29 March 2016

Islamophobic ideology gets countered

The Blog


While others take to the internet to express their idea that all Muslims are suicide bombers, Beliefnet contributor Hesham Hassaballa points out the lack of understanding ISIS terrorists actually have about Islam in a recent post.


Citing The Nation and other sources, the blogger noted that many people are obsessed saying ISIS followers are Muslims, as if this is important. They refer to Islam as the reason for ISIS atrocities such as the recent attack in Brussels. These obsessives use such facts to support their claims that Muslims are inherently violent and Islam is a problematic, uncivilized belief.

However, as Hassaballa points out to us, we must remember the reality of the relationship between ISIS and Islam:

  • ISIS does not care if its followers know nothing about Islam
  • They do not know or care what Sharia law, violent jihad or the "caliphate" are
  • Most suicide bombers are politically motivated and have often been non-religious (e.g. the LTTE)
  • They have actually been found buying Islam for Dummies even as they joined the group

The Islamophobia being countered by Hassaballa - which is gaining apparent support among conservative politicians and voters in the United States and Europe - is actually on par with claiming that the source of Nazism or the Ku Klux Klan is being white or Christian.

Proponents of the "Muslims are violent" hypothesis find their connection between Islam and terrorism to be logical, and fail to understand any argument presented against it. If faced with the above argument, they will just assume they are being called a racist or that you really are saying all white people are evil.


One way of looking at this would be to consider, why is "Islamic" important in labeling terrorists in media and political rhetoric? Why not point out if they are a Jew, Christian or Hindu? Why only connect Islam with murder? We also never see victims of terror labelled as Islamic. Only terrorists are ever labelled as Islamic.

While the belief among some westerners that Muslims are violent is disturbing in itself, there are even more ignorant views being carried through social media. Some of them portray the problems of terrorism in the Middle East itself as coming from "Muslims" and proving how dangerous Muslims are, despite the fact that Muslims typically make up 100% of the victims and have inhabited the area peacefully for hundreds of years.

In other words, these bigots only use the word "Muslim" for anyone who commits murder, and fail to use it for the 1.3 million people murdered by US forces in the Middle East during the "war on terror" or the vast majority of victims of terrorism every day.


The clubof.info Blog

Conservatives disabled by IDS quitting

The Blog


Devastated by the resignation of Iain Duncan Smith, Britain's Conservative government is crumbling as its resentful and immoral treatment of disabled people becomes the focus of outrage.


A recent report from the House of Lords Disability Committee shows that government policy has failed disabled people in Britain, and the Opposition has not shied away from using this fact to spearhead its criticisms of the current regime.

With IDS quitting the cabinet, Chancellor George Osborne recently had to retreat on his idea of cutting Personal Independence Payments (PIP), with Labour Shadow DWP Secretary Owen Smith commenting authoritatively that the Conservatives should "find a conscience". Despite having to abandon the PIP cuts, the shadow Secretary points out  the Conservatives won't back down from their continued unethical cuts. They still intend to take £1,500 a year from each of almost 500,000 registered disabled people.

PIP payments go towards people whose are registered blind or have other conditions that prevent them from being able to manage their own daily lives. And while they don't have to worry about left without a helping hand by Cameron's callous government for now, thanks to its defeats, the government will still look for ways to take money away from the disabled and use it to "fund giveaways for the wealthiest and big business", as Smith said.


The clubof.info Blog

25 March 2016

#JusticeForKurds petition after Cizre

The Blog


Driven by moral outrage, satellite television channel RT has come forward with a rare petition calling on the UN Human Rights Council to investigate mass killings committed by the Turkish regime against Kurds in Cizre, Turkey.


It seems unusual for a television station to take the activist step of starting a hashtag-powered petition in this manner, but RT journalists seem to have been morally motivated by what they saw. The Turkish regime's terrorism has deliberately taken the lives of women and children in Kurdish-populated parts of Turkey, while Turkey continues to give fire support the ISIS against its opponents in northern Syria. The #JusticeForKurds petition is just an apt reaction to such crimes.

From the text of the petition at Change.org:
RT traveled to Cizre to get first-hand accounts from witnesses.  They showed us the site of the alleged mass killing.  RT filmed the destroyed buildings, including blood stains on the debris, and shell casings.  A witness told us that among the victims were women, and children as young as ten years old.
The #JusticeForKurds petition, which is worded in multiple languages, has already gained well over 10,000 signatures in the time it has been available to internet users. RT's #JusticeForKurds plea notes that US-led civil society groups like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch paid no attention to the Turkish regime's terrorism against Kurds, prompting the television station itself to take action.

