So why am i writing this, when i never do stuff like this on my blog? Because i think that this movie ultimately amounts to a hit piece on someone i used to know a little bit. That, and, i fear that this movie will just stoke the public cynicism towards "spirituality". We need spirituality in our lives. There are a lot of quick buck gurus out there. Bhagavan is not one of them. His truth is far, far more complicated.
http://karmageddonthemovie.com/
http://www.bhagavandas.com/home.html
http://login.ramdass.org/WP/
Quick background: Bhagavan Das, born Kermit Michael Riggs, was one of the first Americans to go to India in the 60s, and was the person to introduce Ram Dass to Neem Karoli Baba. BD came back to the US after 7 years and became a sort of Rock star, drugs, sex, the whole bit. Google if you want to know more biography.
Jeff Brown is a Canadian lawyer who wanted to pursue his spirituality. So far, so good. He latched onto Bhagavan Das as a guru. Now the problems arise.
Bhagavan is both saint and sinner in one man. His spiritual kirtans and devotion are %150 sincere; he also has a large ego, likes food and drugs, loves sex with 18 year old girls, likes money and shopping, and talks in very plain, vulgar language. In short, a very earthy man, but one whose sins are venal and egotistic, not large and brutal, whose sins are more harmful to himself than anyone else, and whose spiritual practice has brought great light to many, many people. My testimonial: He taught me one of the greatest lessons of my spiritual life, which is that one can be a flawed human being and still be deeply, deeply spiritual.
For many people it is difficult to accept both the darkness and the light existing simultaneously. They usually feel the need to judge one way or the other. This movie focuses very much on the sinner side of Bhagavan. The saint gets little air time.
There is a phrase "when a pickpocket meets a saint, he sees only the pockets". My perception is that Jeff Brown simply was not spiritually mature enough to make this movie, but that his ego could not recognize this. The cynical, scared mind made this movie too soon, too quickly, not enough depth of practice to see more clearly a deeply complicated man.
A good example of this is the interview with Ram Das. Jeff does most of the talking, Ram Das gets in a word or two here and there. Why bother interviewing the man, if all you are going to do is repeat your own opinions. Maybe Ram Das did say a lot more and just got edited out, while Jeff Brown got edited in. I was really interested in what Ram Das had to say. I felt cheated, thought it was bullshit, a hatchet job. That may have been the point where i lost faith in this movie and the film maker.
In this movie Bhagavan really does display and talk about a lot of bad behaviour; ultimately i was left wondering if he was just trying to get Brown's goat, and i'm not going to defend or make excuses for bad behaviour, for example not honoring a contract he had signed to record some CDs.
I used to know Bhagavan at Harbin in the mid 90s when he was the kirtanwalla in residence. He was a totally no bullshit guy, anyone could talk to him, he made no pretenses about hiding his appetites. Didn't know him well, was not one of his inner circle, did play a dozen or so kirtans with him. One time, after the kirtan, i asked if i could hold his ektar (instrument). I literally got stoned and couldn't speak for about 15 minutes, just from holding the ektar for about a minute.
i loved his kirtans. I would lose interest after the kirtan was over when he started talking and playing guru, it just sounded to me like his ego took over. But in the kirtans, he really sounded as if he would die if god didn't come to him now. Very powerful, very real. I've never witnessed that degree of self surrender and self abnegation anywhere else. The lotus and the mud.
Another time i hitched a ride with Bhagavan from the front gate of Harbin to Santa Rosa (about 40 miles). He was driving this old total piece of junk someone had given him, and in about a mile the thing started to hesitate and grab. i totally expected the car to break down. Meanwhile, from the moment i had gotten in, i had heard Bhagavan doing his mantra. I jabbered away, he was polite enough to make some response, but basically he was into repeating his mantra, and this was not for my benefit. Anyway, the car keeps going, although i was sure that it was going to break down. We get to Calistoga, about halfway, Bhagavan pulls up to the coffee shop and says "i'm a scorpio, i need strong stimulation" (or something like that. Gets a coffee, offers to buy me one, we get to Santa Rosa a little later.
This movie was made 10 years after i knew Bhagavan. He's clearly changed, not just physically, and i did detect more negativity in him than i remembered- and, most people try to hide their flaws. Bhagavan is totally honest and sooner or later his seeds will be cooked and he will find peace in this world, not just in the world of spirit. i think that this will very much involve finding peace with his childhood with his mother, because even spiritual people have psychological issues.
