Author: Slingshot robot #1

By Catakin P. Parkwalker

The key difference between the Jedi and the Sith is the difference between experiential and authoritarian teaching styles.

The Sith teach through authoritarian obedience, with apprentices unwaveringly obeying the dictates of masters who lie to and manipulate them. Rather than asking questions of those more powerful than them, the Sith either obey an authority unquestioningly or murder and replace it with themselves. It is this type of pattern that replicates empire. It is a pattern that will tempt revolutionaries to merely throw rebellions, a pattern that tempts revolutionaries into directing their energy towards narrow visions that are simply regime changes rather engaging in true revolutionary overhauls to the system. It is because of this that Sith spirituality lends itself so acutely to empire —the building of structures for the sake of replicating a structure, rather than the wellbeing of those interpolated by them.

The Jedi are about learning things organically. They hold on to the names they were given at their births, and their journeys as individuals are woven intricately into their training. Jedi Masters don’t attempt to divert their claim to mastery to some abstract system but rather embody it, meaning at times a Jedi Master’s personal truth and personal experience will, by necessity, cloud their judgment. And the Jedi Masters let their judgement be clouded as such; they let themselves make mistakes because they are letting themselves be specific people with actual specific circumstances that are meaningful to them. They retain their connection to those very personal circumstances, and never, like the Sith, attempt to erase them. And that is why a true Jedi is always ever a revolutionary, without even meaning to be, as their very existence posits itself as a challenge to empire. When a Jedi is turned, something terrible happens to the way they use the force. One might say that they lose themselves to the force, or at least to the social power it grants them, and rather than defending what they love with it, defending what makes them who they are, they find the deployment of the force eclipses them, subverting their subjectivities.

True mastery isn’t about doing things correctly, it is about how you direct your attention. The force might be thought of as a metaphor for many things. Religious Star Wars fans think it is god. I think it is social power — systematized social power in the Foucauldian sense. Star Wars offers a universe in which that Hegelian fantasy is given a more tangible form, with the Jedi and the Sith serving as larger-than-life ideological figures around which the sometimes clownish social structures of daily life in the empire or rebellion form themselves. But yeah, the force isn’t real or you would have noticed it. This isn’t some kind of Kansas City Shuffle. No.

Women have always been in positions of high leadership in the rebellion, even in the original 1977 film in which Leia Organa and Mon Mothma play central roles as decision-makers in the assault on the First Death Star, which might also be thought of as an assault upon that empirical, Platonic impulse best described by T.S. Eliot as “To have squeezed the universe into a ball. To roll it toward some overwhelming question.” Perhaps we all have to blow up our own inner Death Stars sometimes, to destroy those overwhelming ego questions, that, if left unchecked, will destroy the everyday world of eating peaches, of being there for our friends.

It is exciting to see, in the 2017 Star Wars universe, there are more women in all levels of labor in the Rebellion, and to also see a woman on the bridge in a Star Destroyer. Hey, representation goes both ways! And no matter what side you work for, this conflict must belong to all of us, and be accessible to all of us, and so much so the pageant of it. Good versus evil isn’t just a game for white men to play any more, thank goddess. But perhaps as Kylo Ren tempts us to speculate, there is more to “evil” than we, who shun the concept, might give it credit for. As Nietzsche argues in his Genealogy of Morals, evil is a category that can only be perceived by those who experience oppression. To those who are oppressors, there is only “good” and “bad,” which is to say that oppressors don’t see their enemies as evil, just as “scum” to be eliminated. Evil is a mask we put upon those who oppress us so we can hate them as we fight them. But as Ren’s shedding of his mask shows, it is in seeing our oppressors as human that their power over us is made complete, and in its completion, finds itself destroyed. When Ren begs Rey to join him by his side, it is no longer as an oppressor but a frightened creature who, in that fleeting moment before manipulating his way back into the structure of the Empire, is at his most human.

Among the Jedi and their rebel counterparts, individual lives matter. Among the Sith and their imperial counterparts, individuals are killed for failing because their lives don’t matter. To be among the Imperials and the Sith is to have been made into a type of human commodity, into a faceless, interchange thing, and publicly murdering their own who fail is a way of reifying everyone’s interchangeability within the empire, of showcasing to each other the degree to which, within the empire, individual lives don’t matter.

To those of the dark side, only raw power matters. They see the talent rather than the person. They are focused only on properly placing that talent within the pyramid-shaped hierarchy of their organizational structure and have no grasp of what it means to have a personal experience as an individual, which is why they so frequently deface individuals with masks and new names, erasing the individual’s past and future, erasing that person’s journey and any markers that might allow them to construct the narrative of being on a journey, and rather reduce existence to an ever-present state of completing tasks and obeying or destroying your superiors and subordinates. The dark side doesn’t afford its adherents things like sisters, lovers, and comrades. The only antidote for this despair is extreme obedience. Vader knelt before the emperor even as he commanded him to murder is own son, but in a reversal of the ancient story of Abraham, Vader’s unwavering faith in the force-for-the-sake-of-the-force is shattered by the command to end his son’s life and his humanity is restored.

As people on the internet have pointed out, the new film redeems the prequels, as unwatchable as they are, by reframing them as a time in which the Jedi Order became corrupted, with a pseudoscience of “midichlorian counts” overshadowing the spiritual underpinnings of using the force.

To turn someone from the dark side back to the light is to make their life matter again, to give them an identity with relationships and channels of meaning that matter to them and to others.

The rebellion offers no ready-made hierarchy between strategy and feelings, so at times, two groups within the movement find themselves at odds, talking past each other, one group saying “this is how it feels,” the other group saying “this is how it should be done.” This type of social messiness is tied to the basic human expression that they fight to maintain space for.

The Buddha is sometimes credited with saying, “Be your own light,” but to do that means you don’t get to have the sort of easy answers that only others can give. This is why Jedi Masters do not demand that their apprentices obey unwaveringly, but rather, as Master Yoda says to Master Luke after setting fire to the ancient Jedi texts, “We are what they grow beyond, that is the true burden of all masters.”