This may be due to the fact that Amnesty and HRW, being pro-US and pro-NATO henchmen who fabricate propaganda against Washington's enemies, are only helping terrorism by the Turkish regime against its opponents.


The clubof.info Blog

FBI exposed as child pornographers

The Blog


Decrying the FBI's "law enforcement gone rogue", Garrison Center director Thomas L. Knapp points out that the Federal Bureau of Investigation broke the law by running an illegal website distributing child pornography.


Similar to other sting operations, in which a large amount of the harm is done by the FBI itself, (such as persuading extremists to commit acts of terror so they can then be arrested) this one involved the FBI taking it upon itself to run an illegal website - a type of cyber sting operation.

Choosing not to "cheer on the white knights who protect society from the scourge of child pornography" this time, considering their methods, the Garrison director sums up how the scandal transpired in a recent March 22 post, as follows:
The Federal Bureau of Investigation, it seems, has been moonlighting as a provider of child pornography. After locating and seizing the servers of a child porn site on the “dark web,” known as Play Pen and reachable only via the Tor browser, the FBI decided not to shut the site down. Instead, they kept it running for two weeks, using it to spread malware that could identify and locate a handful of the site’s visitors. The vast majority of the 200,000 people downloading child porn from the site went on their way unmolested (pun intended). A few whose computers were mis-configured so as to be vulnerable to the FBI’s trick were arrested.
Whistle-blowers (this time Free Talk Live), as usual, came under attack by US law enforcement for exposing the government's tactics. Knapp deems the FBI, in light of these revelations, to be "child pornographers" while "their victims are journalists who exposed the FBI’s role" in the scandal.


The clubof.info Blog

22 March 2016

Synthetic biology: here be dragons?

The Blog


Talking of the possibilities of synthetic biology (synbio), one blog post at Beliefnet speculates that dragons could exist someday, created and bred by scientists.


While many fans of Jurassic Park may be disappointed to know that dinosaur DNA is lost forever, weathered away by time, fans of high fantasy need not be so disappointed. The mythical serpents known as dragons are make-believe animals. Ironically, this would give geneticists and synthetic biologists free reign to write their genetic material almost from scratch, where they would simply lack enough information to create a dinosaur.

As the Beliefnet blog notes, "Dragons were invented by people in the first place. Inventing them again, in the great tapestry of their very DNA, is just an extension of what fantasy writers have already been doing for years and George R. R. Martin tries to accomplish using ink these days."

Of course, while it makes its point clear, this post is only semi-serious. It acknowledges that the the real benefit of synthetic biology will rest in the creation of renewable fuel sources and new unlimited varieties of oil, rather than these mythical serpents so cherished by fantasy readers.


The clubof.info Blog

Would a Brexit make any difference?

The Blog


Britain's future in the European Union has been on a lot of minds leading up to the 23 June referendum on whether the United Kingdom should remain a member.


One view is that it ultimately doesn't matter. It is a hollow debate, with either outcome of the Brexit referendum doing nothing to prevent the further subversion of political power in the UK for the interests of corporations.

Blogger Steve Topple draws attention to numerous media materials featuring his work and the European Union in a recent post on 20th March, including seven articles and one video. In one article, Topple notes, "I don’t think a vote either way will make one damned bit of difference as both the EU and UK Governments, as institutions, are controlled by forces greater than themselves – the multinational corporations." He promises to sleep through the entire thing, not caring much for either outcome.

A similarly abstaining view is given at Beliefnet, where a post takes note of the threat to scientific research funding and welfare posed by Britain exiting the EU, but at the same time praises the referendum as "a crucial step in pressuring the EU to rethink its future". The post speculates that Britain leaving the EU could destroy the EU, something that is not in fact the intention of Brexit campaigners who are concerned merely with Britain's future.


The clubof.info Blog

18 March 2016

What if US elections actually worked?

The Blog


In a recent short post, Garrison Center director Thomas Knapp suggests a way of revising US presidential elections so the outcome would be more satisfactory to voters.


Available at the Garrison Center and Medium, the post tempts readers with a better alternative to "one person, one vote" by asking:
What if you could vote for ALL the candidates you like, instead of just one, secure in the knowledge that your vote(s) would not be “wasted” on a loser, or “spoil” the chances of one of your preferred candidates, resulting in election of the “greater evil?”
That better alternative is Approval Voting, in which, "You vote for as few or as many candidates as you like. All the votes are counted. The candidate with the most votes wins. Yes, it’s really that simple." A US voter might, for example, be able to use three votes - one for your favorite independent who deserves a chance to win but is unlikely, the second for the best candidate in the party of your choosing, and a third for the candidate most likely to win in the party of your choosing.