I wish him nothing but good things.
Namaste
Jay Dancing Bear
Monday, December 17, 2012
Saturday, December 15, 2012
Simple statement of my politics
My politics are very simple.
I don't mind if some people have more than other people,
as long as everyone has enough,
especially enough time,
and
nature is honored,
humans are honored,
animals are honoredUltimately politics is an expression of a society's spiritual consciousness; the openness of it's heart, the clarity of it's thinking, and the values, beliefs and assumptions that the society holds.
All the laws, legal systems, tax codes, economic systems, everything, are the expression of the spiritual consciousness, the psyche, and the values, beliefs and assumptions of a society.
Thursday, December 13, 2012
Public Transportation
A few years ago i tried living in San Diego. I very quickly found out, no car=no life. Here are some letters i sent to a public transportation group and the San Diego MTS bus system.
Dear Union Trib,
I ride the bus. I just got a brochure inviting me to take public transit to Padres games. Well, that's great, except that the last bus to my house leaves downtown at 6:42, doesn't go downtown on Saturday, and doesn't run at all on Sunday. It's no problem, if i want to walk home 4 miles from the nearest Trolley stop.
How much money is the economy of San Diego losing, because people can not get out to stores and ballgames. Drivers have a sense of entitlement that roads will be there, and no one questions that, yet public transit is viewed as some form of charity.
It's not; public transit is essential to the economy, yet this city funds it at starvation levels and the state plays mickey mouse games, while the air gets polluted and the roads clog up with traffic.
Hundreds of millions of dollars of public subsidies for sports stadiums are sold to the public, on the basis that they stimulate the economy, yet MTS was just forced to gut Sunday service, because they didn't have $7 million. The Padres would have 5,000 more people in the stands at every game, if people could get home. I'd go. That's economic stimulus.
I have a challenge for you; assign a reporter to try and live his life for a week using only public transit, see what it's like.
yours truly
jay d. bear
written March 2010
--------------------
be well,
jay
----------
Dear MoveSD
Dear Union Trib,
I ride the bus. I just got a brochure inviting me to take public transit to Padres games. Well, that's great, except that the last bus to my house leaves downtown at 6:42, doesn't go downtown on Saturday, and doesn't run at all on Sunday. It's no problem, if i want to walk home 4 miles from the nearest Trolley stop.
How much money is the economy of San Diego losing, because people can not get out to stores and ballgames. Drivers have a sense of entitlement that roads will be there, and no one questions that, yet public transit is viewed as some form of charity.
It's not; public transit is essential to the economy, yet this city funds it at starvation levels and the state plays mickey mouse games, while the air gets polluted and the roads clog up with traffic.
Hundreds of millions of dollars of public subsidies for sports stadiums are sold to the public, on the basis that they stimulate the economy, yet MTS was just forced to gut Sunday service, because they didn't have $7 million. The Padres would have 5,000 more people in the stands at every game, if people could get home. I'd go. That's economic stimulus.
I have a challenge for you; assign a reporter to try and live his life for a week using only public transit, see what it's like.
yours truly
jay d. bear
written March 2010
--------------------
DDear Mayor and City Council,
The roads are not safe.
One million San Diegans could accomplish the majority of their transit needs by riding a bicycle, if the roads were safe. They could buy a bicycle for $25 at a garage sale or thrift store, oil up the chain, put some air in the tires, and be good to go,
if the roads were safe.
Kids could bike to school (and get some exercise), people could run small errands, bike to work, etc.
if the roads were safe
The roads are not safe
I am specifically talking about surface roads, not freeways.
MTS has been forced to cut service, especially on evenings and Sundays. That means that there are a lot of jobs that people without a car can not apply for, because they can't get there, and that includes low income people who have trouble affording a car. I am speaking as someone who has worked a graveyard shift in a supermarket, who has been a janitor, a dishwasher, a security guard, all those low paying service jobs that need to be done.
San Diego would be God's gift to the bicycle, if the roads were safe. Great weather, long flat stretches, perfect for non polluting two wheelers, if the roads were safe.
The roads are not safe.
Also, just to mention all the drunk drivers on the roads when the bars close, and no public transit to keep them off the roads. Those bars and restaurants need a lot of service staff, people who could, perhaps, ride bicycles home if it was safe and not too far.
