What do you think of our integrative stance?

[Dialectic]

This, I think, will probably be some sort of running commentary, as we will never actually come to a final evaluation of how we're doing.

We're essentially wondering what you think of our "integrative vision": both the theory and the execution.

As most of you know, we're taking a developmental approach to the site, which means we acknowledge that ethnocentricity, modernity, post-modernity, and anything beyond, behind, and in between are "valid" truths much be respected in themselves but at the same time can be judged as "better" or "worse" by their level of egocentricity and inclusiveness.

If you haven't already, feel free to read the following links for more:

Fighting44 Vision
http://www.thefighting44s.com/discussion/viewtopic.php?t=536

A more in-depth explanation of our integrative stance
http://www.thefighting44s.com/discussion/viewtopic.php?t=75

Spiral Dynamics and Integral Theory and Practice as they relate to post-modernity
http://www.thefighting44s.com/discussion/viewtopic.php?t=148

Do you think what we're doing is viable? Realistic? Possible? What do you think of our execution thus far? Anything we should change or improve?

We're trying to make Fighting44s as fucking AWESOME as we can, and the more discussion we have, the more we expand our mutual understanding, the better we'll be. Thanks!

[Scowl]

In short, I think that the theory is pretty airtight, more or less. I'd say that the execution ranges from average to good. Of course, not being part of the inner circle, my understanding is pretty limited. I'm still trying to figure out how to get through to those Kamikazes.

I think that there are a few Snipers who could be shown a couple of things, too, but that seems to me to be an easier task.

Naturally, there's only so much that you could do online. I really believe that some kind of face-to-face interaction is necessary, alongside the thoughts communicated through the site. After thinking about all the different perspectives I've seen here, I firmly believe that, in "the movement," personal growth and individual development are just as important as political/public expression. Things that appear to oppose each other do not necessarily have to.

Do you think what we're doing is viable? Realistic? Possible? What do you think of our execution thus far? Anything we should change or improve?

Definitely viable, realistic, and possible. Which is not the same as saying, "likely." One thing that I've been thinking about - you keep saying, "If you want to make your own site, go right ahead." Not that I'm prepared to make my own site; but maybe several sites in a webring could help serve integration. Splitting people up to bring them together might sound a bit wierd, but maybe people need to get their "fill" of their own shit before they're ready to move on. I dunno. All I know is that I drink too much beer and I need to piss now.

[Pat the Great]

Very simply, I think it's the only viable vision for progressive minority struggle. It retains the anger that is lost through assimilation into the mainstream and the willingness to fight that is lost through downright rejection of the mainstream.

The great thing about it, though, is that the anger is maintained in a very strategic manner; it's anger that's intellectually reinforced and non-exclusive, meaning that we don't come off just as angsty teenage pricks who are angry at The Man cuz we can't get dates. We use big words like Spiral Dynamics, motherfucker, gotta read up before you fuck with the 44.

And I love the Kamikaze. I think they're separating the wheat from the chaff; I'm guessing they've managed to scare off most of the ignorant trolls, and anyone who could be useful to the 44s is usually incensed enough by one of their posts to reply in a way that shows they "get it".

[Kuroyama]

Education/communication through art??

Is that something I can agree with and support? hmm.

I may not have mentioned it, but although I work as a systems engineer... I am in truth a failed artist. My passion was commercial design, though I longed to do my own comic art. Back in the day despite the fact that Jack Kirby (did I just date myself?) liked my work... some pencil neck at Marvel said my work looked: "Too Japanese" to be marketable. Dark Horse comics however, said theyd print my work. Before it ever got submitted though... it was destroyed... (long story). I never followed up. Our design group went on a field trip to Art Center in Pasadena. My instructor told me that my work was better than that of the students whose work we saw... my ego had no problem with that... My wallet did.

I never found a way to finance that path. Somewhere along the way I hoared out my pencils and pens for keyboards and mice. But my heart always longs for good design.

IMO... good design functions. Good design provokes thought... or functions so intuitively that thought is not required. Good design makes this hell we call earth a barely livable place.

Design can come in many forms... but all of them "speak" to the "audience". I should imagine that Asian Americans and their friends have many things to "say/communicate" to the world.

Oh yeah... Im down.

quick note:

At comicon this year (yeah, I went, Im like that) I met this cat named Jack Hsu. Jack has his own comic book that he makes himself. I think hes good some good lines, but I'll tell you the thing that inspired me most about meeting this guy.

Hes about my age, and his "day" job is storyboard artist in hollywood. Check the latest Spider Man credits and you will find his name (according to him) So, despite his VERY busy day job, his passion has also been comics... his OWN comics. He's not big time yet... I dont know that he will be... But he FOUND A WAY to make his dream happen

After meeting him I broke out my (very old and dusty) "toolbox" and have started sketching again.

...find a way.

[Dialectic]

Hi Pat,

I agree with your assessment of the systems function of the Kamikazes: that they are an excellent filter for the bland and not-so-passionate. Hopefully, from the personal and cultural perspectives, we will also be able to help each other grow and overcome limitations in our own worldviews.