Knapp justifies this kind of revision on the basis that most Americans end up voting for the lesser evil rather than the candidate their heart is really with. In the present US election race, many voters are likely to vote (e.g. for Hillary Clinton) more for a desire to keep Donald Trump out of power than because Clinton deserves power.

The widespread public view of Clinton is deeply negative due to her poor role as Secretary of State and track record of lying to to the public, but even she seems harmless compared to Trump in terms of her public statements. A sizable number of Americans polled have indicated that they may leave the United States if the divisive and bigoted Donald Trump is elected to power.


The clubof.info Blog

Existential risks don't matter to politics

The Blog


Current political science and ideology concentrates on the liberties of the individual, therefore lacks any and all theoretical grounds to bother opposing "existential risks" to human progeny or civilization, a blog post asserts.


This view, based on an unpublished review of a Lifeboat Foundation book, appears in a Beliefnet post. The argument goes that there is a lack of support in existing political theory for the pleas of Stephen Hawking, the Lifeboat Foundation boards, and countless other futurists and scientists who say space colonization should be pursued to ensure the perpetuation of the species.

No one in modern politics will be moved by the notion of safeguarding human posterity. In fact, most governments and political movements do not care for the long-term survival of humankind and will never invest any effort in it as their priorities are very clearly elsewhere:
[worrying about posterity] it is contrary to existing political norms. The prevailing liberal, centrist, libertarian and even socialist philosophies in the west today mainly focus on the rights, pleasures, and just treatment of individuals. Where they are concerned, it doesn’t actually matter if no humans exist a couple of centuries from now, as long as people didn’t die painfully.
To put it more consequentially, this means no electable politician or political scientist in the west would be swayed by negative-minded futurist arguments about saving humans from existential risks. Basically, the idea of posterity - of saving future generations to inhabit the world or even other worlds beyond - is completely unheard of to politicians and social science experts and cannot be expected to impress them.

Calling this problem a "gap on all our bookshelves", where there is simply no valid political theory and a lack of literature about why to save civilization or ensure posterity, the blog repeats its earlier value judgment that global injustice is ultimately worse than extinction in any binary choice between the two.

Maybe the political science is on the right track. If the current social system is unjust, efforts to save civilization are only about saving injustice.


The clubof.info Blog

15 March 2016

Cameron's PMQs fail gets him 1 star

The Blog


Weighing in on the incumbent Conservative government's poor record on support for vulnerable members of society, writer Steve Topple comments "Cameron spectacularly failed to answer one single question" from Opposition Leader Jeremy Corbyn during a recent session of Prime Minister's Questions (PMQs).


Topple dismissed PM David Cameron's responses as "dodgy statistics and retorts about a “growing economy”" that evidently are cherry picked from studies that also contained not-so-friendly analysis of the government's performance in welfare (conveniently omitted by Cameron). According to Topple:
"Ignoring Corbyn’s challenge to the utterly nefarious £30 cut to Employment and Support Allowance for those in the “Work-related Activity Group” (going against the House of Lords, and unending calls from charities and trade unions), Cameron trotted out his guff about a growing economy, and incredulously said that “reforming welfare” was helping to “get the deficit down… helping to deliver for working people in Britain”. (Working? Those 800,000 people on zero-hours contracts, perhaps.)"
Deeming such a response "contemptable", Topple gives some praise to Jeremy Corbyn, noting "Corbyn was actually asking him quite direct questions this week", departing from his previous excessive polite form. What Topple saw was a "more impassioned performance at PMQs", harrying the incumbent regime over the "overall disregard the Tories have for those at the lower rungs of society". Challenging the Prime Minister on the profound contribution of the current state to deepening child poverty in the name of reducing public spending, Corbyn also noted that "99%" of Cameron's responses to his questions had been insufficient.

Read Steve Topple's full post here

Ultimately, Steve Topple gives a tally: "Cameron – 2/10" (1 star); "Corbyn – 7/10" (3.5 stars), thus making Cameron's attempts to fend off Corbyn's questions and challenges a big fail.



The clubof.info Blog

Paid $1500 in jail fees, not even guilty

The Blog


Indicating more unfairness in the US jail system, a man was deprived of a large sum of money in jail fees during the time he stood merely accused of a crime.


