thefreeslave

elevate liberate

Archive for November, 2006

‘The Power of Your Subconscious Mind’

From ‘The Power of Your Subconscious Mind’:

“Look around you. Wherever you live, whatever circle of society you are a part of, you will notice that the vast majority of people live in the ‘world-without.’ Those who are more enlightened, however, are intensely involved with the ‘world-within.’ They realize - as you will, too - that the world within creates the world without. Your thoughts, feelings, and visualized imagery are the organizing principles of your experience. The world within is the only creative power. Everything you find in your world of expression has been created by you in the inner world of your mind, whether consciously or unconsciously…Most people try to change conditions and circumstances by working on those conditions and circumstances…They fail to see that their conditions flow from a cause. To remove discord, confusion, lack, and limitation from your life, you must remove the cause. That cause is the way you use your conscious mind.”

Is the power in you? Or is it in the white man, patriarch, slavemaster, or CEO? Bemoaning their power and how they use it doesn’t increase mine or yours. Nor does it get us what we say we want, does it?! Look around…

Muhammed Ali is the personnification of using the power of the mind to achieve. Ali told himself he was the greatest and would be heavyweight champion, probably hourly, from before puberty. Over and over again this man told himself and the world what he would achieve. The caterpillar became a shifty, stinging butterfly, the Champ, the ‘Greatest of All-Time.’

He corrected the faulty thinking that most of us ALLOW to flow in our craniums without correction. I say, ‘correct dat shit.’ Turn that cesspool into a pristine pond. Don’t allow any unsupportive, fallacious weeds to grow in your/my mental gardens. Oh, HELL NO!

What do you want to achieve: Peace? Social Justice? Racial healing?

It can be done - but it starts within. And that internal game is ongoing…it ain’t evah ova!

Instead of mixing the ‘world-without’ in your virgin eggnog, slurp up that distilled thought that only you control.

“I CAN’T BE BEAT!!”

Hiatal Hernia

During my hiatus, I tried to get in touch with some of the dissonance inside of me. A pressure welled up in me, subtly at first. But then, I began noticing a gap between my ‘public’ utterances and what I was working in my personal life. And what I was coming to believe as this new intuition began bursting forth.

I realized that I was falling into patterned, negative behavior. My focus, ‘RACISM/WHITE SUPREMACY, was my bone and my teeth marks were gouged into it. At the end of the day though, where was I getting with my ‘riffing on racism?’ And where was I getting us??

I was fighting the good fight, but my blows were landing on gloves and elbows and were NOT penetrating my opponent’s defenses. It seemed the angle I was punching from was not getting me what I wanted which was victory.

Seeing some of my friends (and ex-friends) blogs this morning, I was struck by the monotony, the consistency of focus on what’s going on and going WRONG in our world. They speak in truths that are very true. However, visioning us out of the nightmare is the road less traveled.

“Life’s a bitch and then you die that’s why we get high, cuz you neva know when ya gonna go!” is the raison d’etre of this line of emphasis. I should know.

I’ve been guilty of the same.

The world is not the way that I want it to be - fo’ shizzle! I have no control over what it IS…other than to be the change…right, Ghandi?! Me thinks I have to change the game that I play. I have to be mindful that I am not becoming what I despise - in ANY way.

I look back on some of the things people commenting on this blog have said to and about me. I know what some of them meant. I have demeaned and attacked and tried to bludgeon some people into getting some real shit.

My intentions were fantastic, the best; but if you slit someone’s throat trying to save their life, (even if their politics are reprehensible) they’re still dead.

DEAD.

Life is what I’m interested in, living it at a higher vibration, joyfully, abundantly. Just cuz there’s misery in the world doesn’t mean one must wallow in it - In ‘SOLIDARITY.’

I used to believe that but I don’t right now.

And don’t get me wrong: I still despise racism and all the other ISM’s. I just hope to be less of a Kodak documentarian of it, and more of a bearer of hope and possibility.

Anything is possible.

“That Which You Resist, Persists”

From: http://www.helpself.com/manifest/resist.htm 

 “You have probably heard of this statement, “what you resist persists”. But how does this apply to you and your life? Most of us are often not aware when or what we resist…

Whatever uncomfortable things repeat themselves in your life (may) show you where you are neurotically resisting desirable personal growth. Are you still bothered by some family member’s behaviors/words? Still being bothered shows you are resisting. Are you still bothered by situations in your past? You are resisting fully resolving that past. You are resisting desirable growth if you often demonstrate at least one of the following: impatience, stubbornness, lateness, arrogance, procrastination or self-deprecation…

We need our resistances, every one of them, to protect ourselves at this moment in time. Resistances need to be tackled one by one in a sequence all your own; the other resistances not up for tackling had best be acknowledged and put aside for now.

