Natural Child, Natural Society

Abuse : Origins, root causes, recovery and re-alingment with optimal human biological health

The resolution of the issue of abuse as a common behavioural dynamic lies not in punishment, rather it rests in altering the way our society as a whole relates to and treats children. And indeed, how it relates parenting, and how it supports healthy parenting. It is intrinsically linked to how power is mediated in social and material terms across our economic and political and judicial systems. It is inherently a matter of governance.

Of course, known serial abusers, those who cause intentional harm who operate without remorse in any sphere of human activity must be segregated, isolated from society at large, because they cannot be trusted to act otherwise. That goes without saying. It is a health and safety matter of extreme importance. Punishment is not really effective as a way to deal with this problem. Punishment does not prevent harm, because it always arrives after the harm has been caused. Punishment is always too late.

"The psychology of any given family, community or society is both revealed and perpetuated in how that family, community or society relates to and treats the children".

Chronic stress degrades all known biological systems, and leads to disease. Unresolved trauma leads directly to chronic stress, as does war, poverty and all forms of abuse.

These are not inevitables, nor are they unknowns.

They are all the result of choices made by adults.

Here is a detailed chart outlining the social behavioural characteristics of various societies, which was collated in the 70s.

http://www.violence.de/prescott/letters/Profiles_Peaceful_v_Violent.pdf

Research since then into endocrine systems, autonomous systems, in utero development and psychology, trauma studies, inter-generational trauma behaviour patterning, history, anthropology, neuroscience, biochemistry, child development and psychopathology confirm the insights of this survey.

Researcher/writers such as Alice Miller, Judith Herman, David Chamberlain, Oliver James, Joseph Chilton Pearce, Carl Rogers, Derrick Jensen, Gabor Mate, Kitty Jones, Robert Zapolsky, David Smail and many, many others are great resources in this.

I URGE you to access the data, the evidence, and go through the works of the writers listed above if you are genuinely concerned about child abuse....

I say this because I want to help you, and all of us, to understand this dynamic so that we can work together to apprehend abusers, to prevent further abuse emerging as it does in such massive numbers and realign our social systems with optimal human biological health.

I am a Survivor of long term intentional child abuse.

I speak and write with some knowledge of this subject.

Both in terms of addressing my own abusive and destructive learned behaviors and my recovery from the trauma I endured for the best part of 20 years.

This blog is where I join the dots on all of this research by people who literally have saved my life and enabled me to return to a degree of optimal biological health.

At some time it will become a book, a website, an interactive mind map and a documentary.

I do this for myself, I do it for you and I do it for my great grand children and all their contemporaries.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe"

*If you like this post, if you found the themes resonant, if you agree in part, would you be kind enough to let others know about it? I would really appreciate that. You could drop a comment too, if you felt the urge. Or not. I will moderate contributions, and block any that are abusive. For obvious reasons. Thank you for reading.

Dynamics of different kinds of societies in a graphic.

Some flows of experiential and sensory societal drivers and behavioural dynamics, related to nurture, trauma, oppression.

Parts of the puzzle, stand back and try to see the whole.
To be able to perceive the underlying patterns.

Right click, then view on new tab, on this link to view it in large scale.

This is a mind map I am looking at the two poles of Societal Behavioural Characteristics, which can be viewed as an adjunct from my previous article on those two poles of Society, and how we got here....

I am trying to describe flows of experience context as they relate to observed social behavioural characteristics of different kinds of cultures, ranging between Egalitarian and Hierarchically Violent.

It is only a brief outline of the difference in dynamic between a hierarchically violent society and an egalitarian empathy based society. A guide for further questioning and exploration.

It also works with this graphic ...

This outlines a flow chart of what can happen when a trauma or trauma pattern remains unresolved, or is resolved.

Healing and recovery are a core dynamic of all living systems, accidents happen, and organisms have evolved repair and recovery processes and dynamics precisely because accidents are common in any dynamically changing environment - wind, storms, snow, ice, rain storms, floods, moment of distraction and oopsie!

