a physical copy of this book
can be
purchase here
it is offered
below
to be read for free as well
download
free pdf e-book for tablets etc., here
On the Nature of Public Life
or
The Soul of a People, the Spirit of a Nation,
and the Sacrifices of its
Leaders.
a collection of essays, some old, some new,
on politics
and related social issues
by Joel A. Wendt
social
philosopher...and occasional fool
includes the four poems called:
the America
Quartet
table of
contents
introduction (maybe page 3)
1) The Soul
of a People, the Spirit of a Nation and the sacrifices of its
Leaders. (somewhere around page 5)
2) Re-imagining
the
Conduct of the Presidency - a Presidential Campaign as an Act of
Statecraft and
the Presidency as the Art and Craft of Statesmanship (probably page 10)
3) some
of us
remember (a poem) (page 25?)
4) A
Forgotten Resource: the American Spirit (I'd
guess page 29)
part one: The American Will: to sacrifice for an Ideal
part two: Economic Tyranny and the American Spirit
part
three:
The Word,
the Idea of Property, and the Creation of a true
American Culture
5) Song
of
the Grandfathers - real wealth (wisdom), and the
redemption of
social and political existence (civilization) (most
likely 59)
6) the
Rape
of the Republic (a poem)
7) Basic
Conceptions: fundamentals of a new
social
view
8) The
Future
9) The
Coming
Collapse:
Civilization on the Brink
10) Beyond
Columbine:
appreciating the patterns of social meaning hidden in the
Columbine
Tragedy.
11) Civil
Society:
its
potential and its mystery
12) America
Sings (a poem)
13) Citizen
Governance: the
Future of the Republic form of Government
14)
the
Future of Business Corporations - individual
self-development
and economic leadership -
15) the
gift
of another's eyes (a poem)
16) surfing
the
coming tsunami of history:
part one: the descent into madness - government during the end of a civilization
part two: what a sane government might look like - how the power of the presidency could be applied in the coming time of social chaos
part three: on the law
and the spirit -
changing fundamentals, including the U.S. Constitution
Appendices:
1) Eisenhower's Farewell Speech
2) the gift of the word (a poem)
3) a short
bibliography
introduction
I am not sure that there is any real organic order to this collection, but rather suspect that the reader could start anywhere, jump around and skip what seems uninteresting.
That said, this
collection of essays
(except for those written for this book) were mostly written
over the
last 15 or so years, starting in the early 1990's, the first
time I ran
for President. Few will know of those efforts (three
failures, as
it were), for I really only ran in a closet. My thinking
about
the nature of campaigns was a bit unrealistic, and I also
choose help
from people who were not equipped to truly aid in such an
endeavor.
The main
obstacle I ran into, oddly
enough, was that while I wanted to run a quite different
campaign than
was usual, no one wanted to believe I was serious unless I was
acting
in a typical or formulaic fashion.
That said, you
could say that I didn't
think very clearly about what was really involved in such an
effort,
and that lack of clarity meant failure, at least in the sense
of
engaging the public in ways expected of presidential
candidates.
The fact is, that while I might have made an excellent
President,
I sucked at being a typical politician. I knew, of
course, that
there was a difference between being a true public servant,
and being a
politician, but I hadn't really thought through (at
that time) what it meant for my
various
campaigns.
I am not upset
that I failed at being a
politician - it is not something at which I would have been
proud to
have succeeded. Nor was the effort at political writing,
during
those years, in any sense without value, for in the act of
putting on
the hat of running for office, I did discover that how one
thought
about such as our shared political and social life was quite
different,
than if one is merely being a critic, a researcher or
otherwise an
ordinary citizen.
Also over the
years, some of these essays
were rewritten, and some of the candidacy elements removed for
various
reasons. Even so, I do believe that it will not hurt to
make this
record of the evolution of my political thought, since this is
being
done using the open source on-demand publishing resources to
be found
at www.lulu.com. This means that no paper is wasted,
unless
someone wants to read what is here. Its all just ones
and zeros
in a server, until someone thinks it might be of interest.
Nor are all the
essays from my political
campaigns - several are the results of my social research.
I'll
make the necessary distinction in the introduction to the
individual
essays, so the reader may know which hat I was wearing at the
time of
writing - a seeker of public office, or a student of the
social.
The poems
included below were more of a
necessary expression of pain at the degeneration of the
Republic, and
at the lack of the pursuit of virtue by those seeking office.
Our
Republic very much has to be infused with virtue in order to
live,
which is why my main political pamphlet is called: Uncommon
Sense*:
the Degeneration, and the Redemption, of Political Life in
America.
Is this book a
mere curiosity then?
I don't think so, but I'll leave the full judgment of
that to
others. I have also broken the essays up with four poems
(as
noted above), which I call the American Quartet. These
are
scattered throughout this book. In addition, I have made
here and
there a few changes or additions to the older essays, as well
as
written material original to this book.
This older
material should also been seen
as a many yeared background to my published essay: Uncommon
Sense*:
the Degeneration, and the Redemption, of Political Life in
America (available at www.lulu.com).
Irregular updates on my views can be found on my seldom
read
blog: Hermit's Weblog: everything your
mother never taught you about how the
world really works:
http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/blog/ (which will also be available
in the
summer of 2008 on my lulu.com storefront for all my writings
(http://stores.lulu.com/store.php?fAcctID=775446).
*****************************
The Soul of a People, the Spirit of a Nation
and the sacrifices of its
Leaders.
At the time I
am writing this (late
winter 2008), America has been involved in a over-lengthy and
essentially pointless Presidential Campaign for at least a
year.
There is more to come, and the main result of this
period of
political excess is neither light nor understanding of the
real
difficulties we face in the coming times. Neither Party
has much
to offer, and few candidates have any real qualifications that
make
them rise above the field of essentially ambitious
politicians.
The most honest
about the situation of
government, Ron Paul, is also (by virtue of being a
Libertarian)
devoted to an ideology whose logical conclusions are often
inhumane.
Another, Dennis Kucinich, has the virtue of being right on a
number of issues, but doesn't think deeply enough.
Barack
Obama is the most likely to help the nation at least have hope
during
the coming times, but he also lacks the qualities of a
Statesman so
desperately needed. The Clintons seem on the verge of a
meltdown
- Bill has gotten totally out of control, and Hillary can't
seem to
reign him in.
McCain is too
old, and not smart enough.
Romney too much the clever politician. Giuliani
has
no heart, and Huckabee has faith and personality without
any
common sense. Al Gore would be good, having actually
become a
Statesman, but he isn't running, and there is not much chance
the
Democrat Party will have the courage to draft his leadership
(in the
best sense of this, he is someone who ought to be courted and
won, for
at the very least such an approach puts him outside the
vanities of the
current campaign).
We really need
to ask ourselves by what
rational process do these people come to seek this office, and
whether
that process is itself (by the absence of any real stature in
any of
these people) is now proved to be so diseased as to be
completely
useless. What do we need in highest public office, and
how do we
find those which can be trusted to serve (the current office
holder,
Bush II never could be trusted to do anything right, and how
he ends up
being President is a horror story all of its own)?
In an effort to
shed some light, I will
try next to take some concepts from the title to this first
essay, and
see if these can illuminate the underlying nature of how we
have gotten
in such a mess. Three words (concepts) are crucial:
soul, spirit
and sacrifice, so let us take them up one by one.
the Soul of a
People
Everyone
understands this idea, but it is
one that is difficult to state with precision. Every
People,
whether the English, the Chinese, the French, and such as the
Brazilians, have a certain quality of character which they share. Americans have something
about
us that is more or less common to all, and when others meet
us, they
know they are meeting Americans. When I use the term Soul
I am referring to this shared character.
Just Google
the term: American Character, and you'll find more than you
need, for
this subject is not new.
Where does this
character come from?
The land, the geographical places and
environments?
How about the culture? Is it TV and Movies, or is
it
something in the education? How about the language?
We can
speak somewhat exactly about American English (a subject that
is
studied by academics). How does our shared language
effect our
character? What about our history, our past?
No doubt our
character comes from all of
the above. It is also true there are significant
regional
differences. New Yorkers and people from Southern
California have
quite different temperaments. Some people intentionally
try to
stand outside these influences. Is a Native American an
American
in the sense described above? What about someone who is
Amish?
Movies, oddly
enough, perhaps don't so
much influence American Character, but often instead try to
portray it.
Westerns and war films were once thought to be
well
informed with representations of the American Character.
Others
(non-Americans) try to describe what they see, such as Alexis
De
Tocqueville. If the subject wasn't about something real,
why
would so many try to define it or otherwise pin it down.
We have several songs that are poetic visions of our Character, but at the same time are a bit at odds with each other. The Star-Spangled Banner is a quite different song from America the Beautiful. The former is our official national anthem, but about every five years legislation is introduced seeking to make the latter the national anthem.
Probably the
best way to get a picture of
our Character is to notice what happens when we are all caught
up in
some kind of national level crisis, such as the Depression or
World War
Two. Character is something that is forged by life, as
much as it
is a natural given. The coming future will tell us a lot
about
our Character, if it takes the form I suspect it will - a time
of
crisis beyond that which we have ever endured before.
9/11 was a test
of our Character, but
somehow or another, our political leaders didn't seem to know
what to
do with that crisis, and as a result have taken us in
directions that
appear to have done more injury to our Character, rather than
to have
called upon it.
the Spirit of
a Nation
Spirit is a
different concept from Soul,
and Nation a different concept from People. Here I am
trying to
direct our attention toward the shared idea we have of government. America is an
experiment in a very unique and original kind of government, as Lincoln put it: a nation of the
people, by
the people and for the people.
Interestingly, this phrase of Lincoln's puts the two
sets of
ideas into a kind of relationship context. A nation is
made up of
the people, but is not the people. It is an arrangement
or
agreement the people make with each other about how to be
governed.
What then is
the Spirit of our way of
being governed? In the U. S. Constitution this is put
this way in
the Preamble: We
the People of the United States, in Order to form a more
perfect Union,
establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for
the common
defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings
of
Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and
establish this
Constitution for the United States of America.
The Declaration of Independence says: "...governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..."[emphasis added]
What is this idea? Here is one possibility: A government of the people and by the people and for the people only has those powers temporarily granted to it by We the People. It is a grant of power that can be withdrawn (it is not permanent). This is a radical shift from the times of the aristocracies of blood (kings and queens). Moreover, by the reserve clause (the 10th amendment) all powers not granted are reserved to the People, and by the 9th amendment not all our rights have been enumerated (listed) - there are understood to be others (this should be all the support Roe vs. Wade needs, but with the current Supreme Court who knows anymore).
What is the
Spirit that lives behind this
idea of a form of government derived from and for the People?
What I best I
can say about the Soul of a
People and the Spirit of a Nation I have had to express in the
poetry
below.
the
sacrifices of its Leaders
One of the
peculiarities of the modern
Presidential race is the frequency with which it is necessary
for the
candidates to say "I". They expect to (and do) make
constant
promises about what they will be able to accomplish once in
office.