Common resistances we think we “should” have. 1.Anger over certain societal difficulties (sexism, racism, homophobia, the latest Florida presidential election results) 2.Discomfort and worry about societal violence. 3.Specific large amounts of psychological pain when we are left by someone dying/leaving. By all means claim these resistances to your breast; but also accept that that is your UNHAPPY choice. This is the disliked question again of “do you want to be right or do you want to be happy?” But the question is valid; your resistance will push you to “be right”.

In summation, we need our resistances, even our neurotic ones; but to maximize our happiness and our potentials we need to weed the neurotic ones out one by one by changing our emotions, thinking, and spirituality.”

“Misery is optional”

A Brown People’s History Of…Thanksgiving

My friend Lord Vegan passed this on to me.  Very interesting, albeit looooooong, reading:

Black Folks Guide to Understanding THANKSGIVING
Excerpt from The Hidden History of Massachusetts: A Guide for Black Folks

DR. TINGBA APIDTA

The Real First Thanksgiving

Much of America’s understanding of the early relationship between the Indian and the European is conveyed through the story of Thanksgiving. Proclaimed a holiday in 1863 by Abraham Lincoln, this fairy tale of a feast was allowed to exist in the American imagination pretty much untouched until 1970, the 350th anniversary of the landing of the Pilgrims. That is when Frank B. James, president of the Federated Eastern Indian League, prepared a speechfor a Plymouth banquet that exposed the Pilgrims for having committed, among other crimes, the robbery of the graves of the Wampanoags.
He wrote:

We welcomed you, the white man, with open arms, little knowing that it was the beginning of the end; that before 50 years were to pass, the Wampanoag would no longer be a free people.

But white Massachusetts officials told him he could not deliver such a speech and offered to write him another. Instead, James declined to speak, and on Thanksgiving Day hundreds of Indians from around the country came to protest. It was the first National Day of Mourning, a day to mark the losses Native Americans suffered as the early settlers prospered. This true story of “Thanksgiving” is what whites did not want Mr. James to tell.

What Really Happened in Plymouth in 1621?
According to a single-paragraph account in the writings of one Pilgrim, a harvest feast did take place in Plymouth in 1621, probably in mid-October, but the Indians who attended were not even invited. Though it later became known as “Thanksgiving,” the Pilgrims never called it that. And amidst the imagery of a picnic of interracial harmony is some of the most terrifying bloodshed in New World history.

The Pilgrim crop had failed miserably that year, but the agricultural
expertise of the Indians had produced twenty acres of corn, without which the Pilgrims would have surely perished. The Indians often brought food to the Pilgrims, who came from England ridiculously unprepared to survive and hence relied almost exclusively on handouts from the overly generous Indians-thus making the Pilgrims the western hemisphere’s first class of welfare recipients. The Pilgrims invited the Indian sachem Massasoit to their feast, and it was Massasoit, engaging in the tribal tradition of equal sharing, who then invited ninety or more of his Indian brothers and sisters-to the annoyance of the 50 or so ungrateful Europeans. No turkey, cranberry sauce or pumpkin pie was served; they likely ate duck or geese and the venison from the 5 deer brought by Massasoit. In fact, most, if not all, of the food was most likely brought and prepared by the Indians, whose 10,000-year familiarity with the cuisine of the region had kept the whites alive up to that point.

The Pilgrims wore no black hats or buckled shoes-these were the silly inventions of artists hundreds of years since that time. These lower-class Englishmen wore brightly colored clothing, with one of their church leaders recording among his possessions “1 paire of greene drawers.” Contrary to the fabricated lore of storytellers generations since, no Pilgrims prayed at the meal, and the supposed good cheer and fellowship must have dissipated quickly once the Pilgrims brandished their weaponry in a primitive display of intimidation. What’s more, the Pilgrims consumed a good deal of home brew. In fact, each Pilgrim drank at least a half gallon of beer a day, which they preferred even to water. This daily inebriation led their governor, William Bradford, to comment on his people’s “notorious sin,” which included their “drunkenness and uncleanliness” and rampant “sodomy”…

The Pilgrims of Plymouth, The Original Scalpers Contrary to popular mythology the Pilgrims were no friends to the local Indians. They were engaged in a ruthless war of extermination against their hosts, even as they falsely posed as friends. Just days before the alleged Thanksgiving love-fest, a company of Pilgrims led by Myles Standish actively sought to chop off the head of a local chief. They deliberately caused a rivalry between two friendly Indians, pitting one against the other in an attempt to obtain “better intelligence and make them both more diligent.” An 11-foot-high wall was erected around the entire settlement for the purpose of keeping the Indians out.

