:: Re: [Bricolabs] Tecnoshamanism book…
Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Patrice Riemens
Date:  
To: Bricolabs
Subject: Re: [Bricolabs] Tecnoshamanism book - open call!!
Hi Rob,

Our in-house star chamber 'naturally' operates according to its original
principles ;-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Chamber

Cheerio, p+5D!
('All Rise' ;-)

> Hi Patrice,
>
> Put on the sternest glasses! :) I am always learning from your perspective
> on things, and I hope this can be the beginnings of a collaborative text,
>
> Greetings, Rob
>
>
>> Op 29-okt.-2014, om 16:37 heeft Patrice Riemens <patrice@???> het
>> volgende geschreven:
>>
>> +1 !
>>
>> (for the mail-readable text. It's content shall be analysed in due time
>> soon by our in-house star chamber ;-)
>>
>> Cheeeeerz, p+5D!
>>
>>
>>> Asbesto,
>>>
>>> You are beyond hardcore! :)
>>> Here is plain text:
>>>
>>> big hug! Rob
>>>
>>> Trolls' purses are the mischief
>>> Rob van Kranenburg
>>>
>>> Angry Samson
>>> by Robert Graves
>>> (1895-1985)
>>>
>>>
>>> Are they blind, the lords of Gaza
>>> In their strong towers,
>>> Who declare Samson pillow-smothered
>>> And stripped of his powers?
>>> O stolid Philistines,
>>> Stare now in amaze
>>> At my foxes running in your cornfields
>>> With their tails ablaze,
>>> At swung jaw-bone, at bees swarming
>>> In the stark lion's hide,
>>> At these, the gates of well-walled Gaza
>>> A-clank to my stride.
>>>
>>> origins
>>>
>>> "Use cunning and deception as weapons, for in the circumstances deceit
>>> is
>>> no more then prudence, - Pope Innocent III to Arnold Amaury, head of
>>> Cistercian order of monks who who the religious leader of the
>>> Albigensian
>>> Crusade against the Cathars. (John Kekes, The Roots of Evil, Cornell
>>> University Press, 2005, p.13.)
>>>
>>> There is no more center and the sacred tree is dead. – Black Elk
>>>
>>> In most, though not all, stories of origin, - human origin I talk
>>> about,
>>> there is a child near the water. This makes sense, as we grow and live
>>> and
>>> be born in water. Sometimes and in some stories – aletheia as told by
>>> Heidegger , for example – there is an open space in the woods. These
>>> spaces harbor the notion of ‘becoming’. That without which nothing
>>> could exist. And guess what, there may be only one. For without
>>> becoming,
>>> no time, no space and no grasp of any kind of dimension. Flat it would
>>> be.
>>> This notion is quite real. It lives. Without it no life would be. One
>>> could therefore say that it has a stake in the developments it has
>>> facilitated, engendered, helped to bring about and has witnessed what
>>> human beings have been up to for their time they have spend on this
>>> planet, earth. Not a disinterested party, our friend ‘becoming’.
>>> Lately we have been having late night conversations and I have been
>>> told
>>> of her worries. Her voice is much thinner lately. She coughs sometimes.
>>> How it pains me to hear becoming herself coughing. What have we come
>>> to?
>>>
>>> For you an RFID tag on a t-shirt or can of tea is still an object + an
>>> RFID tag. You know that an NFC (Near Field Communication) tag/sticker
>>> can
>>> talk to your phone with an NFC reader (for example all LG phones
>>> currently) as the last four digits point to a web page and your phone
>>> is
>>> always on so it goes an collects that page to show you allergy
>>> information
>>> or where it came from or who made it. But your kid won't. For them the
>>> tag
>>> has become a 'quality' of the shirt. It is normal for them that shirts
>>> trigger information on a device. It is 'natural'. Now what will happen
>>> if
>>> only money-makers are in that link from the tag to the device/phone?
