Note: Beware of a website proclaiming to be New Tribal Ventures/An Ishmael Community! Do not reply to any request for information. Our legitimate pages are available on our site here & on the navigation to the left.

DQ on Facebook!Follow Us on

What's new
Daniel Quinn
Daniel Quinn's books
Schools & courses
Telephone Conferences
This website
New Tribal Ventures
Ishmael's Annex
Speaking Invitations

Visit Guestbook
Find others
Help us
Order books
Contact us
Telephone Conferences
Special Requests

Answers to Questions
DQ's suggested reading
DQ's Blog

The Ishmael Companion
Beyond Civilization
 Study Guide


Ishmael Community Guestbook Archive

Back to the *Current* Guestbook Previous 15 Records · Next 15 Records

doug #15078
, USA - Tuesday, December 11, 2001 at 14:36:20 CST (GMT -6:00)

Maggie has been sharing with us the surprising news people meet and become friends or involved over the internet. Sometimes it doesnt go well, sometimes it does....I have indeed been happy to make friends of several, male and female alike.

Some people find this a good thing. Certainly everyone should be warned about everyone, But not to the point of fear! Enough fear these days, and characer will "out" soon enough, as it always does.

Our thrice named visitor and others have had flaring conflicts here in E- relationships, as we have all had conflicts at times. Some public, some private. Some find the need to be destructive, others the reverse, they hate to see destruction. They prefer to relate elsewhere because they dont like to fight! And more importantly, they dont want to damage the cause.

A successful manipulator? I have hardly been able to defend most of my positions or clarify my points much of the time and I have hoped to learn here, when those I think highly of respond positively, I feel maybe I have.

Others take conflict personally and forget totally that there is a much bigger picture, and then it is their own good cause that suffers as do racial, femminist or religious causes so often as issues become personal and petty, a matter of bashing.

Its only sad that a positive point for me and others who found value in a special post I wrote needs to be interpreted as suspiciously motivated and sinister, but after a high point we so often find threat directed. Attacks. A small high point, smaller attacks on someone with little to lose, nothing at stake anyway. Knock me to the earth and I will fall about an inch.

The internet is indeed public domain and one should be circumspect about everything they write, however personal the context. Not because it might damage them, that doesnt matter much, But because one can work and invest in an important cause and then that damage can destroy much of what one may accomplish in that interest...

A new visitor coming here and asking who are these crazies! A wonderful and totally innocent EX-WIFE of a great racedriver slandered in a gossipy irresponsible tirade-this is someone influential who shared our cause, trashed for use as personal ammo. Its so damaging and the result of bad judgement encountering sheer malice I suppose, I wouldnt presume to suppose to know.

I am so sorry everyone has to have this as part of their GB expereince.

maggie #15077
, USA -
Tuesday, December 11, 2001 at 14:9:58 CST (GMT -6:00)

Chris, yes, great post. And the sad fact is, those who are the most damaged have the biggest reason to create identities to cover their wounds, and often learn early in life to do so with astonishing skill. So much skill in fact, that they themselves begin to believe more in their cover than in their actual tortured selves...and there own self-belief is part of what makes them so convincing to others. But usually, their "cover identity" is not sufficient to keep them from hurting people in significant ways--is in fact how they manage to get close enough to anyone at all to do that harm.

Michael, in one way I totally understand your point of view on all this. In another way, I think it is too bad that you write this off as mere "soap opera". But maybe you are not aware that women, especially, have been ripped off, raped and even killed by men they met through the net--men who posed very convincing "wonderful" identities. I thought hard about sharing my story, because I did not want to just be "making allegations" (tho of course I could prove them with copies of emails both ways), seen as seeking vengeance for some imagined slight from those here. But I decided to do it anyway, because while I know that not all agree with this, I feel it is part of my responsibility to life to make others aware of dangers they may not have noticed yet--and this very much includes dangerous people. Hell, it's dangerous people that we have the most to fear from! I'll take the wilderness any day over "civilization". And I am aware that there are women who post here that, like me, may have been marked as potential bait for a very sad and deluded person, whose propensities I can only guess from here.