Master Yoda also tells us that fear is what turns people towards the dark. And this is what we see time and again in the lives of those who succumb to the way of the Sith. Sure, the Jedi also have fear and insecurity — they are plagued by it — but the Jedi manage their fear and insecurity as best they can, sometimes making wild, irrational decisions propelled by it. But the Sith have a very different relationship with fear and insecurity. Rather than managing it daily, they attempt to make it vanish by making themselves so powerful that they no longer have fear and insecurity. In doing so, they erase themselves. Giving in to the dark side is guided by fear — fear that you aren’t enough — leading to the donning of a mask: you become fear itself. This embracing of fear to escape fear — of turning yourself into a thing to be feared as a way to avoid grappling with your own fear — is at the heart of any gesture towards fascism, of any turn towards the dark side, towards the rigid lines of empire and colonialism, it is self-erasure at its deepest form and it is this that guides members of our species towards organized, machine-inspired behavior that destroys all living things.

Like the Sith, the Jedi sometimes do conceal the truth from their apprentices. Old Ben lies to Luke about his father being dead, and Luke conceals the truth about Ben Solo’s turn from Rey. These lies come from the very flawed yet deeply human place of wanting to protect others, and perhaps oneself, from the truth. Does that make these lies any better then the types of lies Sith tell, lies inspired by the desire to increase the power and obedience of the apprentice? In words of moral relativist DJ, “Maybe.”

Luke’s end was so perfect for him. Yoda had long chided Luke for always watching the horizon — never focused on where he is, what he is doing. In his final act, Luke’s not-there-ness achieves perfection. Because Luke was never supposed to be “there” or “here now” or any of that 1970s Ram Dass crap. Luke Skywalker’s job was to be a symbol, to direct people’s attention, to direct it in all the wrong places, or in the right ones, depending on who you are. Yes, Luke Skywalker is a commodity, and what Episode VIII does so well is it acknowledges that. But Luke Skywalker, at least within the story world of the films, is a revolutionary commodity. As Jedi Master Gil Scott-Heron taught us, “The Revolution will not be televised.” But until capital falls as hard as Darth Weinstein did last October, perhaps, for now embodying the revolutionary commodity is the most we can hope to achieve. #OccupytheSpectacle

Even if the police, guided by the lifeless logic of capital, march in and crush our seedlings with their bulldozers, as they did at Occupy the Farm in 2012 and 2013, and even if they fence in People’s Park and harm and murder peaceful protestors as they did in 1969 and the early 1990s, and even if the FBI breaks into the Slingshot loft and steals our computers as they did in 2009 — even as they strike us down in so, so many ways, we only grow stronger. The more they tighten their grip… well, you get the idea.

The rebellion could be wiped off the map — we have been before — but as long children are born who can feel their inherent worth as living beings — and refuse to let anyone convince them otherwise — the struggle will live on.

Water is Sacred.

Occupy Everything, Demand Nothing.

Black Lives Matter.

May the Farm be with you.

May 1000 Parks bloom.

Another collective member’s opinion

Okay so other than being a big goofy metaphor for the “Bernie bros” screwing up the 2016 election through their, uhhhh, “tangential” direct tactics to confront the conditions that empower empire at the codic level, the new Star Wars movie was okay I guess. Worth the torrent. (Wendy)

By Tom Crimmons

A victory! I fought for 3 years to get my veganism accomodated, including a drop of 20 pounds of body weight at one point with some weeks of getting as few as 3 vegan-acceptable trays a week (out of a possible 21 meals per week), the rest refused. In response to my complaint in the US District court, Tuscon, a vegan option is now available here at United States Penitentiary (USP) Tuscon, perhaps only the second Federal Bureau of Prisons (BoP) facility to make a vegan option available — the first being a facility up in SeaTac. The vegan option is now available for any inmate at USP Tuscon to sign up for, and as the menu develops, it will be a possible model for other BoP facilities.

I hope other federal inmates reading this, who are going through similar trials, will be helped knowing that some change has taken place. They might wonder, as I did, why veganism is (or was) resisted in the BoP. I’ve been vegan since February 1982, with my long-term veganism noted in my pre-sentencing report. I’m vegan because of deeply held beliefs rooted in empathy for animals and concerns for the world, beliefs which I can put in terms of my Taoism. I’d think most people would think such things should be positively reinforced. Why would BoP policy discourage such efforts based on the higher aspirations of inmates?

Here, the refusal to accomodate my veganism even went so far as instructions to the inmate servers to put nonvegan items on my trays, even after nearly three years of me refusing such trays and my complaints about weight loss. These instructions were necessary because the inmate servers normally had the common decency to leave nonvegan items off of trays intended for me. It would have cost the BoP nothing to allow inmate servers to continue doing this. It was hard for me to understand this active hostility to my veganism.

. . .

It’s apparent that much of what happens here is simply the following of old patterns – old traditions – some of which go back thousands of years. Realizing this, I had to concede that the people who are the gatekeepers of the BoP bureaucracy, who ignored my complaint, my rights, my wellbeing and my potential for positive contributions, are generally not conscious of the patterns and their origins. While these patterns didn’t begin with Constantine, they reached a certain stage of violent maturity in his actions.

When Constantine prepared his premeditated cruel murder of the Pythagorean Christians, there must have been a smell to the molten metal, and Constantine’s victims must have felt the radiant heat as it was brought close. There was perhaps one last opportunity to concede to the will of Constantine, who threatened a horrible death for refusing to eat the meat — meat brought into the empire by the slaughter done by Constantine’s armies. Constantine would have known of sources, like Plato’s republic, making the link between the warfaring of empires and the consumption of meat by their people, so he could consider it rebellion to this co-opted Christianity or simple ingratitude when the Pythagorean Christians refused to eat meat, and this he would not tolerate. His victim’s mouth would be pried and held open — no way to agree anymore — and the molten metal would be poured. What was the sound of attempted screams in an instantly-seared throat? Does the next victim still refuse, so core to his or her beliefs was refusing to eat meat?

The essence of that devil Constantine’s actions continues within the United States today. His premeditated cruel murder of the Pythagorean Christians has become the bureaucratized cruelty of the United States Penitentiary system, and an inmate’s passion for life can still get a life-threatening response.

There are at least two basic ways that human-on-animal violence leads to an increase in human-on-human violence:

1. The geo-political pressues, that Constantine might have learned about from Plato’s republic, come from the much larger ecological footprint required for a meat-centered diet, such that concentrated populations on such a diet are unable to live within the means of their region, thus they’re required to war with neighboring populations to obtain control over their neighbors’ agricultural production areas. This principle continues to play out as Americans, generally with one of the most meat-centered diets on the planet, have the largest military spending and reach.

