I also dearly love Charles but in my humble opinion he unfortunately miscalculated and unintentionally did a huge disservice to humanity when - instead of encouraging and helping us to free ourselves by getting rid of our ruling class abusers and controllers in its entirety - he instead unwittingly influenced (strongly influenced) his followers into supporting one half of the abusive ruling class, by repeating the false Qanon/MAGA marketing deception that sells us elite billionaire (and infantile abusive narcissist) trump as "anti elite rebel" when he is clearly the POLAR OPPOSITE of that, as his pro-billionaire pro-empire pro-rulling class pro-Wall St pro-M.I.C pro-Big Pharma pro-Big Agri pro-global imerialist theft of resources actions as president clearly show, and as clearly shown by him filling up his administration with the absolute worst DeepState NeoCon swamp creatures (not to mention his promotion of Godless religious fundamentalist warmongers and of CHABAD Zionist supremacists into global policy creators)
TRUMP AND HARRIS ARE TWO FACES OF THE SAME GLOBAL CAPITALIST BILLIONAIRE'S EMPIRE, THAT TURNS THIS PARADISE PLANET INTO A DIVIDED WARRING HELL, TO BENEFIT NO ONE BUT THE CONTROL OF A FEW ULTTA-RICH OVER HUMANITY AND THE PLANET'S RESOURCES.
Americans are profoundly propagandized, emotionally-manipulated, kept ignorant (of the empire's global mechinations) and distracted to fight over the question of what should be the color of the shoes of the person who rapes and murders humanity, should it be red or blue?
Propagandized, deceived and distracted into fighting over which of the billionaire's representatives they prefer to lead the global capitalist militarized empire and its rape, mass-murder and plunder of life on earth to enrich the few...
Perhaps the fact that charles received $20,000 a month for working for rfk from what I've heard made it all the more easier to gloss over such things and fall in line with the endorsement his in-group associates. and perhaps the fact that October was the last paycheck (no more paychecks from Novemebr onwards after the election is done) made it easier to decide to quit right now after one has collected all the money possible, with no more money coming in AND you get to appear to be of a high moral stature, as someone who quits for principles.. But this last paragraph is of course just speculation on my part..
But regardless of possible motivations and what caused such profound miscaculation, the damage has already been done IMHO. Numerous of his followers have already been swayed into NOT rejecting the entire ruling class abusers but into supporting half of the ruling class in the form of billionaire narcissist authoritarian bully-buffoon Trump and his ultra-rich NeoCon war profiteers, his lunatic religious fundamentalists, and his criminal Wall St buddies (and their belligerent militaristic fascist ideology of domination, greed, extraction, objectification, dehumanization and power over) ..
Religious fundamentalist tribalism, hatred & war, coupled with billionaire greed, cruelty and relentless attack on workers & the poor to squeeze as much as possible out of us for the ultra-rich republican billionaire predators, all of it infused with a bullying fascist mentality of brutality, cold-heartedness and lack of empathy inspired by the narcissist abuser in chief - that's the AntiChrist trump presidency in a nutshell..
If immature narcissist Trump, his christian-zionist evangelical warmongers, and his uber-rich criminal Wall St backers slime their way into the white house and starts WW3 (with attacks on Iran and China, a nuclear world war which means the end of life on earth) then Charles will definitely have a hand in making this happen, but with this move, quitting at just the right time, he gets to stay seating on the high moral horse and avoid taking responsibility for this happening..
The comments about Charles being only after money, after years of offering his courses, books, and Sub Stack entirely on gift economy, does not make any sense.
I agree, that's why my comment did NOT say that he was ONLY after money, but a SMALL PART of the comment was speculating on a possible rational (or several rationals) for the timing of the move - why specifically now. But anyway, that was not the focus of the comment at all, the focus of the comment was on the profound damage done by his unwittingly swaying of his followers back into the elite's duopoly (instead of rejecting the duopoly), towards voting for immature narcissist bully trump, his ultra-rich NeoCon buddies, his criminal backers from Wall St and from Silicon Valley transhumanists (like thiel and musk among others) and his fundamentalist christian-zionist warmongers (with all of trump's backers sharing a profoundly belligerent militaristic fascist Godless ideology of domination, greed, extraction, objectification, tribalist division, dehumanization, Genocide/extermination and power over)
Like I mentioned above, Religious fundamentalist christian-zionist tribalism, hatred & war, coupled with Wall St billionaire greed, cruelty and relentless attack on workers & the poor to squeeze as much as possible out of us for the ultra-rich republican billionaire predators, and all of it infused with a bullying fascist mentality of brutality, militarized obedience, cold-hearted utalitarian exploitation and lack of empathy which takes its que from the narcissist abuser in chief - that's the AntiChrist trump presidency in a nutshell (while in the background constantly promising bis hypnotized followers that he'll start taking on the deepstate any minute now...)
How about people get off their righteous high horses and stop demanding that everyone think and vote as they do? How would that be? In our two-party system, there are essentially only two viable choices. That's it. That's the simplicity.
The irony is that the original commentor (Jay Barrett) did not tell people who to vote for but was actually lamenting someone influential (Charles) who DID use his influence to strongly sway his many followers into voting for an infantile abusive jerk, a professional ACTOR ConMan deceiver (who pretends to be "anti-elite rebel" when he is anything but that), and his billionaire financers.
So your concern is probably best addressed to Charles because he was the only one here who was strongly influencing people on who to vote for.
As for the second part of your comment, if I understood you correctly, you seem to be telling us that one must compromise and choose between one of the two options that the billionaire's empire provides for us (trump or harris) even if they're not perfect becasue that's the only real viable options we have, so we have to compromise and make do with what the billionaires offer us. After all, our billionaires rulers were kind enough to give us a choice between one of their two puppets, so we need to be thankful for that, we can choose if we want their empire's global mass-murder and the transferring of trillions of our money to the war profiteering capitalist ultra-rich and the domination of the 1% over us and the treating of the have-nots like dirt by the haves, we can choose between the two options of how we want this to be presented to us, we can choose if we want this to be done under the guise of either (1) 'restoring greatness' and 'superior judeo-christian moral values' and 'israel first' and 'law and order' and 'america and israel are exceptional and chosen by god and have a manifest destiny to lead the world to freedom and prosperity' and 'the poor are lazy and evil and to blame for being poor. The rich deserve to be above others and to treat the have-nots like dirt' and 'we're protecting the nation from the evil monstrous scary enemies who are coming to hurt you, but don't you worry, we the patriotic billionaires really really love you and we are here to protect you from the evil enemies, just make sure you keep voting for us to allow us to keep stealing from you and to transfer society's wealth to the ultra-rich' (the trump option) OR we can choose if we want the billionaires' control and psychological operations and theft and eternal war and domination over us to be done under the guise of (2) 'protecting human rights, democracy, the environment and the underpriviliged' (the harris option). Choose your poison, but you need to be realistic, you cannot talk about anything other than the two anti-life capitalist right-wing (liberal or conservative) mass murderers that the billilnaire's empire allows you to choose between..if you don't like these two options then move to another country, because everyone knows that to be american means that you choose between one of the two options that the empire gives you.
Here's just a few small examples for why such a perspective (we must compromise and choose one of the two murderous puppets that the billionaires provide for us) is profoundly disastrous, in my humble opinion https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/both-trumpism-and-anti-trumpism-are
And regarding what alternative is there to the billionaire's right-wing capitalist empire and the two puppets (conservative or liberal) they provide us to choose between, what alternative is there to the domination of the few ultra-rich over the many, here are a couple of example of what can actually be done (first why and then how)
I'd like to ask anyone reading this to please watch this and tell me if you can ever imagine this level of caring, empathy, heart attunement and emotional maturity to ever be shown by psychologically-stunted infantile bully narcissist abuser empathy-less trump? Not in a million years. We're talking about a completely different level of HUMAN DEVELOPMENT. A completely different connection to humanity and to the heart. I'm not a harris supporter, i wish she wasn't so right-wing capitalist and zionist in her policies, and yet, still, on the most basic human level it's not even a question of which one of them is more human, more caring, more empathetic, more heart-attuned, more connected to God. There's just no comparison. Watch the video.
IMHO they're both horrible on policies, both are right-wing capitalists and zionists, but on the human level, i know i prefer a real caring and sensitive human being rather than an infantile cruel empathy-less greedy narcassist abuser jerk who dehumanizes and objectifies human beings and the living earth (and who buys his trophy "wives" off if the playboy catalogue, and has sham abusive loveless transactional "relationaship" with them, until they get wrinkled and are replaced by the next trophy wife that this wounded man-child buys)
There is no question in my mind which one of them is more connected to the heart and to the sacred essence of humanity.
I used to think they're both the same awful right-wing representatives of the billionaire ruling class, and in terms of policy that might be true, but in terms of humanity, there is simply no comparison.
I pray with all my heart that love, caring and empathy shines through. I pray with all my heart that trump's immature empathy-less greed, insensitivity, narcissism, cruelty, dehumanization and cold-hearted capitalist objectifying brain doesn't win.
Trump's infantile narcissist trauma-thriving mentality is everything the old human world of domimation dehumanization abuse and trauma was about.
In my view, what harris has shown in this video (as much as i wish her policies were left-wing and not so right-wing) is the new world of caring, empathy and heart attunement.
This: "I pray with all my heart that love, caring and empathy shines through. I pray with all my heart that trump's immature empathy-less greed, insensitivity, narcissism, cruelty, dehumanization and cold-hearted capitalist objectifying brain doesn't win.
Trump's infantile narcissist trauma-thriving mentality is everything the old human world of domimation dehumanization abuse and trauma was about.
In my view, what harris has shown in this video (as much as i wish her policies were left-wing and not so right-wing) is the new world of caring, empathy and heart attunement."
You have no idea what you are even talking about. Charles never tried to influence how people voted, he tried (and did) influence a campaign for the better. You would rather only the harmful influences, of which there are countless, have any role in politics. Completely irrational.
I agree with much of what you say about the problems,, not so much about the solution(s). The debate with a billionaire, for example, with all due respect, sounds juvenile.
Charles Eisenstein's role as a PAID ADVISOR to CELO reveals a level of hypocrisy that's both shocking and deeply troubling, especially when viewed alongside his convenient exit from politics. Let's break this down:
1. Charles built his career on ideas of a "more beautiful world," criticizing capitalist exploitation, and advocating for human-centric systems.
2. He strategically stepped away from politics at a time when he could profit without facing political accountability.
5. This "beautiful" digital money project (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKggE50vyhE) could potentially use children's data for global commodity trading - essentially allowing hedge funds to bet on kids' lives.
6. Charles is PROFITING from advising a company involved in what amounts to surveillance and potential exploitation of CHILDREN. How's that for a "more beautiful world"?
The hypocrisy is staggering. Charles condemns the very systems he's now profiting from, conveniently after stepping away from political scrutiny. He's not just participating - he's advising and being PAID for it.
How can someone claim to stand for human-centric values while taking money from a company involved in such ethically corrupt practices? It's a complete betrayal of everything Charles has claimed to stand for.
We need to stop giving Charles a pass because of his past work or eloquent words. His actions - leaving politics at an opportune moment and accepting payment to advise this company - are in direct opposition to his supposed values.
This level of hypocrisy demands accountability. It's not just disappointing; it's a fundamental breach of trust with his audience. We must question everything Charles has taught in light of this glaring contradiction between his words and his actions.
It's time to wake up and see this situation for what it is - a thought leader who left politics to profit from the very systems he claims to oppose, all while potentially compromising the privacy and futures of children. This isn't just a misstep; it's a calculated move that exposes the gap between Charles's public image and his private choices.
Thank you. I can see that I once started the video you link. I'll need to get fully caught up (not just on that video). This is a daunting task that takes a lot of time, but in this group of people once moved or currently moved by Charles, it's time I will probably invest.
But what if the current rogues of the deep state that govern currently with so little resistance are actually worse than the apt description you cite above? The deficiencies of the past Trump administration indeed are obvious, but what about what we have now? My vote is for Stein.
Someone is looking for a scapegoat. Charles has been working for free and by the principle of gift for many years. But I guess this explains why there is just not point in defending oneself online against trolls and projections.
Charles Eisenstein's role as a PAID ADVISOR to CELO reveals a level of hypocrisy that's both shocking and deeply troubling, especially when viewed alongside his convenient exit from politics. Let's break this down:
1. Charles built his career on ideas of a "more beautiful world," criticizing capitalist exploitation, and advocating for human-centric systems.
2. He strategically stepped away from politics at a time when he could profit without facing political accountability.
5. This "beautiful" digital money project (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKggE50vyhE) could potentially use children's data for global commodity trading - essentially allowing hedge funds to bet on kids' lives.
6. Charles is PROFITING from advising a company involved in what amounts to surveillance and potential exploitation of CHILDREN. How's that for a "more beautiful world"?
The hypocrisy is staggering. Charles condemns the very systems he's now profiting from, conveniently after stepping away from political scrutiny. He's not just participating - he's advising and being PAID for it.
