Welcome to the companion journal to the ultimate science thriller THE GOLDEN SPRINGTIME – a book that opens up the overall context of nature and life. Within the framework of an exciting story that alternates between the Australian Aborigines at the end of the 19th century and the collapse of civilisation and the ecosystem in 2038, areas of reality are revealed that are repressed in our society of today. The journal offers some basic explanations under such headings as “Freedom” or “Evolution“, as well as examples of the repression mechanisms in leading mass media and other sources. However, the overall context is much better understood through the book. On the one hand, this is because the story is designed in such a way that all the important aspects, including their interactions, are easily accessible even without prior scientific knowledge. And on the other hand, THE GOLDEN SPRINGTIME contains the author’s perspective from his extensive experience of living as a hunter-gatherer in nature away from civilisation – and thus the extremely intense and rich perceptual horizon of all the free animals that have enjoyed their self-determined development there for hundreds of millions of years. A sense of this ancient perspective is of paramount importance when it comes to understanding the larger contexts of reality. And only then can the meaning of it all be perceived and a truly clear and very positive world view emerge.
Another, more compact treatment of the theme can be found in the latest non-fiction book by the author Steffen Pichler “THE FREE CROCODILE”. There, the real reasons for the unprecedented permanence of the life form “crocodile” for more than 250 million years are revealed: These lie well provable in a selective adaptation to the laws of nature dealt with in the journal here. The many species of the crocodile form, most of which are not directly descended from each other, have always aligned themselves in the same way via convergence, because it is precisely these characteristics at the transition between water and land that allow them to disturb the free development of other living beings as little as possible – resulting in the highest possible stability for their own existence. This can be demonstrated in all features of anatomy and behaviour without exception. Even in mathematical comparison with the civilisation of today’s man, which is diametrically opposed to the said laws, the connection emerges clearly: While the prey of the crocodile, which has been a stable apex predator for millions of years, usually develops in undisturbed freedom for only a few millionths of its life span (the last few seconds), today’s “farm animals” of the obviously unstable apex predator man vegetate for more than 100 per cent of their life span in a state of complete deprivation of freedom – exactly the opposite of what the fundamental laws of nature so clearly reflected in the crocodile are directed towards. The book is available as an ebook in bookshops. More information and photographs of free saltwater crocodiles by the author are available at: www.saltwatercrocodile.info
Preliminary remark: A cursory glance at the information provided here may lead to the misconception that a realistic enlightenment would call into question the food basis of currently almost eight billion people and thus even their very existence. However, this is not the case. It is true that realistic enlightenment includes the uncomfortable recognition that all agricultural plants and animals bred by interfering with their evolution are the results of an unnatural and thus unsustainable scheme. But it is precisely the fading out and ignoring of this inconvenient fact, i.e. the continued “burying one’s head in the sand”, which would soon cause the livelihood of almost eight billion people to collapse in the course of the escalating intensification of agriculture. After a realistic enlightenment, the rapid dismantling of particularly fragile and harmful intensive forms of agriculture could be started. There would be strong psychological effects through which humanity would quickly and voluntarily adapt all its behaviour, for example, through the renunciation of products from factory farming. Thorough enlightenment about the real context of nature is the only possible way to develop such a willingness.
GET AN ACTIVE PART OF THE FIRST REAL ENLIGHTENMENT PROCESS IN THE HISTORY OF CIVILIZATION: Once you have understood that civilisation is repressing most fundamental natural orders around freedom, free evolution and also the regular consciousness of all animals and that here lies the psycological and physical core cause of all the many destructive escalations of the present time, then you might feel the desire to participate in accelerating the enlightenment process. Please check the section “Get Active” for some suggestions of the Author of THE GOLDEN SPRINGTIME on how to get an active part of the first real enlightenment of civilization without much effort nor any costs: Get Active
+++ News: Interview with the author of THE GOLDEN SPRINGTIME, Steffen Pichler, on the psychological consequences of factory farming +++
“Factory farming is the deadly poison for the spirit of today’s humanity”
According to the thesis of the author of THE GOLDEN SPRINGTIME, Steffen Pichler, the industrial factory farming of the last decades is the main reason for an older collective psychosis to escalate in mankind. Here is where the cause of accumulating mass-consumption, mental flattening and the accelerated destruction of the own livelihoods lies. Due to this it can also not been realised that the Covid-19-pandemic is probably a harbinger of factory farming as a cesspool of epidemics. If it continues, our species would soon be confronted with a complete inability to survive. An interview.
