AN AWARENESS TEST: So You Think You're Not a Robot?

WARNING: This blog entry may be difficult to digest. If you choose to read it, it could shake your world a little. Be sure to keep in mind that I am not sharing anything that, at some level, you do not already know. My intention is but to re-mind you that you have a choice. At all times. In every moment. The lessons is:  We are all robots.

 

We are all robots. That is, we are, none of us, behaving with the natural, God-given rights and freedoms with which we were born. We have all been conditioned to think, act, and believe in “norms” which are not natural to our human beingness. We are all the products of a prescribed, programmed “curriculum” which tries to create submissive, self-alienated, externally-motivated automatons.

            The most dehumanizing part of our robotic condition is the ignorance:  we are programmed to be unaware of our circumstances, of our choices, numbed by constant and unrelenting pressures into accepting our situation. If you wish to test this position, please take the following test.

 

 

SO YOU THINK YOU’RE NOT A ROBOT?

An Test of Awareness and Perception

 

Were you born speaking a language? No, you learned it in order to be able to communicate and interact with others, but you also learned it in order to fit in.

Do you own or drive a car? Is this the result of a biological survival need or is it a learned behavior?

Do you own a computer?

Do you live in a house or apartment?

Do you have a television?

Do you subscribe to cable?

Do you own an iPod?

Do you own a cell phone?

Do you use the Internet?

Do you own/use a dishwasher?

Do you own/use a dryer?

Do you own/use a microwave?

 

Do you use money?

Did you pay taxes last year?

Do you use banks?

Do you own any credit cards?

Do you wear clothes?

Do you buy new clothes?

Do you buy clothes seasonally?

Do you own/use more than one pair of shoes?

Do you take more than one shower per week?

Do you shampoo your hair more than once per week?

Do your clothes get laundered after one wearing?

Do you wear makeup?

Do you color your hair?

Do you shave your legs or armpits?

 

Do you visit a doctor annually?

Do you visit a dentist every six to nine months?

Do you believe a doctor necessary for the safe delivery of a baby?

Did you have your children immunized?

Do you use fluoridated toothpaste?

Do you subscribe to a trash pickup service?

Have you ever eaten at a “fast food” restaurant?

Have you ever eaten at a sit down restaurant?

Do you know the source and trail of your daily food?

Do you eat popcorn when you watch movies?

Have you watched more than one Super Bowl in your lifetime?

 

Do you call yourself “American”? Is this the result of a biological survival need or is it a learned behavior?

Do you believe you live in a democracy? Is this the result of a biological survival need or is it a learned behavior?

Did you vote in the last election? Is this the result of a biological survival need or is it a learned behavior?

Did you vote for either the Democratic or Republican parties?

Do you revere the American flag? Is this the result of a biological survival need or is it a learned behavior?

Do you believe that some wars are necessary? Is this the result of a biological survival need or is it a learned behavior?

Do you believe happiness is related to income? Is this the result of a biological survival need or is it a learned behavior?

Do you believe going to college is necessary to get a good job/big income?

Did you attend school/Do you send your children to school? Is this the result of a biological survival need or is it a learned behavior?

Do you feel as if someone or something else is in control of your life?

Do you have any compulsive, addictive, anxiety-based behaviors? Is this the result of a biological survival need or is it a learned behavior?

 

 If you have answered “yes” to any of the above questions, and “learned behavior” more often than “biological survival need,” then your conditioning has been successful:  your thoughts and behaviors have been shaped and modified; you are not fully living according to the freedoms and rights with which you were born. You are a product of a programming service called “acculturation,” “socialization,” and/or “western civilization.”

Who Is Teaching Our Kids?!

 A teacher who began the year, we thought, as an elementary substitute teacher in the K-12 charter school my daughters attend, was then brought in as a long-term sub for the algebra teacher during her pregnancy leave, and has now, mysteriously, moved into a more 'permanent' role, even with the return of the post-partum mom. Stories emanating from our daughters and their friends who have been or still are in this teacher's classes come in causing more and more alarm. We hear repeatedly about Mrs. M's proud boasting of her drug using younger days, about her choice to play rock and roll music ("Queen") during class, her hands off "let the book do the teaching" approach to teaching, and her hard-headed arrogance and unwillingness to work cooperatively or collaberatively with either her peers or her students.  

"I feel awful today but I can't miss school because Mrs. M won't let me turn in work late," announces our near-hysterical 15-year old Algebra One student, a normally all-A's student bent on getting the best grades possible so that she can get in to the best college possible. "I failed today's test and Mrs. M won't let me take it over, do a make up, or do any corrections for extra credit." And then, a few days later a 'progress report' comes home announcing her current grade: F. Then there are the numerous accounts of the copious amounts of junk food Mrs. M brings in for the kids--to win favor--which one teacher, Mrs. M's 'partner' in middle school math, claimed was undermining her own popularity among and enjoyment of her students. 

"My two friends, who are math wizzes and never get anything less than A's, now have Mrs. M for Algebra One and they were just informed that their third quarter grades are C's." And now the kicker: It turns out that Mrs. M 1) is a volunteer (working "out of the goodness of her heart"), 2) was, during the previous summer, the math tudor to the son of the school board president(who has already been accused of trying to micromanage the school, of strong-arming teachers, and of masterminding the Board's recent policies of distance, deceit, and deception), and 3) is the landlord to the school's current "interim" executive director. So what are her credentials? Is it legal for an unpaid volunteer to submit student grades? Shouldn't we parents get some kind of input or at least be informed on the kind of nutritional input our school and school representatives are offering our children? Volunteers are supposedly screened with a very thorough background check. Shouldn't we parents be alarmed about the daily presence and influence of a proud and boastful "former" drug user in the lives of our children? The most telling question I may ask of our school administrator is whether he and Mrs. M are sleeping together. Otherwise, I cannot for the life of me figure out why she is acting as a classroom teacher in a public school.  

The Mysterious Effect of Antonin Maniqui

Here follows an excerpt from the manuscript of Drew Fisher’s soon-to-be published novel, The Mysterious Effect of Antonin Maniqui. These ‘media reprints’ makeup the novel’s Prologue.

THE

MYSTERIOUS EFFECT

OF 

ANTONIN MANIQUI

A Novel

By Drew Fisher

PROLOGUE

(Reprinted from The New York Times Book Review, Sunday April 23, 2004.)

Rip Van Winkle Returns
Antonin Urlov Maniqui publishes his second novel after a 35-year absence.

