OneFiftyOneProof
read my profile
sign my guestbook

Visit OneFiftyOneProof's Xanga Site!

Name: OneFiftyOneProof


Message: message me


Member Since: 1/21/2009

SubscriptionsSites I Read
coolmonkey
DrakonFyre
hesacontradiction
RachelG@datingish
RevEarth
aumshinrikyo
girl_smileyy
lotta_valdez
Lexsonico
exhale_whispers
brokensoul42
Darn_it_danube
into_the_lens
DearRicky
featuredweblogs
featuredquestions
TheXangaTeam

Groups Blogrings
Its ok, we can be losers together
previous - random - next

!! Italian Royalty !!
previous - random - next

+Italian Pride+
previous - random - next

! * Just..... write.
previous - random - next

 Writer's Outlet 
previous - random - next

Save Our Earth
previous - random - next

!! A spiritual life journey
previous - random - next


Posting Calendar

|<< oldest | newest >>|
view all weblog archives

Get Involved!

Suggest a link

Recommend to friend

Create a site


Thursday, January 12, 2012

Freedom Itself And Not "Freedom of.."

Freedom is a fragile thing, something we all seem to want and strive for but with no clear cut definition of what freedom actually is. We all know what freedom of speech is, what freedom of choosing what toppings you want on your sub or what freedom of expression is, but what is freedom itself?

A dictionary definition of the word is: The state of being free or at liberty than in confinement or under restraint.

Still kind of vague though isn't it? Okay, you're not confined or restrained, but are you really free? Have you experienced freedom?

To some, freedom may mean being able to eat something they've been craving for months instead of the 'healthy' diet they've stuck to because of a New Year's resolution they felt obligated to be a part of out of their love for their partner or family member. Or maybe it's finally being able to get that tattoo you've wanted on your arm after years of being told "My House, My Rules!" But these sound more like freedom to choose, or freedom of choice than just plain freedom. Does freedom itself actually exist?

Freedom can be a scary thing, imagine if you had true freedom to do whatever you REALLY want to do. What would you do? What would that feel like?

Is this why we allow others to control what we do? Freedom itself is scary and is too much responsibility to handle, having all that to own up to without someone to blame can be a hard thing to face without some kind of support system or shelter to hide under. Freedom may very well be a dream, a world belonging to the fantasy world along with ogres, living dead and robots that can think and act human.


Saturday, December 03, 2011

Adapting Doesn't Mean Losing Integrity

I know many people who seem to be part of the 'cool' crowd, they're fun and people enjoy being around them. Then there are those that may be shy or not as social as others, not to say they don't have friends, but maybe they're friends are a few miles away at a different school or in another state completely so making new friends is even more of a challenge then it was in the 6th grade, when I had no idea what the hell Pokemon was.

I've noticed that I've the ability to adapt to different groups, I have the gift of knowing how to communicate with others. On one side there's the people who study, have stronger priorities but still know how to have fun in the process. Then there's the group that seems to be goofing around all the time, but they still study and take things just as seriously as the other group. The difference? Sometimes the values of the individuals in these groups click, and sometimes they are complete opposites. And there's nothing wrong with that. I enjoy talking to the quiet one just as much as I enjoy talking to the one who is always cracking jokes and making everyone laugh, including the teacher.

I think because I'm a little bit of both myself. I can be the quiet one, observing and being lightly social. Then I can be the 'class clown' and make people laugh, brighten up there day and make things a little less stressful for everyone, including myself. But I've never lost sight of what type of person I am, I don't drink, I don't think studying for hours at a time is effective for me and I enjoy having a balance of study time and free time, who doesn't right? I'm able to adapt to situations without losing my values, without losing sight of what makes me the individual I am.

What's a situation you've adapted to without losing your sense of self?


Friday, November 04, 2011

What matters most to you about the opposite sex? Looks, personality, etc? Why?

What matters most, at least to me would be personality. Yes there has to be physical attraction but if that's all that exists and they have the personality of a handball then things will get boring quick.

There's something about a sense of humor that is attractive, calming and joyous to be around. Same with someone who is open minded and not quick to project their values on to others and become judgmental of everyone and everything. I believe personality is what creates connection, even if it's not on the romantic level and things say purely platonic.

