pmv: I don't agree that tactics have to be conscious. They can arise collectively as a product of a group mentality, not at a conscious individual level. And in any case, I don't care whether something is conscious or not, I have never really seen why that is regarded as so important.
M: I am going to go with your 'in any case' because I think the ordinary use of the term tactics refers to a strategically thought out plan as the common usage. The reason I see it as important is because the human tendency of people who hate themselves is to blame. We live in a state of repressed unconscious pain and are unwilling to face the real sources of that pain in our childhood because what we feel about ourselves and don't know we feel is our actual inner truth. We hate ourselves and we believe it is justified that we do. To awaken to the source of that pain by a conscious effort to relive it we fear will only prove what we suppress admitting. So not only is the unconscious extremely important as a concept to which we can address our healing, but it is the source of blame, the deflection by projection onto others of what we feel is true of ourselves. It is why we create the other. We are full of self hate and spend our lives looking for a place to unload it that doesn't lead to conscious awakening.
This is our prison, our catch 22, because there is nothing really wrong with us other than those feelings there is that we were made to believe.
pmv: Nor do I share your preoccupation with the concept of 'bigotry'. In fact, in all honesty, I've never been entirely clear what that word means. Nor am that bothered about whether an intent is "evil", only whether it's the same as mine.
M: I am not sure exactly what you mean by worrying if an intent is the same as yours. And this is a problem that becomes difficult to tackle for 'mystical' reasons. Let me start, then, by explaining what how and why I use the word bigotry:
I first began to use the word because it is pejorative, generally speaking, as a method to imply shame or guilt, I am apparently not very good at distinguishing interchange's definitional shadings. And I used it particularly against the typical kinds of bigots, racists, misogynists, homophobes etc. I believed at the time that by calling people bigots for the nature of their beliefs would cause discomfort that might impel them to change. All that was, was my own bigotry and a need to express my contempt for myself onto them, the bigots that surround me. Hehe, I used to be a lot more like agent than I am now. I should say, I used to think a lot more like him than I do now. I see more now but I am not cured of the need. I just see more about how it operates in me and by extension, to liberals generally.
So what is a bigot according to how I use that word. A bigot is a person who believes in some moral principle as a vital good generally to the exclusion of other valid moral principles because they have been inculcated into that belief by some external authority with which they fear to disagree. Generally the authority is a religious text that by its own proclamation is ultimate in nature. This would be your not uncommon Christian idiot that thinks the bigotry of 2000 years ago imparted into the Bible by men and not God actually is the Word of God. Bigots are literalists. And they are difficult to cure because, not only are they sure they are absolutely right, but that any other truth would send them to hell. They are trapped in a catch 22. Recognize the connection?
Bigoty, then, as I use that word is the unconscious certainty that some unexamined assumption that has been somewhere inculcated into ones thinking, has, not only to be right, but must be right or one loses one's ego investment in the salvation being good offers. This is referred to in certain schools of mysticism or real psychological understanding as I would prefer, as our dominant concealed prejudice, the thing that puts in a mental prison. It is a universal form of bigotry. Every culture is may vary in what is the typical blind spot is and that is why there are various forms of cure appropriate for every culture. I personally favor psychoanalysis as an excellent choice for people in the West who are secular, but my first insight into this blind spot thingi came to me via Zen. Fingers that point to the moon are not the moon, but I only have a certain number of fingers. I can only do what I can and that is probably not much.
pmv: I probably could agree with you that the aim is to produce a different culture that leads to different behaviour. But cultures depend on material underpinnings, they don't exist entirely independently and with infinitely malleability.
M: Probably so but I don't wish to make the assumptions you do. I have learned that everything I once believed was a lie. I have learned that one of the best states of mind in which to try to approach the truth is one of humility. If one can't see the nature of one's prison because the bars are invisible unconscious beliefs, it is probably wise not to invest too much an anything one believes.
I have seen this expressed many times in various traditions and in various kinds of advice: "Who should not criticize? You." "Physician, heal thyself." " Except as you be a little child....." "The meek shall inherit the earth." "Empty your tea cup." etc.
Thanks for your post. I get a good vibe from what I feel is your internal honesty. You can express your doubts well and that opens a door for dialog. I hope the above explains a bit more the nature of my thinking.