The difference for existing human culture is that the harm and stress caused is way beyond accidental, and there are no known mammalian biological processes designed for sustained chronic stress and toxicity.

We are not designed to handle chronic stress.

We need to really understand that that means that we humans are 'designed' to accommodate a degree of occasional stress. We are designed to be able to respond/react from a background of robust health - physiological and psychological.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe"

*If you like this post, bla, blah, blad.

'Upstarts' in the Labour Party?

"we don't like honest people being honest about our behaviour"

'New upstarts'? was what one pundit Mefia commentator said of the Momentum group within the Labour Party.

People who he suggests are intent on taking over and destroying the Labour Party from within, a surge of insurgents, an anti-demcoratic horde of ranting idealists, who will NEVER gain power, and will condemn Labour to infinite futility. That's the general mainstream view, the 'public opinion' as manufactured by the Moguls of Mordor and Murdoch.

So let me tell you who I think some of those people are...

A generation of people who were 14 -16 or so when the adults, their parents, teachers, mentors, celebrities etc allowed the British Government to invade Iraq. And their parents, mentors and communities.

They are in their late 20s now, fully adult and effing furious with our generation, their parents and grand parents, who failed to stop that invasion, (largely because we were fixated on home ownership and wealth 'creation' which drove inequity ever deeper in the UK) when the evidence at the time was clear.

A general strike would have been enough to bring the British State involvement in Iraq to a halt. It was mooted at the time but dismissed without a rational debate.

We marched, and then went home....

No WMD, Regime Change 100% illegal, War of Aggression 100% Illegal, no association with 9/11 and a country that had been bombed for more than a decade vs the mightiest military on Earth..... all this info was easily available on line at the time. To those who made the effort.

Those ADULTS that did not seek out that information, but relied upon 'opinion' have by default enabled that War Crime and appear to be wholly unwilling to confront that and have left a mess that the children of 2003 and their contemporaries in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan and elsewhere are all too aware of - that is how these 'upstarts' see matters and they are correct.

They see the previous generations are too timid to call out the bullies, the bullying system.

It's also valid to point out that mere opinion is not the same as evidence or data.... and thus mere opinion is not sufficient when making decisions that affect other peoples lives so deeply, so harmfully.

Neither is religious belief, right wing or left wing ideological bias.

All of these are inadequate to the task of genuine democracy, which is the administration of our shared resource, taxation, for the equal benefit of all people in our society.

You would not accept a brain surgeon operating on the basis of 'opinion' - you would want data, evidence, precedence and insurance... and absolutely due diligence and duty of care....

Most of what is published as fact in mainstream media is mere opinion. Donald Trump's ascendancy is a direct result of submission to mere opinion. Likewise Hilary Clinton's nomination by the Democrats, who were proven to have acted amorally and possibly illegally in their fight back against the people who lifted Sanders...... Brexit was another victory of opinion over evidence.

It's immature to base decision making that affects peoples lives on mere opinion, and it is also careless, irresponsible and feeble.

If I was in my 20's or 30's now I'd be utterly, utterly disgusted at my parents generation. And terrified of the future they have bequeathed me and my contemporaries.

'New upstarts. - HOW DARE YOU!

Most people I know in their teens, 20's and 30's see clearly that the old system of Governance is corrupted, it is a bully system and they fear for their futures as people of good heart (above and beyond home ownership and jobs...) and they are furious, frustrated, appalled and deeply saddened by the way the previous generations of people with such privilege have failed to honour their children's futures....

And you ain't seen nothing yet. These are not young 'idealists' - they live with the reality in a way previous generations do not.... connected, international, global, tolerant, caring, compassionate and robust in their thinking, superbly well informed.

And active.

Get behind them adults, get behind them and support your future grand children's futures.