------
I live on a "quiet" street in Pt. Loma. My housemate's cat got killed by a speeding car. I was at a garage sale a few blocks away, told story to the guy, he said his dog was killed by a speeding car. This on "quiet", "side" streets. I have heard so many stories of bicyclists being hit by cars, and not just from people i've talked to. I've sat at coffeeshops and overheard people talking about being hit by cars.
Too many San Diegans are being terrorized by dangerous, speeding drivers who feel like they own the road.
I live about 4 miles from Old town transit center. If i thought i would survive the ride down Rosecrans, i could bicycle there and catch a trolley. However, i have no wish to die or be maimed for life. To tell you the truth, just crossing the street as a pedestrian can be quite an adventure, and i am a healthy, active man, not an old woman moving slow, like my 88yr old mother.
----------
I have not written you all just to bitch. Here are some specific proposals
1 A ZERO TOLERANCE POLICY FOR SPEEDING ON SURFACE STREETS
There are laws, speeding limits posted. Scofflaws ignore them. My understanding is that the role of the police department is to keep the public safe. What is more dangerous than unsafe driving?
2 Paint the bike lanes a solid color, i.e., not just a thin line, but a whole 3 foot wide paint job.
It's a band aid, but it would help. Of course the real solution is completely separate bicycle routes, but as a step in the right direction, a paint job would be much more visible and save lives.
3 Have the planning department study the feasibility of planning bicycle use as %25 of transit use. It's cheap, it's healthy, it's fun. San Diego has enough traffic congestion and air pollution, it's not like it needs more. The bicycle is the perfect solution for a lot of people, if it can be made safe.
------------
It's true that a lot of people haven't thought of bicycling as much as i am suggesting, but when it talk to my car driving friends (i don't drive), when they think about it a little, the answer they usually give is that it sounds good and they would do more riding, if the safe bicycle routes were there.
Thank you for your time and attention to these matters.
Yours Truly,
Jay D. Bear
---------------------------- The roads are not safe.
One million San Diegans could accomplish the majority of their transit needs by riding a bicycle, if the roads were safe. They could buy a bicycle for $25 at a garage sale or thrift store, oil up the chain, put some air in the tires, and be good to go,
if the roads were safe.
Kids could bike to school (and get some exercise), people could run small errands, bike to work, etc.
if the roads were safe
The roads are not safe
I am specifically talking about surface roads, not freeways.
MTS has been forced to cut service, especially on evenings and Sundays. That means that there are a lot of jobs that people without a car can not apply for, because they can't get there, and that includes low income people who have trouble affording a car. I am speaking as someone who has worked a graveyard shift in a supermarket, who has been a janitor, a dishwasher, a security guard, all those low paying service jobs that need to be done.
San Diego would be God's gift to the bicycle, if the roads were safe. Great weather, long flat stretches, perfect for non polluting two wheelers, if the roads were safe.
The roads are not safe.
Also, just to mention all the drunk drivers on the roads when the bars close, and no public transit to keep them off the roads. Those bars and restaurants need a lot of service staff, people who could, perhaps, ride bicycles home if it was safe and not too far.
------
I live on a "quiet" street in Pt. Loma. My housemate's cat got killed by a speeding car. I was at a garage sale a few blocks away, told story to the guy, he said his dog was killed by a speeding car. This on "quiet", "side" streets. I have heard so many stories of bicyclists being hit by cars, and not just from people i've talked to. I've sat at coffeeshops and overheard people talking about being hit by cars.
Too many San Diegans are being terrorized by dangerous, speeding drivers who feel like they own the road.
I live about 4 miles from Old town transit center. If i thought i would survive the ride down Rosecrans, i could bicycle there and catch a trolley. However, i have no wish to die or be maimed for life. To tell you the truth, just crossing the street as a pedestrian can be quite an adventure, and i am a healthy, active man, not an old woman moving slow, like my 88yr old mother.
----------
I have not written you all just to bitch. Here are some specific proposals
1 A ZERO TOLERANCE POLICY FOR SPEEDING ON SURFACE STREETS
There are laws, speeding limits posted. Scofflaws ignore them. My understanding is that the role of the police department is to keep the public safe. What is more dangerous than unsafe driving?