How can someone claim to stand for human-centric values while taking money from a company involved in such ethically corrupt practices? It's a complete betrayal of everything Charles has claimed to stand for.
We need to stop giving Charles a pass because of his past work or eloquent words. His actions - leaving politics at an opportune moment and accepting payment to advise this company - are in direct opposition to his supposed values.
This level of hypocrisy demands accountability. It's not just disappointing; it's a fundamental breach of trust with his audience. We must question everything Charles has taught in light of this glaring contradiction between his words and his actions.
It's time to wake up and see this situation for what it is - a thought leader who left politics to profit from the very systems he claims to oppose, all while potentially compromising the privacy and futures of children. This isn't just a misstep; it's a calculated move that exposes the gap between Charles's public image and his private choices.
I don't know Charles personally but I find it extremely hard to attribute such cynical motivations to him. From everything I've heard and read from him, he doesn't seem to me like the kind of person who would do such a thing. Not at all. I do think he was profoundly misguided in his implicit (or not so implicit) endorsing of trump, and i do agree that it caused profound damage, but i would never attribute to him such cynical motivations as you attributed here. .
And by the way, pro-billionaire right-wing capitalist & zionist Harris can be just as bad as warmongering zionist trump and his NeoCon billionaires (see here for a deep dive on the organized-crime billionaire networks that brought trump to power https://www.exposetheenemy.com/deep-state-misappropriation-and-the-cryptocratic-clique-behindtrump), and she is just as likely to start a world war for the ruling class as he does (I actually just wrote a post about exactly this https://substack.com/home/post/p-150090964). In her case it will likely be with russia, though she's just as likely to attack whoever the capitalists tell her to attack. Like all right-wing american presidents, liberal or conservative, she's clearly not the one making the decisions but just reading out from the scripts handed to her. Like the tagline on my profile page says, BOTH right-wing DNC & GOP are here to ensure the domination of abusive Love-less God-ignorant psychologically-undeveloped capitalist billionaires over us. Both trump and harris (and their predecessors) are here to enrich the ultra-rich, to cement the global control of the capitalist billionaire ruling class over the planet's resources and over humanity, to ensure their dollar's supremacy, to secure the rule of the few ultra-rich over the many, and to hijack and neutralize our intense desire for change by providing us with FALSE MESSIAHS to invest our change-energy into (like the obama deception or the trump deception)
I'd like to ask anyone reading this to please watch this and tell me if you can ever imagine this level of caring, empathy, heart attunement and emotional maturity to ever be shown by psychologically-stunted infantile bully narcissist abuser empathy-less trump? Not in a million years. We're talking about a completely different level of HUMAN DEVELOPMENT. A completely different connection to humanity and to the heart. I'm not a harris supporter, i wish she wasn't so right-wing capitalist and zionist in her policies, and yet, still, on the most basic human level it's not even a question of which one of them is more human, more caring, more empathetic, more heart-attuned, more connected to God. There's just no comparison. Watch the video.
IMHO they're both horrible on policies, both are right-wing capitalists and zionists, but on the human level, i know i prefer a real caring and sensitive human being rather than an infantile cruel empathy-less greedy narcassist abuser jerk who dehumanizes and objectifies human beings and the living earth (and who buys his trophy "wives" off if the playboy catalogue, and has sham abusive loveless transactional "relationaship" with them, until they get wrinkled and are replaced by the next trophy wife that this wounded man-child buys)
There is no question in my mind which one of them is more connected to the heart and to the sacred essence of humanity.
I used to think they're both the same awful right-wing representatives of the billionaire ruling class, and in terms of policy that might be true, but in terms of humanity, there is simply no comparison.
I pray with all my heart that love, caring and empathy shines through. I pray with all my heart that trump's immature empathy-less greed, insensitivity, narcissism, cruelty, dehumanization and cold-hearted capitalist objectifying brain doesn't win.
Trump's infantile narcissist trauma-thriving mentality is everything the old human world of domimation dehumanization abuse and trauma was about.
In my view, what harris has shown in this video (as much as i wish her policies were left-wing and not so right-wing) is the new world of caring, empathy and heart attunement.
Thank you very much for this. I somehow arrived through your profile to this video https://www.facebook.com/share/v/DjgVqtgD3wy2XJzY/ and to be honest it, it completely changed my perspective. I used to think thylat both trump and harris are equally awful right-wing representatives of the billionaire ruling class, and in terms of policy that might be true, but in terms of humanity, there is simply no comparison.
I urge anyone reading this to watch this very short video and tell me if you can ever imagine this level of caring, empathy, heart attunement and emotional maturity to ever be shown by psychologically-stunted infantile bully narcissist abuser empathy-less trump? Not in a million years. We're talking about a completely different level of HUMAN DEVELOPMENT. A completely different connection to humanity and to the heart. I'm not a harris supporter, i wish she wasn't so right-wing capitalist and zionist in her policies, and yet, still, on the most basic human level it's not even a question of which one of them is more human, more caring, more empathetic, more heart-attuned, more connected to God. There's just no comparison. Watch the video.
IMHO they're both horrible on policies, both are right-wing capitalists and zionists, but on the human level, i know i prefer a real caring and sensitive human being rather than an infantile cruel empathy-less greedy narcassist abuser jerk who dehumanizes and objectifies human beings and the living earth (and who buys his trophy "wives" off if the playboy catalogue, and has sham abusive loveless transactional "relationaship" with them, until they get wrinkled and are replaced by the next trophy wife that this wounded man-child buys)
There is no question in my mind which one of them is more connected to the heart and to the sacred essence of humanity.
I pray with all my heart that love, caring and empathy shines through. I pray with all my heart that trump's immature empathy-less greed, insensitivity, narcissism, cruelty, dehumanization and cold-hearted capitalist objectifying brain doesn't win.
Trump's infantile narcissist trauma-thriving mentality is everything the old human world of domination, power over, dehumanization, abuse and trauma was about.
In my view, what harris has shown in this video (as much as i wish her policies were left-wing and not so right-wing) is the new world of caring, empathy and heart attunement.
Charles Eisenstein's role as a PAID ADVISOR to CELO reveals a level of hypocrisy that's both shocking and deeply troubling, especially when viewed alongside his convenient exit from politics. Let's break this down:
1. Charles built his career on ideas of a "more beautiful world," criticizing capitalist exploitation, and advocating for human-centric systems.
2. He strategically stepped away from politics at a time when he could profit without facing political accountability.
5. This "beautiful" digital money project (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKggE50vyhE) could potentially use children's data for global commodity trading - essentially allowing hedge funds to bet on kids' lives.
6. Charles is PROFITING from advising a company involved in what amounts to surveillance and potential exploitation of CHILDREN. How's that for a "more beautiful world"?
The hypocrisy is staggering. Charles condemns the very systems he's now profiting from, conveniently after stepping away from political scrutiny. He's not just participating - he's advising and being PAID for it.
How can someone claim to stand for human-centric values while taking money from a company involved in such ethically corrupt practices? It's a complete betrayal of everything Charles has claimed to stand for.
We need to stop giving Charles a pass because of his past work or eloquent words. His actions - leaving politics at an opportune moment and accepting payment to advise this company - are in direct opposition to his supposed values.
This level of hypocrisy demands accountability. It's not just disappointing; it's a fundamental breach of trust with his audience. We must question everything Charles has taught in light of this glaring contradiction between his words and his actions.
It's time to wake up and see this situation for what it is - a thought leader who left politics to profit from the very systems he claims to oppose, all while potentially compromising the privacy and futures of children. This isn't just a misstep; it's a calculated move that exposes the gap between Charles's public image and his private choices.
You probably won't like hearing this, but your reply kind of makes me wonder what you do for a living, and if you might feel a bit guilty about cheating people sometimes. Or maybe in your past. I think you would feel better, yourself, if you could figure out what you could do to help more, yourself. I could be wrong. I'm just guessing. No one is perfect. We try. Sometimes we fail. But giving up never works.
Jay Barrett & Sheila McKelvey, RE: Jay, "I've never cheated anyone in my work."
I've met Charles in person (~24 years ago) & interacted a little through email & comment. I'm glad he stood up for Palestinian people in the face of his boss RFKJr & that he knows things aren't quite the way they appear to be.
On a MUCH DEEPER LEVEL, all of us, fake 'money' (Greek 'mnemosis' = 'memory') Oligarch colonized people, are part of playing Oli's sick, 'exogenous' (Latin 'other-generated') damaging & murderous amnesic $$$ game for the last 7000 years since Babylon (5000 BC). 7000 years ago. Could we be much more?
Oligarchy began issue of centralized top-down metal-coin fake 'money', at first cloaked to represent the once worldwide 'indigenous' (L 'self-generating') String-shell 10s of 1000s of years old, time-based equivalency accounting Value system for all contributions. (eg Wampum on Turtle-Island/N. America, Quipu in S. America & Cowrie in indigenous Celtic-Slavic Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia & all islands). String-shell represented the contributions of everyone starting in the collective Domestic 'Economy' (Gk 'oikos' = 'home' + 'namein' = 'care-&-nurture') in ~100 (50-150) person Multihome-Dwelling-Complex (eg. Longhouse-apartment, Pueblo-townhouse & Kanata-village).
Industrial & Commercial economies (mostly male) were considered as subset, supportive economies.
~100 people is an intimate, intergenerational, female-male, interdisciplinary, critical-mass, economies-of-scale unit, which can support specialized professionals within each set of task specialties. Each person's specialty joined with other specific specialties in Production-Society-Guilds. String-shell integrates: 1) 'Capital' (L 'cap' = 'head' = 'collective-intelligence'), 2) 'Currency' = 'flow' of contribution, experience, expertise & decision-making acumen, 3) 'Condolence' = 'Social-Security', 4) Collegial mentored-apprentice 'education' (L 'educare' = 'to-lead-forth-from-within') Credit, 5) time-math Communication, 6) professional Costume plus more.
Women were most powerful within the Guilds of the Domestic economy, from the home, multihome, village, city, region, nation, confederacies, continental & hemispheric councils. Men held more sway within the Industrial & Commercial economy, but in support of the primary Domestic altogether in a worldwide system of Economic Democracy. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/c-relational-economy/8-economic-democracy
Oligarchy's insecure top-down fake money broke the feedback link between people, each other & the biosphere. Thereby Babylon degraded from the enormous food, materials, energy & water-cycle productivity of 3-D Polyculture Orchards down into centrally controlled 2-D 'agriculture', which caused desert along with scarcity & famine among the people. Oligarchy moved from its failure to Assyria, then PHOENICIA (Kingdom of Israel + City-states of Tyr, Sidon, Byblos & Beirut. The Phoenician Empire ruled 4000 years from 4000-0 BC terrorizing all shores of the Mediterranean & Black Seas, creating the Negev, Egyptian & Sahara-Sahel Deserts out of what had been vibrant indigenous nature aligned cultures such as the Amazigh, Imazighen, Kabylie indigenous peoples with huge Polyculture Orchards vast rivers, lakes, & a billion streams flowing at steady state year round. People lived in large cities such as Tenochtitlan (Mexico-city) with population estimates of 350,000 people living on an artificial island on the edge of Lake Texcoco, with natural canals for canoe & walking-distance interaction. The Spanish invader Cortez was shocked at how clean & pure the water was at the base of what was the world's largest city. Fecal & Urine were separated & treated through Biological Plant-based systems, then to re-enter productivity as fertilizer.
SYLVALIZATION (Latin 'sylva' = 'tree'). As empires spread, hungry for the hardwood Oak for weapons of war, forts, arms, ships etc. the main productivity loss is the indigenous, carefully cultivated 3-D POLYCULTURE ORCHARDs of all humanity's worldwide 'indigenous' ancestors, which because of: a) Polyculture's 92-98% Photosynthesis compared with 2-D 'agriculture' 2-8% photosynthesis. Agriculture’s all settlers & 1st Nations had left to 'farm' (French 'ferme' = 'contract of servitude by the peasant imposed by the armed aristocrat') b) Deep Polyculture roots descending many 10s of metres into the substrate mining minerals, pumping water, developing extensive nutrient colonies etc. being 100 times = 10,000% more productivity than agriculture. Actually, this calculation is very conservative. In my experience with both Polyculture & Agriculture such as a 50 square meter (7 by 7 metres) area under the pre-colonial average 100 year old Oak tree produced some 3 tonnes (3000 kg) of nuts/year with little labour except bring wastes to feed the tree. The same 50 sq. M of Wheat, Barley, Oats or Rye will produce only 3 kgs of grains requiring intensive mechanical ploughing, seeding, weeding, fertilizing, fencing & irrigation or drainage preparation. c) Polyculture's nearly complete ~95% photosynthesis of solar energy into food, materials, energy & water-cycle, creates an energy vacuum which drives warm moist ocean winds inland. 60% of Moisture transfer from ocean to continent is through condensation of these winds upon quadrillions of square kilometres of fractal leaf & bark surface. Only 40% of moisture transfers as rain-snowfall. 2-D Agriculture only photosynthesizes 2-8% of solar energy, creating High-pressure airs which push wind from continent towards the sea, creating permanent desert. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/b-ecological-design/1-indigenous-welcome-orchard-food-production-efficiencies
Well, Jay, have you ever felt like the situations in the world called upon you to do something more altruistic or philanthropic, but you just couldn't bring yourself to do it because there just wasn't quite enough money in it for you? In our society, currently it is a little (actually a lot) backwards in that it is so often that the most valuable services one could give, are the least recompensed. Why are teachers that really help students paid less than lawyers who represent corporate criminals, and string out cases when representing ordinary people? Why does it often have to be the pro bono lawyer that steps in when justice is really needed? People do give up. And then sometimes their "profession" becomes caustically criticizing others for things they themselves are doing very little to help about.