Yes, Doug's WORDS are a light in the darkness, to be sure, and I would not discourage anyone from taking them to heart. It is not his words, but HIMSELF as an actual person that I caution those here about, most especially the women.

How sad that this kind of news is only seen as "soap opera", when there might be so much more at stake for some. Would it be merely soap opera, if someone from this site actually did get harmed by Doug or some other sick soul? Yet it doesn't surprise me that you, a man, would disparage my story in this way. Because while it is true that women are capable of the abuse of men, the fact is that at least 90% of abuse is committed by men against women. Did you know that of the small percentage of women now imprisoned for murder, the vast majority of them murdered their violent mates, only after putting up with that man's violence against her for years? This is not something that men need to think about, you are not the ones in danger in patriarchal society. But women most definitely still are.

And so I told my story, choosing to provide as much "soap-opera drama" by way of he said/she said as I did, to allow other potential victims to have as many cues as possible to recognize the pattern.

No, it's not pretty, certainly not as pretty as Doug's words to everyone on Sunday. And it doesn't fit in with the preference here for speaking of history and possibilities in the abstract. I have said before what I needed to say, however, about feminism and the need to attend to the personal (as well as the practical, as Vered mentioned)--and in this, I am saying what also needs to be said. And will reiterate that if just one woman is spared the dangers of men like Doug by what I wrote, then it will be well-worth all the condescension and contempt heaped upon me by men who aren't the ones who might suffer from such as he, or by women who have yet to know personally, the predator-type who skillfully masks his severe internal damage with a sweet wonderful persona so that he might draw victims unto himself.

Say what you like. I am content that I have done what is necessary for my own conscience and likely, for some of the other women here.


Faith Contender #15076
, USA -
Tuesday, December 11, 2001 at 14:4:33 CST (GMT -6:00)

Sam and others:

Why do you read everything I write so literally? Why not interpret my words the same way that the GuruGorilla interprets Genesis 3 or Genesis 4? In other words, leave out the parts (such as the Serpent of Genesis 3) that don't fit your purpose, pull the remaining text out of context and then interpret it mythologically to get it to say anything you want it to.

Althought I do not intend to be mean-spirited, I can see where my sarcastic humor could be interpreted that way. Having said that, I will try to be more gracious in my words and expressions. My apologies to all.

This will be a good time for me to take another break -- besides I need to work on my "book" if I ever want to get past 3% done.

My web site, The Gospel according to Ishmael was last updated 9/29/01.

Mike #15075
, USA -
Tuesday, December 11, 2001 at 13:32:48 CST (GMT -6:00)

Communication with like-minded folks who care deeply about things that matter to us is a way to stay energized when going out and living/acting in the real world.

Having discussion and dialogue allows us to think clearly and orient ourselves towards our goals.

It is time well spent. But the five or ten minutes it takes to write a post here does not take away from the solid action that we cannot help but take in the real world by simply living the vision that we have.

There's time enough for all of it. And that's a good thing because if I can't think and write well about what matters, it's unlikely that I'll be able to live and act that way. After all, what we do originates in what we think.

Sam #15074
, AZ USA -
Tuesday, December 11, 2001 at 13:26:31 CST (GMT -6:00)

FC-Human frailties aside, the people who post here write about issues that matter to them, generally as it relates to the works of Daniel Quinn.

The good people I know who are Christians do not insinuate themselves into discussions having nothing to do with them...waiting for the least opportunity to ridicule. If your goal is to bring people to Christ and to be in Christ yourself, you are heading in the wrong direction. You have only succeeded in being annoying. You needn't bring up the line from After Dachau again. You know as well as I do what it means. Your mean-spirited heckling isn't related to anything in Daniel Quinn's work.

You will, of course be allowed to continue in your current vein, because posts aren't deleted for being annoying...but you would do better to read your Bible and think about what you hope to achieve yourself.


Mike #15073
, USA -
Tuesday, December 11, 2001 at 13:24:59 CST (GMT -6:00)

I find that conclusions and interpretations based on the study of living Indigenous people and archaelogical evidence that helps us understand "primitive" societies of the past is very helpful in at least trying to understand something that might be called "original spiritual vision."

