Quick Takes – Lowering Consciousness: Punching Hippies; Spiritual Anti-War Covenant; Relationship Anarchy

     Another “quick takes” on items where there is too little to say to make a complete article, but is still important enough to comment on.

     The focus this time: Flower power was a mistake.

     First, a little mood setting:

     Carrying on…

     Sometimes, you just gotta shut the hippies up.

“I’m going through one of these moments in which a lot of people have decided that they know my motives better than I do. We don’t need to get into the weeds on that (spoiler: you don’t). But it does make me feel obliged to explain my motives upfront. I want the Democratic Party to get its act together for a few reasons. For starters, it’d be good for America. Second, it’d be good for the Republican Party. Last, if the Republican Party doesn’t get its act together and instead keeps going in a statist, protectionist, price-fixing, big spending, direction with an utterly amoral approach to foreign policy, it’d be good if the Democratic Party offered a (better) alternative to that.

“So, here’s what I think the Democratic Party needs to do: Punch a whole lotta hippies.”

     From a decision by Judge Patrick Schiltz (D. Minn.) in Miller v. Macone:

“This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s motion to lift the filing restriction, which, absent court permission, restricts plaintiff from filing anything but a single notice of appeal.

“Plaintiff’s motion is denied, as plaintiff’s voluminous flow of frivolous filings shows no sign of abating. For example, the packet of materials plaintiff recently submitted included a ‘Motion to Protect Global Media Defenders of Truth and to Compel the Transparent Identification of All Public Satanic Allegiances’ and an ‘Emergency Motion to Halt Unjust Wars, Defund Global Conflict, and Protect the Human Race under Natural Law and Spiritual Covenant.’ The Court will not permit plaintiff to consume court resources with such bizarre and nonsensical filings.”

     When mere polyamory is still to square and trad for you, there is “relationship anarchy”.

“Simply put, relationship anarchy is the application of anarchist principles and philosophies towards interpersonal relationships. It cannot be separated from its ties to anarchism, both historical and contemporary. While polyamorists may form relationships in very similar ways to relationship anarchists, polyamory is not inherently political and tends to emphasize ‘personal choice’ as the guiding principle for how relationships are conducted. Yet without those deeper, political roots, polyamory tends to default into ‘coupledom’ and other rule-based formations that are perpetuated in Monogamism, and that RA outright rejects. Relationship anarchists often view polyamory as an extension of monogamy, only extending many of the same beliefs and values systems to multiple partners.

“For instance, polyamory may still contain hierarchies around who are “primary” or ‘secondary’ partners, which RA views as unethical. It also create a distinction between sexual/romantic partners and friends, often prioritizing the sexual/romantic connections — a delineation that RA would also oppose.

“Polyamory may also take the shape of a rule-based relationship, filled with limits on what partners can and cannot do without each other’s permission; which RA would criticize as coercive, even when all parties willingly give up power and agree to their own oppression. Polyamory also falls into ‘coupledom’, even when there are multiple couples within a polycule; rather than RA’s much more revolutionary vision, where support is shared by the community and individual affinities/attractions/commitments amongst individuals are not treated as the idealized unit.”

     TFN.