The Social Experimentalist - Danny Shine On Waking People Up In The UK and the World
Anarchast Ep.409
Jeff Berwick interviews Danny Shine, The Social Experimentalist, topics include: activism in the public space, addressing social thought control, loud social commentary on a megaphone, the truth can be scary, many laws turn the police into criminals, big brother culture, free speech vs the police state, public school indoctrination, is money good or evil, Capitalism and exploitation, ownership and the fruits of your labor, communism and property, corporations and the free market, Steemit and philanthropy, join Danny on the streets.
Social Experimentalist on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/spiritualentertainer
Danny Shine on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/dannyshine/
Danny Shine on Steemit: https://steemit.com/@dannyshine
Anarchapulco: https://anarchapulco.com
Anarchast on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Anarchast/?ref=ts&fref=ts
Anarchast: http://anarchast.com
Enjoy our content and would like to see us get more amazing guests and spread the word of freedom? A donation to this BTC address will give us more resources to do so: 16AJs5DFEcfCuXkwmx1o54Ld4yXzPP1gVR
▶️ DTube
▶️ IPFS
Thanks Jeff & Danny. Danny's question about money is one that I have addressed in groups online for the last few years and I think I've probably heard every iteration of the various positions we can possibly take on it by now (including having debated staunch advocates of Austrian economics and also the professor who created quantitative easing - among others). I appreciate that the alternative to private ownership sounds 'communistic' and unworkable (thanks to our limited perspectives 'gifted' to us by our closed minded society), but if we consider that part of the bad side to private ownership (which is that with unhindered property ownership the empire builders can dominate the land and resources to the point where some people starve or are forced to go against their own free will just to get some money) is the flipside to this 'communistic' problem, maybe we can see that neither capitalism, nor communism are perfect and actually that both of them have the potential to be disastrous overall.
My current understanding is that the 'higher consciousness' option is the only one that can bring balance and that anything else is basically going to cause suffering - as 'Buddha' said (and is often misquoted) "Unenlightened life is suffering" - which I absolutely agree with since 'enlightenment' only means 'understanding', so by that 'token' (pun intended) 'unconsciousness is suffering'.
Balance is accurately defined as 'no part or aspect is overpowering any other part of aspect'.
If the planet is 'configured' to freely provide food for all (provided our empire building mentality doesn't overpower it's ability to do so by having us mismanage the land - as modern farming practices and our disconnection from the planet has already resulted in) then just using simple logic, any attempt to fence off land from others IS a form of imbalance and cause of suffering. Various battles were fought in Britain historically to attempt to reverse the enclosures act, which was one of the early moves to fence off previously 'common land', whereby for aeons people had looked after the land as custodians for God (from their perspective) and they worked together, often, with a sense of shared purpose and understanding about what they were doing (brothers and sisters). Yes, there was also heartlessness, just as there is now, but ultimately, it was potentially, ideologically to some extent MORE free than a 'free market' due to the spiritual root involved. There is a great irony in the sense of the idea of ownership and free market capitalism, in that money systems are in some senses thought to make things more 'fair' and accessible since everyone can theoretically work to gain money, but one of the denials involved here is that children can be born into the system and forced to start with nothing, while private ownership of land and resources ensures that they are forced to conform to the system of fences and control that defines whether or not those children can have FREE access to the plants and food that grows here freely FOR them. In other words, a 'free market' is 'more free for some than for others' - just as was the result of communism, made clear in the famous book 'animal farm' - capitalism and communism are FAR more similar than most capitalists (or communists) want to look at.
I think there is a high probability that just like how some more anarchistically minded people today look at all the security cameras in London and see an authoritarian nightmare, so too will people in future generations look back at all our fences and property line enforcement and see the same thing. I invite all to run their own thought experiments to determine what the key features are of a way of life that doesn't involve CONTROL at all. Isn't it true that the only way to live full free will is to remove all control? What if by doing so we actually gain balance and thus our fears about what might happen with an absence of control would be found to be errors?
Finally, the issue of 'self ownership' is an oxymoron to me. I AM 'self' and thus it is a logical error to say that I can 'own' my 'self' - there is NO 'my self' because the 'owner' IS 'self'. This might seem a subtle differentiation, but it is absolute and our position on it has huge ramifications for the rest of our perception on self and reality. Just because someone 'else' thinks and acts as if they can own me does not mean that the counter to that is that 'I own me'. How about 'no-one owns me, including that I don't own me'? Why do I need to be Owned, when I AM?
