fleeting moments of connection
are part of my white martyrdom.
On Skeleg Michael,
I would confront my void of human companionship
as a strong but vague urge
that hoisted itself into my consciousness
as an ever-blurring imagination
of being with people who were blurring in my memories.
In this city, however,
these fleeting moments of connection
intrude on my aloneness
with a tang and sharpness of unimagined realness,
as each moment of connection
reaches beyond the defenses
I have had to construct against the siren calls
and makes me confront
my unsatiated longing
for a genuine, lasting communion with others.
It is these fleeting moments of connection
that put the long moments of aloneness
into the sharpest relief.

Before I get too enamored of them,
immediately after allowing me
these fleeting moments of connection,
God, in my spirit,
reels me back to the Skeleg Michael
of my heart and mind,
wherein
I cannot hold onto these moments of connection
as being anything more than moments,
and, in the many long moments in between,
I must gather my bearings
and find peace walking the rocks alone with God.

Prayer in the Atom Smasher

Another poem,

Prayer in the Atom Smasher

In the wrecking room
that has become the space inside me,
I am convulsing with something
far deeper than mere displeasure.
No, the very nature of matter must change
and Time must be ripped a new ass

So I whip the fibers of my mind
until they are stripped of all inertia
and let the fury of my rage
rip away any remaining links
in my consciousness
to the realm of all that is banal
so that the Pnuemosphere
of God's spirit,
that is omnipresent yet invisible to Mundane Man,
will have room to traverse dimensions
and enter through
the oscillating membrane of my consciousness
and winnow the fabric of space-time
at its sub-atomic level

And just as the toxic acid
generated from this combustion
is about to cut the linings of my innards like glass
God leaps off of the pages of history and memory
and alters the nuerochemical matter within me
through an intimate miracle
of peace

And, in that moment,
I know, with a sentience that comes before knowing,
that God has altered space-time
and tilted history
just enough to let the fury
of this conation within me
rest
until the next time
I'm compelled to pray
in the atom smasher

Clearing

Another poem

Clearing

In desperation
I put my forehead onto the hard-packed ground
to let God plant a seed
beneath muted rage and concrete

It was in that moment that I looked up
and saw the haze
of joyless pleasure and ennui all around me
as a pall of sickly yellow
that made the sun overbearing
and made the city a suffocating hothouse
as the sun cast shadows across sullen faces
making their profiles pass darkly
over the concrete underfoot

It was in that moment
that I saw God's spirit
as a clearing being made in the haze around me
and I saw through the air
as it became fresh and crisp
as the sun shone straight from heaven
and onto the crusts of hardened hearts
and gave odd patches of grass and trees
--that push daily against the city concrete--
the purest hue of dazzling green

I was in that moment
that I felt the air on my lungs
as fresh hope
as God began to clear
my heart and my sinuses

Times Change

Another poem

Times Change

In these times
too many in the world
have become part of the Supercomputer
commonly known as
"the times"

wherein:
sexual titilation
is treated as a cocoa leaf--
something to be chewed on
to give a continuous nip of pleasure
to boost a dull day,
people seek freedom and individuality
consuming products
that erode contemplative space,
"Who's to say?"
is the philosphy
that can make an ignoramous sound wise,

When I tried explaining to them
that the "times"
were not necessarily changing for the better,
they simply deferred to the wisdom
of the supercomputer
(that is sorting it all out for them -- besides who am I anyway)
saying, "times change"

So, now,
all I can do
in these times
is to lie in my room
like Jonah
in the belly of a blighted age
and give birth
to a new vision of the world

Green Zone

Yes, I'm still working on my essays. Another poem for this week.

Green Zone

In this moment
if those around me in this city vanished
I wouldn't miss them

I would walk among fresh ruins
and take a deep quiet breath
to lay to rest concrete buildings
before they began to softly crumble

I would allow the morning sun
shining on weeds and asphalt
to gently bake my inert core
Later, in the early afternoon
I would hear an owl
sound a call across empty lots
to signal the beginning of the day's death

In the evening
I would hear crickets on four lane boulevards
and I would hear the quietest patter
of coyote paws on the sidewalk
At night, I would stretch out on cool asphalt
in the middle of a forgotten intersection
under a galaxy split in half
by a flickering traffic light,
an ember of another age,
as I pondered the feng shui of its arrested energy

and I would allow the hush of the quietest breeze
to rebuild my core
without the ravenous churning
of survival and desire

and, in the moment,
before the age that I had left behind
came rushing back into time and space to confront me with a blast
I would have carved a space,
a 'green zone' in my being,
to be a vantage point
where I could see the coervice forces of the city,
as these forces,
manifested in ravenous people surrounding me,
tried to penetrate my consciousness

and, in my 'green zone',
I would allow my vision of the city as it lied empty and still
to be the backdrop
on which I super-imposed
the city as it now confronts me in all of its fury
so that its fury would never seem
to vast and too omnipresent
for me to see beyond

In Search of a Miracle

Another poem. A snapshot of the angst that often accompanies the of life of faith.

