da Visionary Report
join us for evolutions of radical’s radical sanity in process!




Projection champs and assumption-careerists beware

time is high for REMEMBERING our GREAT spirit’d




The character assasins and psychological genocidists will fire off their so-called “best”


while a few (?) o’ yOu –will realize the VALUE



for THIS LIFE and others,

practicing our “better bests”

for whichever QUEST or/and tests

may come on


(editor’s note: Oops, didn’t INTEND to post this on this blog rite here…. Hmmm. Well, i THOUGHT i was posting this on my newest blog! Ahhhhh, wellllllll! No desire to “hide” here, fellow human beings! (did PLAN to link to this site, but not rite now…..))

This is a big topic and i will be accepting writing as well as composing/writing my own posts and possibly illustrating them, either with art i’ve already done or something special just for here. It has been awhile since i have been writing any blogstuff so excuse me if i come off as being a little “off-kilter” (a curious word within itself!).

Off the top of my head, when i think of “care” and “decolonizing” together, i think of the following, almost immediately (what do you immediately come up with?) :

  • nuclearized families vs pre-colonized/tribal families
  • meaningful communities being systematically divided up and alienated
  • the shame that elder care has become
  • the shame of compulsory schooling and what passes as that sort of so-called “help”
  • the mistake of nuclearized parental care not seeing its folly until later in life
  • what passes as “normal” social relations in this u.s.a. society today
  • and how about, how i dare reflect my bests towards unsettlingamerica and decolonization communities in taking up this site name!

HOkay, so there’s some thinking to possibly inspire someone out there. Where-ever you may be.

A little bit more articulation may be needed, so such will likely come in time….

To all the directions i send this, my best.


(please note: the author only recently discovered, at age 50, that he apparently is more fully related to Indigenous folks from this general side of moM EartH than he previously thought; thus, the strength of spirit of that one-sixteenth seems to have inspired my other percentage of spirits of the last, what, 30-plus years?!!!! Tho it may well be that the two relatives that claim their grandfather told them this were in actuality “pulling my leg”; so let that be out in the open as well!)

(please also note that i am a solopathic ORrioR, and that means that most of the people i mention on this site are only known to me as, at best, acquaintances, but mostly they are strangers whose writings i have been DEEPLY inspired by and wish to SHARE, in order to INSPIRE ALL O da WREST o’ y’aLL!!!!!!!!! And of COURSE experience the REFLECTIONS of all o this!


Jared Diamond and two other authors are challenged in this indepth rebuttal posted on survivalinternational’s blog! See: exploding the myth of Indigenous folks as “brutal”, etc.


Survival exposes the ‘Brutal Savage’ myth by examining the recent work of some ‘popular science’ writers, who claim that tribal peoples live in a state of ‘chronic’ violence.

Steven Pinker (‘evolutionary psychologist’)

In The Better Angels of Our Nature (2011), Steven Pinker promotes a fictitious, colonialist image of a backward ‘Brutal Savage’, which pushes the debate on tribal peoples’ rights back over a century and is still used to justify their destruction. Read more about why Pinker’s ‘science’ is wrong.

Napoleon Chagnon (anthropologist)

Steven Pinker would arguably not have been able to reach the conclusions he does about tribal violence without the highly controversial work of a single anthropologist: Napoleon Chagnon studied the Yanomami tribe from the 1960s, calling them ‘The Fierce People’. But are the Yanomami really fierce?

Napoleon Chagnon’s view that the Yanomami are ‘sly, aggressive and intimidating’ and that they ‘live in a state of chronic warfare’ has been widely discredited. Nonetheless, both Diamond and Pinker’s conclusions about tribal violence rely heavily on his work.

Jared Diamond (geographer)

Jared Diamond’s 2012 book, The World Until Yesterday is ostensibly about what industrialized people (whom he calls ‘modern’) can learn from tribal peoples (he calls them ‘traditional’). His book, however, carries a false and dangerous message – that most tribes engage in constant warfare, both needing and welcoming state intervention to stop their violent behavior. Read more.


