Occupy Yourself

Problems are something we’ve all got in common. You may scoff, but the Arab Spring could be the H+ upgrade we’ve been waiting for, because it’s nearly 2012 and nothing is sacred, as each of us moves inexorably towards personal tipping points, financially, environmentally, mentally, et al. At this time, things are more difficult because human evolution is badly handicapped by the greed virus.

It’s complicated, but if you’re on the network you’re in the evolution business, and memes or mental viruses are a good example of online evolution. Simply put, memes are information viruses that travel across the net in waves of intellectual seeding. Memes have become the building blocks, the basic units of cultural evolution, because they exist as contagious thoughts you stumble upon. For example, the ‘Occupy Wall Street’ meme is a virus that replicated successfully by passing from mind to mind. No virus software will protect Wall Street from this kind of infection. It’s a good measure of how much our inner universe has been punctured by thoughts and ideologies of others.

“Words come easily. Thinking is more difficult. Nothing, is impossible.”

Keep the above in mind as your networked self, a digital elf, battles the spin doctors of reality. The spin doctors appear varied but they’re all the same. Whether they’re trying to fragment real issues, like the evolution of non-Darwinian behaviour, or just hitting you up with the latest on Lindsay Lohan, it doesn’t matter. What matters is that they wouldn’t be needed if cultural transformation on a grand scale wasn’t Ahoy. This cultural ‘spring’, it’s not confined to the Middle East, could make it possible for a truly democratic rethink on the fundamental priorities of human affairs on this planet. Of course, the Corporations who own the spin doctors don’t like this idea, which is obvious to just about everyone else, except them.

We’re living in interesting times, or, as Terence McKenna prophesized, an advanced state of Novelty. We live on a Planet where Exclusion Zones are birthing radiotrophic mushrooms, glowing fish and spinach that can elevate Popeye to Superman, or induce cancerous growths.

Toxic waste.

An ‘exclusion zone’ is an area thirty kilometre in radius around a nuclear accident area, so just make sure you’ve got something like an exclusion zone in your head, a zone that excludes the spin, or you’ll be lost to the unfelt nuance of the rarest moment, a moment when your inner self connects with itself.


An ever increasing number of people, all evolving, are asking questions. Small wonder that the Corporate Order of bankers and politicos is imploding or coming under scrutiny, whichever country you live in.

“Occupy Wall Street!”

A corporation is an inhuman and artificial construct used to absolve individual guilt. Anyone who has intimate knowledge of corporate affairs will know that the Corporation eventually becomes more important than the people it is purports to employ. A stock market is much worse.

Fortunately, we now stand at an intersection of some kind, so maybe it’s time to wonder what happened to the lost inventions of Tesla, or how many energy saving devices are locked away in the Corporate safe. Corporations will chew up people to save themselves. Stock Markets are much worse, because they don’t only chew up Corporations, they swallow countries too.

Those in control of the global economy should apply their minds to improving the quality of life on this planet without increasing their marketing budgets, and without resorting to increasing our levels of compulsive, obsessive behaviour induced by subliminal psychotronics. To put it simply;

“No more mind control!”

H+ is expanding and your network has become a communal contact point between transdimensionals, so be kind to your neighbours – though they be transgenic chimerae.


  1. I’m an occupier in NYC. I actually saw someone holding up a sign with the words “biotechnology” and “nanotechnology” and “AI” in it, so I engaged him in a long conversation. A lot of people are rightly afraid of these techs, and for good reason. He cited mind control and surveillance as big worries. He’s worried about the 1% upgrading themselves and leaving us in the dust when machines are doing all human labor. He sees it as opening a possibility for the elite to extinguish everyone else that they don’t need any more.

    All that said, he wasn’t against these techs in themselves, he was for them in a general sense, but doesn’t trust the system or people who really run it to equitably distribute these techs or even keep us around when they get to using them (which will be way before we do).