In Search of a Miracle

A Jesus more available than ever
and yet not

2000 years ago, I could, maybe
have boarded a boat
and met him face to face
and, maybe
have received my miracle
(and have my personal world shaken to its core)

Now, I must access Jesus
with a heart
that must cut through
a thicket of modernity, daily
so that the Holy Spirit
can shine on my mind's eye
for me to see that I am
recognized by Jesus
as one waiting in the line
that lepers once waited in (and still do)

and trust
that the momentary breakthough
--this momentary vision of Jesus--
in the midst of working through
all that my heart must work through
is the miracle
penultimate to any miracle that may follow

as the light
in this new vision of Jesus
illuminates a new direction
for me to look toward,
and as it illuminates
some aspect of the circumstance
of my waiting
that has a utility
in its present existence
in shaping a transformation in my soul,
the Lover of my soul
sees to it
that no lesson is left unlearnt
as I wait in the line, alone
as sees to it that no aspect of my transformation
is left undone

So I wait
in the midst of this
indefinite fast from certainty
--with fury and restlessness punctuated with peace--
for the miracle
as all manner of spiritual growth
is drawn from the circumstance
like marrow sucked from a bone
and as dreams deferred
become the poles on which
hope hangs and grows like a vine

a pilgrimage

It's been a long, tiring week at work, so I'm offering another poem instead of an essay.

A Pilgrimage

The Spirit of God
called an old man
in Etheopia
to carve Coptic churches, alone,
into the rocks
of a distant mountain.

Perhaps
these temple-caves being carved
are like arks
that are being readied
for an ominous, unwritten destiny,
an Armageddon
that will drive Christians
to find shelter in remote altitudes.

Or, perhaps,
the destinies of these temple-caves
are intended
by God
to be blank and pure
until they are claimed
by the sundry few
who are driven to them
for sundry reasons.

Or, perhaps,
a part of God's Spirit
was feeling pinched
and required room to breathe
by communing with an old man
whose spirit
is now resonating
with a solitude
only found among distant rocks
carved into the ancient, reverent form.

Longing for that solitude,
and longing for that communion,
I let my spirit travel
on the wings
of imagination and yearning
to one of these unclaimed,
empty, rock-hewn churches
to rest.

There, I found solace
in its dust, wind and shadows.

you are a radio

I am stalling for more time to complete further essays, so I am offering you one of my poems this week:


YOU ARE A RADIO

Whose circuitry can be positively or negatively affected

according to which station you're attuned to

You have no off button

and you are always attuned to one station or another

You have the power within you to change your station

to one better and healthier

There are powerful forces at work to keep you

from understanding this choice

by enslaving you to expedient pleasures

making Stillness the enemy

as they offer their wares

as the antidote to your boredom and restlessness --

all the while selling these wares as essential

to your liberation and "individuality"

(liberating you from your inner life

and the conscious capacity you might otherwise have

to master your "radioness")

so that you will be uwittingly attuned

to what these forces want

while they avoid the scrutiny that they

would otherwise have for your circuitry

or the competition they would otherwise have with

other, healthier radio stations.

"It's no big deal" -- the religion of cool part II

This is part II of last weeks "it's no big deal" -- the religion of cool part I

I have offered the definition of Primalism as a world view (see a primer on primalism). Now, from time to time in my writing, I will refer to Primalism as an active noun for the sake of clarity and convenience. I will say things like "Primalism has..." "Primalism understands...", treating it as a sentient force that comprises a) the beliefs and practices therein, b) the individuals who follow those beliefs, and c) the gravitational force that Primalism has a social movement that is greater than the sum of its parts. I do so, in part, because individual Primalists on the street are usually not aware of all that comprises Primalism and because Primalists themselves treat the "times"--the social phenomenon greater than the sum of its parts--as a "collective mind".

