Insight and inspiration in turbulent times.
Building an inclusionary common sense will take an understanding of the relationship between our social history, our experience of inclusionary social policies, and the opposing psychosocial dynamic that promotes a readiness to scuttle the gains those policies produced through a belonging based on fear and threat.
What forms of ecological knowledge have we ignored because they emerged from survival rather than privilege—and what would it require to center them now?
One thing is clear—when politicians invoke the phrase “national security,” they are never talking about security for the people who live in this country.
But if form is all there is, there is never justification for ever harming another body. And that is the light that will lead us out of this rotten, brain-damaged culture…Into a life of joyful hedonism…
The point is not to advocate a sudden new language, but to become more aware of the dualistic impositions deeply woven and perpetuated into modern life, through language. The point is to recognize the prison bars and the constant brainwashing rhetoric issuing from the speakers in the asylum of modernity… and to dislike the situation.
This week’s Frankly marks a new recurring segment on this platform where Nate poses questions about our shared future: Uncomfortable Questions in Unstable Times. In this edition, he explores what would change if societies shifted their primary goal from growth to stability.
Currently, global breakdown is being accelerated primarily by an ongoing and worsening political calamity in the United States. In this article, we’ll go to the frontlines of conflict in Minneapolis to see how people are responding to a violent—even deadly—government-imposed crisis.
Eight years ago, the Ecosystem Restoration Communities (ERC) movement began with a simple but powerful belief: that everyday people everywhere could restore the land beneath their feet and, in doing so, restore hope for our shared future.
Despite several theories proposed by scientists and philosophers, there are no conclusive answers.
What I want to do in this post, just for fun (well, more than that), is use the rules of this game to show how hard it is to make a strong and clear case for a point that would still be tough to make if I could use all words. I think/hope we can learn from it.
We’re in a period where relational patterns are shaping how people cope and also how they relate to power. Naming these patterns matters because they are often carried privately, interpreted as personal failure rather than understood as responses to shared conditions.
I’m not suggesting that nothing has changed, nor that religion has faded into the background. Religious themes remain highly pronounced today, especially in American culture. At the same time, these theological structures have been secularized in ways that now shape experience far beyond formal belief.
