Monday, July 14, 2008

Communitarian Ideology in Going Green

"The Alaskan Trailer, common dwelling in the 1960s"
part of the green lifestyles series

As per yesterday's article: I'd like to stress the fact that I did not mean to imply that I don't believe Darren Weeks is telling the truth about Nancy Levant. He did send me a phone number for the farm she was on many months ago, but I've been waiting for her to email me, something we both could always seem to afford to do. I also heard from William Lewis who is sorry I'm having doubts and doesn't want me to drag the Bridgestone Media group into my "fight."

We've been noticing how popular the terms Going Green have become lately. Our Gertee falls easily into the green category and I was curious to see how closely it's associated with communitarianism. A keyword search for "going green" returns about 27 million, one hundred thousand hits. Add the word "communitarian" to the search and it drops to about 110,000.

'Crunchy cons' unite: Moving right by going green
Posted: 03/16/06
"The strain of conservatism to which Dreher adheres is peculiar today, basically a pre-Reagan, even pre-Goldwater outlook.

His views date back to the communitarian school, a midcentury group that includes such thinkers as Russell Kirk, Robert Nisbet and Richard Weaver, who concerned themselves with the “little platoons” of society — civic organizations, churches and informal associations of neighbors that provide the glue for order and continuity in society.

“The liberty we enjoy in America today is certainly worth prizing and defending, but it is insufficient to produce virtue, stability or happiness,” Dreher writes.

Dreher’s critics on the right have of late called him a Christian Marxist. That’s unfair.

Rather, it’s a case of Dreher’s devout Catholicism informing his conservatism. Call it traditional Catholic social justice, viewed through the prism of the Laffer Curve and small government."

Here's a Green contractor in DC:

"Chris VanArsdale runs GBO Construction, a DC construction-management firm specializing in “green” building techniques that conserve energy and natural resources. He’s getting lots more questions about energy conservation since fuel prices shot up in 2005. More than half his clients are choosing conservation options even though up-front costs are high. “The rest look at the payback periods and decide to wait,” he says. VanArsdale says many residential clients go green for the environmental benefits alone: “There is a communitarian sense that we shouldn’t be polluting the atmosphere and increasing greenhouse-gas emissions.”"

What the heck is a "communitarian sense?" Most people I read assume it means a committment to the common good, a values based decisionmaking process, and a broader inclusion of the common people in decisions that affect their everyday life. According to the Communitarian Constitution author Beau Breslin, communitarian sense is "responsibility, shared values and accomplishment, along with the more 'liberal' feelings of individual freedom and personal independence." This is some of the best doublespeak they offer. Unless you have a feeling about what this responsiblity is TO, have an inkling of what these shared values ARE, and know what a communitarian accomplishment IS, then you'd naturally quickly skip past that part and focus on the last line, one you recognise, the one that reassures you communitarian "feelings" somehow support your notion of what individual freedom and personal independence translates to in everyday life.

There are businesses filled with the communitarian sense:

After reading this Canadian's blog, I think I know why William Lewis calls anti communitarianism my fight:

Communitarian vs Independence

"As I make my way around the sundry web logs that pop up while searching the word communitarian I am constantly struck by the rancour the word seems to arouse in some sectors. I suppose to the extent that I believe that most people are in fact independent communitarians who want to preserve some measure of their independence while working towards the common good I knew that separating the terms created two solitudes, and that like all solitudes, they breed distrust and distaste of the other.

"I suppose it's no accident that most of the rancour that I find comes from American blogs that keep the terms firmly divided into irreconcilable political camps. I go back to my belief that Americans hate one another so viscerally that they can barely contain their contempt for each other. It's nation so deeply divided that I can't imagine anyone ever uniting it."

I agree our nation is deeply divided. After 150 years of constant and unwavering dialectical conflicts, we are perfectly poised to accept the communitarian synthesis. It doesn't matter that it was UK/Israeli/USSR facilitators who introduced Hegelian conflicts into the USA. It's of no signifigance that the communitarian "ideology" was never a movement that arose naturally out of U.S. society.

I do not agree that we hate each other so viscerally that we can barely contain our contempt for one another. I believe, and my experience tells me, that once we peel away the dialectically driven arguments between us, there is only one "issue" left on the table for ALL Americans. The only real choice we need to make is between communitarian law and our national law, and that is the one choice we will never be asked to make. If there was a legally proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution to adopt the Supremacy of Communitarian Law, and it passed by 3/4 of the elected state legislatures, I would accept that as the legitimate law of our land. My point has always been that our people are being duped into adopting a code of law they don't understand. Our citizens are not even aware of their having accepted it already.

Thousands of new websites appear online every day to bring us the "real" news. They tell us in detail that our "rights" are being whittled away and that our government has become a nest of traitors. But how often do they tell you why?

Why do the Americans who oppose the North American Union ignore the supremacy of communirian law clause required in the European Union's failed treaties?

