To ‘The Global Alliance’ of ‘Thirteen Indigenous Grandmothers’


Aama Bombo - Tamang - Nepal
Margaret Behan - Arapaho/Cheyenne - Montana, USA
Rita Pitka Blumenstein - Yup’ik - Arctic Circle, USA
Julieta Casimiro - Mazatec - Huautla de Jimenez, Mexico
Maria Alice Campos Freire - Amazonian Rainforest, Brazil
- Mayan - Highlands of Central America/ New Mexico
Tsering Dolma Gyaltong - Tibetan
Beatrice Long Visitor Holy Dance - Oglala Lakota - Black Hills, South Dakota, USA
Rita Long Visitor Holy Dance - Oglala Lakota - Black Hills, South Dakota, USA
Agnes Baker Pilgrim - Takelma Siletz - Grants Pass, Oregon, USA
Mona Polacca - Hopi/Havasupai/Tewa - Arizona
Bernadette Rebienot - Omyene - Gabon, Africa
Clara Shinobu Iura - Amazonian Rainforest, Brazil


Dear Grandmothers,

I have been hearing of your ‘healing’ initiative and wish to support you in some way, and perhaps one way to try to do this is to share the questions re your initiative that come into my mind.

If you are adepts at channelling natural truths, how shall you ply your trade within a society that has become ‘superbly’ skilled at lying to itself, ... so much so that the ‘traffic in lies’ is so thick and toxic as to be near impermeable to the passage of truths? 

You speak of your concerns in similar terms to those that we who lie to each other use;

We are deeply concerned with the unprecedented destruction of our Mother Earth, the contamination of our air, waters and soil, the atrocities of war, the global scourge of poverty, the threat of nuclear weapons and waste, the prevailing culture of materialism, the epidemics which threaten the health of the Earth's peoples, the exploitation of indigenous medicines, and with the destruction of indigenous ways of life.

You speak of ‘cures’ that are ‘prescriptive’, that may come through this “new alliance”, that “comes together to nurture, educate and train our children”.  

The ‘lies’ that we tell ourselves in our western acculturated society, a western acculturation based on lies that has ‘infected’ all strains of ‘indigenous peoples’, some earlier and more deeply than others, but which simple observation suggests, has infected even the bulk of the population of North American native children.

Like a few of my friends, I have spent most of my life trying to understand the nature and origins of our lie-telling, and I can tell you that it does not ‘make friends’ to do so, in our society.  Our society does not want to know about it or to even hear mention of it.  This is in spite of massive good intention at a level that stops short of admitting that we have built lie-telling into the foundations of our culture.

If one does not understand how one is lying to oneself or how much of the foundations of one’s thinking is lie-ridden, how can one open up for the assimilation of truths that you, the grandmothers, are intent on sharing with your grandchildren?

My message is one of support and good will for your initiative. 

It has been my observation and experience that our children’s ears and hearts have been largely closed to the assimilating of truth, because of the superb lying skills that our western acculturation has brought to us, which comes to us through education, politics and business and which permeates our everyday lives.   It is my further impression that this ‘closing down’ of the mind and heart has to be dealt with directly to increase the receptive opening for the entry of natural truths.

The gist of this message, supportive of your initiative, seeks to share with you the findings of myself and a few other co-explorers into the nature of the self-deceit ‘built in’ to the theological-scientific foundations of our western culture.

At the heart of the deceit is the notion of ‘sovereignty’.  This is the belief in ‘local, independently existing entities’ that we purport to have ‘their own behaviours’.  It is a secularized western theological concept and it has also been made foundational in ‘western science’ (the popular science that supports what we would call ‘western scientific thinking’).

In believing in ‘sovereignty’ we tell ourselves a huge lie, ... and that lie is ‘locked in place’ by its ability to alleviate our fear of uncertainty.  The ‘local sovereign nation’ and the ‘local sovereign being’, we say, have their own internal powers of originating dynamical behaviour and are thus ‘fully and solely responsible’ for ‘their own behaviour’.   

From this foundational lie, upon which modern western culture has built its educational, political and business institutions, we get the notion that the sovereign nation and the sovereign individual are fully and solely responsible for their own creative and productive accomplishments.

If our children believe this lie, their ability to assimilate truth is greatly constrained.   This lie is celebrated in the history of science, in the story of Galileo Galilei and his formulation of the principle that all material bodies fall to earth at the same rate irrespective of their weight, provided that they fall IN A VACUUM.   What Galileo removed from this formulation, a general way of formulating scientific thought, was the accommodating backpressure of the dynamical naturespace we share inclusion in.   Whether we are in a crowd dynamic, on the freeway, or negotiating life passage over years and decades, our real-life experience is that the dynamics of the common space we are included in is always actualizing and shaping our behavioural potentials.   Our dynamical behaviour does not really originate fully and solely from within us, and thus we are not really ‘sovereign beings’.  We are included in nature, and without the possibilities inherent in the dynamical commonspace of nature that we are included in, ... our behavioural potentials could not actualize and blossom into shape the way they do.