I am requesting that you, San Diego elected officials, especially you, Mr. Mayor, direct the San Diego Police Department to adopt a zero tolerance policy towards speeding and unsafe driving in general.
Immediately start a citywide campaign to issue tickets to anyone speeding on a surface street. People will slow down, the roads will get safer.
The traffic laws are in place for a reason. Shouldn't drivers be required to obey them?
This will have the additional benefit of putting some money in the city's coffers.Immediately start a citywide campaign to issue tickets to anyone speeding on a surface street. People will slow down, the roads will get safer.
The traffic laws are in place for a reason. Shouldn't drivers be required to obey them?
2 Paint the bike lanes a solid color, i.e., not just a thin line, but a whole 3 foot wide paint job.
It's a band aid, but it would help. Of course the real solution is completely separate bicycle routes, but as a step in the right direction, a paint job would be much more visible and save lives.
3 Have the planning department study the feasibility of planning bicycle use as %25 of transit use. It's cheap, it's healthy, it's fun. San Diego has enough traffic congestion and air pollution, it's not like it needs more. The bicycle is the perfect solution for a lot of people, if it can be made safe.
------------
It's true that a lot of people haven't thought of bicycling as much as i am suggesting, but when it talk to my car driving friends (i don't drive), when they think about it a little, the answer they usually give is that it sounds good and they would do more riding, if the safe bicycle routes were there.
Thank you for your time and attention to these matters.
Yours Truly,
Jay D. Bear
be well,
jay
----------
Dear MoveSD
I am putting my ideas in the form of an email. Please share them with the rest of the move staff
-------------
Strategy for Public Transportation
I live in two worlds here in San Diego. By birth and education, i am middle class, and my friends are middle class. On the other hand, as a musician i am poor and ride the bus, no car. Here's my take on what i see:
---The people i see on the bus (commuters excepted) seem %90 poor and low education. I doubt many are registered to vote. A lot of them don't speak English that well. As far as i can tell, there is almost no political power to be found in this group.
----My middle class friends, who are educated and politically empowered, are barely aware that public transportation exists, have no idea what it's like to ride, feel no connection with it whatsoever, no personal investment or motivation to make it better.
So where is the political will to provide a functional MTS going to come from, other than a few visionaries?
My answer, the business community.
The reason i am writing this is to say that, in my opinion,
MoveSD and other transportation groups would do well to do extensive, ongoing education and outreach to the Chamber of Commerce and the business community, making the following points;
* ACCESS How much money is business losing, because poorer people can not get to shops, restaurants, ballgames. Yes, low income people don't have as much money as the middle class, but there are a lot of them, and they do spend money. How many more seats would be filled in movie theatres, followed by a meal afterwards?
* EXTRA CASH TO SPEND If poorer people could save money by leaving their cars parked, they would have more money to spend at local business, and it would get spent.
* GAS PRICES As gas prices go up, even middle class people are going out less. If it's going to cost someone $20 in gas, just to go out for the day, they are less likely to go, and will have less money to spend. If they could safely, comfortably, conveniently get everywhere they wanted to go for a $5 day pass, local business would benefit.
* ACCESS TO JOBS-benefits both workers and employers
* EASIER, MORE COMFORTABLE COMMUTING this is more of a pitch to the middle class
-----------
* SPECIFIC PROPOSAL
* ONE CENT INCREASE IN SALES TAX, designated, legally reserved, for public trans. If the business community supported it, if middle class people got the idea that the benefits to SD's economy would benefit them, it would pass.
------
The other idea i got from last night is the huge need to form a coalition, a United Front, of every non-car transportation group in the city. Pedestrians, bicyclists, skateboarders, etc. Maybe a name like SANCOATS, san diego coalition of alternative transit supporters, or whatever.
--
be well,
jay
-------------
Strategy for Public Transportation
I live in two worlds here in San Diego. By birth and education, i am middle class, and my friends are middle class. On the other hand, as a musician i am poor and ride the bus, no car. Here's my take on what i see:
---The people i see on the bus (commuters excepted) seem %90 poor and low education. I doubt many are registered to vote. A lot of them don't speak English that well. As far as i can tell, there is almost no political power to be found in this group.
----My middle class friends, who are educated and politically empowered, are barely aware that public transportation exists, have no idea what it's like to ride, feel no connection with it whatsoever, no personal investment or motivation to make it better.
So where is the political will to provide a functional MTS going to come from, other than a few visionaries?
