Mini-post: Using your money to crash the system.

Supporting counter culture involves putting your money where you mouth is...
There is no industry more worthy of the support of the anarchist as much as hemp and marijuana. Even if you are not a smoker, there are plenty of reasons (health, environmental, philosophical, political and economic) to support the burgeoning industry surrounding hemp. A few days ago I was able to interview Eric Politis from Global Hemp, one of the leading businesses in all things hemp. There has not been near enough attention given to hemp industry. And even conservatives and the religious have plenty of reason to support it. In the following article I will discuss the many benefits of hemp products and encourage one and all to put their money where their mouth is. Buying hemp puts you on the cutting edge of counter culture and adds some street cred to your claims of being an anarchist. Buy hemp. Eat hemp. Wear hemp, and smoke marijuana!
      Another plant medicine that should be spread far and wide as if it were the Good News from Jesus, is Ayauasca (Daime). This is a plant that should also be legal for any and all uses, recreational, spiritual and health. Get involved with a church that uses it, and this will provide some legal protection. Stop using toilet paper made of wood pulp. There is bamboo and corn husk toilet paper that is cheap and well-made. This is an easy one anybody can do. I'll tell you exactly where to by it and what the brand is called. Buy it at Walgreens, and the brand is called "Ology." If everyone I knew used this kind of toilet paper, it would make a huge impact. There also may be hemp toilet paper as well. Consult your local hemp expert for details.
    We are close to creating a world that does not use good pine trees, or any kind of tree to wipe out butts. That is huge progress. Next, perhaps start shaming people who are so far behind the times with toilet paper. Why not? Make them feel like fools for not knowing better. In a generation, we could outlaw use of timber wood for toilet paper. Imagine the relief that would provide (no pun intended) to our precious forests!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conflict Mediation Report: The Bacon-Marlborough Dispute

Zen M. S. Dean

Grand Canyon University: Psy 575

April 15, 2015

Conflict Mediation Report: The Bacon-Marlborough Dispute

(Mediation Form is on the last page of this report.)

There may have been times in our history as a species when the only survival tactic was force. As we have evolved from lower species our culture and customs have evolved as well. We look back, no doubt, at the practice of clubbing our neighbor over the head over a prized catch and shake our heads in dismay. It was barbaric. Now in modern times, society has seemed to become more and more complex compared to the stereotypical cave man. Who can trace the line from those beginnings to the time where laws and culture has become intangible, a matter of deep scholarship and study? Today, we don’t just have large fish to fight over; there is a concept of intellectual property to contend with. Scientific research, writings, inventions and even art can be owned in the theoretical realm, not just physically. Cave drawings and petroglyphs made tens of thousands of years ago may not be contested for ownership, but their evolved descendant, fine modern art, most certainly is. Fortunately for us and our heads, our methods of conflict resolution have evolved as well. Nowadays there is mediation instead of clubs, and scientists research how best to mediate by examining real life cases (case studies) rather than violent strategy. This is a report on a case study that illustrates how vital and important mediation can be to dysfunctional conflicts.

One of the most famous and expensive conflicts involving art and grossly under-used, or perhaps completely unused mediation, occurred when famed surrealist painter and multi-medium artist, Francis Bacon, died in 1992 (Falconer, 2015, Francis Bacon). As described by case study authors Camp and Zimmerman (2003) the conflict under consideration is a:

Dispute between the Estate of Francis Bacon, one of England's most important 20th-century painters, and the prestigious London gallery Marlborough Fine Art--described in the British press as "one of the most bitter art wrangles in decades" and "the most sensational legal spat the British art world has seen"--illustrates the limitations of traditional dispute resolution through litigation. Marlborough represented Bacon from 1954 until his death in 1992, and possessed exclusive rights to sell and reproduce Bacon's work. The Estate of Francis Bacon brought suit against Marlborough alleging breach of fiduciary duty, failure to account, and even blackmail. Significant discovery and motion practice ensued. Counsel for the parties anticipated a 12-week trial. Litigation cost estimates were in the millions of pounds. Success would have meant as much as £100 million for Bacon's estate. In addition, English law generally requires the loser to pay the victor's legal expenses. The case abruptly settled days before the trial was to begin (p. 62).

Thus we come upon a scene where hundreds of millions of dollars are at stake, not to mention the beloved art of an English national treasure. Since the legal fees are noted to also be in the millions of dollars, which is not to mention what a 12-week trial would cost, any way to reduce those costs would be a welcomed alternative. And then at the end of the trial, there would be one victor, and one very sore loser. Both sides had legal counsel that seemed willing to take the matter to court at some point.