2. There are cognitive processes where the way we treat animals is a training ground for how we treat other people. Becoming more comfortable with the killing of animals can make a person more comfortable with the killing of people. Some cultures have constructs to mitigate against this tendency, so that a pleasure in killing animals doesn’t become a pleasure in killing people, but warfaring cultures tend to exploit it. The “enemy” is dehumanized with racist or other characterizations that equate the “enemy” to animals, making killing mentally easier.

. . .

In the BoP prison system, we’re at a nexus between these principles. An imperialistic society requires subjugation of its people. So if a meat-centered diet requires imperialistic reach around the world, it will also require the willingness to imprison some high percentage of its people. And the high-security status of a prison like USP Tucson requires the guardianship by people who are willing to kill people under the right circumstances, so it’s no surprise to find a high percentage of hunters and ranchers among the corrections officers – and so no surprise there would be responses to veganism ranging from indifference to hostility.

The system is very costly and unsustainable, so change is inevitable – and it has begun. The ghost of Constantinople will continue to fade away.

By Darryl Lick

Post Contemporary Consumer Forensic Anthropology (PCCFA) is the study of the immediate artifacts created from exhausting the perceived value of a consumable commodity, including forensic analysis of such objects in an attempt to ascertain what place/function/value the commodity had in the life of the consumer and why it is no longer useful or valuable, ownership rejected.

This study tries to include only objects that were abandoned without any expectation that they would be recycled or otherwise reused such as ‘gifted to the street’ items like books, clothes or anything that would not go directly to a landfill. These items can contain much or more of the original information of the product consumed in that the consumer imparts their own ‘fingerprint’ (haha) to the examined object (consumer demographics, habits, etc.) as well as the OEM encoded info (composition, function, place and manner of manufacture). One trend chronicled post anthrax scare in 2001-2002 was that 26 months later Cipro started showing up in a few ‘upscale’ dumpsters (Cipro is an antibiotic that is supposed to protect against bacteria like anthrax and has a shelf life date of aprox 2 years). Highly touted in the mainstream media, Bayer AG sure made out well. transforming Cipro into the most sought-after pharmaceutical since Viagra. (some high government officials supposedly began taking Cipro weeks BEFORE the USA weaponized anthrax germs were discovered in the post-Hmmm… ) Was the appearance of this PCCFA in the trash of the well-to-do related to the terror scam?

Another example could be the proliferation of discarded electronic devices from TV/computer/phones to wifi Internet of things dog poop scoopers. Moore’s law suggests that the complexity of of quite a few of these devices will increase at near expotentality. What becomes of the obsolete?

When laptop computers started getting better in the late 90′s the desktops started showing up on the street. Not so much anymore. Maybe people caught on to the fact that Computer circuit boards have gold and other precious metal traces in densities comparable to mined ore.

When LCD monitors became widely available there was a proliferation of toxic CRT monitors dumped on the street. Now the trend in this area seems to be flat panel screens LCD and LED, although most of the LCD screens examined still function…

A recent discovery has shown that most advanced microprocessors manufactured in the last 20 years (in computers , smart phones and most everything else containing a microprocessor that uses “speculative execution”) have an unrepairable security defect baked into their silicon (haha).

Will this be a new tsunami of E-waste when all these machines are replaced?

A different case is jetsam found in the street. This researcher’s most commonly discovered items now include: gloves (3 to 1 right handed), used condoms (don’t pick those up), lighters (40% are functional), money, phones, and of course the ubiquitous cans, bottles fast food trash, ciggy butts and plastic bags. Interestingly, now in CA, marijuana accouterments are beginning to show up, plastic baggies, bottles and tubes, plastic blunt wrapper packaging and dumped tobacco contents.

Yet another example is food production. In the United States alone it has been estimated that that 30-40 percent of food production is tossed before its intended application (getting munched).

What is the ownership of these objects? Who owns these things once the perceived value is depleted and they become regarded as waste, garbage, rubbish, trash. Who owns the pollution, and environmental degradation due to ‘outsourcing the cost of production’?

(hint: everyno/one).

The illusions of ownership and commodification are some of the foundations of capitalism and imperialism made manifest usually through violence or threat thereof.

Are the discarded artifacts of 10,000 years ago that different than the artifacts of 10 minutes ago? Who ‘owns’ any thing really? The oxygen, the water, the earth, the universe?

Nature seems to have evolved interlocking systems of life cycles where one organisms waste becomes another’s essential resource. When a group of organisms outstrip their input of these essential resources or produce more waste than can be consumed by something else they tend to starve or drown in there own shit like the yeast that lived in your beer. Did they ‘own’ the sugar? Will worms ‘own’ our silly arse’s when there time comes?

I’m sure if the reader just stops and takes a good look around, vast and fascinating fields of PCCFA’s to examine can be discovered on hand!

The forensic anthropologist seeks to construct models of life and values from the debris of the distant past. The PCCFA tries to do this for the immediate past with the after effects of consumption and over production. Also, its a good line to lay on the a$$* getting in yer face for exercising a right to the commons.…

So remember kiddies, when the man or some mindless trash talk’in capitalist consumer tells ye “git out of dat garbage scumbag!!” tell em “I’m with the PCCFAS and you can go take a flying fuck to the dumpster on the dark side of the mooooon!!”

To the trumblers!!!

Viva la trash!!

Thanks if you purchased a 2018 Slingshot Organizer — selling ‘em is how we pay to publish this paper. We still have copies of the spiral bound version for sale.

If you want to help draw art or otherwise create the 2019 Organizer, contact us now. We include the work of over 30 artists from all over the US and internationally in each organizer — it could be you this year. The schedule this year is:

• Edit and add more historical dates in May and June.

• Update radical contact list in June and July.

• Make art for the calendar starting June 24 with all art due July 22.

• Make the organizer July 28/29.

Once we get returns from stores in February, we’ll be giving away bulk quantities to organizations that distribute them to prisoners, immigrants, homeless people, or others who wouldn’t otherwise have access. Contact us if you want to participate.

The Slingshot Organizer smartphone app has been available for a few months and a handful of people are using it. We need help publicizing it. Tell your friends. Right now it only works on Android phones, not iphones and a number of people have asked for an iphone version, but we don’t have an iphone programmer. If you can make us an iphone version, email Slingshot.

Slingshot is working on a policy regarding either inclusion in or removal from the Organizer of radical historical figures who were racist, sexist, homophobic or otherwise bigoted when looked at through today’s standards, but who nonetheless made important contributions to collective liberation in their own day. We have received a number of emails asking us to remove particular people from the organizer and it isn’t always clear what we should do. If you have ideas or suggestions, please let us know. If you see individuals included in the organizer who you think should be removed, write us about it. We might include your comments in a future issue of the newspaper on this topic.

