Dale of Thoughts. The speech today is not missing copies of this program off the air without express permission from the Alan Watts Institute, and we'll be giving you an address at the end of today's talk, which you can write to for more information or for a cassette copy of today's talk. Now here's Alan Watts with part one from Dale of Thoughts. The Conflict of the Feminine with the veil of thoughts and following up a theme that somebody once projected by saying that thought is a means of concealing truth despite the fact that it's an extraordinarily useful faculty but in quite recent weeks we've had an astounding example of the way mankind can be vanduubled by thought.

[01:03]

There was a crisis about gold. And the confusion of money in any form whatsoever with wealth is one of the major problems from which civilization is suffering. Because way back in our development, when we first began to use symbols to represent the events of the physical world we found that such an ingenious device that we became completely fascinated with it and in so many different dimensions of life we are living in a state of total confusion between simple reality and The real reason why, in our world today, where there is no technical reason whatsoever why there should be any poverty at all, the reason it still exists is people keep asking the question, where's the money going to come from?

[02:17]

Not really asking, but money doesn't come from anywhere. It never did. Except if you thought it was gold. And then, of course, to increase the supply of gold and use that to finance all the world's commerce. Prosperity would depend not upon finding new processes for growing food in vast quantities, or getting nutrition out of the ocean, or getting water from atomic energy. No, it depends on discovering a new gold mine. And you could see what an unsensible state of affairs that is. Because when gold is used for money, it becomes, in fact, useless. Gold at a very useful level is feeding sheep, making jewelry, and maybe covering the dome of the Capitol in Washington. But the moment it is locked up in vaults in the form of edicts, it becomes completely useless.

[03:22]

It becomes a false security, something that people treat you like an idol, like an evil kind of Big Daddy or God, Whiskers, who lived above a cloud. And all that kind of thing diverts our attention to reality. We go through all sorts of weird rituals and get in the signal, in other words, gets in the way of our practical life. So, Do you remember the Great Depression? I expect a number of you here looking around are old enough to remember the Great Depression, when one day everybody was doing business and things were going on pretty well, and the next day there were bread lines. It was like someone came to work and they said to him, sorry, gentlemen, we can't build today. No building can go on. We don't have enough agents.

[04:24]

You say, what do you mean we don't have enough engines? We've got wood, haven't we? We've got metal, we've even got tech measures. They say, yeah, but you don't understand that business work. We just haven't got enough engines. Just take engines. We've used too much of them. And that's exactly what happened. And we have depression. Because money is something of the same order of reality. At inches, grams, meters, pounds, all lined with latitudes, not big. It is an abstraction. It is a method of bookkeeping to obviate the cumbersome procedure of the data. But our culture, our civilization, is entirely hung up on the notion that money has an independent reality of its own. And this is a very striking, concrete example of what I'm being taught by. Of the way we are vandalised by our thoughts, which are symbols, and what we could do to become un-vandalised, because it's a very serious state of affair.

[05:45]

Most of our political squabbles are entirely there about with being down to the roof, I think. And it is to be noted that as time goes on, the matters about which we fight with each other are increasingly active. And the wars, thought about abstract probably, get worse at work. It would be an extremely sane enterprise looking at it from an unintended point of view, it would be, I say, an extremely sane enterprise to send the American forces to Vietnam to capture all the beautiful girls that went there to bring them back. That would, of course, be considered unworthy and base and all that sort of thing. But it would have the advantage of being a country in time because we wouldn't want to kill the beautiful girls. We would want to capture them. And therefore, we would wage a more merciful war than we are waging in the name of abstract principles.

[06:48]

So we are thinking about vast abstraction, ideologies, or communism, capitalism, all these systems, and paying less and less attention to the world of physical reality, to the world of earth and tree and water, people, and so are, in the name of all sorts of abstractions, busy destroying our natural environment. Wildlife, for example, is having a terrible problem, continuing with the alongside human being. Another example of this fantastic future is that not so long ago, just a few months ago, the Congress devoted a law imposing stern penalties on anyone who should presume to burn the American flag.