    I consider myself an optimistic transhumanist, but my mantra has been “we must destroy the super-rich long before the singularity.”
    What is positive, I think, is that he wasn’t a Luddite by any means, he was well read on the subjects, and if anything he was bringing up issues that sadly still are very much under the radar.

    The thing about occupy is that it’s very open source. If you want to change the conversation, go and change it.

    • Thanks for the update from the front line and keep up the good work!

  2. It is a bit confusing to talk about “evolving” when you have living beings in the picture, because the concept of evolution in biology is quite different.

    Open it up for the common folk – that’s what open source is all about.

    • open source wasn’t what Steve Jobs was about, was it? 🙂 I was talking about the evolution of the mind within it’s biological incantation. I mean, do you think telepathy is possible?

  3. The whole idea tha@ Eray Ozkural
    What nonsense. “… if fairness is a goal, then no single human should have a privilege to natural resources. How is it that any natural resources, like water, sun, petroleum, are owned by anyone?”
    I didn’t realize anyone owned the sun or water. Could you put me in touch with this individual? Seriously, dude, get real. “Ownership” is an artificial human construct, which for all practical purposes, amounts to control of a resource. You presumably propose communal ownership. But does communal control of a resource allow for the maximum amount of human happiness and prosperity for the greatest number of people? If not, then what is “fair”? Who decides? If 51 percent of the people in a democracy decide it’s ok for the other 49 percent to suffer, is that fair?
    Capitalism is not an idea system history has shown empirically that capitalist societies are far more prosperous and free than their communist and/or socialist rivals. In each system of government there exist weaknesses. Greed is capitalism’s weakness. Human oppression is Communism’s weakness. It’s been said—I forget by whom–that communism is a “great theory. Wrong species.”
    “Capitalism does not liberate, it enslaves, and only fools believe that it promotes freedom.”
    Newsbreak: The U.S. is not a pure capitalist system, just as China is not a pure communist system.
    So what system of government DOES promote freedom? And for that matter, what is “freedom”? Technically speaking, natural law is the only system of government that allows maximum individual freedom. With Natural Law, no one tells me what to do. I am completely free to do anything I want so long as nothing or no one can stop me. Is this what you had in mind? In ANY system of laws individual freedoms will be compromised. If you want a job, and you want me to share my resources with you, then you have to give me something in return: your labor. And don’t give me this Marxist alienation B.S. There’s nothing stopping you from going out and controlling your own share of resources. Just come up with a good idea and get some venture capital funding. Come up with something that benefits people.


  4. Why hate on business owners? They’re not all evil. People who talk smack about business owners haven’t even talked with one for more than an hour. I’d also like to hear their perspective on a lot of these things, though people are too paranoid; a primitive instinct that views organizations/governments to be “evil” due to a lack of knowledge about them. Very similar to how many people believe that Aliens would try and kill us, because we know nothing about them. Works for ethnocentrism, too.

    • “Why hate on business owners?”

      Are corporations businesses owned by people? People don’t own corporations, corporations are a legal self sustaining soulless entities that own us. Institutional shareholders are detached from humanity while corporate officers roam the global markets like herds of hungry predators looking for the next profitable kill.

      For many years I’ve held corporate office.
      It is illegal for me to act in good conscience, I have a legal responsibility to my shareholders before my humanity.

    • No hate works for me.
      ‘Their’ perspective, whether ‘they’ are represented by business men, or aliens, is, IMHO, that ‘our’ priorities are secondary to ‘their’ mission. I agree that we should come up with fresh ways to think because the adversary is the only person really worth talking to, if you want to change things…
      btw, what’s the mission, in your opinion?

  5. We had an interesting discussion about this with a colleague of mine. He’d been reading a book on the origins of corporation. As you can guess, it’s mostly military. Therefore, one must not be surprised when the disrespect for individual rights is so rampant in corporations.

    A corporation is a top-down, hierarchical control system, that exploits the nodes solely for the benefit of the top nodes. Who are typically the only ones who reap the profits. It’s a very typical master-slave system. The slaves are completely replaceable components of a machine, that are only maintained so as to prolong operation.