MATURITY quells the emotional fires of youth while nurturing its corollary: resignation. Daily and yearly confrontation with reality causes idealism to give way to pragmatism, even cynicism. This is nowhere as evident as in the new novel by Antonin Urlov Maniqui, Ideas as Opiates, being released this month by Hestia Press. Known for his 1969 cult classic, Inc. (Charles Scrivener & Sons), Maniqui has returned to the narrative stage after an unexplained, Salinger-like, 35-year absence.
Leaping into the limelight with a best seller at age 34, Maniqui gave voice to the insecurities and dreams of the youth of the Sixties. He accomplished this with such insight and empathy that Inc. helped to spawn a generation of hip-talking, utopian-walking pop-fiction writers. Indeed, due to its historicity and universal appeal, the generations that have grown up since the Sixties have likely found Inc. on their teacher-assigned or friend-recommended reading lists.
The arrival of Ideas as Opiates comes with no little mystery and intrigue. One of the surprises is the fact that this is only Maniqui’s second publication. The sensitive novelist disappeared after a rather dynamic and well-publicized exit from the set of a television talk show in 1969. No one seems to have a clue as to what this talented wordsmith has been doing for the past 35 years. Immigration records show that Maniqui left the United States in 1969 and has never returned. Reliable sources maintain that he has assumed permanent residency in some Western European country, possibly Ireland. However, his exact whereabouts remain unknown.
In yet another curious twist in the Maniqui dossier, Ideas as Opiates is a sequel to Inc. Trever and Inc, the two hippie idealists who tread heavily in the eye of the hurricane that raged around them in 1969, are back to entertain us in 2001—or so we are lulled into believing. While all but the last chapter of Ideas appears to take place in the year 2001, the truth is—or so the author would have us believe—that the dynamic duo are traveling through space and time, choosing from a variety of time-locations in which to insert themselves for the sake of collecting experiences. With each entry into earth reality, the two are apparently subjected to a kind of amnesia, which is supposed to better enable them to more fully engage in the events of their immediate surroundings.
It seems that, according to Maniqui, life is like stepping into a movie role with each and every moment offering the actor-cum-student a multitude of choices as to ‘how to play the role.’ Each choice, then, presents any number of lessons, while at the same time setting into motion myriad consequences, each with its own particular chain reaction of linear repercussions.
Maniqui’s gift-wrapping of New Age ontology proves totally superfluous, which is disappointing, for his presentation of life in 2001 stands well enough on its own. As with Inc., Ideas presents a fast-paced, wonderfully witty yet thought provoking collection of social satire. If Maniqui’s intent with the final chapter is more to open the door for future installments of the travels and travails of his heroes, then he is forgiven. Maniqui’s style is so fresh and up-tempo that any contribution of the adventures of Inc and Trever—even in pulp form— is welcomed.
The experiences of this episode of Inc and Trever’s participation in the game of the human experience are derived from their ‘waking up’ to find themselves bombarded by the myriad stressors and stimuli demanded of East Coast suburban life. Maniqui makes no apologies for his blatant indictment of 21st Century Western koyanaquatsi. A veritable feast of vignettes exposing the dysfunctional dynamics of American family, work, and society are served with humor and wit, yet often leave a rather acerbic after-taste. Americans, the ultimate masters of denial and escape, will find it often uncomfortable and even embarrassing to be confronted with some of their own foibles—especially the likes of avarice, arrogance, extravagance and xenocentricity.
Though Ideas as Opiates is considered a sequel to 1969’s Inc., there exists a most noticeable divergence from the emotional tone of the original. The playful rivalry that existed between ridicule and hope in Inc. is totally absent from Ideas. Actually, aside from the feeble spiritual escape clause in Chapter 50, Ideas is starkly void of hope; one has the foreboding sense that Inc and Trever are up against insurmountable forces, that the tide of darkness has triumphed. Whereas the social commentary in Inc. was transparent and often shamelessly derogatory, its bite was offset by a strong strain of optimism. It is, in fact, Inc.’s optimism that makes it such a popular favorite. Is it Maniqui’s age or his isolation—or a combination of both— that has borne this new cynicism? Does the author truly believe Western civilization has tipped the scales beyond any hope for recovery? Inc! Trever! Dudes! Say it ain’t so!
Despite the new despondent tone, Maniqui remains eminently readable. A master of capturing the voice of the times while confronting his audience with its enslavement to absurdly contradictory behaviors, Maniqui’s snappy dialogue is alive, entertaining, and often poetic. One can only wonder —with no little wistfulness—what Maniqui-isms we’ve missed due to his long silence. Let us hope we won’t have to wait another 35 years for the next printed effort from the now 68-year old author.

(Obituary reprinted from The New York Times, July 2, 2004.)

Author Antonin Maniqui Found Dead

Antonin Urlov Maniqui, reclusive author of bestselling novels Inc. (Charles Scrivener & Sons, 1969) and Ideas as Opiates (Hestia Press, 2004) was found dead yesterday in his home outside Donegal, Ireland. Cause of death appears to be heart failure. Maniqui was 69 years old.

* * * * * *





(Reprinted from the Petoskey News-Review, July 5 2004.)

Petoskey Author Maniqui Dead

Antonin Urlov Maniqui, formerly of Petoskey, was found dead in his country home outside of Donegal, Ireland, Wednesday. Irish authorities say he died of heart failure. He was 69 years old.
Born June 1, 1935, in Detroit, Michigan, to French-Russian immigrants, Victor and Katerina (Myshenskyeva) Maniqui, Antonin grew up an only child in Detroit and later Petoskey, where he graduated from high school in 1952. He earned a bachelor’s degree from the University of Michigan, and Masters Degrees in linguistics, philosophy, and fine arts from Columbia University, New York. Never married, Antonin leaves no living relations.
Author of two bestselling novels: Inc., published in 1969 by Charles Scrivener & Sons, and Ideas as Opiates, published in 2004 by Hestia Press. Ideas currently sits on bestseller lists in 43 countries.

(Reprinted from TIME magazine, July 12, 2004, page 26+.)

Life Imitating Art?
Reclusive author Antonin Maniqui wrote two very popular, critically acclaimed, yet controversial novels. Could he have been the author of more than just fiction?..................26