[07:56]

And they put this law through with a great deal of patriotic oratory and the quoting of poems and so on about old glory. Ignoring the fact entirely that these same congressmen, by acts of commission or omission, are burning up that for which the flag stands. They are allowing the utter pollution of our waters, of our atmosphere, the devastation of our forests, and the increasing power of the bulldozer to bring about a ghastly fulfillment of the biblical property, that every valley shall be exalted, every mountain laying low, and the rock paper plain. But actually they don't see, they don't know the difference between the flag and the country. They probably haven't been pointed out the difference between the back and territory. Compare a physical globe and a political globe. The critical globe is a pretty thing, too.

[09:00]

All kinds of green and brown, wiggly patterns on it. The political globe on the other hand has still got the wiggly outlines of the land, but they are all crossed over with colored patches, many of which have completely strayed in. A lot of the boundary between the United States and Canada, once you get west of the Great Lakes, is simply a straight line. What has that got to do with anything? with any difference between Canadians on one side of the line or Americans on the other side of the line or what have you. It is absolutely a violation of the service of the territory. And look at the Territory of San Francisco. It's a lovely place, but they planted on the hills of San Francisco a city pattern that was appropriate to the claims of Cannes, a gridiron.

[10:02]

And so you get streets that go straight up and that are extremely dangerous, where they should have followed the contours of the hill. This is a practically block of confusion, of map of territory, of abstraction with physical reality. Now, however, I think we should begin by talking a little bit about when we use the word physical reality as distinct from abstraction, what are we talking about? Because you see, there's going to be a fight about this philosophically. If I say that the final reality that we're living in is the physical world, A lot of people will say that I'm a materialist, that I'm unspiritual, and that I take too much of an identification of the man or the body. Any book that you open on yoga or Hindu philosophy will have in it a declaration that you start a meditation practice by saying to yourself, I am not the body.

[11:19]

I am not my feelings. I am not my thoughts. I am the witness who watches over it. And there's not really any of it. And so if I were to say then that the physical world is the basic reality, I would seem to be contradicting what is said in these individual texts. But, I mean, it all depends on what you mean by the physical world. First of all, it must be pointed out that the idea of the material world is itself philosophical it is in its own way, it's simple and so if I take up something that is generally agreed to be something in the material world and I argue that this is material of course it isn't because nobody has ever been able to put their finger on anything material.

[12:26]

That is to say, if you buy the word material, you bring some sort of basic stuff out of which the world is made. I'd say an analogy would be art of divining, pottery. We use clay and we form it into various shapes. And so a lot of people think that the physical world, it's various forms of matter. And nobody has ever been able to discover any matter. They've been able to discover various forms, yes, various patterns, but no matter. You can't even think of how you would describe matter in some terms other than form. Because whenever a physicist talks about the nature of the world, he describes a form, he describes a process, which can be put into the shape of a mathematical equation. And so if you say A plus B equals B plus A, everybody knows exactly what you mean.

[13:30]

It's a perfectly clear statement. But nobody needs to ask, what do you mean by A or what do you mean by B? Or if you say 1 plus 2 equals 3, that's perfectly clear. But you don't need to know 1 what, 2 what, or 3 what. And all of our descriptions of the physical world have the nature of the formulae, numbers. They're simply mathematical patterns. Because what we're talking about is pattern. Patterns are such a high degree of complexity that it's very difficult to deal with it by thinking. In science, we really work in two different ends of the spectrum of reality. We can deal with problems in which there are very few variables, or we can deal with problems in which there are almost occasionally many variables.

[14:34]

But in between, we're putting out things. In other words, the average person cannot think through a document involving more than three variables without a pencil in his hand. That's why, for example, it's difficult to learn how to read music. Think of an organist who has two keyboards or three keyboards for work of his hand, and each hand is very little driven. They speak on the pedals. he could be doing a different rhythm with each foot. Now, that's a very difficult thing for people to learn to do. That's like to rub your stomach in a circle and bash your head at the same time. It takes a little skill. Now, most problems with which we deal with everyday life involve far more than three variables. And we're really incapable of thinking about them. Actually, the way we think about most of our problems is simply going through the motions of thinking.