Charles Eisenstein's role as a PAID ADVISOR to CELO reveals a level of hypocrisy that's both shocking and deeply troubling, especially when viewed alongside his convenient exit from politics. Let's break this down:
1. Charles built his career on ideas of a "more beautiful world," criticizing capitalist exploitation, and advocating for human-centric systems.
2. He strategically stepped away from politics at a time when he could profit without facing political accountability.
5. This "beautiful" digital money project (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKggE50vyhE) could potentially use children's data for global commodity trading - essentially allowing hedge funds to bet on kids' lives.
6. Charles is PROFITING from advising a company involved in what amounts to surveillance and potential exploitation of CHILDREN. How's that for a "more beautiful world"?
The hypocrisy is staggering. Charles condemns the very systems he's now profiting from, conveniently after stepping away from political scrutiny. He's not just participating - he's advising and being PAID for it.
How can someone claim to stand for human-centric values while taking money from a company involved in such ethically corrupt practices? It's a complete betrayal of everything Charles has claimed to stand for.
We need to stop giving Charles a pass because of his past work or eloquent words. His actions - leaving politics at an opportune moment and accepting payment to advise this company - are in direct opposition to his supposed values.
This level of hypocrisy demands accountability. It's not just disappointing; it's a fundamental breach of trust with his audience. We must question everything Charles has taught in light of this glaring contradiction between his words and his actions.
It's time to wake up and see this situation for what it is - a thought leader who left politics to profit from the very systems he claims to oppose, all while potentially compromising the privacy and futures of children. This isn't just a misstep; it's a calculated move that exposes the gap between Charles's public image and his private choices.
You spammed the crap out of this comment section with your paste job. Just post once, like everyone else, and if you believe that your information is good it will go far enough with your fellow readers without having to paste it all over the place.
I agree with Charles on the point that speculation about the motivations of Charles is so very boring.
There'll be one more person in the world talking about the deeply important stuff and shock horror, what if that person's choice to do so could be influenced by <whispers it for fear of summoning evil spirits> money 🫢
Jay, what brings you here?Clearly you do not approve of Charles so why stick around.By the way, I to had misgivings abot Charles going easy on Trump but felt I should also look at my own shadow as to why I was so keen to villify Trump and to be honest I,m not sure I have come to a conclusion.That is not to say I have had a change of heart .As a non American I imagine it must be a tough time to be American.It appears from the outside as if America is pulling itself apart and I imagine China ,Russia and the like are watching closely and are happy as this polarization unfolds.The land of the brave and the free looks like its unraveling ...
I understand what you are saying, thank you. I addressed this in my reply to Tara Rae above (and afterwards also in the reply to Sheila Mckelvey). Kindly see there
The knee jerk paranoia of partisanship this comment exhibits is among many good reasons why a person like Eisenstein belongs anywhere but a political campaign.
I'm glad you are calling him out for the harm done. Not sure he was side tracked by money but perhaps deeper reasons. He has dome harm though and I hope he comes to see this clearly how damaging Trump and his ilk are...
I hear you. I didn't mention it in tne comment, but IMHO there is actually a sane candidate in this election. He's the one I'm voting for https://substack.com/home/post/p-150315802?
Charles you are a beautiful person. In my work as a psychotherapist, I find it healthy for you to not have to justify your existence and legitimacy to people who are categorizing and labeling you. You are a verb, as we all are. I was disturbed seeing how many people treated you in your recent posts—so objectifying. If the problem in our world isn't just that--- making people justify their existence and reducing them to caricatures, then I don't know what is.
Sending love to you, my cosmic earth-abiding friend.
"I was disturbed seeing how many people treated you in your recent posts—so objectifying..."
So it's "objectifying" to point out that Charles resorted to a trainload of logical fallacies, false dichotomies and strawman arguments in his recent pieces? Is only perpetual fawning and gushing over what a wonderful, flawless person he is allowed?
I am not referring to people who pointed out logical fallacies, false dichotomies, and strawman arguments in his work. This is a healthy part of debate and developing stronger intellectual rigor in conversations. It would be a representation of our culture moving out of pathological adolescence if our political party could have debates over politics and differing views in respectful ways, where we still honor the dignity of every person.
I am referring to the comments that were ridiculing, demeaning, and shaming. Those comments felt objectifying to me. A healthy nervous system response of rage, anger, or frustration is essential and vital to our health. But we don't have to vilify, demonize, label, or categorize people to keep our anger, boundaries, or differing views intact.
One thing that stands out for me is how Charles was previously criticized, even though his philosophy and writing was inspiring to many, for spiritual bypassing in the form of being too idealistic and ineffective in the real world.
Then he made a bold choice—-a choice that grew directly from wanting to live up to the spirit of his philosophy—to openly and directly influence the political sphere, and now he’s getting attacked for spiritual bypassing in the form of being TOO cynical and TOO effective, on behalf of the wrong side.
Turns out his writing and philosophy was actually inspiring to a political figure with real visibility and influence.
Unfortunately that politician wasn’t Hillary Clinton or one of the cookie-cutter surrogates of the empire-addled, warmongering Democratic political machine—which would have been impossible anyways.
Go figure.
To me he’s still an inspiration, one of the few left-leaning thought leaders who has survived the craziness of the past 9 yesrs of craziness by continuing to set an all-around example of honesty, courage, and compassion in the face of our collective freefall.
The first thing I’d point out, Jay, is that nothing you write has anything to do with MY criticisms of CE’s various writings, or any of the negative reviews of his books I’ve ever come across online.
This is what you wrote:
“One thing that stands out for me is how Charles was previously criticized, even though his philosophy and writing was inspiring to many, for spiritual bypassing in the form of being too idealistic and ineffective in the real world.”
This is exactly what I’m talking about. Right from the start, right from your very first sentence, you exactly resemble Charles in how you frame the issues in a false, misleading fashion. In fact, hardly anyone criticized him for “being too idealistic.” And if they did, so what? That’s not a serious criticism. Every thinker worth their salt is intensely “idealistic.” Even a dark, harsh satirist like Jonathan Swift is “idealistic” if only by way of contrast: by highlighting hypocrisy and cruelty he wants to show how people don’t have to live like that.
That’s not the main criticism of CE. It’s a red herring. (Just as CE loves to ply his readers with logical fallacies, so do his fans.) The ACTUAL key criticism that DOES come up repeatedly is that he frequently makes truth claims, factual assertions that a critic believes to be false, a critic will submit evidence that CE’s factual claim is false — then crickets. No reply, no admission of a mistake or oversimplification on CE’s part, just CE barrelling on saying the same old things without any modification of his views. He simply refuses to accept negative feedback of any kind, only positive feedback in the form of adulation is acceptable to him. This is why if you’ve read one essay or book by him, you’ve read them all, his thought doesn’t develop or deepen, because for that to happen you have to be capable of listening as well as preaching, receiving as well as giving, more precisely, receiving disagreement as well as agreement.
CE, in reading history or anthropology, for example, will just pick and choose ideas and “facts” that he likes, that he finds appealing, and disregard what he doesn’t like, without making an effort to carefully ascertain if what he’s integrating into his system is really true. It’s all based around his feelings, his whims, his caprices of the moment. This is why he’s not generally regarded as a serious scholar by trained historians. Some of his local ideas and insights are interesting and compelling, but he insists on weaving them into a larger historical narrative that is faulty, misleading, and full of dubious factual claims.
As far as I can see I think you are misunderstanding Eisenstein and how he goes about things. It seems to drive some crazy that he doesn’t spend a lot of time defending his truth claims, responding to every challenge etc, especially in an academic or scientific or theoretical sense. There are plenty of philosophers who make “defensing their thesis” the bulk of thier work, which is fine, but that’s not the playing field he chooses to operste on, and part of his thesis, or basic insight—the so-called “old story” vs “new story” shift (which also drives people crazy in its nonspecificity and simplicity) is in fact that in terms of causality as well as samity and in terms of fostering psycho-emotional well-being that in turn fosters positive transformation, doing so isn’t necessarily the most effective use of one’s time. It might be, for some—we each need to wresstle with the question of what is ours to do in the limited time we have. He goes out of his way to stress that he’s not someone with all the answers. In my understanding, his strength and gift is actually in framing ways to discover for ourselves how to grow in our ability to enact from the heart what we feel is possible in the face of so much cynicism and antagonism. A lot of his premises go against those widely accepted, as well as against those NOT widely accepted as well as against various specifically accepted claims of this or that faction. What’s new? Welcome to life. The people who find hos work valuable are those who have arrived at a place where his message DOES make sense and the truth claims ring true or at least feel like worthwhile and sane guidance. All kinds of journeys can lead to that. If it’s not yours, fine.
"It seems to drive some crazy that he doesn’t spend a lot of time defending his truth claims, responding to every challenge etc, especially in an academic or scientific or theoretical sense."
It's not that he doesn't respond to EVERY challenge, it's that he doesn't respond to ANY challenge! Or if he does respond, he responds in a duplicitous and illegitimate fashion -- as I've pointed out, his favourite approach to responding to challenges is to NOT quote his challenger directly, but rather to employ a straw man version (i.e. an inaccurate paraphrase) of their criticism. He then effortlessly knocks down the straw man. This isn't rising above "the old story" (an idea he plagiarized from Thomas Berry, without credit, and which he's repeatedly misused and abused, thus leaching it of its - Berry's - original profundity), it's being disingenuous and petty.
"There are plenty of philosophers who make “defensing their thesis” the bulk of thier work, which is fine, but that’s not the playing field he chooses to operate on..."
Did you even notice what you've done? You falsely suggest that Charles is wiser and more mature than all those philosophers who make "defending their thesis" the BULK of their work. The BULK... already, you denigrate them, by misleadingly suggesting that the ability to rigorously and eloquently defend one's theories and opinions equates to spending the BULK of one's time doing that! That's such a mischaracterization of reality. The ability and willingness to defend one's arguments with rigour and vigour in no way suggests this is what such intellectuals are spending all their time, or most of their time, doing.
"Welcome to life. The people who find hos work valuable are those who have arrived at a place where his message DOES make sense and the truth claims ring true or at least feel like worthwhile and sane guidance."
Once again, a false characterization. CE's work is not just about morals and ethics, or spirituality, it's also about history, it contains specific historical and anthropological claims, varied assertions and statements he presents as fact. If some of those historical claims are erroneous, that in no way can be defended on the basis of his ostensibly deeper spiritual truths he's also articulating.
If you are such a sophisticated and intelligent therapist, you might want to consider what it is about Charles' conduct that so frequently invites that kind of hostile response. This may come as a surprise to you, but certain choices that Charles makes as a writer are generally considered unacceptable in academia in a serious scholar. One commentator on Daniel Pinchbeck's substack, an academic, mentioned in passing that he recognized Charles as being "scholarly adjacent" rather than a legitimate scholar. That might sound patronizing, but if Charles is going to make claims that cannot stand up to scrutiny, and if he's going to pepper every piece he publishes with a boatload of logical fallacies, he's going to receive pushback! How can he not?
Charles and his fans clearly regard him as a great thinker: I've even seen fans refer to him as one of the greatest living minds. You cannot conduct yourself that way and expect to be outside the bounds of criticism and negative feedback if people think your positions are unsound. Charles has a lifelong pattern of being incredibly dismissive of viewpoints that don't align with his. He caricatures and strawmans other thinkers and writers all the time -- yet still insists we all must accede to his view of himself as being a force for relentless truth, positivity, and love. Can someone really be all love if he doesn't have enough love in his heart even to treat rival thinkers fairly? Because he literally never does that. He either refuses to respond to criticism at all (his usual tactic) or he replies but in a disingenuous, misleading fashion, misrepresenting the counter-arguments all across the board. (One of his favourite tactics is to not quote his critics directly, so he doesn't have to respond to their real arguments, instead he just makes up a fake, weak, and easily debunked position that he falsely attributes to them.)
When an ostensible galaxy brained thinker does that innumerable times, and he receives only undeserved gushing praise for it from hundreds of admirers each and every time, it's necessarily going to invite steadily mounting anger, hostility, and resentment among those who have had their reservations caricatured or disregarded.
His latest piece openly admitted that he doesn't find negative feedback acceptable. He literally refuses to read or engage with any of it! Only endless gushing admiration and adulation is acceptable to him! That's what he just tacitly admitted!
