Earthlings

[Snow Crash]

There's been a few threads of late about us humans and animals, ranging from individual cases of psychos attacking animals to mass cullings etc, and they have reminded me of Earthlings, an excellent, hard hitting documentary I was shown a while back by an esteemed amigo.

When I was first linked to this vid, I thought it was a UFO effort, due to the title (I have assimilated far too much sci fi). When I watched though, I quickly realised it was about how we humans interact with the other species who unfortunate enough to share this planet with us......... and how we humans as a species treat them ALL like shit. Even the ones we've lived side by side with for millenia.

This vid has some genuinely sickening moments, and to be honest, first time I watched it, I found it a bit emotional, being furious beyond belief at some points, and feeling utterly lost in sadness at others. I'd be surprised if even the most icy of us here didn't feel anger and/or sadness at some of the evil shit on display in this video.

[google:arhur5lo]6361872964130308142&ei=iULySJjyMZSM-QH9pJSaAg&q=earthlings&hl=en[/google:arhur5lo]

[Cogburn]

We are not the dominant species on this planet, only the most creative.

Bow before your masters.

http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/sciences/zoology/Insects/InsectAnatomy/Introduction/insectanatomy.gif

[torbjon]

Okay, I'll watch the entire thing, but the first minute has me a bit mmphed already...

"It encompasses each and every one of us: warm or cold blooded, mammal, vertebrate or invertebrate, bird, reptile, amphibian, fish, and human alike."

ie Fauna.

what about Flora?

but perhaps I jump the gun, I'll give the thing a watch...

Thanks for the heads up Snow, I love a good documentary.

laters
twj

[torbjon]

um, no, sorry... I tried. My primary emotional response was a negative one against the people who produced the documentary, and not any empathy / sympathy for the "poor animals".

thanks anyway though.

[boycotteverything]

Great vid, Snow. I'd seen it a while ago. Powerful truth.

My primary emotional response was a negative one against the people who produced the documentary, and not any empathy / sympathy for the "poor animals".
It's all to easy and too common to blame the messenger. How can one not have 'sympathy' towards suffering? The essence of the Ethical is compassion. Those who lack it or do not seek it carry within themselves the seeds of chaos. They can be properly considered to be a virus slowly and joylessly dismantling the natural order in service their own unknown selves. These are the people responsible for evolving a technology whose highest accomplishment are weapons systems and ever more powerful instruments of death. They are the reason that the Earth itself stands on the precipice of dissolution. Ethics is the Basic Substance of the Universe. To deny compassion is to worship destruction. Dr. Arthur Afterburn, 1968*

[boycotteverything]

Dr. Arthur Afterburn, 1968*


Peoplespark Redux, 1971

(From "Telegraph" by Arthur Afterburn,
Uppa U.S. Publications, 1972)

Ragtag hippie,
sagged,
by a stopt shot
that lay his head in
meaty pieces
down,
amongst the jags
amongst the shards
amongst the last
trashed
pane

*Afterburn was a little known but truly fine poet- and a true tovarish. The title ‘Peoplespark’ would have been recognized by any bright commie as a reference to both the ‘park’ and the ‘spark’- an allusion to “Iskra” (The Spark), Lenin’s pre-revolution newspaper. But I guess his work is all just ancient history, meaningless to anyone who wasn’t there. On the other hand, the image and the cadence has a way of burning into your soul. Uppa U.S. Publications was owned by an anarchist named Guido-the-Red who didn’t speak any English and everything Arthur wrote was translated into Italian by his wife, Lucia, and then retranslated into English for the American editions! This process changed the work to a certain degree but she insisted on doing it this way. I think it was her way of insinuating herself into Arthur’s works. They were lovers and always in competition with one another. Nothing by Arthur is still in print, unfortunately. He died in 1992 in a spelunking accident in Belarus. His body was never recovered. I don’t know what became of Lucia. Dust to dust. Rest in pieces, AA.