I’m really looking forward to what the new anti-authoritarian/anarchist journal “Modern Slavery” (modernslavery.calpress.org) will come up with, and have been trying to support Jason McQuinn’s project for awhile now. i have tons of respect for McQuinn thanks to all of his excellent editorial responses for many years in his old project, editing “Anarchy, A Journal of Desire Armed”!

Tho not wishing to identify “merely” as an anarchist, instead preferring a much broader “identity” (if i HAVE to have one!), one that is a little more creative and not so maligned so automatically in many peoples’ heads…(one old friend actually hung up on me and never spoke to me again when i mentioned the mag i thought he might enjoy reading back in the ’80s).

Anyway, my preferred “identity”/methodology? Span-archy, a.k.a. bridge-archy. The method (not ideology?) of seeking to promote and keep “poetic bridges” with the plethora of methods and “ways of doing things” out there.

Sometime i may get into this idea in more depth, but for now i’ll just leave you with that to think about! (anyway, my time is severely limited these days….)


Check this out, first:


VERY IMPORTANT read, and GOOD for passing around through your networks!

*(note: um, a little roughly written, sorry about that! Needs editing when i have the time!)*

Comments on the article:

Same Old Again, Inc. doing its work…i figure.

Question is, who funds these widely-circulated anti-Indigenous books, and how is it that they can get right up there in the mainstream circulation crowd fairly quickly, while other books remain languishing in the margins??? Do you have any idea?

i think i do, recalling Philip Agee and Ward Churchill (two authors who get pretty deep into the “shadow” government thing) discussing  “the patsy picked to…” publish on behalf of shadow government, making his writing appear to be independent. Who? One John Crewdson, a writer, whom for those who have woken up to the meta games of u.s./Western journalism games, was awarded the s0-called “prestigious” Pulitzer award, no doubt for his careful obedience to Western ideology.

The quote above is Agee speaking about this reality in his seminal book about some of the consequences of his whistle-blowing on the c.i.a., On The Run. While Ward Churchill wrote in his book Indians Are Us? (yes, i need to get specific pages, and have them in my notes somewhere)

Do compare and contrast, and let me know what you come up with, if you want.

The linked article goes over a wide variety of truths not being mentioned in Western media outlets, which should come as no surprise. Though, this time, the patsy picked (?) to push the same old bigotry and out-of-context truths is Jared Diamond.

As one who finds myself often engaging the strategically-challenged on Indigenous issues (and etcetera), i for one would like to know more about this Jared Diamond. Anyone know a good source to read?


In response to:


They show a map where the last freely living peoples reside. This is powerful truth.

And yet, what about all the rest of us? Are not each generation of young people, throughout so-called “civilization” tribal peoples not allowed to follow their intuitive tribal truths and desires?

To say this is to risk more, and yet to bridge more at the same time. Then we are not separate. We stand with each other!

We are all young people inside, as well. We all have the tribal intuitive within us (in our HEARTS). No matter what age. It’s just that the youngest young people are closer to that than us.

It’s a lot like Russell Means said of persons under “age 6” in one of his videos about matriarchy:

They are listened to. Because they are closer to their makers, and have not yet been fooled into forgetting! They have much to teach, even when they cannot yet articulate themselves in “mature” ways!


Not a direct quote, but the gist! (the below arte is a ghost spirit of this sentiment)



Posting this here because i see that an older reply of mine is “still awaiting moderation”….

In reply to:


GreeeeetiNgz! To all the grandmother people, i send this in all the directions! May the reflections i send out come back at me full force!!!!