Kuroyama,

Fuckin' awesome that you're a comic guy. Me and Lopan are as well. My second piece in our upcoming gallery is going to be my (hopefully) soon-to-be-finished 12-page portfolio, done by me from script to final lettering. Once we get the gallery up, feel free to submit some work, and also get your buddy Hsu to send shit our way as well. We're gonna be pretty picky/ arbitrary about this stuff though, 'cause with a Gallery and Downloads sections, our bandwidth costs are gonna skyrocket.

Also, very cool that you met Kirby. Neil Gaiman didn't even get to meet Jack Kirby!

[da Tao]

Yo D, whassup.

Now I know I still owe a response to you and Xian dating back to the China Doll thread, but I also did say that I will read the suggested readings and get back to you. Copenhagen, Athens and work have altogether set my timetable way way back... And the more things I read here, the more the actual response is being postponed!

I've noticed that I have been given a nod of respect (or maybe a nod of something else) by being made a sniper. I suppose the only fitting way to return the honour is to give a stab at these productive discussion you have talked about.

Assorted notes:
Now This damned thing took me five bloody hours - I put a hold on my much needed laundry and reading (The Truth about Markets by John Kay - nobel prize for economics) for this. For organizational sake I've made it like a freaking feast - 'cause I like to eat. (And it tells you how much effort it takes to digest.) I tried to proofread on the fly so things do slip through. And this was supposed to be posted in the "Our 'Integral' Vision, Theory, and Practice" but apparently I can't do that... so admittedly this post is going to be out of place. Oh well. And no, I still haven't read the "why you have to talk smack all the time thread yet". Couldn't find it.

APPETIZER:

"Upon consideration, we realize everything is a holon."

I suppose I should do my own research (and yes I know this is an overview), but what is included in this 'everything'?

I don't think you meant the word to be taken literally since this is an overview. (i do hate to have a drawn out discussion over semantics) But if you did then I would like to propose a test with something like "Ghost".

Something that is made up would not have an individual-objective right? Such as the concept/word of ghost. It certainly is a thought, and features in most cultures... but the science related to ghosts are tenious and it would be hard to argue that it can be described by the hard-sciences. UNLESS, me thinking about ghost or someone making a horror flick with a ghost theme creates the action potential along the axon and the technology behind the movie projector is included in the individual-objective quadrant. But that would be really stretching it.

On the other hand, anything (specific) that physically exist but is yet unknown or yet un-imagined would not have a subjective aspect - at least to human beings.

4 course ENTREE:

Now I have a question of Choice. But first I have to set up the foundation... I will resort to crass but direct quoting / paraphrasing if you don't mind.

GIVENS:
Your aim is to combat ignorance, bigotry and hate. (vision statement)
You intend to integrate as many people at as many level of development as you possibly can. (vision statement)
Second-tiers are able to recognize the truths and legitimacy of each level. (this thread)
You want to draw people in at a blue level and help them grow. (this thread)

Now for the assumptions, so you can see why I am asking the questions I am asking.

ASSUMPTIONS:
The offensive quips are mainly second-tier behaviour to shock people, to overcome the developmental inertia... but it is also to get shit out of your system.

Your Centre of Gravity is at second-tier (now I inclined to make this point a given, but neither my nor your assessment necessary make this so. Since I am not aware of any test to positively identify second-tier individuals, I have to make this an assumption.)

And now, after all these circumlocutions - the QUESTIONS:

Q1) Since you are able to recognize the truths and legitimacy of each level, why did you risk alienating the people you are trying to help?

Clarification of Q1:
An example might be Tojo's early rants on CCBs. (or to use my grouping: AF who happens to prefer WM for one reason or the other) I would guess it was meant to resonate with the Blues. As for the Oranges and the Greens, SOME would join the forums and argue with the blues - and in so doing MAY help the development of both. (which was the aim of the articles I take it)

BUT then there are OTHERS oranges and greens that would never read the declaration of intent and dismiss this site due to articles such as those. I would say this is because A) they cannot see the truth of the others, and/or B) they still have some "lower" tendencies and somehow these translate into "does-not-take-provocations-well".

Now none of my questions are rhetorical, but I would like to try answering them anyways (just because I like listening to myself talk)... Either A) you have done a cost-benefit calculation of firing-up discussions vs. turning people off and you figured it was a good bet* OR B) the need to get it out of your system overrode the loss projection in said calculation.

Extension of Q1:
* Can you let us in on your (or other Vanguard's) analysis of how the bet is going?

Q2) Why start with Blue?

Clarification of Q2:
By "Start" I am taking the statement "draw people in from a Blue level of ethnocentric loyalty and passion" literially... to draw as to suck something into the process flow.

I guess it is because it is easier to package the site and makes psychological impact more poignant. And/Or that most of the problems are stemming from blue people and blue collectives. And/Or that you have more members this way. I am not sure, that's why I am asking.