Thanks for discussing some of the most important topics that exist and for being you!
I buy land, plant fruit trees, make sure they are watered and protected, and years later they grow fruit. You can simply walk on my land and take the fruit just because?
The point I have made in the comment you are replying to is intended to challenge your premise that you have really 'bought' the land.
Okay, land can never belong to anyone then? When I toil in a garden all spring and summer, the crops in the fall are not mine? That garden isn't mine? Nothing from it is? When I build a house on the same land, it also isn't mine?
You can make a claim of ownership and if no-one disagrees with you then you can continue claiming that you own the land and within your own belief system you may experience that indeed you do own the land.
However, the 'owning' does not exist outside of your belief systems. If the wider cosmic reality aligns in such a way that your land is now 100m under sea water, you will learn just how real your claim of ownership was. If a 'state' comes along and forces agreement to a system of ownership that involves paperwork and courts etc. - then all that has occurred is that the belief system of ownership has expanded to be held by more people - but it does not make it any more 'real' just because more people buy into it.
What has been missing from Earth for an extremely long time is both a deep understanding of who we are and also an intent to share and operate as one. Instead we have competition, conflict, fear and intention to divide on the basis of thinking that says that if we don't divide and separate then we will have nothing. In reality though, if you really think and feel into this, it is apparent that survival is far more assured when we co-operate than when we compete. Sharing is far more beneficial than not sharing - usually - isn't it funny how we teach children to 'be nice' and 'share with your friends'?, but once they are older we now tell them that 'sharing is communism' lol.
There are many angles that this can be approached from, but one I like to mention is that the Earth is a living being in it's own right.. Think of fleas on a Dog and how the fleas don't 'own' the bit of land (skin) that they inhabit, plus the Dog can eject them through it's own will. Animals don't claim 'ownership' and in truth they tend to move around when wild (and free). Some humans will say 'oh, but the animals are unintelligent, they don't have the mind to understand ownership' - whereas I will say 'the animals are wise because they haven't been trapped by such foolish ideas as that they 'own' part of a planet'.
Ultimately, I value freedom and free movement is part of that. We cannot be totally free while we think it's just fine to shoot each other if we move in ways that some of us don't like. Artificial borders and 'land ownership' form part of that dysfunctional limitation on freedom (ironically often done in the name of freedom).
My children are taught to share their toys with their siblings, but they are not taught to give those toys, which I worked hard to pay for, to random people or even their siblings. That's not a good explanation at all. I teach my children to give to people in genuine need, but that does not include the lazy. Those who can be productive had better be, or they are going to starve--as they should.
Are the poor the fleas on my body? Again, that's not a very good example. Parasites compared to some humans isn't exactly an ideal analogy. I have no duty to keep those fleas on my body any more than a dog does. The dog would gladly be rid of them if it could be too. The dog can eject them through it's own will? That's news to me.
I go back to my development of the land I happen to live on. I work for years to develop fruit trees, berry bushes, and a garden. You then can simply wander onto the land, having done zero work, and lay claim to the literal fruits of my labor? I don't think that's going to work.
My message here is that beyond the family unit there is a much larger family that is being largely forgotten - the family of all that is.
How do you teach them to determine who is lazy and who is not?
When it comes to abundance of food and starvation - my point is that if humans understood how to work with the planet then none would starve since the planet would be an almost continuous garden of food. Unfortunately, we have succumbed to ignorant mis-use of the land after a long time spent divided and out of balance.
That was not what I said. My analogy compares all humans to the fleas on the Dog's body. I did not mean that all humans are parasites, I meant that just as the fleas live on the dog and the dog has it's own will to remove them - so too does the planet have it's own will to remove those who are out of balance and misaligned from the planetary intention. Regardless of whether you feel that or not, the point really here is that the scale of the flea to the dog is being compared to the scale of the human and the planet - with the observation being made that claiming to own part of the land is ultimately as senseless as the flea claiming to own part of the dog. I appreciate that in our current world climate, property rights serve a purpose and are thought to be of use, but I am also pointing to a reality that is superior in every way too that we have mostly not known.
The will is greatly denied and misunderstood.