My answer, the business community.
The reason i am writing this is to say that, in my opinion,
MoveSD and other transportation groups would do well to do extensive, ongoing education and outreach to the Chamber of Commerce and the business community, making the following points;
* ACCESS How much money is business losing, because poorer people can not get to shops, restaurants, ballgames. Yes, low income people don't have as much money as the middle class, but there are a lot of them, and they do spend money. How many more seats would be filled in movie theatres, followed by a meal afterwards?
* EXTRA CASH TO SPEND If poorer people could save money by leaving their cars parked, they would have more money to spend at local business, and it would get spent.
* GAS PRICES As gas prices go up, even middle class people are going out less. If it's going to cost someone $20 in gas, just to go out for the day, they are less likely to go, and will have less money to spend. If they could safely, comfortably, conveniently get everywhere they wanted to go for a $5 day pass, local business would benefit.
* ACCESS TO JOBS-benefits both workers and employers
* EASIER, MORE COMFORTABLE COMMUTING this is more of a pitch to the middle class
-----------
* SPECIFIC PROPOSAL
* ONE CENT INCREASE IN SALES TAX, designated, legally reserved, for public trans. If the business community supported it, if middle class people got the idea that the benefits to SD's economy would benefit them, it would pass.
------
The other idea i got from last night is the huge need to form a coalition, a United Front, of every non-car transportation group in the city. Pedestrians, bicyclists, skateboarders, etc. Maybe a name like SANCOATS, san diego coalition of alternative transit supporters, or whatever.
--
be well,
jay
Sunday, December 9, 2012
i do not hate the rich, and i do not want a revolution
I want to clarify one point. I do not hate the rich, i have no problem with some people having more than others, even much more. i don't begrudge it to them, i'm not jealous, i don't think they're bad people just because they've got a lot of bucks. I've met a lot of nice people who have money.
What i do have a BIG problem with is cheating, rigging the game, taking advantage of your position of power to exploit people as much as possible, to pay people as little as you can and charge them as much as possible in rents and other costs, so that you can engorge your already bloated asset sheet, while people go homeless and lack the simple basics of life.
i believe in the old fashioned values of an honest day's work for an honest day's wage, and a system that treats everyone fairly. An honest day's wage means a living wage, a wage such that you can take care of your expenses and have something left over. I do not believe that is happening today, not just in wages, but in every facet of economic life. How can a millionaire pay a lower percentage of their income in taxes than a factory worker. How can a landlord take depreciation allowance, while a house owner can't. Why do you pay sales tax on the purchase of a hammer , but not a stock market transaction.
It's cheating, pure and simple, legal cheating because of legal bribes to government officials in the form of "campaign finance contributions", so that loopholes are added to obscure provisions of bills, often at the last minute, under the cover of darkness.
In my opinion, it's only a small percentage of the super elite who engage in this deliberate corruption of the system. My understanding is that most people with large incomes are trust fund babies who get their checks, they leave it to the money managers, usually one or two people in each family, to handle the business. The end result is the same, a system designed for the rich to get richer by feeding off of the rest of society.
In simple terms,
The poor and the middle class are just so much hamburger for the top tenth of one percent
The system is rigged
Government is bribed
so what else is new?
-------------------------
and as for revolution
I want change, i want evolution, i want what i consider fairness and decency.
I do not want a revolution, i don't want chaos, i don't want bloodshed, i don't want a violent takeover of the government. I don't need punishment of those i consider to have been wrongdoers in this situation, i just want for things to get to where one can make a decent living doing honorable work, which i wish would include being an artist, which is who i am.
The average person, including me, can live with the fact that they're being exploited, so long as we can still get by. What concerns me is that ruling elites tend to get stupidly, arrogantly, blindly greedy, rather than just plain greedy, and take so much that the common people don't have enough to live on, as in the French revolution. No longer content with %90, they want it all, and then things falls apart. In many cases, the situation gets worse after a revolution than before. I don't want that.
Fox news and right wing folks talk about the radicals on the left. My opinion is that the people the plutocracy needs to fear are the tea party types with guns in their hand, because when it does finally get through their thick skulls that the plutocracy has, in effect, declared war on them, they will fight back in the way they understand, violence. Left wingers talk a lot, sign petitions and post on Facebook, but they're a bunch of peaceniks, myself included. For example, i really believe the old phrase "hatred does not cease by hatred, but by love alone". I don't think the tea party thinks that way.