>>> Any
>>> story told through that link will be seen as 'real'. As real as the
>>> shirt
>>> or the can of tea. And that is how power has for centuries scripted
>>> reality.
>>>
>>>     This time that reality, as Baudrillard shows us in his Agony of Power,
>>> becomes 'integral', as there is nothing but that reality. Well it does
>>> not have to be like this. You can be in that link from the tag to the
>>> phone as well. We can open up the entire chain; from open hardware,
>>> software, NFC, to Sourcemap.com, open data, to open media. It may not
>>> be
>>> that less bad, but at least there is a chance that it will be more
>>> diverse and more and different stories can be told. And as we know the
>>> larger the group the elite can draw from, the more internal valuable
>>> conflict and diversity that leads to resilience. Elite? I hear you
>>> thinking? Are we the elite, as in ‘am I the bad guy here’? Yes, and
>>> we have to live up  to this or forever disappear in a few lines of text
>>> that no one - we can not kid ourselves - will be able to trace back as
>>> all our idiosyncratic qualities will be filtered out.

>>>
>>> We cannot go back, nor go to live in a world without this connectivity.
>>> You would cripple and handicap an entire generation and within ten
>>> years
>>> you would not be able to fill any managerial nor innovation position
>>> with
>>> a local person. You would only hire Cloud professionals and will be
>>> paying
>>> throughout this technological cycle of Internet of Things that will
>>> last
>>> around 15 to 20 years before it will be immersed in the combination of
>>> nano and bio technology.
>>>
>>>     "Bert and Tom went off to the barrell. William was having another
>>> drink.
>>> Then Bilbo plucked up courage and put his litle hand in William's
>>> enormous pocket. There was a purse in it, as big as a bag to
>>> Bilbo."Ha",
>>> he thought, warming to his new work as he lifted it carefully out, "
>>> this
>>> is a beginning!".
>>>     It was! Trolls' purses are the mischef, and this was no exception." '
>>> Ere, oo are you" it squeaked, as it left the pocket, and William turned
>>> around at once and grabbed Bilbo by the neck, before he could duck
>>> behind
>>> the tree. (J.R.R. Tolkien, The Hobbit, p.34)

>>>
>>> vulnerabilities
>>>
>>> “We would certainly be happy if we could all get along well together
>>> and
>>> unite all the forces of anarchism in a strong movement; but we do not
>>> believe in the solidity of organizations which are built on concessions
>>> and assumptions and in which there is no real agreement and sympathy
>>> between members. Better disunited than badly united. But we would wish
>>> that each individual joined their friends and that there should be no
>>> isolated forces, or lost forces.” – Errico Malatesta
>>>  
>>> At Clemson University Nathan Weaver set up an experiment to figure out
>>> how
>>> to make it safer for turtles to cross highways. He “put realistic
>>> ­looking rubber turtles, no bigger than a saucer, in the middle of a
>>> lane
>>> on a busy road near campus. Then he got out of the way and watched as
>>> over
>>> the next hour, seven drivers intentionally ran over the turtle, and
>>> several more appeared to try to hit the defenseless animal, but
>>> missed….One in 50 drivers ran over the dummy turtles. In itself that
>>> ratio might seem –although still awful (and not taking into account
>>> drivers aiming for but missing the turtle) not alarming, “but
>>> consider
>>> how long it take a turtle to cross the road and it becomes plain to see
>>> that road-­crossing for turtles on any semi-­busy road means
>>> guaranteed
>>> death.”
>>>
>>> I have always missed this particular kind of intelligence as being
>>> instrumental or maybe at some point even decisive. Yet the fact is that
>>> this intelligence has particular technology that ensures that by each
>>> small unkind and selfish act it is not an equally small consequence but
>>> -
>>> due to the fact that the infrastructure (road) forces the tool (car) to
>>> follow a particular path - is able to destroy totally that which is its
>>> opposite (slow, vulnerable, purposeful).