Massachusetts Senator John Quincy Moran. Corporate giant-killer James N. Audley. Surgeon General Kathleen Phillips-Rees. Patrick ‘Father Joe’ Gavenucci. Composer/filmmaker Robert Francis Stahrender. Name six things that these five high-profile public figures have in common. Answer: 1) All forty-somethings. 2) All American-born. 3) All innovators in their fields. 4) All very driven to break old social patterns with new, human potential- realizing reforms. 5) All named as beneficiaries of recently deceased author Antonin Maniqui’s estate. 6) All stumbled upon the reclusive author’s home in Ireland during the fall of 1985.
Separately.
Accidentally.
On consecutive days.
Totally oblivious of one another.
“It’s all rather surreal to me,” says Senator Moran. “I spent one day with the man when I was 25. That’s it! And suddenly I’m in his book’s dedication, I’m at his funeral, I’m in his will!”
The ‘dedication’ from Maniqui’s recent novel, Ideas as Opiates, refers to five ‘visitors’ from the autumn of 1985, naming ‘James, Frank, Kathleen, Patrick and John’ as his ‘Children.’ The fervor of interest spurred on by the publication of Maniqui’s critically acclaimed international bestseller sparked a worldwide manhunt that only just ended with notice of the reclusive author’s death last Tuesday.
Mystery solved. On Sunday, ‘James’ Audley, Robert Francis ‘Frank’ Stahrender, ‘Kathleen’ Phillips-Rees, ‘Patrick’ Joseph Gavenucci, and ‘John’ Moran served as pallbearers at Maniqui’s funeral in Donegal, Ireland. Adding to the bizarre mystery of this story is the claim the five make that none of them had any contact with Maniqui before or since their 1985 serendipitous visits. Yet, the heirless author named these five Americans as equal beneficiaries to his estate---which is estimated to be worth about $10 million not including ongoing royalties.
“I can’t believe he even remembered me!” exclaimed Phillips-Rees. “His book, that night, changed my life, but to think that I’d done anything worthy of his remembrance or praise is beyond my comprehension.”
The five American reformers also claim that before Sunday they had never met one another. “Of course I know of Senator Moran, Dr. Phillips-Rees, Father Joe, and James Audley,” said Stahrender. “But, no, I’ve never met any of them before.”
When asked why they were in Ireland during the fall of 1985 the responses are strikingly similar. “Soul searching,” declared Moran. “Getting away from it all for a bit,” said Audley. “Needing time to think,” claimed Gavenucci. “Wanting to do something for myself, for once in my life,” admitted Phillips-Rees. “Escape, introspection, and planning,” from Stahrender.
Not one of the five lost souls had a clue they would be meeting Antonin Urlov Maniqui---a writer whose first novel, Inc., all five admit to having held in high esteem. “It changed my life,” said Stahrender. “My wake up call,” said Audley. “Inc. helped me to believe in my self,” said Phillips-Rees, “to really see that I had choices.” “It was the first book I’d ever read that made me think, ‘this guy knows me! He’s talking about me!’ said Gavenucci. “A great book,” acclaims Moran. “A kind of ‘declaration of independence’ for the 20th Century.”
“I picked up Ideas as soon as it came out,” said Audley, whose personal legacy includes being lead attorney for 1999’s People v. Mall-Mart Supreme Court decision which formerly stripped corporations of their previously assumed ‘personhood’ status. “I must admit, the dedication kind of through me for a loop. I knew it was probably me. But, why?”
“Ideas brought back to mind the debt I owe him (Maniqui),” said Patrick ‘Father Joe’ Gavenucci, whose efforts have led to securing local and govern-ment funding for his urban and ‘com-munity learning center’ project, the nation’s fastest growing educational reform movement. “I would never have come to where I am were it not for my night with Antonin Maniqui. I’d either be a bitter, mechanical Catholic priest, or I’d have quit religion, married, and be doing the 9-to-5 routine.”
“I had never met the other four, but I was dying to find out if the ‘John’ reference in Ideas was me,” said John Quincy Moran, Senator from Massa-chusetts and founding member of the growing Constitutional Party for Reform (CPR).
“I’ll never forget that day in Ireland,” said Dr. Kathleen Phillips-Rees. “I got caught in an unexpected rainstorm,” recalls the champion of people-oriented health care. “Rain was pouring down. The first house I came to was Maniqui’s. We talked by the fire. Or rather, I talked. He mostly listened. Next morning I left rejuvenated, my will focused, new goals forming.”
If the careers of these five shakers and movers are any indication, it would seem that a visit with Antonin Maniqui has life-changing repercussions. Would that we all could have been so lucky.





(Reprinted from TIME magazine, July 12, 2004, page 31.)

T H E   M A N I Q U I   L E G A C Y

The 5 Children of Reform:
Saviors or Satans?

James N. Audley. Corporate lawyer turned corporate giant-killer. Lead attorney in the landmark case, People v. Mall-Mart, in which the Supreme Court struck down the ‘personhood’ status of corporations. With the claim that the writers of the Constitution had never intended for corporations to be eligible for the same rights as natural persons, that our Founding Fathers had in fact worked expressly toward the eradication of all forms of tyranny---including that of ‘faceless corporations’---all rights and privileges assumed by corporations since the 1880s were summarily stripped. Though the world continues to recover from the ensuing economic collapse and Y2K Depres-sion, the decision is viewed as a landmark victory in the human rights movement---a turning point in the ‘Return to Democratic Principles’ movement---as it brought fully to the public eye an understanding of the divergent goals of democracy and capitalism.
John Quincy Moran. Nuclear physicist turned politician and political reformist. Founder of the Constitutional Party for Reform and first third party candidate to be elected to the U.S. Senate from the state of Massachusetts in 30 years, Moran has worked tirelessly for recognition and acceptance of the ‘quantum oneness’ of all things via a return to principles of ‘probable democracy’. Vaulting to national prominence in the 1990s with his book, Reinventing the Constitution, and cable TV miniseries, Revisiting the Founding Fathers, Moran’s efforts have resulted in new legislation for campaign finance reform, the rewriting of the 14th Amendment, and ballot access reform in order to unlock the Republican-Democrat two-party stranglehold on the nation’s political system.
Kathleen Phillips-Rees. The nation’s second female Surgeon General creates bold, paradigm-changing policies in the health care field. Building a medical practice and bestselling books on the premise and catchphrase that ‘health care is about health and caring’, Phillips-Rees has dedicated her career to ‘returning the power of health care back to the people.’ An avid proponent of patient education and ‘team approach’ health care, Phillips-Rees’ work has opened doors for the public acceptance and legal licensure of many ‘nontraditional’, ‘alternative and complementary’, and ‘naturopathic’ health care and healing traditions.
Patrick Joseph ‘Father Joe’ Gavenucci. Former priest and teacher turned social activist. Founder of the ‘community learning center’ movement which has found funding, facilities, and local interest in over 17 major cities and countless smaller towns and municipalities. ‘CLCs’ are a combination public library and school offering community support 24-hours a day. They offer state-of-the art technological services and grass roots learning resources for all kinds of formal and informal educational, vocational and social activities. Some key Gavenucci maxims: 1) “Everyone is learning all the time;” 2) “Everybody---in every community---has something of value to teach or share;” 3) “Everybody has something they would like to learn;” 4) “Everybody---of all ages---needs a safe place to go where they feel welcome, where they can experience community, where they can feel free to learn whatever they wish to learn;” and, 5) “Schools and schooling are antithetical to freedom and individual rights.”
Robert Frances ‘Frank’ Stahrender. Award-winning musician and filmmaker, pioneer of DVD and music video production technologies. Stahrender’s frustration with barriers between performer and audience led to the creation of Opus Humanae, an audience participatory concert experience in which musicians plug in and play, dancers move among the crowd, live microphones are available for anyone, video and sound are mani-pulated by ‘computer jocks.’ The result is spontaneous, unrehearsed, live performance art at its most raw---out of which have come the indie cult favorite Opus Humanae Live films. Permanent Opus Humanae venues have been established in over 50 cities in 13 countries around the world. Proponents love it for its encouragement of the artistry in everyman, while opponents condemn it for promoting ‘paganism’ and ‘debauchery’---citing several acts of violence related to Opus Humanae events. Though reaction to Stahrender’s ideas from critics and fellow artists was at first rather cool, acceptance of Opus ‘bacchanals’ is now virtually universal.





(Reprinted from TIME magazine, July 12, 2004, page 28.)