And to be clear, I do not ascribe to all of Charles views, nor am I a relentless follower. I am my own free-thinker, and there are aspects of Charles philosophy that at times have irritated me. One is that I believe there truly is evil in the world. And as Emmanuel Levinas says, " “The miracle of creation does not only consist in being a creation ex nihilo, but in that it results in a being capable of receiving a revelation, learning that it is created, and putting itself into question. The miracle of creation lies in creating a moral being.”
Charles's philosophy is often not robust enough in terms of ethics for me in his attempt to continually move past the conversation on good and evil.
However, I do think that Charles means well, and if his ideas are flawed, they do need to pointed out. But he is still a legitimate human, on a path, trying to do his best, like most of us are. And compared to what a lot of people are up to in the world--- for instance---abusing children and animals, he's mostly bringing concious awareness to matters of the heart, even if he is not as precise as he could be.
There are all sorts of writers I follow and admire all of whose views I don’t subscribe to. However, what they have in common is that they present their opinions in a fair and balanced way, without constant equivocation and sophistry. Eisenstein doesn’t do that — like, ever. So it’s really a problem with how he presents his arguments. It is perfectly possible to make arguments I disagree with strongly and I still respect the writer in question. Eisenstein, however, seems incapable of adhering to the generally accepted rules of fair debate and discourse. He often sneers at and is disdainful of academic expertise — and one can see why, since he frequently makes claims that experts in particular fields can easily show to be false. Eisenstein’s galaxy brain can’t accept that there are experts out there in academia who can disprove many of his claims.
Im not sure that true conscious awareness could lead to one implicitly endorsing Trump who has done so much harm... EC talks about awareness and love but love has to speak truth and stand up for the disposessed, poor, disenfranchised which he fails to do.
Is your comment about me being a "sophisticated and intelligent" therapist said genuinely or sarcastically? I don't want to assume you were being sarcastic, but if you were, I do not appreciate the caricature you made out of me. This is exactly what I am trying to speak, too. Our culture seriously lacks individuated, differentiated conversations, where people can come together and speak to one another without getting snarky, sarcastic or mean. If you saying, "if you are such a sophisticated and intelligent" therapist, came from a genuine place of respect, then I apologize for misreading you.
You do not know me. I want to be taken seriously and respected as a human being that has my own views that are as legitimate as yours are.
I hear that you have some serious concerns with Charles's ways of relating in the intellectual world, and I will consider what you have said.
Are you going to address the core and substance of my complaint about Charles’ writing? Or are you just going to complain about tone? As a therapist, you should be possessed of better self-control and less oversensitivity to perceived slights. Address the actual argument.
Possibly look at your own strident angst. You do not have a warmth in your communication. If you truly wish to get your views across, you'll have to grant others the same amount of beingness you are demanding.
Eisenstein chose to weigh on a national election of major importance. He has a following. People are being and will be very, very hurt. Commentary is necessary.
Interesting comment for a psycho the rapist. Isn't your profession the same one who uses the DSM to stigmatize people for who they are, forcing them to justify their existence as the are to avoid pharmaceutical lobotomization or worse? Or gaslight and brow beat them into hiding who they are until they appear to conform to what you consider normal? Your fucked up profession is the reason this world is fucked up. Maybe Charles should write a 20-30,000 word salad about it.
Hi. Not everyone that’s in the field of psychotherapy is for the DSM or overtly promotive of chemical imbalances and the overuse of psychopharmacology. Check out the magazine Mad in America, where many of us in my field are trying to rehumanize the counseling arts--- do your research.
It's literally one click away to look at this specific therapist's profile and see that your generalisations missed the mark by 100,000 miles. I agree with your concerns about what some psychologists are doing and good on ya for speaking about it. But there's been major streams throughout the whole history of psychotherapy that are very much on your side with this. If you must have an enemy, at least inform yourself about who it is
I think you have a cliched, outdated notion of what a therapist is. We all have differing approaches. I routinely coach my clients in mindfulness and encourage them to become their own creative healers. Very positive, joyful and affirming.
I know that you ventured in politically, and out again, with integrity. And I know I can say we appreciate and respect that.
I would urge you to choose to overlook non-specific criticisms or any in which you do not feel the spirit of friendship and love. Please, give yourself permission. When we criticize, it comes from our story, not that of the target.
Your books, essays and podcasts have personally have been invaluable to me in recent years as I try to make some sense of the insensible. I'm glad that you are out of that political space, but it was entered for good and noble reasons and you may have, through the process of political, sewn a few seeds in minds that your work has not reached before. All experiences have a purpose!
Your presence in the Kennedy campaign was so incredibly precious and immeasurable. One can’t even imagine how you just being you influenced and colored and embedded the message, the good news, of humanity’s inevitable greater and higher consciousness increasing within this realm. I believe that is the energy and awareness that has been seeded in deep darkness and cannot help but show it’s glory over time.
I look forward to hearing from you as this experience is integrated into your conscious consciousness- your devotion to this was vital in order that it be sown in truth and wholeness.
Good for you Charles! You deserve a much needed break.
It’s clear to me the RFK campaign was ultimately swept up between the malevolent shadow forces and a growing hurricane of planetary wide desired changes that seem to collide this past July. Where all this goes, who knows.
I for one am taking your words to heart, and going on a much needed media fast. For far too long, I’ve been doom scrolled on X and Substack notes subconsciously looking for things to get outraged over, and there’s not enough funny cat videos to balance all that out. It’s exhausting.
I can relate it makes me laugh. What has YouTube algorithms done to all my other favorite topics ! it's 99% political now. I was just a little curious. I didn't mean to lose all those funny cat video etc. suggestions.
A media fast will lead to a longer and more stress free life. I think we often forget that we are in an information war. He who controls the flow of information, controls the narrative, controls the populace. I get very tired of people arguing about ideologies that are presented in media, fighting, blaming, pointing fingers. Nothing ever gets done. We remain divided and look outside of ourselves for the next great political savior. The only way forward is to move outside of the constraints of the political box and start discussing(minus the labels of right-left, I'm right you are wrong) how we can move forward. There is no "fixing" the current situation, no band-aids big enough to make it all better. The answers lie in the unlimited creativity of humanity, and not looking for the savior from the 0.1% who have controlled the narrative and the population for ions.
Oh yes indeed, Hélène! Right through to my dying moment, I’m a true work in progress. Makes me laugh over it all.
I recognize how easy can be to default back into negative resistance to change and growth. Why choose status-quo clinging that can lead to angst, alienation, othering, despair?
My blessed work in my 70s now is to consciously choose ongoing, evolving creative living through the rest my precious life. I recognize that I cannot do this alone.
To achieve a richer deeper way of living, it’s critical that I weave this awareness into my relationship with others, and this planet. This is a collective project!
Here’s to the on-going brave, visionary work of contributing/feeding into this momentum of an emerging life-giving global/universal consciousness.
Here’s to the growing millions of people, including Charles Eisenstein, who are moving forward on this path to another way, as the old way crumbles and the heavy veil drops away.
I think of Joanna Macy! What a saint. There are countless numbers of saints who guide us along in hope and action.
Active hope is the way forward.
Good grief! Thats enough, I tell myself. I’ve gotta stop, and finish up the laundry!
When you first announced that you were entering politics, I leaned over to Stella and said: this reminds me of the story of Thomas Moore.
Of course, because I’m a knucklehead, I misremembered and said, Thomas Aquinas, but I was remembering this character I’d encountered many years prior in a series called The Tudors. It was a long running semi decent show about the life of Henry VIII, and I remember almost nothing of the show. Literally the *only* thing that has stuck with me for all these years was the character of Reverend Moore. He was portrayed as a highly principled, decent peace loving man, a homesteader, and by some happenstance was the spiritual advisor to the king.
The show did such a beautiful job of revealing how incredibly frustrating it must have been to be both deeply trusted and often ignored by someone in a position to do so much for good or ill in the world.
Eventually, he left the court of the king and his role as trusted advisor — something very few in his position did and lived to talk about — and returned to his land and his ministry.
Why did that one piece of this vast story stay with me all these years? I don’t know. But when I mentioned it to Stella I recall the deeper feeling was something like an impulse to… reassurance. Don’t worry. He’ll be back. Whom was I reassuring? Mostly myself, I suspect. Because I can’t help but notice the gladness I feel in my heart as I read of your decision.
I cannot wait to hear of your adventures at court.
Tough decisions, I'm sure, and I'm glad you're out of it, but I'd love to hear more about the experience, maybe in a wide-ranging conversation on a podcast.
When I hugged you Charles this last weekend at the New Human event, I found myself saying,"you are so familiar to me". Maybe 6 years seems a long time since the 2019 global Earth repair conference, but I think it's more than that. I fell with you through that hole in the universe to come here and help if we can. Thank you for sharing your journey and your thoughts and for taking good care of you. It helps so many of us.
I am flabbergasted that the Kennedy team did not go with Jill Stein and the Greens. Going to Trump was an utterly cynical move. Maybe it will work. I understand why they did this from a Machiavellian perspective. But what a step backwards in morality and integrity.
There is not an ounce of arrogance in letting us see more into you. YOU embody the more beautiful world our hearts are all longing for. Your post has the collective family falling more in Love with you -- THAT is the medicine humanity most needs. And I am singing right beside you, sweet, brilliant soul brother Charles. As my 2021 NDE clearly told me, we aren't just here to hold the weight of the world on our shoulders. We are here to REVEL in the splendor of being alive.
I love you, my dear friend. I’ll always have your back.
I also dearly love Charles but in my humble opinion he unfortunately miscalculated and unintentionally did a huge disservice to humanity when - instead of encouraging and helping us to free ourselves by getting rid of our ruling class abusers and controllers in its entirety - he instead unwittingly influenced (strongly influenced) his followers into supporting one half of the abusive ruling class, by repeating the false Qanon/MAGA marketing deception that sells us elite billionaire (and infantile abusive narcissist) trump as "anti elite rebel" when he is clearly the POLAR OPPOSITE of that, as his pro-billionaire pro-empire pro-rulling class pro-Wall St pro-M.I.C pro-Big Pharma pro-Big Agri pro-global imerialist theft of resources actions as president clearly show, and as clearly shown by him filling up his administration with the absolute worst DeepState NeoCon swamp creatures (not to mention his promotion of Godless religious fundamentalist warmongers and of CHABAD Zionist supremacists into global policy creators)
TRUMP AND HARRIS ARE TWO FACES OF THE SAME GLOBAL CAPITALIST BILLIONAIRE'S EMPIRE, THAT TURNS THIS PARADISE PLANET INTO A DIVIDED WARRING HELL, TO BENEFIT NO ONE BUT THE CONTROL OF A FEW ULTTA-RICH OVER HUMANITY AND THE PLANET'S RESOURCES.
Americans are profoundly propagandized, emotionally-manipulated, kept ignorant (of the empire's global mechinations) and distracted to fight over the question of what should be the color of the shoes of the person who rapes and murders humanity, should it be red or blue?
Propagandized, deceived and distracted into fighting over which of the billionaire's representatives they prefer to lead the global capitalist militarized empire and its rape, mass-murder and plunder of life on earth to enrich the few...
Perhaps the fact that charles received $20,000 a month for working for rfk from what I've heard made it all the more easier to gloss over such things and fall in line with the endorsement his in-group associates. and perhaps the fact that October was the last paycheck (no more paychecks from Novemebr onwards after the election is done) made it easier to decide to quit right now after one has collected all the money possible, with no more money coming in AND you get to appear to be of a high moral stature, as someone who quits for principles.. But this last paragraph is of course just speculation on my part..
But regardless of possible motivations and what caused such profound miscaculation, the damage has already been done IMHO. Numerous of his followers have already been swayed into NOT rejecting the entire ruling class abusers but into supporting half of the ruling class in the form of billionaire narcissist authoritarian bully-buffoon Trump and his ultra-rich NeoCon war profiteers, his lunatic religious fundamentalists, and his criminal Wall St buddies (and their belligerent militaristic fascist ideology of domination, greed, extraction, objectification, dehumanization and power over) ..
Religious fundamentalist tribalism, hatred & war, coupled with billionaire greed, cruelty and relentless attack on workers & the poor to squeeze as much as possible out of us for the ultra-rich republican billionaire predators, all of it infused with a bullying fascist mentality of brutality, cold-heartedness and lack of empathy inspired by the narcissist abuser in chief - that's the AntiChrist trump presidency in a nutshell..
If immature narcissist Trump, his christian-zionist evangelical warmongers, and his uber-rich criminal Wall St backers slime their way into the white house and starts WW3 (with attacks on Iran and China, a nuclear world war which means the end of life on earth) then Charles will definitely have a hand in making this happen, but with this move, quitting at just the right time, he gets to stay seating on the high moral horse and avoid taking responsibility for this happening..
The comments about Charles being only after money, after years of offering his courses, books, and Sub Stack entirely on gift economy, does not make any sense.
