top-down vs bottom-up

Besides the endless back-and-forth of "vote your conscience" vs "but
you're just voting for Bush", there's another issue. There is a totally
idealisti, conscience-based reason NOT to vote for Nader.

If we really want to build a more bottom-up, as opposed to top-down (as we
have now) kind of society, then, does it make sense that the first thing
for us to focus on is getting a Green/progressive in the HIGHEST office?
Should we not, instead, be focussing our energies on getting
Greens/progressives elected to City Council, Mayorships, Judges,
Aldermen, perhaps even a Representative or two?

Thus building the movement from the bottom-up, reflecting our values,
which are (??) to make society a more participatory, bottom-up kind,
where more people are more involved as active citizens making decisions
about our communities, counties, states, and ultimately the nation.

Of course. . . working hard to campaign for a City Council duude or
duudette is not as "sexy" as a Presidential campaign, and I fear that
this is the reason why all we ever hear about in terms of 3rd parties is
Nader, Nader, Nader.

Folks, we should be trying to build a society where the guy "on top" is
largely honorary, simply answering to the bottom-up voice of the
collective citizenry. Of course, the guy "on top" IS honorary now,
but he answers to the corporations. . . . . we just need to to replace
"the corportaions" with "the citizenry".

Thus, Nader-for-president is largely irrelevant. And thinking about it
is really a waste of anyone's time.

It's a waste of Nader's time too . . he should be out using his clout and
name to try to build the bottom-up society he supposedly stands for.

Nader is not a green. but this is what the greens are attempting bottom up

Christopher Bailey wrote:

> Besides the endless back-and-forth of "vote your conscience" vs "but
> you're just voting for Bush", there's another issue. There is a totally
> idealisti, conscience-based reason NOT to vote for Nader.
>
> If we really want to build a more bottom-up, as opposed to top-down (as we
> have now) kind of society, then, does it make sense that the first thing
> for us to focus on is getting a Green/progressive in the HIGHEST office?
> Should we not, instead, be focussing our energies on getting
> Greens/progressives elected to City Council, Mayorships, Judges,
> Aldermen, perhaps even a Representative or two?
>
> Thus building the movement from the bottom-up, reflecting our values,
> which are (??) to make society a more participatory, bottom-up kind,
> where more people are more involved as active citizens making decisions
> about our communities, counties, states, and ultimately the nation.
>
> Of course. . . working hard to campaign for a City Council duude or
> duudette is not as "sexy" as a Presidential campaign, and I fear that
> this is the reason why all we ever hear about in terms of 3rd parties is
> Nader, Nader, Nader.
>
> Folks, we should be trying to build a society where the guy "on top" is
> largely honorary, simply answering to the bottom-up voice of the
> collective citizenry. Of course, the guy "on top" IS honorary now,
> but he answers to the corporations. . . . . we just need to to replace
> "the corportaions" with "the citizenry".
>
> Thus, Nader-for-president is largely irrelevant. And thinking about it
> is really a waste of anyone's time.
>
> It's a waste of Nader's time too . . he should be out using his clout and
> name to try to build the bottom-up society he supposedly stands for.
>
>
>

-- -Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island
http://www.anaphoria.com
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU 88.9 FM WED 8-9PM PST

hi Chris,

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, Christopher Bailey <chris@m...>
wrote:

> Folks, we should be trying to build a society where
> the guy "on top" is largely honorary, simply answering
> to the bottom-up voice of the collective citizenry.
> Of course, the guy "on top" IS honorary now, but he
> answers to the corporations. . . . . we just need
> to to replace "the corportaions" with "the citizenry".

yep. this will be the true civil war of the future:
coporations vs. citizens.

for the last century, human society has been undergoing
a painful evolution into a larger planet-wide organism,
similar to the way single-celled organisms long ago learned
how to live together symbiotically in multi-celled organism.

of course, this is something that most citizens will
probably try to resist, particularly in a place like
America which values individual freedom so highly ...
or at least i think it still does ... hard to tell
these days.

but the planet-wide reorganziation of humanity is
already well under way, and the corporations are
leading the way so far.

-monz

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:
> hi Chris,
>
>
> --- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, Christopher Bailey <chris@m...>
> wrote:
>
> > Folks, we should be trying to build a society where
> > the guy "on top" is largely honorary, simply answering
> > to the bottom-up voice of the collective citizenry.
> > Of course, the guy "on top" IS honorary now, but he
> > answers to the corporations. . . . . we just need
> > to to replace "the corportaions" with "the citizenry".
>
>
>
> yep. this will be the true civil war of the future:
> coporations vs. citizens.

