The Flavour of Derivatives

It is said that the Dali Lama only eats food prepared by an extremely spiritually advanced monk. Does this sound strange? In the West, we live in a culture that prioritizes the material over all else. Even the Divine is portrayed as an adult Santa Claus, bestowing material gifts upon the righteous. If Dali Lama were a Westerner, his food service would be called “catering” and be provided by the wealthiest of the available chefs. Rather, the Dali Lama comes from a culture where the most spiritually advanced person in household (who is usually not the wealthiest) should do the cooking. The idea is, that if the most spiritually advanced person in the household does the cooking, this person can raise the vibrations of the food, allowing higher vibrations enter and nourish the family.

Another old culture, based on a different esoteric value, brought the ancient concept of vibrations of food into modern parlance. Japan, centred on Samurai honour, has produced the most-cited research on the vibrations of water. In the 1990s, Dr. Masaru Emoto exposed water to a series of emotions, which showed changes in the crystalline structure of water, based on what we call vibrations of emotions. Photographs of the water crystals were published in a best-selling book, Messages From Water.

There has been resistance by materialists to the idea, denouncing the concept with “scare quotes”, (as happens when one cannot refute the idea itself!), however, subsequent experiments by others have confirmed what Dr. Emoto first saw. Furthermore, Western biologists have adapted the idea of water as malleable, and are now discussing a fourth phase of water — gels (similar to Jello) — as critical to life. Which brings Western science back, almost to the beginning, with the Dali Lama’s food seasoned by the best of spiritual vibrations!

Please remember the idea of water having a memory, responding in kind to beauty, or foulness, and holding that in its structure until the next influence comes along, as this is directly applicable to the next conversation, about money! Let us re-word the ideas about water in a different way: that water is dialoging with us, the “language” of water being the positioning of its chemical bonds. Further, that the chemical bonds in our bodies recognize the language of water, even if our conscious minds have not. Yes? Let’s extend this: if water speaks through “body language”, then what has mankind’s invention, money, (the invention most closely compared to water), been saying to everything it comes into contact with?

First, let’s define money. To do so, picture a glass of water. Ninety-seven percent of the glass is water from the ocean, and three percent is fresh water. We agree that this glass of water is essentially from the ocean? The three percent fresh water is not enough to impact the salty sea taste of the glass? Alright — doing the same for money — about ninety-seven percent of the money in existence is derivatives; the remaining three percent is the money you and I see, in our pockets, our bank accounts, our charge cards, and our salaries. The two kinds of money are not separate; the derivative money mixes in with the rest, and our salaries, pensions and savings slop right back into derivatives. This means that almost any time we hear someone speaking about money, they are referencing “fresh water” ideas, when actually, in our world today, there is no “fresh water money”, it is all salty.

Is this a photo of lentils and buckwheat, or candied ginger? Most would say the amount of lentils and buckwheat defines this bowl!

So, what is the molecular structure, the body language of derivatives, as compared to the money we are most familiar with? Masaru Emoto felt that the most beautiful crystals were formed from the emotions love, and gratitude. Love and gratitude are probably not the dominant emotions in our derivatives system! Raw Tibicos believes that we are intelligent enough to create a hypothesis about what “conversations” and influences our money is having on our businesses, so let’s see what we can do!

Our discussion, below, is about a single chef, in a single restaurant; this is for ease of discussion. We understand that, actually, these maneuvers are achieved by chain restaurants — which then impact smaller businesses — as we shall see.

Imagine a chef/ owner, of a popular restaurant, named Daddy Fastbucks. Fastbucks’ banker scared him about the cost of beef; the cost can vary by season, and so he proposed using the derivatives market to make the cost of beef more predictable. Our chef entered into an agreement with large banks; sell me beef in one month, at today’s price, and I will pay you 20% of the cost of the beef extra, now, plus 2% next month, if you keep the price of the beef next month the same for me.

The bank then off-loaded this risk, by pre-buying beef at a set price, which was quite easy to do. As we know, farm-support subsidies and purchase agreements even out costs, and Daddy Fastbucks could have done what many other chefs have done, at a lower cost, which is contract with a local farmer. On top of this all, ceteris paribus, inertia stops most price movements.

If readers have the impression that “swaps” such as this are frequently costly and usually unnecessary, then Raw Tibicos has explained it well! In addition, many items are not profitable to treat in this way. In fact, for beef to be treated in this way, we must ignore differences in quality from one farmer to another, and one region with another! Due to these essential limits on the “legitimate” uses of options and swaps, the world has come up with a use for them which appears legitimate, but ends up, really, being a way for taxpayers to participate in this game.

The first step was to come up with a name for the whole bag of options, swaps, futures, and so on, which would sound like market participants were doing something similar to paying an ATM service charge. The new market was called “derivatives”, which was a brilliant choice, reminding those of us who took high school calculus, of days dreaming of things one would rather be doing; and probably reminding those who did not take calculus, of the unpleasant reaction when asking, “How goes Calc?”

Daddy Fastbucks liked hanging out with bankers more than local farmers, and he liked seeing large amounts of money slosh back and forth in and out of his account. First, he hedged one month’s beef bill. Next month, he hedged beef, again, for more. After a small gain, he doubled, trebled, quadrupled his bets, hedging far in excess of what the actual bills were. Some months he gained, some he lost, and before long, his options were either costing — or paying — him as much as the diners in his restaurant. Little cards appeared on each dinner table, inviting patrons to pay for next week’s meal, today, to provide funds for more derivatives trading. It is the money equivalent of keeping live chicks in the kitchen, while thinking that a wet blanket tossed on top of them is anything but a temporary solution to keeping them contained.

It’s all good clean fun, as long as the chicks stay under the wet blanket. Inevitably, hungry and mad, the chicks find their way out, and run amuck in the kitchen, squeaking, tripping staff, defecating on the food, and refusing the be caught and put back. Those who like to bet on derivatives call this a “Black Swan” event, implying that it is as rare as a black swan supposedly is. We who are taxpayers notice that these events happen as frequently as chicks finding the edge of a blanket! Such is the eternal truth that what we see, depends on where we and our wallets stand. However, believe it or not, the chief problem here is not the frequency of these “break through cases”, but the magnitude. Just as our one part of fresh water has been defined by the thirty parts of salt water added to it, so the sheer volume of derivatives allows those same chicks to trip staff and defecate on food not only in our chef’s restaurant, but in effect, in all the restaurants in his region.

“Hold on!” some readers may be saying, “I don’t believe in magic, let’s have a better explanation of how derivatives allow those fowl to foul up other restaurants?” An excellent question, which deserves the best answer Raw Tibicos can give! There are two ways — the material way, and the spiritual way.

To start with the familiar, material consequences, let’s peep into the kitchen of our enterprising-making chef Daddy Fastbucks. When we last looked, he was hedging the future cost of beef. “Hedging” involves making a bet that in a month’s time, the price of beef will be either higher, or lower, than it is now. At first, confident in his ability, our chef placed bets, one or the other, higher or lower. As we all do, he soon learned that life is more complicated, and so he thought to himself, “Why should I not bet on both eventualities, up and down? He doubled his bets, buying two options at the same time, one for a higher price of beef, and the other for a lower price.

“But wait,” interrupt readers, “why would he hedge for lower beef prices? Those only benefit him, as a buyer of beef?”

The answer to this lies in the concept of monetization, which gets presented as something desirable, but which actually means that the expected profits for betting on an activity are greater than the money to be made by doing it. We are familiar with this with horses, where raising and training horses is generally a loss-making activity, but betting on horse races is wildly profitable for those who hold the books. Thus we come to the first cost that other restaurants experience: now that our chef has monetized his food service, his main income is from betting on price movements. However, he needs the underlying asset; his restaurant, in order to have something to bet on. Exactly as betting on horse racing, requires the loss-making business of raising horses!

This means that Daddy Fastbuck’s fellow chefs are competing with a subsidized rival. In the long run, Daddy Fastbuck’s customers will leave him, tired of old, dirty furniture, out-dated menus, and shoddy chefmanship. Unfortunately for his rivals, we are living in the present, and customers are noticing that our chef has much lower prices, while the problems are not yet apparent. This leads to a further problem for everyone else. Established chefs are losing custom to the options-subsidized house, while new chefs, looking at the market, are quick to learn that the road to success is to sell cheap food, subsidized by options trading. What had been one problematic competitor now multiplies into a tsunami. Daddy Fastbucks has used the energy of money to change the restaurant market, without the consent of others involved. In fact, other established chefs, in their kitchens minding their own foods, may not even realize what has changed; only that things “aren’t right”.

Meanwhile, in the original kitchen, Daddy Fastbucks has had a series of months with no price movements, which means that both of his bets — the one betting that prices rise, and the other side, that prices would fall — both lost money. Always enterprising, he discovers that he can cause market prices for beef to rise or fall, by issuing wash trades; which means that our chef is both the buyer and the seller on the same bet. For him, the trades cancel each other, but they have the effect of sending a false signal to other buyers and sellers, especially computerized ones. To raise prices, he does a wash sale at a slightly higher price than the current market. To lower prices, he does a wash trade at a slightly lower price than the market, and repeats until he has the result he needs.