    So, it’s really a virtualization of fascism, in a seemingly free, democratic society. It would seem that everyone is free, as proclaimed in state propaganda, yet almost everyone has to work for a corporation and give up a good deal of their individuality and rights.

    The mark of corporatism is inferior group-thinking, identical thoughts and behavior patterns, an acceptance of company dogma and capitalist ideology as sacred (such as an autistic Intel employee friend of mine hating AMD, on what grounds is such a thing justified?). Therefore, at some level, such individuals are mostly fools that fall for a carrot and stick scheme, however, still, it is immoral that they are exploited so widely and openly by an inhuman system of commerce and work. I may not think highly of idiots who think their “career” at a company is above everything, but still their rights must be defended.

    Hence why, capitalism/corporatism is one of the three main branches of sub-human ideology along with religion and nationalism. A system that seeks to enslave the individual is inherently limiting the human condition. In no way can it be said to be compatible with transcending our limits, and our desire to found a more free, more civil, more advanced technological civilization.

    And exactly why the libertarian-conservatist morons on “secret” facebook groups like the singularity network are diametrically opposed to the true philosophy of trans-humanism.

    There, I will say it again, there is nothing liberating about sacrificing your life to the pursuit of others’ profit. Capitalism does not liberate, it enslaves, and only fools believe that it promotes freedom. I have seen some futile attempts to distinguish corporatism from capitalism. They can never be distinguished, corporatism (i.e. fascism) is the only means by which capitalism can work. A system where the injustice has been corrected, cannot continue to be capitalism. It can be based on free commerce and work and broad individual rights, however, freedom necessarily contradicts with capitalism, therefore, it does not become capitalism, it only becomes an honest, fair, way of work and commerce. For instance, if fairness is a goal, then no single human should have a privilege to natural resources. How is it that any natural resources, like water, sun, petroleum, are owned by anyone? It’s simply a lie. A lie that’s too big to fail! Think about it!

    • Perhaps you might explain this to the pro-Monsanto, pro-Nuclear guy above. His life is an illusion as you so aptly pointed out. I hope his career rewards him well with lots of trinkets and glitter.

    • Yes! Well said. This is what the OWS movement and hopefully more and more folks are rebelling against. Even if they can’t so thoughtfully articulate it. I see no contradiction with h+.
      This virtual fascism, This Matrix, is severely limiting human potential. We all need to Thrive together.

  6. “A corporation is an inhuman and artificial construct used to absolve individual guilt. Anyone who has intimate knowledge of corporate affairs will know that the Corporation eventually becomes more important than the people it is purports to employ.”


    A perfect example of the exclusion zone idea was at the time of the riots in London, and several people on Facebook were spreading news that the riots had spread to my hometown and a building had been burned down- the number of people who blindly believed this was the case and spread the information was insane. Unfortunately, even posts from myself and others saying “The building is INTACT. We have SEEN IT. Everything is FINE.” didn’t stop the rampant web-panic. I guess the death and terror information will always attract more attention than the everything’s OK information…

  7. Good article. It’s not even just equality but a set of systems so broken that the super rich get subsidized by the rest besides things like slave labor. Or thing’s like patent troll’s and politics controlled by few. Here is a few small things to help, though take each with there own levels of skepticism. First http://problembanklist.com/fdic-to-cover-losses-on-trillion-bank-of-america-derivative-bets-0419/ that is one of a few big bubbles they are already doing to sell the future of america into nexium slaves and there kids as has been done http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nexum , as well as many other countries. As you see a few who have a different set of rules for them selves, or double standard. Also for some of them, it’s even a perspective of what do they make or do for society, and how do you deal with the ones that are just leaches and don’t contribute anything good. We not only need ways of accrediting people the right ways, but also a fair work to pay ratio that is inline with the work done or some such system that is represented in a human structuralism but also fare from one person to the next. It’s not just america also http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/liamhalligan/8857518/Why-the-latest-eurozone-bail-out-is-destined-to-fail-within-weeks.html , and that’s just part of the monetary pyramid they made to exploit. You even see religions getting involved http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-mainmenu-26/europe-mainmenu-35/9530-vatican-council-calls-for-world-government-central-bank . This is just part of the financial side and twist as most don’t know they have slaves for a short time under current situations. http://www.slaveryfootprint.org/ and http://www.slaveryfootprint.org/about/#methodology . I’ll leave out resources and information hoarding and some of the other things that are not good for a super structured society, but work for the older smaller society’s ok. After all stuff like this http://www.livestream.com/globalrevolution didn’t exist 20 and 30 years ago like now. Also you mainly see this in democratic societies as part of this shows http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/24/occupy-blocked-in-china-j_n_1028863.html?ir=World . If you where to try to fix the near future how would you bring the change? Careful of the malthusian’s, though good insight http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/reviewofbooks_article/11353/ . So if it’s broken how will we all fix it?