The same is true of the ‘nation’.  It is a gross lie to say that the dynamical behaviour of a nation is fully and solely the responsibility of that nation.  Without the possibility inherent in the dynamical space the nation is included in, that actualizes and shapes into blossom its behavioural potentials, the nation-behaviours that we see could not possibly come to pass.   This means that it is a gross lie to say that the nation (and/or individual) is fully and solely responsible for its own creative and productive accomplishments.  This means that it is a gross lie to speak of the ‘sovereignty’ of a nation as if it were a ‘natural reality’.  There is no such thing as ‘sovereignty’, either of a nation, a person, an organism or an object.  ‘Sovereignty’, the property of having ‘independent existence’ and the power to internally originate one’s own behaviour, is a gross and impudent lie.  It is a secularized theological concept [1] but it does give those who believe in this lie a (false) sense of security, as if they are in control of things, as if they have the power to determine what is going to happen to them.

Good lie telling, that is told so as to allay fears, is an artform which succeeds most when the lie is of the most impudent and aggressive order; the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes.” – Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

Ask our western-educated children whether we, as nations and/or as individuals are all fully and solely responsible for our own positive creative and productive accomplishments.  They are likely to lie to themselves as we have taught them to lie and say, ‘yes, this is true’.  This is how we can elevate crooks and criminals to the greatest heights of empowerment and influence in our society.

Ask our western educated children whether we, as nations and/or as individuals are all fully and solely responsible for our own negative creative and productive accomplishments.   They are likely to lie to themselves as we have taught them to lie and say, ‘yes, this is true’.   This is how we can declare war on criminals and terrorists, without ever owning up to how we jointly condition the common space we live in, so that it inductively actualizes and shapes the behavioural potentials of crony collectives and selectively suffocates the growth of potentials of others.

Galileo’s way of formulating dynamics was to vacuum back the material entities so that 100% of the originating of the dynamic is invested in the material bodies, the ‘independently existing’ material bodies that have ‘their own behaviour’.   By vacuum-packing objects and organisms in ‘Euclidian space’, Galileo removed the real-world quality of ‘accommodating’ or ‘opening up possibility to’,  that characterizes the dynamical commonspace of our natural experience.  When a crony collective are claiming that they are sovereign beings that exist independently and are fully and solely responsible for their ‘own’ creative and productive accomplishments, the others who we term ‘less performant’, ‘under-achievers’ are sucking vacuum, the absence of possibility that must be present to inductively actualize and shape into blossom one’s behavioural potentials.

Those who are deprived of possibility by the crony monopolizers of the possibility-giving commonspace, become angry and they know it is a lie to say that everyone is fully and solely responsible for their own creative and productive behaviours, but they can’t do anything about it because this lie is built into the very premises of their sovereign nation-state and it has been institutionalized in western education, politics and business.   Each person is held to be a sovereign being, in the manner that each nation is held to be a sovereign nation, and thus deemed to be ‘independently existing’ and capable of its own internal origination of behavioural dynamics.  This lie of ‘sovereignty’ is protected by western law.  Western law protects every individual in the independent pursuit of his own self-interests.

Where did the sovereignty of nation-states come from?   Anybody who has the power of force can create his own sovereign nation state.   In western law, sovereignty was first based on ‘discovery’ of the land, and later changed to ‘possession’ of the land.  If one has the power of force, one can take possession of lands and declare the ‘independent existence of a sovereign nation with its own internally originating behavioural dynamic’, ... a gross and impudent lie that is challenged by some Native Americans who say; ‘Canada and the United States do not really exist, ... they are artefacts of how Europeans fought over how to divide up what they stole’.   The lie is exposed in this statement, but who is listening?  In order to secure the lie, immigrants were promised co-ownership in the possessed-by-force lands in exchange for swearing an oath to promote ‘belief’ in the existence of the sovereign nation, and to bear arms and give their lives if necessary, to defend belief in and perpetuation of the sovereign nation.   The whole basis for the western concept of sovereign nation-states is built on lies and the defence of lies.

Of course, there are natural-world people-communities there which can also describe these regions of Turtle Island known as ‘Canada’ and ‘The United States’, with good people in them, many of whom would put the brotherhood of man in precedence over the western concept of national sovereignty, as in John Lennon’s song ‘Imagine’ that has touched the hearts of many who are tired of nationalist pride and the concept of Darwinist ‘survival of the fittest’ that is bundled in with the sovereigntist lie.

The lie of sovereignty, a secularized theological concept that is built into popular western scientific thinking as well, has been thoroughly institutionalized in our westernized society that now dominates worldwide, in our western education, in our western national politics, in our western medicine, in our western psychology, in our western business.

How shall our children re-assimilate natural truths while swimming in these institutionalized lies?

This is the issue that I am raising with you, that comes together with my heartfelt support for what you are trying to do, in the hope that we may discover some way to lower the ability of cultural lies to block the assimilation of the natural truths that you are seeking to share.   

mitakuye oyasin,

Ted Lumley

Pender Island, B.C.