I find that reasoning while looking at the empirical data is a valid method to come to conclusions about things that no absolute authority or proof exists to speak on.

Sara #15072
Tuesday, December 11, 2001 at 13:4:51 CST (GMT -6:00)

Chris, great post.

in my opinion, our culture is already at odds with its ruler, its memes. one of the huge things i've noticed lately that, in my opinion, indicate this, is the huge amounts of life crises our culture recognizes. it seems like our entire lives between the ages of 12 and 65 are chock full of trauma, most of it created by our culture. maybe it was always this way, i don't know. but this trauma stems, in my opinion, from the fact that we all know our system is shot to hell. something is fundamentally wrong, and we all know it. why do half our movies deal with major disasters, often of the apocalyptic kind? because we all know, deep down, that our culture is broken.

Chris #15071
Edmonds, WA USA -
Tuesday, December 11, 2001 at 12:38:7 CST (GMT -6:00)

Thinking about what Vered said about "fighting the system" and what Joshua just said about getting the GOP to read these books: Of course, _everyone_ needs to read these books. I was thinking about the contrast between the desire to do things like activism and the need to change minds. It just now occurred to me that a way to think about this is that by changing minds, or at least exposing people such as the politicians to these new ideas, we are in a sense "softening them up" for the assault by the activists. It is like a covert operation where we weaken the enemy from within in preparation for the assault from without.

For Sun Tzu said: "The first of these [five fundamental] factors is politics... Politics means the thing which causes he people to be in harmony with their ruler so that they will follow him in disregard of their lives and without fear of any danger."

In this case, the ruler should be considered the lethal memes of our culture. If the people of our culture cease to be in harmony with their ruler (the lethal memes) then we are on our way toward victory.

To Michael, regarding MaggieMadronejkd: I'm finding more and more that it really helps to remember Thom Hartmann's paper "The Lost People" which Mike recommended below in post #15408. The relevant part of Hartmann's paper is the part near the end where the aborigine guy was being asked if he was angry at the whiteys who had treated him so poorly. He replied something like "No, it was done to them, and their parents before them and their parents before them. Its been going on a long time." My point is, we're all social, human, damaged people. Even the ones some of us call evil, or monsters, etc. All human. It helps me to remember this.


Joshua Richardson #15070
Vail, CO USA -
Tuesday, December 11, 2001 at 12:19:8 CST (GMT -6:00)

I was deeply touched and moved by this book. It gave me an entirely new perspective on life. I can only hope that this book will reach everyone worldwide. I would really like for the members of the GOP to read this book. I think it would be a slap in the face of their capitalist views.

michael #15069
Berkeley, CA USA -
Tuesday, December 11, 2001 at 11:46:14 CST (GMT -6:00)

To all I visted the GB for the first time a couple of days ago and was intially very impressed. However my timing was apparently not so great. My experience was a little like arriving at a party 10 minutes before the shooting starts. In the midst of all the blazing guns it was not really a surprise to me that no one really noticed or acknowleged my arrival(the exception was one individual who greeted me privately.) But I hung in and followed along for a few more days hoping for something redeeming to surface. Doug's piece was certainly a light in the darkness, but now this most recent allegation by Maggie is just...well just way to much of a soap opera to deal with. The shooting may be over but it feels like the cops are going to be here any minute. Gotta go.

So to the folks here who haven't been honest I offer my sympathy. Deceit is a painfull prison to create in ones mind. I could say something like "come clean or get out" but what is the point? Once you deceive there is no way you will ever fully have anyones trust again.

To Faith Contender I respect your passionate belief but might suggest that even Jesus himself would not continue to impose himself on this group the way you have.

Happy Trails everyone. One love. Stay human. Michael

Faith Contender #15068
, USA -
Tuesday, December 11, 2001 at 10:49:55 CST (GMT -6:00)

David of PA: the answer to your questions are NO, NO, NO, NO, ...