  8. Regarding test-proofing politicians, we agree that there should be some kind of system in place that can filter out the noise. Larry Hagman, J.R. Ewing, from the old sitcom Dallas, had a few words on that in this YouTube clip that you may find amusing;


  9. If the Occupy movement (in its present form) succeeds, and I doubt that it will, it will be a step backwards in our level of technological development. The occupy movement supports and embraces technology up to a point; but the sort that they want is open source farm equipment, social media, and green tech. Many of them I think would be opposed to AI, life extension, and nanotechnology/biotechnology.

    • Why do you think so? I’d be very curious in citations and/or explicit evidence. From what I’ve seen about them, I wouldn’t have come to this conclusion myself. It’s a speculative jump to say that because people are protesting corporate greed, they’re automatically against advanced technology.

      • It’s a speculative jump to say that because people are protesting corporate greed, they’re automatically against advanced technology.

        Now THAT is a speculation. I came to my conclusions by reading several articles on the web, including this one:


        (Scroll down to where `artificial intelligences’ appears.)

        Granted, Daniel Pinchbeck is not himself an `Occupier’; but he does keep up with the occupy movement, and represents one significant faction of it (psychedelic, gift economy, indigenous knowledge). His twitter feed is also worth reading, as he posts A LOT about OWS.

        There is also an OWS faction in opposition to Monsanto. I myself am actually opposed to some of Monstanto’s practices, but not because of their use of GMO’s. Here is an example “call to arms” article on alternet about the Occupy movement and GMO’s (and Monsanto):


        What percent of OWS does this represent? I’m not sure.

        Lastly, although I didn’t mention it, there is also an anti-nuclear tinge to the OWS movement, though I haven’t seen any articles that give an estimate for how popular it is within the movement. It’s certainly easy to find articles on the internet about it, however; e.g., there is a brief mention of it in this CS Monitor piece:


        In counterbalance to what I wrote above, there is also a transhumanist presence within OWS. I don’t want to single out anyone in particular, but there are several transhumanists who are protesting in OWS that regularly twitter about what is going on, and I regularly read what they write. The question, ultimately, is just what percent of the total OWS crowd have a pro-high-tech (including AI, nanotech, life extension) perspective. I don’t have any data on this… and it seems to be quite difficult to come by… but it does seem to be not inconsiderable.

        • You are right that there is a large portion of the Occupy movement who disagree with GMO’s, nuclear power and a whole host of modern technology. I’ve spoken with many of them and I think the issue is misinformation. They see these technologies for how they have been used over the past couple decades; for the profit of not-very-ethical corporations. It’s amazing how many of them can be swayed by simply talking with them about how these technologies work.

    • You have to be optimistic, as well as realistic. It’s a difficult holding position, for sure. However, only optimists can change the world.

    • Things like “open source farm equipment, social media, and green tech” are potentially very important to the transhumanist movement, and if individuals within the occupy movement have problems with “AI, life extension, and nanotechnology/biotechnology” I’m sure they stem only from concerns over undemocratic and greed based applications of those technologies.

      Overall, I see no great barrier between the movements and I’m sure many individuals consider themselves as part of both.

Leave a Reply