How to Proceed in a Mediation

            To help demonstrate the recommended steps for conflict management, a conflict mediation form is provided on the last page of this report. The details of the form guide one through the process of mediation starting from before a conflict arises, by having interested parties agree to mediation attempts when a relationship is forged. The theory and method the form follows is derived from three main sources: Organizational Behavior by Stephen Robbins (2015), The Bacon-Marlborough Dispute: A Case Study in Mediation by Alida Camp (2003) and Emotional Conflict and Well-being: Relation to Perceived Availability, Daily Utilization, and Observer Reports of Social Support by Emmons and Colby (1995).

The first step in mediation is to identify the conflict [the mediation recommended in this report applies only to dysfunctional conflict and not to functional conflict as defined by Robbins (2015, p. 402)]. To accomplish this Robbins (2015) describes three main conflict types:  task, relationship and process (p. 402). But if one were to imagine being executor of Francis Bacon’s estate, or perhaps Bacon’s best friend and sole heir, John Edwards (Riding, 2003, New York Times) and all of his life’s work, amounting to over 100 million dollars, one can imagine that intense emotion would be involved. That is why from the beginning of the mediation process, a person’s emotions are indicated and validated. Also, Emmons and Colby (1995) report the results of their research to be supportive of including parties’ emotions in the mediation process:

The results of the mediation analyses support the notion that perceived support is an important contributor to the link between emotional conflict and well-being. An individual's negative perceptions and attitudes toward social support play an important role in reporting lower well-being (pp. 955-956).

Therefore, emotional conflicts and evaluation of social supports (whether they are sufficient or not) are included in a thorough mediation process, and they appear in the mediation form. Even more intangible conflicts like the parties’ response to cognitive dissonance (repressive defensiveness) are included, and this methodology is supported by Emmons and Colby (1995, p. 948).

The next step in mediation is to identify the locus of the conflict. Robbins (2015) supplies us with the definition of the three loci of conflict:

            Another way to understand conflict is to consider its locus, or where the conflict

occurs. Here, too, there are three basic types. Dyadic conflict is conflict between

two people. Intragroup conflict occurs within a group or team. Intergroup conflict

is conflict between groups or teams (p. 403).

Judging from the above definitions, the Bacon-Marlborough case was primarily an intergroup conflict. But there was more to it than just that, as the next comment from the Camp (2003) article indicates, “By not using mediation, the result was that "relations between the Bacon's Estate and his life-long dealer are now strained and it may be some time before they can work constructively together" (Art Newspaper, issue 123)” (p. 62). So in a way, a perhaps intimate, 40-year relationship that existed between Bacon himself, and his personal art dealer was shattered, trust was breached and feelings hurt. The real world cost of hurt feelings may include the fact that cooperative artistic endeavors between Bacon’s estate and his art dealer were stunted and almost terminated permanently. This would have been a catastrophe, and Bacon’s beloved public would have felt the brunt of the injury. Access to Bacon’s art would have been attenuated.

The final steps in mediation follow from the principles already discussed, with a notable inclusion of “checking in” with both parties, asking how things are going in the mediation process so far. This is an expression of Emmons and Colby’s (1995) attention to emotion in the process, but is also a nod to Robbins’ (2015) conditions of conflict. Robbins (2015) lists three conditions of conflict that are salient in the first stage of conflict: “communication, structure and personal variables” (p.404). Checking in is not just a kind act placed in the middle of the mediation, but also handles two of the conditions of conflict rather well, communication and personal variables. It shows a willingness to be agreeable, likable, which according to Robbins (2015) simply works. Robbins (2015) states regarding personalities in conflict resolution scenarios, “A recent study demonstrated that teams made up of individuals who are, on average, high in openness and emotional stability are better able to turn task conflict into increased group performance” (p. 403). Emmons and Colby (1995) also address personal behavior style and recommend agreeable behaviors (“helpful functions”) such as showing sympathy, and being supportive (p. 948). There seems to be quite a consensus that exhibiting socially agreeable behaviors rounds out the mediation process to a positive finish.

Mediation - the Missing Component in the Bacon-Marlborough

            It is does not seem to be publicly known what caused both sides in the Bacon-Marlborough case to settle just before the trial. Perhaps one of the parties came to their senses and decided that some of the mediation principles and steps that happen to be listed in the mediation form here, would avert disaster. The certain resolution of the Bacon-Marlborough case would have been to follow Dean’s Conflict Mediation Form which is based on research performed by leading organizational psychologists, just a few of which are cited in this report. Of course, it is speculation to postulate on how things would have turned out if mediation had been used properly in the Bacon-Marlborough case, but the facts bear out that in the very least a few million dollars in attorney fees would have been saved if the less combative and more friendly methods of mediation had been used.