M A N I Q U I   IN  P R I N T
Inc. and Ideas in Review
Ideas as Opiates (Hestia Press), Antonin Maniqui’s time-twisting novel set loosely in a ‘self-created singularity’ sequels his 1969 cult classic, Inc., by tracing the ‘evolution, devolution, and involution’ of the two protagonists from Inc., Inc and Trever. The book opens with the two rule-bending, reality-testing, morality-challenging, politically active hippies ‘suddenly’ finding themselves in a strange new world.
“Hey, man. What happened to the Sixties?” laments Trever.
“Big Brother won, man,” Inc tells his buddy as they look at each other’s short hair and business suits. “Can’t you feel it?”
Reminded of Brendan Frazer and Alicia Silverstone in 1999’s Blast from the Past, the duo soon figures out that they’ve somehow leaped forward 30 years (it’s 2001). Hypothesizing that they’ve been passing the years in a kind of somnambulant trance, a horrified Trever proclaims, “Zombies, man, we’re zombies!”
In their new reality---one that holds true for most of the remainder of this 532-page novel---the two have not only aged 30 years but they’ve conformed. They each have the standard three-car suburban houses, the 50-hour corporate desk job, the dysfunctional first and second marriages, and of course the requisite chaos that comes with having kids and step kids, wives and ex-wives.
Dark comedy runs rampant throughout the pages of Ideas, but it is the fresh new characters with their wise-beyond-their-years banter that allows Maniqui’s brilliance to shine.
Inc’s bright, confident, empathetic 18-year old son, Jah-man, and Trever’s bring-on-the-world 19-year old daughter, Nasty (Anastasia), happen to push every paternal button their respective fathers never knew they had (and vowed in Inc. that they wouldn’t have). With their casual on-again, off-again romance and more relaxed (Maniqui would say, ‘evolved’) attitudes toward relationships---and especially sex---Jah-man and Nasty provide plenty of push to their fathers’ comfort zones. The mirrors Trever and Inc are forced to look into are at once frustrating, horrifying, and laughable. To the reader they are discomforting and often quite embarrassing.
The dysfunctional dynamics between Inc and his first wife, the paranoid, emotionally-dependent, Freaky (Frances), and his cool-as-ice, corporate-climbing second, Amanda, and Trever and his first and second wives, Alex (“Good-sex”) and Tiffany (“Can’t-get-any”), respectively, are conveyed humorously but, again, prove painfully real. Maniqui is presenting us with a rather grim reflection of our times.
The Maniqui genius, as it was in Inc., is with dialogue. Fast moving, each character highly idiosyncratic—the conversation is always very real yet peppered with occasional questions or observations so candid, so brutally direct and honest, that they never fail to catch us off-guard. Maniqui has once again made satire of our day and age while at the same time offering inspiration and hope for a healthier, more optimistic future.
In the most delightful twist of Ideas as Opiates, the last chapter (titled ‘Yep: a log’) has Inc and Trever ‘wake up’ to find that their adventures in the 21st Century were all an illusion. They are in fact traveling through time, searching for ‘interesting’ experiences. The per-sonalities and situations they take on during their travels are a result of their own choosing. Everything, every moment is dependent on choice---conscious or unconscious (the latter due to familiar or comfortable patterns, called ‘habits’). In the end, Maniqui’s message is that we are all free to wake up to choice—free to recognize the myriad choices we have available to us in every moment—if only we humans would just wake up and take back control of our lives. Or, as Inc would say in his cheerfully naïve way, “Volez!”






(Reprinted from TIME magazine, July 12, 2004, page 29.)

T H E  M A N I Q U I  I D E O L O G Y

Just before a frustrated Antonin Maniqui fled from his last live interview he was heard to say, “No. That’s not what I mean. You just don’t get it. How can I get you to understand?” That was in 1969. His first novel, Inc., had just reached the New York Times bestseller list. Thirty-five years later, with his new novel, Ideas as Opiates, Maniqui may have figured out just how to get us to understand.
With Inc., Maniqui was able to capture the zeitgeist of the youth of the time. The eponymous protagonist of Inc. is burdened with the pull of polar forces of his near-paranoid concern for the Orwellian direction of his world while at the same time able to tap into his youth for the highs of living in the moment. Fear and hope are the novel’s true lead characters/agonists.
In Ideas as Opiates Maniqui also adroitly captures the spirit of these new times---our post-911, debt-ridden, Prozac-popping, technology-obsessed culture---with his display of “barely controlled chaos”---the overwhelm of daily American life. But what is disturbingly absent from Ideas is the hope so strongly ascendant in Inc. While choice is a constant theme in Ideas---“You are always, at every moment, in every second of every day, in choice,” parrots Inc’s daughter, Anastasia or “Nasty,” right in the face of her father---these characters are living under such megastress that there is no time for introspection---barely time to breathe. The priority is on escape. “It’s the American way,” justifies Inc’s second wife, Amanda. “We know how to escape better than anyone else in history.” Drugs, alcohol, food, television, shopping, travel, sports, fitness, dieting, even mental illness all provide a many-layered failsafe network for escape from the pain and suffering of the human experience.
Maniqui’s satirical farce illuminates and criticizes the evils in this system while using lucid dream sequences to allow his reader to ‘feel’ and ‘enjoy’ the full scope of emotions presented in the human experience. Inc’s comment to Amanda’s inquiry as to how it felt during one of his dreams seems to encapsulate Maniqui’s solution to the mind-numbing choices of waking life: “It felt great. I felt alive!”
The final chapter of Ideas is well cited for it’s comical escape from the “horrors of the 21st Century” and hollow but uplifting end. However, overlooked is the likelihood that it may contain the real belief system of Antonin Maniqui: that we are really just traveling in and out of human form on a kind of Buddhist reincarnation rollercoaster---all for the simple purpose of seeking interesting experiences; becoming human for the sake of the unique experiences presented in the panoply of human emotion. Life for life’s sake, being present for the fullness of the emotional experience.
The last lines of Ideas as Opiates contain a rather curious and cryptic reference.
“Hey, look,” Inc points to a robed figure on a nearby cloud. “There’s that Vinoba dude again!”
“He’s cool,” responds Trever. ”Let’s hang with him for a while.”
“Volez!”
Vinoba Bhave was a twentieth century Indian ‘saint.’ (d. 1985) A contemporary of Mohandas Gandhi, known mostly for his commitment to non-violent anarchist principles, Vinoba believed that small community life presented the healthiest dynamics for the fullest realization of human potential--which is to love. This may in fact present Maniqui’s deepest hope: that the world can return to a state of simplicity through small communal life. He certainly held no affection for the dehumanizing effect of Western society’s frenetic pace, impersonal urbanization and suburban sprawl or the robotic effect of our throwaway society’s rampant consumerism and profit-driven materialism. Volez!

ENTRE-LOGUE:

Ireland and Antonin Maniqui in 1985.