I agree, that's why my comment did NOT say that he was ONLY after money, but a SMALL PART of the comment was speculating on a possible rational (or several rationals) for the timing of the move - why specifically now. But anyway, that was not the focus of the comment at all, the focus of the comment was on the profound damage done by his unwittingly swaying of his followers back into the elite's duopoly (instead of rejecting the duopoly), towards voting for immature narcissist bully trump, his ultra-rich NeoCon buddies, his criminal backers from Wall St and from Silicon Valley transhumanists (like thiel and musk among others) and his fundamentalist christian-zionist warmongers (with all of trump's backers sharing a profoundly belligerent militaristic fascist Godless ideology of domination, greed, extraction, objectification, tribalist division, dehumanization, Genocide/extermination and power over)
Like I mentioned above, Religious fundamentalist christian-zionist tribalism, hatred & war, coupled with Wall St billionaire greed, cruelty and relentless attack on workers & the poor to squeeze as much as possible out of us for the ultra-rich republican billionaire predators, and all of it infused with a bullying fascist mentality of brutality, militarized obedience, cold-hearted utalitarian exploitation and lack of empathy which takes its que from the narcissist abuser in chief - that's the AntiChrist trump presidency in a nutshell (while in the background constantly promising bis hypnotized followers that he'll start taking on the deepstate any minute now...)
How about people get off their righteous high horses and stop demanding that everyone think and vote as they do? How would that be? In our two-party system, there are essentially only two viable choices. That's it. That's the simplicity.
The irony is that the original commentor (Jay Barrett) did not tell people who to vote for but was actually lamenting someone influential (Charles) who DID use his influence to strongly sway his many followers into voting for an infantile abusive jerk, a professional ACTOR ConMan deceiver (who pretends to be "anti-elite rebel" when he is anything but that), and his billionaire financers.
So your concern is probably best addressed to Charles because he was the only one here who was strongly influencing people on who to vote for.
As for the second part of your comment, if I understood you correctly, you seem to be telling us that one must compromise and choose between one of the two options that the billionaire's empire provides for us (trump or harris) even if they're not perfect becasue that's the only real viable options we have, so we have to compromise and make do with what the billionaires offer us. After all, our billionaires rulers were kind enough to give us a choice between one of their two puppets, so we need to be thankful for that, we can choose if we want their empire's global mass-murder and the transferring of trillions of our money to the war profiteering capitalist ultra-rich and the domination of the 1% over us and the treating of the have-nots like dirt by the haves, we can choose between the two options of how we want this to be presented to us, we can choose if we want this to be done under the guise of either (1) 'restoring greatness' and 'superior judeo-christian moral values' and 'israel first' and 'law and order' and 'america and israel are exceptional and chosen by god and have a manifest destiny to lead the world to freedom and prosperity' and 'the poor are lazy and evil and to blame for being poor. The rich deserve to be above others and to treat the have-nots like dirt' and 'we're protecting the nation from the evil monstrous scary enemies who are coming to hurt you, but don't you worry, we the patriotic billionaires really really love you and we are here to protect you from the evil enemies, just make sure you keep voting for us to allow us to keep stealing from you and to transfer society's wealth to the ultra-rich' (the trump option) OR we can choose if we want the billionaires' control and psychological operations and theft and eternal war and domination over us to be done under the guise of (2) 'protecting human rights, democracy, the environment and the underpriviliged' (the harris option). Choose your poison, but you need to be realistic, you cannot talk about anything other than the two anti-life capitalist right-wing (liberal or conservative) mass murderers that the billilnaire's empire allows you to choose between..if you don't like these two options then move to another country, because everyone knows that to be american means that you choose between one of the two options that the empire gives you.
Here's just a few small examples for why such a perspective (we must compromise and choose one of the two murderous puppets that the billionaires provide for us) is profoundly disastrous, in my humble opinion https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/both-trumpism-and-anti-trumpism-are
And here https://johnspritzler.substack.com/p/the-billionaire-class-is-no-more
And
https://caityjohnstone.medium.com/trump-minus-narrative-equals-bushbama-84a363947536
And regarding what alternative is there to the billionaire's right-wing capitalist empire and the two puppets (conservative or liberal) they provide us to choose between, what alternative is there to the domination of the few ultra-rich over the many, here are a couple of example of what can actually be done (first why and then how)
https://johnspritzler.substack.com/p/why-have-no-rich-and-no-poor?
And
https://www.pdrboston.org/how-we-can-remove-the-rich-from-power
And https://www.pdrboston.org/let-s-get-organized
And https://www.pdrboston.org/egalitarianism
And https://www.pdrboston.org/mr-billionaire See what a debate with Mr. Billionaire looks like
PS. Having said the above, I want to qualify my statements after I've seen this video https://www.facebook.com/share/v/DjgVqtgD3wy2XJzY/
I'd like to ask anyone reading this to please watch this and tell me if you can ever imagine this level of caring, empathy, heart attunement and emotional maturity to ever be shown by psychologically-stunted infantile bully narcissist abuser empathy-less trump? Not in a million years. We're talking about a completely different level of HUMAN DEVELOPMENT. A completely different connection to humanity and to the heart. I'm not a harris supporter, i wish she wasn't so right-wing capitalist and zionist in her policies, and yet, still, on the most basic human level it's not even a question of which one of them is more human, more caring, more empathetic, more heart-attuned, more connected to God. There's just no comparison. Watch the video.
IMHO they're both horrible on policies, both are right-wing capitalists and zionists, but on the human level, i know i prefer a real caring and sensitive human being rather than an infantile cruel empathy-less greedy narcassist abuser jerk who dehumanizes and objectifies human beings and the living earth (and who buys his trophy "wives" off if the playboy catalogue, and has sham abusive loveless transactional "relationaship" with them, until they get wrinkled and are replaced by the next trophy wife that this wounded man-child buys)
There is no question in my mind which one of them is more connected to the heart and to the sacred essence of humanity.
I used to think they're both the same awful right-wing representatives of the billionaire ruling class, and in terms of policy that might be true, but in terms of humanity, there is simply no comparison.
I pray with all my heart that love, caring and empathy shines through. I pray with all my heart that trump's immature empathy-less greed, insensitivity, narcissism, cruelty, dehumanization and cold-hearted capitalist objectifying brain doesn't win.
Trump's infantile narcissist trauma-thriving mentality is everything the old human world of domimation dehumanization abuse and trauma was about.
In my view, what harris has shown in this video (as much as i wish her policies were left-wing and not so right-wing) is the new world of caring, empathy and heart attunement.
This: "I pray with all my heart that love, caring and empathy shines through. I pray with all my heart that trump's immature empathy-less greed, insensitivity, narcissism, cruelty, dehumanization and cold-hearted capitalist objectifying brain doesn't win.
Trump's infantile narcissist trauma-thriving mentality is everything the old human world of domimation dehumanization abuse and trauma was about.
In my view, what harris has shown in this video (as much as i wish her policies were left-wing and not so right-wing) is the new world of caring, empathy and heart attunement."
You have no idea what you are even talking about. Charles never tried to influence how people voted, he tried (and did) influence a campaign for the better. You would rather only the harmful influences, of which there are countless, have any role in politics. Completely irrational.
Well put. ❤️
I will tell people who to vote for.
I agree with much of what you say about the problems,, not so much about the solution(s). The debate with a billionaire, for example, with all due respect, sounds juvenile.
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1143360786748565&ref=sharing
So, Don't we need to end the evil duopoly with some new ground rules?
That’s the core problem. It is super easy for the plutocrats to control a two party system.
I appreciate your response. I hear you.
Charles Eisenstein's role as a PAID ADVISOR to CELO reveals a level of hypocrisy that's both shocking and deeply troubling, especially when viewed alongside his convenient exit from politics. Let's break this down:
1. Charles built his career on ideas of a "more beautiful world," criticizing capitalist exploitation, and advocating for human-centric systems.
2. He strategically stepped away from politics at a time when he could profit without facing political accountability.
3. He TOOK MONEY to advise CELO, a company founded by Sep Kamvar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sepandar_Kamvar) that's deeply involved in blockchain and "impact financing."
4. CELO is linked to a project putting sensors in PRE-K CHILDREN'S SLIPPERS: https://www.edsurge.com/news/2018-11-20-kid-tracking-sensors-may-not-be-the-wildest-thing-about-this-montessori-model
5. This "beautiful" digital money project (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKggE50vyhE) could potentially use children's data for global commodity trading - essentially allowing hedge funds to bet on kids' lives.
6. Charles is PROFITING from advising a company involved in what amounts to surveillance and potential exploitation of CHILDREN. How's that for a "more beautiful world"?
The hypocrisy is staggering. Charles condemns the very systems he's now profiting from, conveniently after stepping away from political scrutiny. He's not just participating - he's advising and being PAID for it.
How can someone claim to stand for human-centric values while taking money from a company involved in such ethically corrupt practices? It's a complete betrayal of everything Charles has claimed to stand for.
For those wanting to dig deeper into CELO and impact finance, read Leo Saraceno's work: https://siliconicarus.org/?s=celo
We need to stop giving Charles a pass because of his past work or eloquent words. His actions - leaving politics at an opportune moment and accepting payment to advise this company - are in direct opposition to his supposed values.
This level of hypocrisy demands accountability. It's not just disappointing; it's a fundamental breach of trust with his audience. We must question everything Charles has taught in light of this glaring contradiction between his words and his actions.
It's time to wake up and see this situation for what it is - a thought leader who left politics to profit from the very systems he claims to oppose, all while potentially compromising the privacy and futures of children. This isn't just a misstep; it's a calculated move that exposes the gap between Charles's public image and his private choices.
FYI the last two links do not work.
Done with politics and into the beautiful world of tracking children partly funded by the Walton Family. KA Ching!
https://youtu.be/kKggE5OvyhE?si=vJZkcgy1CxvzSi6M
Sorry, Silicon Icarus is now defunct. I'll share a YouTube video where the author of that article I tried to share talks about CELO.
https://www.youtube.com/live/Gy5rho92XQk?si=k74f1YrHdfFTDkBV
Such a thorough response. Thank you for fleshing this out. I hear what you are saying and the concern here.
Hmm. This was so easily readable. I wish everyone wrote as you do. Has Charles ever addressed what you've written above?
Hi Synthia, I've gotten all of my information from Alison McDowell of Wrench in the Gears https://wrenchinthegears.com/?amp#.
Alison brought these concerns to Charles through various social media outlets and he completely ignored her.
According to this SubStack post Charles just doesn't have the time, desire, or capacity to engage with honest criticism and feedback.
Thank you. I can see that I once started the video you link. I'll need to get fully caught up (not just on that video). This is a daunting task that takes a lot of time, but in this group of people once moved or currently moved by Charles, it's time I will probably invest.
Just quickly, in what capacity was Charles an advisor? Philosophically?
But what if the current rogues of the deep state that govern currently with so little resistance are actually worse than the apt description you cite above? The deficiencies of the past Trump administration indeed are obvious, but what about what we have now? My vote is for Stein.
Someone is looking for a scapegoat. Charles has been working for free and by the principle of gift for many years. But I guess this explains why there is just not point in defending oneself online against trolls and projections.
Charles Eisenstein's role as a PAID ADVISOR to CELO reveals a level of hypocrisy that's both shocking and deeply troubling, especially when viewed alongside his convenient exit from politics. Let's break this down:
1. Charles built his career on ideas of a "more beautiful world," criticizing capitalist exploitation, and advocating for human-centric systems.
2. He strategically stepped away from politics at a time when he could profit without facing political accountability.
3. He TOOK MONEY to advise CELO, a company founded by Sep Kamvar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sepandar_Kamvar) that's deeply involved in blockchain and "impact financing."
4. CELO is linked to a project putting sensors in PRE-K CHILDREN'S SLIPPERS: https://www.edsurge.com/news/2018-11-20-kid-tracking-sensors-may-not-be-the-wildest-thing-about-this-montessori-model
5. This "beautiful" digital money project (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKggE50vyhE) could potentially use children's data for global commodity trading - essentially allowing hedge funds to bet on kids' lives.
6. Charles is PROFITING from advising a company involved in what amounts to surveillance and potential exploitation of CHILDREN. How's that for a "more beautiful world"?
The hypocrisy is staggering. Charles condemns the very systems he's now profiting from, conveniently after stepping away from political scrutiny. He's not just participating - he's advising and being PAID for it.
How can someone claim to stand for human-centric values while taking money from a company involved in such ethically corrupt practices? It's a complete betrayal of everything Charles has claimed to stand for.
For those wanting to dig deeper into CELO and impact finance, read Leo Saraceno's work: https://siliconicarus.org/?s=celo
We need to stop giving Charles a pass because of his past work or eloquent words. His actions - leaving politics at an opportune moment and accepting payment to advise this company - are in direct opposition to his supposed values.
This level of hypocrisy demands accountability. It's not just disappointing; it's a fundamental breach of trust with his audience. We must question everything Charles has taught in light of this glaring contradiction between his words and his actions.
It's time to wake up and see this situation for what it is - a thought leader who left politics to profit from the very systems he claims to oppose, all while potentially compromising the privacy and futures of children. This isn't just a misstep; it's a calculated move that exposes the gap between Charles's public image and his private choices.