Q3) Integrative Theory and Practise. What exactly is your practise? What are the methods/mechanisms to aid the development of the blue, orange and green?

Clarification of Q3:
I suspect I will find the answer in the resources you cited. but I am damned curious... and lazy. I can imagine this is something that is debated everytime you discuss the direction of this site. I mean, you are trying to integrate different levels who cannot see the truth of the others... so there must be shitloads of people here who are frustrated at getting others to see things their way. (And from what I have seen this is exactly the case.) Then they either start talking a lot without listening, leave, or get kicked out.

The way I see it, you are hoping with arguments and cogent dialogues, people can pop their proverbial head out their asses long enough to see that there is a higher level and get brains and bicep moving to reach that new plateau. And once that one Blue (or orange or green) has made the leap, the rest would quickly follow because now they are hearing it from someone who was just shooting the shit with them, toe-to-toe the thread before. And it would be icing on the cake if the newly converted writes a feature or otherwise express themselves - flexing new muscles, reinforcing the idea to others and themselves, as it were.

Q4) When success of this site is being called into question, I hear a lot of talk about the number of members, posts, threads, articles, positive reviews from others... so on and so forth. But since you are committed to fight ignorance and help the first-tiers to develop, should you not measure success by the transitions of their centre of Gravity?

Clarification of Q4:
Ok, I admit this one is a bit of a loaded rhetorical question... but hear me out. As I said earlier, I am not aware of any test for colours and I am not too confident in people's ability to judge themselves and others in this regard. (maybe I just need to read more)

Though you did say: "someone familiar with the basics of the Spiral is now able to view a potential friend, adversary, or acquaintance as "Centre of gravity Blue" or "Centre of gravity Orange," etc. This removes the skin-colour focus in a concrete and relatively "unartificial" way by enabling a deeper understanding of the person's views and motives." Therefore, what my opinion of the jugding issue is irrelevant... what is relevant is that people do judge and this yields information - however imperfect.

In this sense, I would regard fighting 44s (or the "FFF" if anyone ever calls it that) as successful if members say something like: "Thanks to my exposure to this site, I no longer indiscriminately shoot white people and have a greater understanding of the social forces behind my emasculination."

Ok, that example was taken a bit too far... The point is this: unless you are spearheading protests like Dr. King or pushing street by street to Hitler's bunker in Berlin as a Russian infantryman, it will be difficult to measure your real contribution in fighting ignorance or helping first-tiers to develop or in achieving some milestone in social justice without resorting to testimonials.

Extensions of Q4:
As a vanguard, how would you guage the quality and quantity of these transitions?
And next the obvious question would be what is your assessment so far?
And how would your members gauge their own transitions?

I can see it now... "Please rate how well you agree with the following statements... 1) Do you feel you are more open-minded since participating on the FFF? Strongly disagree, Disagree, Agree, or Strongly Agree?" or a forum thread titled "how the 44s has changed your life?" (There might be one, and if so then I've obviously put my foot in my mouth - but there aren't enough time to play catch-up)

Sidenote for Q4:
As for myself, I would say that I have so far benefited from the site by the introduction of ITP, smacky chan and the opportunity to speak and hear a few reasonable words. But of course there is no way for me to (objectively) guage the benefit or harm to other participants.

DESSERT:

Q5) If you are to take this to behavioural system/paradigm to an extreme, how would you describe the events leading to Fatfish's or Sir Humpsalot's banishment? Or I guess you can do it with any scenario regarding one of the Kamizakes, or me or anyone for that matter.

Clarification of Q5:
I just wanted to see the intepretative power of the model in action in a locally revelant setting. I am guessing it would be something like this... so and so was operating on this level, but had these certain tendencies... and so that he flipped out on us, we have tried to integrate him through methods A, B and D but he responded like so... and therefore he cannot be integrated and hence banned for the good of other member's development.

Ah heck, it is getting too damned late. Time to hit Submit.

[Dialectic]

Whassup da Tao,

Just a quick note to say there is no "Talking Smack" thread anymore: it was renamed to "Our 'Integral' Vision, Theory, and Practice," so you've read it!

I appreciate the comments and consideration: I'll give you a considered response soon.

Edit: For a detailed response to da Tao's "appetizer," please read this thread:

"Consciousness in the Individual Subjective Quadrant"

http://www.thefighting44s.com/discussion/viewtopic.php?t=1833

[The Ram]

In the beginning, when I first registered for this forum I had briefly skimmed
through the content of the Integral Slanted...now the curiousity strikes
me to read through in detail the explanations...so I copied and pasted
about 16 pages worth of text..and will attempt to absorb it this weekend.

Then I will hopefully have a much better idea of what you guys have
been talking about!

[Dialectic]

I hope you at least find the material somewhat fascinating/ enjoyable! I know that it can be quite long and may seem overly-complex in places, but it's all been structured and laid out this way for good reasons.

Incidentally, and I should've posted this much earlier, the introductory thread to ITP is located under the Declarations here (http://www.thefighting44s.com/discussion/viewtopic.php?t=75).