AMONG the undulating grey and emerald green landscapes of the ancient island called “Eire” by the Celtic peoples who have inhabited it for hundreds of generations, sits a craggy, battered-looking bulge in the extreme northwest known as County Donegal. Named Dhún na nGall or “land” or “fort” “of foreigners” for its many Viking raiders and settlers, but known locally as Tír Choniall for the Tyrconnell family that once lorded over this ancient feudal earldom, Donegal’s topography is quite different from other regions of the fair land that is called Ireland. Though luminous green mosses blanket much of these rugged, rocky landscapes, Donegal stands out for its startling absence of trees and for its far more rocky presentation. The rocky terrain we speak of often sports a rainbow variation of colors—particularly in unusual shades of “brown.” Observe, striated next one another like layers from a petrified log: deep purple-browns with sandstone yellow-browns next to rusty reddish-browns sidled between green-blacks.
The rugged countryside is sparsely populated with few examples of human society except for a sporadic scattering of seaside fishing villages occupying safe harbor inlets. Indeed, once one has traveled west of the town of Donegal, the occasion of towns, villages, or even crossroads, diminish noticeably. Though factories can be found to the north, the west has little to indicate any interactivity among the family of man. It is said that the non-fishing people who have come to live in rural Donegal are probably looking to hide, that they are looking for a place to be left alone, to be anonymous. But there are the rare souls who are purposely looking for a place in which to commune with Nature and her elements in some of her rawest, bleakest forms. Such was the attraction for Antonin Urlov Maniqui when he stumbled upon the area late in 1969.
Two miles north of Donegal town lies Banagher Hill. Unofficially the southern most peak of the Blue Stack Mountains, it is really just an oblong ridge running north-south between the wind- and water-carved Sruell River Valley to the west, and Lough Eske to the east. Still, Banagher Hill’s 1288-foot peak offers impressive panoramic views, weather permitting, of both valleys as well as the mountains to the north and Donegal Bay to the south. Small homes and cottages dot the countryside south of the Blue Stack Mountains, around Lough Eske, Banagher Hill and the Sruell River valley, sometimes sparsely, sometimes in a more neighborly fashion.
A most curious sight is presented by the well packed and, therefore, seemingly well traveled, grey-graveled, fairly level, two-track road that circumnavigates Banagher Hill. The road appears to be traveled well enough yet leads to nowhere in particular, connects to very few, much less traveled, off-roads, and offers access to a sparse number of homesteads.
It is upon this rather odd, desolate, and circuitous path that one such cottage, a small bungalow built of flat grey stones with a grey slate roof, occupies a rather solitary yet sociable-looking spot on Banagher Hill’s western slopes. Sitting just next to the small stone cottage, also on the east side of the Donegal return road, is the rather bizarre spectacle of what appears to be a grove of overgrown, under-groomed Christmas trees (perhaps the abandoned project of a previous owner). A few grazing sheep dot the hillside above the cottage while below the road, into the Sruell River valley, lay fallow pastures down to the river’s edge where more cottages and an occasional tree are sprinkled.
Antonin Maniqui purchased his small stone cottage, along with its 240 acres west of the road on the slopes of Banagher Hill, in 1970—paid for in full, for the whopping price of £3,000 Irish. The bank, which had acquired the property after the death of its last owner (the last of the previous owner’s family, a Surrey, England resident, had neither the interest nor the money with which to settle her distant cousin’s debts, so therefore, chose to give it up to estate auction and bank ownership), had been so excited at the site of Antonin’s green U.S. dollars, that it actually raised its asking price with Maniqui sitting there, in the bank, holding the advert from the most recent edition of the local newspaper in his hand. In a gesture of good faith—and in hopes of earning the future good graces of the town’s primary moneylender—Ant counter-offered at an even higher price. This maneuver did, in fact, prove invaluable during the successive home-improvement projects to which he subjected the cottage—including repairs to the roof and walls in 1970 and again in 1984, installation of a washing machine in 1973 (replaced in 1991), the addition of a solar powered hot water heater and outdoor hot tub in 1977, and an interior re-insulation project in 1994. Antonin remained living there in his isolated spot in the Donegal countryside, sans companion, until his death in 2004.
Weather-wise, the autumn of 1985 was remarkable for its irregularity. The usual daily battle of wind and weather currents rising up the Sruell River valley from Donegal Bay and down from Banagher Hill and the rest of the Bluestack mountain range were accentuated by sudden and unexpected appearances of heavy fog and/or brief unpredictable outbursts of heavy rainfall. The usually misted landscapes and peoples found themselves unusually mystified.
The week of All Hallow’s Eve and All Saints Day was no exception to this freakishness. On Tuesday, October 29, 1985, Antonin had just returned from his Tuesday trip into town when his first visitor arrived. A round trip of approximately seven kilometers, Antonin was rarely seen to step out of this routine. Arriving to post bill payments and collect his mail at the Post Office/Tobacconist shop around half past ten, Ant then crossed the street to visit the bank (to deposit royalties and investment income checks, etc.), followed by a stop in at the corner grocer for a week’s supply of victuals, (seasonal vegetables, breads, cheese and condiments, occasional canned goods and/or personal hygienics), and finally ending with a seat at the Brannagh Pub for the Tuesday lunch special (usually some kind of shepherd’s pie) and pint of “half-and-half” (equal portions of Harp’s Lager and Guinness Stout) and some chatter with the usual group of ‘pub grubbers.’ It took some time, but eventually Ant became an accepted and welcomed member of the afternoon pub house gossip. Preferring to join in on discussions of the local weather and agricultural topics—and occasionally in the issues pertaining to local politics and commerce—Ant’s contributions were respected and often sought after. “What’s the Yank  think?” and “Will the renowned recluse author please speak!” were two of the favorite goads of the good-hearted regulars.
Depending on his payload and the portents of weather, Maniqui was known to make his return walk home circumnavigate Banagher Hill: for a sight of the blue waters of Lough Eske. Though in the habit of daily walks, rare was the occasion in which he would travel south toward town—other than Tuesdays, of course. Most often his perambulations were directed to an inspection of his acreage, but Antonin was, from time to time, known to hike among the Blue Stacks north of Banagher Hill—again, depending on weather, and much more likely during the summer months.
All in all, Antonin Maniqui was considered a rather reclusive, stay-at-home kind of man. Nobody seemed to begrudge him the least for it. Which is probably one reason he felt so at home here. And why he stayed.

Independence

I am a small community anarchist by temperament and belief. This being said, I have often fantasized about seceding from the union, declaring my own little farm independent of the United State of America, creating an autonomous government-less dot on the map—like San Marino in Italy or Andorra between France and Spain. If a small community of people chose to do the same, why should they not be allowed to do so? Why should we—or rather, why should the government—stop them? Why shouldn’t a person or community of people be allowed to choose their own form of government—just as frustrated colonists did in 1776? What binds individual humans to one nation’s laws and property rights? Where is the contract? Where/when did I sign?
The binds of government—any government, no matter how enlightened or altruistic—are quintessentially despotic and tyrannic; the relationship of the governed to its government is that of slave and master. How can it be otherwise? The relationship is based upon control and force; even in the best of circumstances it involves an abdication of some personal power in return for (the illusion of) a feeling of relative safety; a hypothetical exchange of rights and privileges for protective services. Government makes a promise. In good faith, the governed trust their government to keep its promise—to keep them safe. (From what, I’m not sure. From one’s neighbor, perhaps?)
I understand that the morality of the elite wealthy puppetmasters who control the US government, court system, and economy (and they would like to think, masses) is pragmatic, that is, they see it as their right and obligation as socio-cultural leaders to choose the appropriate morality fit for the particular moment or situation (which translates into whichever morality allows them the advantage in a given moment or situation—which means that they are able to rationalize any morality).
Perhaps a popular revolt could be instigated among the sheep by a legal and Internet campaign to secede from the Union. Or perhaps it must be done individually, on at a time, as a microcosmic assertion of our natural born democratic rights. Like this:

