Jan Cox Talk 0389

All Victories Are Honorable

PREVNEXT


September 7, 1988
Video = None on youtube
AKS/News Item Gallery = jcap 1988-09-05 (0389)
Condensed AKS/News Items = See Below
Summary = See Below
Excursion / Task = See Below
Diagrams = tbd
Transcript = See Below
Keywords = The Binary Split;


Summary

Jan Cox Talk 0389   1988-09-07
Notes by EHW

Kyroots read by KG and Rick M.
Two Talks by Group members DebH and Rick H
Task = How Far

A continuation of Talk 0388. Begins with a string of Kyroots: including 1)… If you have to paint yourself Green, then you are not the Incredible Hulk. 2) … just because you know what you are doing in general doesn’t mean you know what you are doing in particular. 3) …the by-products are the Products.
(Diagram of the Binary Split)

The Continual Binary Split As Not Simple: Jan’s extended Talk of a Binary Split of alternatives, representing growth and non-growth in the City World of binary consciousness. An indication of the relativity of this Split: It is not simply a person making a proper evolutionary or a devolutionary move; it also represents a basis of radicalized viewpoints between the Indians and the Settlers; Indians believing that Settlers are ruining their neighborhood and vice versa. It would take an extended, 4D view of the continuing Consciousness of Time, to allow you any suspicion as to how any particular action or circumstance was going to play out in the long range view of evolutionary Life.

(8:51) Some examples might appear obvious at the moment; that some people involved in some event/action are going to be crushed or that beautiful trees are going to be cut down for a parking lot, but this is never the whole view. It’s not just down to the level of C & D, as the apparent two dancers. There are also “notions” embedded in belief systems of all parties that appear to complicate judgments: For instance, throughout history, such notions as “Honorable Victories” suggest their opposites, the notion of “Dis-honorable Victories.” ( I.e , winning by means not Kosher, acceptable or honorable in terms of the set standards of the groups in question.)

10:58
In The Revolution there is No Such Thing As Dis-Honorable Victory: In The City there is the idea of “Conscience” that is tied to simple manifestations of the Binary Split, as to whether some action or the other is going to be growth conducive to Life or otherwise. This attempt can be expressed religiously, culturally, racially, moralistically etc. This is the City effort to condemn what is not honorable: Victories and triumphs can be felt to be good or bad: (12:04 ) examples of people winning by cheating, athletic events where substances are taken to give an advantage, in warfare, people not honoring the Geneva Convention etc. Wired into humanity is this constant judgement call as to what are honorable vs dis-honorable possibilities.

(12:58) IN THE REVOLUTION, however, once you get your nervous system “ignited,” you no longer have such questions as to honorable vs dis-honorable victories. There is no such thing. You would be in the 4th dimension and “dis-honorable victory” would be an impossibility. An oxymoron.

There is a kind of Absolute Certainty based within this larger level of Understanding.
(15:45) Humanity progressing, Going Uphill: In ordinary consciousness you can’t see this as you still do not have a continual awareness of Time as the Seamless Backdrop to Everything. If you did (have this awareness) there would be no question as to whether individual instant behavior and affairs in The City, are leading toward more or less conducive lines of Growth on the Binary Split. This would be a 4D view. But as humanity cannot yet operate here, in 4D, lower binary levels produce illusionary mental constructs of frontiers, contours and episodic thinking. (17:21) This is like a fractured clock. Every “tick” and every “tock” is a new episode. It’s like a single frame in a piece of film-strip, being singled out to represent a whole film. In the City, this chopped up thinking and the attempt to make meanings of it result in billions of perceptions, all of which mean next to nothing.
A Continuing Cry Within Humanity That Men Are Too Violent: (20:29) People are forever concerned, century after century that our next generation, our children, will not live through this (violence.) Based on this Cry there is a continuing apparent confusion in Mankind, asking how humanity can tolerate and support seemingly senseless wars. This Cry represents the Big Sticky Junction in the Binary Split: (22:17) This is the basis of what Wars are: whether it’s a war going on, outside in the larger complex of Life or inside, in the complex of the individual, both can be realized as the continual Binary Split in operation. (22:25) The Greek wars, WWI, WWII, etc.etc., indicate that the big binary split is always going on. It’s how Life Grows. Yet it looks like insanity.