The interview was conducted by Claudia Waigel for ZEIS Publishing
Mr. Pichler, on what do you base your assertion that the current industrial factory farming is the main psychological cause of all escalating problems of mankind today?
Pichler: Other animals have always been of utmost importance for the mental connection of the human mind with the non-human parts of reality. This can be seen concretely, for example, in earlier rock paintings. For more than 40,000 years, other animals were by far the main motif on all continents. These were not only huntable species and hunting scenes, but also dangerous predators, such as bears and lions, and more neutral species, such as eagles and snakes. In addition, human-animal hybrids were often depicted. In the oldest known paintings, made 43,900 years ago in the cave Leang Bulu on Sulawesi, there are figures depicting humans combined with body parts of birds and reptiles. In the present, too, this mental connection point can be seen in various ways. For example, in people in infancy before and until shortly after language development, in the very strong visual focus as soon as they discover a squirrel, for example, or by the clear reference to stuffed animals and later to illustrated animal stories. This is the same on all continents.
How can I imagine the underlying mechanism of this mental link to reality?
Pichler: That is basically quite simple. First of all, imagine that you reformat your brain and then discover reality completely anew. So now all information is completely gone, creating a blank white sheet of paper, and your mind builds up a new worldview based on the information from reality captured by the sense organs alone. Since nothing you now perceive, except other humans, has even a rudimentary resemblance to yourself as far-reaching as other animals, the main mental connection to non-human reality can only fall there. And now you can transfer the mind game beyond the individual to the giant framework of the development of human cognition. Thereby, the most important connection with reality must have also fallen on other animals. This has run over many generations and with all animal ancestors altogether, even over a development history of hundreds of millions of years. A new human being is not born with the white sheet of paper, but large parts of our cognition, behavior and perception already pre-formed. So, the particularly important and central link to reality is not being built anew with each generation again and again, but it lies immovably in the center of our mind. In this sense, the focusing child has not discovered something new, but his cognition recognizes in the squirrel the opportunity for mental connection to reality. One could also interpret this as a very important calibration of the developing mind of the child.
Many people would now object that, for today’s civilization, new mental links to reality have arisen, such as technologies or the knowledge of the larger connections of the universe.
Pichler: That is pure imagination. Knowledge about the universe, for example, plays only a secondary role in the consciousness of most people today, namely because it is mainly theoretical. And the technologies are only tools, for example, for transportation, information transfer and all kinds of facilitations and conveniences. In the deeper sense, no new significant points of connection to reality have emerged with all of that. And again, for emphasis: The formative perception of the other animals as the solid and central connecting point to reality has taken place with our own evolutionary ancestors since brains first existed, thus for several hundred million years. These are fundamental imprints in the very deepest regions of the psyche formed by cognition. Something like this could not possibly be replaced by any subsequent information or self-created technologies. All this is always much shallower than these deepest imprints and thus only superficial, like a very thin film.
So, you mean that the escalation of a psychosis of humanity has arisen because this important point of connection to reality has been moved into the halls of factory farming?