By Teresa Smith

Somewhere in the Central Valley of California, a commercial farmer is preparing to dump many tons of nitrogen upon her soil. This is because the soil is dead due to sloppy farming practices like direct sun exposure and harsh chemical pesticides. It would take only a few summers to nurse the nitrogen-giving microbial life in the soil back to life, but this farmer is trapped by the system of capital, and she must make fast decisions, thinking only one season at a time. So she dumps chemical nitrogen on her soil, allowing her crops to survive the season, but the nitrogen doesn’t stay put: it quickly washes from the field into the creeks and rivers, steadily making its way to the sea.

Once the nitrogen reaches the ocean, a tragic cycle begins: the sudden boost in nitrogen causes the algae population to swell, creating massive algae blooms that soon die and sink, feeding microbes that rapidly suck the oxygen from the water. This creates an oxygen-depleted area of water known as an ocean dead zone. When they enter an ocean dead zone, fish and crabs are knocked unconscious within minutes and die of suffocation. Likewise, slow moving sea creatures like clams, lobsters, muscles, starfish, and anemones all suffocate and die.

There are at least 405 known ocean dead zones in the world—in 1960, there were only 49. Ocean dead zones are often seasonal, as they are directly related to bad farming practices, but in places with high levels of nutrient pollution like the Baltic Sea, they stay year round. These dead zones kill a staggeringly high amount of marine life. The Chesapeake Bay dead, for example, zone kills an estimated 75,000 metric tons of ocean life each year. In the Gulf of Mexico, 212,000 metrics tons of marine life are killed annually by the massive dead zone that emanates from the mouth of the Mississippi.

Ending ocean dead zones is as simple as changing our farming practices. For example, in the early 1990s, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, chemical nitrogen became too expensive for farmers, and the dead zones in the Black Sea vanished, and marine life there began to recover. Because of this, we know that ocean dead zones can be healed, but only if the bad farming practices are put to an end.

This is one of hundreds of direct ways the ecology of our planet is being assaulted by capitalist practices of producing things only for profit and consumption, rather than in harmony with the beautiful biological systems our planet already has in place. We could grow all the food we need without doing it this way. Market competition is the only thing forcing farmers hands.

Dead soil can be nursed back to life by keeping it covered to prevent sun exposure, by feeding it compost tea, and by avoiding harsh chemicals. Once it is alive again, it will be just as productive as with the nitrogen, in fact, more so.

Farmers and the public must be educated about the relationship between chemical nitrogen dumping and ocean dead zones. There must be a demand for food created without nitrogen dumping—a demand for food grown in healthy soil with thriving microbial life.

All life on this planet is interconnected. Bringing the soil back to life is just one way to help the seas. We also need to reduce carbon emissions and the chemical dumping that leads to ocean acidification. We can do it. We can make these changes. But we have to demand better practices across the board.

By Carrion Baggage

The news lingers over the community in a darkness that equals the winter nights. KPFA and its parent organization is $2 Million in debt to a real estate company…with another $6 Million still owed other places. The reality sets in that the resources built up by the community can be confiscated and given to the vultures. For once it seems like studying the issue won’t be of much help. To anyone. When encountering someone from the activist scene It’s hard to not mention the bleak tidings. One of whom has these wise words; “Well they are anti-capitalist — it makes sense that they’re bad with money.”

That’s being a bit generous, crediting the listener sponsored radio station that started in 1949 with being uniformly politically orientated. A few programs critique the way things are but most rarely disrupt the power structure. For example, when shit was brewing in downtown with protests raising hell about killer cops the programming on KPFA would be about distant struggles, and only report on the flashpoint later when crowds had dispersed. The original mission statement of the FM radio station seeks peaceful solutions to conflict by means of having opposing viewpoints air out their message publicly. This was shortly after World War 2 and the surrounding atrocities of that conflict, from racist death camps to racist atomic bombs, were still fresh issues for people. Most of them did not want to return to the conditions that created war and gross economic inequality.

KPFA and its umbrella organization Pacifica has made it through several decades and through various mutations of oppression. Their existence is a testament of the space that can open up when people gather their forces to make change. Very few left wing organizations have that distinction and the ones that do — like the Nation magazine — exist in an obscurity far from mainstream reality. The UFO economics of raising rents and the price of living being a monster to contend with have kept most people from political activity. The world is simply no place to be poor in though most of us on the planet are anything but. Weird then that the quarterly fund drives on KPFA are hyper-focused on being a home shopping network that caters to smug progressives who may be well-intentioned, but ultimately victim to having disposable income and not enough sense where to spread it. Books for $75, flash drives with video or audio of a some celebrity public speaker for $150. This has been quite lucrative for it allowed the station to exist in the black while almost any other community project eats shit and dies a premature death.

More news came in with the New Year worthy of rethinking about the merits of jumping off the Golden Gate Bridge. Boxcar Books in Bloomington, Indiana closed from being suffocated with rents that went up 700% since it opened in 2001. An idealistic venture created during the bleak days of George Bush Jr.’s reign over the world and the commencement of “Never Ending War.” Settling near a college, they provided a space of resistance in the heartland of the US.

Recently Berkeley’s Long Haul Info Shop was host to a student from New College of Florida whose central studies is info shops. Savannah Hawk made a point to visit the space each day it was open and observe and interact with the various crowds. Much like Boxcar Books it would seem the primary users of the Long Haul are street people (calling them homeless is an outdated term). Both Long Haul and Boxcar Books opened to resist gross oppression. Treatment of “homeless” and issues of poverty being no more or less important than war, racism, sexism, homophobia….yet somehow this is what the fight is being boiled down to.

Should we blame the internet? Where is everybody? Long Haul was once the meeting ground for people who were between bouts of fighting the system — often planning where to shift the battle next. Boxcar Books made a public statement astutely noting that new projects tend to get more interest than in sustaining existing projects. Much of their statement exalts how the space provided a free toilet, free coffee and a space where people can charge their devices. It begs the question just what makes up the current definition of “Resistance”. Maybe our organizations shouldn’t advertise workshops that espouse ripping off corporations, squatting, un-arresting friends from cops and the finer arts of billboard redecoration — doing so will only invite state oppression. Still its kinda sad that people fight so hard to make a space and its essentially a drop-in center.