It looks useless and dangerous to us all… (24:49) But it’s not. It’s no more dangerous than you deciding to have another cigarette or another martini or another piece of pizza. It is a choice demanding to be made.

Inside A Person Doing This Thing: (27:33) there is always a similar situation. And yet The True Revolutionary will understand that any Victory within the Work Directive is always Honorable. You will know “I am at that juncture.” It is no longer a question or having to check with Jan, or your Rabbi or your Priest; you will know which choice or Line is conducive to Growth. (28:52) Taking the Line that takes Effort is always the “honorable” course.
(31:11) Kyroot tells the story of the Father and the kid: the “I don’t ever, Ever, want to hear any of your personal problems.” The nipper is rejoicing, astonished at the Teaching of a Life time, told in so few words.(32:16) Jan admonishes the still low level “problems” brought to him by his students. These little “problems” are not a True Battle ( which is the inevitability of struggling with Real Growth.) In the Bushes, you must see these small problems as wasteful. The little struggles are of no serious consequence as they are part of a built-in tension. 
(31:07) In the City, people struggle against change. They are struggling, unbeknownst to them, against the inevitability of change, and thus are always disturbed. (34:07) That struggle, that impetus, can be seen as fertilizer, as part of the change itself. If you are trying to get your vehicle to go in another direction, however, if you are trying to make your vehicle fly ( as would a Revolutionist) then you cannot continue to waste your time in that which is irrelevant.
(35:50) At 4D level, your personal problems are this irrelevance. City people may see this continual “personal problem” thing as having to make constant decisions in Life. The idea of Paradise, might be conceived as a place where one will never have to make another decision. (40:48) In such a Paradise idea, there may be imagined that only people of a certain caliber will be allowed in, thus “my group” will not have to put up with a lower or “Evil” group. I will therefore not have to make decisions, I will just submit to the Right God. (42:28) 
(44:35) When the would-be-Revolutionist reaches the point of making decisions for himself/herself, they will see that anything that takes effort, when you get outside the hold of 3D consciousness, will never be a dis-honorable victory. In 4D you cannot do anything that is not conducive to Growth. Examples of a couple involved in the Work, when seeming difficulties come up: it must be realized that Real Growth never harms anyone else. Events/situations can feel like the sensation of harm, as they involve the inevitable struggle for growth, but in reality they are not harmful. In a 3D relationship, in the beginning of a break-up, the dance has changed.

The balance between the partners has shifted.(47:23) A molecular fact has occurred. One partner sees something conducive to growth and the other partner doesn’t. To someone tied to City consciousness, they can feel the break-up as other than honorable. (50:01) From 4D point of view, however, no matter how it looks, what you do is never to hurt anyone. (54:12) Change is not possible without hurting someone. On one part of the binary split, someone gets energy while the other part is depleted of energy. (55:19) Every choice you make hurts someone. Growth hurts and someone has got to pay. If you are alive, you are hurting someone. You can’t step aside from “the game” of this continual juncture point of the binary split. (58:54) Humanities Institutions, be they religious, governmental, constitution-making etc., arise out of man’s desire that Someone else make choices for him that he/she feels uncertain to make independently; “morally correct” choices. 

Institutions then devise the motto,the schematic, the “song” that addresses the “Sorry state of Man.” (1:00:29) The “Original Sin” is devised to show Man as weak, as lazy. Yet, his “gods” are inclined, mechanically, to peruse the “D” line in the binary split. They have been created on the basis that “poof” they were here, from outside the System, and you can’t have gods outside the system. (1:03:42) These gods that show up in this “poof” manner can be found in back-stories of all the religious founders. They all point to The Sorry State of Man, and then they say BUT, there is hope; there is help, there is salvation. To the Revolutionist, however, outside the City Consciousness, this BUT is not an answer to anything. “BUT” is what always promises to be “The Answer.”