>>>
>>> So, although we disperse, diversify and are tactical, we can still be
>>> destroyed utterly as in all earlier iterations (from Cathars to 60s,
>>> anti-globalization, Occupy, WL, etc). Therefore we need to work on an
>>> autonomous trajectory that escapes potential and probable retaliation.
>>>
>>> Who’s we?
>>>
>>> The Chrysalids, John Wyndham
 (first published around 1930): “When
>>> I
>>> was quite small I would sometimes dream of a city - which was strange
>>> because it began before I even knew what a city was. But this city,
>>> clustered on the curve of a big blue bay, would come into my mind. I
>>> could
>>> see the streets, and the buildings that lined them, the waterfront,
>>> even
>>> boats in the harbour; yet, waking, I had never seen the sea, or a boat.
>>> ...”
>>>
>>> On April 1 Olga Sjeremetjev was summoned by the NKVD for questioning in
>>> the police headquarters Petrovska street. After waiting two hours, she
>>> was
>>> invited into a small damp and smokey room and asked to sit across a man
>>> whose face was hid in the contours of an army cap. He asked the usual
>>> questions. In between were long pauses. No one said anything. She could
>>> hear the conversations in the adjacent rooms. People were crying as
>>> they
>>> were told to pack and leave Moscow in a day, or in two days. After what
>>> seemed to her an eternity, he handed her back her passport, told her
>>> she
>>> was free to leave and maybe she would consider changing her name?
>>>
>>> In her diary she writes that she took a tram home, happy to be
>>> breathing
>>> freely. As she rode through town she kept wandering what the point of
>>> this
>>> interview had actually been? What purpose does it serve? How does it
>>> enable the state to move forward and what does this cost?
>>>
>>> I would say that I can relate to that and I want can be -temporarily-
>>> but
>>> part of this kind of ‘we’. The kind that is able to act, undergo,
>>> be,
>>> act, question and reflect on the meta axioms and requirements of the
>>> situation. At any time. Whether friend or foe.
>>>
>>> But I am fine with saying ‘I’, not we, if necessary.
>>>
>>> In a review of the August-September 2006 Waves Conference, also in
>>> RIXC,
>>> Riga I argued that two things were becoming painfully clear. “First:
>>> the
>>> need to organise in some way or another is paramount as the pre-network
>>> schemes for influencing government and company policy through public
>>> debates and scandals no longer works as there is no more public in the
>>> network, only audience going from one daily scandal to another: either
>>> we
>>> assist policy to ensure that at least some public space survives, or we
>>> build our own parallel systems. And the second: while technology is
>>> becoming cheap, malleable and potent enough to create parallel
>>> infrastructures how do we organise the avant-garde conceptual power to
>>> be
>>> focused on real, concrete, discrete local and everyday objectives?” I
>>> said basically the same in Dortmund: “In a digital environment – no
>>> memory loss, intricate data-mining, serendipity as default – the
>>> question is: “What might be deemed wrong by whom in power three years
>>> from now?” surely quite a different set of assumptions. So what to
>>> do?
>>> If a ‘no’ is a loss of energy, though a balance to the industry, if
>>> sparking a debate is a loss of energy, though a process of education
>>> large
>>> numbers of people, I can only see one course of action that takes all
>>> scenarios (utopian and dystopian) seriously and that is building our
>>> own
>>> mixed reality nation. This gives sense and purpose and positive energy
>>> to
>>> our young hackers and idealists. Poets, after all, are the true
>>> legislators of the world.”