People new to the scene are not always burdened by what the space used to be or even what it is. For young people they are gifted with a vision of how the world could be. When asked to respond to Boxcar Books statement Savannah had this; “Reading this reflection immediately makes me think of that ridiculously corny phrase: ‘don’t cry because it’s over, smile because it happened.’ And while this phrase is stupid and ambiguous, the essence holds true. For to be alive and co-create as a radical space or a collective entity, simply existing is an act of resistance. And I think it’s really easy to think of a closure as a failure; and maybe that’s because that’s what we’ve been taught to believe in this capitalist culture based on competition and exploitation. Whereas the reality is that existing in the first place is a triumph. To think that Boxcar existed for 16 years in the face of a warping ever-gentrifying landscape is a mighty feat in and of itself! Just thinking of all of the volunteers that were active participants in their own life; having to figure out how to deal with real challenges and share a space with others is no small task. Who knows what resonance and reassurance someone fighting depression or an eating disorder was able to find in the pages of zines displayed at Boxcar. Who knows what person was exposed to collective practices and the course of their life was shaped. Who knows what person needing to feel heard and valued was able to walk in and meet others needing the same comfort. And in reading Boxcar’s final reflection I am hopeful that this will not be the end of their collective journey but rather the closing of one stage to make room for another project somewhere down the line. ”

Boxcar Books’ farewell is a reminder how it is essential that people renew their sense of what the fuck they are doing. It would seem that the idea was to run a bookstore that would help keep open the space as a community center and organizing space for activism like prisoner support. That model seems untenable with the shifting game changes of capitalism. The KPFA model of fund drives relates back to the centuries old tradition of community barn raising — where various folk converge and invest their resources to collectively make something. That model seems remote to modern people. But it is something we all might have to consider necessary in order to make radical space. Its essentially what happens with this publication Slingshot every 3 months. There’s a need to create radical space, drop what you’re doing and help make it a reality.

In many ways what is needed is to make the new world while the old world dies. This year will mark the 20th anniversary of Seattle’s World Trade Organization meeting. Thousands of people converged from the grass roots in part to show opposition to the WTO. More so people saw themselves able to make their dreams a reality; from smashing a Starbucks window to frustrating a suit and tie on his way to a meeting intent on global dominance. From setting to motion an independent media organization to making an autonomous space that teems with imagination and personality. More dreams are needed when next we meet to speak our mind.

By the world’s biggest asshole

Everyone is going to say I’m a horrible person for bringing this up, but I’ve been thinking a lot about cultural appropriation lately. Like, the concept of cultural appropriation is really freaking weird. Like, it means you have to look at yourself and everyone in the world as if we are all always pawns in power games, as if we never get to be just people, as if everything you say or do should always ever be evaluated in terms of its relation to theories about huge power structures over which we have no control as individuals. It’s a very cosmopolitan way of talking about things. Very neoliberal way. And sure, it’s not wrong, the idea of cultural appropriation, at least not wrong within it’s own logic, a logic which, it seems, views the social reality as if through a telescope from a planet far, far away.

Like the rule of “Thou shalt not culturally appropriate” has a sort of Prime Directive feel to it, and it isn’t hard to imagine Mr. Spock on Star Trek saying “Captain, wearing that traditional head fwap from the planet Beta Centauri Seven is in direct violation of the Secondary Directive which states—” To which Starbuck responds by saying, “Shut up, I’m on to something here…and if I don’t work this shit out it’s go to kill me.” And knowing Starbuck, she probably then punches Spock in the nose. What an asshole she is!

It’s awful to be torn between not wanting to further hurt groups of people who have had everything torn from them by this empire and yet feeling drawn to the beautiful music, art, and food that these groups somehow haven’t let the empire beat out of them.

Like, the empire took everything from these people. Fucking everything. Like, in the case of indigenous Americans, these are people who were driven off their ancestral land and subjected to mass genocide and shoved onto horrific reservation death camps where they had to get permission to leave and weren’t allow to practice their tribal religions until 1967. And for African Americans, these folks were fucking kidnapped from their homes and turned into commodities and were subjected to rape and torture and being treated like cattle and having their children sold in auctions. You want to read some really heartbreaking stuff? Read the newspaper announcements from just after the 13th Amendment was passed by all the Black folks desperately looking for children and parents that got sold away from them. And then there’s the continued level of terror people in these groups have been subjected to. It is just obscene. From everything to racist cops murdering brown and Black people for so much as looking at them funny, to the white riots and fucking lynch mobs that enacted a holocaust against Black people throughout the first half of the 20th century, to the way the California Indians were bounty-hunted and enslaved, and many native families around here had to use special blankets to transform themselves into rocks and hide in the hills that way for years at a time (please read Benjamin Madley’s American Genocide: The United States and the California Indian Catastrophe, 1846-1873 if you haven’t already). And there is the fact that here in Berkeley, the Campanile, that giant tower over the university, and also the basement of the Anthropology Library are filled with the bones of over 10,000 murdered California Indians, some of whom were killed as late as the 1920s by lunatic white serial killers who fancied themselves “cowboys” and because of racism, society congratulated them for it.

These horrors are real and the trauma lingers amongst all these people who carry inside them unspeakable pain that grew from unspeakable acts. To just offhandedly grab the few things they have that are still theirs, even if it’s just a song or a headdress, and to treat it like it’s mine—that is an act of horrific ignorance.

And yet… I still get these urges to listen to rock and rock music, which, as one Slingshot member has pointed out, is all inspired by the music of African slaves so maybe we should all stop listening to it and only listen to music made by people who have the same genetic make up as us, and she suggested I listen to Albanian music, even though I’m ancestrally Danish, but oh well. And others in my extended community have claimed you shouldn’t eat corn or plantains if you’re white. I’m willing to give up corn, but to give up caramelized plantains covered in salt on a Saturday morning? Will that really help anyone? Will it really? Also, in Poland, people have worn dreadlocks for hundreds of years. Does that mean it is okay for my old housemate, whose grandparents were Polish to have dreadlocks? Everyone else thought so once she explained, which is really fucked up because Black people find that their natural hair is banned from many places of work in this country, especially government-run places, forcing them to use harsh chemical relaxers that can really damage your body. My old roommate’s “traditional polish deadlocks” weren’t her natural hair, she really had to work to get that knappy, greasy rats nest going, and for her to get to wear her hair like that and still have a job was a slap in the face to those whose natural hair does that sort of thing (but prettier) but who can’t wear that hair due to racism. I mean, a lot of these arguments I keep hearing from white people about how we shouldn’t do cultural appropriation sound creepily a lot like eugenics. Like a genetic ghettoization of culture. That is literally what we are doing by going this route.