Thomas L. Knapp relays the story in a column, available at the Garrison Center and also published via the Mesa Independent and Citizens Journal.

The man, who isn't mentioned by name, was acquitted, but not without being charged "$1,500 he was required to pay just to remain in a place he would cheerfully have walked right out of if allowed."

In his conclusion, Knapp comments that as an antistatist, he doesn't believe in the present government prison system - but, while one exists, taxpayers should really shoulder the costs. He asks, "shouldn’t “we” pick up the check for keeping people — even guilty people — in jail if that’s where “we” want them kept?"


The clubof.info Blog

11 March 2016

Wallerstein: Is it left to be nationalist?

The Blog


Observing why a new unified global political left ideology or platform has become so difficult to create, social scientist Immanuel Wallerstein tackled the question of whether the left should be nationalist or globalist in outlook.


Prominent left wing anti-imperialist theorists, going back as far as Frantz Fanon or Edward Said, held a belief in a strong patriotic movement by colonial subjects to gain their freedom from the international capitalist bourgeois class (if we are to use old Marxist terminology). Samir Amin is possibly the one who best expresses such thinking at a theoretical level today.

Other left wing theorists are avowed antistatists, who emphasize the boundless nature of class, with exploited and oppressed people existing in all nation-states and their oppressors hopping freely from country to country to maintain global exploitation. In theoretical terms, it is starkly clear that proponents of left internationalism and antistatism are more faithful to the social science behind left wing groups and movements. By comparison, left wing nationalism has been ad hoc or influenced by cultural details, and usually justified by the needs of the moment to oppose wars of meddling and intervention by the west (e.g. Algeria in Fanon's time, or Syria now).

Immanuel Wallerstein's commentary from 15 February points out the problem of the ideological gulf between anti-imperialist patriotic and cultural movements and globalist left-wing social theory and liberation, by asking the question:
Is it left to be internationalist, one-worldist, or is it left to be nationalist against the intrusion of powerful world forces? Is it left to be for the abolition of all frontiers or for the reinforcement of frontiers? Is it class-conscious to oppose nationalism or to support national resistance to imperialism?
Wallerstein doesn't answer from his own heart, but asks us to think about this. However, as a Beliefnet response points out, there is a "strongly seductive anti-nation-state thread" in all of Wallerstein's writing. It is clear that he would fall onto the globalist side in such a debate, as would any left wing proponents of technological modernity and digital activism such as the technoprogressives (including this very blog!).

The inability to reconcile left wing national liberation causes with theories of global oppression and liberation is crippling the left's ability to appeal to people as a united and coherent ideology (the way Socialism did in the old days of the late 19th and early to mid 20th Century) according to Wallerstein. As Wallerstein concludes, "the failure of the global left to enter into a collective internal debate in a solidary manner undermines the ability of the global left to be a principal actor today on the world scene".


The clubof.info Blog

Tories "cannot outsource" their failures

The Blog


Pointing out a deterioration in Britain to "second-rate public services", the Labour Party's Shadow Minister for the Cabinet Office said outsourcing and privatization can't change the fact Chancellor George Osborne is culpable.


Shadow Cabinet Office head Tom Watson (also Deputy Leader of the Labour Party) made the comment after the government announced it would review contracts with private company ATOS. Any review of contracts is meant to suggest ATOS is to blame for problems, rather than the government being to blame for foolishly awarding the contracts in the first place.

The penchant for privatization is shared by both Blairite anti-Corbyn policy advocates in the Labour Party, and the incumbent Conservative government. The free market forces embraced by such ideologues, however, have no bearing on whether companies awarded with government contracts are able to do their job effectively. In fact, once awarded with a government contract, private companies like G4S and ATOS are convinced that they are now safe to act as parasites, draining public money, escaping oversight, and no longer even having to compete with other companies.

Possibly worse, outsourcing Civil Service work to private organizations flagrantly violates the intentions of the Civil Service Code by delegating work to people who simply do not have to abide by that Code - something Tom Watson hints at when he says "until private providers of taxpayer-funded services are subject to the same transparency and accountability rules as their public counterparts, whatever steps the Cabinet Office takes to improve services are bound to fail".

Many of the organizations awarded with government contracts (especially G4S) have not only performed badly and failed to live up to the standards of government workers but have their own record of impunity, violations of human rights, and callous treatment of vulnerable people including the disabled. Nevertheless, they are left in charge of their own oversight and free from any intervention by real government officials.