Regarding the men who “take over” “normal” meeting space, self-imposed time limits, and all those other self-limitations:

Okay, i’m jumping full on into this Polar Bear chillish-feeling post as my reply style (watch out, it’s a canonballjump!), and many of you will have to see me as politically incorrect! (because you may not have any other box to throw me into)

First of all, imagine seeing people as “perfectly imperfect”. Imagine that human beings called “men” are CHAMPIONS of this reality, and so ARE YOU. Imagine that you need not get stuck in many mens’ competitive ways, and use more creative ways to touch their attention! (if you’re so called)

This is a decolonizing way of seeing and being, i think.

People called “men” are often flailing around in this world they are stuck in, or enslaved to. Usually. They need to flail.  i know because i have walked in those places many times.

So how does the creative intelligence of excellent womyn champions deal? i say, create ceremony! Create depth spectacle that they may be blown away by, where they can journey through. Ask to interview them! (be not afraid to stroke egos, if that’s what ya must call it!) Make short movies, letting them have the limelight, to help them get their hearts out! Help them, if you feel called, in a rotational way with your sistahhz! Don’t go it alone (unless you’re a real BADASS great spirit’d person!)(recalling womyn i’ve met who have hitch-hiked alone x-country, carrying brass knuckles!)

Create ceremony where YOU can be a part of it, also!

Stop falling back on the devoutly “normal” box (which is a europeonstuck way of doing things). Stuck? Stuck in getting caught up in differences rather than commonalities.

Of COURSE you ALREADY knew this! i’m just helping you remember!


Don’t take my wingnutty, “paranoid” view nakedly (heh), consider the following:

“Mongoven, Biscoe & Duchin, a PR firm known for its monitoring and infiltration of activist groups, claim to use a classic divide and rule strategy when working against grassroots campaigns. MB&D characterise activists as belonging to one of four categories: ‘radicals’, ‘opportunists’, ‘idealists’ and ‘realists’. Their three step strategy is to isolate the radicals, ‘cultivate’ the idealists and educate them into becoming realists and then to ‘educate’ the realists so that they agree with industry.”[95]

(quote from this link: http://www.corporatewatch.org/?lid=1573 )

And the main link that gives a really good looking larger synopsis of a very good book (especially good for demystification) is here (very well worth educating oneself on!) :

Corporate watch summarizing Sheldon and Rampton’s book Toxic Sludge Is Good For You

If you look over the main page there, look for this REALLY EXCELLENT comic (in pdf form) about the PR Industry: What’s Wrong With the Public Relations Industry – A Comic by Corporate Watch and Kate Evans
August 2010
web version | print version

(i’d link to it, but I don’t know how to…Best thing is to just go to the page “corporate watch reports” –http://www.corporatewatch.org/?lid=412 — and find the link)


In this light, I’ve long been labeled “a radical” that has to be kept isolated. Why? Because I systematically choose to demystify the war-perpetuating machinations of tyranny in many of its forms (have one you think I should think through? I’ll try!). And I dare stand with groups of people who are actively being misrepresented, and whom are NOT ALLOWED to be defended by anyone, much less a g’damn ARTIST with quite a talent! No ripe monetary rewards for THIS unsettling settler!

And, last but not least, I dare to walk out from the fold of devoutly normal settler norms!

Thus, this blog is kept isolated, as am I. And yet wingnuts like me, persist!

(Was just feeling like touching on this topic a little tonight. Maybe a more thorough exploration another time. Maybe. Don’t hold your breath)


Wasn’t sure if this post I made would remain up online, so thought I’d reproduce it here. This post is in reply to the blog post in the title, here:


(discussion invited!!!!)

ethicalartservice | February 12, 2014 at 18:22 | Reply

Okay, this is an idea in “progress”, okay? So please take it that way. I’m not sure I can fully articulate what i seek to “get at”.

The thing that jumped out at me most when I first read this was that it seems to me that many of the posts here tend to push a typical Politically Correct tone of “shame and guilt” orientation towards unsettling settler people, categorically. Unsettling, certainly, and a good thing to start out with. But if it is the only reaction we are going to find…? Then I understand your lack of actual participation, or such in more meaningful ways.

