EnlightenNext Magazine goes porno

Have you seen the cover of the latest issue of EnlightenNext Magazine (issue 43 / March-May 2009)? Take a look: http://www.enlightennext.org/magazine/current/

The cover looks like a scene from a pulp fiction graphic novel, and entices us to read on with these lures:

• A "seal" which reads "parental advisory, explicit content"

• A caption: SEX: the good, the strange, & the sacred

The cover also lists some of the topics contained within:

• David Deida: The Quentin Tarantino of the spiritual world?

• Transcendent Sex

• Is sex a path to God?

None of the above

I consider "none of the above" to be pornographic. However, this particular article by Steve McIntosh (on page 34) most definitely is:

Winning in Afghanistan - An Integral Strategy for Peace

Winning covers two pages and is an adaptation of his article on a German website* under a somewhat different title:

Winning In Afghanistan - An Innovative Strategy for Peace

Actually, these two titles differ by exactly one word: Integral vs. Innovative. And there's a very good reason for this: integral is a buzzword held in high esteem by followers of EnlightenNext's editor Andrew Cohen and his cohort Ken Wilber, Integralist and Self-Idolizer Extraordinaire.

On to the pornographic part

I accuse Steve McIntosh of being nothing more than a wolf in sheep's clothing. In the guise of a New Age spiritual leader, he is nothing more than a neo-colonial fascist. And that's sufficient basis for a charge of pornography.

His article opens rather innocently with:

QUOTE**:

...I advocated for a future goal of an integrally informed, integrally structured world federation.

:UNQUOTE.

Sidenote: I break McIntosh's narrative here to point out his use of the word integrally, twice in one sentence. Scammers like this are knowledgeable enough to be able to hijack the buzzwords of New Ageism, while having quite a different agenda in mind. An agenda, which has nothing to do with hastening the dawn of a New Age, but (rather) has everything to do with maneuvering for more power for the "developed world" (please note carefully the last words in the following):

QUOTE:

In other words, democratic global law will become desirable, achievable, and inevitable only when the integral [that word again - Steve Searle] worldview is adopted by approximately ten percent of the population of the [and here are those two words I promised you - Steve] developed world.

:UNQUOTE.

I don't think McIntosh cares much what the undeveloped world might think of "democratic" global law. In fact, after I finished reading Winning in Afghanistan, it was painfully obvious he doesn't give a damn what they think.

QUOTE:

If we want to win in Afghanistan and bring lasting peace to the region, we need to eliminate the artificial, colonial relic that is the border with Pakistan. This could be done by ceding Afghanistan to Pakistan in exchange for a joint security agreement with the Pakistani military under which temporary, yet direct, military access to the tribal areas could be had by NATO forces.

:UNQUOTE.

Doesn't anybody see anything wrong with this picture? McIntosh is advocating the elimination of the Afghan nation. He writes (toward the end of his essay), "Thus, if we want to bring lasting peace to this region, we must face the fact that the ‘nation' of Afghanistan is not a sacrosanct entity." Suppose Guru-Faker McIntosh had written this instead [replacing just three words]:

"Thus, if we want to bring lasting peace to the Middle East, we must face the fact that the ‘nation' of Israel is not a sacrosanct entity."

This would make perfect sense to those who believe that a Jewish state should have been carved out of Germany immediately after World War II as punishment for the Holocaust. But no, that didn't happen. The victorious Allies, under the banner of the United Nations, decided to insert the Jews back into the Middle East, from which they had been absent for centuries, against the wishes of the Arab/Muslim world.

But hey, the "developed world" thought it knew better - thought it knew what was best for the sand niggers of the defunct caliphate. Hey, why not? It's so easy to make decisions from afar as to what should be the fate of the lands of third-world, dark-skinned foreigners. [You know, "pip pip" and all that rot.]

And our Guru-Faker McIntosh wants to continue this noble tradition of carrying the White Man's burden, while wearing the mantle of an altruistic visionary. Why? Just exactly what is this particular White Man's game?

