deep dive


same on issuu site []


more of what inspired deck..

1\ while reading dawn of everything:

especially david graeber and david wengrow‘s decade long prolonged convo p 25 (as noted in deck).. but also/including:


what ultimately matters is whether we can rediscover the freedoms that make us human in the first place..t

graeber and wengrow freedom law (3) .. maté basic needs (2)

huge.. let’s do that.. let’s focus on that.. let’s org around that..


what if we treat people, form the beginning, as imaginative, intelligent, playful creatures who deserve to be understood as such..t

yeah that.. but has to be all of us or the dance won’t dance and we’ll just keep perpetuating sea world (aka:tragedy of the non common)

so.. we need a means to org/facil that chaos – again.. from deep dive .. our findings


the course of human history may be less set in stone, and more full of playful possibilities than we tend to assume..t

graeber unpredictability/surprise law et al

this book is also something else (besides trying to lay down foundations for a anew world history): a quest to discover the right questions.. for about a decade now..we.. that is the two authors of this book.. have been engaged in a prolonged convo w each other about exactly these questions..(what should be biggest question we should be asking about history.. how do we characterize what has been lost.. is it really lost.. what does it imply about possibilities for social change today..

same time frame for me.. but prolonged convo about what legit free people are like .. what they need to be set/stay free.. and how 8b people can get there

was my deep dive


these .. our findings:

1\ undisturbed ecosystem (common\ing) can happen

2\ if we create a way to ground the chaos of 8b legit free people


on the indigenous critique.. revealing possibilities for human emancipation that, once disclosed, could hardly be ignored..

how i felt/feel after/during deep dive – can’t not see it (what i’ve seen et al from findings)

ideas expressed in that critique came to be perceived as such a menace to the fabric of european society that an entire body of theory was called into being, specifically to refute them..

yeah.. that’s how i felt with ed system in particular.. i was a menace to their sinclair perpetuation law.. so i was gotten rid of

2\ fragments re re read.. [75-85]

790 [75]

9\ one or several theories of alienation – this is the ultimate prize: what, precisely, are the possible dimensions of non alienated experience.. how might its modalities be catalogued or considered? .. people like john zerzan.. whittling away absolutely everything.. end up condemning the very existence of language, math, time keeping, music and all forms of art and representation.. they are all written off as forms of alienation.. leaving us w a kind of impossible evolutionary ideal.. true revolution could only mean somehow returning to that (perfect ape.. w unimaginable telepathic connection w fellows.. at one w wild nature.. )

actually need to go that deep.. ie: lit & num as colonialism.. language as control/enclosure.. representation as red flag.. need to get back/to non hierarchical listening ness (telepathic connection ness at one w nature ness).. findings from deep dive

need to: org around legit needs

798 [77]

there is of course no single anarchist program – nor could there really be – but it might be helpful to end by giving the reader some idea about current directions of thought and organizing

well.. there could be a single infra.. if we go deep enough for it to be based on the essence of human being.. if we org around legit needs


the point is that despite endless rhetoric about ‘complex, subtle, intractable issues’.. (justifying decades of expensive research by rich and their well paid flunkies). the anarchist program would probably have resolved most of them in 5-6 yrs.. but, you will say, these demands are entirely unrealistic.. true enough.. but why are they unrealistic? mainly, because those rich guys meeting in the waldorf would never stand for any of it. this is why we say they are themselves the problem

graeber unrealistic law.. sinclair perpetuation law..

from deep dive.. today we can leap – as in year or less from now

the struggle against work has always been central to anarchist organizing.. by this i mean, not the struggle for better worker conditions or higher wages, but the struggle to eliminate work, as a relation of domination, entirely.. t

still in relation to domination if naming.. time stamping.. in any way.. any form of m\a\p is domination ness

graeber job\less law et al live sans the supposed to’s of school/work et al

earn a living ness et al

hence the iww slogan ‘against the wage system’.. this is a long term goal of course.. in the shorter term, what can’t be eliminated can at least be reduced.. shorter work week et al


but has anyone carried out a *feasibility study (to 16 hr week.. 4 day/week.. 4 hr/day).. after all.. it has been repeatedly demo’d that a considerable chunk of the hours worked in america are only actually necessary to **compensate for problems created by fact that americans work too much

exactly.. this is *deep dive ness and **response to simona ness..

elim of advertising would also reduce production, shipping, and selling of unnecessary products, since those items people actually do want or need, they will still figure out a way to find out about..

rather than way to find out about.. way to make it themselves or not even think/want about it

we need to org around legit needs

as a means to undo our hierarchical listening so we can grok enough ness


elmin of radical ineq’s would mean we would no longer require services of most of the millions currently employed as doormen, private security forces, prison guards, or swat team.. not to mention the military.. beyond that.. *we’d have to do research.. financiers, insurers, and investment bankers are all essentially parasitic beings, but there might be some useful function in these sectors that could not simply be replaced w software..

*deep dive and simona ref.. our findings: need none of it..