If, on the other hand, the approach was more about MUTUAL liberation, where unsettling settler people were able to be viewed as FELLOW champions of our mutual desires (with crucial attention paid to our past work, i.e. putting our lives on the line, as well as our mutual visions), you might find more desire to stand with you as equal human beings (though obviously poor in decolonial knowledge); and, I think, more solidarity. That’s my feeling, anyway.

For more insight into this thinking, you might try this link:
http://anarchy101.org/1312/what-are-some-definitive-post-left-texts See note 5 where “identity politics” is challenged with: critiquing identity politics insofar as it preserves victimization-enabled identities and social roles and inflicts guilt-induced paralysis, amongst others.” Guilt-induced paralysis, whoa. Maybe that’s the difficulty you all are having??

The MUTUAL bottom line, in my view, then becomes: Can diverse champions find meaningful community TOGETHER with you, or shall such forever remain in a subordinate role? Can our unique approach, based on our own trajectory be just as powerful? Can our unique method(s) also have equitable power?? Because, if all we’re apt to gain out of defense relations with you is assuaging our guilt complexes, well, only a trickle of those sorts of folks are likely to show up….

~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~

(ed’s note: My agreement with post-left anarchist critique does not mean i identify as an “anarchist”; i am more tending towards my own critical- ideological approach/self-theory which i call “bridge-archy”–the desire to metaphorically bridge with ALL human tendencies towards whichever ideology/non-ideology, via the portions of each which draw most to them!)

For further thought on this subject:

“Accepting the social role of victim—in whatever one of its many forms—is choosing to not even create one’s life for oneself or to explore one’s real relationships to the social structures. All of the partial liberation movements—feminism, gay liberation, racial liberation, workers’ movements and so on—define individuals in terms of their social roles. Because of this, these movements not only do not include a reversal of perspectives which breaks down social roles and allows individuals to create a praxis built on their own passions and desires; they actually work against such a reversal of perspective. The ‘liberation’ of a social role to which the individual remains subject.” (from wikipedia link, with a link that is old, and should be this one: http://anti-politics.org/feral-faun/ideology-of-victimization.html )

NOTE: It has come to my attention that there is a really good reply to feral faun’s quote and link above! Read it here, and see if we can start a new thread on this!:



The Great Transformation
by Karl Polanyi ; 1944, 1957
Pages 237-245

Apparently K. Polanyi is a conservative thinker. And yet there are some powerful insights to be found here, insights that seem to be sometimes independent of ideology to only one side of thinking, especially when it comes to capitalism! Especially interesting, I think, for those evolutionaries (not “revolutionaries”) who wish to make a qualitative escape from the traps of ideology, of forever-only-Left or Right-wing Eurocentric/colonial and neo-colonial ways of thinking and seeing! In that light, I wish to share this as “ammo” for increased critical consciousness! And invite dialog, as always!

Page 237:
“[Fascism] offered and escape from institutional deadlock which was essentially alike in a large number of countries…

“The fascist solution of the impasse reached by liberal capitalism can be described as a reform of market economy achieved at the price of the extirpation of all democratic institutions, both in the industrial and in the political realm. The economic system which was in peril of disruption would thus be revitalized, while the people themselves were subjected to a re-education designed to de-naturalize the individual and make him unable to function as the responsible unit of the body politic.”