I’m curious, Don.. what do you do for a living?
I don't know Charles personally but I find it extremely hard to attribute such cynical motivations to him. From everything I've heard and read from him, he doesn't seem to me like the kind of person who would do such a thing. Not at all. I do think he was profoundly misguided in his implicit (or not so implicit) endorsing of trump, and i do agree that it caused profound damage, but i would never attribute to him such cynical motivations as you attributed here. .
And by the way, pro-billionaire right-wing capitalist & zionist Harris can be just as bad as warmongering zionist trump and his NeoCon billionaires (see here for a deep dive on the organized-crime billionaire networks that brought trump to power https://www.exposetheenemy.com/deep-state-misappropriation-and-the-cryptocratic-clique-behindtrump), and she is just as likely to start a world war for the ruling class as he does (I actually just wrote a post about exactly this https://substack.com/home/post/p-150090964). In her case it will likely be with russia, though she's just as likely to attack whoever the capitalists tell her to attack. Like all right-wing american presidents, liberal or conservative, she's clearly not the one making the decisions but just reading out from the scripts handed to her. Like the tagline on my profile page says, BOTH right-wing DNC & GOP are here to ensure the domination of abusive Love-less God-ignorant psychologically-undeveloped capitalist billionaires over us. Both trump and harris (and their predecessors) are here to enrich the ultra-rich, to cement the global control of the capitalist billionaire ruling class over the planet's resources and over humanity, to ensure their dollar's supremacy, to secure the rule of the few ultra-rich over the many, and to hijack and neutralize our intense desire for change by providing us with FALSE MESSIAHS to invest our change-energy into (like the obama deception or the trump deception)
PS. Having said the above, I want to qualify my statements after I've seen this video https://www.facebook.com/share/v/DjgVqtgD3wy2XJzY/
I'd like to ask anyone reading this to please watch this and tell me if you can ever imagine this level of caring, empathy, heart attunement and emotional maturity to ever be shown by psychologically-stunted infantile bully narcissist abuser empathy-less trump? Not in a million years. We're talking about a completely different level of HUMAN DEVELOPMENT. A completely different connection to humanity and to the heart. I'm not a harris supporter, i wish she wasn't so right-wing capitalist and zionist in her policies, and yet, still, on the most basic human level it's not even a question of which one of them is more human, more caring, more empathetic, more heart-attuned, more connected to God. There's just no comparison. Watch the video.
IMHO they're both horrible on policies, both are right-wing capitalists and zionists, but on the human level, i know i prefer a real caring and sensitive human being rather than an infantile cruel empathy-less greedy narcassist abuser jerk who dehumanizes and objectifies human beings and the living earth (and who buys his trophy "wives" off if the playboy catalogue, and has sham abusive loveless transactional "relationaship" with them, until they get wrinkled and are replaced by the next trophy wife that this wounded man-child buys)
There is no question in my mind which one of them is more connected to the heart and to the sacred essence of humanity.
I used to think they're both the same awful right-wing representatives of the billionaire ruling class, and in terms of policy that might be true, but in terms of humanity, there is simply no comparison.
I pray with all my heart that love, caring and empathy shines through. I pray with all my heart that trump's immature empathy-less greed, insensitivity, narcissism, cruelty, dehumanization and cold-hearted capitalist objectifying brain doesn't win.
Trump's infantile narcissist trauma-thriving mentality is everything the old human world of domimation dehumanization abuse and trauma was about.
In my view, what harris has shown in this video (as much as i wish her policies were left-wing and not so right-wing) is the new world of caring, empathy and heart attunement.
Here's a read for you: https://open.substack.com/pub/momentoftruth/p/our-anti-fascist-anti-racist-eco?r=4uba8&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Thank you very much for this. I somehow arrived through your profile to this video https://www.facebook.com/share/v/DjgVqtgD3wy2XJzY/ and to be honest it, it completely changed my perspective. I used to think thylat both trump and harris are equally awful right-wing representatives of the billionaire ruling class, and in terms of policy that might be true, but in terms of humanity, there is simply no comparison.
I urge anyone reading this to watch this very short video and tell me if you can ever imagine this level of caring, empathy, heart attunement and emotional maturity to ever be shown by psychologically-stunted infantile bully narcissist abuser empathy-less trump? Not in a million years. We're talking about a completely different level of HUMAN DEVELOPMENT. A completely different connection to humanity and to the heart. I'm not a harris supporter, i wish she wasn't so right-wing capitalist and zionist in her policies, and yet, still, on the most basic human level it's not even a question of which one of them is more human, more caring, more empathetic, more heart-attuned, more connected to God. There's just no comparison. Watch the video.
IMHO they're both horrible on policies, both are right-wing capitalists and zionists, but on the human level, i know i prefer a real caring and sensitive human being rather than an infantile cruel empathy-less greedy narcassist abuser jerk who dehumanizes and objectifies human beings and the living earth (and who buys his trophy "wives" off if the playboy catalogue, and has sham abusive loveless transactional "relationaship" with them, until they get wrinkled and are replaced by the next trophy wife that this wounded man-child buys)
There is no question in my mind which one of them is more connected to the heart and to the sacred essence of humanity.
I pray with all my heart that love, caring and empathy shines through. I pray with all my heart that trump's immature empathy-less greed, insensitivity, narcissism, cruelty, dehumanization and cold-hearted capitalist objectifying brain doesn't win.
Trump's infantile narcissist trauma-thriving mentality is everything the old human world of domination, power over, dehumanization, abuse and trauma was about.
In my view, what harris has shown in this video (as much as i wish her policies were left-wing and not so right-wing) is the new world of caring, empathy and heart attunement.
Yeh, and genocides are caring.
Yes, I hear you and agree. That's why i repeated several times how strongly i object to her govt's policies
Charles Eisenstein's role as a PAID ADVISOR to CELO reveals a level of hypocrisy that's both shocking and deeply troubling, especially when viewed alongside his convenient exit from politics. Let's break this down:
1. Charles built his career on ideas of a "more beautiful world," criticizing capitalist exploitation, and advocating for human-centric systems.
2. He strategically stepped away from politics at a time when he could profit without facing political accountability.
3. He TOOK MONEY to advise CELO, a company founded by Sep Kamvar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sepandar_Kamvar) that's deeply involved in blockchain and "impact financing."
4. CELO is linked to a project putting sensors in PRE-K CHILDREN'S SLIPPERS: https://www.edsurge.com/news/2018-11-20-kid-tracking-sensors-may-not-be-the-wildest-thing-about-this-montessori-model
5. This "beautiful" digital money project (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKggE50vyhE) could potentially use children's data for global commodity trading - essentially allowing hedge funds to bet on kids' lives.
6. Charles is PROFITING from advising a company involved in what amounts to surveillance and potential exploitation of CHILDREN. How's that for a "more beautiful world"?
The hypocrisy is staggering. Charles condemns the very systems he's now profiting from, conveniently after stepping away from political scrutiny. He's not just participating - he's advising and being PAID for it.
How can someone claim to stand for human-centric values while taking money from a company involved in such ethically corrupt practices? It's a complete betrayal of everything Charles has claimed to stand for.
For those wanting to dig deeper into CELO and impact finance, read Leo Saraceno's work: https://siliconicarus.org/?s=celo
We need to stop giving Charles a pass because of his past work or eloquent words. His actions - leaving politics at an opportune moment and accepting payment to advise this company - are in direct opposition to his supposed values.
This level of hypocrisy demands accountability. It's not just disappointing; it's a fundamental breach of trust with his audience. We must question everything Charles has taught in light of this glaring contradiction between his words and his actions.
It's time to wake up and see this situation for what it is - a thought leader who left politics to profit from the very systems he claims to oppose, all while potentially compromising the privacy and futures of children. This isn't just a misstep; it's a calculated move that exposes the gap between Charles's public image and his private choices.
Well said, all of this
You probably won't like hearing this, but your reply kind of makes me wonder what you do for a living, and if you might feel a bit guilty about cheating people sometimes. Or maybe in your past. I think you would feel better, yourself, if you could figure out what you could do to help more, yourself. I could be wrong. I'm just guessing. No one is perfect. We try. Sometimes we fail. But giving up never works.
I understand where you're coming from and the thought process that made you arrive at this question, but no, I've never cheated anyone in my work.
As for "giving up never works", I'm not sure what is the connection of this statement to my comment..
Jay Barrett & Sheila McKelvey, RE: Jay, "I've never cheated anyone in my work."
I've met Charles in person (~24 years ago) & interacted a little through email & comment. I'm glad he stood up for Palestinian people in the face of his boss RFKJr & that he knows things aren't quite the way they appear to be.
On a MUCH DEEPER LEVEL, all of us, fake 'money' (Greek 'mnemosis' = 'memory') Oligarch colonized people, are part of playing Oli's sick, 'exogenous' (Latin 'other-generated') damaging & murderous amnesic $$$ game for the last 7000 years since Babylon (5000 BC). 7000 years ago. Could we be much more?
Oligarchy began issue of centralized top-down metal-coin fake 'money', at first cloaked to represent the once worldwide 'indigenous' (L 'self-generating') String-shell 10s of 1000s of years old, time-based equivalency accounting Value system for all contributions. (eg Wampum on Turtle-Island/N. America, Quipu in S. America & Cowrie in indigenous Celtic-Slavic Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia & all islands). String-shell represented the contributions of everyone starting in the collective Domestic 'Economy' (Gk 'oikos' = 'home' + 'namein' = 'care-&-nurture') in ~100 (50-150) person Multihome-Dwelling-Complex (eg. Longhouse-apartment, Pueblo-townhouse & Kanata-village).
The collective Domestic economy, being the most essential & effective & personally appropriate tended to be attended to more by women. In today's fake system, collective domestic labours are unaccounted-for, un-recognized & not-empowered. Except for the extended family, collective Domestic economy is inappropriately institutionalized delivering cold 'service'. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/c-relational-economy/1-extending-our-welcome-participatory-multihome-cohousing
Industrial & Commercial economies (mostly male) were considered as subset, supportive economies.
~100 people is an intimate, intergenerational, female-male, interdisciplinary, critical-mass, economies-of-scale unit, which can support specialized professionals within each set of task specialties. Each person's specialty joined with other specific specialties in Production-Society-Guilds. String-shell integrates: 1) 'Capital' (L 'cap' = 'head' = 'collective-intelligence'), 2) 'Currency' = 'flow' of contribution, experience, expertise & decision-making acumen, 3) 'Condolence' = 'Social-Security', 4) Collegial mentored-apprentice 'education' (L 'educare' = 'to-lead-forth-from-within') Credit, 5) time-math Communication, 6) professional Costume plus more.
Women were most powerful within the Guilds of the Domestic economy, from the home, multihome, village, city, region, nation, confederacies, continental & hemispheric councils. Men held more sway within the Industrial & Commercial economy, but in support of the primary Domestic altogether in a worldwide system of Economic Democracy. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/c-relational-economy/8-economic-democracy
Oligarchy's insecure top-down fake money broke the feedback link between people, each other & the biosphere. Thereby Babylon degraded from the enormous food, materials, energy & water-cycle productivity of 3-D Polyculture Orchards down into centrally controlled 2-D 'agriculture', which caused desert along with scarcity & famine among the people. Oligarchy moved from its failure to Assyria, then PHOENICIA (Kingdom of Israel + City-states of Tyr, Sidon, Byblos & Beirut. The Phoenician Empire ruled 4000 years from 4000-0 BC terrorizing all shores of the Mediterranean & Black Seas, creating the Negev, Egyptian & Sahara-Sahel Deserts out of what had been vibrant indigenous nature aligned cultures such as the Amazigh, Imazighen, Kabylie indigenous peoples with huge Polyculture Orchards vast rivers, lakes, & a billion streams flowing at steady state year round. People lived in large cities such as Tenochtitlan (Mexico-city) with population estimates of 350,000 people living on an artificial island on the edge of Lake Texcoco, with natural canals for canoe & walking-distance interaction. The Spanish invader Cortez was shocked at how clean & pure the water was at the base of what was the world's largest city. Fecal & Urine were separated & treated through Biological Plant-based systems, then to re-enter productivity as fertilizer.