   

I just answered this Featured Question; you can answer it too!


Sunday, October 23, 2011

Shoplifting: A test of true morals?

When we're growing up we're taught that there is a huge difference between right and wrong, good or bad. Stealing was wrong, punishable by imprisonment, being grounded or the dreaded belt across the back side, surely this would be a deterrent to exchange your hard earned allowance for sugar filled goodies or a magazine that has colorful cars and curvaceous women. Those who stole were doomed to become losers, drop outs from life and society destined to beg for change from people outside of Starbucks and develop a drug addiction of some kind. The lowest of low, scum of the earth and the reason why we lock our doors and have ATD security systems.

Remember the story of Robin Hood? He would gallantly rob from the rich to feed the poor. Many supported him even though he was declared a criminal, an outlaw who was to be punished by death and to be made an example of. The people supported him and helped him hide, they knew he was their only hope to survive.

Fast forward to today, or next week if today isn't good for you. When we hear of people committing small shop lifting crimes like taking a basket of groceries or robbing a Wal-Mart of thousands of dollars, do we cheer? Do we say 'Oh no how could that they do such a thing?' or does a small part of us wish we could do that same exact thing, just once.

As a kid and as a teenager you may steal more, less or even not at all. But you've developed a set of morals to go by. They could be only taking from corporations, take only what is needed and nothing more and so on.

Maybe it was that stealing will send you to hell, that it will ruin your chances of getting into heaven, a good college, or getting the new iPhone for your birthday. Whatever the case, shoplifting will always be one of those things that some will root for, and others will notify the store security when they see someone sticking something selling for 14.99 in their pocket.

The next time you're in the grocery store, in a place full of electronics that you can purchase to distract you from how obese you're getting, how much your job sucks or that your wife is pregnant but you haven't had sex in months I want you to think to yourself about what your morals are, could you shoplift? Why? Why not?


Friday, October 21, 2011

An Anarchist Opinion of Occupy Denver

After reading several reports on how anarchists are being treated in many of the occupy movements I feel that I should share my experience in Denver. Although I consider myself an anarchist, I am not affiliated with any of the local anarchist groups and have been attending Occupy Denver as an individual. I decided to enter this particular situation in Denver as an observer/listener and therefore have not been singled out or labeled nearly as much as many other people.

Problems concerning anarchist involvement arose starting at the first general assembly hosted by Occupy Denver. Although I did not attend, I have listened to the audio and spoken to members on both sides who were there. It appears that a mix of people gathered; a mix of long-term activists and newbies. The first thing agreed to at the meeting was a commitment to nonviolence. No one seemed to have a problem with that. After that discussion the topic of of – gasp – a diversity of tactics threw the newbies into disarray. It was simply mentioned that a diversity of tactics be respected; or at the least, talked about.

Being a student of Gandhi and King, it troubled me that these newbies were using these great people as a shield of pacifism, locking out any notion towards the term diversity of tactics (even though both Gandhi and King supported such). In the end, there were threats to DOX anyone speaking about other forms of action and many of the groups began to feel uncomfortable within this new movement. This caused a major split in the group. I showed up a few days later. Although I was not on board or in agreement with the main goals being stated by OD (mainly reform) I did not see anyone being treated unfairly, so, I stuck around.

Slowly, I began to notice some prejudices creeping out of the woodwork. When anyone one would mention doing anything unpermitted, that person would be pressured to stay nonviolent. If, during a march, someone would cross the street on a red light or walk in the actual road, members of OD not only accused protesters of being provocateurs, but went so far as to point out specific people and scream it through a megaphone.

Shit really hit the fan when OD got the notice – on October13th– that the governor would be sending his thugs in to remove our tents and other belongings if participants didn't do it themselves. Naturally, the reformist newbies were inclined to stay within the perimeter of the law and remove all of the things we had spent three weeks building. After all, “the police and politicians are our friends and are acting in the best interest of the people”.