Any Indian who came within the vicinity of the Pilgrim settlement was subject to robbery, enslavement, or even murder. The Pilgrims further advertised their evil intentions and white racial hostility, when they mounted five cannons on a hill around their settlement, constructed a platform for artillery, and then organized their soldiers into four companies-all in preparation for the military destruction of their friends the Indians.

Pilgrim Myles Standish eventually got his bloody prize. He went to the Indians, pretended to be a trader, then beheaded an Indian man named Wituwamat. He brought the head to Plymouth, where it was displayed on a wooden spike for many years, according to Gary B. Nash, “as a symbol of white power.” Standish had the Indian man’s young brother hanged from the rafters for good measure. From that time on, the whites were known to the Indians of Massachusetts by the name “Wotowquenange,” which in their tongue meant cutthroats and stabbers.

Who Were the “Savages”?

The myth of the fierce, ruthless Indian savage lusting after the blood of innocent Europeans must be vigorously dispelled at this point. In actuality, the historical record shows that the very opposite was true.

Once the European settlements stabilized, the whites turned on their hosts in a brutal way. The once amicable relationship was breeched again and again by the whites, who lusted over the riches of Indian land. A combination of the Pilgrims’ demonization of the Indians, the concocted mythology of Eurocentric historians, and standard Hollywood propaganda has served to paint the gentle Indian as a tomahawk-swinging savage endlessly on the warpath, lusting for the blood of the God-fearing whites.

But the Pilgrims’ own testimony obliterates that fallacy. The Indians
engaged each other in military contests from time to time, but the causes of “war,” the methods, and the resulting damage differed profoundly from the European variety:

*Indian “wars” were largely symbolic and were about honor, not about territory or extermination.

*”Wars” were fought as domestic correction for a specific act and were ended when correction was achieved. Such action might better be described as internal policing. The conquest or destruction of whole territories was a European concept.

*Indian “wars” were often engaged in by family groups, not by whole tribal groups, and would involve only the family members.

*A lengthy negotiation was engaged in between the aggrieved parties before escalation to physical confrontation would be sanctioned. Surprise attacks were unknown to the Indians.

*It was regarded as evidence of bravery for a man to go into “battle” carrying no weapon that would do any harm at a distance-not even bows and arrows. The bravest act in war in some Indian cultures was to touch their adversary and escape before he could do physical harm.
*The targeting of non-combatants like women, children, and the elderly was never contemplated. Indians expressed shock and repugnance when the Europeans told, and then showed, them that they considered women and children fair game in their style of warfare.

*A major Indian “war” might end with less than a dozen casualties on both sides. Often, when the arrows had been expended the “war” would be halted. The European practice of wiping out whole nations in bloody massacres was incomprehensible to the Indian.

*According to one scholar, “The most notable feature of Indian warfare was its relative innocuity.” European observers of Indian wars often expressed surprise at how little harm they actually inflicted. “Their wars are far less bloody and devouring than the cruel wars of Europe,” commented settler Roger Williams in 1643. Even Puritan warmonger and professional soldier Capt. John Mason scoffed at Indian warfare: “[Their] feeble manner…did hardly deserve the name of fighting.” Fellow warmonger John Underhill spoke of the Narragansetts, after having spent a day “burning and spoiling” their country: “no Indians would come near us, but run from us, as the deer from the dogs.” He concluded that the Indians might fight seven years and not kill seven men. Their fighting style, he wrote, “is more for pastime, than to conquer and subdue enemies.”

All this describes a people for whom war is a deeply regrettable last resort. An agrarian people, the American Indians had devised a civilization that provided dozens of options all designed to avoid conflict–the very opposite of Europeans, for whom all-out war, a ferocious bloodlust, and systematic genocide are their apparent life force. Thomas Jefferson–who himself advocated the physical extermination of the American Indian–said of Europe, “They [Europeans] are nations of eternal war. All their energies are expended in the destruction of labor, property and lives of their people.”

Puritan Holocaust

By the mid 1630s, a new group of 700 even holier Europeans calling themselves Puritans had arrived on 11 ships and settled in Boston-which only served to accelerate the brutality against the Indians.

In one incident around 1637, a force of whites trapped some seven hundred Pequot Indians, mostly women, children, and the elderly, near the mouth of the Mystic River. Englishman John Mason attacked the Indian camp with “fire, sword, blunderbuss, and tomahawk.” Only a handful escaped and few prisoners were taken-to the apparent delight of the Europeans:

To see them frying in the fire, and the streams of their blood quenching the same, and the stench was horrible; but the victory seemed a sweet sacrifice, and they gave praise thereof to God.