WE THE PEOPLE, formerly of 1111 Cinterly Road, Mancelona, Michigan, USA, do solemnly declare our independence from the governments and agencies of those United States of America. When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the Earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident:
 That all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,
 That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, by men, for men, and that these governments should derive their just powers from the consent of the governed,
 That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter, discard or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly experience has shown that mankind is more disposed to suffer while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, it is their moral obligation, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.
 Such has been the patient sufferance of this Couple; and such is now the necessity that compels us to cast off our former systems of government. The history of the present government of the United States is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over its inhabitants. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world. The United States government and its agencies and cohorts have:
 Continuously created laws which favor and benefit unnatural persons, called “corporations,” over that of the natural persons it claims to serve and from whom it supposedly derives its authority;
 Increasingly chosen to interpret the United States and Michigan constitutions and their laws in ways which grant favor and lenience to the moneyed privileged and to unnatural persons, while at the same time ignoring or even denying the Life, Liberty, and pursuit of Happiness of the working classes;
 Allowed the influence of representatives of the moneyed to become the dominant influences with regards to the writing of, passage of, and interpretation of law and policy;
 Closed its ears to the voices of the people, of the world;
 Chosen to prioritize foreign policy issues and spending over that of domestic needs;
 Chosen to pursue a policy of imperialistic perpetual war and now, as result, a state akin to martial law at home;
 Repeatedly and consistently chosen to favor capitalism over democracy;
 Repeatedly and consistently chosen to grant clemency or amnesty to the crimes and criminal acts of the rich and powerful;
 Turned a blind eye to, allowed, and even sanctioned criminal acts in domestic and foreign policy, especially in the areas of rights of privacy,
 Repeatedly and consistently chosen to not protect contract property as its laws and constitutions have promised to do;


We, therefore, Toril Narissa Fooker-Bisher and William Andrew Bisher, III, wife and husband and co-inhabitants of the Bisher Farm, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by authority of, our selves, solemnly publish and declare, that this farm and its inhabitant are, and of Right ought be, a Free and Independent state, that we are absolved from all Allegiance to the U.S. governments, and that all political connection between us and the state of Michigan, the United States of America, and all other states, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as a Free and Independent State, we have full Power to do all the acts and things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

Can a Country Have No Name?

CAN A COUNTRY HAVE NO NAME?

That’s what my wife and I are trying to find out. We have filed for secession from the United States of America. We don’t want to join any other country, and we don’t even see any reason to assume a new name, it’s just that we no longer wish to be governed by the laws and government of the United States. We do not seek conflict, and we certainly don’t want to alienate our neighbors, we’re just tired of the governments of the United States and its subsidiaries (Michigan, Antrim County, Mancelona Township) and they way they treat us. We love the Declaration of Independence (See Below), the Bill of Rights, and the principles and ideals of democracy. It’s the way the courts, Congress, the President, multinational corporations, and even local officials interpret the Constitution and their laws and ordinances that we no longer wish to be a party to. We watch in disgust at the infantile and self-serving displays of deceit and immorality now being practiced within American government; we no longer see any adherence to or respect for the lofty tenets and high principles manifested in the Spirit of 1776. So we’re seceding. Just us. And, of course, our 29.5 acre farm off of Cinterly Road—the same 29.5 acres farmed by my father and his father all the way back to 1896 when my grandfather paid for it in cash with the earnings he’d accumulated from working in the timber industry. We no longer wish to have the protections of government of the once great United States of America. We just want to be left alone to continue doing what we’ve been doing for over a century: farming.
     We’re nearly self-sufficient and self-sustained here. We are off-the grid and fairly energy-independent with our wind turbine, solar panels, eleven acres of woods that provide fuel to heat our wood stove and a fairly lucrative maple sugaring business. We have two wells—one of which provides water to an underground cistern-system, which then provides radiant heat and cooling to our house. Our fields and gardens provide us with nearly everything we require. Our main concern is that the US will remain on friendly terms with us so that we can freely cross the border in order to visits friends and family and continue to trade with local and mail-order businesses. We have no need of any financial connections to the US. We are willing to trust in the goodness of others and in the will of God for our safety. My wife and I have not subscribed to health or dental care or insurances for nigh on twenty years; we have always paid cash for any local services needed (which we also hope will be allowed to continue). We see no need to create our own currency—especially seeing that so many countries in the world are converting to the American Dollar for their own currency. We hope the US government won’t mind. Within our own little country we really won’t have any need to do that kind of business. My wife and I are more than happy to help each other out without the expectation of exchange or accounting. We also see no need to set up any form of “government” seeing as we’re pretty set in our ways and can manage to settle our petty disputes through interpersonal dialogue. We don’t expect to want to do any business with any foreign countries other than the above-mentioned private businesses in the United States. We have no debt, do not own credit cards, operate quite happily without a telephone, have never owned a television. But we have become rather fond of the Internet. It has, in fact, become our primary method of contact with our children and grandchildren. But, all in all, we really just want to be left alone. We are tired of being unlistened to, guilty-by-association, participants in the rape and plunder of the planet and its peoples. For years we tried to figure out how we could direct our tax dollars so that the taxes we dutifully paid would not be used for war and the military industrial complex.
      For years we begged our government representatives—even paid law experts—to find a way we could “earmark” our tax dollars for specific causes that we felt supportive of. To no avail. Now, rather than continue to be given no choice, rather than continue to have to watch the erosion of our Constitutional rights, rather than have to submit without choice or recourse to the abusive and inhumane foreign and domestic policies of a government which is controlled by money, not “we the people,” we have decided to leave. No more taxes. No more guilt and shame at being a unwilling participant in the atrocities and crimes against nature and humanity perpetrated on behalf of greed and profiteering. We Declare our Independence. But, must we have a name? If so, why not “The Bisher Farm” as it has always been?

WE THE PEOPLE, formerly of 1111 Cinterly Road, Mancelona, Michigan, USA, do solemnly declare our independence from the governments and agencies of those United States of America. When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the Earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident:
 That all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,
 That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, by men, for men, and that these governments should derive their just powers from the consent of the governed,
 That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter, discard or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly experience has shown that mankind is more disposed to suffer while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, it is their moral obligation, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.
 Such has been the patient sufferance of this Couple; and such is now the necessity that compels us to cast off our former systems of government. The history of the present government of the United States is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over its inhabitants. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world. The United States government and its agencies and cohorts have:
 Continuously created laws which favor and benefit unnatural persons, called “corporations,” over that of the natural persons it claims to serve and from whom it supposedly derives its authority;
 Increasingly chosen to interpret the United States and Michigan constitutions and their laws in ways which grant favor and lenience to the moneyed privileged and to unnatural persons, while at the same time ignoring or even denying the Life, Liberty, and pursuit of Happiness of the working classes;
 Allowed the influence of representatives of the moneyed to become the dominant influences with regards to the writing of, passage of, and interpretation of law and policy;
 Closed its ears to the voices of the people, of the world;
 Chosen to prioritize foreign policy issues and spending over that of domestic needs;
 Chosen to pursue a policy of imperialistic perpetual war and now, as result, a state akin to martial law at home;
 Repeatedly and consistently chosen to favor capitalism over democracy;
 Repeatedly and consistently chosen to grant clemency or amnesty to the crimes and criminal acts of the rich and powerful;
 Turned a blind eye to, allowed, and even sanctioned criminal acts in domestic and foreign policy, especially in the areas of rights of privacy,
 Repeatedly and consistently chosen to not protect contract property as its laws and constitutions have promised to do;


We, therefore, Toril Narissa Fooker-Bisher and William Andrew Bisher, III, wife and husband and co-inhabitants of the Bisher Farm, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by authority of, our selves, solemnly publish and declare, that this farm and its inhabitant are, and of Right ought be, a Free and Independent state, that we are absolved from all Allegiance to the U.S. governments, and that all political connection between us and the state of Michigan, the United States of America, and all other states, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as a Free and Independent State, we have full Power to do all the Acts and things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

Schools Are Not Democracies

Democracy in Our Schools


“Schools are not democracies.”