[15:41]

We don't really think about them. We do most of our decision-making by hunch. You could collect data about a decision that you have to make, but the data that you collect has the same sort of relation to the actual processes involved in this division as a skeleton to a living body. It just belongs. And there are all sorts of entirely unpredictable possibilities involved in every decision. And you don't really think about it at all. The truth of the matter is that we are as successful as we are, which is surprising, the degree to which we are successful in conducting our everyday practical life, because our brains do the thinking for us in an entirely unconscious way.

[16:49]

The brain is far more complex. than any computer the brain is in fact the most complex known object in the universe because our neurologists don't understand it they have a very primitive conception of the brain and admit it and therefore if we do not understand our own brain that simply shows that our brains are a great deal more intelligent than we are meaning by we the thing that we have identified ourselves with Instead of being sensible and identifying ourselves with our brain, we identify ourselves with a very small operation of the brain, which is the faculty of conscious attention, which is the sort of radar that we have that scans the environment for unusual features. And we think we are that, and we're nothing of a kind. That's just a little trick we do. So actually, our brain is analyzing all sensory input all the time.

[18:00]

Analyzing all the things you don't notice, don't think about, don't have any negative thoughts. And so it is this marvelous conflict going on which is responsible for our being able to adapt ourselves intelligently to the rest of the physical world. The brain is furthermore an operation of the physical world. But now you see, though, we get back to this question. Physical world. This is a concept. This is simply an idea. And if you want to ask me to differentiate between the physical and the spiritual, I will not put the spiritual in the same class as the abstract. But most people do. They think that 1 plus 2 equals 3 is a proposition of a more spiritual nature than, say, for example, a tomato.

[19:08]

But I think a tomato is a lot more spiritual than 1 plus 2 equals 3. This is where we really get to the point. That's why in Zen Buddhism, when people ask what is the fundamental point of Buddhism, you could very well answer, it's mental. Because look how, when you examine the material world, how diatonic it is. It really isn't very solid. Jamaica doesn't last very long. Nor, for that matter, do the things that we consider most exemplary of physical reality, such as mountains. The poet says, the hills are shadow, and they clone from form to form, and nothing's there. But the physical world is diaphan. It's like music.

[20:11]

When you play music, it simply disappears. There's nothing there. And that, for that very reason, it is one of the highest and most spiritual in the art, because it is the most transient. And so, in a way, you might say that transiently is the mark of spirituality. And other people think the opposite, that the spiritual things are the everlasting things. But you see, the more a thing tends to be permanent, the more it tends to be lifeless. Nothing is so dead as a diamond. And yet, the idea of the most mineral objects, they ain't the most permanent, and so they get associated with the spiritual. Jesus Christ is called the rock of ages. And even the Buddhists have used the Dham, the Vajra, as an image of the fundamental reality of the universe.

[21:19]

But the reason why they used the Dham was not that it would be hard, but that it was completely temporary. And therefore, the body is a symbol of the body, which everything fundamentally is. not meaning that there's simply nothing there, but the boy means that you cannot get any idea. It will sufficiently define physical reality. Every idea will be wrong, and it will be boy. So then, The physical world, we can't even find any stop out of which it's made. We can only recognize each other. I'd say, well, I realize that I met you before and that I see you again. But the thing that I recognize is not anything really except a consistent pattern.

[22:29]

Let's suppose I have a rope. And the rope begins by being manila rope. Then it goes on by being cotton rope. Then it goes on with being nylon. Then it goes on with being silk. So I tie a knot in the rope. And I noodle the knot down along the rope. Now, is it as it goes along between knots, or is it not? He would say it was the same, but he recognized the pattern of the knot. At one point, it's another. At another point, it's cotton. At another point, it's nylon. And at another, it's children. And that's just like us. We are recognized by the fact that one day, you face the same way as you did the day before. And people recognize your facing. So they say that's Chanda or Mary's mouth.