Meanwhile, remember the copycat restaurants, who also monetized? Quick learners, all of them, they are now betting high, betting low, and using wash trades to make the bets into certs. Our food-centred chefs, who had been facing the problem of subsidized competitors, now face a new problem. The very concept of money, on which they rely, has become corrupted. For money to be useful it must be a reliable measure of value, (usually labour value), and it must also serve those who save as a store of value. In a world where the derivatives market is estimated at $1.2+ quadrillion 1 — about thirty times the income of the whole world — there is no question that the world menu is being set by speculators, not diners or chefs. All of mankind’s combined income is not even the tip we leave at a restaurant, compared to the derivatives cheque.

To put this into perspective, imagine a household of four, mother, father and two adorable children, where one of the parents is an alcoholic. In this household, fifteen dollars go to buy hooch, and one dollar, total, is spent on housing, shoes, food, utilities, and fun. We can imagine that the only salesman making house calls to this home is the liquor merchant. Further, after a few decades of this spending, when the police or doctor are called in, who has been paying for the new cop car, the doctor’s stethoscope, the annual holiday dinners, the new stadium? Modern life requires us to pay attention to the source of our money! Is not every solution, to all issues, a shot of the hair of the dog that bit us? This is why so few people have heard about the derivatives side of money; for all who are “in the know”, there is simply too much money there, to risk talking about it!

Remember all those cards on the table, for the diners? The pre-paid meals all went into the derivatives market, and the diners who pre-paid meals may or may not ever get what they paid for. In the world of derivatives, the actual meals are not as important as the process of setting up the pre-pay, putting the pre-paid money into the derivatives market, accounting for it, agonizing over the diner who wants a refund, re-speculating with the money diners left in the market, looking for more sources of money to bet with, and finally, looking for new physical things, like beef, that can be treated in the same way, and so on. Each of those activities — called monetization — takes effort away from training new waiters and chefs, replacing worn-out chairs and tables, checking the quality of the ingredients, and so forth. If only one chef does it, it’s a personal mistake. When all the chefs participate, it’s a slow-moving economic disaster. Monetization doesn’t translate into knowledge of how to grow, store and prepare excellent food, and once that knowledge is gone, money cannot buy back that which no longer exists.

Monetization, therefore causes a decline in the knowledge base of civilization, not only by rewarding Lady Luck over Knowledge, but also by setting up a hunger that can never be satiated. When we eat a fine meal, receive and give a hug from a friend, sip coffee while we enjoy a fine view, these are finite pleasures. Everyone reading this is incorporate, living in a body, present here at this minute, which means that we are bounded by the material world. We can understand the concept of “goodness”, but to really feel it, to be filled by goodness, we must experience the kindness of a particular person, at one time and place. Here lies the danger for mankind in non-tangible financial instruments. We buy one swap, we buy a million options, and it is never enough, it is no different than a restaurant where one enters hungry and is never allowed to do more than sniff the aroma of food. This is why our monetized money is thirty parts salt water; generations of traders and CFOs chasing mirages, and never finding satiation. Only when we pull the money out of the derivatives market and use it to purchase goods in the material world, does it become satisfying — but at that point, by definition, it is no longer in the derivatives market.

We have discussed the impact of money on the physical world, which is to say, that much as house plants die when fed salt water, the wrong kind of financial system, alone, can kill prosperous businesses. As with water, there is also a spiritual component to our choice of financial system. People are not used to thinking about how systems of finance can dictate moral values; however, as we grow and mature as a civilization, there is no reason not to!

Previously, we mentioned the new chefs entering the market have been psychologically changed by the flow of money into derivatives. Looking a little closer, we see that there is more going on than simply changed business plans. Speculation is attractive, as it needs no knowledge base, just a willingness to play. In most speculation games, any sub-normal person can speculate, especially when risks are borne by taxpayer. The speculator looks like a genius during an up market, and a victim when things turn down, but in this system, never appears in his real identity as a gambling addict who impacts the world around him as surely as any other addict.

When over ninety percent of all the world’s money is drawn out of the productive economy, into what can only be called speculative gambling, it creates mis-aligned values. Some months Daddy Fastbucks, and all his imitators, has far more cash than anyone else, and lavishes it on whatever strikes his eye first; other months he cannot pay his bills. Meanwhile, his kitchen staff are working at low wages to create meals that delight both the eye and the tongue. This is the reason for uncomfortable situation of both inflation and deflation at the same time, which we have all experienced, without knowing the reason why. More than that, it creates a mismatch between the qualities we need in order to live in harmony with each other — trustworthiness, responsibility, hard work, honesty, willingness to help — and what is rewarded. On the one hand, Daddy Fastbucks has no financial incentive to benefit his employees, customers and community, as his income is divorced from all those. On the other hand, his competitors, restaurants who make great food at a reasonable prices, are punished. It is said that goodness is its own reward, but how confident do we feel about the continued kindness of our neighbours and family, in a system where, by design, only those who gamble, and are lucky, are rewarded? Even worse, once the spiritual value of bottomless hunger is engraved into our financial system, how do we blame our politicians for subsidizing, supporting, and bailing-out ninety-seven percent of the monetary system, when it springs a leak? No politician, running in an honest election, ever won by that margin, so can we blame them for continuing a system which has such an overwhelming dollar vote?

Discussions about problems and solutions tend to blame farmers, consumers, food processors, when in reality, the source of discomfort may be our particular energy of money. The philosophy of materialism has degraded mankind to the status of a lump of clay, but thanks to the thoughts of curious souls, we have a wider menu to chose from. Raw Tibicos would like to know; what happens in people’s lives, when we express love and gratitude to anything containing water, before we consume it? If nothing happens, we are no worse off than we were before. If we feel better, than what fascinating vistas open before us? For suddenly, we have moved from lumps of clay, into important souls, who can change the world through expressing love and gratitude. Perhaps, if we are powerful enough to change the crystalline structure of water, are we not also strong enough to change the energy of our own creation, money, into a form that honours human values?

Love and gratitude, horse style!

1 Derivatives are estimated at thirty times all the other money in the world, as mentioned earlier, but only fifteen times world income. The difference is the velocity of money: let’s say Daddy Fastbucks made $250,000 gross from his restaurant last year, but $200,000 of that was paid to suppliers, staff, who then paid it for their own rent, utilities, etc. This means that the same dollars show up in many accounts during the course of a year; this is called velocity.


The New Race to Zero: Let’s Be Democratic

A quick overview of what is being enacted on our behalf, the “Build Back Better” / “Race to Zero Emissions” plan. Is everything proposed the best possible solution, or are there some gaps? Let’s be a part of the discussion . . . starting here . . .

Further reading:


Weight Loss, Banking and the Illusion of Simplicity

Have we all heard the theory, that weight loss is a simple formula? Eat less, exercise more, and weight loss happens? Those of us who have tested this simple theory know from long personal experience, that this theory does not fit the facts! Yet, it keeps being repeated as if it is “proved by science”, rather than a theory that doesn’t fit reality. We like to think that we are ruled by science, but the truth of that statement depends on what one’s definition of “science” is (and whether one has tried to diet!) Does Science mean that which:

  • a) can be modelled by computer models,
  • b) supports corporate profits, or
  • c) is supported by direct observation of the real world?

Those readers with experience in the sciences will know already that the three goals, above, are incompatible. Could a world where a) and c), computer models and direct observation, are compatible exist? Whereas for b) corporate profits, to be compatible with science, would require a great deal of disappointment and restraint on the part of corporations. Please, do email me, if anyone knows of a modern corporation putting science ahead of profits?

Computer models, and corporate profits, are mathematically-based, which usually implies a constant relationship between two variables. In real world observations, the third choice, direct observation, would suggest that most phenomenon have a balancing point — a bit like a black hole from the point of view of one who wants change — into which the efforts of many, many variables are sucked to oblivion — until suddenly, effortlessly, reality moves to a new balancing point. Shall we call this the“Stasis-tipping-point framework” philosophy of science, which is a tremendously inelegant phrase, and Raw Tibicos apologizes for using it, when Aesop explained it much better:

A Lion lay asleep in the forest, his great head resting on his paws. A timid little Mouse came across him unexpectedly, and in her fright and haste to get away, ran across the Lion’s nose. Roused from his nap, the Lion laid his huge paw angrily on the tiny creature to kill her.

“Spare me!” begged the poor Mouse. “Please let me go and someday I will surely repay you.”

The Lion was much amused to think that a Mouse could ever help him. But he was generous and finally let the Mouse go.

Some days later, while stalking his prey in the forest, the Lion was caught in the toils of a hunter’s net. Unable to free himself, he filled the forest with is angry roaring. The Mouse knew the voice and quickly found the Lion struggling in the net. Running to one of the great ropes that bound him, she gnawed it until it parted, and soon the Lion was free.

“You laughed when I said I would repay you,” said the Mouse. “Now you can see that even a Mouse can help a Lion.”

From the Library of Congress, The Aesop for Children:
The Lion and the Mouse

As with all fables this one has levels of meaning. The Library of Congress’ conclusion trivializes: “a kindness is never wasted”. If only that were true! Let’s re-phrase this into three layers, corresponding to the three layers of human meaning: spirit, soul, and body. The spirit-level meaning of this fable is that generosity has children. The soul-level meaning is of the essential brotherhood of all creatures; while the physical level teaches that at the right time, only the smallest breath is needed to make massive change. This last meaning is the one for today’s post . . . “the smallest molecule might make all the difference”!