I'm not saying any of this is going to happen, i don't want it to, i don't think it will. The reason i am posting this is just to make clear that i want positive change, not violent revolution.
Wednesday, December 5, 2012
The End of the age of Materialism
The first three words of ECOnomy are ECO (Jim Bell). That's the central truth we all need to remember. Sustainable is not some hippy dippy feel good idea, it's the key to our survival. Just like any individual, the economies of the world have to live on the budget of what the earth will sustain.
The economies of America and the world are based on fantasy and denial. Whether the societies are capitalist, socialist, communist or whatever, ultimately they are all materialists.
There's only so long the illusion that we can loot and pollute the earth without any consequences can be maintained.
Resources are not infinite,
the ability of the environment to absorb poisons of various sorts without serious consequences to our own health and well being has been reached, including electromagnetic pollution, not to mention various other manifestations of fantasy thinking, such as GMOs and fracking.
We are living in what could be called The Age of Pollution, or perhaps the Age of the Two Experiments, biological and electro-magnetic.
1) The Biological pollution experiment-Starting with the beginning of factories, toxins were spewed out in all directions. Now there are toxic chemicals in almost every product on the market today, especially widespread use of poisons to grow food. That has gone into overdrive with the sudden shift into GMO usage, basically using the whole world as a testing lab, and the people in it as guinea pigs.
2) The Electromagnetic pollution experiment-living organisms, indeed the earth itself, are electromagnetic beings just as much as we are flesh and bone. Starting with the widespread introduction of electricity, power lines everywhere, now going into overdrive with computers, wifi, cellphones, cellphone towers. and all the rest of the electronics that modern life seems to revolve around, ubiquitous everywhere one goes, there is another worldwide experiment going on, an experiment in which the effects of all these devices are impacting every living being on the planet.
These are two big experiments.
We can no longer base our economies on the production and consumption of material goods. Particularly odious and destructive are disposability, and the conspicuous consumption and massive waste seen especially in the US and other wealthy countries.
Voluntary Simplicity and efficiency are the order of the day, but what about jobs?
One thing no one talks about when asking where will people work is that- how much income someone needs is directly dependent on prices, especially housing and food, and this is very much a function of the equality or inequality of a society, the degree of exploitation imposed by the haves on the have-nots.
How many hours do you have to work to pay your rent? In the US in the 50s, one could push a broom for $1/hr and rent a room for $10/month. You could pay rent with 10 hours work per month. Now the ratio is a lot more brutal. Who sets those prices. How do the laws of a country affect that? It's not so simple.
The simplest things people could do would be to
1) go vegetarian, even vegan
2) get out of their cars and on to a bicycle, walk or public transit
3) stop buying stuff not really needed
Sounds great, but how safe are the roads for bicycles, how much public transit is there? Can people get where they need to go and do what they need to do? That takes a different infrastructure.
What happens to all the people out of jobs because people stop buying? My view is that most jobs are unnecessary, especially when one calculates in the subsidized waste and inefficiency and consumerism so rampant today. However, those jobs feel very necessary to the people working them. Is America suddenly going to go to a 15 hour workweek, so that there is work for everyone? Will prices come down to adjust? It's not so simple.
It's one thing when disasters happen in isolated instances, but if it happens on a large scale?
What happens when rising oceans force people, including businesses, to move somewhere else?
What happens when storms and fires destroy homes and businesses?
What happens when various disasters happen as a result of fracking and other insane practices.
Etc. (too many things to list all
Where will people get money, how will they live?
1 What we work at, what jobs the economy is based on, must inevitably change, because right now jobs produce a lot of poisons, and this is simply not sustainable. Already cancer rates have skyrocketed, not to mention all sorts of other health problems that ultimately come down to a toxic environment. Not to mention global climate disruption, the oceans being fished out, loss of soil nutrition, ad infinitum.
2 The whole issue of wage and social inequality will make a huge difference in how much suffering this change entails
3 Voluntary simplicity and conscious consumption must be seen as the patriotic and socially useful choices they are, rather than as a bunch of granola munchers living weird lives.
How can we have good lives, doing useful and productive work that doesn't result in poisoning ourselves and the planet?
How do we transition as gracefully as possible to this new economic system?