The majority of OD's group on the ground wanted to stay, but a few of the newbie organizers insisted that this would force the police to get violent and to them not following laws was violent (or at least not nonviolent). The point made by myself and a few others there was that there's nothing violent about civil disobedience. We explained that everyone has a right to be on this land,  that the group calls itself an occupation, and there indeed was a need to stay and fight for OD’s structures. Fear mongers stood up and warned participants who would most certainly face time in prison, huge fines, and have a record that would follow them around for their entire life. A decent number of folks responded by explaining that each person has a choice and that no one would need to stay if they didn't want to, but that those who chose to stay would know the consequences.

Denver Anarchist Black Cross has been getting fucked with by the police in this town for years and have an established legal team set up. Denver ABC made sure everyone interested in staying had a number to call for legal assistance. Even though they were one of the main groups who felt uncomfortable being in a space with potential snitches, they (and Denver CopWatch) offered their unwavering support to those who wished to stay and face arrest.

There was so much fear mongering and trying to talk those of us willing to stay out of staying, and I believe that because of that, no time was set aside to talk about strategy or anything relevant for that matter. Nothing was done when the police brutally tore down the 60 or so tents that had been put up, but arrestables quickly formed protection circles around the medic tent and the Thunderdome (the kitchen that served up to 400 meals per day, not only to Occupy members, but also to the surrounding homeless community). While this standoff ensued, I saw none of the self-proclaimed OD leaders around, but only Denver ABC and CopWatch. Then, 24 of us were arrested.

In jail the only number made available to us (meaning the only people who were even prepared enough to have a number) was from Denver ABC's legal line, so we called. When the arrested showed up (myself included) for court that day, not only was the courtroom packed with supporters, but four lawyers awaited us. On the other side of things, the Occupy Denver website and Facebook page were practically useless, as no one thought it necessary to post updates or even answer my wife and friends as they frantically posted questions as to my whereabouts. When, twelve hours after our arrest, most were finally released, the first (and only) person I saw – as soon as I walked out the doors – was a member of Denver ABC, offering me invaluable support. As of today, the only legal help I have gotten has been from Denver ABC; not one single thing has been done by the members of Occupy Denver.

As far as the people who were left in jail (some people had previous charges, causing the judge to set bail), every penny needed to get the 1st group of participants out (and the 24 people arrested the very next day) was raised by – you guessed it – Denver ABC. Despite all of this, certain members of Occupy Denver refuse to allow Denver ABC onto its legal team or to provide any other kind of critical help. Regardless of their disrespect for Denver ABC, myself and most of the arrestees know who is able to offer the most help, and we will go to them. 

There are mainly three people pushing for the oust of any influential Anarchists (because apparently anarchists are not part of the 99%). One of the most vocal of the Anarchist haters stood up at Sunday's 3pm general assembly and, after re-stressing her commitment to nonviolence said, “ to all the people in this group who consider themselves anarchists. I was wrong. I judged you and I was completely wrong and I am sorry. I am proud to call you all allies.” While this was mind blowing, it was only one person, and one who is very rarely on site.

Right now, the group is having a standoff with the mayor and governor (who is the former – up until less than a year ago – mayor of Denver), there are around 50 people facing charges, and the occupation is growing immensely with every passing day, yet instead of pulling together there are (at least) two people still insisting that Occupy have nothing to do with Denver ABC or any other anarchist people or groups.

After all of my observations and experiences it feels to me like things are headed either towards total destruction or being divided into two movements. We cannot let this happen. I, repeat, we cannot let this happen. This is what always happens. This is what our opponents want. From things I've read by other anarchists in other occupies, it is possible to make people understand a broader concept of nonviolence and diversity of tactics. This was proven by the fact that the older lady who threatened to DOX anarchists three weeks ago was able to change the opinion she had held on to for decades, simply because of a few acts. Although I do not feel like we should have to get on our knees and beg for acceptance, I do think that we can be the people who show up organized, help new comers understand what our minds are open to, how we have come to this place where we question and challenge power structures and furthermore, how to bring others in rather than keep opposing ideas on the outside. In my opinion, this is the only viable solution for the lack of knowledge we are facing. For centuries, anarchists have been made – by the media, the police, and others – to look like a bunch of crazy kids who just want to light shit on fire and smash windows, but we all know that we are much more than this. As soon as that connection is made, we will officially be unstoppable



Next 5 >>