(quotes himself, in “The Essence of Fascism” In [journal?] Christianity and the Social Revolution, 1935)

“This re-education, comprising the tenets of a political religion that denied the idea of the brotherhood of man in all its forms, was achieved through an act of mass conversion enforced against recalcitrants by scientific methods…

“The appearance of such a movement [in such a widespread way, not dependent on how ‘civilized’] should never have been ascribed to local causes, national mentalities, or historical backgrounds as was so consistently done by contemporaries. Facism had as little to do with the Great War as with the Versailles Treaty… The movement appeared in defeated countries like Bulgaria and in victorious ones like [Y]ugoslavia, in countries of Northern temperament…and of Southern temperament…in countries of Aryan race…and non-Aryan race…in countries of Catholic…and in protestant ones…in soldierly communities…and civilian ones…in old cultures…and in new ones. In fact there was no type of background…that made a country immune to fascism, once the conditions for its emergence were given. (237-238)

“…The very term ‘movement’ was misleading since it implied some kind of enrollment or personal participation in large numbers. If anything was characteristic of fascism it was its independence of such popular manifestations. Though usually aiming at a mass following, its potential strength was reckoned not by the numbers of adherents, but by the influence of the persons in high positions whose good will the fascist leaders possessed, and whose influence in the community could be counted upon to shelter them…thus taking the risks out of revolution.
“Hitler was eventually put in power by the feudalist clique around President Hindenburg, just as Mussolini and Primo de Rivera were ushered into office by their respective soveriegns…In no case was an actual revolution against constituted authority launched; fascist tactics were invaribly those of a sham rebellion arranged with the tacit approval of the authorities who pretended to have3 been over-whelmed by force.

[(note: with many patriotic soldiers no doubt “sacrificed”)]

“There were no accepted criteria of fascism, nor did it possess conventional tenets.Yet one significant feature of all its organized forms was the abruptness with which they appeared and faded out again…”

“…where a handful of scantily armed rebels were enabled to storm the supposedly impregnable strongholds of reaction, then the “fascist situation” was its complete parallel except for the fact that here the bulwarks of democracy and constitutional liberties were stormed and their defenses found wanting  in the same spectacular fashion. In Prussia, in July, 1932, the legal government of the Social Democrats, entrenched in the seat of legitimate power, capitulated to the mere threat of unconstitutional violence on the part of Herr [Franz?] von Papen. Some six months later Hitler possessed himself peacefully of the highest positions of power, whence he at once launched a revolutionary attack…To imagine that it was the strength of the movement which created situations such as these, and not to see that it was the situation that gave birth in this case to the movement, is to miss the outstanding lesson of the last decades.

“Fascism, like socialism, was rooted in a market society that refused to function. Hence, it was world-wide, catholic in scope…”

“Counterrevolutions were the usual backswing of the political pendulum towards a state of affairs that had been violently disturbed. Such moves have been typical in Europe at least since the English Commonwealth [(ed’s question: post-Roman invasion?)], and had but limited connection with the social processes of their time. In the [nineteen]twenties numerous situations of this kind developed…partly due to the backwash of defeat, not to the forward move of democracy. The job of counterrevolution was mainly political…The alliances and clashes of conservatives and fascists during this period concerned mainly the share [of the spoils]…Now, fascism was a revolutionary tendency directed as much against conservativism as against the competing force of socialism. That did not preclude the fascists from seeking power in the political field by offering their services to the counterrevolution. On the contrary, they claimed ascendancy chiefly by virtue of the alleged impotence of conservatism to accomplish that job, which was unavoidable if socialism was to be barred…[The conservatives] deprived the working-class parties of influence and power, without giving in to the nazi.

241: (…)
“[various nations able to keep fascism in limbo]…In Italy alone were the conservatives unable to restore work-discipline in industry without providing the fascists with a chance of gaining power.

I put the following quote in while thinking about One World Government consequences, here–ed:
“…in a world in which the only existing organization of international law, international order, and international peace rested on the balance of [allied?–ed] power, a number of countries had been made powerless without any intimation of the kind of system that would replace the old. …The nascent fascist movement put itself almost everywhere into the service of the national issue; it could hardly have survived without this “pick-up” job.