847 [81]

minor note: admittedly, all of this presumes the total reorg of work, a kind of ‘after the revolution’ scenario which i’ve argued is a necessary tool to even begin to think about human possibilities.. even if revolution will probably never take such an apocalyptic form

again to simona ref

yeah.. i think that’s where we start.. in the short term.. living as if already free (but won’t be enough).. from the supposed to’s of school/work et al


this of course brings up the ‘who will do the dirty jobs’ question.. one which always get thrown at anarchists or other utopians.. peter kropotkin long ago pointed out the fallacy of the argument.. there’s no particular reason dirty jobs have to exist.. if one divided up the unpleasant tasks equally, that would mean all the worlds’ top scientists and engineers would have to do them too; one could expect the creation of self-cleaning kitchens and coal-mining robots almost immediately..

rather.. wouldn’t create ie: robots to clean.. would be living in ways sans waste.. so dirty jobs et al irrelevant

kropotkin dirty jobs law


all this happened completely below the radar screen of the corp media, which also *missed the point of the great mobilizations.. the org of these actions was meant to be a living illustration of what a truly democratic world might be like, from the festive puppets to the careful org of affinity groups and spokecouncils.. all operating w/o a leadership structure.. always based on principle of consensus-based direct democracy.. **it was the kind of org which most people would have, had they simply heard it proposed, written off as a pipe dream..

*missed pt.. which was what any form of democratic admin would be (is) like.. which to me is missing the point of legit free people..

**oi.. yeah in sea world.. where we just offer finite sets of spinach or rock ness.. oi oi oi..

add pages.. redo deck.. this is false.. via decade long deep dive.. like you saying human history is false (in doe).. via decade long prolonged convo

yeah.. i see consensus et al as just replacing rep ness et al.. same song ness

and.. to the careful org of affinity groups.. we can do so much better.. ie: imagine if we just focused on listening to the itch in 8b souls.. first thing.. everyday.. and used that data to connect/coord us..

again.. great.. but not decentralized/diff/diverse enough

org we need.. 2 convers as infra.. org around legit needs


on good form of consensus

public consensualways oppresses someone(s)

instead of voting proposal up and down, then, proposals are worked and reworked, scotched or reinvented, until one ends up w something everyone can live with..

not gonna happen.. again.. pcaos.. huge.. we need to let go of any form of democratic admin.. any form of m\a\p.. that insight from decade of deep dive..

point is.. this is diff dind of direct democracy.. but still sucks energy .. as noted in mid page.. oi oi oi ..

? why.. why can’t we all live w diff things? (today we can actually facil/welcome/dance-with that chaos)

and again – public consensus always oppresses someone(s) and is huge energy suck.. as noted mid page ie:

when it comes to the final state, actually ‘finding consensus’ there are two levels of possible objection: one can ‘stand aside’ which is to say ‘i don’t like this and won’t participate but wouldn’t stop anyone else from doing it’ or ‘block’ which has the effect of a veto.. one can only block if one feels a proposal is in violation of the fundamental principle or reason for being of a group

why waste our time on all that?.. not to mention that it changes us.. so that we’re not us

brown belonging lawthe opposite of belonging.. is fitting in.. true belonging doesn’t require you to change who you are.. it requires you to be who you are.. and that’s vulnerable.. –Brené Brown

888 [85]

one could go on at length about the elab and surprisingly sophisticated methods that have been developed to ensure *all this works: modified consensus for large groups; consensus working so that don’t bring before large group unless have to as means of ensuring gender equity ([86] – in n america consensus process emerged more than anything thru feminist movement)

i guess the question is *all what.. because it hasn’t (and won’t) work toward a more antifragile, healthy, thriving world.. the ecosystem we keep longing for.. what the world needs most is the energy of 8b alive people

consensus ness won’t wake people up to that energy

3\ simona twitter convo

after fragments at lse on org around legit needs and around jobs:

Let’s org around legit needs – that’s it! which also means  to org around legit jobs, asking what’s the point with our jobs and demanding to work only for legit ends: those fulfilling human needs and enhancing human freedom and playfulness #care

Original Tweet:

quote tweeting me here:

@ayca_cu @davidgraeber ‘neither is there much point in speculating about it .. the question is how to create a situation where we could find out’ @davidgraeber’s fragments

let’s org around legit needs

Original Tweet:

me: i think if we org’d around legit/deep/universal/essence needs.. we wouldn’t have to org for anything else.. i think most (if not all) things we think we need to org for now.. would become irrelevant

simona: not sure i understand

me: i think if we org’d deep enough.. that people truly felt free to be themselves.. and we trusted that.. things like work, school, politics, .. would become irrelevant.. all the things that keep taking up our time/energy now.. so we just assume we need to org them better.. rather than perhaps.. let them go

goes back to so much in first two (fragments and doe).. but mostly.. just about what i’ve seen



also add link to dd to image on deck and other things? and reload?







1\ undisturbed ecosystem (common\ing) can happen

2\ if we create a way to ground the chaos of 8b legit free people