In a world that is divided and dysfunctional, it can seem that if we do not all work on our own small piece of the land that we will starve. However, what I am pointing to is an altogether more balanced reality where we have collectively shifted away from wasting most of our energy in pointless activities and instead share a collective intention to not only re-green the planet, but to do so in style - with food baring plants all around. Imagine if all the lazy office workers knew how to grow plants instead of just how to push pieces of paper and watch tv? Imagine if they weren't some of the highest 'paid' and thought of to be the least lazy ;)
I understand the flea analogy now. We are one of millions of species on this planet. Our significance is definitely very small in the overall picture.
Sure, we are all connected via energy, etc., but our production, the individual's production, cannot be forcibly taken from them. Individual liberty doesn't exist without private property.
Even a small garden takes work. The planet does not have an apple tree on every corner. There isn't plentiful food all over. To support even a small family, you have to work very hard to develop your land.
To do what you suggest, millions of people would have to be forced to work in food production for others. Who's going to force them?
A lot of people think food in grocery stores get there by magic. The piece of fruit you are buying isn't very expensive by itself. Most of the cost is getting it to the shelf.
That's because most people do not grow their own food, and there's no such thing as a free lunch. Someone had to work to get that food to the point where the person buying it could. It cost time and fuel and other resources to bring it to market.
The planet has plenty of room too. People could live in places that have plenty of food, but they choose not to do it. Who's going to force them to move?
I'm an office worker, and I'm definitely not lazy. By lazy above I meant people who do not work, who leech off others for everything (welfare), and who also do not produce their own food via a garden, etc.
The old saying remains very true. "If you don't work, you don't eat." Just be sure the work you do is valuable to the market, for you can't simply dig and refill holes all day.
Again a very interesting interview!
While you talked about money, I got some thoughts to share:
First of having money is not bad!
But we could design some parts of the monetary system differently so that people's minds are changed...
If this coin is designed as a cryptocurrency, it might change everything; This link leads to the free English e-book:
http://gradido-university.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Gradido_ebook_en_Edition2_free.pdf
Because you hate governments you can leave out one part of the money creation of this idea...
Production takes time, and time takes life.
My property is an extension of the time and effort, past production, I have worked to achieve. I cannot be free if I do not own my time, production, and the property produced/acquired by it.
I inherited it and I'm a dead beat? Someone before me still worked for it. Now, if they stole it or they took it by unethical means, that is when the issue quickly becomes cloudy. Most people are not in that situation. I am building wealth to give it to my children. If someone plans to steal that, I have a serious problem with them. That's literally my life spent for their benefit.
Tread carefully, thieves.
In the end he asks for SP delegations. I get those requests too. Why would I support a random person who many not even be my friend (another person furthering individual liberty)? Some of my limited SP goes to @spaminator to help clean up steemit, and then a majority of the rest is being given to @smartsteem to make me more money!
Hey Jeff, we met at Anarchapulco, Mike, with the Russian wife who said I thought you and I will become friends. Danny and I have / been discussing your interview and his views here. Excellent job answering his concerns. I hope you'll take a look at my Steemit article: “As Above So Below - Blockchain is a Mirror of the Akashic Record / Creation's Cosmic Ledger”, inspired by my experiences in the Ocean Room if you know what I mean. And again thanks for the conference, a life changer for me really. https://steemit.com/introduceyourself/@mwmartin/as-above-so-below-blockchain-is-a-mirror-of-the-akashic-record-creation-s-cosmic-ledger
it was very enjoyable to listen... I like it :)
Congratulations @jeffberwick, this post is the third most rewarded post (based on pending payouts) in the last 12 hours written by a Superuser account holder (accounts that hold between 1 and 10 Mega Vests). The total number of posts by Superuser account holders during this period was 1278 and the total pending payments to posts in this category was $7293.84. To see the full list of highest paid posts across all accounts categories, click here.
If you do not wish to receive these messages in future, please reply stop to this comment.
Really your post is great i like it and to listening @jeffberwick
Keep it up, Good work
@dannyshine, I used to watch you and Charlie Veitch several years back. The Love Police videos were instrumental in my peeling back my 3rd eye. Super glad to see you're still lighting fires under the asses of tyrants and sheep alike. ;)
I hate censorship as much as the next guy, but the only problem with publicly listed companies/corporations is it is open for censors to buy majority shares, shut you down and censor you again ie. like your googles or fb's etc.
The creator deserves to make some coin on creating it and I understand at the moment that is the best way to raise capital.