“Yet, [fascism of both a Left and Right nature?–ed] used this issue only as a stepping stone; at other times it struck the pacifist and isolationist note. In England and the United States it was allied with appeasement; in Austria the Heimwehr cooperated with sundry Catholic pacifists; and Catholic fascism was anti-nationalist, on principle. Huey Long needed no border conflict with Mississippi or Texas to launch his fascist movement from Baton Rouge…[Ed’s note: Huey Long was a Leftist/Populist, anti-banking, anti-rich “share the wealth” US Senator, assassinated in 1935, according to Wikipedia; thus the author putting him into such a category might be viewed as being labeled wrongly by Leftists, and yet what would anti-authoritarians say? And what would John T. Gatto, a critic of mass US education say about Long’s desire to expand educational institutions?]

“In its struggle for political power fascism is entirely free to disregard or to use local issues, at will. Its aim transcends the political and economic framework: it is social. It puts a political religion into the service of a degenerative process. In its rise it excludes only a very few emotions from its orchestra; yet once victorious it bars from the band wagon all but a very small group of motivations, though again extremely characteristic ones. Unless we distinguish closely between this pseudo intolerance on the road to power, we can hardly hope to understand the subtle but decisive difference between the sham-nationalism of some fascist movements during the revolution, and the specifically imperialistic nonnationalism which they developed after the revolution.”

[here cites H. Heymann, in <i>Plan for Permanent Peace</i>, 1941: Cf. Bruning’s letter of January 8th, 1940]
[discusses Bruning’s beliefs about his being put out by Hindenburg’s clique, but author says this seems immaterial…, citing H. Rauschning, <i>The Voice of Destruction</i>, 1940]

“Both in Germany and in Italy fascism could seize power only because it was able to use as its lever unsolved national issues…[a good portion left out here by ed].
“In reality, the part played by fascism was determined by one factor: the condition of the market system.

“During the period 1917-23 governments occasionally sought fascist help to restore the law: no more was needed to set the market system going. Fascism remained undeveloped.

“In the period 1924-29, when the restoration of the market system seemed ensured, fascism faded out as a political force altogether.
“After 1930 market economy was in a general crisis. Within a few years fascism was a world power.

“In the majority of countries the peasantry turned against the urban workers; in some countries fascist movements were started by officers and gentry, who gave a lead to the peasantry…

[(Ed’s note: today the peasantry might be viewed as marginalized rural people, including non-corporate mainline farmers?)]

“[Calling for law and order (“mooted”? [up for discussion–ed]), no question of radical reform raised, no sign of fascist revolution was apparent]:
 These movements were only fascist in form, that is to say only in so far as civilian bands, so-called irresponsible elements, made use of force and violence with the connivance of persons in authority. [Ed’s note: Political Correctness realities??]

“It was in the third period –after 1929– that the true significance of fascism became apparent. The deadlock of the market system was evident…It now emerged as an alternative solution of the problem of an industrial society.
“An adventitious but by no means accidental event started the destruction of the international system. …[Wall Street slump, Britain, and then USA going off gold standard, and Disarmament Conference ceased to meet, and in 1934 Germany withdrawing from the League of Nations]
“These symbolic events ushered in an epoch of spectacular change in the organization of the world.Three powers, Japan, Germany, and Italy, rebelled against the status quo and sabotaged the crumbling institutions of peace. At the same time the factual organization of world economy refused to function. [Etc…]

“Germany…fostered economic autarchy (??)…”

Goes on to discuss how Germany “easily managed to cammouflage her true intentions since neither Wall Street nor the City of London nor Geneva suspected that the nazis were actually banking on the final dissolution of nineteenth century [Eurocentric, colonial] economy. ...Illusions…survived in Downing Street up to the time of Munich and after.”

Economic history reveals that the emergence of national markets was in no way the result of the gradual and spontaneous emancipation of the economic sphere from government control.  On the contrary, the market has been the outcome of a conscious and often violent intervention on the part of government which imposed the market organization on society for noneconomic ends.”