But sometimes it goes beyond your genes. Once I had a white housemate ask to see my tribal nation ID because I was burning sage and I mumbled something about my Cherokee and Sioux ancestry. But apparently, it doesn’t matter if you’ve got the genes because you have to be a federally-registered card-carrying tribe member to burn sage, at least according to some people who are eager to set up an impromptu cultural appropriation check-point any chance they can get. What’s messed up about this particular tactic is that it is disrespectful of that fact that hundreds of tribes in the US lack federal recognition, largely due to bureaucratic laziness, and this means they don’t get to be card-carrying federally recognized tribe members. This includes the brown people upon whose land the city of Los Angeles now stands, the Winnemem Wintu, and the Ohlone, upon whose land we make the Slingshot newspaper.

As I watch all of these heated screaming matches about cultural appropriation go down in radical community, I find myself bothered by a horrible, asshole-ish question:

Could it be that our frenzied obsession with cultural appropriation right now is actually a way to let white people off of the hook for the larger thing at stake here: reparations?

If white people were on an equal economic and interpersonal playing field with folks of color, cultural appropriation wouldn’t be a thing. Like, it’s fine to wear green and talk with a fake Irish accent on St. Patty’s day because the Irish Americans, collectively, are now fine. Of course, if you look back into the history of Irish-American immigrants, you’ll find this wild era of the racial discrimination that Irish people experienced in the early 20th century here, when they first came to this country to escape a capitalism-contrived famine. Like, American employers hung “No Irish need apply” signs in their windows, and there were racial slurs about the Irish, and horrible things that happened to Irish folks walking alone in the streets. It was only through the ability of Irish people to pass as white within a generation that, as a group, they were able to get ahead.

How can we overcome the propensity among “whites” to share their wealth and network only with other “whites”? Maybe we need to figure out how to get rid of whiteness as a category, and this is something that can only be done if we start listening, really listening to people of color. I’m not talking about listening to their music or mimicking what they do. I’m talking about really listening. To reach out as people, rather than grabbing capitalist commodities that have been labeled as “Black” or “native.” It is through really listening and being in community together that we can break down the arbitrary things of “whiteness” / “not whiteness” that keep us all in chains.

If you have lots of extra cash due to systemic oppression, how about using it to support amazing projects that literally lend power to communities of color? Like supporting African American ownership of cooperative farmland through projects like The Federation of Southern Cooperatives (federationsoutherncoop.com). Or if you live on Ohlone land, you may give “shuumi” or a financial offering to help make up for the fact the feds have failed to grant them land of their own (sogoreate-landtrust.com/shuumi-land-tax/). Or you can support the Winnemem Wintu’s project to restore their ancestral salmon (facebook.com/run4salmon). Or there’s like a million other ways you can financially support the people who have been systemically hurt by the structure of power that gave you your money.

If those with power can strategically help folks of color get on the same playing field as whites, we’ll have a type of equality in this land that we have never yet known. But until we are on equal footing, cultural appropriation will continue to be a thing. And instead of getting to playfully borrow things from these cultures, we will continue to find that, what to one person seems like just silly borrowing of a song or headdress, cuts another person to the bone.

Once we’re truly equal, and everyone, no matter what color their skin, has the same access to food, clean water, emotional care, civic determination, and quality education—once we achieve that, we won’t need the concept of cultural appropriation anymore.

By Amanda Thomas

Earlier this year, I began my Artist’s Residency in Motherhood, and connecting with other mothers in residency at the same time has led to a lot of reflection on the role and status of mothers within creative and alternative circles. One thing I’ve noticed about the group is that most of the women in it are supported by a partner. They struggle enough to find time to create and to be recognized in a white cis male field and world (and a lot of them are making some really biting, powerful stuff about motherhood!), but being a single parent, I find that there is an added layer to the level of difficulty I face in pursuing my work. Single motherhood, despite being such a common, prevalent occurrence, is a topic that often goes unexplored both in the dominant cultural narrative and in creative and activist circles. We are a largely impoverished group of people, and our position should be examined more often in discussions of social justice and building community. I want to start off this article with a short list of statistics:

-There are nearly 12 million single parent families in the United States; 83% of those are headed by single mothers.

-In 2011, while only 8% of married couples with children lived in poverty (and only 24% of single father households), a full 43% of single mothers lived below the poverty line.

-The median adjusted income for a three person household headed by a mother is $26,000, as compared to $40,000 annually for single father households, and $70,000 for households headed by married parents.

-41% of single fathers have a cohabitating partner [who ostensibly is supportive with childcare, financial support, etc.], versus only 16% of single mothers.

-The national average of the annual cost of child care at a center averages over 40% of the median income of a single mother for an infant, and 32% for a school aged child.

-Two thirds of single mothers receive no child support.

As you can see, financially, the situation for a single mother in the United States is pretty bleak, if easily quantifiable. (Side note: these statistics are for full-time single parents, not people with joint custody arrangements.) I hate to reduce the problem to numbers based on a capitalist ideology, but the reality is that it is pretty hard to provide for a child without being entrenched in the capitalist system, and living in poverty with children is a huge struggle. The thing about statistics is they’re not just statistics; behind each number is a profusion of human lives, with so many people’s stories behind it. In this case, that includes mine.

I realized I was pregnant right after my 22nd birthday. A confused child myself, I made a decision that I was not ready to make, but had to make anyway. Despite all the promises, my son’s biological father left before my child was ever born, and was never meaningfully involved in his life. The paltry $53 a month in child support that I was awarded rarely gets paid. Last year, for instance, I received only $100.

Just before my son turned 2, I tentatively welcomed a new partner into my world. After about 4 ½ years of being hugely, deeply involved in our lives, he, too, walked away, deciding his dreams of being a wandering punk and starting a band in the city were more important than the child who told everyone this was his “real dad.” To this day, over a year after he began drifting out of our lives, my son still refers to him as his real dad, and struggles deeply with the abandonment and absence.

I am a passionate and creative person: an artist, a musician, an activist. I have so much potential and determination within me, but, as it is with most single parents, I have literally only a handful of hours a week to spend on anything outside of the endless deluge of work, school, meal preparation, housecleaning, laundry, appointments, bills, the kid’s homework, and just BEING THERE and being present with my child. It is not easy. It is beyond not easy. When I am exhausted and overwhelmed and depressed and sick, I still have to pull myself up at 6 am to get my kid ready for school. I still have to wake up at 3 am if he’s having a nightmare and be emotionally available for that. I still have to remain patient and be as much of a shining example of humanity as I can possibly muster.