As I said in my lust makes the world go 'round, Primalism is the unconscious repository for many people's latent drive for meaning who do not otherwise believe that "meaning" exists as a real thing outside of feelings. This latent drive for meaning contains the latent need that people have to organize life according to some ethical system that is larger than themselves. To the extent that Primalism serves this need, people become bonded to the ethical imperatives that flow from following the wisdom of the collective id. Here, the wisdom of the collective id is understood as the "times" wherein new forms of id expressions are being negotiated into the fabric of social acceptance. I refer to these id desires and expressions that are in the process of being woven into the fabric of social acceptance as the "emergent id".

In this context, Primalism has a value for each individual to experience the primal feeling of expressing his/her individual self ("it's all about you"). Primalism, however, places a premium on each individual giving deference to the collective id so that others throughout the collective can have their id based individuality too. Individuals within the collective are expected to protect and nurture each new id experience that is being woven into the fabric of social acceptance -- this, so that those who are discovering their individuality in the new id experience can have as much individuality as those who have found their individuality in id experiences that were ratified in earlier "times".

As such, Primalists understand themselves as being part of a matrix, a social economy of individuality, that maximizes id based individuality across all the members of the collective. Here, each individual Primalist within the collective needs to do a lot of "fitting in" and suppressing of his individual judgement ("who's to say?") to make it work. It is on this basis that Primalism has the ethical imperative for an individual to fit-in to the "times" in such a way that he/she does not present a threat to the emergent id. In this way, Primalism values the individuality of one's id but not individuality of one's mind.

The Primalist idea of being "cool" is based on this value system. To be "cool" is to experience one's id at the expense of one's mind so that one's individual id does not conflict with wisdom of the collective id. In this way, Primalism is a secular attempt to turn the collective id into a sort of tao. Exploring only a similarity in ideas, An enlightened Primalist has "blown out" his mind to follow the collective id in a manner similar to that of a Zen Buddhist who has "blown out" his mind to follow the Tao. In the secular, Primalist sense, to be cool is to be enlightened. Primalism, is, of course, vastly different from Zen Buddhism in that it does not involve the "blowing out" of primal desires. Rather, Primalism is an ethical system that works upward taking for granted that society is made up of self-aggrandizing people with churning desires who all follow their id, even if they don't admit it. In Primalism, people submit to the Primalist ethics, believing it to be a system of "checks and balances" on their own self-aggrandizing and on the self-aggrandizing of others.

An individual who is bonded to the Primalist idea of being "cool" will have his/her latent drive for meaning bonded to the mandate to advance the Primalist ethical system as a superior ethical system above all others. As such, Primalists are apologists for the Primalist system of "checks and balances" on individual self-aggrandizing in the face of those who would pose a threat to its assumptions. Being an apologist for Primalism as such involves protecting the emergent id from any threats that come from someone asserting their own individual wisdom above the wisdom arrived at by the "times"(see WWAD and "don't judge me").

To the extent that Primalism is a post-articulate belief, Primalists consider the very act of argumentation to be a sign of regression out of individuals' allegiance to the collective id. For this reason, Primalists very often don't construct arguments when faced with criticism as much as they rely on slogans that encapsulate Primalist ideas. In this way, a Primalist confronts criticism that is threatening to the emergent id by asserting what he/she considers to be the ethical superiority of Primalism as something that is beyond argument.

A Primalist has arrived at the idea that a thing's normalcy is a status that is granted to it because it has been ratified by the collective id. As such, the fact that something is normal is reason enough to let it be left alone and protected from contradicting opinions. A Primalist often will employ a variety of slogans to enforce this idea. Sex, fashion and money are examples of powerful things -- indissoluble from the id experiences that are highly valued within Primalism and are integral parts of the Primalist social economy. When a Primalist wants to suppress incorrect scrutiny of these things, he will often say something like "it's no big deal" "it's just ... fashion ...sex ...the times ...what people want ...etc..." or any similar saying that is based on the its normal because it's normal axiom.