Corporations, even yours (Tonalsoft), can't survive for long without
the citizens (or occasionally governments, admittedly) who buy their
products. So no. It'll take much more than mere citizens -- it'll
take unusually conscious citizens who are willing to reverse the
clock on the many evil aspects of economic "growth" and
technological "progress". I got a rare glimpse of such a citizenry at
the Kerrville Folk Festival, where the sign at the entrance says "It
Can Be This Way Always". This type of consciousness is still a small
minority among our citizenry, most of whom are out buying SUVs and
such. I'm hoping it will grow to be a majority. And if it does, by
some miracle, many of the "evil" corporations (not yours, of course)
will simply shrivel up. Their managements and employees will simply
have to find something else to do. That's the beauty of the market.
No need or cause for war at all. Just consciousness. Unfortunately,
lazy gluttony and indifference seems far more prevalent than
consciousness these days.

On Friday 11 June 2004 05:48 pm, Paul Erlich wrote:
> --- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:
> > hi Chris,
> >
> >
> > --- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, Christopher Bailey <chris@m...>
> >
> > wrote:
> > > Folks, we should be trying to build a society where
> > > the guy "on top" is largely honorary, simply answering
> > > to the bottom-up voice of the collective citizenry.
> > > Of course, the guy "on top" IS honorary now, but he
> > > answers to the corporations. . . . . we just need
> > > to to replace "the corportaions" with "the citizenry".
> >
> > yep. this will be the true civil war of the future:
> > coporations vs. citizens.
>
> Corporations, even yours (Tonalsoft), can't survive for long without
> the citizens (or occasionally governments, admittedly) who buy their
> products. So no. It'll take much more than mere citizens -- it'll
> take unusually conscious citizens who are willing to reverse the
> clock on the many evil aspects of economic "growth" and
> technological "progress". I got a rare glimpse of such a citizenry at
> the Kerrville Folk Festival, where the sign at the entrance says "It
> Can Be This Way Always".

Paul, that's a great slogan, and a great experience !!!!

BTW, I didn't realize you liked folk music. In fact, I'm a memeber of an Irish
group (part time) called the 'Kiltartan Road ensemble'.

They are not xentonal Irish though ;)

Best,
Aaron Krister Johnson
http://www.dividebypi.com
http://www.akjmusic.com

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron K. Johnson" <akjmicro@c...>
wrote:
> On Friday 11 June 2004 05:48 pm, Paul Erlich wrote:
> > --- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:
> > > hi Chris,
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, Christopher Bailey
<chris@m...>
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > Folks, we should be trying to build a society where
> > > > the guy "on top" is largely honorary, simply answering
> > > > to the bottom-up voice of the collective citizenry.
> > > > Of course, the guy "on top" IS honorary now, but he
> > > > answers to the corporations. . . . . we just need
> > > > to to replace "the corportaions" with "the citizenry".
> > >
> > > yep. this will be the true civil war of the future:
> > > coporations vs. citizens.
> >
> > Corporations, even yours (Tonalsoft), can't survive for long
without
> > the citizens (or occasionally governments, admittedly) who buy
their
> > products. So no. It'll take much more than mere citizens -- it'll
> > take unusually conscious citizens who are willing to reverse the
> > clock on the many evil aspects of economic "growth" and
> > technological "progress". I got a rare glimpse of such a
citizenry at
> > the Kerrville Folk Festival, where the sign at the entrance
says "It
> > Can Be This Way Always".
>
> Paul, that's a great slogan, and a great experience !!!!
>
> BTW, I didn't realize you liked folk music.

Well . . . I play it (professionally) more than I listen to it. I
always sound good on it because the chord progressions are so simple -
- always know where things are going to resolve, so it's really easy
to weave nice solos into it. But what I really got from the festival
is that you have to really listen to the *lyrics*, the chord
progressions and stuff serve an auxillary function at best.

> In fact, I'm a memeber of an Irish
> group (part time) called the 'Kiltartan Road ensemble'.

Cool!

a few weeks ago Carl and i were discussing the
possibility of a future without government. in
another thread, i wrote:

/metatuning/topicId_7346.html#7360

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:

> for the last century, human society has been undergoing
> a painful evolution into a larger planet-wide organism,
> similar to the way single-celled organisms long ago learned
> how to live together symbiotically in multi-celled organism.
>
> of course, this is something that most citizens will
> probably try to resist, particularly in a place like
> America which values individual freedom so highly ...
> or at least i think it still does ... hard to tell
> these days.
>
> but the planet-wide reorganziation of humanity is
> already well under way, and the corporations are
> leading the way so far.

people will gladly submit to being single cells of
a larger organism -- chess pieces, if you will -- if
it is generally felt by all, that the humble folk
(which always make the majority of the population)
have played a major part in creating the rules of the game.

currently, it is generally felt by a lot of people
(and i would say, correctly), that a bunch of
unintelligent, greedy, power-hungry, and self-centered
rich folk are calling the shots.

there's going to be a lot of resistance to that,
from people all over the planet.