Pichler: I would rather define it in such a way that the point of connection has been poisoned by this to such an extent that it can no longer function. Most of the larger terrestrial vertebrates, other than humans themselves, exist today in forms of intensive factory farming, and every single person knows where the many animal-based foods in the supermarkets come from. It can be shown by empirical studies from Germany that, in surveys, almost 100 percent of the participants say that they basically have a problem with factory farming and that they prefer to repress it. Look for any other empirically proven cognitive problem with a higher quantitative rate. You won’t find anything there, whether it’s environmental issues, climate change, or whatever. And as far as the qualitative depth of the problem in the subconscious is concerned, you can test this further yourself with a little trick by casually interjecting the remark that “factory farming is hell” at an appropriate point of a conversation. The word “hell” has generally established itself as a term for the worst of all. If you carry out the test inconspicuously and take your counterpart by surprise, so to speak, then he or she will almost always signal agreement in some way. At that moment, you are virtually peering into their subconscious and seeing the poison working there. Mankind, thus, subconsciously feels itself to be the originator of a real hell. Your counterpart subconsciously recognizes on this level that this is such a high-grade unnaturalness and an incomparable lifelong cruelty that he himself would not stand even for one single day. And he is, as part of the collective of civilization, an indirect part of creating it. However, the human being as an individual hardly perceives anything of all this consciously, because there are strong repression mechanisms on the collective level.
Has the mental problem basically only arisen with the advent of industrial factory farming? Animal husbandry has existed for several millennia.
Pichler: No, the mental problem basically arose with the beginning of animal husbandry itself and even of agriculture as a whole. The relationship of an earlier hunter-gatherer to other living beings was literally pure and healthy, because the hunted, as it had been in nature for several hundred million years, had their own free life, i.e., self-determined, just like the hunter, and the contact during the hunt on both sides was usually only a tiny fraction of the free lifespan. The most important point of mental connection to the real-world structure and its regularities was thus undisturbed. With the so-called Neolithic Revolution, i.e., the beginning of breeding and lifelong keeping of other living beings a few millennia ago, a radical caesura occurred. Now the human being existed rather suddenly in a relationship with other lifeforms in which they no longer existed and reproduced freely, but were, in fact, his life-long subjected slaves. Thereby that ancient natural order got completely mixed up and confused, to which the cognition of all our hunting and collecting ancestors had adapted at least over nearly 500 million years: as long as vertebrates have existed.
But many today would argue that, if there is something like sin within the relations between man and other living beings, then the killing would be the greatest one, and then the former hunter of other animals also committed it.
Pichler: Yes, this attitude is widespread in civilization, but it is nothing more than an attempt at distraction in the context of the aforementioned repression. One tries to distract from the perversion of the lifelong enslavement of other living beings by focusing on the killing that also takes place in nature. In fact, every organism born dies at some point; this is a central regularity of nature and the basis for the diversity of the ecosystem. But it is also a central regularity that between birth and death in all species, there is, on average, a much larger span of free development of the individual. The short and punctual event of the successful hunting and killing of a free animal for the genuine purpose of the food procurement, or also the potential danger of the corresponding being killed out of the own freedom, are not disturbing factors in this regular structure. It is a mostly particularly fast and surprising natural cause of death at the end of a free existence and exactly that was realized by our ancestors. In nature, freedom is the pivot, while birth and death, on the other hand, are only inevitable peripheral phenomena of life. And, by the way, the killing of an animal enslaved for life and thus completely without chance is something very different compared to the killing of an animal that was absolutely free and mostly had the chance to escape. These are two vastly different things. There are documentations of expressions of earlier hunter-gatherers, who, after first contact with civilization, perceived not only the captivity of other animals but also the act of killing them in captivity as extremely dishonorable and unmanly.
Was there then a collective psychosis from the Neolithic Revolution, long before the emergence of industrial mass animal husbandry?