SYLVALIZATION (Latin 'sylva' = 'tree'). As empires spread, hungry for the hardwood Oak for weapons of war, forts, arms, ships etc. the main productivity loss is the indigenous, carefully cultivated 3-D POLYCULTURE ORCHARDs of all humanity's worldwide 'indigenous' ancestors, which because of: a) Polyculture's 92-98% Photosynthesis compared with 2-D 'agriculture' 2-8% photosynthesis. Agriculture’s all settlers & 1st Nations had left to 'farm' (French 'ferme' = 'contract of servitude by the peasant imposed by the armed aristocrat') b) Deep Polyculture roots descending many 10s of metres into the substrate mining minerals, pumping water, developing extensive nutrient colonies etc. being 100 times = 10,000% more productivity than agriculture. Actually, this calculation is very conservative. In my experience with both Polyculture & Agriculture such as a 50 square meter (7 by 7 metres) area under the pre-colonial average 100 year old Oak tree produced some 3 tonnes (3000 kg) of nuts/year with little labour except bring wastes to feed the tree. The same 50 sq. M of Wheat, Barley, Oats or Rye will produce only 3 kgs of grains requiring intensive mechanical ploughing, seeding, weeding, fertilizing, fencing & irrigation or drainage preparation. c) Polyculture's nearly complete ~95% photosynthesis of solar energy into food, materials, energy & water-cycle, creates an energy vacuum which drives warm moist ocean winds inland. 60% of Moisture transfer from ocean to continent is through condensation of these winds upon quadrillions of square kilometres of fractal leaf & bark surface. Only 40% of moisture transfers as rain-snowfall. 2-D Agriculture only photosynthesizes 2-8% of solar energy, creating High-pressure airs which push wind from continent towards the sea, creating permanent desert. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/b-ecological-design/1-indigenous-welcome-orchard-food-production-efficiencies
Well, Jay, have you ever felt like the situations in the world called upon you to do something more altruistic or philanthropic, but you just couldn't bring yourself to do it because there just wasn't quite enough money in it for you? In our society, currently it is a little (actually a lot) backwards in that it is so often that the most valuable services one could give, are the least recompensed. Why are teachers that really help students paid less than lawyers who represent corporate criminals, and string out cases when representing ordinary people? Why does it often have to be the pro bono lawyer that steps in when justice is really needed? People do give up. And then sometimes their "profession" becomes caustically criticizing others for things they themselves are doing very little to help about.
Yes, thank you, I agree with all that you wrote, but I don't see what does this have to do with my comment..
Charles Eisenstein's role as a PAID ADVISOR to CELO reveals a level of hypocrisy that's both shocking and deeply troubling, especially when viewed alongside his convenient exit from politics. Let's break this down:
1. Charles built his career on ideas of a "more beautiful world," criticizing capitalist exploitation, and advocating for human-centric systems.
2. He strategically stepped away from politics at a time when he could profit without facing political accountability.
3. He TOOK MONEY to advise CELO, a company founded by Sep Kamvar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sepandar_Kamvar) that's deeply involved in blockchain and "impact financing."
4. CELO is linked to a project putting sensors in PRE-K CHILDREN'S SLIPPERS: https://www.edsurge.com/news/2018-11-20-kid-tracking-sensors-may-not-be-the-wildest-thing-about-this-montessori-model
5. This "beautiful" digital money project (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKggE50vyhE) could potentially use children's data for global commodity trading - essentially allowing hedge funds to bet on kids' lives.
6. Charles is PROFITING from advising a company involved in what amounts to surveillance and potential exploitation of CHILDREN. How's that for a "more beautiful world"?
The hypocrisy is staggering. Charles condemns the very systems he's now profiting from, conveniently after stepping away from political scrutiny. He's not just participating - he's advising and being PAID for it.
How can someone claim to stand for human-centric values while taking money from a company involved in such ethically corrupt practices? It's a complete betrayal of everything Charles has claimed to stand for.
For those wanting to dig deeper into CELO and impact finance, read Leo Saraceno's work: https://siliconicarus.org/?s=celo
We need to stop giving Charles a pass because of his past work or eloquent words. His actions - leaving politics at an opportune moment and accepting payment to advise this company - are in direct opposition to his supposed values.
This level of hypocrisy demands accountability. It's not just disappointing; it's a fundamental breach of trust with his audience. We must question everything Charles has taught in light of this glaring contradiction between his words and his actions.
It's time to wake up and see this situation for what it is - a thought leader who left politics to profit from the very systems he claims to oppose, all while potentially compromising the privacy and futures of children. This isn't just a misstep; it's a calculated move that exposes the gap between Charles's public image and his private choices.
You spammed the crap out of this comment section with your paste job. Just post once, like everyone else, and if you believe that your information is good it will go far enough with your fellow readers without having to paste it all over the place.
I agree with Charles on the point that speculation about the motivations of Charles is so very boring.
There'll be one more person in the world talking about the deeply important stuff and shock horror, what if that person's choice to do so could be influenced by <whispers it for fear of summoning evil spirits> money 🫢
Jay, what brings you here?Clearly you do not approve of Charles so why stick around.By the way, I to had misgivings abot Charles going easy on Trump but felt I should also look at my own shadow as to why I was so keen to villify Trump and to be honest I,m not sure I have come to a conclusion.That is not to say I have had a change of heart .As a non American I imagine it must be a tough time to be American.It appears from the outside as if America is pulling itself apart and I imagine China ,Russia and the like are watching closely and are happy as this polarization unfolds.The land of the brave and the free looks like its unraveling ...
One does not need to "vilify" an actual villain. It's been 8 years. No one is projecting. It took us far too long to call a spade a spade in fact: https://open.substack.com/pub/momentoftruth/p/our-anti-fascist-anti-racist-eco?r=4uba8&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Thank you. Detailed and well written. I will look more in-depth into it. Thank you for the care and concern
Seems to me maybe you’re imagining what you’d do in his situation. Doesn’t sound to me at all like Charles.
I understand what you are saying, thank you. I addressed this in my reply to Tara Rae above (and afterwards also in the reply to Sheila Mckelvey). Kindly see there
The knee jerk paranoia of partisanship this comment exhibits is among many good reasons why a person like Eisenstein belongs anywhere but a political campaign.
I'm glad you are calling him out for the harm done. Not sure he was side tracked by money but perhaps deeper reasons. He has dome harm though and I hope he comes to see this clearly how damaging Trump and his ilk are...
Im soory but you appear all caught up in the us & them political BS & you cant hear what Charles is saying?
Thank you Jay, for clarifying this and helping me make my decision to actually not participate in the folly of "voting" at all this year.
I hear you. I didn't mention it in tne comment, but IMHO there is actually a sane candidate in this election. He's the one I'm voting for https://substack.com/home/post/p-150315802?
2nd that!
Charles you are a beautiful person. In my work as a psychotherapist, I find it healthy for you to not have to justify your existence and legitimacy to people who are categorizing and labeling you. You are a verb, as we all are. I was disturbed seeing how many people treated you in your recent posts—so objectifying. If the problem in our world isn't just that--- making people justify their existence and reducing them to caricatures, then I don't know what is.
Sending love to you, my cosmic earth-abiding friend.
I'll second the motion! I do not live for what the world thinks of me, but for what I think of myself.
Jack London I can't tell you how to succeed, but I can tell you how to fail: Try to please everybody.
Eleanor Roosevelt
Oh, deep breath. Thanks for this.
"I was disturbed seeing how many people treated you in your recent posts—so objectifying..."
So it's "objectifying" to point out that Charles resorted to a trainload of logical fallacies, false dichotomies and strawman arguments in his recent pieces? Is only perpetual fawning and gushing over what a wonderful, flawless person he is allowed?
I am not referring to people who pointed out logical fallacies, false dichotomies, and strawman arguments in his work. This is a healthy part of debate and developing stronger intellectual rigor in conversations. It would be a representation of our culture moving out of pathological adolescence if our political party could have debates over politics and differing views in respectful ways, where we still honor the dignity of every person.
I am referring to the comments that were ridiculing, demeaning, and shaming. Those comments felt objectifying to me. A healthy nervous system response of rage, anger, or frustration is essential and vital to our health. But we don't have to vilify, demonize, label, or categorize people to keep our anger, boundaries, or differing views intact.
One thing that stands out for me is how Charles was previously criticized, even though his philosophy and writing was inspiring to many, for spiritual bypassing in the form of being too idealistic and ineffective in the real world.
Then he made a bold choice—-a choice that grew directly from wanting to live up to the spirit of his philosophy—to openly and directly influence the political sphere, and now he’s getting attacked for spiritual bypassing in the form of being TOO cynical and TOO effective, on behalf of the wrong side.
Turns out his writing and philosophy was actually inspiring to a political figure with real visibility and influence.
Unfortunately that politician wasn’t Hillary Clinton or one of the cookie-cutter surrogates of the empire-addled, warmongering Democratic political machine—which would have been impossible anyways.
Go figure.
To me he’s still an inspiration, one of the few left-leaning thought leaders who has survived the craziness of the past 9 yesrs of craziness by continuing to set an all-around example of honesty, courage, and compassion in the face of our collective freefall.
The first thing I’d point out, Jay, is that nothing you write has anything to do with MY criticisms of CE’s various writings, or any of the negative reviews of his books I’ve ever come across online.
This is what you wrote:
“One thing that stands out for me is how Charles was previously criticized, even though his philosophy and writing was inspiring to many, for spiritual bypassing in the form of being too idealistic and ineffective in the real world.”
This is exactly what I’m talking about. Right from the start, right from your very first sentence, you exactly resemble Charles in how you frame the issues in a false, misleading fashion. In fact, hardly anyone criticized him for “being too idealistic.” And if they did, so what? That’s not a serious criticism. Every thinker worth their salt is intensely “idealistic.” Even a dark, harsh satirist like Jonathan Swift is “idealistic” if only by way of contrast: by highlighting hypocrisy and cruelty he wants to show how people don’t have to live like that.
That’s not the main criticism of CE. It’s a red herring. (Just as CE loves to ply his readers with logical fallacies, so do his fans.) The ACTUAL key criticism that DOES come up repeatedly is that he frequently makes truth claims, factual assertions that a critic believes to be false, a critic will submit evidence that CE’s factual claim is false — then crickets. No reply, no admission of a mistake or oversimplification on CE’s part, just CE barrelling on saying the same old things without any modification of his views. He simply refuses to accept negative feedback of any kind, only positive feedback in the form of adulation is acceptable to him. This is why if you’ve read one essay or book by him, you’ve read them all, his thought doesn’t develop or deepen, because for that to happen you have to be capable of listening as well as preaching, receiving as well as giving, more precisely, receiving disagreement as well as agreement.
CE, in reading history or anthropology, for example, will just pick and choose ideas and “facts” that he likes, that he finds appealing, and disregard what he doesn’t like, without making an effort to carefully ascertain if what he’s integrating into his system is really true. It’s all based around his feelings, his whims, his caprices of the moment. This is why he’s not generally regarded as a serious scholar by trained historians. Some of his local ideas and insights are interesting and compelling, but he insists on weaving them into a larger historical narrative that is faulty, misleading, and full of dubious factual claims.
As far as I can see I think you are misunderstanding Eisenstein and how he goes about things. It seems to drive some crazy that he doesn’t spend a lot of time defending his truth claims, responding to every challenge etc, especially in an academic or scientific or theoretical sense. There are plenty of philosophers who make “defensing their thesis” the bulk of thier work, which is fine, but that’s not the playing field he chooses to operste on, and part of his thesis, or basic insight—the so-called “old story” vs “new story” shift (which also drives people crazy in its nonspecificity and simplicity) is in fact that in terms of causality as well as samity and in terms of fostering psycho-emotional well-being that in turn fosters positive transformation, doing so isn’t necessarily the most effective use of one’s time. It might be, for some—we each need to wresstle with the question of what is ours to do in the limited time we have. He goes out of his way to stress that he’s not someone with all the answers. In my understanding, his strength and gift is actually in framing ways to discover for ourselves how to grow in our ability to enact from the heart what we feel is possible in the face of so much cynicism and antagonism. A lot of his premises go against those widely accepted, as well as against those NOT widely accepted as well as against various specifically accepted claims of this or that faction. What’s new? Welcome to life. The people who find hos work valuable are those who have arrived at a place where his message DOES make sense and the truth claims ring true or at least feel like worthwhile and sane guidance. All kinds of journeys can lead to that. If it’s not yours, fine.
"It seems to drive some crazy that he doesn’t spend a lot of time defending his truth claims, responding to every challenge etc, especially in an academic or scientific or theoretical sense."
It's not that he doesn't respond to EVERY challenge, it's that he doesn't respond to ANY challenge! Or if he does respond, he responds in a duplicitous and illegitimate fashion -- as I've pointed out, his favourite approach to responding to challenges is to NOT quote his challenger directly, but rather to employ a straw man version (i.e. an inaccurate paraphrase) of their criticism. He then effortlessly knocks down the straw man. This isn't rising above "the old story" (an idea he plagiarized from Thomas Berry, without credit, and which he's repeatedly misused and abused, thus leaching it of its - Berry's - original profundity), it's being disingenuous and petty.
"There are plenty of philosophers who make “defensing their thesis” the bulk of thier work, which is fine, but that’s not the playing field he chooses to operate on..."
Did you even notice what you've done? You falsely suggest that Charles is wiser and more mature than all those philosophers who make "defending their thesis" the BULK of their work. The BULK... already, you denigrate them, by misleadingly suggesting that the ability to rigorously and eloquently defend one's theories and opinions equates to spending the BULK of one's time doing that! That's such a mischaracterization of reality. The ability and willingness to defend one's arguments with rigour and vigour in no way suggests this is what such intellectuals are spending all their time, or most of their time, doing.
"Welcome to life. The people who find hos work valuable are those who have arrived at a place where his message DOES make sense and the truth claims ring true or at least feel like worthwhile and sane guidance."