Fierce mundanity is a term that I use to describe what happens when something that is "no big deal" is also the proverbial "elephant in the room". Fierce mundanity is the intellectual phenomenon of people asserting the commonality of a thing as a means to quell the scrutiny of that thing. Fierce mundanity is used to suppress the scrutiny of something powerful when there is a tacit payoff in not having that power examined. A Primalist will use the it's normal because it's normal axiom as fierce mundanity for the tacit payoff that he gains advancing the collective id in a non-articulate way. Not only does he satisfy his unconsious drive for meaning by advancing the ethical demands of Primalism at large, he also gains the tacit payoff of enjoying the id experiences that are being made available to him in the emergent id. Another important tacit payoff for him is the status that he reinforces for himself among fellow Primalists as a "post-articulate" person who "gets it". Thus, being "cool" in the Primalist sense is to experience these tacit payoffs by expressing "fierce mundanity" with ease throughout one's words, demeanor and behavior.

In Primalism, the ethical imperative for an individual to "fit-in" reinforces the individuals' ethical imperative to have a "thought-ethic" of non-examination and non-judgement. For a Primalist to experience his individual id in concert with other Primalists across the collective requires that he sacrifice his individual attempt at making judgements on what has become normal around him. To do this he must apply the same it's normal because it's normal axiom to himself that he asserts to others. In other words, he must suppress his own scrutiny of what is normal by saying "it's no big deal" to himself.

To the extent that there is any latent dissonance that an individual Primalist has fitting in with his fellow Primalists and with progress as it is defined by the "times", he will subconsciously harbor anxiety. A Primalist who wishes to experience all of the payoffs of being cool will be bound by its claims on his mind, feelings, words and behavior, and he will try to remain "cool" even while harboring dissonance and anxiety within himself. To be cool, a Primalist must look out on what has become normal and say "it's no big deal" as a means of pledging allegiance to the collective id. Here, a Primalist will internalize "it's no big deal" and subconsciously apply the "it's no big deal" idea onto his inner life. In this way, a Primalist confronts the dissonance within himself as being something that is "no big deal" and thereby suppresses his anxiety enough to maintain a "cool pose".

In Primalism, a certain amount of latent anxiety is actually taken for granted as just another churning primal drive that humans have. This latent anxiety and insecurity is part of what makes the world go 'round and is the engine for the Primalist social economy and the business economy that is based on it. As such, the Primalist social economy is one of negotiated insecurity that operates as an undercurrent under people's "cool pose" -- more on that later.

"it's no big deal" -- the religion of cool Part I

As I talked about in "my lust makes the world go 'round", people who don't consciously believe that life has any true meaning nevertheless retain a latent drive for meaning. This drive compels people to find something that serves as a focal point for their subconscious drive for meaning. Without a belief in truth, many these days are subconsciously serving their drive for meaning with the Primalist notions of what is "authentic" for the self and notions of what is "correct" for the times. The changing times, negotiated by the collective id, represent an "emergence" of new expression of primal desires that are being woven into the fabric of social acceptance.

The emergent "times" move through the air faster than the speed of any individual person's thought, and are undertsood as trumping any individual's attempt to articulate reality and place it into a coherent system of thought. Primalists consider it a sign of progress that people adhere to the "times" and not try to assume mastery over the times by scrutinizing them (see "don't judge me"). In this way, Primalism is a "post-articulate" belief system, having the idea that it is a sign of progress that people follow the times without debate or scrutiny.

It is for this reason that the essence of being "cool" for a Primalist is to be hip to this new emergence and to be able to behave the fact that one "gets it". One's coolness is determined by one being able to know the times without having to ask, thereby proving one's status as a post-articulate person. Here, one's coolness--one's tacit understanding and approval of the emergent "times"--is something that must be behaved and "if you have to ask you'll never know".

It is true that aspects of Primalism are found in many of the arguments articulated by various intellectuals. As I said in my WWAD essay, postmodernism is one intellectual movement, among others, that has ties to Primalism. Nonetheless, Primalism is mostly a populist movement wherein people who are not able to articulate complex ideas can still be hip and on the cutting edge operating with Primalist slogans and behavior.

A Primalist understands that things that have become normal have become so because they have been ratified and accepted by the collective id. It is in deference to this ethical system of following the collective id that a Primalist uses a thing's normalcy as a justification for its existence. In other words, Primalists express their allegiance to the collective id by operating on the axiom, it's normal because it's normal.

Primalism is a belief system that places the id and the feelings that flow from the id as the essense of what is most vital and real. Even as Primalism encourages people to say "but I feel like it" as a justification for their behavior, the very structure of Primalism results in a system of belief and behavior that encourages people to experience certain feelings and suppress others. Primalism encourages lust and id based anger and hubris that have been determined to be within the bounds of what is "correct". As Primalism appeals to these primal desires that people actually have on some level, Primalism encourages people to cultivate them in ways that they might not under different circumstances and even to cultivate certain anxieties.