Speaking of lions, some have noticed that men are bigger than women, with more muscle mass, thicker bones, and the advantage that testosterone aids in faster wound healing. Nature seems to have compensated women with the ability to add armour, in the form of added flesh. In a woman, portable flesh armour can happen when she feels unsafe in a verbally or physically abusive situation, and also in response to modern threats, when her body is threatened with chemical additives, with electrosmog, non-ionizing radiation, or other bodily “insults”. Men may build fleshy armour — however, to a lesser extent — weight loss for men tends to be closer to the exercise-food model. The modern level of hormone disruption in the environment may be putting men on an equal footing with women, in this regard. Our modern comforts are not as benign as those who profit from them suggest!

Weight-gain, especially for women, is complex, and may come from a mouse-sized bodily insult, or a combination of them. Our relationship with food is one such source of possible insult — not in the simplistic sense of counting calories, but in the molecular structure of the food we eat. For centuries, a little extra weight has been a sign of wealth and status, so it is not too surprising that the plants which cause extra padding have never been subjected to rigorous interrogation. Botanists divide plants in many ways; one of the more basic divisions is between monocotyledons and dicotyledons, or, for everyday, “monocots” and “dicots”. There is a tremendous amount of excellent information available on the visual differences between these members of Plant World. Less discussed are the interactions between humans, monocots and dicots. One might think our relationship with these plants would be the first item of discussion, ahead of what they look like? Such has not been the case, but we can remedy that.

Monocots have the rep of being less genetically stable, and therefore respond in a more gratifying way to mankind’s efforts to breed them. The seeds are generally richer in starch than those of dicots. The prevalent starch in most monocots is fructans — like its counterpart galactins — is indigestible to all people without the aid of our intestinal biome. Common monocot foods are a set of plants which in addition to breeding, has ease of storage, transportation and taxability, which pleases proponents of one world government, too. Additionally, it is also a list of foods that many modern people have found to be problematic as food: wheat, rye, barley, corn, garlic, onions, rice, asparagus, sugarcane, palm, oats, teff, millet, sorghum. One notices that these plants have been charged with a variety of misdeeds, the underlying cause of which may actually be starchy fructans.

  • Digestibility of fructans depends entirely on one’s own personal microbial helpers. Addition of glyphosate, a known killer of micro-beings, may have tipped the scale on these foods.
  • Modern breeding, focused on commercial characteristics, may have tipped the starchy properties from food to non.
  • History, (as they say), is written by governments and corporations, not the diners, perhaps these foods were never as good for us as others?

As mentioned before, the alternative to monocots, are dicots. Dicots tend to have less starch, more lipids — which transport the fat soluble vitamins A, D,E and K, and are the building blocks of the structure and function of cells — and protein. For some dicot plants that are commonly eaten, think: lentils, chickpeas, beans, broccoli, soy, cabbage, brussels sprouts, buckwheat, rhubarb, quinoa, Amaranth and cassava. The starch in dicots tends to be galactans. Galactans, like fructans, cannot be digested by humans, but must be digested by the biome in our intestines. This makes sense, as the body doesn’t directly use carbohydrates of any kind; we use lipids, glucose, and proteins.

Superficially the fructan and galactan carbohydrates are the same — however, like money being divided into debt and equity — there are real differences:

* Several fructose units bonded* Several galactose units bonded
* Absorbed by passive transport across a membrane requiring the aid of a protein* absorbed by active transport across a cell membrane, requires expenditure of energy
* Converted by the liver to glucose* Galactose is used by the brain as food
comparison of fructans and galactans

The last fact is quite important — fructose is only converted by the liver — too much fructose burdens the liver and can cause a cascade of problems for the body. Could we finally have an explanation for why a diet high in grains — but not root vegetables and other carbohydrates — causes malaise and often weight gain? What other bodily problems are caused by overburdening the liver? Is it the difference in the starches, or the difference in the bacteria that digest them for us? We do not, at present, know. We even do not know if men and women digest these differently.

In digestion — as we tend to avoid the foods that cause distress — the result is low-level mis-function. We tend to see the growth of water-based flesh on the outer person, along with a collection of minor body complaints. The reason many feel better, initially, on a keto diet (or any other of the high-protein and fat diets) is that keto avoids many of the starchy monocots. As the digestion’s memory of fructans fades, the initial keto glow also fades. Our bodies need glucose for the brain and every-day cell work. Too much protein in the diet is disruptive, leading to dehydration, nausea, irritability, headaches, unusual tiredness, and perhaps increased propensity to aggression!

Glucose is the food of the brain, the molecule that powers our bodies, and yet, fructose makes up the majority of our diets. Fructose burdens our livers, but tastes much sweeter on our tongues. Nature often packages both glucose and fructose in her fruits; the fructose to keep us coming back, and the glucose to keep us healthy enough to spread the fruits’ seeds. The dilute doses of fructose in fruit, or other natural sources, is easy for the liver to cope with!

Chemists for large corporations have learned to harness the seductiveness of fructose for their food products, isolating and concentrating fructose. Do fructans — which are, after all, fructose hooked together — act in the same way, sweeter to the tongue than other starches, but havoc on the liver and other down-stream processes? Why are not the foods rich in galactans; beans, squashes, chickpeas, potatoes, lentils and buckwheat (all used in Raw Tibicos products), also major world commodities, traded in the same way that wheat and corn are? This last question creates another, more interesting question: given that the patterns of behaviour in eating high fructose/ fructan foods are the same as our most common financial structure, is there a connection? Which came first? Debt and monocots have been twinned in the history of cities for as long as we have records, back to settlements over five thousand years ago.

The idea that “calories are calories” might be called a measurement error, in that when a scientist burns food to find its energy component — perhaps assuming equal dryness of the foods — the energy released looks much the same. To the human body, a calorie from butternut squash soup functions differently than a calorie from a frosted doughnut. The same error of measurement has crept into our economy! GDP/ GNP measures (traditionally male) work, based on activity. Two fundamental errors are thus created, and the best example of both, is some road work that Raw Tibicos used to drive by, on a major US highway. In the dozen years of passing this, Raw Tibicos would frequently see teams of twenty or thirty people, of whom only one was working.

  • First measurement error: the nineteen or more people standing around are contributing to GNP more than the one working — meaning that actively shirking work counts toward GNP as much as actual work — and
  • Second measurement error: doing the same task over and over again — tearing up the side of the highway, reshaping it, then tearing it up again, shaping it, and tearing it up again, and building it again — counts in GNP as three or more highways — even though the end result is one. In other words, there is no category for “destruction of value”

Most of us have seen these principals in action in our own lives — perhaps without realizing that what seems a waste — to a trained economist counts as progress? The reason for this, is that the definition of “free market” has evolved in a way that only trained professionals can explain. For political science professionals, policy-makers and such, the definition of “free market” is an economy dominated by debt. This may be different than most people’s definition, so let’s look at some examples.

For much of the twentieth century, the world was dominated by two different financing systems — the debt-based system, in the free world — and the equity-based system, in communist countries — perhaps, “Alex” and “Sasha”. Both are chefs, and wish to open restaurants. Alex must go to a bank, and borrow money, which he repays with interest. Sasha has no need to borrow, he must get government permissions. In the first, restaurant ownership is rationed by Alex’s financial standing, or the finances of his family; in the second, restaurant ownership is rationed by government connections of Sasha or his family. So far, both seem equal?

Sasha’s monetary system = Equity — money given by investors
Alex’s monetary system = Debt — money given by lenders
two types of money for business formation

In the debt versus equity debate, Raw Tibicos is not a participant. Raw Tibicos feels that following one’s own path of spiritual growth should be prioritized. For Raw Tibicos, either system might hinder personal growth, or both might allow it, depending on the priorities of those in charge. In today’s world, this refusal to take sides is controversial; please do stay with this, and read on, there might be something later on that readers agree with!

Mankind is always thinking that the grass on the other side of the fence is greener. We are living through a global do-si-do, where Cold War enemies are swapping dance roles; communists issue debt, and the free world demands government support. If we watch and see where our global dance partner has already been, hopefully when we reach the same place, we can caper better than he.

Equity (Sasha, soon to be Alex) = If Sasha gets sick — say pneumonia, a broken leg, pregnancy, some temporary illness — then the investors who contributed money to the restaurant might allow the chef recover, if he has the connections or track record. Regardless, he does not lose his home.
Debt (Alex, soon to be Sasha) = If Alex, in a debt system, gets the same affliction, the debt payments are still due. Frequently the lender benefits by throwing Alex out of a job, and therefore does so, before he has recovered
comparison of life’s setbacks in equity and debt systems


Debt (Free Market)Equity (Communism)
* Interest payments make the actual price 50-200% higher* The actual price is the visible price – no ongoing finance costs
* Risk of the unexpected is only on the borrower (worker)* Risk of unexpected events is shared among many
selected summary of debt versus equity from chef’s point of view

Warning — anyone who may become pregnant or have any other temporary indispositions or life set-backs should approach DEBT with caution!

Does this mean that Raw Tibicos supports the recent WEF plan, “You will own nothing and be happy”? Absolutely not. Communism, and the Free World, have both been fatally flawed by the kind of measurement error described above. In fact, if an artist painted a picture of a monoculture field of wheat, rice or corn — with a home on one side, destroyed, the family scattered and unhappy — on the other side, layers of physically unhealthy policy-makers unable to help — this picture could be applied to both systems. The tragedy in all cases is the idea that The Only Possible Change is to Stand where Our Dance Partner Previously Stood.

The real world can be complex and confusing. We have all had that eureka moment where something that previously seemed incomprehensible suddenly made sense. For Raw Tibicos, reading about monocots and dicots was that moment when the mouse released us from the net, explaining why the mixture of squashes, root vegetables, plants, and fermented honey, brown sugar and juice that we have developed, works so well to support health and happiness.