What a sad, cynical statement.

“Schools are not democracies.”

I have heard this belief proclaimed by teachers, administrators, board members, college professors, business leaders, parents and even students. I have also uncovered the harsh reality that the United States is not—and may never have been—a democracy. This does not change the fact that many Americans have latched onto the ideal of democracy; they believe democracy is not only possible but worth ‘fighting’ for (and I don’t mean the type of fighting our soldiers are doing, based on the misleading slogans that our Presidents have used to send our youth to war, such as: “to preserve democracy,” “to spread democracy,” “to defend democracy,” and “to establish democracy”). Thanks to the inspiring words of America’s Founding Fathers, the people who believe in democracy embody and nurture in themselves and in others life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

What Is ‘Democracy’?

In true democracies everybody has a voice, everybody’s opinion is deemed worthy, yea, is required. Unfortunately, true democracies cannot be found in his-tory books. Many republics and oligarchies have tried to lay claim to the ‘democracy’ designation. Alas, they are mere pretenders. The fact is that in ‘civilized’ man’s previous dabblings with ‘democracy’ some segment of society has always lain disenfranchised: be they slave, indentured servant, non-landowner, people of color or of differing language, women, and, of course, children. In 1789, the list of people intended to not be covered under the protections of the Bill of Rights and Constitution included all of the above. Some ‘democracy.’
Still, the spirit of democracy—the allure of democracy—has spurred countless individuals and groups to action. They educate, raise consciousness, organize, unionize, demonstrate, even bear arms. It is democratic spirit that brought us to this point in history in which slavery is outlawed (supposedly), women can vote, and the landless and naturalized citizens—even illegal aliens—have constitutional rights. (Had constitutional rights. See the PATRIOT Acts.) We have come a long way. But, there is still a long way to go.


‘Democracy’ Is an Intrinsic Desire

“Schools are not democracies.”

I can’t imagine saying this as if it’s okay—as if there’s nothing we can do about it! Like Seal said in his 1992 award winning song, “There’s a sky full of people but only some want to fly, isn’t that crazy? Crazy!” Yes, it’s crazy.
Democracy is a product of a human archetype; it is a life- and self-nurturing ideal we carry in our subconscious throughout our lives, a goal our unconscious mind is in the constant state of trying to realize. Democratic principles—coming out of Natural Law and Natural Rights—are the internally motivating force behind man’s search for freedom, his pursuit of happiness. They are the reason the oppressed yearn and fight for their freedom—why individuals seek independence and autonomy. Just ask any former slave or concentration camp survivor—or an immigrant or migrant worker: the drive and desire to create freedom, independence, and happiness is inextinguishable. Yet some humans grow so distracted by the constant barrage of external stimuli that the internal thrum of peace and contentment are drowned out, even forgotten. Their hypervigilance keeps them so outwardly focused, so stuck in the ‘fight or flight’ mode of functioning, that they forget the kind of joy and comfort that are available to them when they choose to be masters of their own lives. That choice is not an easy one; it is a choice that big businessmen and their politician lackeys would just as soon see you forget. Hence the true lesson of compulsory public schooling: “You will do as you’re told, you don’t have a choice, so shut up and step in line.”


American Hypocrisy

“Schools are not democracies.”

When schools are not democracies what does that say about our society? That we don’t want to practice what we preach? That we’re hypocrites, or, worse: outright liars? That we don’t want to be Americans: to live up to the responsibili-ties set upon us by our forefathers—that is: to uphold democracy?
We say we live in or want to live in a democracy, yet we won’t allow democracy to be taught to and experienced by our children in schools? Why? Shouldn’t our children be receiving exposure to and practice with the skills necessary to practice our hallowed democracy? Or is the real truth that none of us wants democracy—that we certainly don’t want it for our children? Are we happy, content, or apathetic being told what to do, submissively proffering blind obedience to our ‘leaders’ and ‘superiors?’ Why is it that we don’t want our children to have the chance to be equal with these ‘leaders’ and ‘superiors?’ And what exactly do you think those ‘leaders’ or ‘superiors’ did in order to earn their authority? How can one believe that the longer we play and the more we conform and ignore our hearts and souls that we will earn the opportunity to become a ‘leader,’ ‘superior’ or policy maker? What is it about conformity and complacency that you believe will earn you happiness and a fulfilling life?


Kim Overton and Concord Academy

Kim Overton is the co-founder of an award-winning charter school named Concord Academy. Kim is a believer in democracy. She is a believer in the equality of human beings of all races, colors, creeds, nationalities, sexes and even ages. The school she and her husband founded in Northern Michigan was created with democratic beliefs and values in mind. They sought to nurture creativity, critical thinking, and diversity. They provided an environment for learning and growth through cooperation and collaboration. With K-12 under one roof, they sought to create a ‘family’ or perhaps ‘one-room schoolhouse’ effect. They preferred to try to celebrate the differences between individuals. They promoted collaborative program and curriculum design. They gave teachers and children a voice and showed them that their input was truly valued—that it, in fact, helped steer the course of the school.
Corporations and the business/corporate world function without democ-ratic principles in place. Likewise, the public school system, following the business model, functions without democratic principles at work. Concord Academy is not a public school, or rather, it was not founded upon the public school model. Concord Academy was created to be different, to offer something different.


