A Language Older Than Words Ch. 16-19

In this section of his book, Jensen continues to drop jaws with shocking statistics, bold claims, and subtly persuasive arguments. For the first time thus far I found myself not being skeptical with left brained thinking, but really starting to grasp Jensens message about the shocking state that our society is in. The reading covers four chapters, with a definite shift between chapters 17 and 18. Because these two distinct sections (16&17 and then 18&19), I will summarize these two parts and then break into an analysis of both.

Chapter 16, entitled the Parable of the Box, opens up by discussing the misconception that the rich man owns the right to resources and that all of the little people must abide by his rules. The example given is a man on top of box. he claims to own all the fish in the water. The poor people thus starve next to the river under the impression that this rich man really does own the fish, and their are soldiers that protect these lies with weapons. In actuality, the rich man has no right to these fish while his fellow man starves. Jensen breaks into a discussion about how successful or "good countries" have a system where wealth is funneled from the rich to the poor. "Bad countries" function under the principle that we must do whatever it takes gain power, and then whatever it takes to maintain that power. Chapter 17, entitled Violence Revisited, continues by addressing the idea of assassination attempts. Jensen brings up the idea that even if we were to kill the men in power that are destroying the world, there would be several men waiting in line to take their position. Hitler for example. Even if we could have killed him, there was a laundry list of people waiting to take his spot as commander of the Nazi regime. Besides, if we had killed him then we are just as bad as him: murderers. Jensen then breaks into a numbers analysis of plutononiam. Basically the message he is trying to get across is that we have created a deadly element that didn't exist naturally, and now we are risking killing our entire population just to utilize this element. For instance, the probe sent to explore venus could have exploded on lift off, infecting 5 billion people. The last bit of this chapter deals with utilizing anger in a positive manner.

Chapter 17, coercion, talks about exactly that: coercion. The opening few paragraphs talk about the fact that Jenson is "pretty fucked up" and consequently he has all sorts of questions with no viable answers. If her weren't to pose these questions though, we would just maintain our ignorance. Talk of coercion is in reference to the idea that we feel the need to convince others that we are right. We coerce them with our philosophical views, our applied sciences, our economics, our legal system, our politics, our child rasing, and so on. One great example of this coercion is how his father coerced everyone into thinking his beatings were justified. This clears the conscious of the one doing the coercing while justifying him legally. Another example of coercion is wage slavery. The only saving grace is the good will of a small number of us humans we refuse to rape or coerce. The last chapter, chapter 18 Honeybees, revisits the idea of interspecies communication. It starts off with an anecdote about a dog who wouldn't listen, and some cats who would (but only if jensen played by the rules). The second half though is about bee keeping and Jensen's affinity towards insects. The conclusion drawn is that cooperation with such creatures can bring joy, honey, and satisfaction from hard work. The ever present theory to live by: treat them as you would want to be treated.

As always, Chapters 16, 17, 18 and 19 of Derek Jensen's Book insight some very strong feelings in me. The interesting thing though is that this is the first section of "A Language Older Than Words" that has not left me skeptical. On the contrary, the words found in this chapter really had me believing in Jensen's message. The statistics about defense spending and wasted research funds made me drop my jaw to the floor. I was appalled at the fact that we could be saving millions of lives for the same price as it costs to build a bomber airplane. The other important thing I learned was the concept about the hording of resources; how one man prevents others from fishing in a river that is clearly not his. This references giant monopolies (ie. utility companies) and oligopolies (ie. phone companies) and how they leave the rest of the world starving and in need. The problem is that they control resources that should be readily available to the public, and yet their tyrannical control over such resources results in population suffering. My mind isn't necessarily changed on the topic, its more that my eyes have been opened to the injustices.

In terms of application to the real world (the big picture), I think that the American's conquest of the Indians ties right in. When the colonists arrived in the states, they stumbled upon a foreign land where they knew and owned nothing. Coexisting and interacting with the Natives would have been perfectly moral and good for the state of the US, but the colonists quickly chose to conquer and exploit the local tribes. As time passed, the white's conquest of Indians escalated at an extremely rapid pace, culminating in the 1830's trail of tears and the current Native American oppression we maintain. Just like in the rich man and the fish story, the Colonists thought they were entitled to the land that they had discovered. Using force and intimidation, the Colonists successfully convinced the Indians, just like the rich man convinced the hungry, that the states intrinsically belonged to them. Despite the fact that they were wrong about this ownership, their disillusions and military skill allowed them to dictate how American soil was allotted. Both Jensen and I are appalled by this injustice. There is nothing that says that starving individuals cannot fish in that river, and accordingly there is nothing that says the Indians were not entitled to the Americas. We must work to ensure that such authoritarian systems are not allowed to unlawfully claim and exploit common resources.

Application to my life is difficult when it comes to this reading, but essential none the less. Although I personally do not prevent others from obtaining resources they are entitled to or coerce individuals politically, philosophically, or legally, I CAN work to prevent others from doing so. For example, one big injustice that I personally have worked to correct is Notre Dame's food service practices, and I intend to maintain my efforts to fix such problems. In my opinion, the manner in which food is distributed at our school is extremely dictatorial. There are no viable alternatives to the norm, there is no competition in place that pushes prices lower, and their is no student representation advising the administrators on how to fix these problems. Thus NDFS (Notre Dame Food Services) is the man on top of the box or the white colonist conquering the Native Americans. Based on my knowledge and understanding of Jensen's work, I intend to continue my pursuit of curing food service injustices at Notre Dame. The key is that at some point these tyrants must be stood up to, because unchecked they will continue to take advantage of those they control. Action against them removes this control and leads to a more balanced equilibrium. In my specific case, I hope that opposition to NDFS's practices will lead to meal plans that better cater to the needs of every student.

Questions -

Why was the extra work to tend the spread out bees not with the increase in productivity?

How can coercion be spotted on a daily basis? Are there lesser forms of coercion that are ok? Such as persuasion?

Are there any cases where killing on man WOULD save many lives? Perhaps a serial killer who functions alone?