As a species, we have the tendency to under-react: until we over-react! The fructans in grains cause us to bloat and ache, so we eschew all carbohydrates. Debt — that “bad boy” of the financial world, which – like fructose – a little bit wakes us up and makes us happy — when tasted to excess causes the type of communist revolution which eschews all innovation. We are all adults! Can we self-master to touch our tongues to the sweetness, without wallowing in excess? Often, naming a problem is the biggest step toward solving it. Monocots and dicots, debt and equity, gluttony and moderation, we have now named it, thought about the measurement mistakes, and recognized the one unconscious pattern that led to a place we would rather not be. We can draw courage from the ancient story of the Mouse who saved a Lion, knowing that we — none of us — need to be perfect. Could it be that we only need to be generous and use self-mastery toward some of our momentary temptations, in order to move towards a healthier, wealthier, and more spiritually satisfying world?

As always, please do email with your personal results and observations. Do say whether your comments can be posted, and if so, how you would like to be identified!


Food, Philosophy and Finance Begin Here

When was the last time we found ourselves discussing the connections between finance, food, and spirituality? There is so much to say, and the concepts involved have such wide-ranging impact, that perhaps they should be on every secondary school’s curriculum. One cannot imagine how such a primary subject got missed; which is why this topic will cover more than one post. Let’s not allow another moment to escape without beginning this discussion!

The philosophy of our modern diet, and our modern finance began with religion in the dark ages. Most of today’s world was born and raised in monotheistic systems that came to dominance after the agricultural and iron age revolutions, solidifying about one to two thousand years ago, depending on region. In the West, Christianity was by-and-large imposed from the top down, imposing a theology of One God over a landscape that had harboured gods and goddesses – who represented both human failings and divine help, divinities tied to one particular place, minor spirits who helped with one aspect of life, helpful totems associated with each tribe, and spirits of everyday items, trees, rocks, hills, herbs – in a word, polytheism. In ancient times, Rome’s founding was associated with the wolf who nursed Romulus and Remus – the snake was associated with wisdom and healing – Irish tribes were said to each have their own totem tree – the Netherlands is named after its own goddess of place, Helle (Hol-land); not to mention the divinities who gave us the days of the week, and also represented movements of the sun, moon and visible planets.

Plato’s writings could be said to have laid the foundations for monotheism by popularizing the concept of one perfect, abstract archetype that lies behind each type of material object. Behind every cat, lies an abstract “cat”, which contains all the physical cats – behind every meal, lies an abstract “meal” that epitomizes all the meals – and so on. These writings and the traditions they came from, were lost to early Europe for a time, but preserved in the Middle East, and thus were part of the cultural landscape as both books of the Bible were written.

Those who have dipped into Icelandic Sagas, particularly the work of Snorri Sturluson, will have read about the discussion in Iceland, circa the year 1000, about whether people should follow the Norse tradition of polytheism, or adopt Christianity. This is how we know that for kings, Christianity had one siren virtue; Divine Right. Divine Right is the belief that God has chosen our parents in order to place us in the sphere of life in which He wants us. In other words, kings are made by God; any disobedience to the royal will is a sin against God and the proper order as determined by absolute authority. It is a very Calvinist notion – far more punitive than the idea of karma, where those born into misery must have sinned in previous lives. With karma the door is open for improvement in this life – with divine right, one man is locked in place at the top – and the rest are frozen in an immutable hierarchy below. The difference, in fact, relates to whether philosophy holds “the one” or “the many” as the basis of correct thinking. Calvinism and the Divine Right of Kings have only one narrative; karma is a choose-your-own-adventure. . .

According to the old testament, “the many” are closer to our instincts as humans; the Bible itself describes the difficulties in maintaining monotheism. A glance at today’s Christianity shows many polytheistic elements: the Trinity, Mother Mary, Saints, places such as Lourdes, as well as the more humble practice of exorcism. Monarchies have mostly been superseded by non-hereditary forms of government, but the concept of divine right in politics continues – modern government is quite intolerant of challenges to its authority. Extending the analogy, many readers will notice the similarity in structure between divine right of kings and the central bank system of finance and currency that each country has today! Try paying for your meal with wampum, cowrie shells, or salt, all of which were once considered valid currency – established in common law, one might say – unlike challenging the government, so secure are central banks that the most probably reaction will be laughter!

The most famous proponent of the divine right of kings was Thomas Hobbes. Hobbes’ opinions have frequently been attributed to his premature birth due to his mother’s fear at the news of the Spanish Armada approaching England – in itself, a very Calvinist explanation for a remarkable work of either wisdom, or propaganda – depending on one’s beliefs. Hobbes most famous work, Leviathan, is celebrated for his analogy of government as a human body – the king is the head, and each hierarchal hereditary group has its immutable place in the “body politic”, held in place by natural law, as our bones, organs and muscles are held in one spot by our functioning systems. Many will have heard the most famous quote from the Leviathan, where Hobbes calls life without a monarch, “nasty, brutish and short”.

Hobbes’ Leviathan is a classic example of how our desires mold our beliefs! Thinkers before this era recognized the heart and the gut, (and a lower organ), together with the head, as alternate sources of behaviour. Modern science supports the earlier view – the gut has been found to have its own complex nervous system – our hearts are another source of decision-making, controlling some hormones and body functions – and perhaps even Hobbes didn’t believe that our heads always ruled all of our lower organs! Thomas Hobbes was tutor to Charles, Prince of Wales during the period of the English Civil war, which is to say that Thomas Hobbes had a personal financial incentive to write as he did, as did the many who quoted his work, so perhaps we shouldn’t assume that he was completely behind all that he wrote.

Interestingly, at about the time that Hobbes was proposing government as a body politic, food in the western world was changing. Previously, food in the Christian world was in line with the rest of the world: each bite was supposed to contain all of the four flavours – sweet, savoury, salty and sour. Think of a mincemeat pie; one of the few survivors of the change in philosophy from a polytheistic (many) to a monotheistic (one) cuisine. The new style was invented in France – also the origin of the ultimate expression of the divine right of kings – L’état, c’est moi – and involved a single flavour – a breast of turkey, for example – with a sauce of thickened turkey juice, to intensify the turkey flavour.

Normally, Raw Tibicos is in favour of culinary diversity, however, in hindsight, one can notice three unfortunate results of the switch to monotheistic cuisine.
First: the unitary flavours tend to make us overeat. We fill up on the savoury, but yearn to overeat as our sweet and sour flavours have not been satisfied!
Second: the unitary flavour concept led to the idea of “purity” in food, which has lead us to nutritional nightmares such as white sugar and white, bleached flour.
Third: monotheism in food has led to the notion that getting almost all our calories from only wheat, beef, and tomatoes is virtuous – in other words – only one starch, only one meat, and only one veg!
Never challenge the king’s rule, and never challenge the supremacy of wheat, beef, tomatoes, in many, many forms.

Over the past few decades, in the Christian world, the people most likely to say, L’état, c’est moi, have been not monarchs, but central bankers. When younger, Raw Tibicos spent a few years in the World of New York Banks. At that time, the elder bankers were – without exception – while wearing bespoke suits, hand-tailored shoes, handing around cigars, snorting white, hopping in taxis to go to surf ’n’ turf meals – they were smiling while saying that North America was going to become a service economy. Being a rather literal child, Raw Tibicos couldn’t help imagining how happy these bankers would be in a pure service economy — nothing but services — getting pat downs and foot massages as compensation for being naked and homeless in a New York winter – smoking and snorting – what? – another person’s breath, provided as a service? Being carried around by two stout (naked) service providers, to a lovely dinner of one’s own saliva – or perhaps, in a service economy – someone else’s?

Joking aside, talk of becoming a service economy was never about reality – it was an expression of hierarchy – the kind of hierarchy Hobbes, the king’s tutor, understood. Banks themselves are the epitome of a service industry. At this time, Raw Tibicos was interested in politics, rather than banking, and spent may hours chatting with the bank’s chief lobbyist. We may have discussed questions such as: if one buys a politician, the politician who is bought – isn’t he also part of a service economy? His service is pleasing campaign donors? Like Hobbes, our beliefs follow our desires. One of the most basic desires of mankind, is to be surrounded by “people like us”. From a self-referential, mirror-gazing perspective, one can understand that policy-makers (who are of the service economy) might think that increasing the number of “people like them”, is the ultimate good, and those who do so are benefactors. That’s logic!

What Plato has to say about politicians verges on rude, so we will pass him by. Thomas Hobbes was a monarchist, of course, and would not hesitate to tell us that rule by the service economy, for the purpose of expanding the service economy, would be like having a body politic composed of only hands. Hands are the service sector of the physical body. Having fiscal policies that benefit only hands, brings new meaning to the expression, “he’s all hands,” doesn’t it? Amazing how the rudeness creeps back in, isn’t it?

In a monotheistic world one function is more important and rules over the others. For Hobbes it was the monarch, the head. In the modern world we feel democratic by making a lower part of the body supreme – the hands. Yet, whether the head or the hands rule, it is still rule of the one!