Once again, a false characterization. CE's work is not just about morals and ethics, or spirituality, it's also about history, it contains specific historical and anthropological claims, varied assertions and statements he presents as fact. If some of those historical claims are erroneous, that in no way can be defended on the basis of his ostensibly deeper spiritual truths he's also articulating.
If you are such a sophisticated and intelligent therapist, you might want to consider what it is about Charles' conduct that so frequently invites that kind of hostile response. This may come as a surprise to you, but certain choices that Charles makes as a writer are generally considered unacceptable in academia in a serious scholar. One commentator on Daniel Pinchbeck's substack, an academic, mentioned in passing that he recognized Charles as being "scholarly adjacent" rather than a legitimate scholar. That might sound patronizing, but if Charles is going to make claims that cannot stand up to scrutiny, and if he's going to pepper every piece he publishes with a boatload of logical fallacies, he's going to receive pushback! How can he not?
Charles and his fans clearly regard him as a great thinker: I've even seen fans refer to him as one of the greatest living minds. You cannot conduct yourself that way and expect to be outside the bounds of criticism and negative feedback if people think your positions are unsound. Charles has a lifelong pattern of being incredibly dismissive of viewpoints that don't align with his. He caricatures and strawmans other thinkers and writers all the time -- yet still insists we all must accede to his view of himself as being a force for relentless truth, positivity, and love. Can someone really be all love if he doesn't have enough love in his heart even to treat rival thinkers fairly? Because he literally never does that. He either refuses to respond to criticism at all (his usual tactic) or he replies but in a disingenuous, misleading fashion, misrepresenting the counter-arguments all across the board. (One of his favourite tactics is to not quote his critics directly, so he doesn't have to respond to their real arguments, instead he just makes up a fake, weak, and easily debunked position that he falsely attributes to them.)
When an ostensible galaxy brained thinker does that innumerable times, and he receives only undeserved gushing praise for it from hundreds of admirers each and every time, it's necessarily going to invite steadily mounting anger, hostility, and resentment among those who have had their reservations caricatured or disregarded.
His latest piece openly admitted that he doesn't find negative feedback acceptable. He literally refuses to read or engage with any of it! Only endless gushing admiration and adulation is acceptable to him! That's what he just tacitly admitted!
And to be clear, I do not ascribe to all of Charles views, nor am I a relentless follower. I am my own free-thinker, and there are aspects of Charles philosophy that at times have irritated me. One is that I believe there truly is evil in the world. And as Emmanuel Levinas says, " “The miracle of creation does not only consist in being a creation ex nihilo, but in that it results in a being capable of receiving a revelation, learning that it is created, and putting itself into question. The miracle of creation lies in creating a moral being.”
Charles's philosophy is often not robust enough in terms of ethics for me in his attempt to continually move past the conversation on good and evil.
However, I do think that Charles means well, and if his ideas are flawed, they do need to pointed out. But he is still a legitimate human, on a path, trying to do his best, like most of us are. And compared to what a lot of people are up to in the world--- for instance---abusing children and animals, he's mostly bringing concious awareness to matters of the heart, even if he is not as precise as he could be.
There are all sorts of writers I follow and admire all of whose views I don’t subscribe to. However, what they have in common is that they present their opinions in a fair and balanced way, without constant equivocation and sophistry. Eisenstein doesn’t do that — like, ever. So it’s really a problem with how he presents his arguments. It is perfectly possible to make arguments I disagree with strongly and I still respect the writer in question. Eisenstein, however, seems incapable of adhering to the generally accepted rules of fair debate and discourse. He often sneers at and is disdainful of academic expertise — and one can see why, since he frequently makes claims that experts in particular fields can easily show to be false. Eisenstein’s galaxy brain can’t accept that there are experts out there in academia who can disprove many of his claims.
At this point in time, when it comes to experts I'm with Henry: An expert is someone who articulates the needs of those in power.
Henry A. Kissinger
Im not sure that true conscious awareness could lead to one implicitly endorsing Trump who has done so much harm... EC talks about awareness and love but love has to speak truth and stand up for the disposessed, poor, disenfranchised which he fails to do.
Is your comment about me being a "sophisticated and intelligent" therapist said genuinely or sarcastically? I don't want to assume you were being sarcastic, but if you were, I do not appreciate the caricature you made out of me. This is exactly what I am trying to speak, too. Our culture seriously lacks individuated, differentiated conversations, where people can come together and speak to one another without getting snarky, sarcastic or mean. If you saying, "if you are such a sophisticated and intelligent" therapist, came from a genuine place of respect, then I apologize for misreading you.
You do not know me. I want to be taken seriously and respected as a human being that has my own views that are as legitimate as yours are.
I hear that you have some serious concerns with Charles's ways of relating in the intellectual world, and I will consider what you have said.
Thank you.
Are you going to address the core and substance of my complaint about Charles’ writing? Or are you just going to complain about tone? As a therapist, you should be possessed of better self-control and less oversensitivity to perceived slights. Address the actual argument.
This conversation does not work for me. Thank you for sharing your perspective. As I said I will consider your argument. Goodbye.
Possibly look at your own strident angst. You do not have a warmth in your communication. If you truly wish to get your views across, you'll have to grant others the same amount of beingness you are demanding.
"yet [CE] still insists we all must accede to his view of himself as being a force for relentless truth, positivity, and love."
I'm unaware of CE insisting on any such thing. What did I miss?
Eisenstein chose to weigh on a national election of major importance. He has a following. People are being and will be very, very hurt. Commentary is necessary.
Interesting comment for a psycho the rapist. Isn't your profession the same one who uses the DSM to stigmatize people for who they are, forcing them to justify their existence as the are to avoid pharmaceutical lobotomization or worse? Or gaslight and brow beat them into hiding who they are until they appear to conform to what you consider normal? Your fucked up profession is the reason this world is fucked up. Maybe Charles should write a 20-30,000 word salad about it.
Hi. Not everyone that’s in the field of psychotherapy is for the DSM or overtly promotive of chemical imbalances and the overuse of psychopharmacology. Check out the magazine Mad in America, where many of us in my field are trying to rehumanize the counseling arts--- do your research.
It's literally one click away to look at this specific therapist's profile and see that your generalisations missed the mark by 100,000 miles. I agree with your concerns about what some psychologists are doing and good on ya for speaking about it. But there's been major streams throughout the whole history of psychotherapy that are very much on your side with this. If you must have an enemy, at least inform yourself about who it is
I think you have a cliched, outdated notion of what a therapist is. We all have differing approaches. I routinely coach my clients in mindfulness and encourage them to become their own creative healers. Very positive, joyful and affirming.
I know that you ventured in politically, and out again, with integrity. And I know I can say we appreciate and respect that.
I would urge you to choose to overlook non-specific criticisms or any in which you do not feel the spirit of friendship and love. Please, give yourself permission. When we criticize, it comes from our story, not that of the target.
Your books, essays and podcasts have personally have been invaluable to me in recent years as I try to make some sense of the insensible. I'm glad that you are out of that political space, but it was entered for good and noble reasons and you may have, through the process of political, sewn a few seeds in minds that your work has not reached before. All experiences have a purpose!
Your presence in the Kennedy campaign was so incredibly precious and immeasurable. One can’t even imagine how you just being you influenced and colored and embedded the message, the good news, of humanity’s inevitable greater and higher consciousness increasing within this realm. I believe that is the energy and awareness that has been seeded in deep darkness and cannot help but show it’s glory over time.
I look forward to hearing from you as this experience is integrated into your conscious consciousness- your devotion to this was vital in order that it be sown in truth and wholeness.
Thank you Charles.
Welcome back home to your own good center, Charles.
blessings and clarity to you,
Michael Glaser
Good for you Charles! You deserve a much needed break.
It’s clear to me the RFK campaign was ultimately swept up between the malevolent shadow forces and a growing hurricane of planetary wide desired changes that seem to collide this past July. Where all this goes, who knows.
I for one am taking your words to heart, and going on a much needed media fast. For far too long, I’ve been doom scrolled on X and Substack notes subconsciously looking for things to get outraged over, and there’s not enough funny cat videos to balance all that out. It’s exhausting.
I can relate it makes me laugh. What has YouTube algorithms done to all my other favorite topics ! it's 99% political now. I was just a little curious. I didn't mean to lose all those funny cat video etc. suggestions.
It won’t take long to call in the Cats if you focus. 😝
Hee hee. Thats the rub - focus! Its a challenge. Or maybe I just dont want to.
A media fast will lead to a longer and more stress free life. I think we often forget that we are in an information war. He who controls the flow of information, controls the narrative, controls the populace. I get very tired of people arguing about ideologies that are presented in media, fighting, blaming, pointing fingers. Nothing ever gets done. We remain divided and look outside of ourselves for the next great political savior. The only way forward is to move outside of the constraints of the political box and start discussing(minus the labels of right-left, I'm right you are wrong) how we can move forward. There is no "fixing" the current situation, no band-aids big enough to make it all better. The answers lie in the unlimited creativity of humanity, and not looking for the savior from the 0.1% who have controlled the narrative and the population for ions.
Keep charleseisenteining. We are all works in progress.
Oh yes indeed, Hélène! Right through to my dying moment, I’m a true work in progress. Makes me laugh over it all.
I recognize how easy can be to default back into negative resistance to change and growth. Why choose status-quo clinging that can lead to angst, alienation, othering, despair?
My blessed work in my 70s now is to consciously choose ongoing, evolving creative living through the rest my precious life. I recognize that I cannot do this alone.
To achieve a richer deeper way of living, it’s critical that I weave this awareness into my relationship with others, and this planet. This is a collective project!
Here’s to the on-going brave, visionary work of contributing/feeding into this momentum of an emerging life-giving global/universal consciousness.
Here’s to the growing millions of people, including Charles Eisenstein, who are moving forward on this path to another way, as the old way crumbles and the heavy veil drops away.
I think of Joanna Macy! What a saint. There are countless numbers of saints who guide us along in hope and action.
Active hope is the way forward.
Good grief! Thats enough, I tell myself. I’ve gotta stop, and finish up the laundry!
Ellen 🙃
When you first announced that you were entering politics, I leaned over to Stella and said: this reminds me of the story of Thomas Moore.
Of course, because I’m a knucklehead, I misremembered and said, Thomas Aquinas, but I was remembering this character I’d encountered many years prior in a series called The Tudors. It was a long running semi decent show about the life of Henry VIII, and I remember almost nothing of the show. Literally the *only* thing that has stuck with me for all these years was the character of Reverend Moore. He was portrayed as a highly principled, decent peace loving man, a homesteader, and by some happenstance was the spiritual advisor to the king.
The show did such a beautiful job of revealing how incredibly frustrating it must have been to be both deeply trusted and often ignored by someone in a position to do so much for good or ill in the world.
Eventually, he left the court of the king and his role as trusted advisor — something very few in his position did and lived to talk about — and returned to his land and his ministry.
Why did that one piece of this vast story stay with me all these years? I don’t know. But when I mentioned it to Stella I recall the deeper feeling was something like an impulse to… reassurance. Don’t worry. He’ll be back. Whom was I reassuring? Mostly myself, I suspect. Because I can’t help but notice the gladness I feel in my heart as I read of your decision.
I cannot wait to hear of your adventures at court.
Tough decisions, I'm sure, and I'm glad you're out of it, but I'd love to hear more about the experience, maybe in a wide-ranging conversation on a podcast.
Thank you as always Charles for your honesty and your integrity. I Look forward to your next chapter.
Thank you for sharing your journey with us, Charles. You feel like a dear friend, so it's always nice to know how you are doing.
When I hugged you Charles this last weekend at the New Human event, I found myself saying,"you are so familiar to me". Maybe 6 years seems a long time since the 2019 global Earth repair conference, but I think it's more than that. I fell with you through that hole in the universe to come here and help if we can. Thank you for sharing your journey and your thoughts and for taking good care of you. It helps so many of us.
I understood why you entered politics Charles, but I’m very happy to hear you’re out of it now renewing and recalibrating. Keep singing! Love.
I am flabbergasted that the Kennedy team did not go with Jill Stein and the Greens. Going to Trump was an utterly cynical move. Maybe it will work. I understand why they did this from a Machiavellian perspective. But what a step backwards in morality and integrity.
First, the Greens were covid tyrants and were vocally attacking RFK as far back as 2022, they refused to ever associate with him.
Second, Trump is almost certainly going to win, so if you actually want to do something good for the world, then joining with Trump is the right move.
There is not an ounce of arrogance in letting us see more into you. YOU embody the more beautiful world our hearts are all longing for. Your post has the collective family falling more in Love with you -- THAT is the medicine humanity most needs. And I am singing right beside you, sweet, brilliant soul brother Charles. As my 2021 NDE clearly told me, we aren't just here to hold the weight of the world on our shoulders. We are here to REVEL in the splendor of being alive.
Thank you for your beautiful and inspirational words.
🫶🏽
Knowing your background, wondering if you or family and friends are OK in Asheville...