>>>
>>> Reiterating it again: “At this very moment in time when technology
>>> has
>>> become cheap, malleable and potent enough to wire up our own streets,
>>> who
>>> cares about this bunch of people drawing neat nice lines on worthless
>>> paper? How productive it could be to get all this conceptual power
>>> focused
>>> on real, concrete, discrete objectives. This is not about alerting the
>>> public any more. There is no more public. People just go from one
>>> scandal
>>> to another and could not care less if 12 cameras were installed in one
>>> afternoon. This is about us. Saving us a place “a space” where we
>>> can
>>> breathe, discuss, think and dream manic dreams. We have two options:
>>> either we assist policy to ensure that at least some public space
>>> survives, or we build our own parallel systems. We start Mixed Reality
>>> Corporation with about 200 locative artists and become the new
>>> Microsoft
>>> of the 21th century ourselves instead of helping through all our
>>> wonderful
>>> unscalable stuff IP become wiser and feeding the machine with all our
>>> lovely ideas. Things are serious. This is not a game. Time to
>>> organise.”
>>> (WHEN WIRELESS DREAMS COME TRUE, Mute)
>>>
>>> That is why I founded Council, theinternetofthings.eu. To be a strong
>>> potential building block in this open strategy. If and when there is
>>> momentum. If there is, ok. If not, then not. I can not force things.
>>> Especially not ‘smart’ things :)
>>>
>>> On the cover of the first issue of the group’s publication, Black
>>> Mask,
>>> in November 1966) is printed Black Mask’s original manifesto : “A
>>> new
>>> spirit is rising….The industrialist, the banker, the bourgeoisie,
>>> with
>>> their unlimited pretense and vulgarity, continue to stockpile art while
>>> they slaughter humanity. Your lie has failed. The world is rising
>>> against
>>> your oppression. There are men at the gates seeking a new world. The
>>> machine, the rocket, the conquering of space and time, these are the
>>> seed
>>> of the future,which freed from your barbarism will carry us forward. We
>>> are ready -- LET THE STRUGGLE BEGIN.”
>>>
>>> Nestor Makhno, 1926: The Russian Revolution in Ukraine (March 1917 -
>>> April
>>> 1918): “The fact that we libertarian communists or
>>> anarcho-syndicalists
>>> failed to anticipate the sequel to the Russian revolution and that we
>>> failed to make haste to devise new forms of social activity in time,
>>> led
>>> many of our groups and organizations to dither yet again in their
>>> political and socio-strategic policy on the fighting front of the
>>> Revolution.
>>>
>>> If we are to avert a future relapse into these same errors, when a
>>> revolutionary situation comes about, and in order to retain the
>>> cohesion
>>> and coherence of our organizational line, we must first of all
>>> amalgamate
>>> all of our forces into one active collective, then without further ado,
>>> define our constructive conception of economic, social, local and
>>> territorial units, so that they are outlined in detail (free soviets),
>>> and
>>> in particular describe in broad outline their basic revolutionary
>>> mission
>>> in the struggle against the State. Contemporary life and the Russian
>>> revolution require that.”
>>>
>>> So we need to organize the unorganizable. I have been trying quite a
>>> few
>>> times and failed until now. But all is iteration and I am constantly
>>> finding new allies. And I keep losing old connections like shedding
>>> skin.
>>> Growing up I suppose.
>>>
>>> political, personal, spiritual
>>>
>>> I did know this, Kandinsky said to art critic Sadler who asked him if
>>> he
>>> had foreseen war as his paintings were so ‘warlike’, that there was
>>> a
>>> terrible battle going on at a spiritual level. It was that battle that
>>> led
>>> me to paint this.
>>>
>>> The key element is that normality has been defined so strict that a lot
>>> of
>>> human behavior is falling outside of it, or at least people that have
>>> less
>>> to none filters are feeling as if they do not belong ‚here’.
>>> Probably
>>> everybody at one point or another has these feelings of estrangement,
>>> but
>>> I believe that there is a group of people that feels like this on a
>>> daily
>>> basis and as a default.
>>>
>>> They have no boundaries and find it difficult to create or have a
>>> notion
>>> of ‚self’. They have to deliberately make markers on and around
>>> such a
>>> ‚self’, but the truth is that they don’t really understand that
>>> need
>>> to pull strict boundaries between ‚self’ and ‚others’. They
>>> have
>>> grown up believing in a way that there always is a camera on them, or
>>> always someone or something present. The concept of ‚alone’ to them
>>> is
>>> non existing. In my opinion this is easily explained through the notion
>>> of
>>> the tribe.