Yet, this all relates back to food. Both Plato, and Hobbes, and in fact, all pre-modern philosophers lived in a culinary world where all food was local, seasonal and organic, and in all cases, white flour would have been an expensive delicacy, and sugar almost non-existent. Plato travelled from Athens to Italy and Egypt, and ended up summarizing his archetypal ideal meal as bread, wine, figs, cheese and honey, along with other fruits and perhaps beer – but absolutely never large servings of meat. History has not recorded Thomas Hobbes food preferences – all we have is one Dad joke – probably apocryphal:
Q: What was Hobbes favourite healthy drink?
A: A shot of cod liver oil (“nasty, brutish and short”)
History has also remained silent on the bacterial contents of pre-modern philosopher’s guts. We can find a proxy, though. Recent research with the Hadza – a hunting-gathering tribe still following traditional food ways – has shown some incredibly interesting facts:
Overall diversity of bacteria was much greater with the Hadza than modern populations,
The composition of the bacteria changed seasonally, as food changed,
Bacteria associated with illness in the modern world, Treponema, were not only more prevalent among these hunter-gatherers, but the autoimmune diseases we associate with these bacteria in modern populations do not appear in the Hadza,
Bacteria differed in men and women, reflecting a different proportion of hunting, versus gathered foods eaten by men and women. Perhaps beauty is more than skin deep – perhaps it is gut-biome deep?
Our two featured philosophers were separated by almost two millennia, but their gut biomes – in fact, the guts of every single person before modern n food – would have been closer to the Hadza than to ours. All our ancestors gut biomes would have been seasonal, location-based, and complex – a polytheistic gut biome, in effect – or, in body politic terms – it would have had all its limbs, organs, functions, with competing centres of decision-making power. Modern gut biomes are hands only!

Hobbes could plead that the head should be paramount over all the other centres of bodily power – we who live in a centralized, simplified, sterile world must balance our bodies and diets by seizing the other end of the analogy. For us, health, prosperity and happiness of a polity, a body, or a meal depend on overlapping power structures, overlapping tastes and textures, complementary dishes and beverages, independent decisions by heart, mind, soul, gut, government, business, labour, service – independent yet with a common goal of health, wealth, happiness. Hobbes lived in a world of always changing diverse gut bacteria, diverse dialects, customs and foods, which change as one travels even a few miles away; and a wide range of currencies available in each market, not only bi- and tri-metalism, but English, Spanish, French coins of different (and changing) values, not to mention frequent barter and promissory notes. He sought to balance this with what we today call totalitarianism; (although it is important to note that the ability of the monarch, at this time, to impose his will often did not extend beyond his court). In contrast, today we have thin, fragile, monoculture biomes, year-round choice of the same few processed foods, paid for with a single centrally-controlled currency, bought in towns that each resemble the other. For balance, to be whole people, at least our cuisine must be polytheistic.

Hobbes, personal tutor to a monarch, spoke for the head, and history followed. If we, the many, speak for and cultivate the microbiome, what will our future be? Shall we revel in the beautiful complexity of our bodies? Shall we care for our intestinal biomes, like gardeners and gourmets, wrapped into one? Shall we explore how changing our diet – not only changes our internal biome – but also shifts the external biome too? Much has been said about how the flap of a butterfly wing can affect events miles away – and that may be – however for Raw Tibicos, the small action of a central banker pressing “return” on a keyboard has a direct effect on the food we all eat, in a way that policy-makers themselves may not be aware aware of; and in return, the food that we eat (in the aggregate) shall rebound onto national policy. Shall we return to choose-your-own-adventure?

Placed here is a conceptual overview, future discussions will go deeper and higher, looser and tighter, so please stay tuned!


Mothers and Soldiers

Mothers and Soldiers both have a day of remembrance in the national calendar, and most people think the similarities stop there. An anthropologist could write several books on the interesting cultural phenomenon that while mothers definitely face pain, and combat injury, hostility, violence, ridicule and even today, sometimes death, in pregnancy and childbirth, it simply isn’t done to talk about it, as one can for the military. A woman killed by the father of her child makes the news a couple times a month, but the pain, danger, labour and sometimes permanent injury that mothers face during pregnancy and birth is never discussed; as if the location where pain happens makes a difference!

Part of the perceived difference may be in the culture’s perception of soldiering as active, and having a baby is perceived by the culture as passive – when everything goes well. If some problem arises, everyone is quick to blame the mother – which shows a schizophrenic kind of view of pregnancy and labour!

Soldiers have a mirrored result – good outcomes result in medals and honour, and bad outcomes result in generals or politicians taking blame. Raw Tibicos suspects this is the result of confusion about gender roles in intimacy. Soldiers have historically been mostly men, and mothers are by definition, are women. Traditionally, male soldiers showed great vigour with long rod-like weapons . . . perhaps no more need be said about that side of perceived gender roles . . . on the gentler side, there is scandalous confusion over the difference between “passive”, as in “passive like an inanimate object”, and “receptive”, as in, “let me guide your energy”.

The ancient world understood this: understanding of the immense importance of receptive-guiding-energy is why Sophia (wisdom), Liberty, Truth, Fate, Justice are all female. All of these are essential for human life – all must be sought – but never conquered – just like the essential nature of receiving. Would any of us want Wisdom, Liberty, Truth, Justice, or even Fate, that was inert, lifeless; passive?

Yet, as soon as one becomes expectant, the modern world wants the mother to be like a doll, allowing medical interventions for her body and her baby, without opinions or participation in the birth process. The process of birth is a sacred dance between mother and child, giving and taking on both sides – a breath here, a position adjustment there – small, constant adjustments that make the difference between life and injury – or worse. Where in today’s culture do we give expecting mothers the Sophia needed to be the heroines of their own dangerous passage from innocence to motherhood? Those readers who have experienced labour; how many of you were empowered by those around you to be the star of your own body’s birth? How many of you were pushed into second or third place, behind the medical establishment’s interventions, opinions, and needs? Where are the medals and honours for exceptional bravery and self-sacrifice? Raw Tibicos suspects that the answers to these questions would sadden all of us who care about happiness.

Those of you who are not mothers; when have you seen a movie or other portrayal of labour where the mother is the Sophia – the guiding wisdom – of the birth? Have you even once seen the labouring mother’s needs or requests validated, honoured?

If readers have the idea that mothers should be honoured as soldiers are, that is only a part of what this is about! Let’s return to the notion of vigorous, obvious action, as contrasted with receptive, grounded, channeled agency. Today’s concept of “staying healthy”, falls into the archetype that we just rejected. On the one side, a war-like state with our bodies – jogging, starving ourselves, eating unpleasant foods, taking mountains of powdered supplements. If that fails, culture decrees an utterly passive, inert reliance on the medical world to fix us.

Shall we be the heros and heroines of our own health, in a channeled, wise, receptive way? Raw Tibicos has a collection of suggestions to live more healthy, joyful lives, with interventions that should be so soft and natural that when sought (but not conquered) these practices become invisible supports, as invisible, yet valuable as Wisdom, Liberty, Truth, and Justice. These were originally sent in the newsletter, but repetition and context doesn’t make them less valuable:

  • How about any activity that gets one’s hands in the soil? Starting about twenty years ago, scientists began finding that some of the bacteria that make our guts healthy can be replenished from soil bacteria —  as a seller of a pro-biotic beverage — Raw Tibicos probably shouldn’t have mentioned that soil bacteria are also beneficial!   Additionally, a recent study showed that the components of healthy soil help wounds clot quickly.  It is comforting to know that if one is injured, far from help, and handful of dirt might save the day and stop the bleeding.  Proof that gardens are indeed, blessed!
  • Use Nature’s original disinfectant —  Sunlight!   With so much being closed, it’s a great time to discover some off-the-beaten path walks, and less-travelled times.  Scientists are discovering more and more how linked human life is to actual sunlight.  The staff at Raw Tibicos are universal in this, we all feel that time outside is essential for health! If you do not already know what your Minimum Daily Nature Time is, this might be the chance to experiment!
  • On the topic of ourselves being linked to the natural world, it is easy to forget that we evolved without artificial light. If one has trouble sleeping, adjusting your indoor lighting to reflect the sun’s natural rhythms may be all the remedy that is needed for a good night’s sleep.  When the sun is high, turn on all the lights inside, and when the sun is down, dim inside lighting to the minimum possible, as close to the light of candles as possible.   Twenty years of experimenting with this, have shown Raw Tibicos that physical energy and “sunny good nature” are quickly affected by bright electric lights at night!   Give it a try, and see if there is any reaction in your household —  at the worst — lower electric bills!
  • On the subject of artificial light, perhaps we have all noticed that it differs from sunlight? We have all experienced red, tired eyes with blurry vision, from spending too much time looking at computer screens?  This is because our eyes are adapted to the ultimate in full-spectrum light —  the sun.  The imbalances in artificial lighting cause a wide range of human imbalances, ranging from blurry sight and splotchy skin, to documented behavioural and health problems with school children.  This is another quick and easy experiment to try:  1). try to limit regular fluorescent lighting, and if not, try to put physical distance between you and it 2). use computer glasses to balance the blue light, and 3). consider spending some time in front of some of the red/ infra-red lights that are sold, to counter-balance all the too-blue!
  • It seems as if science is daily making new discoveries about the previously-unsuspected benefits of new and old plants.  This one is good for inflammation —  that one has antioxidants — it can get overwhelming!  We often forget about the healing power of the plants that are so familiar, they get called ‘spices’, many of which were originally included for their healing powers.   Has it been a while since you tasted rosemary?  It makes a great tea!  How about some tarragon on your eggs?  Chopped basil on your salad?  Turmeric and ginger in your hot milk?  Sumac on fresh fruit?   Give your spices a daily work out and I think you will find that they will work for you —  A word about plants:  plants often carry the nickname “master chemists”, as unlike human chemists, plants have access to more chemical compounds, and can vary their growth according to need.   Science has found that plants quickly become more bitter in response to an animal or insect eating their leaves —  not only in the plant being browsed on, but also its neighbours change leaf chemistry!  This rapid adaptability of plants has led many herbalists and foodies to speculate that we can rely on our plant friends to carry some of the burden of keeping us healthy, of responding to the shifting nature of disease, by working with these master chemists.
  • On the subject of chemistry, please remember that our skin absorbs many items right through it, into the blood!  Any unhelpful substances absorbed by the skin, must be filtered through the liver and kidneys, which is fine much of the time, but perhaps a burden when one is fighting an infection.   Ayurvedic tradition asks that one only put edible items on the skin; that seems an attractive way to think of it? How often do we think of our skin as delicious?
  • It is true that not every micro-organism is beneficial to humans; being so small, often they cannot tolerate the wide range of conditions that larger beings can. For this reason, fever is one of our body’s most effective defences against infection, which is why doctors often let a fever burn itself out —  and perhaps why if we get a chill, we are more prone to getting sick.  Generating heat like that does place a strain on our bodies  —  however, we can get all the benefits and none of the downside, by having a hot bath —  or sauna for those lucky enough to have access to one — and there is the additional benefit of stress reduction!  This might be a good time to treat yourself to a daily hot bath — as a preventative measure  —  stop a just-caught virus before it gets a foothold!   If you are bored, or curious, you can always check to see the impact by taking your temperature before and after the bath  — I know one couple who did this, and the change in body temperature was surprising.