Politics, Governance, Corbyn and Bullying

There's a difference between Politics (which is the strategies deployed to gain, retain, enhance and project Power) and Governance (the administration of shared resources for the equal benefit of all the people).

We need to find ways to remove politics, the power struggle, the adversarial dynamic of seeking dominance, which is based on hierarchies of violence, aka bullying, from ALL systems of Governance, which would be more correctly based on equity - the value and meaning of what we share.

This is not an easy task, yet it is a necessary one, and it is a collective task that cannot be led by any individual or grouping - it's a task for all of us, who seek healthy human social systems. This is not so much about rebelling as it is about robust healing, with all the practical, material details that that task entails.

Corbyn.

The mainstream narrative attacks the person and ignores or trivialises the policies which he is standing for, which are largely informed by the party membership and the evidence.

What other behaviour does one need to make a behavioural diagnosis on institutional Power occupied by bullies?

Bullies you say?

Just to re-iterate : there's a difference between Politics (which is the strategies deployed to gain, retain, enhance and project Power) and Healthy Governance (the administration of shared resources for the equal benefit of all the people).

We need to remove politics, which is based on hierarchies of violence, aka bullying from ALL systems of Governance, which are more correctly based on equity.

Corbyn:

He stands as a representative of a grass roots who have decided that enough is enough, we pay their wages, we decide policy, we want oversight of implementation and we want the shared responsibilities of power across the grass roots.

He stands for a GENUINE democratic process of engagement, where power rests in the people, not an executive.

It was Tony Blair's strategy to strengthen the executive, which enabled him to send the State to war, illegally, amorally.

British Democracy died the day Parliament voted for a War of Aggression.

That decision to go to war had a vast parliamentary majority, one sixth voted against it, and the rest abstained (stained, they were, nonetheless, by that avoidance of their duty of care)

"At 10 pm, the motion was passed by 412 to 149 votes, authorising the invasion."

A Demoracy cannot wage a war of aggression, and retain the definition. Not in my view. The amorality undermines the very essence of Democracy.

It is the NeoLiberal's within Labour who are protecting the power establishment by attacking Corbyn.

The old 19th century concept of leadership as some person in Authority convincing the electorate to vote along certain lines using grooming tactics is out of date, yet still in use, and effective.

In essence, I view the 21st Century as the emergence a healthy system of Governance, where the people are the leaders, the people are asked to choose who will represent our insight, our concern, our creativity and intelligence, our vulnerability, our human frailty and love, our family, our community by carrying forward policies the people have deliberated upon, across all levels of Governance.

Honesty in Education with regards History is a priority, as is introducing demoracy into schools. as a collective, deliberative decision making process.

With that in mind, I refer the reader to The Power Inquiry, 2006, a project on examining democratic power within the UK with a view to an accurate description of power disparities, and various ways to approach devolution of decision making to local populations where any policy that might impact them is informed by their conditions, their needs.

The Power Inquiry

A constituency of more than two million people active in the Community Voluntary Sector looked at how power can be safely devolved to the grass roots.

In effect the Power Inquiry was engaged in undermining the ability of a power establishment, any power establishment - to dominate Governance and deploy the resources of the State as political weapons with which that establishment retains, maintains, enhances and projects it's power over the people.

Which is why David Cameron, Ed Milliband and others after praising it at the 2006 Conference, suggested only 2 days later that it was 'impractical'. A dismissive turn of phrase. The matter is not worth discussing. No reasons were given. To do so would mean they would have to lie in public. Silence is the better part of valour, in this case, for those in power.

Impractical.

As if the millions of people serving vulnerable people were ill placed to discuss Governance, a key element of their work - from matters of finance to developing evidence based services, from oversight to deliberation, from representing their clients to lobbying for more support and understanding.... that's a LOT of self Governance skill-sets in action, and the bullies declared it is 'impractical'?

