Fox in socks on the rocks

You told me about your desire to heal,

but that's not really what I can feel.

You provided me often with food,

and also your fast-changing mood.

Now I stand here with an empty hand,

still don't know what I had to understand

of the obstacles created in the distant past,

which stopped the chance of our story to last.

So my heart fills again with sadness,

walking alone through a world of madness,

waiting for love's resurrection,

another heart-felt connection.

I stay connected to you, my beloved fox,

hope you're happy after putting me in a box.

Sleepless night

Your life seems like a battle for control,

there's a fight against yourself inside -

you know that fight is just not right

and asked for help to become more whole.

We were mutually attracted,

and let our defences go

connected into effortless flow -

but very soon got distracted.

Control returned with a vengeance

and demanded plenty of distance.

The old ways came back and did much

to prevent more exposure to healing touch.

The door is still open, now you decide -

No jailbreak needed, want to step outside?

Unholy threesome

Divide and conquer

The primary deception

lies in the perception

that we're not really whole,

that our parts play their own role.

So we split body and mind,

our feeling and our thinking,

and turn our soul blind

and send our heart sinking.

We still manage to get by,

living this insidious lie.

Our ego takes over control

and acts as if it was the whole.

Yet it's still our own decision

whether to be whole or in division.

Conquered

Once body and mind have disconnected,

which isn't trivial to be corrected,

we become dependent on outer guidance,

available readily for blind compliance.

Our minds start to rationalise

why it's so good to specialise.

Instead of adapting to any environment

we succumb to any given predicament.

Our bodies slowly deteriorate -

isn't that our only fate?

We get used to the creepy feeling

that we have lost our inner healing.

We can still live a life in glory,

but that's a completely different story.

Reunited

We need a body to think and feel,

yet we choose which one is more real -

Our thinking in its lucid clarity,

or our feeling in its plasticity.

Our emotions reflect the whole picture,

while our minds like a clear structure.

This just seems like opposition,

as reality is a delicate composition.

While our ego prefers one or the other,

our soul doesn't really bother -

with impeccable precision

it uses both for any decision.

From the perspective of the whole

each part plays its indispensable role.

Incidentally funny

Looking at the global state of affairs, facing the truth about what's really going on on this planet, can be quite depressing. After I chalked an Orwell quote in front of the State Library, 'In times of universal deceit, speaking the truth becomes a revolutionary act', I got into a chat with someone trying to sponsor an NGO, taking care of children in Africa or so.

Before she could give me her spiel, I used the opportunity to give her mine. I updated her about the latest sit-in in the US consulate, Bradley Manning and Wikileaks and the enemy of the state role, war crimes and drone wars. Basically, lots of stuff the main stream media doesn't bother to tell, still information available to anyone who knows what to look for.

Although I tried my very best to convince her that humans are basically harmless, and hinted a lot that government is the real problem, I received probably a typical reaction to handing out a red pill in what I considered a mild verbal dosis. "I feel a little depressed now." came back, after I mentioned that Obama signs the kill orders for the drone war. Oops.

Silly me. I guess I thought the nice girl was maybe interested in me, as a person, and not just as a potential name on the email list for the charity she was working for. When I noticed that her approach to make this world a better place differed a bit from mine, I stepped back to listen to the NGO story she tried to sell.

Who can resist an appeal to one's purse when images of hungry black toddlers are shown? Well, I could easily. When I came across a map of the world in the material she presented to me, I was mildly amused that Australia wasn't even on the map. 'You know, it shows all the countries we're involved in helping children', as if nothing is wrong in this country.

Would somebody, please, think about the children? In retrospect, it seems like a clash of civilisation happened. I happily assume that someone working for an NGO has this weird idea of making the world a better place, which motivates me to expose myself as 'enemy of the state US' by protesting in front of their embassy, to show the hypocrisy of Australian politics that send in the police to end this kind of protest, to chalk messages in public places. Basically, making a dick of myself in public, for no other returns than the experiences I gain.

So there we are, two human beings in front of the library, united in our good intentions, yet worlds apart. Me, appealing to the community I live in, pointing out what's happening in front of our doorstep, for the sake of it, she, wanting to help poor kids in some distant countries, and getting paid for it.

Yet in a way, we used a similar strategy - using information to appeal to our hearts to do something, pointing out some 'bad stuff' on this planet. While I'm happy with planting seeds, without offering any specific solution besides probably daring a bit more a walk your talk, her solution comes easier.

I admit, unless people that walk their talk become more numerous, quietening one's conscience with a donation to starving kids in Africa has more appeal. It takes at least the Hegelian triangle to prevent people from feeling overly depressed when confronted with some unpleasant truth. Or a good dosis of humour.

Strange consequences

The problem is, if god is dead, then you lose the most important word in your language and you will need a substitute. God was one end, one extreme, and when one extreme disappears from your mental vision the necessary and inevitable is that you will fall to the other extreme, and that is what has happened... Instead of god, fuck has become the most important word in our language.

Before the Christian era, there existed two royal roads into the unconscious: religion (meaning group experience) and sex, and these two were commonly combined. With the establishment of the Christian Church, the road of sex was closed to traffic, and the road of religion was heavily policed. The Protestant Church, without opening the road of sex, gradually denatured the religious ceremonies until they offered little appeal to the unconscious. Today, the position has been substantially reversed: many people have abandoned the pursuit of religious experience, so that sex remains for them the only route to the unconscious. It is this which gives sex its disproportionate importance in our films, books and newspapers, and as a subject of gossip; this is why the perverted and anti-social manifestations today emerge as sexual crimes rather than in forms sanctioned by religion, such as flagellation. Always coupled with Eros we find Thanatos, for the penalty of failure to love and create is the irresistible need to hate and destroy.

G. Rattray Taylor

Countless people in East and West throughout the ages have tried to find God, salvation, or enlightenment through denial of the body. This took the form of denial of sense pleasures and of sexuality in particular, fasting and other ascetic practices. They even inflicted pain on the body in an attempt to weaken or punish it because they regarded it as sinful. In Christianity, this is called mortification of the flesh. Others tried to escape from the body by entering trance states or seeking out-of-body experiences. Many still do. Even the Buddha is said to have practiced body denial through fasting and extreme forms of ascetism for six years, but he did not attain enlightenment until after he had given up this practice.

The fact is that no one has ever become enlightened through denying or fighting the body or through an out-of-body experience.

When we frame the inquiry "how did human languages originate?" in terms not of adaption but of living bodies, we are necessarily confronted with the creation of meaning, a creation that did not arise de nove but was grounded in an already present semantic repertoire, itself grounded in archetypal corporeal-kinetic forms and relations that, as suggested, follow along biological family lines. Accordingly, we should take not only gestural systems of communication seriously: we should take movement seriously, all the more so in view of the fact that in the bisocation of modalities, the kinetic modality is always primary: it is the source of meaning.