This event marked the first actual Thanksgiving. In just 10 years 12,000 whites had invaded New England, and as their numbers grew they pressed for all-out extermination of the Indian. Euro-diseases had reduced the population of the Massachusett nation from over 24,000 to less than 750; meanwhile, the number of European settlers in Massachusetts rose to more than 20,000 by 1646.

By 1675, the Massachusetts Englishmen were in a full-scale war with the great Indian chief of the Wampanoags, Metacomet. Renamed “King Philip” by the white man, Metacomet watched the steady erosion of the lifestyle and culture of his people as European-imposed laws and values engulfed them.

In 1671, the white man had ordered Metacomet to come to Plymouth to enforce upon him a new treaty, which included the humiliating rule that he could no longer sell his own land without prior approval from whites. They also demanded that he turn in his community’s firearms. Marked for extermination by the merciless power of a distant king and his ruthless subjects, Metacomet retaliated in 1675 with raids on several isolated frontier towns.

Eventually, the Indians attacked 52 of the 90 New England towns, destroying 13 of them. The Englishmen ultimately regrouped, and after much bloodletting defeated the great Indian nation, just half a century after their arrival on Massachusetts soil. Historian Douglas Edward Leach describes the bitter end:

The ruthless executions, the cruel sentences…were all aimed at the same goal-unchallengeable white supremacy in southern New England. That the program succeeded is convincingly demonstrated by the almost complete docility of the local native ever since.

When Captain Benjamin Church tracked down and murdered Metacomet in 1676, his body was quartered and parts were “left for the wolves.” The great Indian chief’s hands were cut off and sent to Boston and his head went to Plymouth, where it was set upon a pole on the real first “day of public Thanksgiving for the beginning of revenge upon the enemy.” Metacomet’s nine-year-old son was destined for execution because, the whites reasoned, the offspring of the devil must pay for the sins of their father. The child was instead shipped to the Caribbean to spend his life in slavery.

As the Holocaust continued, several official Thanksgiving Days were proclaimed. Governor Joseph Dudley declared in 1704 a “General Thanksgiving”-not in celebration of the brotherhood of man-but for [God's] infinite Goodness to extend His Favors…In defeating and disappointing…the Expeditions of the Enemy [Indians] against us, And the good Success given us against them, by delivering so many of them into our hands…

Just two years later one could reap a £50 reward in Massachusetts for the scalp of an Indian-demonstrating that the practice of scalping was a European tradition. According to one scholar, “Hunting redskins became…a popular sport in New England, especially since prisoners were worth good money…”

Do You Live The Life You Think Into Existence?

“The Secret,’ you really need to watch ‘The Secret.’”

Two of my bestest friends practically demanded I watch this video about manifestation. I did and it blew my mind. Many of the ‘truths’ were old news; however, the new bottle enhanced my understanding of this old wine.

Reflecting on my ability to manifest crazy-negative shit and having no problem maintaining a consistently negative outlook and thought pattern, it occured to me that if I did a mental 180, perhaps I could garner positive results. And alas I have.

Don’t get me wrong, it ain’t easy. My default still goes to ‘the sky is fallling,’ ‘people who look like you ain’t supposed to have shit,’ etc. So, I have to work on changing the default, changing the subtitles beneath my actions, beneath consciousness.

The raminfications of believing that one creates their own reality are revolutionary. How should I relate myself to racism? Should I maintain a ‘victim status,’ mindful that the forces of oppression ain’t hardly gone anywhere. Does that matter? Or, do I acknowledge what those forces are ‘trying to do,’ while focusing my energy on creating what I can, riveted on ‘out-creating’ these racist muthafuckas?

I’ve spent many months focused on the white man and white supremacy; he’s still here and so is his sandbox. I’m turning my attention to MY sandbox, creative palette, drawing board. I’m gonna manifest my beige ass off and see if that suits me more than burrowing a microscope up the white man’s colon.

It can’t hurt.

(Recs: Ask And It Is Given, Esther and Jerry Hicks; The Secret, thesecret.tv)

BLACK! By Popular Demand!!

Contesting the Conquest of the Senses
Pattrice Jones

Throwing the homosexuals to the hounds sounds like a metaphor for the Republican Party’s electoral strategy of recent years, but it actually happened back in 1513 in what is now Panama. Then, governor Vasco Nunez de Balboa condemned 50 homosexual Indians to be torn apart by dogs.

Read the entire article: http://baltimore.indymedia.org/newswire/display/14124/index.php

In the 21st Century and in a world where people say things like: “

‘Homosexuality is a Crime Worse Than Murder’,

its nice to receive an email - without any cut card - that adds light and historical context to one aspect of man’s inhumanity to man. Can’t we just love each other, ya’ll?