And it was about then that the Government's plans to destabilise the Community Voluntary Sector (CVS) under the "Social Care Reform' and the 'Big Society' label were set into motion, by a Labour Government, and continued by a Tory/Lib Dem and now a Tory Government, and now (in 2019) a Tory Tory Majority seeking to enhance it's executive powers....

That's practical to the Rulers... retain their dominance.

Justice

There is no justice without empathy, no justice without prevention, no justice without honesty, no uustice without accountability.

As I wrote earlier:

We need to remove politics, which is based on hierarchies of violence, aka bullying, from ALL systems of Governance, which are more correctly based on equity - the value and meaning of what we share.

It is also important to look at the tactics and behaviours of those who are bullying Corbyn (and all of us who want a genuinely evidence based just participative democratic governance system). I have another short blog on some of the behaviours of those who bully through the media, etc, that you might find interesting and useful.

I would also suggest readers take a look at this superb blog piece on bullying in politics and how it operates to obstruct fair discourse, justice and healthy democratic change... (blog by Kitty Jones). Insightful, evidence based, honest and easy to read an assimilate...

We also need to be able to spot bullying from within our own ranks, and how to confront it, safely, in order to preserve our calm, and prevent provocative people from derailing our work, and possibly help those who are angry and frustrated and hateful to deal with that side of their struggle.

We are all in this together.

Theresa May, Angela Eagle, Jeremy Corbyn and War Crimes.

1. The Laws prohibiting war were then as they are now. Nothing has changed.

2. The senior Lawyer at the Foreign Office, Elizabeth Wilmshurst quit her role just before the war.

She had been at the Foreign Office since 1974.

She stood down from a career that spanned 30 years.

She was 100% clear that the invasion was a War of Aggression, the supreme war crime, in that it contains all other war crimes.

Her letter of resignation made this clear.

"I cannot in conscience go along with advice - within the Office or to the public or Parliament - which asserts the legitimacy of military action without such a resolution, particularly since an unlawful use of force on such a scale amounts to the crime of aggression; nor can I agree with such action in circumstances which are so detrimental to the international order and the rule of law. "

ALL Cabinet level politicians had access to that advice.

http://www.news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4377605.stm

Claire Short, Robin Cook also resigned. Why?

3. ALL MP's had then, as they have now, a duty of care and of due diligence that is inherent in their roles as MP's, as representatives of their constituencies.

Each and everyone of them had a duty to examine the Laws prohibiting war, and to understand them as they applied at the time.

Failure to do so, along with voting for the War, on such a matter where peoples lives (the troops they were sending, their families) were being put into harms way, and where the outcomes for Iraqi civilians were likely to be horrific, at the expense of the tax payer, was corporate negligence of the highest order, at the very minimum.

They all had plenty of time to exercise due diligence and honour their duty of care.

They chose not to.

Angela Eagle chose not to .

David Cameron chose not to.

Theresa May chose not to.

They are all culpable under the Law, for their inactions as much as their actions.

It is a matter of parliamentary and public record.

They were and are not alone; there are many people in positions of influence in the BBC, Media, Civil Service, Military and Police Command who participated in the rush to war, all of whom had the same duty of care, the same due diligence, given their positions in the system.

4. Jeremy Corbyn is 100% committed to upholding the Law, as is John McDonnell, and as are the vast majority of grass roots electorate.

This is not about personalities, it is about policies, outcomes, accountability and prevention.

We at the grass roots owe it to the dead and living of Iraq, Libya, Yemen and Syria to hold our Government to account for their many crimes, committed using our taxes, using monies borrowed with our future taxes as collateral......

That is the threat the Establishment want to neutralise.

And they will fail. They are failing.

5. Hold steady.

Stay strong.

Stand for justice, truth, honesty and a fair Society.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe"

*If you like this post, if you found the themes resonant, if you agree in part, would you be kind enough to let others know about it? I would really appreciate that. You could drop a comment too, if you felt the urge. Or not. I will moderate contributions, and block any that are abusive. For obvious reasons. Thank you for reading.