Whether it’s religious, economic or political, etc., the “BUT” shows up to explain. Back to the Old Father giving advise to the kipper, (1:06) the child is given a 2nd lesson: ” Do you Understand, you are never to say “BUT…” To your Father? All of these “BUTS” we use are preludes to taking the “D” line. A “BUT” therefore is not an honorable victory…
All attempts at explanation as to why a person takes the lesser of the 2 possibilities, is hedged with a “BUT.” An honorable act requires no statement. You don’t have to defend an honorable act. 

(1:17:00) sketches from two group members:
1) What’s The Point? The film The Last Temptation used as example. Energies are exchanged, but you have to be able to Hear them. (By DebH.)
2) Molecular energy flow between people discussed. The Noise detected in electronic systems and the possibility of a correlation with the human brain system. (By RickH.)

Excursion

TASK: For NP
The 3 questions of How Far? Jan asks us to ponder: 1) How Far do you think you are from being straight forward with THIS? 2) How Far do you think you are from being straight forward with Jan? 3) How Far do you think you are from being straight forward with YOU?

And Kyroot Said…

In the city proficiency doesn’t mean much.

***

What could be sadder than the passing of the third floor.

***

Some of the great minds who ever lived seldom used the
letter “G.” Some of the really great ones seldom used words with
more than two syllables. And some of the super-duper greats
seldom evered.

***

City critics bemoan the lack of integrity amongst the
powerful, but their so-called “integrity” would be anathema to
those who seek such control. A ruler with integrity would be a
race horse with five legs.

***

“Listen,” said the voice, “I got something important to tell
you… and that’s why I’m not going to say anything.”

***

I ran across a tome in the City entitled, “The Philosophy
of Physics,” and damn if they haven’t gotten their words reversed
again.

***

One guy in the City said, “I feel like I live in the Eastern
Time Zone, and my brain in the Pacific.”

***

In the dear ole City you can count on this little piece-of-
business: A Man who doesn’t believe himself superior to others,
ain’t. Out in the Bushes this is not simply reversed, this is
simply hilarious.

***

Sometimes, just before sunrise, over a rusty, dusty City
sky, a keen eye can clearly see that the by-products ARE the
products.

***

Behold the optimistic, though dazed, City thinker who
declared, “What we must now do is introduce some stable form of
morality into the world of mathematics. Men made equations, Men
can solve them.”

***

Don’t forget: If you gotta PAINT yourself green you’re NOT
the Incredible Hulk. (Some of you who still dream of flying
probably shouldn’t have a plane. Most of you who still dream of
smoothing out the routine lumps and bumps of everyday life should
probably have a planer.)

***

Two guys had been kidding around, laughing at various
aspects of Man and mortal existence, and one became thoughtful
for a moment, and said, “You know, if life was as funny as we
make it out to be we’d be in a world of trouble.” He thought a
moment more and added, “Hell, it IS.”

***

Useful motto for the East Sector of the City: Just because
you know what you’re doing in general doesn’t mean you know what
you’re doing in particular. (For the West Sector just reverse.)

***

What this City needs is a darn good book of adjectives.

***

Should Men now adopt as a new rule-of-conduct the idea that
we should always be a little louder than is actually necessary?

***

One City poet declared his purposes thusly, “All I ever
wanted to do was to show the people how truly sad and dreary were
their lives.” I’ll bet the people must have been rightly
overcome in their gratitude.

***

The most inconvenient thing about ordinary opinions is that
they cut off the view. Don’t be a post in the auditorium of
Life.

***

Pretentious City verse updated: An open heart, an open
mind, will bring friends from afar/ But nothing has the drawing
power of having an “open bar.”

***

History is just whatever Life SEZ it is.
***

To a Real Revolutionist, it’s ALL the same.

***

…and by unpopular demand, Kyroot epilogued: A
Revolutionist, who had never spoken to his offspring, one day
took the child by the shoulders and told him, “Look, I don’t EVER
wanna hear about your ‘personal problems’ — EVER!” And the
little heir exclaimed to his little self, “My god, what a
delicious, and all-revealing first instruction.”

***


Transcript

ALL VICTORIES ARE HONORABLE

Copyright (c) Jan M. Cox, 1988

Document: 389,  September 7, 1988

I’ll begin this evening by elaborating on a map I used several days ago, a very simple map. it contains the lines of your actions and has many branches, juncture points, where choices must be made.