[23:34]

But actually the contents of your face, whatever they may be, the water, the carbon, the chemical, are changing all the time. You are like a whirlpool in a stream. The stream is doing this consistent well-tooling, and we always recognize, like at the Niagara, the well-tool. It's one of the sites. But the water is always moving on. And we are just like that, and everything is like that. So there's nothing in the physical world that is what you might call potential. It patterns. And this is why it's so spiritual. To be non-spiritual is not to see that. In other words, it is to impose upon the physical world the idea of fainness, of substantiality. That is to be, in the sense that the Hindus use it, that is to be involved in matter, to identify with the body.

[24:46]

To believe, in other words, that the body is something constant, something tangible. The body is really very intangible. It cannot sit down or pull it up. We're aging, getting older, and so therefore if you introduce the body, you will be frustrated. So the whole point is that The material world, the world of nature, is marvelous so long as you don't try to lean on it, so long as you don't cling to it. And if you don't cling to it, you're going to have a wonderful time. Let's take for example a very controversial issue. All spiritual people are generally against lovemaking. Ramakrishna used to speak about the evil of woman and gold.

[25:52]

I've already demonstrated the evil of gold. But what about the evil of woman? In my point of view, yes, women can be a sort of evil if you attempt to protect them. I mean, if you can save another person, I love you so much I want to own you. and really cut it down, and, uh, all you would... what, like, that kind of up in that, where someone, um, claimed that he loved it quite so much that he climbed a mountain and made it after her. Well, that mountain, this is all what you get. And so, in other words, if you try to possess people and you make your sexual passion possessive in that way, then of course you are trying to tend to the physical world.

[27:04]

But you see, women are in a way much more interesting if you don't tend to them, if you let them be themselves and be free. And, in my opinion, you can have a very spiritual sex life if you are not possessive. If, on the other hand, you are possessive, then you're in trouble. But, you know, the average swami won't agree with that because he confuses. But he, by thinking that The body, the body that I touch, is something evil. He's hung up with it. It's like the story of the two then monks who were crossing the river. And the pond was very deep because of the flood. And there was a girl trying to get a cross. And one of the monks immediately picked her up, threw her over his shoulder, carried her across, put her down on the other side.

[28:10]

And then the monk went one way, she went another. And the other monk then. kind of the entire style, which he finally broke. And he said, do you realize that you broke the monaptic rule by touching and picking up a woman like that? And he said, oh, but I left her on the other side of the ring room, and you're still carrying. The whole question then is, Even you can find this to some extent in some rather irritable saint, Paul, where he speaks of the opposition of the flesh and the spirit. Now, this word, sarx, in Greek, the flesh, as he uses it, is really, as the giant points out, it's a spiritual category.

[29:11]

And for the Christian, you see, the Word is made flesh in Christ. And there will be the resurrection of the body and the final consummation of the universe. So you cannot really, as an Orthodox Christian, take an antagonistic attitude to the flesh. Why then does St. Paul take an antagonistic attitude to the flesh? Well, he could only save the situation by saying that he meant by the flesh a certain kind of spiritual category. He didn't mean this. But this isn't flesh. Flesh is a concept. This is not. And so the flesh, or you might say we talk about the decisions of the flesh, They have entirely to do with certain dynamics that we have about our bodies.

[30:22]

And that, again, is what I would call leaning on the world, exploiting it. When you take, as a Buddhist, you take the third precept, kamiso itachara vermanisi katharan samadhiya, And it's usually translated, I undertake the precept to refrain from adultery. It doesn't say anything of the kind. is passion. therefore is, I undertake the precept not to exploit the passions. So in other words, you may be bored, see? And you're feeling sort of empty and at a loose end, and you think, well, If in a perfectly spontaneous and natural way you fell in love with that woman, you wouldn't be going out of your way to get in trouble.

[31:29]

It would be appropriate and natural at the time. On the same way, a lot of people, instead of saying, let's commit adultery, when they feel sort of bored, they say, let's go and eat something. And so they become fatter and fatter and fatter because they're filling the spiritual battery in their psyche with food, which doesn't do the job. It's not the function of food to fill spiritual vacuum. So in this way, One exploits the appetites or the passions. Likewise, also, the fifth precept, sura merya madhaka madhatana, the list of intoxicating substances. And it doesn't say that you are not going to take them. It says you're not going to be intoxicated by them. In other words, the Buddhist may drink, but not get drunk. I don't know how that applies to psychedema.

