Out Here On The Perimeter

Opening ourselves to experiences lying closest to the perimeter, and if possible, beyond it, is the only chance we have for achieving our evolutionary awakening.  The decision for or against this awakening is the one and only ‘given’ that we encounter in the moment at every moment, and it is thus that our reaching for the outer limits acquires validity. Simply put, we are unable to evolve if we refuse to raze the entire edifice of cultural imperatives to dust.  There is no longer any hope of reform.  Even the notion of Revolution is now become a misnomer of sorts.  The only hope for anything worthy of the name 'Revolution' now resides in the stripping away of every last vestige of normality and authority in existence.  Our only potential, our only comfort shall come in the form of Tabula Rasa!

For me, it has taken time to come all the way here. As an adolescent, I recognized the evil inherent in the development of culture, and believed that through revolution anything was possible in terms of change. Even violent overthrow of established systems seemed a real option for a time. Once that was shown to be a pipe dream, I reluctantly settled for the lesser notion that reform was possible. But the years of our lives go by, and reform is also shown to be not merely a pipe dream, but the incurable delusion of fools.  Along with this comes the even more horrifying realization that power has continued to successfully corrupt the very concept of progressive thought, just as predicted by the apocalyptic writers such as Orwell and Huxley. At the end of the day, there are only two real options remaining; three, if you count selling out. We’re not going to do that. The two legitimate options are world-negation, that is, some variation on the precepts of Eastern Philosophy that sees the world only as illusion and renounces it, or the thoroughgoing rejection of all authoritative ideologies in favor of a comprehensive and uncompromising individualism, through which we endeavor to make ourselves aware of our own truth, or self-actualization, by refusal to be hoodwinked into adopting the conformist identity of the herd. Clearly, I have made my choice for the latter.

The Choice: The problem with world negation is simply that it is a passive philosophy. Our inclinations toward action always get siphoned off into the anonymity of a rigid admonition to self-sacrifice (because the self is not real anyway) for the good of others. It actually becomes far closer to the Christian ethic than the Easterners OR the Christians would have us believe. It is a renunciation of the world combined with an active ethic of unconditional compassion. Nutshell-wise, it is simply full-scale world-negation and its shadow, unconditional altruism, with Buddha or Shiva on the label instead of Jesus of Nazareth. This world-negation allows for action-in-the-world only in the service of self-sacrifice, and as such, is no action at all. It's function is only to ease suffering in the short term as we await the ultimate transformation.  The New Man, on the other hand, views action as something possessed with trans-formative power!  It is perhaps even sufficiently trans-formative as to hold the potential for alteration of the ultimate transformation.  Action must always be aimed squarely at the eradication of the disease.  It is, of course, absolutely a strong possibility that our actions will be of no avail. They may even become the causes of regression. But if an ethic of ‘going down fighting’ indeed leads ultimately to the same end as that of 'comforting the dying during surrender', I must choose to work and to accomplish, even in the face of inevitable meaninglessness. For me, working within the illusion holds the possibility of understanding it. Convinced that there is no ‘right or wrong,’ at least between these two alternatives, I’ll pay the cover and take my chances.

The Agenda:  Knowing, then, that the only pathway leading forward is that of razing the entire edifice of present-day civilization, our work is cut out for us, to say the least.  Our preaching becomes the most radical preaching ever preached and the most unsettling preaching ever heard.  If anyone thinks of Christ’s Gospel as ‘radical’ teaching, such a one will stand in utter stupefication in the face of a message that extols the renunciation of EVERYTHING, including itself!



The beauty of our renunciation, however, is that it signals a beginning, not the end.  For in spite of the fact that a new ‘program’ or ‘formula’ are not advocated by our agenda, the admonition to discover ones own truth remains, not as a prescription, but more as the only legitimate response to the inescapable imperative of choice that we encounter in the form of ‘living’ at any given moment.  Our hand-me-down ethic, bequeathed to us down through the centuries of so-called civilization, has always been a socially inspired ethic.  That is, it is its job is to facilitate the perpetuation of a given social order, and to do so in such a way that the power remains in the hands of the ‘Chiefs,’ and never becomes the possession of the Braves.  This ethic is firmly entrenched in all educational and cultural processes, and is especially notable in the overall patterns of child-rearing.  Because parents in our culture become terrified of their own inadequacies and incompetence once their progeny has arrived, they turn away from trusting themselves, opting instead to do what?  To take on the formulas suggested by the experts, the cultural experts whose job it is to insure that the young grow up to be carbon copies of the old.  This pattern of clinging to the status quo is at the root of all of humanity’s great ills.  Falling back becomes a way of life, handed down to us surreptitiously in the guise of 'tradition.'  Falling forward is a curiosity at best; and at worst an alliance with unreality.  The alternative to this pattern of social xeroxing is obvious, and that is, to cultivate individuality and not conformity.  But the obvious, unfortunately, is that which is most often misunderstood.

This is not meant to suggest that we shouldn’t be influenced by those rare instances of greatness that do arise from time to time.  There are those whom we should rightly desire to emulate; individuals who have learned to embrace walking in the shadows in order that they may arrive at the true source of light.  The imperative here is simply that we stand with The New Man against the mindless following of the herd and its herd philosophy that says 'do as suggested so you can remain an atomic piece of the whole!’  The one principle that must be applied consistently to our task is that of the dismantling of the traditional.  Ideologies wear out.  Most are ill conceived and designed only for the maintenance of mediocrity from their inceptions.  And so it is that only through summoning the courage to tear down the past are we able to come into a right relationship with the present.  And the most effective way of dismantling the past and its grip on our notions of right action and thought is to consider in detail all of the forces that stand, through any and all disciplines of knowledge, in opposition to those granite idols.