Each choice you make sends you either in a direction of growth (for you and Life) or non-growth. And you can almost always sense which choice is which, and further, that the direction of non-growth is the path of least resistance, of habit. But remember the absolute relativity of these descriptions: it’s not simply growth and non-growth, not simply a person making a proper move at a given time, because recall how the Indians believed the Europeans were ruining the neighborhood. Of course, they did, from that viewpoint. But you can’t be limited to the view of the apparent participants, be they the Indians or the Europeans, or yourself and another in a particular dance. Rather you should try to have, at the very least, a four dimensional view, a continuing consciousness of time, before you’d view any particular action or circumstance as a part of a long range evolutionary or devolutionary line. Otherwise some action might appear obvious to you, at that moment, to not be in the best overall interest of fostering the growth of life, yet you’d be operating on insufficient data.

For example, if a construction company were paving over a lot for a future parking lot, some people might be heatedly disturbed by the assault on nature whereas others might be pleased that those ugly trees are finally being cut down for a much needed parking lot. Years later if the parking lot is no longer in use someone might say, “Will you look at the weeds overtaking this beautiful piece of asphalt?” Someone else may eventually buy the parking lot just to tear it up and allow nature to take it back over.

I’m not just referring to the C and D nature of two apparent dancers, but I wanted to slip in another angle on some of this. Consider the notion of honorable and dishonorable victories often talked of in the world of warfare and politics. It is a given in many parts of Life’s body that not only do honorable victories exist but also dishonorable victories, that is, winning by means less than cricket. In the Real Revolution there is no such thing as a dishonorable victory. To Life, and so to the Real Revolutionist, victory is victory regardless of the unpleasantness involved. All notions of morality in any guise are simply addressing the continual split between what growth is conducive to Life and what is not. Those who are condemned, be it on a religious, cultural or moralistic basis, are actually being condemned on the basis of behavior which is unprofitable to Life’s health. City consciousness believes there can be victories that are not honorable, that people can take advantage of the rules and be ungentlemanly in war (while attempting to rip each other’s guts out). Every victory is honorable: A dishonorable victory would be a true fourth dimensional oxymoron. You cannot have a triumph that is in any way questionable — not merely theoretically impossible, nor morally questionable — but not open to any kind of interpretation. It is literally impossible.

Life over the long range does what is conducive to growth, as do almost all of you along with the bell curve middle class. Discounting the city misfits, those on the extreme ends of the bell curve, people do what is conducive to the expansion of Life. One side effect, you might say, to this growth and expansion of humanity are the strong feelings people have that things are going downhill. Only those who have been exposed to This for some time can see that it’s obvious as dirt that things are otherwise.

Ordinary consciousness, which is, at best (on a warm and sunny day) two and a half D, cannot conceive of, let alone maintain, a continued awareness of time as a seamless backdrop to everything. If you did, there would be no question of whether individual behavior and affairs in the city are heading down a more or a less conducive line of growth. Since binary consciousness cannot continually remember time as a cycloramic backdrop, since it must think in frontiers, contours and episodes, one possibility is always being weighed against another. Like a fractured clock, the ordinary conception of time is, more or less, tic toc, tic toc, tic toc — as if things are moving right along. Every tic is an episode, and then the toc that seems to follow is another episode. As if consciousness were a series of frames in a movie; each frame doesn’t change much from the one before, but each is separate and different. Were consciousness operating in a more complex manner, you would be aware of time seamlessly, not focussing on one frame at a time nor attaching any special significance to apparent episodes.

Life drives people in the City to look at individual frames and explain their meaning. Witness to that is the fact that so many different people on the planet can look at one frame and you have hundreds, no thousands, how ’bout millions, how ’bout billions of interpretations. If you canvassed the entire planet to discern the meaning of one frame, you’ll find that one frame alone is going to tell you next to what?…Nothing!