[32:35]

That's another story. So one might say then that we are confused through and through about what we mean by the material world. And what I'm first of all doing is I'm just giving a number of illustrations would show how confused we are. And let me repeat, just to get it clear. In the first place, we confuse abstract symbols, as if we say numbers and words and formulae, with physical events, as we confuse money with consumable wealth. In the second glimpse, we confuse physical events, the whole class and category of physical events, with matter.

[33:45]

But matter, you see, is an idea. It's a concept. It's a concept of stuff, of something solid and permanent that you can catch hold of. Now, you just can't catch hold of the physical world. Physical world is the most evasive, elusive process that there is. It will not be cleaned down. And therefore, it fulfills all who require it. So what I'm saying, then, is that the non-abstract world, which, for you, we call unspeakable, but can tell you a lot of what we are, is the spiritual world. And the spiritual world is a tongue-in-a-tongue gap to the abstract form. In that sense, it's chakras. It's formless in another sense. The formless world is the wiggly. You see, when we say something is chakras, like a cloud, what shape has this cloud?

[34:56]

And you say, well, it's so vague, it's chakras. That's the real formless rhythm. The formal world is the one that human beings try to construct all the time. See, wherever human beings have been around, you see a rectangle in the straight line. And they're always trying to straighten things out. And so that's the very mark of our presence. I don't know why we do it. That's always been a problem with me. It's why architects are always using rectangles. But the thing is that they make us feel very uncomfortable if they don't. I have an architect friend who built somebody a house like a snail shell. And it spiraled in and in and in and in.

[35:59]

And the jar was right at the center. Look, everybody rebels against this house. They just feel very uncomfortable. It's the furniture that hurts them. Because all furniture is made to fit in a rectilinear theme. And we're always putting things in boxes. See, all thoughts, all words are labels on boxes. That's all we've got here to be boxed. And so we put ourselves in boxes. Everything is put in boxes. But actually, everything else in nature doesn't go that way. As, for example, the snail doesn't put itself in a box. The crab doesn't put itself in a box. It has these fascinating, gorgeous objects. What is, for example, more beautiful than a conch shell or a lovely scallop shell? These are gorgeous things.

[37:00]

We could make the most delicious shells out of concrete or plastics. They could be very beautiful. And we could distribute ourselves over the landscape like shellfish along with these shells. But then we have to live in boxing. There's nothing you can't fight. It's a system. So, you know, then you have to, you begin to build your furniture and chair, everything according to the shape, because they're easy to store away in a place that is a box in the workplace. But you see, that is this rectilineal world. This is unspiritual. This is the world of what we'll call the artificial, as distinct from the natural. And when we live in a world like that, we begin to have ourselves .

[38:11]

You begin to think that reality is this sort of straightened out situation that we all have to live in. And you don't remember that reality is precisely the wiggly world. See? we have realized that we are all wiggly. The problem is that we wiggle in rather the same way. We have head, two arms, two legs, et cetera. But notice how we do all sorts of things to ourselves to sort of elate our wiggliness, the way we dress, particularly men. Women are allowed to be a little bit more curvaceous and wiggler than men are. It's somewhat appreciated. But men go around in these square-cut suits and straight pants.

[39:16]

They're really, these clothes that we wear in the West are originally military uniforms. You know that? That's why they have buttons on the seat. Because they used to have buttons all the way up the sleeve so that people wouldn't wipe their noses on the sleeve. They were literary, my lord. And this uniform is being adopted all over the world. I was in Savannah in November. And the moment I got to Savannah, I saw the men were going around in sarongs. with long white shirts over them. So I bought such an outfit. And it is currently a part of me. And therefore, this kind of clothing looks extremely comfortable. They wear a sort of a stole, usually yellow-orange, which is a little scarf with fringe around her neck.

