Just found this talk on an unrelated forum in a thread about cultural appropriation. Food for thought.

meta-info: ayahuasca; cultural colonialism; the erroneous thoughtforms of Rousseau; true meaning vs empty husks; the view of the self as a German cowboy singing redneck tunes with an awkward accent and a ukulele

http://video.google.com/videopl...ocid=1471567783918794440

I've played with the idea of going on an ayahuasca retreat as a first encounter with this way of administration, but now I'm having doubts. Maybe it's better to assimilate the usage of this brew in my everyday life and incorporate it in a non traditional way, as opposed to catapulting myself into someone else's culture and possibly feeding the disruption of a slowly diminishing culture.

After viewing, what are your thoughts on this? I know some of you went on retreats, is the situation really as bad as this guy says? And if you did go all out and searched a little place time forgot to partake in these things, have you ever felt like an intruder?

P.S. how do you make a hyperlink out of a part of your sentence? Would injecting html code work?

So much questions, so little time...


Peace,

PotB

I say try ayahuasca at home first, and if you are interested in a ceremony try looking into the prices some places are charging. This might just help you decide very quickly!!

great lecture. Thanks!

" I know some of you went on retreats, is the situation really as bad as this guy says? "

I havent been on any ayahuasca retreats, but I don't think this lecturer was saying the situation is "really bad". He was very eloquent about acknowledging the changes you make to a culture begin simply with your presence, and that the changes can easily become destructive and negative despite the outsiders intentions. If you are concerned and value his opinion you can take the advice he gives at the end of the lecture.

I believe there is a santo dame church in Oregon where you can attend a ceremony. This probably isn't the same as experiencing it in south america in the jungle, but the benefit would be not disrupting an ancient culture.

@ouro
indeed, the point made in the lecture isn't necessarily negative, but it got me thinking about the proverbial melting pot. I always thought that, although it is a difficult and tedious process, this blending of cultures would be beneficial to all earthlings in the end. The point made by the speaker has put this concept in a possible new light for me. The appropriation of cultural elements by the colonist to further it's own culture (my ponderings, not necessarily that of the talk) while slowly squating the source is a perspective I never really connected with my space travels.

I must admit that during the day today I was pondering on the testimonial of the speaker, feeling a bit guilty of my connection to this (through international trade our influence is also felt in those places) when I suddenly realised something. The "sadness" for and subsequent relativation of the said impact expressed by the speaker seems to stem from a rousseau-esque train of thought, as we somehow inflicted change on these places rendering it (a) less "pure" (culture). A train of thought he himself dismisses as erronous as he states that at the end of the trip there is no old wise man, just a mere human.

But yes, his advice at the end is a sound one. Not only for ritualistic settings but as a mindset for all travels into countries with extremely different cultures.

@NotIButWe :
Thanks for the tip but I reside on the other side of the pond.

Is that not the same thing though? Playing tag along with the diame just to experience ayahuasca is the same in principle as it is when it is done with indigenous peoples. If you are not into a pyramid sort of structure that is steeped in religion and biblical references than I dont think the diame is the place for most people to experience ayahuasca. The diame is for the diame. If you are not into the bible or christ than the diame probabily wont be that appealing.

I dont see it as just people disrupting ancient cultures either. I actaully think that that is a viewpoint that most of these cultures find to be seriousily arrogant and birthed out of a level of cultural elitism. It is like the white man who thinks native americans should still hunt with bows and spears.

I dont think we should try to glorify and romanticize other cultures, in some deluded attempt to comodify superfical aspects that we can package and sell to all of these western people who's lives lack any real substance..we can respect these people and stil work with them face to face and learn from them. to TRUELY learn to shut the fuck up and listen and follow in they're footsteps. We have to understand though..these people cant be just sheltered. Do they really need us to protect them from our "disturbances"?

DO we really have the right to assume they dont want some part in the western modality? The whole idea of the noble savage needs to die.

When I meet or hear of people who spend a year, 3 years whatever in the amazon..and come back here to charge people to run ceremonies where they dance around in funny costumes at some retreat in some forest where they cant even pick and identify 2 or 3 medicinal plants I just find it rediculous. You can spend all the time you want in the amazon..but once you come back here, what can you show me? Your just out of your element. That is peoples problem. They are not connected to anything these days other than plastic ideas that dont seem applicable within the moment.

We can and do have a hell of alot to learn from indigenous peoples. Also remember..ALL people are indigenous peoples.

^^This. These are some of the questions that came to mind today after realizing that the speaker, although refuting the noble savage idea in his lecture, was somehow still acting out of this paradigm in a way.

The global village is still in it's infancy. At least we already have a global council of elders, whatever that's worth.

Excellent, impassioned talk about a very tricky issue. The phenomenon he's describing seems to be something like the Heisenberg uncertainty principle - you can't study a thing without changing it, and the closer you try to examine it, the more it changes. Cultural cross-contamination is an inevitability and constant flux an ever-present reality for every society on Earth; but when we intrude searching for the experience of a culture in some (often illusory) historical state, we're unaware of the damage we do to the present and future states of that society, and also ourselves in perpetuating this seeking behaviour.

The fact that Huautla is now a grim psychedelic Disneyland with an economy built upon shilling instant chemical enlightenment to naive gringos is not really surprising.

Also, I don't think he's speaking from any kind of Rousseau paradigm when he bemoans the disruptions wrought by outsiders. The "purity" of these communities is simply the equilibrium of any poverty-ridden place. Throwing a steady stream of easily-duped rich people in the middle of that is eventually going to bring out the worst in the natives, which, as he says, is just basic human nature. If gringos didn't go there with wallets full of cash and heads full of fairytales, the culture likely wouldn't be as perversely commodified and denigrated as it has been.

That there's gonna be interaction is inevitable, the issue is, how to establish tools and structures that facilitate a beneficial interaction both for indigenous cultures as well as for the 'outsiders'?

Here's a post about going to south america for ayahuasca I made, might be relevant:
https://www.dmt-nexus.me...&m=252133#post252133

I think the exile of tibetan budhists has eventually greatly benefitted both western and tibetan culture (if the dalai lama himself says tibetan culture has benefitted from contacts with the west, then who would i be to disagree? and budhism has definately been beneficial to our culture), but 'discovering' a new, unknown tribe will almost everytime lead to the immediate destruction of it because of lack of immunity among it's members for all the virusses and bacteria (and maybe some other stuff as well) we carry with us.
i think the lesson we can learn from this is that globalisation and cultural exchanges will be beneficial for all those cultures that already have adopted some sort of opennes for all that is alien to them, but that it can be extremely harmfull for those who lack this openness.

Movements like santo daime show that cultural exchange has already taken place and has lead to new hybrid culture's. There is no way back to how it was before the europeans came. The only way is forward, towards more exchange and new hybrid's, new ideas, new mutual inspiration. Once you realise, you're not the only one, you can only grow by opening up to others. Not thinking about the rest of the world when you didn't know yet, there was something like the rest of the world, wasn't an act of xenophobia and self-isolation. Not thinking about the rest of the world, once you've come to know it exists is a different thing.