I will end the
war, I will fix the
economy, I will solve
the problems of race, or immigration, or the
tax code and on and on and on.
In the next
essay below you will find the
idea that sometimes it is not what the President does that is
crucial,
but what he or she doesn't do. We are just ending a
period of
time in American History when the President (under the
influence of
others) reached out to increase greatly the powers of the
executive
Branch, and moreover sought to apply that power whenever and
wherever
possible. "I'm
the decider" said President Bush.
It is true, as
President Truman
understood, that: the
buck stops here. The President
can't
pass on to others those decisions that are his or hers to
make.
The problems come when the Executive Branch, or any
political
Party, begins to believe and act as if their personal wishes
and points
of view are why they are in office.
Our Founders
understood, that for all our
necessary "I" oriented needs to make decisions, the essential
nature of
this new form of government - this American Experiment - was
in service
to the People and the Nation, that is in service to the
soul-character
of the American People and to the Ideal (Spirit) of its
conception of
government. As soon as a Party or members of the
government (of
any Branch) believe that they are there in those offices
because what
they think and want is to rule, they have lost first a
connection to
the fundamental Spirit of this Nation, and second are no
longer able to
be of service to the Soul of the People.
It is because
of these tragic facts of
our modern history in this regard that I wrote my pamphlet: Uncommon
Sense*:
the Degeneration, and the Redemption, of Political Life
in America. In the essays
below is
recorded much of the thinking processes over the years that
led me to
understanding both our plight, and our potential. This
is always
the case in history. The existence of tragic
circumstances always
represents the possibility of remarkable transformation.
Our
lives are about to fall into even more dire conditions, yet at
the same
time, it is just those conditions that can evoke in our Soul -
our
Character - the forces of will to renew the Republic and to
reconnect
to the true National Spirit.
******************************
This essay was
written for my last (the
2004) presidential campaign. It was actually written in
2002.
It has been slightly rewritten for this book.
Re-imagining the Conduct of the Presidency
- a Presidential Campaign as an Act of Statecraft, and
the
Presidency as the Art and Craft of Statesmanship -
The People of
the United States of
America can no longer afford to have their government run by
professional politicians. The People of the World can no
longer
afford the conditions of internal corruption into which the
United
States government has fallen. The cost, in terms of the
unnecessary pain and suffering of ordinary people everywhere,
is too
high.
It remains for
the People of the United
States, in cooperation with others throughout the World, to
realize
that the 2004 Presidential Election in the United States is
the
business of all of us. What some like to call America
does not
just belong to the geographic Americans. America is an
Ideal of
how to have a government of the People, by the People and for
the
People. This Ideal doesn't just belong to the citizens of the
United
States, although we are, in the present, its most important
stewards.
Some
fundamental considerations:
The conduct of
the Presidency and of a
presidential campaign is not something done by one person,
although one
person is fully responsible for its fundamental moral
character.
This was the pattern and standard set by George
Washington, a
pattern and standard that has fallen away over the many years
since his
initial gifts to our polity.
In the present,
politicians have taken
up, as their main tasks, getting elected and staying in power.
Secondary and subordinate to this is the care of the
Republic and
the health of our Society. In their pursuit of winning,
politicians have sacrificed their alleged secondary goal more
and more
by turning over the conduct of election campaigns to faceless
political
operatives, who are then allowed to engage in almost any
activity that
supports the primary goal - winning the election. No
longer does
the politician act as a statesman, but rather becomes a mere
merchant
of influence, selling favors and votes, patronage and access,
all the
while letting slide responding to our Nation's real needs.
For anyone interested in the truth, it is unnecessary to say anything about how far from the Ideal was the conduct of the last election by the current administration. Needless to say, their conduct in office has shown the same level of irresponsibility.
Some years ago,
in a remarkable book (Statecraft
as Soulcraft - what government does)
by
George Will, written at the time he was still a true
Conservative in
the tradition of Edmund Burke, Will quoted, in the First
Chapter - The Care
of Our Time, Senator Pat Moynihan as
follows:
"I have
served in
the Cabinet or sub-Cabinet of four Presidents. I do not
believe I
have ever heard at a Cabinet meeting a serious discussion of
political
ideas - one concerned with how men, rather then markets,
behave.
These are the necessary first questions of government.
The
Constitution of the United States is an immensely intricate
judgment as
to how men will behave, given the circumstances of the time in
which it
was written. It is not at all clear that it is working
well,
given the circumstances of the present age. But this is
never
discussed."
Politicians,
who do not understand that
at its fundamental levels our form of government is an Ideal,
and/or
have no experience with the necessary inner work required to
understand
and practice this Ideal, - such politicians no longer serve
the
Republic or our People, but rather only those influences from
the
realms of concentrated wealth that buy their attention and
support
their election.
This is not to
say that everyone in
public office is a mere politician. Certainly many seek
office,
wanting to be statesmen, and some survive the experience of
seeking
office to actually become statesmen. Unfortunately, far
too many
have lost their way, and in the process have sold our Republic
to the
highest bidder.
In order to
renew the relationship of our
polity to the Living Ideal (which is its true nature), certain
activities are required both by the ordinary citizen, and by
those who
seek office. Mostly I have written in these working
papers
[campaign papers for the 2004 election, see
http://ipwebdev.com/campaign] of matters connected to the
renewal of
the responsibilities of citizenship, or what is called Citizen
Governance. In this paper I am focusing more directly
upon what
those who might yearn to be statesmen need to do.
The first
required task is the
transformation of the political campaign. No longer can
it be
merely about winning office, or the acquisition of power.
Those
goals will corrupt the whole process right from the very
beginning.
The campaign itself needs to be conducted as the initial
act of
statecraft - as an offering, or demonstration if you will, of
the
candidate's abilities as a practitioner of the art and craft
of
statesmanship.
This means, at
the very least, placing
the truth ahead of all other considerations. Granted
people do
not agree on what the truth is, but the present conventions of
politicians, and their out of control operatives, is that spin
is
appropriate. Yet, spin by its very nature concedes that
its goal
is not the truth, but rather the warping of facts so as to
place the
candidate or office holder in the most agreeable light.
The gift
of the word is then used to obscure and hide, rather than for
enlightenment and illumination.
No one wants
any longer to know what the
true and the good are. These realities are too
inconvenient to
the primary process - the buying and selling of influence.
Our
understanding of the true nature of governing has so far
degenerated,
that this buying and selling itself is seen as compromise.
But compromise, in the processes of governance and
statesmanship, is a much higher calling than mere influence
peddling.
True compromise concerns not the convenient collusion's of
power, but
rather the melding of differing Ideals and Ideas into a union
that
represents the agreeable conduct of the Whole People.
Now someone who
aspires to this true art
and craft of statesmanship - to an understanding of true
compromise,
must at the first offering of public service conduct their
campaign
itself as an act of statecraft by grounding its use of the
gift of the
word in the truth. Someone aspiring to the office
of public
servant needs to place ahead of their own victory in an
election, the
discovery of those truths about which this particular election
must be
concerned. Only in this way can we transform the fallen
circus
which passes for public debate during every four year cycle of
presidential politics, and replace that circus with a periodic
National
Rite of Celebration and Search for the slowly growing and
unfolding
meaning and purpose of our Nation and our People.
So as to make
this more concrete, it is
not just spin that evades the truth, but also promises made
that the
speaker does not in fact know they can keep. Political
campaigns
are full of allegations that the candidate will accomplish
this or that
act when in office, while the truth is clearly otherwise to
anyone who
wants to think about it. For example, for a presidential
candidate to promise any legislative result is to engage in a
lie, for
only the Legislative Branch can make laws, and Presidents
frequently
are not able to bend the Legislative Branch to their will.
Someone might
say that this form of
speech - the loose promise - is common today. That it
is, but its
very existence as a habit of conduct diminishes the level of
reality in
the public dialog. Candidates sitting around trading
promises
made, which can't be kept, engage in fantasy, and conversation
without
any true meaning. This is made all the worse, as anyone
with any
common sense knows, by the fact that the promises are
frequently made
not because it is the true will of the candidate, but merely
to appeal
to a set of voters whose emotional state the campaign
operatives seek
to ensnare. All of this kind of speech degrades the gift
of the
word and makes of our public dialog nothing higher than the
typical
false promises made for the advertising and selling of a
useless patent
medicine.
How did we get
to this state?
The truth is
that the United States of
America is young, adolescent even. We are immature as a
Culture
and a People. At the same time, the Genius of History
has placed
us in this position of preeminence for a reason.
Something is
being born just here, that can not be brought forth anywhere
else - the
forging of a People
of Peoples. That phase in the
evolution
and education of humanity, that first was carried forth among
differing
races and cultures, is passing away, and is beginning to be
replaced
with that child-like first People and Culture that integrates
the gifts
of the parts into one Whole. It is as if Life on the
Earth is
engaged in a very delicate experiment - can human beings find
a common
sense of themselves beyond the ties of blood, history, race,
culture
and religion?
Such a process
is awkward in the extreme.
The Genius of History doesn't do these things in that
much of a
straightforward and organized fashion as we might prefer,
because at
its root such a process has to be based upon freedom. We
are not
being formed into a People of Peoples, but are rather being
invited to
take up such a task. Moreover, in order for us to
embrace such a
task in freedom, it has to be completely possible that we will
fail.
For all to be possible, all must be at risk.
Further,the
True Spirit (Ideal) of
America, as noted above, does not just belong to geographic
Americans,
whether of the United States or North or South America.
This
Ideal belongs to all human beings, and all may live it.
The
foremost example of the living this Ideal in the Twentieth
Century was
a nameless man of Chinese descent and culture who stood in
front of a
tank in Tienanmen Square. By this act he said: "I
offer my
life on the altar of freedom and brotherhood".
Brotherhood, you might ask? Yes, brotherhood. To what other end is it possible to offer ones own life? Only the community of those who survive benefit by such a sacrifice. And the freedom part? This offer of sacrifice can only be done morally as a free act, while elsewhere, where the sacrifice of life is compelled, it is an abomination.
How little is
required then of someone
seeking to be a public servant than to ask of them that they
sacrifice
winning in favor of the truth?
Now some may
think that if the United
States is being forged into a People of Peoples, what does
that mean
for the rest? This is a quite legitimate question.
As was pointed
toward in the beginning of
this paper, the 2004 presidential election in the United
States is the
concern of the whole world. In a very real sense the
rest of the
World's Peoples are the Father and Mother of the People of
Peoples, and
we who live in the United States are their offspring. We are
their
clumsy and errant adolescent child, who in our natural
nationalistic
egotism think we should be in charge, and that the whole world
should
revolve around us. In a kind of self important drunken
ecstasy we
stumble around the house and the neighborhood, wreaking
everything in
sight.