Pichler: With the so-called Neolithic Revolution, a strong cognitive dissonance arose due to the radical deviation from the regularities of nature that had always been firmly imprinted in cognition. And in order to reduce the unpleasant tensions of this dissonance, artificial worldviews were produced and adopted over millennia with the help of imagination and fantasy, in which the unnaturalness no longer appears as such. These were complex collective processes. A very well-known example, far more than 2,000 years old, is the very first pages of the Old Testament and thus also of the Bible, where it is expressly claimed several times that an almighty God had instructed man to rule over all animals and to subjugate the entire earth. This proposed worldview was the actual recipe for success of the basis of this religion. Later, philosophers invented the alleged exclusive human reason, which in turn was claimed to be the prerequisite for the freedom that was thus also only open to man. So, it was always about exactly the same main goal: to legitimize the enslavement of other living beings, which started with the Neolithic Revolution, by means of artificial reinterpretation of reality in order to reduce the unpleasant tensions of the cognitive dissonance. Those who managed this well were rewarded with encouragement from the audience. The collective acceptance of such artificially created worldviews to reduce tension was, of course, in itself a psychotic mechanism from the outset, which already disconnects the mind quite extensively from reality.
And the artificial concepts of religions and philosophies do not function at all now in the face of the industrial factory farming?
Pichler: For most people, for example in Europe or the USA, such inventions as the command of God and the alleged exclusive reason of man, are still very formative, even if they do not consciously perceive this. But these artificial fantasy stories are no longer sufficient in the face of the extreme escalation of enslavement, and even with as much mental knotting and imagination as possible, no halfway functioning substitute could be concocted. Until the middle of the twentieth century, most “farm animals” ran around in the open air, that is, on farms and pastures, at least during the warm half of the year. Chickens pecked for insects there, cattle grazed, reproduction happened by reasonably normal mating, and so on. Deviations from natural regularities were thus still at a relatively significantly lower level, and the soothing concepts of religion and philosophy were sufficient to reduce the tensions that were mainly subconscious. Today, the vast majority of the planet’s terrestrial vertebrate biomass exists in factory farming. Most of them see no daylight in their lives, no green plant; they are crowded together by the thousands and forcibly artificially inseminated and thus, de facto, raped. In addition, there is the extreme breeding deformation. So-called high-performance cows can hardly move because of their large udders, and the billions of broiler chickens develop such large pectoral muscles in three weeks that they tip over when they stand up. Information about this historically completely unprecedented and boundlessly escalated perversion inevitably seeps through to all receptive people in the formative industrial nations. But it is then always very quickly and powerfully suppressed from the surface of consciousness. So even now, the human being as an individual does not perceive the enormous tension consciously. But it acts all the more strongly in the subconscious and from there it causes the poisoning of the spirit and destroys its ancient point of connection to reality.
But what happens in the people’s minds now? If the old point of connection now no longer functions, then man must have completely disconnected himself from reality.
Pichler: Yes, you can define it that way. The collective mind is now in a kind of idle state. It has practically lost contact with reality and revolves around itself without meaning or goal. The course of events can be compared helpfully with the courses that occur with single individuals in the final phase of severe psychosis. At the beginning of the illness, this would present as a relatively lighter craziness; transferred to the collective process, this would correspond to the religions and philosophies mentioned. Now, at the end, however, the affected person loses any rational connection to reality. He no longer has any guiding framework for orientation, makes only wrong decisions, does not recognize dangers, neglects his food intake and his body care, anesthetizes himself with all kinds of substances and, if he has no one to care for him, perishes from a combination of all this and much more. He is now, simply summarized, totally incapable of survival, although his original mental potential would have been sufficient to cope very well with reality.
So that would mean that practically all of the many confusing environmental and other destructive escalations caused by today’s civilisation are symptoms of this incapability to live, which has arisen due to the severance of contact with reality?