The issue is not just the rich who own the companies and the governments and buy the laws. The issue is the attitude shared by so many people that, in effect, the earth is just something to eat. Translated, that means that if their job, which pays their rent and buys their food, if doing that job means toxic waste in a river, well, they just do it. Perhaps they would prefer not to, but they don't feel they have a choice. Truth be told, in many cases they may not apparently have much choice.
Many may not even think about it all.
So now we get into values and self esteem. So long as people peg their self esteem to how much they earn and spend, especially how much stuff they buy, well, big problem. This is especially true of men, who often have been taught that the way to prove how much of a man they are is spend, spend, spend.
And for women, they seem to like lots of nice things.
Does it make a difference how we live our personal material lives?
In an old article, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has been a real warrior for the environment, said that personal choices by a few wouldn't do much in the larger scheme of things, that laws were needed. Statistically speaking he is correct, however in metaphysical terms i think he's wrong. I think of the story about a mother who brought her child to Gandhi and said "please tell him to stop eating sugar". Gandhi said come back in two weeks. When they came back, Gandhi said "Stop eating sugar". The woman asked why they had to wait two weeks, Gandhi said, 2 weeks ago i had not stopped eating sugar.
Always carrying a shopping bag, coffee cup, portable plate and silverware, takeout container with you; being very conscious how much water runs when washing dishes, indeed starting with whether a dish really needs to be washed or not, these are small things, and let's face it, there are people who can waste in a week what we can save in a year, but... in metaphysics there is the principle of "if you take one step towards god, god takes ten steps towards you". It's really all a lesson in consciousness, consciousness in the everyday details of our lives as a spiritual practice.
Ultimately, what has created these problems is a lack of consciousness and self responsibility, what will solve them is consciousness and self responsibility on a global scale. i realize that's a lot to ask, but there it is.
Every spiritual teaching says find fulfillment within, don't look without. Ultimately i take the view that this whole massive crisis, this upheaval, is for the purposes of spiritual growth, of teaching consciousness, in the everyday details of our lives. In a lot of teachings, there is the view that we are spiritual beings having a material experience, and that all that falls shall rise again, that nothing is created or destroyed, just transformed, speaking on a spiritual and energetic level. None of which excuses or condones the rape of the earth by a society that is living unconsciously. Well, we are about to become a lot more conscious on a mass level, so see the silver lining, which is that, at the end of however long this next period of upheaval lasts, which could be hundreds of years, humanity will have evolved to a new level.
The economies of America and the world are based on fantasy and denial. Whether the societies are capitalist, socialist, communist or whatever, ultimately they are all materialists.
There's only so long the illusion that we can loot and pollute the earth without any consequences can be maintained.
Resources are not infinite,
the ability of the environment to absorb poisons of various sorts without serious consequences to our own health and well being has been reached, including electromagnetic pollution, not to mention various other manifestations of fantasy thinking, such as GMOs and fracking.
We are living in what could be called The Age of Pollution, or perhaps the Age of the Two Experiments, biological and electro-magnetic.
1) The Biological pollution experiment-Starting with the beginning of factories, toxins were spewed out in all directions. Now there are toxic chemicals in almost every product on the market today, especially widespread use of poisons to grow food. That has gone into overdrive with the sudden shift into GMO usage, basically using the whole world as a testing lab, and the people in it as guinea pigs.
2) The Electromagnetic pollution experiment-living organisms, indeed the earth itself, are electromagnetic beings just as much as we are flesh and bone. Starting with the widespread introduction of electricity, power lines everywhere, now going into overdrive with computers, wifi, cellphones, cellphone towers. and all the rest of the electronics that modern life seems to revolve around, ubiquitous everywhere one goes, there is another worldwide experiment going on, an experiment in which the effects of all these devices are impacting every living being on the planet.
These are two big experiments.
We can no longer base our economies on the production and consumption of material goods. Particularly odious and destructive are disposability, and the conspicuous consumption and massive waste seen especially in the US and other wealthy countries.
Voluntary Simplicity and efficiency are the order of the day, but what about jobs?
One thing no one talks about when asking where will people work is that- how much income someone needs is directly dependent on prices, especially housing and food, and this is very much a function of the equality or inequality of a society, the degree of exploitation imposed by the haves on the have-nots.