I am sure this is written everywhere in the various wisdoms of the world, but in that which comes to Western Culture as the Ten Commandments, number four or five (depending upon your rite) implores: "Honor thy father and mother" ("...in order that thy days may be prolonged upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee..").
As I tried to
point out in the essay America's
Growing Moral Debt (see below), the
People
of the United States owe a great deal to the rest of the
World.
A politician (afraid to lead, and only able to follow a mob) will get all pumped up screaming "you're unpatriotic!", while a true statesman will have no problem whatsoever understanding that reality is much deeper, and that compromise and brotherhood and honor are much more important than self serving pretense and vain posturing.
The United
States of America wasn't born
out of itself, and doesn't exist for itself. The
same is
true of any candidate for public office. It's not about
me, or
even our People, its about us and all Peoples. And
even
more so, it is about our children and their children's
children.
What sane culture can claim to be of value even to
itself (much
less the rest of the world) that squanders its wealth on
itself,
leaving its children to live among wastelands and ruins?
This is all I
wanted to say about the
conduct of the campaign in its Ideal sense. As to the
actual
conduct of the Office of the Presidency, that is another
matter.
There are aspects of that Office that need to be
discussed in
relationship to the particulars of our current situation.
This we
consider next.
The basic
effect of the corruption of the
nature of our public life, by the overreaching of concentrated
wealth
on our constitutional processes, has been the weakening of the
Legislative and Judicial Branches of our government, with the
result
that the Executive Branch has become so warped that the
President is
now, in effect, a near-King. Yet, we once fought a very
bloody
and protracted war in order to free ourselves from the
arbitrary
authority of a King. Tragically, we have fallen
back on old
patterns, in that the influence of the aristocracy of
concentrated
wealth has been to install their own sons and daughters in
office,
through the abuses of power that influence can buy.
We have had in
the last Century,
Roosevelt's, Rockefeller's, Kennedy's and now Bushes in the
higher
offices (President and Vice President, Governors, Senators and
Congressmen), while all manner of Cabinet offices, heads of
the CIA and
diplomatic posts have been held by the elites of our banking
and
mercantile classes. We have become so used to this, that
we no
longer really notice it.
At the same
time, to go from one
condition, that of influence peddling to a condition of truer
social
and political health, this cannot be done overnight, or in a
violent
and disorderly fashion. Further, just as the People of
the United
States of America must learn to honor their Father and Mother
as that
lives and has lived in all the older, and more mature,
cultures and
races, so also must the Citizen
Governance (see below) movement
learn to
honor that which lived in the impulses of concentrated wealth
that was
also born of the true and the good.
For example,
Joe Kennedy, certainly a
rascal of the first order (as have and will be many in our
wonderfully
complex and rich history), did not just impose his children on
our
society, but if we read carefully the biographies of that
family we can
see that he insisted they not only be trained by life, but
also
provided all the formal education money could buy. It
was the
Kennedy's and their friends that took us through that horrible
moment
of the Cold War where all of mankind stood on the brink of
Nuclear
Catastrophe (see the movie Thirteen
Days for details).
In this
approach of the patriarch of the
Kennedy clan, we find one valid version of the Ideal standard
- those
who are to hold highest office need to be trained and educated
for it.
As much as we would like it, we cannot go out and pick
any
factory worker, housewife or househusband, nurse or cab driver
and
elevate them to public service. Yes, to be a son or
daughter of
wealth is not enough (as Bush II proves), but we do well not
to throw
out the baby with the bathwater here.
This is part of
why Citizen
Governance, especially in the form
of its
work in changing the nature of the political conversation, is
so
important. The renewal of the Ideal that is America
needs to be
rooted in "We the
People", but at the same time we
need an
educated and trained elite at the core of governmental
service.
If there is a problem, it is that the same forces, that
have
brought about the fallen nature of our polity, have also
infected our
centers of learning, our great and small universities and
colleges.
This is one of the matters pointed to by Eisenhower in
his Farewell
Speech (see appendix), where he also
spoke of
the undesirable influence of the military-industrial complex.
Mostly we recall the latter, but the former - the
problems he saw
coming into our system of education, this part of his speech
is
forgotten.
What this tells
us, among other matters,
is that Education, whether for the ordinary citizen in support
of their
ability to carry out the relevant responsibilities of Citizen
Governance, or in the preparation of those charged with the
managing of
our Society, this Education is the primary function of a
healthy
society. However, we have to deal with the
presently fallen
nature of our schools, which have lost hold of the goal of
creating an
educated citizenry, and have been forced (and are being
forced) to
primarily provide trained workers and consumers - two very
antagonistic
goals.
One can be a
trained worker whether one
is a biochemist or an auto mechanic, and we certainly, as a
society,
need all these skills. But as a modern human culture, trying to
awaken to who we are in the World, we also
need to be truly educated. Someone is educated who is free to be who
they
want to be, and who has been helped to unfold all the human
capacities
natural and latent in their own inwardness.
I am not here
going into how we go about
doing that (this would take a book or two), I only want to
point to the
problem and its centrality in going into the future. The
reality
is that the most important people in any society are the
parents and
the teachers, for the children are formed into who they become
(their
character) by these initial experiences of family and school,
and it is
the children who are the future. We can have all the
wealth and
technical expertise in the world, and still have no culture whatsoever,
because we do not educate human beings, but
only train workers and consumers.
With this
background in mind, let us now
return to the problem of the imbalance among the three
branches of our
form of government that has come to be due to the excessive
influences
of concentrated wealth.
The next holder
of the Office of the
Presidency has to do everything they can to restore the true
balance,
and to contain their own shadow impulses toward seeking to
solve all
problems by the conduct of what has become essentially an
imperial
presidency. And, the Citizen
Governance movement has to stop
looking to
the Executive Branch to solve all their problems. The
President
is not a King, but rather a Servant and perhaps a Shepherd,
and as a
Servant the President will not do a proper service by
replacing the
will of the People by his or her own vain beliefs.
We have in our
young culture recently
given birth to a couple of important and wise ideas. One
such
idea is that of enabling and comes to us out of the profound
spiritual
work of 12 Step movements. In the hard and painful
school of
addiction, it has been discovered we do no service to a person
with
such a weakness if we feel sorry for them and try all
the time to
help them. Our best service is done by what is called
tough love,
another of these new wise ideas (this is actually not so new,
and might
be found in some of the spiritual wisdoms of the Original
Peoples of
the Americas in the idea of grandmotherly kindness - but that
is
another story). Another such idea is that of
co-dependency.
This involves becoming so enmeshed in each other, that
we really
end up supporting each others weakness, instead of our
individual
strengths.
What this means
is that the President
can't be the co-dependent enabler of either the weaknesses of
the
People or of the other two Branches, by using an excess of
Executive
powers to do something the People and their public servants
need to do
by themselves. What this means is that we need in
the
Executive someone with the wisdom not to do things.
There is really no other way to wean
us from our current addiction to the presidency as all knowing
ruler
and king.
The People's
will is best manifested by
the Legislative Branch, who are called upon to make those laws
necessary to the proper ordering of a modern human society
(please note
that in the Constitution, the Legislative Branch is written
about
first). But the Legislative Branch does us no good with
its own
addiction to wealth as the only means to obtain and maintain
power.
Both our Congresspeople and our Senators must end this
obsession
with their own importance, and learn to set that aside in
favor of
striving again to realize the Ideal that is embodied in our
Constitution. Every election, which proceeds on the
basis that
the truth can be ignored, and that the ends
found in winning is more important than the honest means
by which it is obtained, drags us further into rot and decay.
Just as true Citizen
Governance can only be founded on a
proper
understanding of ends and means, so the practice of statecraft
at all
levels of government will only be balanced and healthy when
the right
relationship is found between these two elements of political
process.
For the Executive Branch this means that at the center
of its
practice must exist the
truth in all that it says to our
People.
Anything less, anything self serving and in support of
hidden
agendas makes a lie of the process and tears down the
presently fragile
remaining trust of the People.
We must not
fail to notice that a
mistrust of politicians has lead to almost half - HALF! - of
our People
refusing to practicing even their most basic right and
responsibility
of the vote. We presently live in a situation of deep
spiritual
despair at the core of our polity due solely to the failure to
honor
the trust of the American People. From the Pentagon
Papers,
through Watergate and Irangate,to the joke that was Clinton's
statement
that he never slept with that woman [and now to the lies in
the run up
to the Iraq war], our government has done nothing but harm to
the Ideal
Center of our way of Life, through lie after lie after lie.
Not only has
great mistrust been the
fruit of these failures, but such work divides the nation
deeply
between those who still hold to the faith and want to trust,
and those
who have been too many times burnt. The Executive (and
the
Legislative Branch) harms us deeply with every piece of spin
and
outright lie.
The only real coin
of any value, passed between the
citizens of a Nation and their public servants, is the truth.
With that coin in circulation, nothing is impossible to
such a
People, for truth leads to trust, and it is mutual trust that
binds us
together into a Whole.
This being the
case, and given that the
Media itself has been corrupted by concentrated wealth, it is
the need
of our People that as many barriers as possible be removed
between the
People and their public servants. In practice, this will
mean in
my campaign [now
abandoned] that nothing will be
hidden from
the Press, should they seek it, except in that rare
circumstance where
undo harm to others would result. I certainly have no
intention
of hiding anything concerning myself. The same rule will
apply in
practice in my administration, should the People honor me with
their
trust - essentially unlimited access to the People through the
Media.
In fact, the whole nature of such a modern administration changes, once we admit the value of the truth as the primary Ideal element. The object then no longer becomes serving some kind of ideology (of the Left or the Right), but of finding out what is the true need, and the best means to provide those services which government is charged to provide.
However (and
this is a big however),
given the nature of the imbalance between the Branches, it is
no longer
healthy to look to the Executive for that which should be
provided by
either of the other two Branches. Neither new laws nor
justice is
the role of the Executive. Moreover, given that this
imbalance
didn't appear just recently, it will not be easily corrected.
We
need to be patient, and take small steps where those are
called for.
Radically reformations are usually destructive of more
than they
create.
As the Citizen
Governance movement grows into its
own, the
foundational elements will shift, and a new kind of public
servant will
come forth (since they will now find the right support).
These
changes at the level of who is doing the work in the three
Branches are
the essential. Many believe that if we just change this
or that
law, we will have progress, but the real curative is to change
the character
and quality of the people doing the
work. The raising of the
quality of those people coming into public service will take
time, and
will require multiple transformations of our ways of Education
and
other related matters.
We need to
understand that social
problems of the systemic nature so common today cannot be
corrected by
the application of this law, or that edict. We are
involved in a
work of healing whole systems, and this means advancing on
many fronts
at the same time.
In a way it is
a kind of mutually
reciprocal process, whereby Citizen
Governance elevates on its own the
level of
discourse, while this in turn enables public servants to
strive more
toward the truth in all their activity. The one slowly
reinforces
the activity of the other, each becoming stronger over time.