Seven tips for a healthier life; playing outside, a nice hot bath afterwards, be careful who your (skin) associates with, limit night-time bright lights, eat well cooked and nicely spiced food; have herbal tea rather than soda — all of them the kinds of things our mothers tell us to do! It also sounds like the list of things soldiers miss most – that and the healing from laughter with loved ones. Picking one at random – the sun actively shines on us – but does that make us passive? Aren’t we all – plants, humans, animals – receptive to the sunlight – channeling the gift of sunlight into work and play?

It has been said that our everyday habits become character: our character becomes our Fate! In this way, Fate becomes the best symbol of the receptiveness that is the ultimate gift for every mammal, from our mothers. Let’s hold close to our hearts the vision of mothers and babies in an intimate dance of birth; let the feminine energies of Wisdom, Liberty, Truth, Justice, channel our life-force like a baby toward health. Do we require active, warlike, interventions to mechanically stretch our children to make them grow? No! Our children receive nourishing food, healthy environments and joy in learning, and they grow without effort creating their own Fate. Can we do less?

If you like this series of articles, please do support the work by purchasing @RawTIbicos products, here: — even you don’t like this writing, please consider purchasing, anyway, as twenty-five years is a long time for testing; many of the products are extremely good! Information provided is for entertainment only, no medical or other advice is offered.


Bitcoin and Food – So Similar?

Bitcoin and food — food and bitcoin — how would the two begin dating, let alone marry? One lives on computer servers and hard drives, and only moves to the beat of electricity; the other in the sensual world of taste, smells, colours, traditionally enjoyed without an electrical plug!

Raw Tibicos can take a break from food to learn about the world, and has been fascinated to hear bitcoin advocates speak of two concepts crucial to food: de-centralization/ personal sovereignty. As Raw Tibicos understands it, if governments fail to meet citizens’ basic needs, then at least one has bitcoin safe in an off-line wallet, in one’s own possession, with transactions processed and recorded in multiple servers around the world. The servers are chosen at random from among those who do ‘proof of work’; and the total number of bitcoins is limited by the algorithm. Let’s assume that ‘the algorithm’ does what its advocates claim for it, and caps the amount of bitcoins extant; awesome. Bitcoin is now like food; the amount of food is limited on the right hand by the biology of human digestion and corporal realities, and on the left hand, by our ability to source, process and store it.

De-centralization and personal sovereignty in the digital world are discussed everyday, over and over; so why, Raw Tibicos asks, would the convo. Not shift from bitcoin to food, reflecting the connection between the two? “Enough about the digital world, let’s discuss the same issues with food”. Astonishing isn’t the word! Most of us do not interact with bitcoin three or more times each day, and yet, with all the breakfast, lunches, dinners, and snacks eaten, while discussing bitcoin, Raw Tibicos is aware of none who have thought about food’s journey from de-centralized, marker of personal sovereignty, to – the complete opposite! Yowsers!

We don’t have to go back to the Roman Empire to find a world where the average human controlled his own food supply – but in the Romans we have a well-documented connection between food and conquest. Most of us are aware that Imperial Rome’s expansion was stopped by the Celts and the Germanic tribes — what should also be taught is that the reason Rome was stopped – with barely a weapon drawn – was that Rome was unable to control the area’s food? Rome – and all imperial-slave-based systems are based on control of food. Rome was a grain-based culture; the Germano-Celts tribes’ food was tree-based. No central granaries to control – probably not even barns to burn. What is an imperialist slaver to do? Go native?

A contemporary recorded that the Germano-Celtic diet was apples, deer and milk; and we have confirmation of this in the wealth of ancient Celtic legends that have come down to us. The tree-based pastoralists knew that cows and horses can be fed in the forest – leaves were an important source of additional food for cows and horses. To this we can add the many nutritious and delicious forest products that we know traditional temperate forest people eat: walnuts, hazelnuts, chestnuts, acorns, mushrooms, birds, berries, ground and pig nuts, pine nuts, rabbits, burdock and even the bark and leaves of some trees. Unlike relying on a grain crop, if one food source fails, or is destroyed by the Romans, there are others. Stockholm syndrome has led many to conclude that only a small population can be kept on this kind of food supply, however, intensive historical food reading by Raw Tibicos shows this kind of thinking for what it is. Did you know that for over a century after contact, the coast of North America was so densely populated, that European trading ships could not land? Another victory for tree-based economies as difficult to conquer! (One suspects they had heard about their southern neighbour’s experience with Columbus). How many people know that during the summer fur trade, along the Michigan peninsula, each individual woman was able to provide enough food for herself, her family, and five – ten French & First Nations traders, plus enough for her family’s (non-meat) needs over the winter? No plows – and no monocultures need apply!

So why did Western Civ move from sustainable, productive, low-risk decentralized food production to one that is more work, more prone to famine, may provide less calories per acre, and best of all (sarcasm) – is easier to tax and – even better – control the population?

Cows may provide a (cow-shaped) keyhole to peek through, to begin answer that question. Cows were so central to Germano-Celt economies that they were the symbol of wealth, and the first letter of the Futark. Cows turn wasteland – useless for farming – into food. Cows can be fed in the forest as well as on grass, and give so much milk, that the cow – along with her co-conspirators sheep and goats, are probably the beginning of civilization. The dairy cow, in particular, has one additional fascinating characteristic – she gives immunity from small pox to dairy maids.

Imagine that we are living in a time not so long ago, where most people were involved with their food production, small pox is rampant; except among dairy maids. An alien observing this, from his UFO, might think, “Of course, mankind will share the labour and the benefits of milking the cows, so that everyone has a day off, and also the benefits of disease control. Plus, it solidifies decentralized and personal control over an important food source, as these are important values to these people.” HEAD FAKE! Rather, all the leading thinkers said, “Let’s have a centralized authority cut open the skin of healthy people and rub pus from a sick person in! Then we can make all the dairy farms centralized and pay the milk maids less!” Our fictional UFO observer would have given up on humanity immediately, for all time!

After knowing this slice of history, who would not shed a tear for the future of bitcoin? The values of decentralization and personal control can mean less than nothing compared to the march of profits. Perhaps more information will make this weakness more striking?

When small pox inoculations were introduced, there was tremendous push-back from the population. The inoculations had to be imposed by a central authority; usually the local landowner. The inoculations initially seemed beneficial; but this was a mirage, due to the way that diseases wax and wane naturally. By the time that years of data were available, including the deaths of many whom had been inoculated, it was clear that this method did not give the immunization that milking cows gave.

Personally speaking, (unlike most people living today), Raw Tibicos has spent some months hand-milking two cows, and found it to be rather nice. The cows are warm and soft, the calf is adorable, and the barn is a nice peaceful refuge. It is hard to hypothesize that a hatred of cows was the reason that funding went to further research of inserting pus into bodies, rather than researching human-animal symbiotic relationships.

As decisions about which research priorities got funding were made, other forces grabbed a decisive lead against decentralized, personal control over food. “Enclosing the commons” had begun, arguably as early as William the Conquerer, who set aside common land forest for his personal hunting preserve, but the practice of local large landowners appropriating land previously held as commons was a keynote of the Enlightenment. Developing world markets opened up the possibility of using the land to sell for those same world markets, putting in view the tantalizing prospect of heretofore unattainable wealth – for the few. All that was needed was a stomach strong enough to dispossess local families of land traditionally held in common; land used to graze family cows, hunt a few rabbits, or harvest wild foods and wood for fuel. Much ink was spilled justifying this; the end result was that people who preferred to control and manage their own food, were forced into the cities, to provide labour for the factories processing the wool grown on their own former commons. As an added insult, access to food was much more centralized, and depended on acceding to the demands of the factory owner. No longer could a family be fed by the simple act of one’s own labour!