Due to the emphasis that Primalism places on an individual to be "cool" and "post-articulate", Primalism elevates the need for people to look to see what the others in the collective are doing and saying. Its is in this context that Primalism encourages people to experience the primal desire of being comfortable by cultivating the desire to avoid conflict and the desire to fit in. The desires to avoid conflict and to be accepted are encouraged for Primalists to meet the ethical demands of looking to the "times" for guidance. (Part II next week)

"Don't judge me!"

For a Primalist, the changing "times", negociated by the collective id, represents a continual "emergence" of new expressions of primal desires that are continually being woven into the fabric of social acceptance and public space. Primalists place a premium on this emergence, and seek to nurture and protect this emergence from incorrect ideas from individuals and groups, and even from themselves.

There are many ways that Primalists protect this emergence of primal desires in society from notions and criticism that would hinder its progress. When a Primalist is faced with public criticism directed at his behavior, he will often say "don't judge me!". Speaking as the Primalist, "don't judge me" means that I, as the individual criticized, should be given the latitude to exercise my personal judgement in regard to what is right for me by being protected from you, the criticizer. On the surface, it appears that I, the criticized, simply want to protect my perogative to judge without it being violated by others. Dig one layer beneath the surface, and "don't judge me" is actually based on a world view that makes claims on the very nature of judgement.

"Don't judge me" is part of a dialogue ethic, which is a set of social rules that dictate how, if and when individuals my share their opinions with one another. Primalists have a low view of any persons attempt to judge apart from deferring to the wisdom of the "times" via the collective id and frown upon any person making public any judgements that deviate from the wisdom of the collective id. In this context, "don't judge me" is part of a Primalist dialogue ethic that says "no one should publicly criticize anyone with judgements that deviate from the times" -- I, the Primalist, should not be exposed to your judgements that deviate from the times, and you should not be exposed to mine. (I'm reminded of a porn star who, during an interview, referred to the clinic where she was tested every month as a "very safe place". What she meant by "safe" was that the people there were uncritical of her choice to be a porn star.)

Primalists believe that when an individual attempts to judge others, he/she assumes too much mastery over what is right and wrong. It is believed that when an individual assumes this personal mastery over what is right and wrong, it will necessarily lead to that person operating out of fear, hubris and ignorance -- if not his hubris, fear and ignorance directly, then the fear, hubris and ignorance of those he influences. It is understood that an individual's judgementalness, left unchecked, can spread like a cancer to become society's judgementalness (see the essay what would assholes do? -- WWAD). A Primalist who wishes to nip this judgementalness in the bud will say "don't judge me" as a way of enforcing a social contract that says that criticisms have no claim to public space and should not be made within earshot of the criticized.

Given the fear that Primalists have of judgementalness and the premium that Primalists place on the deferring to the "times" for wisdom, "don't judge me" does not merely make claims on public criticism by saying in effect "don't publicly criticize me, "don't judge me" also makes claims on the mind by saying in effect " don't use your mind to judge me or anyone else with any yardstick that extends beyond yourself and/or the times". In this way, "don't judge me" is not just part of Primalist dialogue ethic, it is also part of a Primalist "thought ethic". "Don't judge me" is a statement that no one, not even the Primalist himself, should use the mind to judge beyond what is being decided by the collective id. In the context of primal desires, one should not allow one's conscious intellect to judge so that the primal desires that are being ratified by the "times" can have free reign to be expressed.

This is why "but I feel like it!", when spoken by a Primalist as a justification for his actions, is a corallary to "don't judge me". Speaking as the Primalist, my feelings have spoken and, as long as my feelings are within the boundaries of what is correct for the times, my feelings and the behavior that flows from them are a better and more authentic expression what is real and true than your judgements about me. As such, speaking as the Primalist, the unfettered expression of my feelings has the claim to public space, while your contradicting opinions do not.

WWAD -- what would assholes do?

(The following essay assumes that you have read "My lust makes the world go 'round" and a primer on primalism)

Primalists do not like the idea of truth as something that can be known. For Primalists, "correct" and "authentic" are more palatable terms that approximate the idea of truth. Within Primalism "correct" is a term that is oriented around the "times" and "authentic" is a term oriented around the self.