All of this has
been fairly abstract, so
in order to make it all more concrete, let me now write of
these ideal
elements in terms of our various problems with regard to the
economy.
This is just a for instance, by the way, and not meant
to be
complete or definitive.
We can start by
dismantling some
illusions - the President is not the manager of the United
States
economy, and in fact, there is no such thing as a national or
state
economy. This may surprise many, but as we are
trading here
in the coin of the truth, these things have to be said.
There is only a
World Economy, which has
come slowly into being over the last few hundred years, taking
off with
the trading empires, and then being more built up by the
industrial
revolution. What the Left worries about as
Globalization, is
merely the by-product of the emergence of the World Economy in
the
final age of the aristocracies of concentrated wealth.
And, what
the Right worries about as the threat to the privileges and
prerogatives of private property, is only the last stage in
the dying
away of a false understanding of the nature of human progress.
Why is there
only a World Economy?
One important clue is to notice that all this is
happening in
that time when all of humanity is awakening to its shared fate
as the
inhabitants of one Earth. It is no accident that our
consciousness as a world full of companions and brothers and
sisters is
emerging at the same time as the World Economy, globalization,
and the
apparent intensification of the struggle between the so-called
rich and
the poor.
Economy deals
with the transformation of
the gifts of the Earth, their movement to where needed, and
then their
use - that is, production, distribution and consumption.
The
consequences of such activity effect us all, and imbalances
are
everywhere.
The only reason
we think at all of
national economies, or even local or state economies is
because of a
habit of thought instilled in us by the influence upon our
thinking as
a result of living in the age of natural science. One of
the
processes of natural science, as conducted in the past (this
may be
changing), has been the use of abstractions - of taking single
facts
out of the context in which they are embedded, and then
believing we
can understand these single facts free of this context.
So it is
possible, say for those living
in New Hampshire, to gather local facts, rates of
unemployment, stock
values of local companies, profit and loss figures from these
same
companies, tax revenues, and so forth. From these
abstracted
facts then (they are all embedded in a much larger picture
where the
flow of capital, the changes in interest rates, and federal
tax cuts or
raises dominate the local conditions) an imaginary picture is
created
as if there was a local economy. In truth, we can only
ever speak
of local conditions in the World Economy, in much the same way
we can
only speak of local conditions in the Total Climate of our
planet.
Yes, it will rain here tomorrow, maybe. And maybe
there is
some capital flowing in our local direction next year if we
offer
property tax rebates.
What this means is that whatever our coming economic realities, the whole world is in the same fragile boat - our one planet, the Earth, and Its Children, humanity.
Yet, because we
assume that the Executive
Branch manages the local economic conditions in our Nation, we
tend to
look to Presidents for economic leadership, and conduct.
But the
factual relationships are quite otherwise, and to the extent
that the
Executive pretends to managing the economy, they lie.
This is one of
the hidden realities
behind globalization - it is a necessary stage on the path to
learning
to deal with the World Economy through international
relations.
As this particular time is during the infancy of our
understanding of the dismal science (economics), and as the
dominating
political power has been with the elites of concentrated
wealth, our
first efforts at managing the World Economy have been trade
agreements,
mostly written with the benefit to the elites of concentrated
wealth in
mind.
At the root of
these problems is a kind
of understandable mistrust. Over the years of the birth
and
coming into being of the World Economy, the banking and
mercantile
classes have had a lot of trouble with various governmental
leaders.
Since this all began as the age of Kings and Queens was
is its
last days, these authoritative personalities made all manner
of
decisions that were destructive of commerce and trade.
It is no
wonder that the elites of concentrated wealth wanted little to
do with
the interference of governments in the management of economic
processes.
Then as the
hereditary aristocracies gave
way to the emergence of democratic republics, the problems
continued,
for voters were not well educated in even the basics of
accounting,
much less the intricate details of high finance. As a
result, the
dialogs between the voters and their public servants lost any
contact
with economic reality, while at the same time the discipline
of
economics wandered about in a universe of abstract principles
and
mathematics, attempting to imitate physics, a poor choice in
all
events, since all economic decisions have a moral (human)
component.
I am not going
to go into the economic
decisions of the current Bush administration, being made in
conjunction
with a Congress even more in denial of the real consequences
of their
actions, except to say that the same irresponsible patterns of
behavior
applied in the 2000 election, and the field of international
relationships prior to the war, are being carried out in the
realm of
economics. No care is being taken for our common
future,
and all is determined by the agendas and short term political
goals of
the moment. What we have here is the very opposite of
true
statesmanship.
Like much else
in human society, if we
wish to have some kind of balance and health, we must make
approaches
on multiple fronts. Economic health can't be dealt with
by
itself, nor is the Executive to be looked toward as the
primary actor.
The most that can be expected of the presidency is some
common
sense and guidance.
The economy is
created by activities we
do together. The President doesn't run it like some
corporate
executive, any more than does the Chairman of the Board of
Governors of
the Federal Reserve System.
There are a
number of actors in the
drama: consumers, bankers, workers, financiers, stock brokers,
investors, and so forth. Added to these are all the
regulatory
bodies, whether governmental or private. At present each
group,
and frequently each individual within each group, goes their
own way,
frequently irrespective of their effect on the whole.
Self
interest seems to dominate over community interest and the
common good.
What we want
and need is for self
interest to be enlightened, and for it to understand how to
satisfy
itself and how to participate in the common good at the same
time.
It is here where a true education plays its most needed
role.
Only someone, who knows how to be free and who has begun
to
unfold that which is latent within themselves, will be able to
find
their way to enlightened self interest. This is what a true civilization does,
when it
possesses a living and dynamic culture - it makes its greatest
investment in the education of its children, knowing full well
that
only this act gives birth to a healthy future.
*******************************
Some of Us Remember
best, read
aloud
there's a war in Iraq / I see it on the news
images of dead and dying / pictures of exploded trucks
bombed cities / crying mothers / maimed children
I've seen it all before. / oh, the country side was different
Vietnam was jungle / not desert
water and trees, dark shaded shapes / instead of rock and sand and too much light
but the dead were the same / and the senselessness was the same
and the stupidity was the same / and the horror was the same
and the blood was the same
the young faces of the soldiers are the same / young faces made old in one night of terror / innocence lost forever / mind ripped apart and the remaining moral nature raped and lamed / even if the body comes home intact
the only difference now, is that / so many Americans don't remember
you can hear it in the political dialogs / in the speeches made by politicians / in the idiotic words spoken by news readers /
in the vapid empty entertainments on TV / and in the songs without pain
too many Americans were born / or came of age / after
after the Insanity of Vietnam /
so they don't remember / but only know as stories / they never lived
they don't see yet what we saw / for numbing endless years
the body bags, the caskets / the crying neighbors and friends
the hopelessness of a people / whose leaders had gone around the bend
and cracked open hell's gates / and let the demons loose
so many Americans don't know what / we who do remember know
Iraq hasn't gone on so far yet, / only a couple thousand dead,
while we who do remember/ remember 50,000
and endless nights of TV / a nightmare never over
never over / even when over / for hell came back
in lost limbs / and missing faces
and drug addictions / and minds lamed and broken
strange, how many of those lamed / in not so distance a past
wander our streets now / talking to themselves, and
wake screaming in the night
yes there is a monument / in DC / a long black wall of names /
but that is not the same / as memory of politicians' promises
that broken led us deeper / into hell on earth
you can hear it in the dialogs on TV now / the difference between those who remember / and those to whom Vietnam
is only a name from something / an older generation laments
and can't seem to let go
the young don't know what it cost / us as a Nation
and many think, as many did then / that we are well led
and so they buy the lies / and history begins its
repetitious and ravenous / eating of our young
and some, like me / we sleep not well, and
find ourselves looking for distraction
for ways to forget / what won't be forgotten
memories of a war that didn't die / but now comes to be reborn
yearns in fact to come again / for demons like such darkness
and love to live in hate / and arrogant ignorance
is it worse?
how can it not be, / for the sellers of war
are better at their dark arts now / the politicians better at their lies
the TV better at ignoring truth / and people better at hiding
heads in sand
we do it all better now / all of it, we can only hope
for maybe those who protest / will be better too
those who opposed will be more able to educate
those who want to stop the madness / more willing to sacrifice
maybe, / while the politicians / and the arms industry
and the idiots on the news / the talking heads who can't remember
or never saw even then / tell their lies and plead their dark dreams
as wisdom
maybe their vain foolishness / will stir us deeper inside,
those who refuse to forget / that we fought this war
before and lost / not only national pride
not only dead and lamed young / not only unity of purpose
but the very moral ground on which America once stood
maybe this is what it takes / for heads to be pulled from sand
for politicians lies to be seen through / for our true nature as Americans to rise again
maybe it is justice and karma / that once again we let ourselves be led
into folly so colossal that even the imagination / cannot contain it
maybe there is a price that has to be paid / for what we did so many years ago / or what we didn't do
maybe there is a price to be paid by those / who lied, and got their profit out of blood, / or pretended nothing was happening
maybe there is a price to be paid by those / who tried to stop the madness, but didn't really risk as much as needed risking
maybe there is a price to be paid / by those who forgot what should never have been forgotten
maybe there is a price to be paid by those / who heard the stories and have not believed them / and who swallow the same lies once again
in spite of history's lessons
but it isn't a price that should be paid by others, / is it?
politicians should pay it / arms merchants should pay it
idiots on TV should pay it / those who refuse to remember should pay it
those who didn't try hard enough to stop it / should pay it
by why should the children pay it? / why should the soldiers pay it?
why should the world pay it?
maybe that is the real legacy of Vietnam / questions / many many questions
we need to face these questions / or be haunted justly all
our days and nights / forever
haunted with good reason / by the ghosts of children
mothers / daughters / all the so-called collateral damage
and even the young soldiers
haunted we will be / justly haunted
deservedly haunted / for our sleep
for our acceptance of lies / and for our refusal to resist
haunted all our days / until we stand / and wake up / and insist
no more vanity wars / no more claims that might makes right
no more pretense that politicians / know what they are doing
or that conviction means truth / or belief and opinion are knowledge
war is too dangerous / too permanent
to be sold / on the basis of someones belief
and conviction that they / know what to do
there needs to be evidence of competence / evidence of truthfulness
evidence of understanding / evidence of contact with reality
evidence of wisdom / evidence of morality
evidence of humanity
before the drums of wars ever / ever beat again /
for some of us
remember
****************************
this essay was written in the mid 1990's, and then
placed on my website on the Internet. Later the first part was
published in "transintelligence
internationale", Feb- Mar
1999.
The next two parts followed in the next two issues of
the
short-lived magazine.