Why do the Americans who oppose the UN ignore the supremacy of communitarian law implicit in all UN Local Agenda 21 suggestions for datagathering and enforcement?

Why do the Americans who oppose the War on Terror, the Fed, the CFR, the TC, the IRS, Sustainable Development and congressional legislation like the Patriot Acts ignore or play down (or completely ignore) the core ideology driving all of these wars, organizations and bills?

Why don't global anti NWO whistleblowers explain that communitarianism is the philosophy, the law, and the religion of the emerging global synthesis?

I'll tell you why. The communitarian synthesis is so perfect it gives rise to NO antithesis. Americans are "allowed" to scream about anything from 9/11 to impeach Bush for war crimes to the "coming police state." Americans can write about the illegal tax structure, the SPP, the PNAC, U.S. government violations of "civil liberty," Chemtrails, the Illuminatti, the Bilderberg, the G-8, etc, etc, etc. But the REASON for the existence of all these things, naw, just forget about it. The dialectical conflicts are so much more digestable than the driving philosophy.

My oldest sister thinks I should concentrate more on my miniatures because they're divine. I love making my minis and encouragement works for me! Thanks Susan!


Bobby Garner said...

“There is a communitarian sense that we shouldn’t be polluting the atmosphere and increasing greenhouse-gas emissions.”

The "communitarian sense" is nothing more or less than the peer applied pressure that we all feel to comply and conform. Political correctness is just one familiar term which describes it, but closer to home its: What will the neighbors think? Of course, what the neighbors think is tightly controlled by what they see and hear on TV and other media. Its "Public Opinion" and the pressure comes from all side to agree with it.

The real question about Nancy is: How come Daren Weeks knows the scoop on her when her alleged best friends were totally in the dark? I had a couple of phone conversations with her and in her last email she concluded with "talk soon". Something about this just doesn't smell right.

S. said...

I think the hardest part of being bombarded with different "sides of the synthesis" is accepting that many of the people we'd like to trust are on the wrong side... either knowingly, or naively.

Levant, Weeks, Lewis, Kidd, I don't trust any of them. I have some trust for Niki and Nord, only because we've forged a more personal relationship via e-mail and other correspondence. If people can get massive publicity, it seems they NEVER say the right thing. I swear, if they put Devy Kidd on Nightline, she'd only say communitarian once, and then she'd say it it actually communism.

Your minitures are friggin awesome Nikki, I'm glad to see that you have time to make cool art, despite being busy exposing the emerging global legal framework.

take it easy....


Anonymous said...

So, what do we do now?

the tent lady said...

That's a really well written definition of communitarian sense Bobby, thank you !

Ths whole issue with what happened to Nancy can be solved by her coming back online, which Darren was told would be sometime in the near future as she's moving to a town. I believe Nancy is real. I personally watched her learn about communitarianism after I contacted her FIRST. She never sought me out and so yeah, I'm worried more than I'm skeptical. I've talked to Darren many times on the phone and have no reason to doubt his story or who he is either, none at all. And it's not as if this is the first time I've lost contact with anyone I met during the work. But one of the last things Nancy said to me was we had to keep in close touch and never assume anything.

Levant and Weeks are not in the same camp as Lewis and Kidd, they are not famous or successful in this work. Nancy lost everything because she wrote continuously and if anyone can relate to that, I can. But it's been so long, almost a year, and she couldn't get to email once in this whole time. And not to contact Bobby again either, who I absolutely trust and know is real, and who is also the only other researcher/writer in the USA who has independently verified my sources and then added a lot more valuable information to the entire body of anticommunitarian published works. I loved Nancy's mad teacher style as much as I love Bobby's scientific and religious focus. We each seemed to take on a different but extremely relevant slant. I miss her input as much as I honor the work she left behind. Maybe she'll hear that we're discussing her fate and deem it important to contact one of us very soon.

I sure glad though that I made the decision to remain in Alaska when Nancy wanted me to move to Michigan with her and Naomi. Nordica never liked that idea at all.

Bobby Garner said...

My inclination is to trust people, but that comes from my experience in personal, face to face encounters over many years. That just doesn't work on the Internet.

Most of those who contact me through my Website end up disclosing some ulterior motive after a few email exchanges. Some interpret what they see to imply that I'm one of "them". One said, "Yep, we're in the same business." Others just disappear after the first exchange as if their congratulatory remark satisfies their obligation to the truth. Out of all of them, Niki is the only one I can really trust.

Darin Weeks has never commented on anything I've written, except for one time regarding a broken link on one of his websites. It takes some level of interaction on principles to establish trust, so I have to reserve judgment.

Isn't it odd that Russell Kirk is connected to the "communitarian school", while the Heritage Foundation claims Kirk for helping to establish The Roots of Modern Conservative Thought...?

Whereas Professor George E. McCarthy at Kenyon College hopes to limit the debate to only two philosophies, Liberalism and Communitarianism.

