🚀 go-pugleaf

Day Brown <daybrown@hypertech.net> wrote in message news:<4168a89a$1_2@127.0.0.1>...
> Gatos Loco wrote:
> > Maybe it will be diminished if we destroy enough with it. In turn
> > destroying sociatal infrastructure and thus the means of creating it.
> > So to some extent I suppose it would be possible.
> Maybe. Why if primitive tribes were violent, would we not be if reduced 
> to their level.
> 
> Anthropology, zoology, psychology, and archaeology are converging on the 
>   phenomena of the Alpha male, so named from field studies of primates. We
> have the video of alpha male chimps organizing a gang to go out and find 
> a foraging couple in an adjacent territory. They murder him and any 
> progeny she has, then gang rape her while they kidnap her and add her to 
> their own harem. Chimps have wars with neighboring groups, and the alpha 
> males commit what we call 'domestic abuse' within their own group.
> 
> Alphaism is handed down on the Y Chromosome. Behaviorism does not work. 
> the assumption that Skinnerian techniques in the schools to prevent 
> violence and produce humane adults are insufficient.
> 
> But then, we have the example of the Bonobo; the chimp groups are run by 
> a streetgang; the bonobo groups are run by an elder sisterhood. Bonobos 
> dont kill and eat other monkeys, they dont war with other groups, and 
> nobody gets raped. There's no 'domestic abuse' and no violent struggle 
> among alpha males for dominance.
> 
> The problem is not the religion or the politics or the customs; if the 
> alpha males rule, they will engage in violence. If the sisterhood does, 
> as we've seen in the Chalcolithic matriarchies, there is peace. Bonobos 
> have sex a dozen times a day. There are two forces to control the action 
> of men: sex or violence. Pick one; the negative re-inforcement of 
> violence, or the positive re-inforcement of sex. Sex changes the brain 
> chemistry; guys that get laid more when women are in charge, dont want 
> to change the system.
> 

Wait a minute, what you are saying is that humans need bananas, I mean
Banana Revolution? Well, maybe that's the way to go, no? ;)

(The alpha male in this case is the King of the Jungle)

"If I can't dance, I don't want to join your revolution" 
-Emma Goldman (1869-1940) 

What if instead of using something totally abstract for national
identity--the flag, the anthem--or something which makes you different
in a suspicious way--religion, politics--we used something real that
everybody liked? Suppose that the symbol of national identity was
'food' and suppose that we spiced it up (what good food isn't
spiced?), wouldn't people prefer it?

Of course, people love it! My first writing over 11 years ago was the
"Guarapo Revolution" (denouncing scarcity in Cuba) and, after its huge
success, I came up with the Jalapeno (Mexico), Arepa (Venezuela),
Banana revolutions...

While other activists struggle to convince an overwhelmingly skeptical
public, I just say "Banana Revolution," and people take the literature
with a smile. In fact, it is *very* popular by that name. And along
with it they get the deeper stories of the jungle with the solution
being proposed...

Most of all, they want the party, the promised "Banana Party"! So all
we got to do is, not fight anyone, but throw the party. That's what
the people want. At least that's my experience among the Latin
American people...

There many more arguments for a funny food name though: 

-Nationalistic symbols--flag, anthem--divide and lead to conflict;
food differentiates yet unites. (These nationalistic symbols have been
used by the lions to control the little people)/ The easiest way to
get people involved is to throw a party. And we need people, lots of
people/ The leaflets are passed on, not wasted/ The names really
stick, which is good for the cause... These names become a 'protest
vote' against corrupt politics, against the foxes. Make fun of
something to destroy it/ It signals that the happiness of people is
more important than politics/ It emphasizes food and things real (not
risk the famines or scarcities some revolutions--USSR, China,
Cuba--are known for). Hungry revolutions feed the lion/ It challenges
junk food, that's low in nutrition and makes us fat. Junk food is also
an instrument of globalization/ It constitutes a 'back to basics'
movement/ It keeps the lion away, since love and laughter are not part
of his aggressive language/ People have something better to think
other than the afterlife. The people need to live 'here and now'/ If
we have a problem with the BANANA REPUBLIC, then the logic solution
would be a BANANA REVOLUTION, no?

We got some very spicy surveys though some don't mean the same in
English. They ask important questions about the party...

BANANA SURVEY 

In preparation for the VICTORY PARTY, we are doing the following
survey so nothing's missing:

Do you like "Chiquita Banana" or "Grande Banana"? 

__ I like Chiquita Banana (Banana Republic) 

__ I like Grande Banana (Banana Revolution) 

The answer is obvious, but HAVING OPTIONS is at the core of our
solution...

Make love, not war? 

"Make love, not war," was not just a protest against the indifference
and lack of humaneness in Vietnam; it was also a positive statement
that love between parent and child, teacher and pupil, fiance and
fiancee, and husband and wife is an activity we should try to pursue
in the house when work is not necessary. It is the one real source of
truth, beauty, and salvation in a community where deceit, corruption,
and impersonality seem to be rampant.
-Jerome Kagan 

*** 

Another argument for a Banana Revolution is as follows... 

The monkey knows that the lion is a dangerous animal, and knows from
past experiences not to dress like a lion, so he decides to be funny,
that being his natural gift. And he also realizes that the lion--a
beautiful lioness--is lacking in love, which is known to cause
aggressiveness. So he offers his banana to the lion who, moved by that
act of kindness, and checking the banana, falls madly in love with
him. And it is said they lived happily ever after...

Moral: Love is more powerful than violence. 

Well, if the above doesn't work then try this... 

The ABC of handling a lion... 
-DO NOT FEED THE LION (you feed the lion, you feed the problem) 
-VOTE WITH YOUR FEET (don't buy from predators, move elsewhere) 
-NONVIOLENCE IS BETTER (the lion wants you to dress as a lion for him
to play the victim)
-CRY LION! (The lion relies on camouflage, so your voice is needed by
others)
-NO LION NO PROBLEM! (do not accept the beast in your life) 

*** 

A Revolution for the Young? 

Sorry guys, but this revolution is aimed at the young--or at least to
the young at heart.

Perhaps it's natural for a young idealist to turn into a greedy
hypocrite later in life, given that the harsh reality of the jungle is
"eat or be eaten."

Then we need to reach the younger generations who like to love and
dance--and WHO WANT TO LIVE. What do the older voters who put
war-mongering, environment-hater Bush in power care about the future?
Well, not enough, and they are likely to vote for him again. I have
approached the young many times though and they agree with the
statement JUSTICE FOR PEACE, since, you know, it makes sense, and
since they haven't developed yet vested interests. So, YES, there's a
generation gap, and we need a change of generations.

And how do we reach them? Say through music, say through throwing a
party? Perhaps we need to give them a chance, no?

SEE YOU AT THE BANANA PARTY!!! 

http://committed.to/justiceforpeace