The Struggle to Revive Democracy in Our Schools

Though I hear and feel the numbness and apathy toward the anti-democratic changes imposed upon our schools by No Child Left Behind, the Michigan Department of Education, and more business-minded school board and school administrations, I see and hear the commitment and energy of a few who still wish to hold out, who dare to hope, to even speak up for, democracy. These courageous, principled, and passionate people are engaged in a crusade—a crusade for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; a battle for the very possession of their souls and the souls of their children. Will they succumb to the pressures of conformity and the daunting litany of rules and regulations imposed from ‘above’ and ‘without’ or will they succeed in keeping alive that spirit which caused Kim Overton to create a school—the same spirit that caused our American forefathers to put their lives and possessions on the line in order to shake off tyranny and oppression?
These are the people who believe, as Kim does, that the educational experience offered and gained in our schools be one that nurtures within each community member the flame of democracy—the desire and palpable need to achieve individual identity and confidence, to experiment with and learn mutually supportive, inclusive, collaborative skills, to explore and gain confidence in creative and critical thinking, to walk out into the world with skills that enable them to be self-sufficient adults.
Schools have a choice. They can be vehicles for the growth and develop-ment of human beings or they can be vehicles for the control and molding of little factory/corporate robots. Many schools, Concord Academy included, contain in their mission statements wording purporting the belief that education is a bring-ing out, not a pouring in—that is, that education implies the use of a nurturing, nature-supporting environment, not a coercive, prescribed program. However, this is not the truth—this is not the fact—of our schools’ practices. Schools are not nurturing the natural, God-given talents of each and every one of the individuals in their communities. Schools are guilty of quite openly trying to force community members into prescribed, ‘poured in’ behaviors, skills, and information packages.
I believe schools have been moving even closer toward this latter scenario since the creation of the No Child Left Behind laws. The end result of this movement—and one could argue that it is also the desired result of this legislation—is the production of a uniform line of programmed automatons. The adverse effect of this result—from a humanist perspective—is that these assembly-line produced consumer robots—worker bees—may require the remainder of their lives to recover from and unlearn the conditioning and indoctrination from their school years in order to be able to relearn how to breathe, think, speak, and act for themselves. It is my opinion that people who know that they are free to breathe, think, speak and act for themselves and who are able to take conscious advantage of this knowledge are higher functioning human beings. They are more trustworthy; they act from higher, more altruistic motives. They are more creative and more desirous of seeking information—of being active lifelong learners. They are more capable of self-governance, and more effective and successful collaborators.
We are doing such a disservice to today’s children (and adults) by bom-barding them with prescribed learning expectations, by forcing them to qualify their personal self-esteem according to how well they memorize the dates of Charlemagne’s eldest son’s birthday, or the Binomial Theorem, or the definitions of ‘clauses’ and ‘gerunds.’ We should be exposing them to the real skills and mental issues they are likely to encounter daily in ‘the real world.’ We should be giving them ‘real’ things to do, ‘real world’ problems to tackle. We should be exposing them to experiences that will develop their ability to meet, analyze, and come up with creative solutions to problems they will encounter in their lifetime, including morals, values, ethics, philosophy and religion, debate and forensics skills, opinion writing, how to maintain and manage personal property (including personal, household and business budgeting), the intertwined biology, chemistry, and physics of living working systems (e.g. growing, storing, and preparing one’s own food), environmental awareness and activism, community service and social responsibility, democracy in theory and in action, effective physical and psychological self-care tools, and the list goes on.
In order for democracy to ascend and prevail, children must be exposed to and experience for themselves what democracy looks, sounds, and feels like. In order to do this, students need to be given some voice in their curriculum—a say in the experiences and lessons their education can provide for them. It is, after all, their education we are talking about. “Each generation may find it necessary to reinvent their world,” Thomas Jefferson said. This may well turn out to be especially true for this up-and-coming generation. So, let’s try to give them the op-portunity to pick up the tools they’ll need for this daunting task.
If your knee-jerk response to this proposal is oppositional—because “they’re just children,” or because “they don’t know any better”—then we have already condemned the next generation to failure, we have given up hope, we have already dispassionately sentenced them to our own sanitized and scientific compartments of inferiority and dependency. Unfortunately, we have been conditioned into thinking that all young humans are incapable, unformed, ‘wild’ and, if truth be known, ‘dangerous’. “Innocence” we call it. We have been taught to be unwitting accomplices in the business of prolonging the mythical and fairy-tale period of growth known as ‘childhood’ for as long as possible.
Before the 1840s the period of partial or limited involvement in the basic activities of life—called “childhood”—was extended to about the age of seven. At seven, young humans were fully engaged, fully functional within the immediate community. With the industrial capitalists’ growing need for large, localized, ro-botized labor forces, that period was elongated to 12 years (sixth grade). (Schools became the instrument of robotization.) Then to eighth grade. Now it is at 16 years when a ‘child’ is eligible for freedom—considered capable enough to attempt adult life. But, should you want entry into the corporate and/or professional world, ‘high’ school and college degrees are necessary to pass out of childhood and into ‘adulthood.’


Democracy and Hierarchical Structures

Many school administrators and school boards are out of touch with Nature’s intrinsic motivator. This is evidenced in their repeated decisions to clamp down on democratic freedoms and move more toward a corporate/military model of hierarchical structure. Hierarchies do not support democracy. Hierarchies flow toward control, toward the limitation of freedoms, toward social stratification (‘castes’), and are naturally supportive of dictatorships and tyrannies (the ‘top’ of the pyramid). Democracy supports a “man is inherently good and should be trusted” foundation of beliefs; hierarchies support a “man is basically evil and cannot be trusted” attitude. Hierarchies foster “me against you” and “us versus them” mentalities, which, in turn, create discord, disharmony, disparagement, disregard, disdain, dispute, distance, and disease. Hierarchies nurture isolation, distrust, hypervigilance, and fear. Democracy nurtures cooperation, collaboration, trust, mutual respect and appreciation, and love.
Don’t get me wrong: It is not my wish to eradicate all contraries. After all, it is only through contrasts and comparisons that we can really get to know our world. What would the yin be without the yang? How could we know goodness without knowing wrongness, joy without pain and suffering? But there comes a time when everyone learns to step back from the game of dualities, when one realizes that one has a choice—in every moment. We have the freedom to choose between optimism or pessimism, love or fear, joy or suffering, the perspective of ‘me’ or that of ‘us,’ between democratic principles or conformity to oppressive structures.
Which do you choose? Are you for democracy or not? Real democracy? Do you wish your children to learn what democracy is—what it feels like, how to practice it? Or do you want only the theory to be memorized for test regurgitation? If you’re at all like Kim Overton and me, you believe democracy is not only an attractive ideal but also an achievable practice.
Take notice of some of the issues challenging the world today. Then ask yourself, “If I were trying to prepare my child(ren) for the world out there, for the likely future, is this what I’d be teaching them/wanting them to learn? Is my child’s school truly preparing my child for the real world in which s/he will have to live?” Is it?

The Phenomenon of Compulsory Schooling

The phenomenon of compulsory schooling has only existed for about two hundred years. The Prussian government, humiliated by the ease with which Napoleon and his Imperial Army had ransacked their proud army in what some historians still consider the “worst defeat of all-time,” a one-day defeat of the what had previously been the most highly reputed and “unrivalled” military force in Europe, at the Battle of Jena on October 14, 1806, instituted a broad-scoped form of state-mandated mass schooling in the early 1800s. Though many Americans came under the influence and admiration of the revolutionary Prussian education system, it was not until Horace Mann and his Harvard cronies conspired with New England business leaders of the Industrial Revolution to get the first compulsory school laws passed in the United States in 1852.
Out of a human history of about 12,000 years, 200 is not a very long time. Still, there are many who will automatically argue that the conception (first found in the writings of Plato and much later illustrated in detail by Rousseau) and institutionalization of schooling have been signs of progress, of the evolution of our species, another benefit and advance coming out of the Enlightenment and the Scientific Revolution. While these arguments may have some merits, the fact remains that compulsory schooling is a system that is by its very nature forced upon a population--it is, after all, compulsory and, therefore, in need of questioning: Why is this system forced upon we the people? Is this system really necessary for the achievement of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as promised in the foundational documents of our democracy? Is this a system that we, the people, would choose naturally to impose upon ourselves? Is this a system that truly nurtures the potential of the promise of our natural, inalienable, and democratic rights?