Unsurprisingly, many objected to this arrangement. They were suppressed by the military, or deported, and even the name of their movement, Luddites, has come to mean stupid people objecting to wonderful progress. Lesson learned; the trouble-makers in their new continent, traumatized, ceased to advocate for food sovereignty, and those left knew the consequences of disagreement. Therefore food has come to be the poster child for centralization out of individual’s control.
Food became the pathbreaker for a new model of economy, one that included cycles dominated by man rather than nature. We are subject to an endless cycle of “wonderful new discoveries” which we must all buy, which are in due course of time, very predictably revealed to be actually harmful. Anyone with a memory long enough to point out the many previous cycles, and recommend caution in the most recent, is called “unscientific”, “a conspiracy theorist”, a “Luddite”, or maybe a climate denier or racist – the insults cycle along with the marketing – that is probably the point of it all, to keep us “disrupted”? Who among us cannot point to an industry or two, or three, that follow this disruptive cycle of higher and higher profits, and lower and lower quality of goods? Raw Tibicos is in favour of profits, what (apparently) sets us apart is the idea that profits can also partner with happiness! As a note, Soup&Kefir @RawTibicos sources from many suppliers, including small, independent sources, and our products are reputed to increase happiness. Please click here for the happy review:

During the era of smallpox inoculations and enclosure of the commons, legend has it, that as he left the Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin was asked what form of government had been decided. “Democracy, if you can keep it,” is the legendary reply.

Franklin would have known that what had been decided was a Republic, not a democracy – the difference being that in a democracy citizens vote themselves for laws and budgets, whereas in a Republic, citizens delegate law and budget duties to others. Bitcoin, of course, began with much wider distribution of mining, (as compared to users of bitcoins); but as the market has grown, bitcoin has become more like a republic, in that many of the essential functions have become professionalized and have a fairly high barrier to entry for the average bitcoin “citizen”. First World food, however, is even further along the centralization slide – almost everything the average food citizen puts in his mouth came from one of a small handful of companies. This includes restaurants, almost all of which source from one of the only two or three giant distributors.

Raw Tibicos would like to see bitcoin survive as a “republic”, and not slide into dictatorship, but one hopes that the real utility of this analogy is to provoke a little thought about the tremendous power concentrated in a few hands, which is the industrial food system. It has been almost exactly a thousand years since William the Conquerer caused mass starvation by kicking people out of the thousands of acres of their traditional land. The centuries since have seen billions displaced off of their traditional land, and their direct control over their own food. Can we stop this, or is it too late? Future blogs will discuss Soup&Kefir @RawTibicos’ efforts to decentralize and democratize food, and the barriers we see: please stay tuned, and if possible throw a few dollars every week toward us by donating here, or other providers who are working on food democracy, if only to prove that decentralized food does have a future!

Support decentralized food by purchasing at Soup&Kefir @RawTibicos, or donating below! Information provided is for entertainment only, no medical or other professional advice is offered.


Help! The Dog Ate My Dinner!

WAR – isn’t our culture comfortable with war? War on Drugs, War on Cancer, War on Poverty, War on Terrorism, War on Viruses – If this blog were titled War on Bad Food, it would click into today’s gestalt without a seam. Only one problem – experts, observers and victims – all – have seen no decline in the objects of War. Shouldn’t drugs, cancer, poverty, terrorism and viruses know that civilized people have ganged up on them and all their works, and slink away, out of sight and away from harm?

Drugs, cancer, poverty, terrorism and viruses – it’s a motley crew – one collection of chemicals, one metabolic disfunction, two unwanted results of modern economies, and one by-product of life – and the techniques of war have failed on all of them. It reminds Raw Tibicos of a dog we once had, a large Bernese Mountain Dog with a dominant personality. A dominant personality – in a dog – or a drug, or a disease, or a social problem – means that the dog enjoys challenging your status quo more than he enjoys praise or being a good team member. The maxim, “Any attention is good attention,” was written by a dominant dog. . . and perhaps perfected by The War on X, where bad news brings in more funding?

People think of peace as the opposite of war – but it is a lot more than that – peace is actually an active verb. Just as war requires both material and a certain way of thinking, so peace has its own infrastructure and peculiar ways of thinking. If war is two stags locking horns and wrestling for victory, then peace is each stag with his own grazing area and family to raise. It can be difficult to understand ourselves by simply gazing into the mirror; what is hard to see in ourselves can be easy to understand when watching other beings do the same thing. Let’s continue by looking at the household dog; the dominant Berner, mentioned earlier.

Picture yourself, hungry, sitting down to a fabulous meal – featuring @RawTibicos veggie mixes and water kefir, available here: – and a 120 pound dog, clad in the Berner dinner jacket of black back fur and white fur necktie, sits down next to you and calmly begins chewing on the table! Just in case you haven’t noticed, he leaves his jaws locked on the table, swivels his eyes toward yours, full eye contact, and gives the table a challenging bite. Dinner is perfectly cooked, the absolute right temperature for eating, smells are steaming up from the plate, the water kefir glass is frosted, and your loved dog is commanding your mad attention, because he thinks that your hunger is stronger than your desire for a well-behaved dog. Your Berner has nothing of importance to lose, but if you dash after him, then your dinner might get lost to the Golden Retriever on the other side, slyly pretending to be asleep! Isn’t this exactly what the War on Drugs, Cancer, et al, feels like?

This is a blog about bringing spirituality back to food, and so of course, the answer lies in the perfection of the human spirit. It is true that sometimes spirituality is spoken of as war. Wars are famously bad for the pleasures of the table – so we will use the metaphor of a ladder – which leads much better food.

At the bottom of the ladder is our old rival War – choosing teams, finding weapons, trash talk, it’s all about “I need”, and “You must”. We are good, they are bad – we don’t need to say much here, as our culture is stuck on this rung. Here is the hero who smacks the bad Berner, the dog with the dominant character, who already has his teeth out for the table. Things escalate from there, to the delight of the golden retriever.

Next on the ladder – spoiler alert, this ladder only has three rungs – is neutrality. Neutrality hangs on the rung of freely-entered into contracts, trade, negotiation. I’ll trade what you want, to get from you, what I want. On this level we have the saint who comes prepared with dog biscuits. One for the Golden, for being good, and one for the Berner who has now moved his mouth from chewing wood to drool on the biscuit in your hand. The saint hands Dominant Dog his biscuit; trade made, dinner gets eaten hot – at least until the Berner wants another biscuit. Everyone feels good at this level – the dogs got biscuits, dinner got eaten hot, the saint feels smug, and so does the Berner. Sound familiar? Badness had its reward – neutrality was maintained – good had something on account, too. There is a better option, but there is also a worse one – things could descend to war later in the year.

We at Raw Tibicos prefer the view from the peak, so let’s keep climbing. On the top rung, love reigns alone. Not “peace and love”, which brings up visions of irresponsibility, youth, trampled lawns, loud music, and indifferent meals. This is a love based on experience, and strength – the kind of love that good neighbours have. This is the love that can give for no reason, for no expectation, simply because love has enough to share. This is the love that leads us to have dogs in the first place, and belongs to the world of extra zucchini, checking when the house next door is empty, watching out for your friends when they have drunk too much, helping someone else to a benefit that you won’t share. On this level, our neighbour-character deescalates by looking eyeball to eyeball back at the Berner, taking a huge bite of the steaming succulent dinner, conveying to the dog by energy, attention and pleasure, the knowledge that the food on the plate is much better than the dry wood of the table.

There are dogs who would react to changing the focus, by biting more than the table. A relationship of love had already been built between this dog and the owner, and so the Berner, unable to have attention on command, with no answer to his challenge, released the table and lay under it.

Some people yearn to climb the ladder themselves, and others fight to bring everyone to their level. It can be so hard to climb the ladder – that many of us who have climbed, don’t want to step back down – I mean, those of us who have educated our palates to proper food are reluctant to step back to junk. However, is that a reason to circle the wagons, and refuse to share what we know about healthy, clean, delicious and nutritious food? Some people prefer stale chips and cheap beer, and we cannot pull them to where they do not want to go! Having dinner with this group means accepting stale chips and cheap beer, maybe without complaint. Others are looking up the ladder, hoping for help climbing to a better spiritual relationship with food.

Wisdom lies in knowing that the ladder exists, descending if needed, climbing back when done, and enjoying the view from the top. This is real food spirituality! How simple, to grow a better world, through love and sharing the gifts of our souls, redirecting attention from what is lacking, to the extra in our gardens! Why should those who love war, be able to keep down those of us who prefer to climb, for ever?

In this blog, some of those looking to climb are not even people – how does the story of the dogs’ dinner end? Yes – to answer the question – after releasing the table when redirected, being a good dog throughout the rest of the meal, both the Berner and the Golden got table scraps. Much better than dry wood! As one memorable vet said, many years ago, “Dogs are not like us – they need vegetables, whole grains, and healthy proteins.” ?? This vet was advocating commercial kibble – perhaps not knowing better food exists?

We began this discussion with the thought of love, rather than war, and before closing it, Raw Tibicos feels that one more animal metaphor might be appropriate. Love is more complicated than war. War is harm, and that can take many forms – monosodium glutamate, corn syrup, antibiotics left in the meat, trans-fats, glyphosate residue, dyes that cause anxiety, etc – war involves impediments. War only exists on the bottom of the ladder. Love, however, has levels. Love at the bottom of the ladder is the love of the wolf for the sheep, the love of the master for his slave, the love of convenient junk food. This is a selfish love; and being human, we have probably all experienced this. Raw Tibicos has experienced selfish love!