This is another reason why history is not particularly satisfying or agreeable. A continuing cry is wired into humanity that men are too violent and something must be done about it: “If we don’t do something about it we’re going to kill ourselves.” That was uttered in Athens thousands of years ago, and just as it happens now, the people heard and said, “You’re right. Let’s only hope that our children won’t have to live in such a world.” There is a confusion, a great disturbance on peoples’ part, based on piecemeal eyesight. Those of the intelligentsia, who believe they have some compassion and perhaps a deep understanding of the spiritual side of man, especially cry out: “How can humanity continue to not only tolerate but apparently support wars — bloody, despicable, useless wars.” Quite literally, wars on a large scale represent the working out of a very complex juncture, a binary split. The juncture is more complex, of course, than what resides in any one individual. That is the basis of wars.

Just as you often feel that there are things you should be doing and decisions you must make, Life, too, has a continuing element of binary splits as well. In yourself you’ll notice that if you don’t do something about all those minor decisions then within five minutes you feel bored, as if you should be doing something. People outside of any warring factions, those in the E pool, always look upon the conflict as useless, dangerous and insane. “If they would just sit down and discuss it, if they would attempt to reason among themselves they’d be able to resolve the conflict. War is dangerous to us all.” War is no more dangerous to everybody than your eating another entire pizza before bedtime.

What I’m referring to is a particularly sticky split going on in Life’s body on a larger level that is absolutely incomprehensible to 3-D consciousness. That’s why war appears insane. There is no rational defense of war, and I’m not making one. I’m not attempting to in any way justify war because it needs no justification. That is why nobody can do it. That doesn’t stop them; people try and explain it in terms of economic pressures, internal racial and religious disputes, etc. But after the fact they still can’t explain war. It is a working out of a split and one direction will be more conducive on a grander scale to the growth of Life. It’s a sticky split, it’s as if things have gotta move, a decision has gotta be made but it’s not easily made. It even seems to go one way, then another: rumors of wars, tiny wars, threats of greater wars, one party backs off, both back off, one advances, and sometimes these bloody things called wars take place.

The same occurs inside of someone attempting This: occasionally only a kind of warfare is the proper decision. And when that happens you understand that any victory, any expended effort, is always honorable. When you’re capable of understanding the long range implications, the victory is never questionable or open to advice or interpretation. At that juncture it is not a question of first checking with your priest, rabbi, mother, the I Ching or channeled dead spirits. You understand that to go into a line more conducive to growth requires one inescapable thing — effort. To travel the other line not conducive to growth takes no effort at all. If you can take the course that requires effort, it doesn’t matter what kind of effort. You took the honorable course; you did what other people believe they must learn how to do. Victory is always honorable, because if you don’t make effort there is no victory at all, you did not win the war.

Everybody at City level feels a kind of internal warfare. In a sense ordinary people are engaged in a continuing battle with the inevitability of growth. It comes out as people feeling that they’re always missing a piece, that they have an itch and can’t find the right place to scratch, that they’re always hungry for answers they can’t find. All of you felt that before you found This, and at the ordinary level you still feel it. I’ve mentioned the story before about a father pulling his son aside to give him his first (and possibly his last) grand, glorious, delicious, all encompassing lesson. He told him, “I have one thing to tell you and that is, ‘I don’t ever, ever, ever, ever want to hear anything about your personal problems.'” And the little kid breaks into a major league smile — delightfully astounded by the breadth of such a lesson said in so few words. It just says it all. I don’t ever want to hear about your problems. You shouldn’t want to hear them. All controversies spring from the inevitability of growth whether they be, “I wonder what people think of me?” Or, “Can I ever right the wrongs I’ve done?” Or, “Should I cut my hair?” Or, “Should I change jobs?” — all those really important questions. None of that is a true battle in any revolutionary sense — it’s the built-in tension of being in the midst of struggle against the inevitability of change, unbeknown to you and everyone.

Do you understand what a waste that kind of struggle is for someone involved in This? In the City, such a struggle is fertilizer and impetus for mechanical change itself. But if you’re trying to get off the highway in hopes of driving that vehicle in another direction you need to make that automobile fly. And you can’t do that if you waste your time on that which is irrelevant. Don’t like irrelevant? How about impossible? .paDon’t like impossible? How about predictable? Or necessary? It’s all the same.