[40:18]

And it's a remote. A jeezy, wonderful, dumb, remote in-round. Well, I was invited to speak at the University of the Long County. When I got there, I found that it was very tense atmosphere. There was a great degree of anti-American feeling. As we cut off aid, they didn't approve of our aid in Vietnam. So I was an American speaker. But when I appeared, they started doing it. But I was wearing Chinese coat. And I got up and said, I had an interpreter who was a very bright psychology graduate student. And I got up and said, ladies and gentlemen, and the gentlemen, incidentally, were all wearing white shirts and pants. And I got up and said, ladies and gentlemen, I purposely put on tonight the old national dress. Because, ladies and gentlemen, it is practical.

[41:21]

You have developed this over many hundreds of years at the right time of growth for wearing the garment, and I find it very suitable. The second is, it is properly adapted to male anatomy. And there's a big lot of it. And the interpreter whispered to me, he said, you meant it that way, didn't you? But you know, that broke the ice. But you see, that kind of clothing follows the wiggeriness of things and doesn't contradict it. But what is the paradox of it? That both these Sinhalese clothes and Japanese clothes and Indonesian clothes don't attempt to violate the nature of cloth.

[42:26]

And they are more rectangular than our clothes. But they don't look that way when you put them on. You can take a kimono, and fold it, and pack it away. And when you unpack, you don't have to have it in the trailer. The Sinhalese Minister of Education's wife was talking to us about saris. She said, I've got these saris. I can pack 20 saris into a small suitcase. When I travel, I can wear three a day. There's nothing but an enormous piece of woven material, rectilinear. But they clearly see that since it is the nature of top to be woven this way and to be rectilinear, you shouldn't violate the nature of top when you make clothes. And so we, with all these fitted clothes that we have, with this extraordinary shoulder work,

[43:29]

and so on, they are impossible to pair. Every time you travel with a business ute, you have to get it pressed if you want to look decent. And that's true of many women's clothes, too. But by following the nature of cloth and not ballet, the cloth then will follow the nature of your body. And it will gracefully adapt to it and hang in just the right way. by, as it were, respecting the physical world. In either case, it all goes together. But this world, this physical world, is wiggly. And this is the most important thing to realize about it. That's it. We're living in a new world of Rorschach plot. There really is no way that the physical world is. In other words, the nature of truth, I said in the beginning, somebody had said that thoughts were made to conceal truth.

[44:34]

This is a fact, because there is no such thing as the truth that can be stated. In other words, ask the question, what is the true position of the stars in the Big Dipper? Well, it depends where you're looking at the problem. And there is no absolute position. So, in the same way, accountants, a good accountant will tell you that any balance sheet is simply a matter of opinion. There's nothing of the true state of affairs of a business. But we're all hooked on the idea that there is, you see, an external objected world, which is a certain way. and that it really is that way. History, for example, is a matter of opinion. History is an art, not a science.

[45:36]

It's something constructed, which is accepted as a more or less satisfactory explanation of events, which, as a matter of fact, don't have an explanation at all. Most of what happens in it is completely irrational. But people always have to feel that they've got to find a meaning. For example, you get sick. And you've lived a very good life. And you've been helpful to other people and done all that you might think. And you get counted. And you say to the churchman, why did this have to happen to me? And you're looking for an explanation, and there isn't one. It just happened that way. But people feel that they can't find an explanation. They feel very, very insecure. Why? Because they haven't been able to trade in technology. The world is not that way. So the truth, in other words, what is going on is, of course, a lot of wiggles.

[46:38]

But the way it is is always in relation to the way you are. In other words, however hard I hit a skinless drum it will make no noise because noise is the relationship between a fist and a skin so in exactly the same way light is the relationship between electrical energy and eyeballs it is you in other words who evoke the world and you evoke the world in accordance with what kind of a union you are, what kind of an organism. One organism evokes one world, another organism evokes another world. And so everything, reality is a kind of relationship. You've been listening to Alan Watts report one from a seminar entitled Veil of Thoughts.

[47:41]

How much the United States helped this organization establish its first Uh, industrial centers, you know, the truck building and the automobile industry and certain other... Let me ask Don Carson, are you online? Don, as a businessman in California, what are your perceptions and your hopes about the possibility for vast accelerations in East-West trade? I understand you're planning a trip. And the purpose of that, Gerrit?