[torbjon]

BE:

ya, again, not buying it, and no empathy / sympathy for Dr. Afterburn. Still no mention of Flora, the only life essence these people seem to care about is Fauna. That makes them a hypocrite in my book. It seems that is is perfectly okay to 'torture' Fauna since we can't hear their screams or really relate to their plight, that particular life essence doesn't seem to count... it's "okay" to put on a pair of jack boots and stomp on the "face" of plant... it's "okay" to kill a weed simply because it bothers you... stomp on a kitty cat for the same reason and folks freek out... this concept of "higher" and "lower" life essences kinda sickens me, actually... it seems short sighted, misguided, and ill informed... and kinda stupid.

This line:

"These are the people responsible for evolving a technology whose highest accomplishment are weapons systems and ever more powerful instruments of death."

also seems like a crock o' crap to me, more Bernays mind fucking / fear mongering... it could also be argued that the 'highest accomplishment' of 'evolving technology' has been the global communication networks (existing in '68 and still evolving today) which have helped to break down the cultural and societal differences that have been the primary Cause of the wars (and the development of technology of destruction).

Perhaps they don't have them where you hang out, but here in NYC it's hard Not to bump into some "animal rights" activist standing on a street corner shouting their gospel... I've tried to have 'rational' conversations with them from time to time but they don't seem to be capable of it... much like 'bible thumpers' or other 'zealots'.... they seem to be firmly convinced that the life essence of Fauna is "higher" than Flora, but can't really tell my why this is the case... they don't seem to have any problems Eradicating (genocide) a strain of bacteria (again, the "higher" and "lower" thing), and nobody seems to have any problems whatsoever with eating... they may be squeamish about eating certain things, but the generic consumption of another life essence? not a problem to them.

Then there's the Darwinian thing.... if that theory is true, then we all started out on equal footing and evolved to where we're at today... "they" had their chance just like "we" did... living beings that are capable of multigenerational mutations in a short period of time, say, bacteria or some insects, etc. may actually have an evolutionary "edge" over us slower breeding, lumbering, rather stupid creatures... but they don't seem to be "winning"... yet *grins*

This seems like a crock of crap to me too:

"To deny compassion is to worship destruction."

To deny destruction is to deny LIFE. Life, by its very nature, DESTROYS complex structures, turns them into their base components, and reforms them into an image of themselves.

I have No Clue what other life essences "feel"... perhaps the Flora is laughing hysterically as it dumps particles into the air that cause me great pain and discomfort. Perhaps the mosquito gets great Pleasure from infecting me with parasites. Perhaps Plasmodium Falciparum (malaria) is intentionally being sadistic when it destroys my body...

I refuse to assume that I know what another being feels, or what the motivating factors are behind their actions... those who make such claims have so far been unable to explain it to me in a 'rational', 'mathematical', 'scientific', 'DETACHED' fashion... the arguments invariably end up being emotional ones... Emotional argurments are two sided... both parties are 'right' And both parties are 'wrong' *shrugs*

But I'm a nut job that used to work in an abattoir, so what do I know?

[boycotteverything]

I have No Clue what other life essences "feel".that all makes for a small world. There are 'clues' but you reject them.

[torbjon]

Okay, help me out here, what are the 'clues' to the 'feelings' of a tree? Are you willing to state that a tree has no 'feelings'? If so, what do you base that statement on?

[boycotteverything]

Trees have feelings. Peter Tompkins and Chris Bird established that to my satisfaction. All things, alive and inanimate, are manifestations of energy and share in a common essence. That essence is The Ethical. Which, in itself, is the Mood of God. That's reality in a nutshell.

[boycotteverything]

Let me add this- if you treat a tree with compassion you will be so treated. Give them water when they're thirsty and they will give you shade when you're hot and fruit when you're hungry. Do you really need a clue to see the truth of that? They should not be worshiped nor insulted but lived with in a natural order.