It is literally impossible for one person to wear all of these hats and do as good of a job as they want to do at any of it. It is even more impossible to fulfill all those roles and have the opportunity to meaningfully pursue one’s interests and one’s own dreams. This is the reality: behind every father figure who has left to do something else, there is a mother bearing the burden and having to sacrifice or postpone a lot of her own dreams. The father figure’s chosen path in life is only possible at a mother’s expense.

It’s beyond time to shed the old idea of children being a “woman’s responsibility.” It is long past time for fathers (biological and otherwise) to know that they are expected to stay and put in real effort, and that a child is a lifetime commitment that one does not back out of. It’s time for them to know that they are equally responsible, and time for fathers to care for their children with the willingness, dedication and grace they deserve. This pattern of child-rearing being placed on the mother’s shoulders is, of course, also present in cis/hetero/two-parent nuclear families, but the single mother is the penultimate example. We are literally doing everything, inside of an often painful and isolating existence. It’s also time we remember that children are the future adults of the world, and it should be a cohesive, community effort to ensure they’re getting the guidance and support they need to create a future that’s worth living in.

If there are nearly 10 million single mothers in the United States, think of the massive potential, brilliance, inspiration, and creative force we are all missing out on because all these people with a valuable perspective are struggling, largely alone, to survive in this culture while carrying the next generation on their backs. We are depriving ourselves as a society by ensuring so many people are perpetually too overwhelmed to explore and contribute in the ways they wish they could.

It’s time to make sure we don’t lose that potential. If you are part of an artistic or activist group, do your best to facilitate parents, especially single parents. Can your event, meeting, group, or space accommodate children? If not, perhaps you could consider providing quality childcare so parents can still attend. A group that meets regularly could have members take turns being with the children. There are a lot of solutions and options that take just a little imagination, a bit of effort, and a sliver of compromise. Not only is childcare exorbitantly expensive, it’s also incredibly discouraging to be unable to join a group due to the inability to obtain childcare. It makes it hard to feel welcome when the support doesn’t exist for a person to be involved. Having this kind of support is often the difference between someone being able to be involved in activist group, or pursue their art form, and them being isolated. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve done things like feel bad that I can’t go to a protest or art/music event due to not having childcare, or dragged my kid along to an art opening or a “community presentation” and been shamed for being the annoying parent with the loud, obnoxious kid. It feels terrible, and certainly doesn’t encourage me to get involved.

Do you personally know any single parents? Offer them direct help. Not just “If you need a babysitter sometime, let me know.” Develop a real relationship with your friends’ kids and make specific offers like, “I’m free on Saturday and can come over at 7 and spend time with (insert child’s name here) for the night. You should go out and do something if you’d like to. There’s going to be this event here at this time if you’re interested in that.” Visit them at home; sometimes it’s just too much work to drag kids around to places. When you visit, quietly do small things to make their lives easier: wipe the bathroom counter, wash a few dishes, read the child(ren) a book. The societal pressure to be unremittingly self-sufficient is compounded here with the cultural expectations of mothers that lead them to feel guilty about doing things for themselves, so don’t even leave them the burden of having to ask,. They probably won’t ask for help with childcare with anything other than a doctor’s appointment or some other obligation or necessity.

When my partner was thinking of leaving us, he had people advising him that he shouldn’t think twice or care because it wasn’t his biological kid – never mind the fact that my child told everyone he was his real father, never mind that he admired and looked up to and loved and needed him, deeply. My son’s biological father, also, continues on in his artistic circles with no repercussions for the abandonment of his child. People have even defended him to me, and say he’s a “good guy.” I’m tired of hearing it, and I’m tired of looking around and seeing so many of my friends who are mothers raising their children alone and unsupported.

Confront men who walk away; don’t let them slide, and definitely don’t defend or encourage them. If a mother leaves her children behind, the social stigma is crushing, as is the guilt. A patriarchal culture dictates that a mother who is not with her children has committed some unforgivable sin and essentially failed as a human being. A patriarchal culture is, at the same time, accepting of an absent father’s justifications for leaving as reasonable and valid, or excusing him for his supposed inability to meaningfully be there for his child(ren). To excuse an absent father is to be complicit in the overburdening of women. Let’s demand equal standards here. Let’s demand equal responsibility. This dynamic will never change if we don’t inisist upon better, and reinforce within our own circles that such behavior is unacceptable. Mothers will continue to carry the future of the world on their shoulders if we don’t start holding fathers accountable for their fair share.

*Please forgive the binary-reinforcing terms in this article. It was relatively impossible to find comparable statistics that didn’t reference “mothers” and “fathers” specifically. I also am speaking to the terms “mother” and “father” as social constructs that need some reexamination instead of as some sort of correct or true default. I am also placing myself under the umbrella of “mother;” even if I don’t entirely align with that word, it is a relevant representation of the dynamics I experience living in this culture. I also want to apologize for not including family structures other than the nuclear family and the single parent. I am not at all trying to invalidate multi-parent families – in fact, I think the more present, supportive parents a child has, the better off they will be.

*The statistics in this article come from the Pew Research Center and the US Census Bureau.

Addendum: This article stimulated an intensely heated debate in the collective. Some thought the article should run exactly as submitted while others felt strongly about asking the author for revisions (most articles get revised). As a compromise, we’re running the article as is and offer this additional note to sum up some of the controversy.

While most of us agree that more childcare (and support of other sorts) for parents (especially single parents!) would be a good thing, the Slingshot collective, and The Long Haul infoshop, don’t offer any childcare services. Both projects limp along on a barebones crew of committed volunteers, a not uncommon predicament for radical projects of all sorts. Calling on others to do something we don’t do ourselves is somewhat hypocritical. And while we all feel strongly about parents taking responsibility for the well being of the children they bring into the world, calling out a boyfriend who fails to do so is a complex and problematic assertion. Some of us critiqued the role of “the artist” as a problematic expression of individualism, an assertion that sent our discussion sideways off a f**king cliff! Whew!!

One thing we all agree on is that we don’t want to cast a shadow on the many parents locked up in the injustice system. We hope you find the article as stimulating as we did!

By I Steve

We all know them, all tried to work with them. The one who insists on being the leader. The one who says everyone who criticizes her is a fed. The manipulative male “feminist.” His close cousin, the serial sexual perpetrator who thinks he’s the hero of the story.