>>>
>>> From early dawn of men we run in packs and survive in teams of about
>>> 30-50. In every tribe you would need some people who would go out, look
>>> around and bring things and ideas back home. These early innovators
>>> were
>>> balanced by other intelligences and ideally there’d be a balance
>>> between
>>> the outer ends of manic boundary less and extremely focused semi
>>> autistic
>>> and the in between skillets that build and maintained a notion of the
>>> ‚real’, ‚reality’ and ‚normality’ that was able to sustain
>>> basic humans needs and functions. To each his place in the tribe,
>>> ideally.
>>> If however such a situation arose every body (literally) felt well. The
>>> seer was listened to and the mason build as he saw fit, thus timely
>>> shelter from the storm.
>>>
>>> From time to time the specialists start to build such intricate
>>> elements
>>> or the innovators bring back home such far fetched ideas that the
>>> skillsets in the middle start to adjust what is ‚normal’ and what
>>> is
>>> ‚strange’ and an evolutionary process starts changing the
>>> Zeitgeist,
>>> the ‚fashion’, the ‚customs’, in short : the ‚real’. And
>>> sometimes this process would be a rupture, a real break; war and
>>> invading
>>> tribes bringing such new world views that a new normal was imposed and
>>> the
>>> old forgotten but in stories of grandmothers and the artifacts of the
>>> time. Once in a while such a rupture became an ontological change as in
>>> the ‚death’ of God for certain tribes. More often the notion of the
>>> normal was kept to till it was impossible to keep at the cost of
>>> burning
>>> even more seers as witches, wizards, heretics, Cathars, hippies,
>>> hackers,
>>> or any other minority group it could lay their hands on.
>>>
>>> We are now witnessing such an ontological change, a rupture in what we
>>> perceive as normal. The Internet, Augmented Reality, The Internet of
>>> Things are all technological toolsets that have been far removed from
>>> the
>>> first tools that men used to chisel stone. The first chivel to be used
>>> on
>>> stone was a stone. it only later became a chisel. But it still fit in
>>> someone’s hand. The feedback was intense and obvious. It was
>>> Heidegger
>>> who saw that through mechanical engineering and the Industrial
>>> Revolution
>>> it was no longer a hand applying force but a machine and hands
>>> overseeing
>>> that machine. This was the start of the substantiation of the space
>>> with
>>> before that had been of visible mediation and cause and effect. He
>>> realized that there was nothing we could do, only wait as the famous
>>> last
>>> line in Sein ind Zeit goes. He also realized that it was a particular
>>> part
>>> of the tribe slowly taking up the notion of ‚the normal’. It was
>>> the
>>> specialists who had been crafting and dissecting and splitting things
>>> up
>>> into smaller and smaller building blocks that at first made no sense
>>> but
>>> slowly began to offer the possibility of recreating their visions as a
>>> layer on top of what the old notion of normal was not hurting it at all
>>> but slowly perfecting it, smoothing the edges of every perceivable
>>> human
>>> act. They offered convenience.
>>>
>>> The specialist intelligence - an engineering toolset - began eating
>>> itself
>>> as it found that it had no more real boundaries. After automating work,
>>> leisure, administration, governing, it succumbed briefly to the notion
>>> of
>>> the ‚Living Lab’ but soon realized that the last territory it had
>>> to
>>> conquer was the space in between driving to work and back home:
>>> everyday
>>> life and living. Like a grin trying out faces it tried out all human
>>> forms
>>> of organization till it found the space in between where love lives and
>>> hope and shame and fear.