The father was telling his son that he never wanted to hear anything irrelevant or meaningless from him, and that his personal problems were just that. They can lead nowhere because they’re not problems. And since they are not problems they don’t have solutions. At the ordinary level, the juncture at the binary split is based on the belief that the continual “decision making I must do” is a direct output of “my personal problems.” I could probably get most city people to admit that their personal problems are synonymous with having to continually make decisions — small, big, mid-size — about all kinds of things. Should I end this relationship? Do I need to cut down on food? Should I go to bed earlier? Where can I borrow some money because I never should have used those credit cards? In fact, as an aside, man’s conception of paradise is a place where you’ll never be sick, everyone will be the ideal height and weight and all that, AND where you’ll never have to make another god damn decision!

Another aspect of the mythological and religious view of paradise is a place populated only by those who do good. You can, from another viewpoint, see that as the true, molecular, cellular basis of morality — doing good as that which is conducive to growth. Evil is not conducive to growth so those who do evil, by ordinary definition, those who lust, fornicate and steal will all be sent somewhere else like Cleveland or Detroit. Anyway, it is wired up into humans to feel that there is some way in which they can make more of the “right” decisions. And if you make mostly good decisions, then you’ll end up in heaven where you no longer have to make any decisions because they’ll be made for you. Everybody wants to submit, to dance backwards, and if you find the right dancing partner — the right president, preacher, guru — then you’ll do good. And, of course, if you end up in paradise (that is, find the right god) then you dance for eternity with the right guy and he makes all the decisions — you no longer have to make any!

I’m not inclined to say much more about honorable victory, but let it be clear that I’ve not been insinuating anything related to any City morality about honor. What I’m driving at is that you should not let anything interfere with your making proper effort in This. Once you get a feel for what assists your own growth, you’ll find that some of it may fly in the face of your wired up sensation of morality. As you know, I have never told any of you to do anything that could be called, even remotely, immoral, but some of the attitudes I say that a Revolutionist would have may sound uncivilized to you. Once you reach the point of Revolutionary action you’ll find there are no questions to ask or justification to seek, not from me or anyone. When you get in the bushes outside City limits, outside the hold of 3-D consciousness, there is no victory that is not honorable. It’s impossible to do anything conducive to growth that is questionable in any manner. Not moralistically, chauvinistically, jingoistically, nationalistically or _____istically. It’s impossible because growth never harms anybody else. It may harm their sensation of struggle with the inevitability of growth. For example, take a couple involved with This and, let’s say, there was no ban on excessive alcohol. If one of them realized that he no longer wanted to drink alcohol because it interfered with doing This it could be the beginning of the end of that relationship, if the other partner doesn’t like what transpires. The dance between them will perforce change with any change in the triad, and in this case, the partner who still drinks may come up with a variety of complaints. “You’re not the same person. I liked you better when you could loosen up with a few drinks in you, etc.” One person could apparently do good for himself and the other see it as destructive, perhaps to the point of “ruining their wonderful relationship.” Do you understand that this other person was not harmed even if they viewed the efforts of their partner as detrimental to the status quo? It was an honorable victory for the one who gave up the drinking and he knows it, he can feel it without any question. He also knows that his mate was not truly harmed, not in the tiniest bit, no matter what she may say.

Life cannot hurt people by doing that which is conducive to growth, but boy, does it ever seem otherwise to city consciousness. Speaking in toto, the feeling that Life is unjust is based upon the inability of ordinary consciousness to perceive all growth as honorable. If Life actually took into account each individual’s complaints about what it should and shouldn’t do it would self-destruct. If a person could say, “Wait a minute. Forget all this theoretical stuff about overall growth, you’re mashing my privates and stepping on my toes,” and Life went, “Oh you don’t like that. Okay, I’ll stop,” — it would be destructive. It seems to 3-D consciousness that your prayers were being answered, but in fact it would not be a satisfying solution of your problems.