The primal desires of lust, anger, greed, fear and hubris are seen as the essense of one's authentic self. It is only in the interest of being correct that one should supress any of these desires. Suppressing one's primal desires other than to be correct is understood as the act of repressing one's authentic self. Primalists have a low of view of an individual's higher consciousness as being anything other than a repository for primal desires and understand people as creatures who are driven by emotions and primal desires and not by rationality. When evaluating a person's words, Primalists are primarily interested in the underlying motive. In evaluating a person's words, the only question relavent for a Primalist is which emotion/primal desire-- lust, greed, anger, fear or hubris-- is lying underneath the words and that the person is allowing to dominate him/her.

Suppose that one is suppressing one's primal desires on the basis believing in an idea of truth that makes claims on desires beyond what is correct for the "times". A Primalist interprets this person's belief and supression of his desires as being an act of fear, using his belief in truth as a vehicle for his fear to repress his true authentic self underneath. As such, this person's fear is understood as an "incorrect" fear. If an individual is calling others to suppress their primal desires on the basis of an idea of truth that lies outside of what is correct, that person is seen as using his belief in truth as a vehicle for his hubris to elevate himself self above others. As such this person's hubris is an "incorrect" hubris.

Primalists understand that violence leads directly from the hubris and fear that is connected to individuals and groups believing and propogating an idea of truth outside what is correct. If an individual or a group is making broad claims of truth that apply to others, that individual or group is necessarily in intellectual conflict with those who do not "see it that way". If an individual or group making a claim to truth is granted any power, their hubris will drive them to create a society and create institutions capable of imposing that belief on others by force. Primalists have a view of history that when individuals and groups make claims to truth it leads to violence over others that don't believe in that truth. Better that individuals relinquish their claims to truth and defer to "progress", as progress is negociated through the changing times by the collective id. And so it is operating in deference to the collective id and calling others to do the same that Primalists attempt to hold this dark side of primal desires in check.

Postmodernism, at its most vague and generous, allows for the possibility of truth but says that it can only be arrived at via different view points -- that no truth, as true as it may be, can be absolutely commicated to everyone via a singular source. An idea of Postmodernism that allows for the intellectual acknowledgement that truth may exist is a form of Postmodernism that is friendly to debate and inquiry. However, for a Postmodernist to be able to
a) sincerely believe that he/she has the truth
b) allow that others may only see it as a point of view, and
c) to able to operate peaceably within a community of debate,
requires that the Postmodernist have the ability to "think in stereo". "Thinking in stereo" is the ability to see the truth that one believes in while also seeing outside of oneself to the world that doesn't see it that way. Thinking in stereo requires sophisticated emotion processing (which I'll get into later) .

Primalism is a social application of Postmodernism that is oriented around the masses. A Primalist may not be sure whether "the truth is out there", but a Primalist is very sure that any one person can't know it ("Who's to say?). Primalism does not give individuals much credit for an ability to "think in stereo". Primalists operate on the premise, stated by the Tommy Lee Jones charater in the movie Men in Black, who said, "a person is smart but people are stupid". Primalism looks at individuals throught the prism of the masses and the potential for masses to "think in mono" and act stupidly -- like assholes.

Based on this assessment, Primalists evaluate any intellectual idea on how it could be interpreted by the worst instincts of the masses. In other words, Primalists are most interested in the social utility of an idea by asking the question "what would assholes do if they found out about it?" It is on the basis of the danger that ideas have to inflame the masses with the wrong primal desires that Primalists evaluate ideas to see which ideas can operate as an organizing premise of society. A Primalist on the street might utter a slogan such as "times change" and "who's to say" to quell an idea that does not pass this "asshole" test. Among intellectuals, there are a variety of more sophisticated ways to try to quell ideas that fail the test -- more on that later.

Primalists are most favorable to intellectual ideas that are seen to maximize pleasure and freedom among a society of people driven primarily by lust, greed, fear and hubris. As such Primalists are interested in an "asshole equilibrium" accross society that maximizes the primal expression of these desires throughout society in such a way that causes the least amount of violence. Based on this "gain calculus", Primalists do look the other way for certain types of violence (more on that later).

