i***@yahoo.com
2005-02-12 02:23:26 UTC
The doctrine of Communism was based on a single premise: Historical
inevitability. That premise is of course wrong. Bush, among others,
has shown that it is possible to use one's own choice to break any
historical pattern or precedent and deliberately direct the course of
history, rather than being directed by history like an overgrown ape.
The implementation of Communism was of course completely inconsistent
with Marxian theory. A Lenin, a Mao or a Castro who uses deliberate
action to bring about an outcome that is supposedly historically
inevitable is not letting the course of history take its course, but
is acting deliberately to make it happen. Now if you are acting
deliberately, then you are not acting according to historical
inevitability; and if you believe in historical inevitability then you
can only harm your cause by jumping the gun and using your own powers
to bring about what should come naturally without your assistance.
In my studies as an economics major, I saw this frequent scenario: An
economist discovers a pattern; and in the years that follow the pattern
ceases to exist. This happened at a far greater rate than chance, and
while someone may say that there are patterns in chaos which are
ephemeral, it would stand to be predicted that at least some of the
patterns discovered would persist for a couple years after their
discovery, rather than disappearing in every case immediately once they
have been spotted.
In my meditations in spring 2000, I discovered something very similar.
Every time I apprehended and verbalized a pattern in the consciousness
of another person or in the cultural consciousness, it ceased to exist.
This leads me to believe that the forces at work are the same in both
cases: That whatever the source of patterns, demands absolute freedom,
and any time it is apprehended the source has to change forms in order
to remain in existence.
This is of course quite similar to quantum mechanics. The process of
observing the electron demands using a photon to see its place and
speed; and as the photon is sent at the electron, the electron is
bumped
and changes speed and position. It seems to me that at this level - at
the
level of meditative mind, at the level of social and economical
patterns,
at the level of oceanic (Dionysian) universality - something similar
takes place. The act of observing a social, economic or
consciousness-level pattern
and
putting it into words either sends mental energy at it that forces it
to
change form or direction, or else the pattern-making chaos demands
absolute
liberty and mystery and, once observed, morphs into something else.
I can fathom both scenarios. It most certainly has been my experience
that whenever someone predicts something outright, a large number of
people (including myself) seek to prove them wrong; and if it is
something positive, then there is still something inside of me wanting
to prove them wrong if only to assert my authority over my life. So I
have two possible explanation for the aforementioned phenomena: One,
that observing social, economic and consciousness patterns changes them
at the quantum level; and two, that when forces of Dionysian
universality are observed and articulated they seek to regain mystery
and control by morphing into something else.
Which one it is - or both - I do not yet know. I do know, for example,
that when I sought out the essences through meditation - when I
approached not intending to dissect but rather simply approached and
listened to infinity - I was given insight I had not possessed
previously. And what I also found was this: That the wisdom and
knowledge that dwelled at that level was infinite; that it kept
emanating existents and patterns and attributes and never in its
creativity came to a halt. And to attempt to understand it logically
was similar to attempting to map the patterns in ocean using Euclidian
geometry.
So to people who claim that there is such a thing as historical
inevitability, I say: Not only does man possess power to change history
deliberately, but that furthermore any attempt to deliberately bring
about an outcome regarded to be historically inevitable is in violation
of the premise of the theory. And, as I've seen both from economics and
from consciousness studies and spirituality, the universe refuses to be
predicted or even patterned; and, once a pattern is discovered, it
ceases to be. The concept of free will and the concept of inevitability
are mutually contradictory, and if a person truly believes in Marxism
then he must not try to deliberately bring it about. And if a person
seeks to impose logic and control on the chaos and the oceanic, the
quantum dynamics of change through observation (or the dynamics of
universe seeking to remain mysterious and uncontrolled) will frustrate
him again and again.
Ilya Shambat.
inevitability. That premise is of course wrong. Bush, among others,
has shown that it is possible to use one's own choice to break any
historical pattern or precedent and deliberately direct the course of
history, rather than being directed by history like an overgrown ape.
The implementation of Communism was of course completely inconsistent
with Marxian theory. A Lenin, a Mao or a Castro who uses deliberate
action to bring about an outcome that is supposedly historically
inevitable is not letting the course of history take its course, but
is acting deliberately to make it happen. Now if you are acting
deliberately, then you are not acting according to historical
inevitability; and if you believe in historical inevitability then you
can only harm your cause by jumping the gun and using your own powers
to bring about what should come naturally without your assistance.
In my studies as an economics major, I saw this frequent scenario: An
economist discovers a pattern; and in the years that follow the pattern
ceases to exist. This happened at a far greater rate than chance, and
while someone may say that there are patterns in chaos which are
ephemeral, it would stand to be predicted that at least some of the
patterns discovered would persist for a couple years after their
discovery, rather than disappearing in every case immediately once they
have been spotted.
In my meditations in spring 2000, I discovered something very similar.
Every time I apprehended and verbalized a pattern in the consciousness
of another person or in the cultural consciousness, it ceased to exist.
This leads me to believe that the forces at work are the same in both
cases: That whatever the source of patterns, demands absolute freedom,
and any time it is apprehended the source has to change forms in order
to remain in existence.
This is of course quite similar to quantum mechanics. The process of
observing the electron demands using a photon to see its place and
speed; and as the photon is sent at the electron, the electron is
bumped
and changes speed and position. It seems to me that at this level - at
the
level of meditative mind, at the level of social and economical
patterns,
at the level of oceanic (Dionysian) universality - something similar
takes place. The act of observing a social, economic or
consciousness-level pattern
and
putting it into words either sends mental energy at it that forces it
to
change form or direction, or else the pattern-making chaos demands
absolute
liberty and mystery and, once observed, morphs into something else.
I can fathom both scenarios. It most certainly has been my experience
that whenever someone predicts something outright, a large number of
people (including myself) seek to prove them wrong; and if it is
something positive, then there is still something inside of me wanting
to prove them wrong if only to assert my authority over my life. So I
have two possible explanation for the aforementioned phenomena: One,
that observing social, economic and consciousness patterns changes them
at the quantum level; and two, that when forces of Dionysian
universality are observed and articulated they seek to regain mystery
and control by morphing into something else.
Which one it is - or both - I do not yet know. I do know, for example,
that when I sought out the essences through meditation - when I
approached not intending to dissect but rather simply approached and
listened to infinity - I was given insight I had not possessed
previously. And what I also found was this: That the wisdom and
knowledge that dwelled at that level was infinite; that it kept
emanating existents and patterns and attributes and never in its
creativity came to a halt. And to attempt to understand it logically
was similar to attempting to map the patterns in ocean using Euclidian
geometry.
So to people who claim that there is such a thing as historical
inevitability, I say: Not only does man possess power to change history
deliberately, but that furthermore any attempt to deliberately bring
about an outcome regarded to be historically inevitable is in violation
of the premise of the theory. And, as I've seen both from economics and
from consciousness studies and spirituality, the universe refuses to be
predicted or even patterned; and, once a pattern is discovered, it
ceases to be. The concept of free will and the concept of inevitability
are mutually contradictory, and if a person truly believes in Marxism
then he must not try to deliberately bring it about. And if a person
seeks to impose logic and control on the chaos and the oceanic, the
quantum dynamics of change through observation (or the dynamics of
universe seeking to remain mysterious and uncontrolled) will frustrate
him again and again.
Ilya Shambat.