>>>
>>> As this intelligence could always count on the support of the middle as
>>> it
>>> was the perfect middle, the epitaph of normal : who does not want to
>>> feel
>>> safe, happy, secure?”, the first steps towards the ultimate
>>> disciplining
>>> of the body, home, street as ‚smart city’; cameras everywhere,
>>> automated entrances to public transport, elimination of cash money,
>>> energy
>>> management as a way to fight Climate Change, children playing within
>>> line
>>> of sight of caretakers, banning of smoking (with emerging debate on
>>> banning it in cars and homes), were not seen as invading a private
>>> space
>>> to such an extent that it was a rupture with ordinary liberal
>>> capitalist
>>> society.
>>>
>>> One of the defining qualities of the specialist is that he needs
>>> protection. As his or her gaze is on the detail, someone has to watch
>>> his
>>> back. Industry and states provided this protection alongside with the
>>> briefings and the funds. This, however, is about to change. The
>>> obsessive
>>> worry and attention to perfectionist detail has, as we have seen with
>>> the
>>> NSA revelations, lead to an ever growing paranoia of security services
>>> an
>>> pillars of the state that can no longer be stilled by any piece of data
>>> or
>>> any snippet of information. Equally the full monitoring schemes are
>>> driving the costs of hardware, software and infrastructure so down that
>>> sharing and collaboration through open source is fostering the
>>> realization
>>> that what the SAP, Siemens and Cisco’s of these world are doing is
>>> not
>>> rocket science. Their bloated balances are the result of decades of
>>> isolating data in IP, patents and copyright. Yet what have they build
>>> after WW2 that is so exciting? More planes, cars, computers, nuclear
>>> plants and stuff for wars that keep blowing up people? Big deal. As it
>>> turns out these things can be build in different ways.
>>>
>>> There is a parallel process running alongside this specialist expertise
>>> running amok, ocd’ing on itself in ever stronger attempts to gain
>>> control over the ‚happenings’ of life, as we have seen to the
>>> extent
>>> of defining the ‚normal’ as that sphere where every tiny detail is
>>> in
>>> process and every object on the planet is individuated either in a
>>> giant
>>> Object Name Server (GS1) or in IP to every edge (IPSO alliance) or any
>>> combination of this together with RFID and NFC resulting in every
>>> object
>>> and item being digitally approachable in the distributed local grid as
>>> well as in the ‚Cloud’. That parallel process is the awakening of a
>>> combined and shared intelligence of that other outer end on the
>>> spectrum;
>>> the manic mind. It has been fueled by and has itself helped to build
>>> that
>>> open white line engulfing the planet: tcp/ip where still no King,
>>> Tyrant
>>> or Tycoon can make bytes go faster (at least for the moment). In under
>>> twenty years any mind capable of sharing has shared and fueled sharing
>>> as
>>> a new default. To keep to yourself the minimum of necessity and share
>>> all
>>> other resources with other so no one needs to be in want.
>>>
>>> So now I want to make the case that this sharing is the new default and
>>> that this is facilitated by that very framework the specialists have
>>> build.
>>>
>>> A Gramscian moment.
>>>
>>> Are we going to stand aside, bitch and moan and grumble and lose this
>>> shot
>>> at full traceability and transparency like we lost his notion of
>>> hegemony
>>> to the extreme right wing that is now reaping the rewards of fully
>>> using
>>> it? Or are we going to get together, share resources and build the
>>> building blocks on the cheapest ecology of hardware, software, database
>>> storage and analytics ever? Yes, bad magic, yes watered down alchemy.
>>> All
>>> true. But if the we that I outlined is not invested and actualized in
>>> it,
>>> it we will lose the opportunity that we can either at one point break
>>> it
>>> (owning it) or fullfill it in such a way that we leave some notion of
>>> becoming, so space for real magic to occur or to hide herself
>>> thoroughly
>>> for a while.