The clubof.info Blog

8 March 2016

The Venus Project and transhumanism

The Blog


Somewhat connecting the issues talked about by the Venus Project and transhumanists, a recent issue of TVP Magazine features an eBook mentioning longevity and resource abundance to be achieved by technology.


Authored by TVP Magazine project manager Tio, an infographic-style ebook goes over a lengthy TVP-inspired account of the history of economics. It then makes the case for a technological paradise without any of the problems of war brought about by scarcity, trade and currency.

Interestingly, the free eBook, titled The Money Game and Beyond, mentions some issues important to transhumanist and futurist authors, including resource abundance and longevity achieved through science and technology. While praising the work of current developers, activists and movements towards open source solutions and decentralized governance and production, the book laments a lack of overall "design" behind such goals.

In its summary, the TVP ebook argues it would be a myth to say breakthroughs in medical science are radically extending human lifespans. In reality, "modern medicine" is simply extending lives in ways that it did not have the opportunity to do in the past, the book says. As such, the book concludes, "defeating aging will not remove poverty, wars, corruption and the like, but retiring trade (the money game) will certainly allow enormously more research on curing aging, along with solving most of the world's problem". This is part of a larger criticism of other existing scientific and political movements as simply treating "symptoms" of an ailing society rather than providing real cures targeting the fundamental causes of such ailments.

The goal of the Venus Project, mostly the work of futurist Jacque Fresco, has been to design a specific alternative society, including by constructing entire new circular cities.


The clubof.info Blog

Charlie Hebdo 'should be called idiots'

The Blog


What happened to Charlie Hebdo when their artists were attacked and killed by terrorists for publishing offensive images was a result of "stupidity and lack of vision" on the part of the artists, who provoked their own deaths.


A blog published via the multi-faith Beliefnet website advances, "If artists are killed for offending people, you should call them idiots, just as you would call any prankster an idiot for insulting the wrong person and getting beaten up or killed as a result."

The blog writes that the idea of expanding the mandates of free speech to protect any offensive publisher from reprisals by the general public is actually "anti-freedom". It would require security cameras and armed guards everywhere, and for people's opinions to be monitored and suppressed brutally. For example, eight-year-old children were detained and interrogated by police for not supporting Charlie Hebdo in France, yet Charlie Hebdo still pretends to be advancing the frontiers of freedom of speech.

In its conclusions, the post asserts that rather than a war on Muslims and further insults against people's religious sensibilities, "People should not be offensive. They should censor themselves for their own safety from everybody else, as the vast majority of people wisely do." The blog notes that "even in the “freest” society imaginable" certain images or statements can go too far and incite members of the public to violence.

Much of the media portrays Muslims as exceptionally easy to provoke and prone to violence, while ignoring the violence and oversensitive behavior of other social groups and the fact that anyone else can also be provoked to violence if their feelings are constantly and deliberately being hurt.


The clubof.info Blog

4 March 2016

Russia broke its own Syria ceasefire?

The Blog


Despite the fact Russia organized and demanded the current Syria ceasefire in the first place, pro regime-change sources insist Russia is violating its own agreements and commitments that it set for itself within mere days.


Because the illegal armed groups propped up by the west against Syria are facing collapse and defeat, increasing hysteria and irrational thinking is overcoming the supporters of these so-called "opposition" or "rebel" groups.

More than ever, idiots are lobbying for a larger-scale war that will target Russia and involve the United States in a potential nuclear armed confrontation about the war in Syria.

Pushed up against the Turkish regime's border and begging for the despots in Saudi Arabia and Turkey to send troops to rescue them, Syrian "opposition" forces are again whining throughout the international media for foreign powers to refuse peace and instead invade the country. Rather than accusing the Syrian government of using chemical weapons or accusing Russia of bombing hospitals, for which they don't need any evidence to convince war hawks in the US government of the need for regime-change, they are accusing Russia of breaking its own Syria ceasefire within two days.

The claims were already being reported in the Qatari dictatorship-controlled media outlet Al-Jazeera, which has always advocated in favor of the Saudi regime and its massacres of the people of Syria and Yemen, only days after the Russian-drafted ceasefire was implemented.

None of these claims can be taken seriously as they are too farcical. If Russia's plan is to destroy the ceasefire, why did it create the ceasefire in the first place? The absurd allegations were predicted accurately at Beliefnet before they were made. One thing worth noting is that while the US indicates a "Plan B" to dismantle the Syrian state (something all the current traitors and foreign militants responsible for butchering Syria's people advocate strongly), experts in Russia warned that "Plan B" will lead to a nuclear war with Russia if the US attempts it.