 

   

   

 

References

Camp, A., & Zimmerman, P. (2003). The Bacon-Marlborough dispute: A case study in

            mediation. CPA Journal, 73(9), 62-63. New York: NYSSCPA

Emmons, R. A., & Colby, P. M. (1995). Emotional conflict and well-being: Relation to

perceived availability, daily utilization, and observer reports of social support. Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology, 68(5), 947-959. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.68.5.947

Falconer, M. (Ed.). (2015). Francis Bacon. The Art Story Foundation. Retrieved from:

            http://www.theartstory.org/artist-bacon-francis.htm

Riding, A. (2003, March 7). John Edwards, 53, Francis Bacon confidant. The New York Times.

            Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/07/arts/

john-edwards-53-francis-bacon-confidant.html

Robbins, S.; Judge, T. (2015). Organizational behavior, Sixteenth Edition, Upper Saddle River,

            NJ: Prentice Hall.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dean’s Conflict Mediation Form

 

Before Conflict Agreement:

Signing the following form constitutes an agreement by both parties that upon the identification or realization of a conflict, both or all parties to use the following form to, in good faith, attempt to solve the conflict or come to a settlement in regards to the conflict. The following questions and procedures will be used to attempt an amicable resolution of the conflict. This does not constitute an agreement to settle, but merely an agreement to use this form and its processes to attempt a settlement. None of the parties should feel pressured to settle or compromise based on its use. The purpose of this form is to look out for the interests of all parties and arrive at a fair and acceptable solution to the conflict as defined in this form. Know that the privacy of all parties will be respected and the information collected as a result of this process is to be kept confidential and cannot be used outside of this proprietary institution unless agreed upon by all affected parties. Use of this form and its processes does not constitute a legally binding contract. Its aim is to possibly avoid unnecessary litigation or legal processes for the peace of mind and well-being of all parties. Signature_____________

 

What kind of conflict is this? A task conflict? A relationship conflict? A process conflict? Emotional expression conflict (Ambivalence towards)? Social support (lack of), socio-emotional support or interpersonal support conflict? Breach of trust? Legal conflict? Property conflict? Other? More than one or all of the above? ________________________________________________________

   

What is the locus of the conflict, Dyadic, Intergroup or Intragroup? ___________________

 

Please describe the nature of this conflict using as much or as little detail as you wish. (Feel free to use the back of this form or additional pieces of paper to make your description. ______________________________________________________________

 

What is your primary goal in this matter? _____________________________

 

If you like, please name all persons or entities that you feel may be involved in this conflict

_____________________________________________________________

 

What do you feel is the cause of this conflict?_______________________________

 

If you like, please propose one or more solutions to this problem __________________

 

Do you feel that a settlement or compromise might be possible in this case? If so please describe the nature of what a settlement or compromise would look like in your opinion.

________________________________________________________

 

Have any laws been broken to your knowledge? _____________________________

 

Do you feel you have been treated fairly so far during this mediation? ____________

 

Have the terms of a contract been violated to your knowledge on the part of any persons or entities? _________________________________________________

 

Is there any cognitive dissonance that may be resulting in repressive defensiveness on the part of yourself or another party that you can point to? ________________________________

 

In an ideal anarchist society, things would just fall together naturally, magically. Natural selection would be at play. The strong and intelligent would dominate on one hand, and the most nurturant would dominate on the other. The feminine would be equal with the masculine. Conflict resolution might be best handled by mediation rather that litigation or arbitration. IN the following article I discuss a case study and how mediation might have better solved the issue early on in the conflict thus avoiding expensive legal costs.

The Zen Anarchist

This blog has been created by the gods of disorder, entropy, social oxidation, decay and cosmic randomness. If that sentence confuses you, read no further. If that sentence somehow appeals to you, you may be an anarchist of sorts. This blog will recount and discuss the unfolding of a part of me that has never been expressed so openly, but it is an unavoidable tendency in my personality. If you, like myself, have been vexed and annoyed by, and chained and tethered to organizations, nations, churches, corporations, cults, clubs, groups, cliques and even families, and you just can't take it anymore, then you might be an anarchist at heart. I will be mixing blog entries with scholarly articles that I have been writing while pursuing a Master’s Degree in Organizational and Industrial Psychology.

         It might seem contradictory for a person who feels such distaste for all forms of order to be pursuing an advanced degree in Organizational Psychology, but to me, it is a journey into the belly of the beast, to seek understanding, and perhaps eventually, a coming to terms with, organizations and all constructs that would presume to control and manipulate individuals. Distrust and even hatred for authority is at the heart of my personality, and anyone or anything that seeks to reign me in will be met with rabid and vicious resistance.

         There is no need for anybody or any government to fear violence from me, however. Just as long as your laws stay off my body, off my property and out of my business, we should be able to live in harmony. But history has proven that, not the anarchist, but the organizationalist, the nationalist, the religious, the power hungry and the greedy are the ones that draw first blood in all cases. For now, my fight is just of the pen. Let's call it a cold war between myself and society. It would be great if I was so self-sufficient that I could separate myself completely from all social constructs, but unfortunately, there are things in this world that I want, that society offers, such that I have to make deals with and make compromises with, to obtain. I would be truly blessed if one day I could separate myself from the greater society and live as a natural man, but I have enough greed in me, that it keeps me making deals with the Devil.