A Forgotten Resource, the American Spirit
-a story in
three parts -
Everyone understands that America has a very dominant position in the modern world. Many people see this in a negative way, as if to be dominant is some kind of flaw or wrongness. We would be in error to think this way. Once we understand the ordering principles active in social existence, we will come to see that in something like a nation or a People, the dark and the light always tend to balance. Certainly there are moments when one form of being will be in control, but always the other is present and latent. One aspect of the future is that these conditions more and more depend upon how we act. Where once they were instinctive, today they must be more conscious. Basically, it is up to us.
- part one -
The American Will: To
Sacrifice for the Ideal
Every
four
years America indulges in what ought to be a great rite of
renewal
and re-dedication: the election of our national officers, the
President
and the Vice-President of the United States of America.
We ought
to wonder, as these rites climax and then pass away, whether
the
election campaigns have not been the scene of a great
sacrilege, rather
then one of restoration. Do those who display
themselves, seeking
the Presidency, and our other major elective offices, truly
appreciate
the significance and meaning of the office they seek?
Political
offices in the United States of America are more than just a
very
powerful political role; they are, in truth, a sacred charge.
Few
of our presidents, for example, have had the courage and self
honesty
to face squarely these awesome responsibilities. Teddy
Roosevelt
called politics a "bloody
pulpit" and spoke more accurately
then he
realized. Political office does offer the opportunity to
preach
and harangue, to persuade, to divide, to unite, to degrade and
to
uplift. But there is more to this privileged duty, much
more.
There
is
such a quality to our way of life that is rightly called the
American Spirit. There is a truth behind the words the
America
Soul, the American Character. These have a reality, to
which the
idea - the American Dream - gives a bare hint. But it
has been a
long time since someone has spoken or written, with the
necessary depth
of feeling, of these qualities and characteristics, these
extraordinary
ideals; that gave light to the minds of our nation's founders,
that
fuel the dreams of every immigrant, and that are ultimately
the real
strength of "We the people...".
In
spite
of many assumptions to the contrary, we are not a nation whose
mastery lies in military or economic power. Our true
gifts are
not born of force or mercantile skill. The roots of what
America
is, and what being an American demands, cannot be found in
might, or
inventiveness or in any material thing. Rather, we are a
People
who have fiercely insisted that certain fundamental ideals are
the
innate right of every human being. We have insisted and
insisted
and insisted, through much blood and many wars, that not just
liberty
and equality, but that true brotherhood is the birthright of any human born on this
Earth.
If
we
want to really understand what has happened to our country, to
our
civilization, to our people, then that understanding can be
found in
just this. We have lost our way. Having won once,
twice,
perhaps thrice, we relaxed, we rested on our laurels. We
mistook
the pleasures of our mutual industry - the great plenty we
provide for
each other - for the ideals that fired our birth, and which
have not
yet been achieved. And therein lies a grave danger.
Having
sat
back and become inattentive, we may well lose what part of
this
dream that has already been won. We strive today for
what? Better
jobs, more security, better health care, lower taxes, millions
at the
lottery, our own home, our own business, a younger spouse, a
safer
neighborhood, less fat, more morality. The list is
nearly
endless. But in striving for these things, we have
ceased to
drive ourselves from the fire of will of who we truly are.
We
have forgotten the fundamentals out of which America came to
be, and
without which we would not have what we do have. And
forgetting
this we put all at risk.
Are
the
homeless our brothers or sisters, or the gays and lesbians,
the new
immigrants, the ghetto youth, the working poor, the pregnant
teens, the
fostered children? Those who claim otherwise lie, and
they should
be ashamed to do so. It is so easy to point a finger and
say that
this one or that one is the evil whose rot and stench disturbs
our
passive slumber. But these accusing fingers only reveal
the raw
prejudice of those who point. A much more real evil of
our time
is our abandonment of the ideals which sing in the heart and
light up
the mind when the name America is spoken rightly.
Do
we
want a more effective foreign policy, and more respect on the
international scene? Then we must stand up again for our
ideals.
Do we want an economy that works for the many instead of just
for the
few? Then we must stand up again for our ideals. Do we
want
civility in our cities and healthy life in the countryside?
Then we
must stand up again for our ideals. Without our
passionate
engagement these ideals are empty phrases, a lonely noise lost
in the
coming night.
Life
is
not meant to be easy. Every bit of human wisdom tells us
this
is true. But the human spirit is equal to the hardships,
the
human spirit overcomes the obstacles. Our way of life is
not yet
the real American dream. We have not arrived at what
America is
capable of being. We have not achieved what it is our
destiny to
achieve (and
crown
our good with brotherhood).
And
it ought to frighten us to the core of our being, as a People,
the
extent to which we presently fail to understand our unmet
tasks and our
increasingly dire, yet unacknowledged, peril.
Now
we
all know that this which has been written above is true. We
know it
our hearts, for this is the very same spiritual nourishment we
took in
when we were taught these ideals as children, in school, home,
and
church. This knowing is why we suffer so when the
candidates
arrive and seek to drive us apart from each other, seek to
emphasize
differences and point fingers and lay blame. We know
their words
are empty, and that they appeal not to that higher nature we
enjoy and
which is eternally willing to serve the ideal, but rather to
that lower
being, the self satisfied, self indulgent parts of our souls.
What good are leaders who take us on such a course, and
how
dangerous their ways that they direct us in these troubled
times not by
the star of our destiny as a people, but rather by the
whisperings of
the ancient dark that lurks inside us all.
This
nation,
this people, will not fail because it has been ill lead, but
because its people have not the courage to realize in
themselves when
the time has come to put the differences aside and rediscover
the
majestic powers latent in our true ideal being. We will
fail
because we can't talk to each other about what we really care
about,
except as that lies closest to our own selfish concerns.
If we
cannot find within ourselves that realm of soul which cares
for
strangers and recognizes the truth of "whatsoever ye do unto
the
least of these my brethren, ye do so also unto me"; then we will not find what we really need for
ourselves, which is company and sharing and to not stand alone
against
whatever rough fate that waits. Divided, events will destroy
us.
In community, no evil can win the day. Don't we know
this when we
sing: "...and
crown
thy good, with brotherhood, from sea to shining sea.".
Modern
presidential
politics in America is disconnected from our true ideal
roots. It's as if politicians have never actually thought
about what
America is, or how it came into existence, or what its future
potential
might be. We hear many cliche's, but few words are
spoken where
the speaker truly feels in their heart a relationship to the
American
Spirit - to the ideal of brotherhood, so eloquently revealed
in the
mood of the song: America the Beautiful.
Many
of
the Founders of our Nation had no trouble seeing the hand of
God in
events both large and small. And they felt no
embarrassment in
calling upon His aid. The special marvel is that they
approached
this subject - the role of God in the fortunes of a Nation and
a People
- in a way that did not divide the world into those who are
morally
right and those who are morally wrong. The Founder's
religious
nature was mature, and not an adolescent ploy from which to
posture
possession of a higher moral ground. And, we will be
very foolish
if we think that the moral nature of our Founders is not
related to the
high ideals which moved them, and the very extraordinary
results they
produced when they created our form of government.
The
question
for us is this: If we wish to reconnect ourselves to the root
ideals expressed by the words "the American Spirit", what, if
any, relationship do we need to take toward our own religious
and moral
natures? This is not a question we dare ask others.
This is
not something we can demand of others. This is something
we have
to face within ourselves, and out of those answers we
individually come
to, then we are able to proceed. Let us consider this
crucial
matter more closely.
There
is
a world of difference between proclaiming God is on our side,
- that
this or that war or act is morally just - and, between asking
God's
support in the endeavors we ourselves undertake. In the
first
instance we are in denial of our real doubts, and use the
assertion of
God's blessing to bolster our view in the face of the
criticism of
others. We are arrogant rather then humble. In the
second
instance we recognize our doubts, we accept responsibility for
our
actions (rather then justification), and through prayer plead
for the
Deity's benediction. This difference in approach is no
simple
matter, for whether we believe in God or not, anyone who
thinks on the
question knows that both, our thoughts and the success of our
acts of
will, depend upon our attitude, especially our moral or
ethical
attitude.
Regardless of our beliefs, it is a very wise statement in the Christian Gospels: "Render therefore unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's". "Caesar" is the equivalent of the government - the State, and if we think on it we will realize that our government is what it is out of what we "render" it, in the broadest sense of that idea.
We
also
know this: that the very best of our leaders have been humble
before God and never self righteous or arrogantly certain of
their
course. The politician certain of his course and of
God's
blessing on it, is a very dangerous human being.
A
Nation,
a People, is something quite different from a political party,
or a point of view, or a cause, or a sitting government.
America
is a Nation, and Americans are a People, and these other
political
fashions are just that, things which will pass away. A
Nation and
a People are a living thing, and what a Nation is depends upon
what its
People are, and what they give out of themselves to that
Nation.
But
today,
all we seem to manage is to "render" a
demand for our rights.
Yet, every right has a correlative duty.
If we suffer at all a mysterious loss of political will
its root
cause lies in this: we are a People focused only on rights and
not on
duties.
At
this
moment in time we are a house divided against itself; and we
are
dangerously close to that about which Lincoln warned us in the
Gettysburg Address. All those, who have died in the
cause of
liberty and equality and brotherhood, may have died in vain,
if we do
not again find our way to common cause with each other, to a
common
understanding of what the American Nation is, and who the
American
People are, and where our own individual responsibilities lie.
The
crux
of the matter is not what the politicians do, not what the
presidential candidates say or promise, or what happens in
Washington.
The crucial factor is how are we toward
each other. No leader makes us
a People, no leader makes a
Nation. We either find that place inside ourselves -
that
well-spring from which Peoples and Nations are born and
nourished - or
we do not. Freedom bears fruit not in the fact that we
can do
anything we want, but rather in the fact that if we do choose
to act in
the right ways and if we do choose to act together, we can
then in fact
take another step forward toward that yet to be realized
ideal, a "...government of the People,
by the People and for the People..."
In
the
1996 presidential primaries in New Hampshire, on television,
some
unusual campaign ads were played. If one was not
watching
carefully it appeared as if a newscaster was announcing that
some
terrorist groups had obtained atomic weapons and were
threatening to
use them. As the ads proceeded, the emphasis changed to
reveal
that this was only being suggested as a dire possibility, and
that we,
as a People, needed to recognize that future leaders of this
country
would have to face many terrible decisions, and we should
judge the
various candidates for the Presidency accordingly, as to
whether they
had the capacity to act wisely in the face of the rising
darkness of
the times.
Everyone
is
aware, of course, that political leaders are now sold to their
People like so much soap. Political campaigns use highly
trained
advertising and publicity experts and, as well, the most
modern
techniques. Ads, such as the ones described above, are
normally
first shown to focus groups, groups of ordinary voters, in
order to
test their reactions to various images and key words and
phrases. For
the most part, the intellectual reaction is irrelevant, and
the
emotional response the more significant. Research has
revealed
that if our emotions can be aroused, what we think, when we
take the
time to reflect, is of little importance.
One
of
the most powerful emotions is fear. Advertising
routinely
arouses this emotion when it suggests that use of a certain
product
will make us more beautiful, or handsome or happier and so
forth. Here
our fear of not being liked or of not fitting in is aroused.