Among the primal desires, lust, greed, fear and hubris, lust is seen as having an important utility for a social equilibrium that mitigates against the violence connected to hubris and fear that is connected to broad claims of truth. If people are finding pleasure in lust and sex, they won't be so pre-occupied with obsessing about grand ideas of "truth". "Make love not war" from the 1960's is a statement that contains the 60's starry-eyed conflation of boffing with "love" and sets it up as the antidote to violience. Current Primalists mostly eschew the abstraction known as "love", but still hold lust as a social force that can operate as a substitute for violence-via-truth-claims.

That is why if one is questioning a primalist expression of lust/sex on the basis of a broad claim of truth, politically incorrect truth, a Primalist will counter saying "Why do you care so much about sex? what about violence?". Reading between the lines, it is not actually true that a Primalist believes that sex is "no big deal" -- the full expression of one's primal sexual desires is key to happiness. It is only half true to say that a primalist thinks that sex is not worth one's mental energy to address but violence is. In truth, intellectually diminishing the importance of lust/sex actually has utility in suppressing incorrect intellectual scrutiny of lust/sex so that sex/lust can continue to operate throughout society as a Primalist force to mitigate against violence.

a primer on primalism

Primalism, as I talked about in "my lust makes the world go 'round" is the belief that experiencing primal desires is the key to happiness, that ones id is the essense of one's authentic, true self and the key to enlightenment and freedom.

I identify five aspects of primalism -- collective id, neo-marxist id, neo-primalist id, desire id and emotive id. Desire id is simply ones wants and delights, and Primalism is a belief in the full unfettered expression of one's desire id ("it's what you want") for happiness. Emotive id comprises all of the raw emotions that one feels, and Primalism is a belief that the full, unfettered expression of all ones raw emotions is essential for one's therapy and mental health. Neo-marxist id is the Primalist belief that certain expressions of the id address social inequalities. Neo-Primalist id, closely related to neo-marxist id, is the Primalist belief that we must get back to the full and unfettered experience of our id that has been thwarted and repressed by adulthood, civilization, religion, etc... Collective id is the collective intuition expressed through popular trends. I'll elaborate more on these later.

Primalism's notion of progress is based on a teological meta-narrative of id catharsis. In other, easier words, the Primalist idea of progress is the advancement of id expressions within society that advance primalism's ideas of happiness, therapy and social equality; progress is the continual unfolding of id expressions within society that had been repressed in the past or that are simply being discovered by new products, services and artforms that facilitate new id experiences.

Primalists believe that the collective id is the path of wisdom to know what new aspect of the id to weave into the fabric of society's acceptance to advance this progress. The collective id is felt as that something that is "in the air" and that precludes any one persons ability to lay claim to it as the source. The question of what aspect of the id to allow and how to allow within any given "time" it is the situational ethic that is decided by the collective id. When a new form of id is being expressed, a primalist justifies it by saying "times change". In other words, a primalist is saying that the collective id has negociated a new form id expression into social acceptance for these times and we must defer to what the collective id has ratified.

"Who's to say?" is a rhetorical statement that can be translated, "which individual among us is to say?" that has the collective id as its default. In other words, "who's to say" is a slogan that is code for saying that one should not attempt to make judgements with the use of one's own personal mind but should rather defer to the collective mind whose engine is the collective id. Here, the collective id is the supercomputer that negociates primalist progress, a supercomputer that no one individual can comprehend or should try to question.

The marketplace is a primary "voting booth" where the collective id votes for and ratifies what is newly acceptable by purchasing and consuming it. If something "sells", ie. "sex sells" it is understood that the id experience associated with it is being ratified by the collective id. The collective id's use of the marketplace as a medium of making decisions is one way that primalism partners with with economism (see "my lust makes the world go 'round) in using the marketplace as the basis of making ethical decisions.

Though most people do not self-identify as being primalist, much of what is "Politically correct" in our society is correct because it is connected to a Primalist sense of progress. Though not all political correctness is primalism, much of what is "correct" for the purposes of being advanced social, legally, intellectually and policitally, is correct because it advances primalism.

"My lust makes the world go 'round"

People have a need for meaning. This is true even for people who believe that life is meaningless in the most ultimate sense of being the result of random, impersonal forces in the universe. These people do not believe that "meaning" actually exists as a reality outside of themselves and society at large in the way that a theistic person believes that meaning is contained in God.

