cyberrose

cyberrose wrote

Reply to comment by existential1 in poem by ziq

the doing something is at best going back to a 10:1?

That's your interpretation. How about taking everything back? Or just burning this shit down? The poem says nothing about it.

3

cyberrose wrote

Definitely some psychological, and probably physical, abuse has been done using this character.

The thing is these traditions come from times where there was no such thing as an individual. Such stuff has a purpose and this is to form the thinking of children in a way to obey order and knowing the place in an hierarchical system. For sure psychological abuse happened (quite often since this figure scared the shit out of a lot of children) and for sure also physical abuse (but at least I haven't seen such; think this happens more often with the Krampus).

3

cyberrose wrote

Me neither but that would explain the meme. I really thought even a lot of people here do not know Krampus when they do not have any connection to the region where its celebrated (southern southern germany & austria mainly). But in other parts there is also some equivalent called Knecht Ruprecht; he has a bat and a sack to put naughty children in and hit them. Oh yes Christianity (mixed with pagan) traditions are so charming.

But they also fade away in the recent years.

2

cyberrose wrote

Lol, people know "Krampus"? He basically belongs to Nikolaus (some kind of Santa Claus) and punishes the naughty children. (Also hes not really [just] german) But yes we like to scare the shit out of our children; this seems like a sane way of dealing with people.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/1911_circa_anonymer_K%C3%BCnstler_Wiener_Werkst%C3%A4tte_Postkarte_No._542%2C_Krampus_mit_Kind.jpg

4

cyberrose wrote (edited )

In german there is https://www.radikale-therapie.de/ I tried to look up some english page but the first few hits where quite dissapointing. So if you are interested you have to do your own research; sorry.

Basically its a form of group therapy based on:

  • Radical Psychiatry
  • Transaktionsanalyse
  • Co-Counseling

These forms of therapy are performed in a long-time group (1 year min) and do not have a leader or professional person guiding the group. The group starts with 2 weekends of training on which people from other groups come and teach the fundamentals of this therapy. After the first weekend the group is ready to perform its own weekly meetings. The meetings are organized in a way that every time 2 people prepare the meeting and perform the methods. This rotates and every week different people will be in the position to prepare the next meeting. This leads to the point that everyone is capable of sharing the knowledge and helping other groups.

The methods they use are based on the three mentioned abvoe but can be extended in various ways. Everyone can bring in other methods and try out if it fits to the group. E.g. body therapy is also very common.

This is basically RT. FORT is quite similar but women* only and MRT also but for men*. Also the content from every group can be very different.

In critical psychology there is something "similar" called "kollektive selbstverständigung" (https://selbstverstaendigung.de/was-ist-ksv/). With this they build groups to find out why people (they) behave in the way they do by reflecting their socio-economical standpoint and how society influences them. I can't explain it good in english since the wording is quite complex. The concept is based on critical psychology (Holzkamp) which is kinda an anti-authoritarian marxist psychology which was formed around 68.

Edit: I really like critical psychology; not for their real life methods (they often are just not there, lol) but for their view on life and how your psych is formed and how to act. Personal they gave me, just by reading the stuff, so much more ease in life but also conserved the anger on society; and the second point is often missing in classical psychology (I have the feeling it's that case at least).

Hope this is enough for now?

4

cyberrose wrote

About the licensing and stuff:

Why not forming therapy groups? There are already "Programs" which can be adopted; e.g. FORT, MRT, RT (Radical Therapy). They live from untrained persons and also live from sharing the idea and training new people.

There are also other, quite similar, approaches but I can't give any english name for them and they are also often more or less "marxist" oriented. E.g. critical psychology but can't name a specific method there. Also don't know if the readings in english are good.

4

cyberrose wrote

Will read that later.

But if that's the case: What's the new story then? I mean individualist primitivist anarchism isn't something new and this romantic view of pure survival is also a very old story.

But instead one has to determine for themselves "What's the implication of that".

And people do that? I rather have the feeling that people like to think about that without taking action. Sure you can not prevent climate collapse or steer society in any direction. But doing nothing - in a group or as individual - does not make things better for you or others.

As I said to me it passes just romantic pictures, but not the urge to discover the great unknown and measure the world; but the curiosity of the great nothing.

3

cyberrose wrote

Can someone please explain why so many people like that book so much?

For me its summed up a little like:

  • we are doomed
  • only small groups will survive
  • a lot of shit is coming

Yeah I can relate to quite some stuff but it feel too romantic for me. Somehow as a pre plot to "Dune". What's the implication of that. What's the political message?

I tried to like the book but found it quite unsatisfying.

PS: Sorry if I missed a lot of stuff; I read it some years ago. I just ask myself why there are so many memes about that book.

4

cyberrose wrote

Reply to by !deleted27729

The context is important. When it's about personal stuff: Being right or wrong is unimportant as long as you feel comfortable with it. When it comes to social stuff, you can take the bigger context into account. Reflecting your standpoint in relation with society can give you little more clearness. Your standpoint and your "right" can be completely different to other ones "right" because your history is completely different.

In general it gives me a lot of self confidence and clearness to know why my standpoints or views differ from those of others. If somebody tells me I'm wrong I may confront them with things they don't see or just give a fuck without questioning myself. But that's not always possible to the full extend, in situations where this is not that clear I take this opportunity to reflect about it and include it in the bigger picture of myself for the next time.

Another thing which is quite important to me is being graceful to myself. As the others also said: You don't have to be always right. You are definitely not always wrong. It's just your view of the world and as long as you are okay with yourself that's very okay. If not it's - again - a starting point for reflection and reorganization; or at least could be if you take that opportunity.

Thinking dialectically is quite a help for me there. (even though quite some people don't want to hear that I guess ^^)

4

cyberrose wrote

Reply to comment by NOISEBOB in by !deleted27729

Small problem means it gets expensive if you just pay. But there are ways to lower the fine or even get around it.

3

cyberrose wrote

Don't waste too much time on digital stuff. As others said: It's important to provide some basic infrastructure, tools and skills and you can waste a lot of time there. But if you really want to change something don't wait for others using your infrastructure but act on your own. (or do both) Theory and practice in real world is more important than digital tools.

2