Let me preface by saying some of this blog and video are probably out-of-context for purposes of internal evaluation. So be it. That said…
David D Friedman begrundgingly sat behind the microphone half joking about his annoyance in hearing his voice from straying from its pure form. He spoke about global warming. He took some interesting angles, which are worth exploring. More relative, he smacked down the natural movement a peg or two, while confessing to contradictions in his personal life. Apparently Freidman is human.
He thinks the idea that natural is good is not only bad, but that nature worship is dangerous. He then says he’ll write a blog about it, which cannot be found to date but he does have some interesting blogs, including one about Amish Anarchism.
Since he has thus far failed to blog about this subject, let’s make some assumptions and examine. The first thing to understand is that there is no good and bad, there are just choices. Constantly we are making choices in our personal lives in how we eat, dress, talk, sleep and so on. The idea of all-natural is absurd, so we are all making choices within our current societal construct, which for the most part does not move humans forward in the spiritual realm.
Some of these choices seem great at first but end badly. Others seem bad at first but end up ok. Most choices people consider bad give us short-term pleasure with long term problems awaiting. For example, choosing to take 6 shots of tequila may be awesome for about an hour but soon your stomach will tell everyone to go out where they came in and you’ll feel like death in the morning, begging for mercy to a god you may not even believe in.
If nature worship is a a replacement for religions on the decline as he suggests, then what is science? Science in it’s natural form is “knowledge attained through study or practice.” Unnatural science would be science with an agenda, usually political or monetary gain.
This makes for an interesting question: what is natural? There are many definitions, one being not aquired; inherent.
Friedman makes the point that people once called homosexuality unnatural in their condemnation of same sex sexual preference. It is not normal like having red hair is not exactly normal, sure, but is it unnatural? Yes, in a making babies sort of way it is. At the same time, there is no good and bad just decisions. When people spoke badly when calling homosexuality unnatural, they were using the wrong word for their fear of gays.
Not long ago most people strongly opposed interracial couples as well, presumabely arguing it was unnatural. Again, it’s not about good or bad, it’s about a decision. If you are 100% Irish and decide to have babies with a 100% black African, it is your decision to end your Irish whiteness bloodline. The ‘good and bad’ aspect is projection.
Further down the line is when things get exciting. Friedman, being the Anarchist that he is, obviously has his issues with government intrusion. One could argue that a powerful central government is completely unnatural, is bad for humans and that things need to go back to a free market, where good and bad decisions have consequences.
Friedman discussed home-schooling his kids. Those in the ‘natural’ movement would probably argue that home-schooling is the natural way to teach, rather than the chopping block indoctrination program known as public schools.
Our entire monetary system is unnatural, fake and a meme to keep up all busy and in debt. Friedman himself would probably support a more natural form of commerce, void of endless inflation and the Federal Reserve as we know it. A system naturally forming around voluntaryist.
The 9-5 system many of us are subjected to seems awfully unnatural. Atomic bombs, drones and other weapons of mass destruction are not natural. In fact, they are humanity moving in a directing that has seen dire consequences for many.
The upstairs neighbor who refuses to turn off their air conditioning system even when the temperature dips below 70 degress probably needs to connect with nature and breath the fresh air.
Connecting with what is natural is connecting with the roots of what is human, what has always been human and what will always be human until we find a way to destroy ourselves. It is about what is best for humans, not about humans being bad for making decisions in the present. Humans have choices to make and the more they stray from established rhythmic forces in nature, the more difficult the consequences may be in the future.
Friedman shares a story of his own astonishment that he too gets sucked into nature worship because he refuses to cut down a tree in his back yard, even though he does not like where it sits. This is profound, as it shows a reality he is struggling to make sense of. When focusing on the left brain for everything, compassion towards plants does seem odd.
The bottom line is that so many disagreements circle around language and emotional attachment to words. If connecting with nature, two feet firmly planted in dirt, living an semi-natural healthy lifestyle makes some feel like they are an animal, filled with life and potential, who are you to tell them they are dangerous? On the flip side, if you are just going about your business within the confines of the matrix, two feet firmly fit insides shoes that are firmly planted on carpet but perfectly happy, who are you to tell them they are ignorant?
If there is one truth it is that nature will ultimately repel almost all manipulation humans force upon it. It is a battle we cannot win. It is a reality some will need to learn to live with or else there will be consequences, no matter how well you are able to wax poetic about what those consequences may actually be, in a case-by-case analysis. Friedman is always worth listening to but he needs to listen to that voice, who communicates with the tree and seems completely irrational.
What is the energy field other animals see, ancient cultures described and we have lost and replaced with artificial flavoring? Why are we the instrument for earth to eat itself alive and why? The earth is our home, it is where we live. It’s not about worshipping, it’s about keeping it clean. There is a clear disconnect for some and no amount of words woven together in what amounts to clever trolling will change that. It does not address root issues, rather political annoyance, which is understandable. It’s not about being a nature worshipper it’s about staying human.
Hug the tree, Mr. Friedman and try not to roll your eyes.