>>>
>>> Hellekin pointed me to SCIENCE, MEANING & EVOLUTION: THE COSMOLOGY OF
>>> JACOB BOEHME By Basarab Nicolescu. Foreword by Joscelyn Godwin
>>> Afterword
>>> by Antoine Faivre Translated from the French by Rob Baker, 2013):
>>>
>>> “It is natural to define the different levels of reality according to
>>> our own level, in the way they are experienced by our body and our
>>> sense
>>> organs. We are not the centre of this succession of levels, but the
>>> natural system of reference. With respect to ourselves, we can
>>> recognize
>>> the existence of levels which are nearer or farther away. In any case,
>>> we
>>> are those who, alone among the other natural systems of the planet,
>>> seem
>>> to be equipped with a capacity for translating this information between
>>> levels. This capacity for translation, associated with the scientific
>>> study of natural systems, allows us to pass beyond the modern illusion
>>> of
>>> a single level of reality, an illusion which has as its source the
>>> taking
>>> as absolute the information given by our body or our sense organs (and
>>> also, of course, the extension of these perceptions by various
>>> measuring
>>> instruments).”
>>>
>>> This once human - shamanistic - capacity for translation, has become a
>>> ‘capability’, a set of functional descriptions of agencies of Big
>>> Data.
>>>
>>> It is not something good or bad. It is the condition of our situation.
>>> We
>>> either play it or not.
>>>
>>> ‘In a report in this week’s issue of the journal Science, Dr. P.
>>> Read
>>> Montague Jr. and colleagues at the BCM Human Neuro-imaging Laboratory
>>> and
>>> California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, Calif., describe where
>>> and
>>> when trust is formed between two anonymous people interacting via
>>> functional magnetic resonance imaging in machines more than 1,500 miles
>>> apart. They found that as the interaction continued, the trust response
>>> occurred earlier and earlier in the subjects’ interchanges – until
>>> a
>>> decision about trust occurred even before the latest interaction was
>>> completed.’ [...] ‘The study was made possible by hyperscanning or
>>> hyperscan-fMRI, a breakthrough that allowed Montague and his colleagues
>>> to
>>> synchronize the scanning of two interacting brains.’
>>> Trust requires love:
>>> ‘In a springtime sort of story, researchers say they’ve used
>>> advanced
>>> scanning methods to pinpoint the region of the brain where feelings of
>>> trust arise.’ .. ‘Turns out those emotions are nestled in the same
>>> area as the most powerful springtime feeling of all — love.’ [...]
>>> ‘“Love is a primitive, basic, emotional affective state,” he
>>> said.
>>> “So is trust. Trust is something that a child has for its mother or a
>>> lover has for a lover.”’
>>> Yes.
>>> That is how simple it is.
>>> Love brings trust. Love negotiates trust.
>>> Trust builds relationships. Relationships are embodied in people:
>>> middle
>>> men. Love builds trust, trust builds bureaucracy. Love builds trust,
>>> trust
>>> builds boredom.
>>> Three cheers for boredom.
>>> Let’s hear it for some peace and quiet.
>>>
>>> Stir it up.
>>>
>>> Big thanks to J.Period & K.NAAN, The Messengers.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Rob, ASCII please! This is unreadable :(
>>>>
>>>> kisses,
>>>>
>>>> asb
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> [ ::::::::: 73 de IW9HGS : http://freaknet.org/asbesto ::::::::::: ]
>>>> [ Freaknet Medialab :: Poetry Hacklab : Dyne.Org :: Radio Cybernet ]
>>>> [ NON SCRIVERMI USANDO LETTERE ACCENTATE - NON MANDARMI ALLEGATI ]
>>>> [ *I DELETE* EMAIL > 100K, ATTACHMENTS, HTML, M$-WORD DOC and SPAM ]
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Brico mailing list
>>>> Website on http://www.bricolabs.net
>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/brico
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Brico mailing list
>>> Website on http://www.bricolabs.net
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/brico
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Brico mailing list
>> Website on http://www.bricolabs.net
>> Unsubscribe:
>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/brico
>
> _______________________________________________
> Brico mailing list
> Website on http://www.bricolabs.net
> Unsubscribe: https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/brico
>