The fight against fascism, if writing about fascism is fighting, is wearying. It's also worrisome. I'm not talking about concerns regarding personal safety; that's coming when the last vestiges of constitutional governance are destroyed. Right now, in the calm before the storm, it is the surreal unreality of commingling with unaware people. They're everywhere.

Last week, the American Movie Channel played the 1960s film, Fahrenheit 451, with Oskar Werner and Julie Christie. Werner portrays a fireman in 21st century England. His job, along with other firemen, is to seek out book readers and set fire to their books. Growing awareness of a mind numbing and soul destroying life in a world dominated by state controlled televised propaganda transforms Werner, and he becomes a book reader himself, escaping finally to a sanctuary of fellow readers. He takes a step up the evolutionary ladder.

I saw the film when it first came out in 1966. It was interesting both then and now. Werner's alienation is easy to relate to. To be aware of a coming train wreck, while watching people running to get on board, is beyond depressing. What to make of it?

I have more than a passing interest in astrology, not the variety that provides handy one-liners about how one's day or life is going to go, but the kind that attempts to provide an understanding of the universal influences at work in the lives of individuals and groups. To admit this is to risk losing credibility; however, like Dubya, all one can do is trust the people. Truth is where you find it.

In astrological circles, a book having considerable influence was Pluto: The Evolutionary Journey of the Soul and the second volume, Pluto: The Soul's Evolution Through Relationships, by Jeff Green. There is a section in each book that keeps coming up for me as a reasonable explanation for the herd behavior of the majority. I'm writing about (not selling) it as being potentially helpful in understanding what's going on.

Green believes, and so do I, that we get many spins on the wheel of life. The prevalent exoteric Christian view that we have a one strike and you're out contract makes less sense. Evolving consciousness takes time. Acceptance of at least the possibility of reincarnation is an underlying premise for what follows.

Based on Sanskrit texts, Green describes four evolutionary stages for a soul's journey. We come into a life conditioned, based upon past life experiences, with an orientation to one of four stages: dimly evolved, consensus, individuated, and spiritual. This isn't a deterministic view of man, because, via free will, we have the option to evolve at a rate limited, largely, by our desire to progress. Nor, does it promote elitism, because, in simple terms, we're all in this together, sharing the journey. For the purpose of this essay, I'll focus on the consensus state, because this is where the herd hangs out. It's not a comforting idea, but it is an explanation for behavior that defies understanding..

If Lincoln was correct about being able to fool some of the people all of the time, he was referring to those living in the consensus state of consciousness. Green believes they comprise, roughly, 70% of the population. Seventy percent ... that number more or less represents, in the US, the approval rating of the current leader of the free world.

In the first Pluto book, Green refers to the consensus state as "the herd state," and characterizes the people as those who "do not seriously question what they are told to believe or think. And, if they do question, the answer will be a consensus answer as prescribed by society." This isn't all bad, provided, and this is a big if, the society in which they find themselves is functioning in ways conducive to life. If they find themselves in a society where the wheels are coming off, however, going along in order to get along is a strategy doomed to failure. And, worse, it runs counter to our reason for being ... evolution.

Consensus consciousness is, I believe, particularly change averse. "If it isn't broke, don't fix it," characterizes the consensus attitude toward change. The problem with this attitude is the veil it casts over the need for change. When something is broken and needs fixing, change isn't forthcoming. As Green says, and I'm simplifying, failing to adapt to, or be aware of, the need for change doesn't prevent change from happening. One way or another, events transpire to create it. The impact is typically cataclysmic if individuals and groups choose to be reactive.

As the Bush cartel presses for the implementation of fascist rule without meeting any meaningful opposition, it gains confidence, growing bolder. Stopping the cartel now requires much greater resolve than it would've after the December 2000 coup. Even though there are some voices being raised in protest, there is no indication that spontaneous and/or sustained outrage will erupt, placing a stick in the spokes of the Bush juggernaut. Such awareness may come when it is too late. Civilizations have slid blithely into deep entropy, never to recapture their lost vitality.

With its disdain for life and love of death, the Bush cartel could very well turn the planet into a global war zone with the support of the unaware consensus majority. The result would be a planetary dark ages with tribal groups living the scratch grabble existence already endured by most of the world's people. The US may be a "super" power, but it is not superior in terms of embodying humanistic ideals. Eminence wrought by force tends to be undone by force. Unless wise men and women come forth against the national detour from constitutional government and ethical principles, cataclysmic events are a certainty.