At the top is the kind of love a mother gives her child, the love that says, “how may I help?” without judgment, or the love a chef gives a meal, food which will be eaten and forgotten, but in which the love becomes part of not only the experience, but also the nutrition. With food, we can test the love! Cook two meals, exactly the same – one cooked by an unhappy, resentful chef, and the other – the same in material terms – cooked by a happy, love-filled chef. When Raw Tibicos tried this experiment, there were actual, measurable differences in the experience and results of the meal. Sounds crazy? Test it for yourself, and see if you look at food – or war – or even dogs – in the same way?

Information provided is for entertainment only, no medical or other advice is offered here.


Life, Men & Microbes

There is elite corporate history; and then there is history for the rest of us. . . The first can be known for how it flatters and degrades us at the same time; the second for how it connects with us on a daily level and makes our understanding richer.

In elite corporate history, Great Men use Powerful Forces to attain Great Results. These histories began with the bards hired at courts to memorialize the conquests of kings; one can easily see how the format of Great Men/ Great Results would result in a bigger payment from the king to the bard!

During the Industrial Revolution the person paying for the genre changed from kings to corporate owners; until our time when the people paying are the shareholders. One of Raw Tibicos’ first jobs was as a very junior equity analyst; which means that it was actually Raw Tibicos who had to open endless annual reports, all with the same photo of a CEO taken from somewhere at the man’s knee, giving the perspective of the company being lead by a literal Great Man. This was in the early 90’s, when people still felt that raiding pension funds, loading companies with debt, cutting benefits and eradicating investment in the future required an excuse!

The good thing about the Great Man version of history, (from the perspective of the man taking the money out of the company), is that in order to question the Great Man’s actions, one must question the very format in which the story is told . . .

Let’s do this, shall we? Let’s explore the alternative to the Great Man! Most histories, attempting this, begin slightly lower with everyday people’s lives. For a really different history, let’s go way, way, wa-a-y down the social scale, to depths often uncharted. As Soup&Kefir @RawTibicos was founded on the magic of microbes, let’s begin our history on a very, very small scale.

A teaspoon of soil has more microbes than there are people alive. Microbes vastly outweigh the total weight of humanity. Microbes are Elder Brother to mankind, and will probably be Surviving Sister. Healthy microbiomes in the soil process nutrients, act as information sources, and share goods with the plants we depend on. “As above, so below”, in our intestinal tracts, we all process personal “soil” with the help of our own microbiome. A healthy human biome processes nutrients, acts as information sources, and shares goods (sound familiar?) with its host? client? you. By contrast, an unhealthy biome does none of these things, allows cracks in the intestinal lining, and as an added insult, may actually manufacture toxins as byproducts of itself. To complete this circle – the plants we ingest become soil in the intestine, and historically, returned to the maternal soil source, to nourish new plants.

The capacity of the Earth, to grow, nurture and care for humanity – as well as all the other life – depends on the quality – not of Great Men and their Powerful Forces – but on the health of the microbiome. Destruction of the microbiome has resulted in a measurable, documented decline in the nutrient value of the fruits, vegetables and grains that mankind relies on – one the past hundred years. How much is this decline? If asked to guess, would you guess 20%? 50%? You would be wrong – the decline has been more than 90% – in many cases, over 95% of the minerals and nutrients in our food has disappeared!

Let’s go further. Most histories describe the rise and fall of nations and empires as having been the result of Great Men. The truth is – men might be doing great things – however their actions have zero predictive value! What does have predictive value? Soil. Oh, and one other thing – soil. Nations with strong, fertile microbe-strong topsoil thrive. Once that is gone – the nation falls. The secret of some cultures’ ability to survive thousands of years? You guessed it – it isn’t subtle planning, big weapons, or virtuous thought – it all depends on soil. Do you disbelieve me? I invite you to prove Raw Tibicos wrong!

We aren’t done yet – we can go further and deeper!

Healthy topsoil with a healthy biome => leads to nutrient-packed foods => leads to healthy, strong nations and cultures; each individual filled with his or her own personal strong soil filled with healthy biome.

Instead, we have the “green revolution”, where artificial nitrogen fertilizers have led to huge plant growth – but the plants lack nutrients and structure, and so are prey to disease and predation by micro-insects – and therefore require larger doses of poisonous insecticides. Is there a parallel? There is! Humanity, fed on food created by nitrogen fertilizers has exploded in number, but we are weak, nutrient depleted, depressed, and increasingly, require large doses of toxic chemicals and interventions. Hmmmm?

Comparing human growth to the growth of our food is an ancient idea – older than thinking about causes of population growth – which goes back only a few centuries, as far as we know. Readers are doubtless familiar with the work of Thomas Malthus, whose famous prediction was that given adequate food, populations increase exponentially, tragically outstripping the supply of food, which only can increase linearly. Malthus has fallen in and out of popularity in the two centuries since he wrote; the conclusion most supported by long-term evidence seems to be that occasionally, in the short-term, Malthus can be correct. Malthus, is of course, in the Great Man tradition. Modern thinking is now centred on more everyday decisions: each set of parents plans to have one or two children survive them. With high infant mortality, mothers have more children; when infants have a high likelihood of surviving, births decrease. Most of the population increase has occurred around the world in the generation where infant mortality dropped, but expectations of mortality had not yet caught up with the new reality.

Infant mortality would seem to contradict the idea that soil health is important – as nitrogen fertilizers and the attendant pesticides, herbicides have wreaked havoc on soil microbiomes – infant mortality has gone down. Let’s get deeper on this subject:

Any parent can confirm – feeding infants is hard! Breast feeding, which is so natural and evolved, is far more difficult than one can guess. Breast feeding an infant not only provides the best nutrition, but the action helps an infant’s palate and jaw grow to the correct shape. As with anything of great value, there is a learning curve – infants must learn to latch on correctly, and the sucking takes effort – necessary effort, as it is the action of muscles that pulls the palate and jaw into shape. Dehydrated, malnourished or drunk babies will have difficulties. Further, mothers must have enough nutrition to make milk, enough time to suckle their babies, enough peace to allow the milk to come, and enough maturity to bring this all together. None of these many factors can be taken for granted!

These difficulties caused the rise of the profession of wet nurse. A wet nurse is a professional baby feeder, a woman who had demonstrated the ability to bring infants through the crucial first two years. We do know that wet nurses were common in the Enlightenment, in Europe – concurrent with, or more likely – the cause of the population boom at that time. During the Enlightenment, wet nurses came from a family located near by, a family usually known for generations to her employers. Historically, Jane Austin and her siblings were sent out to a local women for nursing; the Austin family was known for having a high survival rate for its children. Compensation in the form of household help; food, probably clothing and other tangible help was given, as well as probably a wage.

This system broke down during the Industrial Revolution, and here is where we return to our theme of the microbiome. Alcohol has seven calories per gram – higher than sugar, at 4 calories per gram – or whole wheat flour at 3 calories per gram. Sugar was expensive, and flour gets insect infestations, plus needs labour to make it edible. For these reasons, for the hungry many, especially in cities, easy-stored and relatively cheap to buy alcohol became a food staple – not only for adults, but also for cows, and for babies. Cows can be kept alive (but not healthy) on the spent grains left over from distilleries – and babies can be fed, and kept quiet and docile (but not healthy) – on a diet of rags soaked in alcohol. For a world focused on efficiency, and not at all concerned about healthy microbiomes, this seemed like a good solution. Populations, fuelled by alcohol, continued to rise. In fact, one could call this the first wave of the “green revolution”, tied to the bodies of people, rather than plants.

Unsurprisingly, mothers objected to wet nurses who substituted alcohol for breast milk, and were unimpressed by the results of nursing provided by women fed on a diet of alcohol. Equally, the milk provided by sick, but alive cows, fed on the spent distillery grains, killed many infants. Must one mention that alcohol, as a disinfectant, and lacking fibre, is murder on the intestinal biome?

Wealthy families set up their own dairy herds in the country, and paid railroads to bring them fresh country milk, grown on the still healthy soil in the country. Middle class and poor families advocated for governmental succour – governments turned to corporations – and corporations responded with products – nitrogen fertilizers, baby formula, pesticides and herbicides, and the sterilization necessary to produce food in one place and time, while consuming it in a totally different place and time. The history of this time is also the history of Great Men, using Powerful Forces to attain Great Results. What is forgotten during the subsequent explosion of corporate profits, is the vitality in the soil, in the food, in the people and in the planet itself.

People are not used to thinking of themselves as creators of soil, or of alcohol as being parallel to nitrogen fertilizers, or to thinking about our food in context of the health of the soil, the cow, the wet nurse, or even the agricultural labourer. Could we be asking the wrong questions? Neo-Malthisians talk about the carrying capacity of the earth. Parents who have healthy children and an expectation of seeing them survive, have less children. People, plants and animals with healthy, nutrient-rich food consume less calories, and are sickly less often than when given nutrient-poor food. If it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a Great Man to enter the kingdom of God – would our lives, and the lives of those we care for – be easier if we gave the microbiome – (which, although greater in size than mankind – can certainly fit through the eye of a needle) – shall we give the microbiome for soil, cows, infants and adults what it needs to be healthy, happy and productive?

If you like this series of articles, please do support the work by purchasing @RawTIbicos products, here: — even you don’t like this writing, please consider purchasing, anyway, as twenty-five years is a long time for testing; many of the products are extremely good! Information provided is for entertainment only, no medical or other advice is offered.