Here on the GB, Ishmaelians don't have time to save the sacred world -- Thay are too busy dealing with conspiracy theories, identity games, soap operas, interpersonal warfare, etcetera, etcetera, ad nauseum -- not to mention plenty of conjecture which dq himself initially infected us with via his books.

Then they have to deal with me, Faith Contender. They are supposed to be ecstatic that I'm here but they are not, or so it seems.

My web site, The Gospel according to Ishmael was last updated 9/29/01.

David J. Paterno #15067
Media, PA USA -
Tuesday, December 11, 2001 at 10:31:53 CST (GMT -6:00)

In the summer of 2000 I taught an undergraduate class at the University at Albany, SUNY. A student in that class (Frank Deluca) suggested that I read "My Ishmael" after we spoke about the role of culture in society and human communication.

Soon afterwards, I read the text cover to cover and now consider it one of the most important texts for any adult reader.

The call for a new, honest, compassionate, and sustainable society is more important today than ever before. Do you think we'll 'get' it and see that solutions to our problems ARE already at hand? Will we be able to coordinate together for social justice and equity? I hope so!

Just a few thoughts...


Maggie #15066
, USA -
Tuesday, December 11, 2001 at 9:47:29 CST (GMT -6:00)

Hi there folks,

I returned here today to share a quote that I came across which may address the issue of my "performance-experiment" in a positive light. Before coming to the "add an entry" part of this site, tho, I scrolled through the last few days' posts to see what was happening here; to see what reactions folks may have had to me and just to see how things are now. And I saw some things that greatly distressed me in light of some recent things happening in my emailbox which I am also going to address. But first, this quote, written by zen master Osho, which I found in the guidebook to Osho Zen Tarot, a deck/guidebook created by 2 of his disciples. The card referred to is called "Thunderbolt", also known as "The Tower" in traditional tarot:

"What meditation does slowly, slowly, a good shout of the master, unexpectedly, in the situation where the disciple was asking some questions, [does all at once]...and the master jumps and shouts, or throws him out of the door, or jumps over him...These methods were never known. It was purely the very creative genius of Ma Tzu, and he made many people enlightened.

Sometimes it looks so hilarious: he threw a man from the window, from a 2-storey house, and the man had come to ask on what to meditate. And Ma Tzu not only threw him, he jumped after him, fell on him, sat on his chest and he said, "Got it?!"....And in fact he got it, because it was so sudden, out of the blue--he could never have conceived it"

So, there is that, and I hope it makes sense of the thing I was aiming at as Madrone. Not to put myself at the level of a master, but to say that there is a place for such performances in our awakening....the alarm clock is abrasive to the sweetly dreaming sleeper, the mate who walks out forever on his/her addicted mate is a shocking jolt, the strong and intelligent middle-aged woman whose long struggle for respect and a voice in life who becomes strident and attackative--these are all natural and needed ways that life can speak to us, bring us out of our comfortability to see ourselves and what is around us in a new way. There are so many ways to wake up, in the various ways we each might need. I also want to add that my performance experiment and your responses to it, has given me much food for thought; was good for me, too, not just as a way to laugh at others' expense, but to help me see myself and the world in a new way. From Sara's recent post on the subject, I trust that it was not all just lost words for some of you. (yay, Sara!)

Now, as for the other thing, it is a long story but I hope you will give it a try. It w concerns identity of, and one's trust in, the people who use the internet to make friends. This is a cautionary tale, for those not already wise and careful of the ways that some seemingly sincere and real people use this venue to hide from their deep personal troubles, and to create a "wonderful" identity to both make themselves feel good as well as to attract the unwitting not just into internet correspondence but into real life relationships as well. Now, to begin I will say that most of us have good and honest reasons to seek outside our ordinary lives for companionship--such as not knowing anyone nearby who share common interest in such things as DQ's work. Or, in my own case when I first made e-friends last year, because the fallout of an abusive relationship had destroyed my former community, and the necessities of being on-duty 24-7 with a baby and no partner made it nearly impossible to get out in the world to recreate community in real life. Just to say that I don't think everyone out there is a nut or anything!