What is interesting to me is the way the need for meaning expresses itself among those who do not believe that life has meaning in any ultimate metaphysical sense. What I observe is that these people want, somehow and in some way, to believe that their lives are a part of something much larger than themselves. A person such as this may try to fulfill this need for meaning through some sort of genuine sacrifice or altruism. However, what I observe more often, is that these people are not willing to go to such great lenghts to sacrifice their comfort and safety find a sense of meaning in a universe that is ultimately meaningless.

What I observe more often is that these people contruct for themselves, often unconsiously, a sense of meaning that "works upward" from the inevitability of their desires. If they desire pleasure, comfort and gratification, they will find a way to frame their desires in such a way that places the expressions of those desires in the context of servicing the greater good of society, whether it actually serves society or not. In this way, one is able to service one's need for meaning without the having the need for meaning ever be compelling enough for him/her person to have to suppress or reject any desire. When a person has a drive for meaning, but does not ultimately believe that meaning exists, they are driven to create a semblance of meaning, a construction of meaning, out of the scraps left behind by the unmeaningful forces of the universe.

While desires comprise one scrap of the metaphysically meaningless universe, the vague need to perpetuate or advance society, or to "make the world go 'round", is a scrap of reality that often functions as as the greatest good for one attempting, often unconsiously, to construct meaning out of non-meaning. Advancing the GNP or some other economic index to advance the short-term economic well-being of society is a way to "make the world go 'round" within a construction of meaning that does not make claims on one's desires.

If one arrives at the idea that advancing the market is the greatest good, then the question of whether or not something sells is the yardstick for its true value and essential goodness. This is the basis for what I call Economism, an ethical system that uses the economic marketplace to determine anything's true value and to make ethical decisions based on that value assessment. In Economism, people are seen primarily as economic creatures, and to increase their economic benefit is to benefit them at life's most essential level of reality.

Economism goes hand in hand with belief that I call Primalism, a construction of meaning that makes expressing primal desires as the greatest good; as the greatest transcendant experience one can have in life and is the path to one's happiness and enlightenment. Primalists understand that life, like an economic cycle, is short and must be "played to the hilt" so one doesn't have to face death with any primal desire left un-expressed. Economismists and Primalists do not make any distinction between desires and expressions as being vices and virtues. If another moral system has labeled a desire/expression as a vice, there are any number of creative ways that a primalist can frame his "vices" in economismist terms as advancing the economy. In other words, economism is a complementary belief that helps to allow a primalist to believe that his primal experience is "making the world go 'round".

For one to have a construction of meaning that one has arrived unconsiously, apart from a self-conscious search for meaning, driven into existense only by the raw, unexamined drive for meaning, often results in one making unconsious assessments of gain and loss that grossly overvalue the "greatest good" at the expense of other things that might be good. For a economismist, if expressing a desire causes other problems throughout a person's life or throughout society at large, the short term economic benefit to the individual and to society wins out in the assessment of gain and loss. Likewise for a primalist, maximizing society to facilitate ones ability to express one's primal desires is the greatest good that outweighs other assessments of gain and loss. Ones assessment of gain and loss, whether conscious or unconsious is what I call a "gain calculus".

With the exception of thinkers like Ayn Rand, most people who are economismist/primalist or who have constructions of meaning based on meaning out of non-meaning do not consciously articulate their belief in so many words. This is because such people would rather hold onto their construction of meaning than face the metaphysical meaninglessness that their construction is based on. Furthermore, as the construction of meaning frames one's desires, so do one's desires reinforce one's constuction of meaning. Each is propping the other up, and to dismantle the whole is terrifying. It is for this reason that constructions of meaning for those who believe life is ultimately meaningless are held to with a religious ferver, and the practice that flows from it becomes the religion of the non-religious.

Yet another reason that most people do not describe themselves as Economismist or Primalist is because these are rather crass beliefs when stated so bluntly. There are many other parallel beliefs that complement Economism and Primalism that sound much more thoughtful and magnanimous which I'll elaborate on later. So it is for most Economismists and Primalists that the clues to their beliefs are found in the composite of their behaviors and justifying slogans.

"Sex sells" is an example of a common economisimist slogan that works backward from the economic-benefit-as-greatest-good view to justify the use of human sexuality as a market commodity. Contained in this slogan is the gain calculus that the need to advance the economic benefit of society via the use of sexuality is so compelling as to trump any consideration of whether the use of sexuality in question is good or healthy. If I were a primalist who believed that expressing my lust was essential to my happiness, I could use the economism to assign global value to the sexual commodities that facilitated my lust. In so doing, my lust would "make the world go 'round".