Our
human social needs are thus used to manipulate us into buying
certain
products. For mature individuals, this deception is often seen
through,
but the young of our Nation lack the experiences necessary by
which to
make the needed discrimination. The whole cultural
environment is
filled then with this message: Unless you purchase these
products, you
will not be an adequate or fulfilled human being. We should
ask: What
is "rendered" our Nation by such acts?
There
is
another aspect to these facts, an aspect which is important to
appreciate, but which also makes us face certain things in
ourselves,
things we often wish to avoid acknowledging.
Advertisers, and
politicians and their campaign staffs, also do what they do,
because it
is their intention to give us what we want. While they
do try to
manipulate desire, they also follow those desires and needs as
they
appear as a natural part of who we are. Politicians go
out of
their way to conduct polls in order to understand what we as a
People
appear to want, so that the politician may then appear to
offer to us
that same thing. What this all means is that what
happens in a
political campaign also serves the same function as a mirror
does,
reflecting without bias who we are and what we want. So
if we
don't like what the politician is saying and doing, we need to
understand that they are often simply attempting to feed back
to us
exactly what they think we ourselves have expressed.
If
we
can step back a little, from the campaign process, from the
issues,
the points which seem to divide us, we might notice that the
whole
event is a very special ritual. In effect, every four
years, when
the Presidential campaigns heat up, we practice a rite of self
knowledge. Who we think we are, as a Nation and as a
People,
comes to expression. And not just in the words or ideas,
but most
especially in how the campaigns are conducted - in what is
done, there
comes to expression some element of the American Spirit.
Some
questions we can then ask ourselves are: Do I like what I see?
Am
I really such a creature of darkness as sometimes seems
expressed, or
is there somewhere a hidden light, wanting, needing to return
to
prominence?
Politicians
are
like chameleons. They change colors in accord with the
background against which they appear. But the sad truth
is that
this background is in large part a reflection of the American
psyche.
Are our politics in a sorry state? Yes, but the
politician
is only the mirror of something inside us as a People.
It is we
who are in a sorry state. We no longer believe, we no longer
have faith
in our ideals or in the necessity of sacrifice in the pursuit
of those
ideals. We no longer participate as a vital force in the
political life of our Nation, and we are therefore, as a
political
body, more than we might wish or acknowledge, lost, alone, and
in the
dark. And no one but we ourselves can change this dire
situation
or the tragedy that awaits if things remain the same. How long
will it
be until "We the
People..." are ready to fire the
light again?
There
is
an art and a craft to governing a People. Columnist
George
Will wrote a book, attempting to touch on this, which he
called: Statecraft
as Soulcraft. In this book he
quoted
Daniel Monyhan as saying that he had worked for four different
administrations, and never once participated in a discussion
of ideas.
Now, no one of us would let an untrained surgeon operate
on
ourselves or one of our children, yet we routinely place the
guidance
of our ship of state in the hands of individuals whose only
skill is
getting elected; i.e. the mastery of appearing to meet our
expectations
of what a political leader is, but which in reality is the
mastery of
appearing to be like ourselves, and that most often in an
unredeemed
state. If they don't make it easy on us, if they don't
cater to
our desires, if they don't subvert their own character in
order to
placate our most base needs, then they don't get elected.
The truth is that we
have
been asleep and we've gotten the politics we deserve.
This
statement is not made as an accusation, but rather as the base
point in
the acceptance of our real responsibility. We dare not
lie to
ourselves about this.
"A nation of the
People, by
the People, and for the People..."
is not
something easily attained. We don't have it yet.
And the
mystery is that the essence of this ideal is not to be won
through who
we elect to go to Washington. It rests in our own hands
and in
our own communities, and in how we conduct ourselves toward
each other.
How do we live together? What higher or lower
qualities of
our nature appear just here? Is there something we can
do in our
individual communities that can have an effect on politics in
accord
with our real needs? Do we have more power than just the
vote?
Amidst the seeming growing darkness, is there a way for
the
American Spirit again to shine?
I
believe
this is true. There is a possibility, there is a chance
for the ordinary people, for "We the People..." to become
active in a simple way and yet produce a profound effect.
To
understand, how this can be, is not so simple, but yet not too
complex.
Bear with me a moment longer.
Few
of
us would pass a burning house by and not stop to render some
help.
But suppose the burning process was happening very
slowly, and
that we ourselves were in the burning house.
Suppose
lots of people were agitated by the heat, but not aware of the
fire,
and thus they ran around exclaiming, its too hot in here, and
pointing
fingers at others and saying, "you're too hot, get out of here, your
burning me up." Imagine it is
not a house, but a civilization
that is on fire, that is burning up, but yet burning so slow
that no
one quite yet notices in a clear way what is happening.
Isn't
this
what we see on the news and hear on the talk shows. Many of us
in
our behaviors are "too hot", too agitated. We demand our
rights.
We sue at the drop of a hat. We are rude and too
easily
angry. We are intolerant of differences. We are
confused
and uncertain in our souls. In the big cities, where human
beings are
most concentrated, the temperature
and the confusion
and agitation are even higher.
This
heating up is part of a long term process that has been
going on
for many years, perhaps hundreds, depending on how broad we
want to
make our perspective. The traditions which normally
guide
behaviors in organized societies have been dying away in
Western
Culture for a long time. The loss of "family values",
which seems
fascinating to some, is simply the modern appearance of a long
term
social process. The individual has become stronger than
the
social forces which once defined his or her role and set the
standards
for behaviors in many communities.
Blacks
no
longer accept their oppression, even if it was, for a time, a
norm.
Women refuse to be limited by the roles implicit in
their
capacity to bear children. Gays refuse any longer to
hide in the
"closet". Human sexuality demanded it be an acceptable topic
of
conversation. The Third World threw over the colonial
powers.
Ethnic groups demand to have their own governments.
Businesses see themselves as no longer tied to a Nation,
and to
that Nation's goals or needs, or standards of practice.
Terrorists
refuse to acknowledge any code of honor for a warrior at all
anymore.
There are no more rules. The individual makes up
his own.
The whole world burns, and in the process most of
tradition and
most of civilization go up with the flames. Yet there
still is a
degree of order in some places. America is not yet
Bosnia. Social
chaos does not yet rule everywhere, and may yet be held back
and
overcome. Americans are a People of possibilities.
What
we
need to do is something that requires some degree of effort,
yet at
the same time has qualities of effortlessness. It is not
a
question of changing who we are, but of being more deeply who
and what
we are by nature - by, in a sense, unleashing in a more
powerful way
the true American Spirit.
If
we
change the background against which the politician hides
himself in
his chameleon-like nature, then he is forced to change.
If there
comes to be more depth, more wisdom to who we are as a People,
out of
our own forces, then the politician must follow. In
effect we are
his religion, we are his dogma, we are his god. Where we
go, he
follows. We don't need to elect a new kind of leader.
If we
deepen our citizenship, the actual practices of being "We the People...", then everything else changes from necessity.
And, therein lies the real power of a free People.
If
we
were to observe the political campaigns at one remove, with
some
objectivity, rather than as someone with a set point of view,
we can
come to see that the campaign is a struggle to define what is
important
in the moment. One candidate makes his issue a flat tax,
another
fear of terrorism, a third his own record, a fourth his
opponent's
weakness. To some this is seen as leadership. Yet,
as we
noticed before, the reality is that the politician and his
campaign
experts look to us, to see in what way they can put a hook in
our
emotions for their own benefit. In a sense we could say
that the
struggle is to see who can define the dialog during this every
four-year rite of self-examination.
In
this
struggle to determine the dialog, there are many players: the
candidates, the political parties, the various factions of the
press,
the many interest groups (businesses, unions, pseudo-religious
pressure
groups, foreign powers and so forth). All these bombard
our
consciousness, as a People, using the media, in particular
television.
While, at the same time, we continue our usual course,
struggling to
survive amidst the social chaos of modern life.
But
these
simple facts hide a remarkable possibility. If we act in
a
new way, a way which is yet just a deeper expression of who we
are,
then it is we who can determine the nature of the dialog and
all the
others then will have to dance to our tune.
What
confuses
us in the face of this possibility, is the assumption that the
most important thing that needs to happen is struggle over the
issues.
About taxation, abortion, capital punishment, welfare
and so
forth, we all have opinions. The result is that during
this
ritual of self- examination, we over-concentrate on what
divides us,
how we are separate and different from each other. We
see this as
a rightful expression of our freedoms, which it is. But,
as we
saw earlier in this essay, all rights and no duties is what is
destroying our way of life. The vital nature of our form
of
government has been dangerously depleted, because we no longer
"render" what it needs: Our driving unity in the
expression of
the pursuit of the ideal.
The
dialog
must change. The dialog must belong to us, to "We the People...". And the dialog must be about who we are as a
Nation
and as a People, who believe in, and dream, and will the
becoming of a
political and social environment where prejudice and enmity no
longer
dominate and instead exists a way of life based on tolerance,
friendship and the common bond of sister and brotherhood.
- part two -
Economic Tyranny and the
American Spirit
Whatever
efforts
are made in America, and elsewhere, to subdue the overreaching
of corporate power into the lives of ordinary people (e.g.
Ronnie
Dugger's Alliance impulse), nothing can be changed until those
concerned find in themselves that same emotional core from
which
America's founders drew in order to refuse any longer to
submit to the
tyrannical impulses of the old aristocracies. We need to
realize
that nothing will be gained without sacrifice. All must
be put at
risk: the security of our homes, our families, our current
freedoms,
and our individual lives.
But
even
that core of being, that source of courage, will be
insufficient
unless there is something else done, which is even more
necessary.
Human societies are much more complicated then that
stark
analysis which places the greatest blame for our current woes
on
corporate overreaching. Economics is only one aspect of
civilization, and while it is currently out of control, it is
not to be
set within its proper limits unless other elements of
civilization are
brought to bear. Thus, while we on one hand must
organize, must
stand up and proclaim No More!, at the same time we need to
deepen our
understanding of what makes a Nation, what makes a People, and
what
makes a civilized society. Organize, yes. But even more
crucially, think
it through!
America
was
founded out of a number of impulses. The discovery of a
new
world was one. The need to flee oppression, another. The
colonies
would have remained English, but for the fact that the English
aristocracy went too far. This is a crucial point.
Our
ancestors were forced into choices. While America is a
Nation
based on an Ideal, its impelling impulse was not that Ideal,
but rather
the overreaching of the hereditary aristocracy. Only
after it
becomes necessary to resist tyranny, because that tyranny asks
too
much, does it then become possible to conceive a new nation,
and to
organize that Nation around new Ideals.
Thus,
there
is this similarity between then and now; namely, that
corporate
overreaching has gone too far, and people are beginning to
accept the
need to restrain it. But there are differences between
then and
now and it is these differences which are most crucial.