From one point of view, it is unsurprising that anti-Syria advocates are accusing Russia of such an absurd crime as conspiring to destroy an agreement it created. They get their information from such faulty and propagandized sources like the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) that they can be expected to believe and react to anything except reality.


The clubof.info Blog

West-Islam dialogue on values needed

The Blog


A dialogue on values between the west and Islam is needed as an alternative to the "clash of civilizations" and "imposition of western culture by force" on Muslims and others.


This is the advice given by Sonia Mansour Robaey at her own blog Les Politiques as well as at the publication Iran's View.

  • Read the version at Les Politiques here
  • Read the version at Iran's View here
  • Read one response at Beliefnet here

From the author's conclusions:
As I wrote in the aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo tragedy, a dialogue on values is urgently needed to silence the voices of confrontation.  The clash of civilizations is an idea as backward as the barbaric terrorism it sets out to explain... and fight... by curtailing our civil liberties and creating an artificial wedge between civilizations destined to increase their common ground in an era of rapid communications where societies are becoming more open and more welcoming. 
The promoters of the clash of civilizations are the new enemies of the Open Society.
Open society can mean different things. In its use in Robaey's analysis, it seems to refer to social globalization creating the borderless world, whereas in its original pre-globalization usage by Karl Popper it referred to the liberal democratic state model that only exists in western countries.

Les Politiques was recently added to the blog listings of the Mont Order society. The Mont Order has itself managed to host an element of dialogue on values between the Muslim and western blogospheres by inviting the Pakistan-based Voice of East magazine to add views to online conferences otherwise only seating western bloggers.


The clubof.info Blog

1 March 2016

Muslims should look at technopolitics

The Blog


In a lengthy Facebook post republished to the Pakistan-based online magazine Voice of East, Moeed Pirzada asks politicians and intellectuals in the Islamic world to look at the "relationship between technology and politics".


This relationship between new technologies and politics gives rise to the term technopolitics, which is known quite widely among transhumanists and futurists in the west.

In his post, Pirzada appeals to Muslims to see the ways technology can be abused to reduce freedom (or conversely, protections built in to ensure freedom is protected on an even greater scale than before):
Western society and intellectuals understood the messages conveyed by the visionaries like Adlous Huxley and George Orwell and they built firewalls against authoritarianism... but there were no Huxleys and Orwells in Muslim world, perhaps there could not have been because of colonialism... that ‘battle of ideas in the world of technology’ and its relationship, its impact on the future of democracy, is not understood. Technologically empowered elites can endlessly market illusions as reality.
While these claims largely ring true, and are similar to the claims of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, Assange has also written of a type of "rebel elite" emerging through the same technologies to challenge the ruling elite in technopolitics. The book in which Assange makes such claims is Cypherpunks (2012).

We may be faced with numerous types of control or oppression enforced by technology, but the history of revolution proves that no solution can be obtained except by different conquests and uses of the very same technology. Hence, today, we have rebels within the global technopolitics space who include hackers, dissident bloggers and encyption experts at the frontline of the battle for online freedom and privacy.


The clubof.info Blog

'Mont Order not an organization'

The Blog


A post to unofficial Mont Order website lordre.net asserts that the Mont Order is not an organization.


The post, made on Saturday 27 February, also refutes the idea that the Mont Order group has a "security council" anymore. It is posted by L'Ordre, the social media handle of one friend of the Mont Order.

This follows a global audio conference that had been planned between Mont Order associates. The discussion did take place between six Mont Order friends and has been made available as an audio track via YouTube. The discussion has been released for reasons of recording the Order's own recent history, rather than being published in any particular viewer-friendly form.

Saturday's L'Ordre post on the Mont Order appeals to the real nature of the Mont Order as an urban legend, a metaphor and a pluralistic gathering rather than an official organization. At present, the Mont Order is an entirely digital gathering loosely bound together only by a 7-point code of values from 2015. This code, the post mentions, could be delivered in book form to some Mont Order friends.

The message that the Order is no normal, formal organization with a set agenda has been put forward before. In "Organizing without Organization" it is made clear that the Order does not follow traditional management, rules or see any need to have its own model organization. Instead, in principle, the name and idea of Mont Order are simply applied by professed friends of Mont by achieving consensus on defining world events and ideologies.


The clubof.info Blog

Delivered by Email

Featured

Clubofinfo World Commentaries

Follow by Email

Mont Experts

Follow by Email

Follow Me on Twitter