Green describes three stages in the consensus state. The last stage would explain why many of us do not feel represented by our political leaders. "In the last stages of this condition, individual Souls can evolve to the station of political leaders, or positions of leadership in a variety of occupations. This is because they have learned how the system works. As a result, this could very well be the origin of the saying, 'the blind leading the blind." This would explain the Bushes, Cheneys, Reagans, Nixons, von Rumsfelds, Negropontes, Roves, Poindexters, Norths, etc. But it doesn't explain the Jeffersons, Washingtons, Lincolns, and the like. Of the latter, Greens continues, "On the other hand, as evolutionary necessity dictates, every once in a while a political leader will emerge that has the effect of fundamentally altering or restructuring the existing system or society so that it can evolve. Such leaders will be individuals who have begun the process of leading to the next evolutionary condition or gate — the individuated state. Typically, as such leaders attempt to implement their ideas or vision, they are met with various degrees of resistance, confrontation ... , and opposition by various factions within society who are invested in maintaining the existing status quo."

What identifies these leaders is their life orientation, which aids evolution. Leaders like Bush, Hitler, Nixon, Stalin are or were change agents. However, they do not facilitate evolution, except incidentally. They create chaos through cataclysmic events that may or may not shock the herd into action in the service of evolution. What we need is the leadership of the enlightened. But I fear that such a person or persons will not be heard; we have slipped too far into entropy. God help us.

Links:

Given our devotion to materialism, any restrictions on our ability to consume freely might derail Bush, Inc. Shopping is the one freedom the consensus majority might be willing to fight for. Here are some links indicating all is not well with the economy and our wallets.

• Bushonomics & Close Encounters with the Neighborhood Watch: "Then Bush made another interesting faux pas. The panel was talking about the acceleration of tax cuts for the rich and Steve Forbes said that he was tired of hearing this and that it's just Democratic propaganda. He was referring to all the times you hear on the news that the tax cuts are for the "rich" or the 'Republican rich.' But he planted that in everyone's mind. Then Bush said that he thinks we should 'accelerate tax cuts for the rich.' After he realized what he said, he added, 'I didn't mean to say that. I meant for the people.'"

• Scandal Fatigue: Putting The Corporate Crime Wave Into Perspective: "With that in mind, I've done a little research in an effort to offer up some perspective on the magnitude of these crimes. My hope is that when you see a number like $100 million — the amount Jeff Skilling pocketed from Enron before abandoning the sinking ship — expressed not in dollars but in terms we can all identify with, your outrage meter will be set to the proper scale."

• A vision of dystopia: "Unlike the Charlton Heston movie, the Bank does not suggest that we will be making food from dead bodies in 20 years' time. But its warning of an increasingly dysfunctional global society, with enormous pressure on basic resources such as water, energy and health, is remarkably similar."

• Goering Up to Leave the Country: "'What kind of country kills thousands of innocent civilians in Afghanistan and admits to nothing, that looks the other way? What kind of country takes advantage of a national tragedy to take away citizens' rights, give more money to the rich, spread fear throughout the land and at the same time engage in the most boastful and self-satisfying rhetoric?'"

• Corporate Steroids: "Enron provides the most tawdry example of what can go wrong with derivatives. In 2000 Enron claimed it made more money from its derivatives business — $7.23 billion — than Tyson Foods made from selling chicken and other products. If Enron's derivatives business had been a stand-alone Fortune 500 company, it would have been the 256th-largest company in America. By the time Enron failed, its derivatives liabilities exceeded $18 billion. The notional value of those derivatives positions approached $700 billion."

• The Powell Manifesto: How A Prominent Lawyer's Attack Memo Changed America: "After 30 years, the self-serving creed of a right-wing coalition of wealth and power — ideologues, promoters, corporate executives, and the American aristocracy of money — is under assault, its system failures increasingly apparent."

• US firefighters protest Bush's veto: "The unanimous vote by the 2,000 union officials at the IAFF's annual convention in Las Vegas came the day after Bush announced his rejection of $5.1 billion of supplemental spending that included some $340 million for fire department funding."

Our archive of earlier articles by J:

"Bats in the National Belfry," parts 1-4

"Many Moments of Bullshit:
'The decline and fall of a democracy'" (July 22, 2002)

"Bush Family Fascism:
70 Years in the Making" (July 15, 2002)

"Time for a change" (July 8, 2002)

July 1-3, 2002

June 26-28, 2002

June 10-24, 2002