Economic
Tyranny is a thing much different from the tyranny of the old
aristocracies. The main difference is that its power and
influence is much less direct and much more hidden and
invisible.
We know instinctively that concentrated wealth goes too
far, but
the means is not so obvious as it was with aristocratic
abuses.
One
thing
is the same, namely the shameless display of wealth in which
the
leading elites live out their excessive life styles.
But, just as
in the time of the aristocracies, the true money changers hide
their
activities, lead less public lives and strive to remain hidden
from the
public eye because they instinctively realize the danger of
flaunting
their greed and ill-gotten fortune. Moreover, we need to
realize
that merely to name the corporations, to name concentrated
wealth, to
point out the money changers, this is not enough. For
the true
Name of these abuses is Tyranny, and more importantly the true
Nature
of this tyranny is Evil.
Of
the
many ideas and words we can use to come to a deeper and more
thorough understanding of our modern dilemmas, the word "evil"
is one of the most essential, but is also one of the more
dangerous.
The religious in our culture mean one thing and many movie
makers
another. One politician calls the Soviet Union an "evil
empire"
and makes demographic points but adds nothing to our
understanding.
We need to use "evil" in a way that
aids our
understanding, and nor merely as an epithet. This is not
so
difficult if we think carefully on it.
First
we
look to ourselves. We know ourselves what evil is, for
we have
this darkness inside us as well. We lie easily to our
bosses, our
spouses, or our children when it is convenient and saves us
small
troubles. If given too much change, how many notice it but do
not
correct the situation and instead take advantage of it.
We gossip
excessively, forming our own little groups and saying terrible
and
unjustified things about those outside our own group. We
have
many impulses we cannot control, alcohol, smoking, more
serious drugs.
What family does not have an addictive member, does not
have
divorce, does not neglect in many small ways the needs of the
children
and the elderly? The list can go on and on. Evil flows
into the
world from human beings. It was always this way, and
will always
be this way.
Evil
is
also a spectrum; there are greater and lesser evils, and
individuals
who give themselves over more than others to such impulses.
History
tells us that this darkness in the soul leads to certain
consequences
of various kinds. One, which is most significant for us
to
understand, is that certain evil impulses attract power and
wealth,
like flies to honey. Balzac's dictum is that behind all great
wealth
lies a great crime. In a world which has great saints,
great
souls, so also does it have great sinners, individuals whose
denial of
their own humanity grants them extraordinary cleverness in the
pursuit
of their desires. We sometimes make a joke of evil
genius, but
history has shown us many, and our modern life is full of them
as well.
Thus,
we
need to realize that it is not corporations per se, or even
concentrations of wealth, in which economic tyranny is rooted,
but
rather it flows from the darkness in the souls of human
beings, and
this darkness becomes an organizing principle in how societies
work and
live, and grow and die and then become something new.
What
this
means as a practical matter is that it is not adequate to the
task
merely to notice that corporations abuse workers, or that
making money
using money itself as a commodity creates nothing and merely
redistributes wealth upwards, or that Central Banks exist to
serve the
needs of wealth and not the needs of ordinary people, or that
concentrated wealth abuses and corrupts our political
processes, or any
of the hundreds of other unnecessary and unhealthy
consequences of our
current economic order. Rather we must see that, in what
has to
be understood as a quite natural reality, the darkness
expressed by
human beings creates in its wake many consequences, only one
of which
is an economic hierarchy in which the top one percent uses as
their
servants, or their prey, the bottom ninety-nine.
With
this
understanding a great deal can be accomplished. First we
give the true name to the opponent of our freedoms and this
name is: the evil tyranny of
concentrated wealth. Second we
give
human faces to the perpetrators of this evil. It is
delusional to
see Exxon as an evil entity, when it is the decision makers at
the top,
and the gods they worship that need to be named. Is Bill
Gates'
desire to form the world according to his personal vision an
act of
corporate tyranny, an excessive use of financial power and
privilege?
Yes! Do we need to confront this directly and to
name as
false the gods he worships (personal wealth and power, the
bottom line,
the stockholder, the market etc.)? Yes! Until we
give faces
to these actors and names to their base impulses, we falsify
our
picture of the world and live amidst illusions and ghosts.
Our
next
task is then to see more clearly the nature of our
enslavement,
and this means first to understand what a tyranny truly is.
Fundamentally
tyranny
is the abuse of power. In colonial times that power had
over centuries come to reside in the hands of the hereditary
aristocracies. Nor is it the concentration of power that
is the
problem, for power is, like many other things, a two-edged
sword.
It can be used for good, to benefit those who don't
possess the
power. The evil comes, just like any other human act,
from the
intention that wields the power, whether it be the power of
directors
of large institutions to influence and corrupt governments, or
the
power of a parent to abuse and demean a child.
In
the
case of economic tyranny we have a number of aspects and
abuses.
Modern economy is not a natural order, such as, for
example, a
local eco-system. Many aspects of it are created, are
invented.
Banks don't have to make profits, but could be organized
simply
to perform the same functions but only extract from those whom
the bank
serves the necessary costs. Capitol doesn't have to
belong to
individuals, banks or corporations. Capitol can belong
to the
whole society and be administered by groups whose talent it is
to carry
out that administration. The only interest capitol has
to earn is
its costs, which would probably need to include those losses
where
capitol could not be repaid. Labor does not have to be
treated as
a commodity, and the well being of individuals and families
made
thereby dependent upon bottom line, i.e. profit motivated,
thinking.
Wages can be according to real need, and thus the cost
of
producing products has to bear the reality of that need.
There
are many options, and our problem is more that we don't give
the real
names to how our system works, but falsify the picture with
abstractions and pseudo-scientific jargon.
In America, for example, we have a peasant class with the greatest standard of living in history. What does this mean? Now a peasant class is merely that group of individuals within a society that are landless. Without access to land what can you do for yourself? You can grow no food, nor make any shelter, nor produce your own goods. You then become dependent upon what the landowners offer to you as opportunity; and what is worse, but not so well understood, is that with this dependence and landlessness something essential in the soul dies because there is no way for it to be expressed. When we look at the decay of the inner city, this is what we must learn to see, landlessness and dependence leading to the death of the soul. No wonder there is so much rage which cannot express itself properly because it cannot even give name to its pain or its true enemy.
We
are
also peasants in the realm of ideas. We only have as
ideas
about society what we have been given, rather than what we
might create
for ourselves. Here is another tyranny, one which helps
hide the
other. The whole language, in which human economic life and
its
relationships is expressed, is false. Economics, by
trying to
emulate natural science and thereby mathematics, became
completely
divorced from reality. It doesn't describe what goes on
in the
real world at all, but rather only certain lifeless and
abstract
relationships which equates quite falsely the production of
goods with
the nature of land, money and human labor. Its like the
grade
school problem of multiplying apples and oranges. Goods
are
nothing like land, which is nothing like money, which is
nothing like
labor. None of these elements is like the other, and to
draw
abstract relationships between them and think that something
is
understood is to live in an illusion which has only served to
aid and
abet the
evil
tyranny of concentrated wealth, and
to
confuse us, almost completely, about how societies work, and
what it
means to have civilization.
There
is
a darkness which lurks over our way of life, casting a shadow
over
how things are actually arranged and what they actually mean;
a
darkness that abhors the light. And just like our Sun,
which
grants us illumination as well as warmth, so the goodness in
human
beings is capable of bringing forth into societies and
civilization the
illuminating light of understanding, and the warming heartfelt
strength
of mutual aid and community.
Evil
cannot
be defeated, no more then one can repeal the law of gravity.
Human nature gives forth this darkness, but human nature
also
gives forth light, and before this light the dark retreats and
finds
its proper place in the whole balance. Our world is out
of
balance, and by bringing out of ourselves greater
understanding of how
things work, what they mean, and how they can fit together, we
create
that needed illumination and cast aside the darkness which has
so far
lead to the current state of things. And, by bringing
out of
ourselves sharing and community we bring forth the warmth
which repels
the cold of that darkness - the aloneness, the despair, the
hopelessness, which has for far too long been the soil in
which abuse
of self and of other has taken root. Drugs and child and
spousal
abuse will fall before no man made law. Only the light
of
understanding and the warmth of community can cure these dark
impulses
before they wake and take possession of human beings.
These evils
are merely symptoms of the greater imbalance which holds our
societies
in thrall and drags us unwillingly toward places no ordinary
human
being has any desire to go.
The evil tyranny of
concentrated wealth can be
understood by this
means to be a goad, a tool in the wise and self-correcting
governance
of the human race, which having had for a time free reign, now
exhausts
its welcome because its excesses have become too obvious, and
we are
finally fed up and will no longer tolerate them. Isn't
this in
part the story history teaches us? Don't the ordinary
people live
their lives quietly, minding their own business, accepting
life's
ordinary pains and pleasures. Until - until something is
too much
and this dark excess touches that deeper realm of soul and
spirit,
which mostly passive and self contained does then no longer
accept the
pain and the loss of freedom. And so something stirs
from deep
inside, something awesome in its genius and its force for
goodness and
moreover its willingness to sacrifice itself for something
greater.
Over
two
centuries ago America was born out of spirit which said No! to
the
tyranny of hereditary aristocracies. The beginning of
this No!
was a "shot
heard
round the world", first fired at the
Old
North Bridge in Concord Massachusetts. In the spring of
1996, at
a conference on economic rights, which finished its sessions
on this
same ground made hallowed by the blood spilled there, there
was heard
not a "shot", but a "shout".
No!
it
said, No! No! to the tyranny of concentrated wealth, and No!
to the
tyranny of abstract knowing which supports it. And then
Yes! Yes!
to understanding, to illumination and to light. And
finally, Yes!
to social good and to community and to warmth and human
sharing.
- part three -
the Word, the Idea of Property,
and the Creation of a True
American Culture
Societies,
cultures,
civilizations, whatever name we wish to give to large
aggregates of human communities, all have woven into them
various sets
of ideas, or world views, sometimes common, and in our more
supposedly
"modern" times, oft times fractured and chaotic. And,
these
social laws, expectations of behavior, ways of seeing the
world, the
whole rainbow of meaning that lives in
what we call culture, is first taught to
our children at the same time they acquire language.
Unfortunately
we
seldom think about the significance of this fact, the fact
that
initial meaning is born in language. Yet it is just here that so
much
happens whose gravity we overlook, and whose importance must
be
mastered if we are to even begin to take hold of those
realities which
underlie the symptoms of social disorder that are so apparent
in the
daily news. Language, the Word, is a great gift, the
gift that
makes us human and which marks us as essentially different
than the
animal kingdom, in spite of what the Darwinists have taught.
It
is here, in the introduction to culture, first begun with the
acquisition of language, that property comes
to be known,
communicated and instilled. There is no natural sense of
ownership, it is all taught. And if it is taught, then it can
be
untaught.
Yes,
the
child does say mine as it grabs its
toy.