Are they confused, or is everyone working to meld everything together in the same pot?

the tent lady said...

Okay, Darren sent me Nancy's new address and a contact phone #. Please email me if you'd like to use it. I'll send her a snail mail letter and maybe we can restablish contact the old fashioned way.

I admit I'm a bit naive when it comes to people, but I've met quite a few online who I immediately really liked. There are about ten guys out there who I am convinced are "real" people, and most I just choose to believe are real. (I was able to spot Hayfield a mile away only because the Fusionist borg is so obvious.) Nordica, however, has been online since she was 9, so she has a lot more experience with liars and scammers. I think it's jaded her, because her immediate reaction to almost all the people who first contact me is, "it's them." Heh.

To anonymous who asked what we can do, I have to say, I don't know. If I said I did, I would be "them."

And wow Bobby, that last link pretty much sums up the entire arena for the final conflicts. I think they're confusing everyone because everything can't fit into the same pot.

Bobby Garner said...

I would say to anonymous, there is enough information out there. If you understand the problem, then help other people figure out who the liars are. is a good place to start, and I can't believe I just found this yesterday. Belief Systems and Social Perception Structures.

Stop Common Purpose said...

OT Nikki here's a piece about the Fabians you may be interested in:

the tent lady said...

Thanks scp, I wrote the article for the ACL. It doesn't credit me for it but it does have all my inpage links. That site is rabidly anti Muslim and shows me how far the divide is in Europe between Christians and Muslims. Maybe they didn't cite me because I am clear in my understanding that the "war" between the religions is part of the dialectical games. The religion we all need to be looking at right now is the Bahai.. they represent all the communitarian's global ideals, and they assume to teach us how to become global citizens.

And Bobby is right anonymous, figuring out who the liars are in our own home towns is the first step to freeing our minds. After that we can start going to the meetings and make our voices heard by participating in their new form of democracy. Americans are so not familiar with visionings, speakouts and community development meetings. Most of us have no idea how powerful an impact these plans they "pass" have on our communities. I believe we have little to no impact on the criminals at the top, but we can take over at the local level if we know what's going on.

The barrier to helping people see the lie and who the liars are is all the people who pooh pooh the plan as a conspiracy theory.

Bobby Garner said...

Does anyone know how many "societies", secret organizations, think tanks, philanthropies, foundations, trusts, and other such social engineering groups there are out there? Each one has a dedicated cadre of curiosity seekers trying to uncover their secret agendas, and yet very few seem to know, or care, how they all interact together for a common purpose.

I think we have grown past the point of making case studies of each one of these. Imagine picking through a stack of bananas looking for the best one. Trying to figure out which one of these groups is responsible for our troubles is very much like that. How many do we need to examine before we realize that they are all grew from the same root and have the same DNA.

I have been looking at "The Union Jack" recently, and that in itself is very interesting in view of what we have already been able to put together. It seems to provide a window into the mind of those doing the planning and scheming. Researching the keywords which appear there turns up so many more connections, and more current and related information. The book is somewhat dated (early 70's), and the focus is a little off, but we can easily update it from our more recent studies, and a very large picture begins to unfold.

Coupled with all the other bases we've covered, all of the institutions referenced above, appear to have close ties to a far reaching long range PLAN, and I am certain that we all know what it is.

All of these groups are obviously carrying water for some higher unseen power, and Alice A. Bailey and her genre of channeler's, seerer's, and magicians have written extensively about that power, and the forces it has deployed through them and their "Master's" within all of these seemingly disparate groups.

Their function and activities were clearly spelled out, by Alice Bailey and others like her. They omitted the detail that we see, but gave instruction as to how those details would be filled in by world servers, disciples, and aspirants.

The most concise source of this information which ties everything together is The Externalization of the Hierarchy, with The Destiny of the Nations also being very important. I have left links on my blog to many of the organizations who are enthusiastically pursuing the objectives outlined in those publications.

If they can understand it and figure out what their role is, What excuse do we have for not understanding it?

The problem is that its in perfect tune with their beliefs and so out of harmony with ours that most would-be researchers are simply too throughly disgusted to dig very deeply. This perfectly illustrates the importance of my research of the role and function of belief, and the urgency of getting past that by setting our own beliefs aside. Nancy once told me that it literally made her sick to her stomach. That was a short time before her disappearance, and I think it was a factor.

Laurie said...

I am sure the Third Way left and Communitarian right movements were initiated back in the days of FDR.
The plan to take the dollar off of the gold standard, to undermine the constitution and bill or rights and to promote global govt. was all established back then.
Here is a link from your blog:
The communitarians bluffed the republican party, while the Third Way took control of the democratic party. They use the false dialectic to create the illusion that there is some "choice". As long as the party faithful allow themselves to be led by globalists who hate the constitution of the USA, we will support our own loss of freedom and national sovereignty.