[torbjon]

BE:

hmmm... naw. That's emotional, not very detached. "Ethics" are arbitrary. I treat the tree with "compassion", like you say, and in return it sends out a root structure that totally destroys the cave I'm trying to live in. That doesn't seem very equitable... not very 'nice' on the trees part... kind of a 'fuck you', actually.

as near as I can tell, Flora has been actively engaged in continuous Open Warfare against its perceived adversaries since the get go. They seem to focus their technology on perpetually upgrading and perfecting their chemical Weapons of Mass Destruction in order to 'take out the competition', but they also seem to spend a lot of time and energy on perfecting, improving, and developing New methods to fuck with their neighbors. Most Flora seems to have no problems with 'brutally' and 'sadistically' MURDERING anything that it perceives as 'competition'.

But that's somehow 'different', right? When one plant Poisons another plant, murders it, perhaps even in a slow, long, drawn out process that may even cause the 'victim' great pain, agony, and distress, that's "okay"... that's "just the way it is"... they don't have "choice" so it doesn't matter...

and that's really what this boils down to, huh? The concept of "choice"... THIS group of physical / chemical actions / reactions HAS choice, but this group of physical / chemical actions /reactions does NOT have choice... Just Because. No other detached / mathematical reason other than 'Because'.

We, as humans, seem to like to believe that we have "choice"... but that somewhere along the line these other living things do Not have choice... and anything that we perceive as not having "life" has NO choice at all... different people draw that line at different places, but draw the line they do... and there doesn't seem to be a consensus on where that line is, or any real detached evidence to support that theory.

My conscious "choice" is to sadistically murder the things that annoy me, to rape when the urge strikes me, to take what I want from those weaker than me... but I've never done those things and doubt that I ever will even though I WANT to, simply because it is not within my physical / chemical action / reaction make up.

I WANT to kill those politicians and make them Suffer. I WANT to rob that bank. I WANT to fuck that bitch right now with nary a care for what she wants... I have NO FEAR of retribution or death... so? What's stopping me? My "compassion" for others? HA! The chemical equation which is me simply doesn't unfold that way... my Newtonian "action/reaction" existence just doesn't allow it...

But it does for others. Why? Why can they carry out their "choice" to do those things, but I can't?

In relation to the video that Snow posted, I'm not sure that those 'sadistic bastards' doing what they do to animals had any more "choice" than the animals getting the shitty end of the stick.

[century]

When I was first linked to this vid, I thought it was a UFO effort, due to the title (I have assimilated far too much sci fi). When I watched though, I quickly realised it was about how we humans interact with the other species who unfortunate enough to share this planet with us......... and how we humans as a species treat them ALL like shit. Even the ones we've lived side by side with for millenia.









:alien:

[Snow Crash]

:alien:

Indeed.

[century]

My man,

MIlton

u]RWsx1X8PV_Au]

[Alessandra]

(<>..<>)

[FancyFree]

Let me add this- if you treat a tree with compassion you will be so treated. Give them water when they're thirsty and they will give you shade when you're hot and fruit when you're hungry. Do you really need a clue to see the truth of that? They should not be worshiped nor insulted but lived with in a natural order.


BE you act like a grumpy, condascending old asshole alot of the time, but i give credit where credit is due..

Well said, and i totally agree.

[boycotteverything]

I'm an equal opportunity curmudgeon. The only point I've ever tried to make in the Amkon parlor is this: Take away from the World no more than you need/ Give back to the World no less than you can.

If that makes me grumpy and condescending at times- so be it. It's a double edged sword, after all.


BE:

hmmm... naw. That's emotional, not very detached. "Ethics" are arbitrary.You make a grave mistake when you confuse the Ethical with morality. The Ethical is transcendent/ morality is relative- a mere shadow of Ethics. On the other hand it's good to see you admit to living in the Cave. Plato would be proud. Those 'destructive roots' are simply performing as they should- to introduce some oxygen, to wake you up- to remind you that it's time to feed them.