         I am sure that my way of thinking will raise some concerns, but if that is the case, you probably are taking the term "anarchist" a bit too literally. So, as a feature of this blog, I will be probably forever, defining and redefining anarchy. I can say confidently that I am rational enough to admit that actual and literal anarchy is not possible. Even if a group of individuals could tear down every organized social construct, the mere meeting together to discuss terms, divide land, resources etc., is already a form of government in and of itself. Whether or not to have stop signs is a form of government when you think about it. Complete anarchy, I would argue is physically impossible, not just inadvisable or impractical.

         Another issue with anarchy is that, violence seems tied up with its definition, and since the powers that be have ICBMs, satellites, drones and nukes, well, I don't think that I need to spell out that a violent revolution on the part of anarchists, who are an incredible minority, would be a waste of time. Heck, anarchists couldn't win a war with some tiny South Pacific Atoll, let alone a nation. But I believe there is enough discontent within society that we can use available political processes to win a more hands-off form of governing. Privacy, freedom and peace tempered with the right to protect one’s body and property and family cold define a more anarchistic world. That would be progress in the right direction in my opinion. In this way I could say that anarchism for me is a direction not a position.

         Drawing on recent events, the negative aspects of so-called government can be seen plainly in the shooting of an unarmed black man by a South Carolina police officer. (And they call US anarchists!!) This is the result of government gone wild. Authority corrupts just like money, and it prods people with the lethal combination of guns and badges. The film footage of the old black man running away, and a cop shooting him in the back in cold blood, and then planting a Taser on his dead body has become cliché. How dare any government be afraid of anarchists! It is that kind of abuse of power that makes a person want to just flush the whole system down the drain.

         I imagine that some prospective employer might read this blog one day and label me a terrorist. That would be a person who lacks the ability to understand nuance, subtlety, metaphor and hyperbole. Probably not the kind of employer I'd want to be associated with anyway. Ignorance has spawned many an authoritarian organization, and has caused much suffering in this world. Actually, there is no one I'd trust in a position of power more than an anarchist. So, yes, I believe an anarchist could be a politician, and support a government. Anarchy will never be a literal reality. But it is something in my soul that cries when abuse of power is manifest. Anarchists have hearts and souls and they love their mothers. Anarchy is a feeling state. Abandon. Wanton creativity. Art. Love. Sex. Sanity and madness. If not for a touch of anarchy in our governments and organizations, they would be intolerable (which they are almost that already.) Anarchy is the spark that ignites the flame of freedom. But anarchy itself will never reign. The real anarchist is a realist. There is no sense in wasting time believing in a form of government that could never come to be. We have to stay grounded in reality.

         On the topic of political party, some of you might imagine I am a Libertarian. Some, maybe, Green Party or Peace and Freedom Party. I'm sad to disappoint you, but I am a straight ticket Democrat. (I know, I know, I know, but I have my reasons.) As long as I am participating in reality, I see no point in supporting a political party that can't win. I voted for Obama. I will support Bernie Sanders in the primary and vote for Hilary Clinton after she wins the primary. Of course, if a miracle happens, and anti-corporate Bernie Sanders wins the Dem primary I will of course vote for him. I have committed myself to support the Democrat Party until it dominates so completely that the Republican Party ceases to be relevant, or exist altogether. At which time, I can safely move left. But even that is practically a dream. Possibly there are extremely rich and powerful individuals that will just keep us vacillating back and forth between Republican and Democrat for all eternity with no progress whatsoever. If such is the case, well, we are all fucked anyway, so it wouldn't matter which party I vote for. But at least the Democrats represent me on a few key issues. Don't get me wrong. All politicians are whores. Democrats are only marginally better than Republicans, and most of the time I can't tell the difference.  But at the end of my life, I can actually envision an America that has endorsed gay marriage, completely decriminalized recreational marijuana in all states,  and made a stand for the environment while erasing or laminating the need for war, however they accomplish that. I would like to see authoritarian religions limited or banned and I would like to see atheism flourish and dominate. Religion, which I find to be more vile and evil than government, must fall.


             I hope to provide some interesting and thought provoking articles for progressive minded individuals. You will find much blasphemy in my posts. That is a given. But even if you disagree with my positions, I hope to be entertaining. I look forward to creating some dialog as well. If you comment, I will try and engage with you, but sorry to say, spending time going back and forth with people on subjects I have already laid to rest in my life is not going to take priority. I'm busy enough as it is. But hey, you can always start your own blog! I wish you all peace, love and Zen.