How many hours do you have to work to pay your rent? In the US in the 50s, one could push a broom for $1/hr and rent a room for $10/month. You could pay rent with 10 hours work per month. Now the ratio is a lot more brutal. Who sets those prices. How do the laws of a country affect that? It's not so simple.
The simplest things people could do would be to
1) go vegetarian, even vegan
2) get out of their cars and on to a bicycle, walk or public transit
3) stop buying stuff not really needed
Sounds great, but how safe are the roads for bicycles, how much public transit is there? Can people get where they need to go and do what they need to do? That takes a different infrastructure.
What happens to all the people out of jobs because people stop buying? My view is that most jobs are unnecessary, especially when one calculates in the subsidized waste and inefficiency and consumerism so rampant today. However, those jobs feel very necessary to the people working them. Is America suddenly going to go to a 15 hour workweek, so that there is work for everyone? Will prices come down to adjust? It's not so simple.
It's one thing when disasters happen in isolated instances, but if it happens on a large scale?
What happens when rising oceans force people, including businesses, to move somewhere else?
What happens when storms and fires destroy homes and businesses?
What happens when various disasters happen as a result of fracking and other insane practices.
Etc. (too many things to list all
Where will people get money, how will they live?
1 What we work at, what jobs the economy is based on, must inevitably change, because right now jobs produce a lot of poisons, and this is simply not sustainable. Already cancer rates have skyrocketed, not to mention all sorts of other health problems that ultimately come down to a toxic environment. Not to mention global climate disruption, the oceans being fished out, loss of soil nutrition, ad infinitum.
2 The whole issue of wage and social inequality will make a huge difference in how much suffering this change entails
3 Voluntary simplicity and conscious consumption must be seen as the patriotic and socially useful choices they are, rather than as a bunch of granola munchers living weird lives.
How can we have good lives, doing useful and productive work that doesn't result in poisoning ourselves and the planet?
How do we transition as gracefully as possible to this new economic system?
The issue is not just the rich who own the companies and the governments and buy the laws. The issue is the attitude shared by so many people that, in effect, the earth is just something to eat. Translated, that means that if their job, which pays their rent and buys their food, if doing that job means toxic waste in a river, well, they just do it. Perhaps they would prefer not to, but they don't feel they have a choice. Truth be told, in many cases they may not apparently have much choice.
Many may not even think about it all.
So now we get into values and self esteem. So long as people peg their self esteem to how much they earn and spend, especially how much stuff they buy, well, big problem. This is especially true of men, who often have been taught that the way to prove how much of a man they are is spend, spend, spend.
And for women, they seem to like lots of nice things.
Does it make a difference how we live our personal material lives?
In an old article, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has been a real warrior for the environment, said that personal choices by a few wouldn't do much in the larger scheme of things, that laws were needed. Statistically speaking he is correct, however in metaphysical terms i think he's wrong. I think of the story about a mother who brought her child to Gandhi and said "please tell him to stop eating sugar". Gandhi said come back in two weeks. When they came back, Gandhi said "Stop eating sugar". The woman asked why they had to wait two weeks, Gandhi said, 2 weeks ago i had not stopped eating sugar.
Always carrying a shopping bag, coffee cup, portable plate and silverware, takeout container with you; being very conscious how much water runs when washing dishes, indeed starting with whether a dish really needs to be washed or not, these are small things, and let's face it, there are people who can waste in a week what we can save in a year, but... in metaphysics there is the principle of "if you take one step towards god, god takes ten steps towards you". It's really all a lesson in consciousness, consciousness in the everyday details of our lives as a spiritual practice.
Ultimately, what has created these problems is a lack of consciousness and self responsibility, what will solve them is consciousness and self responsibility on a global scale. i realize that's a lot to ask, but there it is.
Every spiritual teaching says find fulfillment within, don't look without. Ultimately i take the view that this whole massive crisis, this upheaval, is for the purposes of spiritual growth, of teaching consciousness, in the everyday details of our lives. In a lot of teachings, there is the view that we are spiritual beings having a material experience, and that all that falls shall rise again, that nothing is created or destroyed, just transformed, speaking on a spiritual and energetic level. None of which excuses or condones the rape of the earth by a society that is living unconsciously. Well, we are about to become a lot more conscious on a mass level, so see the silver lining, which is that, at the end of however long this next period of upheaval lasts, which could be hundreds of years, humanity will have evolved to a new level.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)