QUOTE:

This could be done by ceding Afghanistan to Pakistan in exchange for a joint security agreement with the Pakistani military...

:UNQUOTE.

Two questions:

• Who would doing the "ceding?" I doubt Afghanistan's duly-elected president or government would want to do this. Maybe we'll do the "ceding" for them, since they're obviously too stupid to know this should be done.

• And what's this bit about "in exchange for a joint security agreement with the Pakistani military...?" I thought such agreements were made between governments and not between outsiders and the military of a nation. McIntosh refers to Pakistan as a "homegrown Islamic democracy" elsewhere in his article. So why isn't he suggesting a joint security agreement with the duly-elected Pakistani government (instead of military)? [NOTE: I think McIntosh made a bit of a Freudian slip here, which betrays his real philosophy: The ends justify the means.]

So what's McIntosh got against this border?

QUOTE:

Like the North Vietnamese before them, the Mujahideen effectively used the protection of an international border to defeat a more technologically advanced enemy. This is the same situation we face today; the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan is proving to be as reliable a weapon in this century as it was in the last.

:UNQUOTE.

He adds, "We need to learn from the lessons of Vietnam and not allow ourselves to be defeated by a border that we must recognize but which our enemies may ignore." [Looks like McIntosh is another sore loser who can't get over the US loss of prestige in the Vietnam War.]

McIntosh even deals with why NATO doesn't ignore the border and conduct cross-border raids into Pakistan: "If we accelerate the war by attacking the Taliban in the tribal areas of Pakistan, we could trigger a civil war in Pakistan and destabilize the entire region." He even states that Pakistan finds it desirable to have a militarily-viable Taliban as a buffer against Afghanistan, given the friendly relations between Afghan President Karzai's government and Pakistan's mortal enemy India.

Therefore?

The upshot of McIntosh's thesis is: Karzai and his India-friendly government has got to go. And the easiest way to do that is to incorporate Afghanistan into a greater Pakistan, while allowing a "degree" of autonomy to (the former Afghanistan's) tribal regions. ["allowing?" That's mighty White of you, Big Mac.]

McIntosh ties up his thesis by concluding: "...with the two countries consolidated into one federal region, the Taliban's role of buffer force for Pakistan would become unnecessary." Especially after an Afghanistan with an India-friendly (and therefore threatening) government ceased to exist.

Steve McIntosh, just leave them alone

Big Mac is nothing but a busybody wanting to stick his nose in other people's business. As he says, "...I fear that until national borders are adjusted to better correspond to the natural borders of consciousness, this war will continue."

No, you Mac Faker, this war will continue until we finally "get it." We have no more right to tinker with borders (or with the destinies of our fellow man) than our forefathers did. Our best bet is to show these people some respect by completely removing all NATO and US forces from the region. I have great faith that the so-called undeveloped peoples of the world can work out their own solutions.

The more we try to micromanage, the worse we'll make things.

Steven Searle (was) a candidate for U.S. President in 2008:

"Let me make one thing perfectly clear: As soon as the Powers-that-Be finish micromanaging the Undeveloped World, we'll be next" - Steve.

Founder of The Best Party Available

Contact me: bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

* http://www.worldsecuritynetwork.com/showArticle3.cfm?article_id=16863

 ** All quoted material I've cited is from Winning in Afghanistan, as published in issue 43 of EnlightenNext magazine.

Open Invitation: I hereby waive all copyright protection for any material I've posted on Zaadz/Gaia with these exceptions: I reserve the right to disseminate this material, claim authorship credit for it and any compensation I can negotiate. However, if anyone wishes to use these essays, they are free to do so. I do not require that advance permission be obtained, that I be paid any royalties, or that I receive author's credit or even be notified of intent to use. I truly want anyone "out there" to feel free to use these essays, in original or modified form, for whatever purposes they deem worthy.