In any event, when I first began to post here as jkd, I was soon contacted by a man from this site, who told me he felt I had things to teach him and perhaps much in common with me; in his first post he named some of those things and also went on to mention concepts from certain books he'd read. We posted back and forth daily for a few days; I was never able to do more than address one or 2 points he would raise due to time constraints (aside from the simple fact that not everything he brought up was of interest to me). During these first few days of mutual posting, he mentioned being newly in contact with another woman who had recently signed the guestbook. Over the course of days, he went on to say that he had seen pictures of this woman (on the net or elsewhere was not entirely clear--apparently she is married to some famous sports hero). And also told me that he had sent pictures of himself to me, which had been refused by my server, and asked that I send pictures of myself to him. I was very put off by this, especially as in his mention of the other woman's pictures, he'd made an offhand comment that she was quite attractive for her age, but probably too old for him (her 52, to his stated 47). I wondered what her age and looks had to do with anything, especially from a man presenting himself as so soulful and above superficial things. But also, I didn't feel that we had a strong enough acquaintance for him to presume permission to send me his photo, nor to ask for mine. This was a personal correspondence of about a week and 1/2 duration, mind you, and at about 1/2 way through that I had already notified him that I couldn't keep up with our initial level of posting due to time constraints of single parenthood along with school and my other internet relationships...I was making a boundary, in other words, and his attempt to send photos without asking, his need to see me in photo, and his comments about that other woman all seemed to me to add up to potential trouble to me. Call me paranoid if you like, but I have learned the hard way to take anyone's verbal self-representation with many grains of salt, even in real life! I had no wish to rush into the creation of a relationship of this type, with someone I wasn't entirely in agreement with from the get-go, though it is true that I saw certain commonalities between us that I felt worth pursuing a bit.

IN any event, before I could get back to him to express my discomfort about the photos and the comments he'd made about that other woman, I was outed here in my performance identity and spent next earliest opportunity writing to you all about that. I had a feeling that he would be miffed--for putting that performance ahead of my posting to him personally, and also for not confiding to him about that identity. Not that I could feel I was betraying a friend in any real way, given the short and highly limited nature of our exchange, but let me just say that with one thing and another, he had provided a few cues that he might be one to take it all as a highly personal slight, rather than as a daring experiment which required my secrecy or even just a silly prank to laugh about.

So, sure enough, he wrote to me instantly, and could not say enough awful things about me: deceitful, disturbed, troubled by inner demons, disruptive, superficial, avoiding intimacy by failing to respond to all of the content of his posts to me, (or god forbid, ignoring his content in favor of saying something on my own mind about my life in the time I had to give the correspondence that day). In addition to all that, he posed some mysterious reference to all my many secret identities as probably being necessary to conceal from all, my "professional identity"--what ever he might have meant by that. In other words, essentially meant to rip me to shreds, without once naking reference to his own reality--never said, for instance, I'm pissed off, I'm hurt, I feel slighted; just "YOU are this and YOU are that and the other deranged and dangerous thing". Did in fact use the word "dangerous" in reference to me.

My response to this was first to attempt to explain myself a bit, and to ask if he indeed did feel hurt, mad, slighted. When he only wrote another bunch of reviling bs without owning anything of his own reality, I wrote again to say, well, it seems we can't be friends after all; I owe you nothing and do not care to hear your judgements; I am happy with myself and wish the same for you, farewell. Even then, he could not let off and again wrote to hammer on about his points. When I wrote once more to say some of what I just said here about photos, and other matters wherein I felt he was presuming far too much between us under the circumstances, and to ask him to leave me alone, he then posted back with not only the comment that he'd read only the first few lines of my post before deleting it, and went on to further say that he had tried to tell me that it was over and now he adds "criminal" to the list of my failings--I suppose referring to harassment or something, tho he did not make this clear.

NOw, before I go on, he told me as jkd that he much agreed with my assessments of things in the gbk and generally, and later that he liked what Madrone was saying (not knowing then that she was me). And he as well appeared to have more than one net identity, for which he gave plausible reasons about renewing passwords or whatever....