The very act of growth requires that for every hospital built, cement is laid over grass. For every area of the planet that was newly explored a group of people were slaughtered or in some way absorbed. Change is not possible without hurting someone. This will sound harsh to ye of tender sensibilities, but, yes, even spiritual growth is not possible without hurting somebody. Think about it. Even those attempting to do good on the 3-D level are going to hurt someone. At the juncture point where the road ahead splits and you choose between two directions, the one you choose will receive your energies while the other is actually denied energy it might have had. When you decide not to eat that last piece of pizza it is denied the opportunity to be chemically transformed to a higher energy which would have happened if you ate it. It will of course eventually reach another level: it will be thrown out, eaten, or end up in the earth as we all do. But, at any given time, whatever the immediate choice you make, the line not infused with energy is hurt. Growth hurts. Somebody’s going to pay. You can’t step aside from the game, from this continual splitting at the juncture points. There’s nowhere to step to get aside from life, and it’s impossible to proceed in any direction that won’t hurt people. Part of the folly of 3-D consciousness is the notion that there are gods outside the system who can still, in some way, have an effect. It is not physically possible.

Let’s see if I can pull you slightly in another direction. Many city institutions, religion being the most identifiable example, seem to exist for the purpose of assisting humanity in making morally correct decisions; to point in directions conducive to individual growth or that will please the gods. (Remember, institutions such as the church are not just “out there,” they’re inside of your own wiring system.) The first thing these institutions do is detail the sorry state of man, how we’re all weak, lazy, touched by original sin, or as the case may be, original laziness. Such observations, by the way, simply point out the second rule of thermodynamics — we’re all inclined to cool off, everything is running down from a state of order to one of less order, everything alive is inclined to die. So when they say that man is weak and touched by original sin, all they’re saying is that man, like the mountains, worms and stars is inclined mechanically, molecularly and cellularly to pursue the D line, the line of least effort. Were they a little more conscious they could say it’s the sorry state of god because in most religions the story goes that god made man in his image. But you know the city — consciousness just won’t fool with that one.

What I was really trying to point out specifically regarding conventional institutions and religion is how they first point out the sorry state of man and then say BUT…salvation is available through the church. They say, BUT help is available if you become more civilized and humane. Here’s the kicker: Life has man aware of the fact that things are inclined to cool off and take the line of least resistance, while simultaneously telling him that he shouldn’t allow his own life to flow that way. It’s an aspect of the struggle against the inevitability of growth. On one hand man is told he’s in a sorry state, and on the other hand (BUT) help is available. Man is weak, sinful, etc. BUT, BUT, BUT…he could be otherwise.

To the Real Revolutionist who has freed himself from personal problems, “BUT” is not an answer to anything. It appears to consciousness that following the “BUT” is an answer, be it religious, political or economic. The answers are always inconclusive and no one is satisfied. “BUT” is not even the beginning of an answer to a Revolutionist. Do you understand that if you don’t have any problems, if you were the kid in the story who never told his father any of his problems, you would never have the occasion to use the word “BUT.” In fact, the second lesson the father could give the kid is to not use the word “BUT.” Without personal problems you could never have to explain yourself, offer excuses, give your story — and if you did none of those, you’d never have to say “BUT.” To give any excuse or explanation for the way things went in any situation is merely an excuse for not having a victory.

“BUT” is not the beginning of an attempted answer. The part of the sentence preceding it is the wrong assumption to begin with. In this case, the wrong assumption is that “we are all in a sorry state, we all have problems.” Next comes the BUT…but help is available, but I’ll try to do better, but I didn’t mean to, but I’m not always this weak. It is all a prelude to taking the D train. Any choice that needs to be explained to anybody, or that has the word “BUT” in it will be the least conducive to growth. Even if it seemed a victory of sorts it is not an honorable one. “I wanted the piece of pizza, then I thought I had already eaten enough. But, what the hell do I care. I’ll never pose for GQ anyway.”

When you do that which is less conducive to growth you’ve always got to comment on it, somewhere and in some way. That’s the basis of babble and why I keep apparently attacking useless talk, capricious talk, talk of any kind. Because most of it has “BUT” in the sentence somewhere, and it’s an attempted explanation as to why the person took the lesser of two possibilities. If you must explain or defend what you’ve done, you’ll use the word “BUT” which is no answer at all to a Real Revolutionist. An honorable act requires no defense.