Pichler: Yes, transferred to the collective psychosis of today’s humanity, the physical self-destruction due to the incapability of survival is expressed, among other things, in the rapid destruction of one’s own livelihood through rampant consumerism and through manifold wrong decisions regarding nature exploitation, intensive agriculture and technologies. The consequences include the increasing contamination of soils with fertilizers and toxic pesticides, as well as damage to surface water. Numerous escalations around the parasitic adversaries of humans or the organisms enslaved by them are also part of this process. Among other things, these will foreseeably lead to the inevitable collapse of the monocultures of so-called high-yield crops. Those are, in fact, very weak and genetically impoverished and have to be supported with more and more poisons to stand the parasitic enemies, which cannot function in the long term. It is easy to conclude that in the near future this will result in famines that huminity has never seen before. And in regards of such pathogens that attack humans directly, those will escalate due to massive grow of the biomass of animals in husbandry. Currently, the SARS-CoV-2 virus is likely to be an example. Renowned scientists believe that it first jumped from bats to some form of animal husbandry and then from there to humans. After all, the growth of the biomass of more and more crowded vertebrates must lead to an evolution of pathogens in a time-lapse fashion, so to speak; it’s like a giant pressure cooker. The current problem with SARS-CoV-2 is probably only a relatively harmless harbinger. In last October, for example, it was discovered that another coronavirus, Sads-CoV, which suddenly appeared in pig fattening a few years ago, can reproduce very well in human cell cultures. This virus is 90 percent lethal in young piglets. It is, therefore, an extreme danger obviously created by man within animal husbandry. Just imagine the enormous consequences of a pandemic where there is a high mortality rate among children. That would be a completely different dimension to what is happening now with Covid-19.
So that means that mankind is allowing more and more dangers to arise, but doesn’t even realize it, or doesn’t understand the connections behind the dangers and above that even blocks them out of his mind?
Pichler: Yes, due to the loss of contact with contexts of nature and reality, it is no longer possible to perceive the dangers that we ourselves have conjured up. The examples just mentioned around the coronaviruses show this well. Mankind cannot directly see the connection to animal husbandry, because otherwise the unpleasant object of the repression would come up to the surface of consciousness. Instead, it helplessly searches for alternative causes, which in the case of SARS-CoV-2 can be evil secret services, sloppy laboratories, poisonous snakes or armadillos. This is also why there is so little interest in the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. After it was determined in empirical studies that neither snake nor armadillo could be the final answer, and no loadable indications emerged for the other alternative theses, the collective spirit withdrew. It no longer wants to hear about it, because it knows, so to speak, where it would have to look otherwise.
What further damages result from this repression and removal from reality on a psychological level?
Pichler: Further damage on a psychological level lies in severe losses of the extremely important perception of the beauty and fascination of nature and, thus, of reality. For the purpose of repression, attempts are made to make nature, and thus the entire non-human reality, appear as cruel and primitive as possible, in order to be able to hide one’s own actual extreme cruelty and perversion. Also, by belittling and coddling objects of compensation, such as polar bear cubs in the zoo, attempts are made to make humans look like something especially good and noble, which contrasts with the allegedly cruel reality of nature. These are clear symptoms of a severe psychosis, which you can observe in the media in many ways. Losing the perception of nature, and thus of reality as something beautiful and fascinating, leaves a brutal vacuum. This leads to enormous mental flattenings. And in order to try to fill the painful vacuum, irrepressible urges into all kinds of senseless and boundless consumption have developed, as well as furious flights into artificial substitute realities. There is a disorienting tattering of collective consciousness and intelligence, which is also visible in the mass media. This is a firing drive of all mankind into the complete inability to survive and very soon self-destruction, starting mainly in the industrial nations. The mentioned symptoms will probably already intensify significantly within the next few years and will increasingly look like a collective dumbing down. It is not improbable that mankind at the very end, in the last death struggle, will drag large parts of the higher life on earth with itself into the destructive abyss. Already, a strong acceleration of the destruction of nature and species can be observed.
To return briefly to the individual level, for example to the small children mentioned at the beginning who focus on the squirrel, even if the collective repression works in principle, they would suffer severe mental damage in the further course of their existence as individuals?