-monz

>>for the last century, human society has been undergoing
>>a painful evolution into a larger planet-wide organism,

I can't think of any way to support this statement
historically. Globalization has been going on for a long
time -- there's nothing special about the last 100 years.

> > but the planet-wide reorganziation of humanity is
> > already well under way, and the corporations are
> > leading the way so far.

I think corporations are a pretty good model for
doing this.

> people will gladly submit to being single cells of
> a larger organism -- chess pieces, if you will -- if
> it is generally felt by all, that the humble folk
> (which always make the majority of the population)
> have played a major part in creating the rules of the
> game.

Not me man. Fight to the death, I will!

> currently, it is generally felt by a lot of people
> (and i would say, correctly), that a bunch of
> unintelligent, greedy, power-hungry, and self-centered
> rich folk are calling the shots.

I don't think that at all. Power comes at the cost
of freedom. One again, I do not think this hierarchical
view of social behavior is valid.

-Carl

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@y...> wrote:

> >>for the last century, human society has been undergoing
> >>a painful evolution into a larger planet-wide organism,
>
> I can't think of any way to support this statement
> historically. Globalization has been going on for a long
> time -- there's nothing special about the last 100 years.

In the last 100 years we've certainly come much closer, metaphors
about organisms aside, from a sitation where we have a number of
distinct societies in connection, to having a single, global human
society.

Aristotle was the first to point out that man is a social animal, but
the point remains true. Outside of the insects, humans are the only
species which creates societies of extreme complexity. The hive (a
better analogy than a multi-cell organism) does indeed seem to be in
the process of merging into one; compare Europe a hundred years ago to
Europe today, and it may be the pattern for the next hundred years for
the world as a whole.

Of course, we never really know. Maybe the so-called sigularity will
actually arrive. Maybe the wars over transgenic humans will tear us
apart, maybe global warming will become too big a headache, maybe a
lot of things.

> > people will gladly submit to being single cells of
> > a larger organism -- chess pieces, if you will -- if
> > it is generally felt by all, that the humble folk
> > (which always make the majority of the population)
> > have played a major part in creating the rules of the
> > game.
>
> Not me man. Fight to the death, I will!

Man is a social animal. This includes you. You are already in the
game, so you may as well try to influence it to your liking.

> > >>for the last century, human society has been undergoing
> > >>a painful evolution into a larger planet-wide organism,
> >
> > I can't think of any way to support this statement
> > historically. Globalization has been going on for a long
> > time -- there's nothing special about the last 100 years.
>
> In the last 100 years we've certainly come much closer,
> metaphors about organisms aside, from a sitation where we
> have a number of distinct societies in connection, to
> having a single, global human society.

Much progress was also made in the period from 1400-1500.

> > > people will gladly submit to being single cells of
> > > a larger organism -- chess pieces, if you will -- if
> > > it is generally felt by all, that the humble folk
> > > (which always make the majority of the population)
> > > have played a major part in creating the rules of the
> > > game.
> >
> > Not me man. Fight to the death, I will!
>
> Man is a social animal. This includes you. You are already
> in the game, so you may as well try to influence it to your
> liking.

I do, I do.

-Carl

Carl,

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@y...> wrote:
> Not me man. Fight to the death, I will!

I'm just curious as to what you actually mean. Whenever anyone else
brings up activism or action, your idea of it seems to mainly be to
type stuff out on your computer.

Just what *would* you do to preserve your individual liberty? And
would you fight to the same degree, and with the same conviction, for
other peoples liberties, or just your own?

Cheers,
Jon

> I'm just curious as to what you actually mean. Whenever
> anyone else brings up activism or action, your idea of
> it seems to mainly be to type stuff out on your computer.

Whatevuh. But, the pen is mightier than the sword...

> Just what *would* you do to preserve your individual
> liberty? And would you fight to the same degree, and
> with the same conviction, for other peoples liberties,
> or just your own?

Just what kind of question is this? I'm sure it would
depend on the particular circumstance.

-Carl

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@y...> wrote:
> Whatevuh. But, the pen is mightier than the sword...

On the assumption that the pen has something meaningful to write.

> Just what kind of question is this? I'm sure it would
> depend on the particular circumstance.

Joe wrote:
> people will gladly submit to being single cells of
> a larger organism

You wrote:

> Not me man. Fight to the death, I will!

Just what did you mean?

Cheers,
Jon

P.S. Sidenote: had dinner with a former student who is a drummer in
NY, who uses a practice studio near the Ed Sullivan Theatre (home of
the Letterman show). He told me that on daily walks to the studio he
noticed one day some steel beams installed under the marquee, and
couldn't figure it out. Then he saw that Phish was playing on top of
the marquee (including a B-3) and it all made sense!