[48:49]

Well, it would be, it would vary. In some cases, it would be actually those of men who would have the possibility of entering into trade agreements, but in other cases, it would be a broad perspective in terms of what the potential might be. Would you like to ask the question of our Russian friends in Moscow? Well, I'm really looking forward to it, personally, so... I know there are obstacles to trade, but being in a broad sense, with either Joseph or John there, what can we do to expedite the process to accelerate more meaningful trade between ourselves and the population? John, are you there? Yes. Can you have someone there comment on the possibility of rapid increases in business relationships between our two cultures? An opener is that you should always refer back to what Lenny used to say, that politics and foreign trade should never be mixed.

[49:57]

And, you know, the European Union is always trying to get, you know, good economic relations going with all countries, as long as it's not, you know, they make one of those business-like matters. They feel that everyone has to get by this. They've never tried to use economics and trade as a... Dana Perry was sitting here in Los Angeles. Dana, would you like to ask a question of our friends in Moscow? Well, I would in connection to the human side of U.S.-USSR relationships. I'm a firm proponent of that heart-to-heart connection that has to happen. If it happens through the communications technology or through economic negotiation, the main reason we're doing it is to create that person-to-person, heart-to-heart contact. I'm going to be taking 40 kids and adults to the Soviet Union in about two and a half weeks.

[51:01]

And we're doing it so we make those heart connections. So I want to ask Joseph and John and all those people, how are our kids going to be received by your kids in the Soviet Union? Did you hear the question? During last Moscow Film Festival of the 1983, hundreds of fluid kids were sharing their visions and their interests and films together. The American kids collected together in the University of California. They thought one hour of their TV program was filled with a myriad of kids. As a fact, we received hundreds of thousands of letters from all of them. And we were raffled a lot because of an American 12-year-old guy who said, Thank you, Joseph. And now, Chuck Alden.

[52:02]

Okay, we're going to take a 10-second break for the stations to identify themselves, and then we have a special report from Sharon Leeds on a very special meeting of veterans from both the United States and the Soviet Union coming up. And then we'll come back to the third Global Town Meeting, and we'll talk about projects in progress and projects in the future. You're listening to the third Global Town Meeting on the U.S. Radio Network. and what county will go to lead it? KALW in San Francisco, a community service in the San Francisco Unified School District. It was on April 25, 1945, on the Elbe River in Germany, that Russian and American soldiers embraced its comrades in arms and partners in victory against Nazi Germany.

[53:24]

It was this unification of Russians and Americans that ensured the defeat of Hitler and the end of the war. To commemorate this event and to promote peace and international goodwill, the The 40th Anniversary Journey for Peace will send a contingent of U.S. citizens led by American World War II veterans to Torgau, Germany to meet a contingent of Russian citizens led by Soviet World War II veterans. The American delegation will gather in Washington, D.C. on April 20 to return to historic places of the war in Europe and travel in the spirit of reconciliation from Amsterdam to Moscow. This project has been endorsed by a variety of prominent Americans, from Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole to Senator Paul Simon. World-renowned author Dez Turkle applauded the reunion. The 40th anniversary journey is a pilgrimage for Saturday as well as for peace. It recognizes...

[54:26]

that those we call our enemies quote us, quote, for once our staunch allies, the great and brave known as World War II, get their reminder that that which separates us is far, far less important than our balanced humanity and those ever-disminishing global abilities we call the Earth. And so I tell you, But he looked at life. Celebrating the 59th anniversary. Veteran John Booth in Bristol, England. Then you think that 20 years ago, these people met. On the back of the river house. They climbed the bloody end of the wall. Then it wound and happened to me. It was the greatest chance for peace the world had ever had. It got me sick. I might have been so bruised and slipped for one of those days. The pain of my pain. In Bremen, West Germany, Lutheran Minister von Sander urges us all to see the significance of this timely commemoration.