Pichler: Of course, that is the case. All parts of the collective process determine the individual; you can’t separate that. Apart from the fact that the overall process destroys the future of today’s children, the loss of the perception of the beauty of nature alone inflicts great spiritual damage on the current individual level. That child, who once focused on the squirrel with pure and great fascination, will slowly but surely learn within the next few years that it was born into a system which creates a completely perverted hell of lifelong enslavement for other animals. Since the conscious realization of the extreme unnaturalness of this is impossible, it must duck under the umbrella of collective repression. It will, thus, grasp nothing about freedom as the central regularity of nature, but instead learn that nature, and thus reality, is cruel and that the squirrel is merely an unconscious triviality. What remains is a relatively tiny worldview, which is completely insane compared to reality, within which no healthy unfolding of the mind can take place. The collective psychosis is, so to speak, imposed on the children of today. Actually, every adult who does nothing against it should somehow be held accountable. Or at least those who have a greater influence on the collective.
In your opinion, are there still chances now to stop or even reverse the fatal overall process?
Pichler: If there are any last chances, they could only lie in a profound and rapid process of enlightenment about the overall context of nature and an equally rapid practical adaptation. That would be such a radical caesura as there has never been in the history of civilization. For a transitional period, it would also be a very painful process, because one’s own perversion would have to be openly admitted and then the whole artificial worldview, with all the self-exaltations of man, would have to be torn down. In regards to the concrete steps, the most harmful core cause of the current escalation, industrialized factory farming, would have to be completely eliminated with immediate effect, but this is only part of it. It would also involve the fast and far-reaching realignments of teaching and science. Such subordinate subjects as mathematics or particle physics could continue as minor subjects, but the animated levels of nature would have to be moved into the center: for example, the regularity of freedom and the laws of free evolution already set forth by Charles Darwin. The many self-lies, for example, the concepts of the alleged exclusive consciousness or exclusive reason of humans, would have to be unmasked in such a way that they can quickly dissolve as completely as possible in the minds of humans. Empirical proof of this was ever found; these were all inventions in the context of the repression. With such a genuine enlightenment, a recovery of the collective spirit would be initiated and the survivability would increase rapidly. However, the question is whether the time would still be sufficient then. The whole thing is like a fully loaded heavy train speeding toward the abyss.
But how could such an enlightenment process be started in concrete terms? In fact, there seems to be a rapid escalation in the other direction at the present time. People’s entire interest is increasingly focused on consumption and shallow entertainment rather than on fundamental questions of reality. With regard to the many escalations in very recent times, one could even get the impression that the symptoms of a collective dumbing down, as you predict it, are already very pronounced at present.
Pichler: I can’t say whether the last chances are still practically feasible. One theoretical way to seize them quickly would probably be for as large a number of influential multipliers as possible to play an active role as boosters, such as journalists, media makers, scientists and other people with corresponding potential. However, as I have seen through my years of attempts to involve them, most of these people either do not have the strength to open themselves up to such a process of enlightenment or they are simply too cowardly. Acknowledging the perversion of civilization also meets with very strong cognitive defensive reactions in them. Moreover, it makes them unpopular in all social and political circles, because the collective demands repression. This collective will is very strong. Even people with previously completely different political and social stances feel like a united family when the deepest foundation of civilization is called into question. So, I understand that in terms of mechanisms, but I don’t want to exonerate the people concerned at all. Anyone in a position to help start a real enlightenment must summon their strength and overcome the cowardice, otherwise he or she leaves not only the directly concerned other animals and the increasingly destroyed nature in the lurch, but also the children of humanity. Currently, mass media is substantially responsible for the active maintenance of the collective repression, not only through omission. Those involved load themselves with heavy guilt.
Thank you for the interview!
(The interview was conducted at in June 2020 for the German journal version of The Golden Springtime)