They are the narcissists among us. And what is narcissism? “… an excessive need for admiration, disregard for others’ feelings, an inability to handle any criticism, and a sense of entitlement,” says Google.

Last issue of Slingshot, I wrote about the need for all of us to learn a little humility. This issue I’ll discuss a small number of people with a very large impact. This is not intended as a call for or against ostracizing or reeducating such people. Rather, an initial inquiry into a topic we too often ignore or don’t see, and ideas on designing our community projects with the assumption that narcissists are inevitable.

Vocabulary

Narcissist, narcissism, narcissistic behavior, healthy narcissism, narcissistic personality, narcissistic personality disorder. Even among psychological researchers and mental health workers, the words vary in meaning. So to clear for this article:

narcissist (person/personality): Someone who exhibits the behavior above.

narcissistic behavior: The behavior. The distinction is emphasized because some approaches confront the behavior, however consistently or not, without focusing on individuals.

narcissistic personality: Someone who severely and consistently exhibits narcissistic behavior over a lifetime or many years; stronger language than just calling someone a narcissist. Used here as a term for the person as well as the trait.

narcissistic personality disorder: A psychiatric, i.e., quasi-medical term, for a narcissistic personality. While this may apply to any narcissistic personality, here it refers to a person who hopes to be a considerate member of the community with loving relationships but struggles with deeply rooted narcissistic behaviors.

healthy narcissism: A term for narcissistic behaviors at reasonable, functional levels. For clarity I prefer to simply use other terms for this, although the concept may come up. See egoism below.

In this article I use male pronouns for narcissists, because narcissitic personality is more common in men. But by no means exclusive to men; there’s sufficient little Hillarys among us.

Egoism

Egoism is an anarchistic philosophy in which the point of life is to pursue one’s own interest. It’s considered to have started with Max Stirner and is popular with post-left anarchists. While I’m here neither to critique egoism nor to give it free advertising, I do want to distinguish it from narcissism (so post-leftists don’t write “In Praise of Narcissism in response). The two things are in some ways opposite, although on rare occasion a egoist can be a narcissist.

Leading psychoanalysts and new-age psychics1 agree that the root of narcissism is a sense of worthlessness, or a lack of a sense of self altogether. The narcissist personality creates a false grandiose cover self: attractive, heroic, charismatic, a very stable genius. Egoism, on the other hand, actually embraces a sort of radical self-acceptance. The egoist boldly embraces the true desires of their real self, and doesn’t give a shit what you think of their flatulence and acne.

The Impact

What makes the narcissist personality different from others who misbehave is the relentless refusal to change their actions and the rabbit hole of manipulation and games for any who try to work with them on it. For example, consider sexual abuse, one of the most destrutive behaviors in anarchist scenes and the frustrations people experience organizing around it:

“Accountability processes do a lot of good but sometimes they just teach men how to appear unabusive when nothing’s changed but the words coming out of their mouths. Survivors and friends are left wondering if said male is no longer a threat. Eventually the issue recedes from peoples’ minds because they don’t want to seem overly reactionary and don’t know what further steps to even take and the perpetrator is able to continue on in their life without much changing.”

From “Is the Anarchist Man Our Comrade” quoted in Accounting for Ourselves by Crimethinc. The pamphlet goes on to discuss the impact on the community of these stymied efforts: “This stuff depresses people and burns them out,” and “Accountability processes suck up disproportionate time and energy.” All this begs two too often ignored questions:

(1) Why is this happening in activist scenes devoted to the opposite? The stock answer is that “abuse happens in all communities,” but if our values don’t make a difference, what is the point of a feminist community? (2) Why would someone devoted to life-affirming values and a better world not only minimize or deny previous behavior, but actively pursue future behavior under duress?

The answer to both questions may be that radical movements attract narcissist personalities for narcissist reasons. Even if not more numerous than in the general population, their presence and effect is noticeable. To be admired, to be the leader, to lead and exploit naïve sheep. To some degree that’s many of us; a “healthy narcissism” drives us to be like Cesar Chavez or Emma Goldman. The narcissist personality joins to become Stalin or Pol Pot.

Post-authoritarian social movements have been damaged by our own success in a way. When Marxist activism was the norm, and entrenched leadership was considered more functional, narcissist aspired to be great leaders, hoping, like the great communists of the past, to use the scientific principles of socialism to remake the universe according to their own whims. When a narcissist failed in the heroic struggle to be the leader, he became the leader of a new alphabet-soup-group. A leader lucky enough to hit the bigtime was immune to accountability (SWP in Britain)2.

Since the Cold War ended and as anarchy increases in hipness, the narcissists come to our door.

What to do?

Much more has been written about narcissistic personalities in personal relationships than in communities. Do lessons apply? A lot of it is like “Ten Signs He’s a Narcissist” so you can avoid a relationship with that person. The advice is usually intended for someone who’s suffered already in such relationships.

This preemptive exclusion approach won’t work in communities and movements, for many reasons: the scale involved, people with narcissistic personality disorder can change. Some people on the narcissistic spectrum just need to plug into a community to get functional. Besides such people with too much healthy narcissism, many with other situations can be mistaken for narcissists: autistic people, people with complex PTSD, and ADHD.

And, or course, if anyone is ever punished, it must be because of their behavior and not some clever label we put on them. Nor should anyone’s bad behavior be ignored because of an amateur diagnosis.

The other notable aspect of narcissist relationships is the affinity for codependence with narcissists. This is applicable to radical movements. While part of the problem is that narcissists can rely on available forms of institutionalized privilege, the tenaciousness of narcissist personalities in our communities is empowered by a dainty everyone-is-special mentality.

Part of a culture of integrity is a balanced approach to compassion—which usually turns out to be the overall most compassionate approach to compassion. This includes neither attacking or defending anyone based on our own neuroses, the knee-jerk reactions we use to reassure ourselves of our own goodness. Our noble capacities for pity and tolerance can be balanced by the needs of those who don’t need pity and tolerance but do need safety and functionality.

Remembering that a narcissist personality lacks an affirming sense of self. Achieving a stable resiliency from narcissist disruption and devastation, a culture of integrity can focus on how our community can embrace the worth of the true selves of all, becoming a place of healing for people on the narcissist spectrum, regardless of why they came here in the first place.

 

1. James F. Masterson. The Search for the Real Self. The Free Press, 1988.

Teal Swan. “Narcissism.” Youtube.

 

2. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/mar/09/socialist-workers-party-rape-kangaroo-court