[55:36]

We, the people, are supporting the meeting at the Elko on the third 20th anniversary of the journey for peace. You see, we think it's very good to know that the biggest countries of the world, the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia, are working together for peace. And we think peace is only possible if they help together like in Geneva now, or if they work towards a better program. And I met the opportunities of the University of Wisconsin-Central Union, and I found out that the people there can work and have peace. And I'm at the opportunity to go to the U.S.A., and I found out that they're there, too, to have peace. So I think it's very necessary to come together and work for peace and the steps of reconciliation. Above all, the Journey for Peace recognizes that in spite of very real differences between our two systems, there are areas in which the U.S.

[56:58]

and the USSR can cooperate effectively in securing a just and lasting peace. To find out how you can join the Journey for Peace, you can call this toll-free number right now, 800-255-3000. That's 800-255-3000. And send information about upcoming events right to the Global Community Calendar, Box 1899, Burbank, California, 91507. I'm Sharon Reeds for the U.S. Radio Network. And this is Chuck Alden in Los Angeles, and you're listening to a live conference between Soviet and American citizens, called by those citizens on the eve of the very important arms talks in Geneva. In the coming moments, we will be talking about cooperative ventures of all different kinds between the people of the two countries. And we're very honored to have in our studio Mr. Ted Turner from Geneva.

[57:59]

WTBS and the CNN News Network. Dana Perry, a conflict resolutionist who has been working with the people at the laundromat level in the Soviet Union, dealing with people at all levels of society. The number of people on our conference call and people waiting to talk to you in the Soviet Union. The number you can call here to ask your questions and make your comments about this broadcast. about this meeting, about the picture of relations between the two countries, is area code 213-744-1717. That's area code 213-744-1717. Operators are on duty right now. And back to our moderator, Joel Schuch. Thank you, Chuck. It's always good to report good news, and it will take just a few minutes to do that. after which we'll return live to the Soviet Union. There are a number of projects underway right now intended to normalize people-to-people relations between both cultures. Don Carlson, are you online? Yes, I am. Don, can you explain briefly the conception of your book and the shape of taking the Soviet participation?

[59:04]

Well, the book is part of a really large reference, so if you're watching a whole variety of articles, You know, it's a whole variety of things, but you know, by the time it's memorized in a nutshell, it's basically a very positive thing. You're testing a whole variety of people participating, including a number of finalists, writers, writers from television, people smart, non-degree rankings, Norman Cousins, Richelieu's top program, and it's very big. We'll be focusing on it. Much of the work is public, but a lot of it hasn't been. And we met with all the people who had a big type of a vehicle that would be nominated for fighting, but meeting for the relevant work they might have worked up, it would pop out. It would aid in the idea that we're all involved in trying to do this work.

[60:10]

Now, we do have an outlier. And, Don, we do have confirmation that we have about a dozen contributions coming from the Soviet Union this week for that book. Well, that's wonderful, Joe. The probable name will be something you will want to be able to see. We're trying out five or six different names now on a survey. We'll talk to you about the final name picked out within the next five or six days. Thank you, Don. Greg Hiller, UN1. Is Greg Hiller with us at all? Not a man? For the project of having to do the jazz exchange, Chuck, would you like to explain that? Well, we're working with a gentleman by the name of Tom Evert out of San Francisco who just recently married and brought himself back a wife from the Soviet Union. And Tom, or Ted, is a jazz aficionado, and we're working on developing a project where there will be a joint exchange of jazz musicians between the United States and the Soviet Union.

[61:21]

And in our April 14th Global Talent Meeting, the fourth Global Talent Meeting, we have set aside about 20 minutes of the program where there will actually be a live stereo uplink from the Soviet Union. And the group there has yet to be announced, but the group here that has agreed to be a part of this exchange on April 14th is Weather Report. a very famous and well-known and great group here in the United States. We're looking forward to that portion of our Global Town Meeting. And I think Carol Rosin is on the conference call, and she has news about other events which will take place on April 14th. Are you there, Carol? Yes, I am. I'm really looking forward to the participation of Soviet scientists or the Academy of Sciences who will be talking about corporate venture in the States and about a company in the United States.

[62:22]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_83.53