IN any event, on the very same day that he wrote a long post here that stated near the end "I know many of you are doing just the same in different ways, and respect and honor all their expressions...even Maggie"--on that very same day that he was apparently making a name for himself here as the latest spiritual leader, he was posting to me to utterly revile me as if he were an Inquisitor, and I nothing more than the next candidate for the well-deserved flames that would take me to hell.

Yes, folks, I mean Doug Lundy, or whomever he really is. And I know that at least one other poster here has even closer experience with him than me, for they both report that she went to see him last year. I will let her declare herself to confirm if she will. "Deeply hostile" were the words she once used to describe him, especially toward, but not exclusively toward, women. And it appears to me that he uses the internet not just to create a "wonderful" image of himself, but also to find women as potential mates...all without owning any of this. Remember, he first posted to me to invite conversation because he felt I had something to teach him--never said, "you seem interesting and I hope you'll send photos so I can see if you might please me as a sexual partner", or just, "I'm looking for a good woman in my life".

Now, you can question my motives in writing of this if you like; I will stand by one friend's general assessment that no one ever has just one motive for anything. I certainly do want to warn the women here about Doug. For even if you never go so far as to visit with him personally or even send him photos, I believe that he is a deeply troubled and needing soul with a vast talent for manipulation. People have varying degrees of tolerance for being reviled for the crime of being themselves; I have little for being damned as superficial and avoiding relationship, etc, by someone I scarcely know, no matter how many things we seem to have in common as learned only through the internet.

Again, a cautionary tale. It is not just to bust Doug here, tho I sure think that's needed--and if only one woman here is saved from danger through him, I will be content. On a larger scale, my tale is about identity and trust in general with internet "friendships"

so, again I share with the good of all of us at heart (at least as much as with whatever else I may be accused of in telling my story).

Take care all--and rememember this: if you see Buddha on the road, kill him! You yourself are plenty sufficient to your own spiritual growth, without the need of masters or wanna be masters to distract you from your journey.


Sara #15065
Tuesday, December 11, 2001 at 9:40:11 CST (GMT -6:00)

FC --

but what is religion if not conjecture? unless you have seen for yourself (and so many people haven't), you have to get everything second hand, or just believe what you read in a holy book. all theology is, in essence, is conjecture. because even those who have seen could be "proved" wrong. there are no facts where spirituality is concerned, whether you're talking christianity, animism, or anything in between.

Sara #15064
Tuesday, December 11, 2001 at 9:36:20 CST (GMT -6:00)

Doug --

but what you describe DOES change minds, and those changed minds are what changes our behavior.

I think you're misunderstanding the idea of changing minds. people will never change what they do or how they do it unless their minds are changed. and by changed, i do not mean convinced they are wrong via argument, or baptized, or brainwashed. i mean they truly open up their minds to different ideas.

for instance, cars. right now, everyone in this country takes it for granted that you should have a car, and that you need one, and that all cars only run on fossil fuels, and that's the way it should be. however, that certainly isn't how it is everywhere, and it also isn't how it has always been. something happened here in the 30's that changed American minds. What was it? well, it was the WPA and Robert Moses, as well as newly burgeoning car companies like General Motors. All due to the depression. In response to advertising, to the media, to the government, and to things that were already happening around them, minds were changed and the way Americans traveled was never the same.

Americans weren't forced to accept the automotive revolution, and they weren't won over by money. The american pop cultural climate was changing, and with it went american minds.

Of course, that was a change for the worse. but my point still stands. when minds are changed on a mass scale, people act differently on a mass scale. I don't really get how that doesn't work, because you can point to a million examples in history that prove that changed minds change people.

changed minds caused the fall of rome. changed minds caused the rennaisance. changed minds caused the settlement of the americas by europeans. changed minds caused the end of slavery. changed minds were responsible for the success of the womens and gay rights movements, as well as the civil rights movement (their problem was that they just couldn't change enough minds where it mattered most). every significant social and cultural change, from 3 million years ago to right now has been caused by changed minds. you can look at the changes as a religious or spiritual thing, or you can see it from a more pragmatic standpoint. either way, the only way to change people is to change their minds.

Previous 15 Records · Next 15 Records

Top of page
Site design and content, © 2017, Daniel Quinn