Ownership does then appear natural. But the child also
shows no
power over its bladder or its bowels in the beginning either.
Yet
we do civilize our children so that their excretory functions
take
place appropriately and according to our cultural norms.
No less
then is mine an instinct and an appetite. It is thus
immature
and animal-like to claim things and territory as ones own.
The
truth is that what we conceive as ownership, possessions, and property are all things whose
meaning is taught, and whose instinctive roots can be
cultivated and
turned in other directions.
Certainly
we
do not want to alter something so fundamental in our culture
without
a great deal of thought. It is not being suggested here
as the
answer to anything, but rather as an example of a certain
aspect of
social and cultural reality. We raise children into a
way of
seeing the world. There is no greater power, and no
deeper
responsibility. It is the main way the past has of
coercing and
giving order to the present, and that the present has of
grasping and
determining the future. It is why Fascist governments
need and
use so much mind control. It is the main tyrannical process in
Orwell's
1984 - the power to give certain names to aspects of reality
and
thereby determine how the world and self are perceived.
In
a
free people, such as ourselves, where freedom of speech and
thought
are guaranteed, it is the primary power, a power far in excess
of
anything that governments or corporations may ever hope to
exercise.
The proof of this is how ardently they attempt to
control the
meaning of things through media, and through advertising
especially.
And
there
is a special factor effecting this, a factor related to the
particularities of the time in which we now live. At
present the
general power societies exercise in determining how its
children grow
up to see the world is at its weakest point in perhaps
thousands of
years. Recall what was suggested earlier, that tradition
and its
power to compel social conformance has passed away.
Individuality
is in an ascendancy, for
the moment; there are no more rules.
It
is this truth we see active in the so-called family values
crisis.
All tradition is collapsing. In ways almost
incomprehensible, all over the world the power of tradition is
passing
and this creates a special opportunity. Into this vacuum
new
impulses can arise. Let us take up an example - a
possibility -
and see where this leads us and what it can reveal about this
opportunity.
Someone
loses
their job, a very common experience. This is often a
tragedy in the making, in some instances whole families have
ended up
homeless with this as the beginning event. For a few
there will
be a cushion of savings; for most - who live paycheck to
paycheck -
this is an immediate catastrophe. Unemployment
insurance, if
applicable, may hold back the night for a while, but
bankruptcy soon
follows; the last desperate measure to restrain the financial
hemorrhaging. A home, if owned, will disappear.
But these
obvious financial moves hardly touch the core problem, which
has to do
with the inner sense of well being of those affected.
The
psychological toll is the most devastating cost, for it erodes
just
those inner resources from which any solution must be
generated.
These emotional costs of the
loss of work will
damage the family, may lead to divorce, to drug or alcohol
abuse, to
violence and the whole cycle of self destruction that seems so
common
today.
What
a
fraud then is our economic language in that it paints these
things in
terms of rates of joblessness and argues for or against the
useless
abstraction full
employment as if somehow it makes
any sense
at all to delete from our consciousness a true awareness of
the human
costs. In economics much is made of preventing waste,
but the
waste of lives is far more devastating to our civilization.
What
kind of dark god is profit that it lets us
so
casually destroy human beings in its name?
Hidden
beneath
these facts is an odd, yet very important social one.
For
the most part, when someone loses work and begins this slide
into
despair (for the moment ignoring of course those who are born
into this
despair because they will never find work in the first place),
those
who lose a job take this course in a social context which
leaves them
alone, and which defines their problem as belonging only to
them and
one which they must themselves resolve. To lose the job
is solved
by getting another. But one who loses their job is
expected to
deal with the problem themselves.
There
are
exceptions and qualifications to this observation.
Unemployment
insurance, food banks, welfare programs, homeless shelters,
our society
does struggle to hold up the fallen and wounded from our
economic wars.
Even so, an idea still surrounds this whole thing, the
idea that
one is individually responsible. Sometimes families
help, and
other times people will be members of certain groups that make
a point
of giving community support to the economically wounded, such
as the
Mormons. But for the majority, joblessness is
frightening and
difficult and leaves one feeling very much alone.
Children in
families going through such a crisis will not understand the
emotional
distance which can arise because the parent now feels less
human,
because very often the parent does not understand the real
costs of
joblessness themselves. The reality is that the context
of
meaning in which we view such events is itself unhealthy.
We
go
to work, we receive a paper telling us of our new status, and
then
we go home. We have lost our job, and this event is cast
in a
certain light, has a certain social and individual meaning,
and it is
this understanding which effects us as much as anything. That
effort
we have been expending each week, that portion of our will
which is
lost into the job and its natural and unnatural stresses, this
no
longer secures for us some sense of control over the future.
We
feel as if we've gone from a state of power to a state of
powerlessness. Yet, we will not die. Our material
circumstances will change greatly, but poverty is not death.
Even
so, we are somehow so diminished as to be psychologically
incapacitated. Perhaps something more is happening here,
something which has so far escaped our notice and
comprehension.
Let
us
imagine for the moment that this same event occurs, i.e.
joblessness, but that the context of meaning is different.
Let us
imagine a different culture, one in which
such an
event has a different meaning.
This meaning I
will paint by telling a story. Story telling is one of
the main
powers of culture, the main way communities give meaning to
the common
life events that all can or will face. Like many, I had
once
worried that our current culture, for
what there is left
of it seemed to be abandoning books and literature. Now
I have
begun to realize that there is a wise ordering principle at
work behind
these events - especially the loss of interest in reading.
It is
part of the much wider process which is destroying tradition,
and in
this instance it paves the way for the possibility of a return
to an
oral culture. How can we go on to the new if the old
does not die?
Why
tell
stories? Facts, even if assembled well, tend to a picture of
things as black and white and gray. Facts are usually
abstractions,
that is they arise by removing them from the context in which
they are
embedded. Stories, being imaginative, can express
qualities not
capable of being captured by facts. What mere facts hide,
stories can
illuminate.
*
the War Against the Grey Men
Like
many
human beings, Adam labored in the House of the Grey Men.
Each morning he awoke, and after breakfast said good-bye
to his
two children, and with his wife, and the others whose time of
sacrifice
it also was, Adam went to the station there to wait for and
then to
ride the Machine Beast into the bowels of the House of the
Grey Men.
The lower levels of the House were a terrible place to
labor.
No one was allowed to care for the work place except in
the most
minimal way. Soot, oil, garbage, foul air and water, and
worse
yet, colorless ideas - the lower level of the House was a
place of
little light and much darkness. But Adam understood;
were it not
for the Peace, the whole world would be like the House of the
Grey Men.
The Peace had made it possible for human beings to have
the Home,
but only for a Price. The Grey Men always had to have a
Price.
Yet Adam and the others were glad to pay their share of
the
Price, for in this way they could, perhaps, keep themselves
and those
they loved from becoming Grey as well. How else to save
ones Soul
then to pay the Price.
As
always
the Labor made Adam tired. But he knew that when he came
Home the tiredness could be made to go away. So, as he
always
did, Adam gave his Labor with a good heart. In this way
Adam kept
the colors in his soul and his spirit alive. On this
particular
day, at the end of his shift, one of the Grey Men came to Adam
and told
him to come into the Office. Once there, the Grey man
gave a pink
envelope to Adam, and, with it, a very Grey smile.
Adam's heart
lept into his throat, and he struggled to contain his
excitement. It
would not do to let the Grey man know what he truly felt.
Carefully Adam opened the envelope and saw the
Magic Words
inside: "your
Fired!" it said. As he had
been taught
Adam looked at his feet and slumped in his chair, even though
his mind
was racing with all the changes that were now possible.
After a
few minutes of silence the Grey man dismissed Adam.
Carefully
Adam put the pink envelope into the pocket of his work clothes
and
returned to his place of Labor. It took all the
discipline he
could muster to keep from jumping for joy.
Riding
Home
in the Beast, Adam could not contain himself. Standing next to
his
wife, he had her peek into his pocket. When she saw the
envelope
a smile lit up her face and she leaned against his shoulder
and took
his hand in hers. That night in the quiet of their
apartment they
and their friends had a party. Adam would now be able to stay
Home all
day, he had been freed of his duty to sacrifice to the House
of the
Grey Men, and now his Labor could be kept in the community.
Various guardians of the community came to Adam that
night asking
where he would like to give his Labor, while others came to
his wife to
help manage the change. No longer would they live in the
apartment that belonged to the Grey Men, but now they could
live at
Home. As the evening wore down, one of the guardians
spoke the
words of the Peace makers, reminding them all of their true
power in
the war against the Grey Men.
"
They think
they've fired me, but I am human, and this means I am free to
give my
own meaning to all things. Not so, say I, that pink
means to be
fired, but rather to be set free. They think they get my
Labor
for their Price, but I give it of myself. Sad it is that
they
choose to lose their colors, but I have kept mine and with my
freedom
to declare what it all means, I ride the rainbow of life in
the company
of others, sharing the same destiny. "
*
Behind
this
story are many ideas. For example, we currently tend to think
of
corporations as our enemy, as the cause of much unhappiness
and tragedy
in the world. But the corporation is an illusion. There
is
nothing real there; it is simple the Ghost which hides the
Grey Men
from their responsibilities. Our enemy is the Grey Men
and their
colorless souls. This is another true name for the evil
tyranny
of concentrated wealth.
The
power
which we possess as the potential creators of culture does not
lie in the fact that we can give any name we want to anything
or idea,
but rather that we can seek and find the truest names, the
ones that
help us see through the Ghosts. There are many Ghosts.
Another
Ghost
is the idea that we have to change the corporation, that we
have
to somehow overcome the apparently tremendous advantage that
concentrated wealth possesses. Just in thinking this way
we grant
power to the Grey Men they do not in fact have. This is
a
variation of a general human theme which goes like this: "...if only X
(someone) would
do Y (some act) then I can be Z (whatever we believe we lack
because X
has not acted and done Y)."
Whenever we
think this way we grant extra power to X, in many cases power
they only
have because we have chosen to think this way.
Whenever
we
discover ourselves thinking this way, we need to stop and
reflect on
the reality. Do they really have this power? Is
there a way
which I can act which eliminates or lessens this power?
Can I act
in concert with others in some way so that we mutually
diminish such
power? What can I and/or we do independent of those who
I/we
perceive possess such power? What freedom do I have to
no longer
grant such power to another?
Many
of
our economic ideas are Ghosts of the Grey Men. We need
not
continue to feel bound by them. We can recognize that
they are
illusions and that we need no longer fear them.
Especially if we
act in concert. We can think of this as a kind of
psychological-political aikido. Aikido is a martial art in
which the
person being attacked is taught to move in such a way that the
energy
of the aggressor's attack is harmlessly dissipated, while at
the same
time the person being attacked maintains their center and
their
balance. It is often not necessary to attack back.
The
attacker moves toward you, but you are not there.
So
it
can be in the War Against the Grey Men. They look for
prey and
for servants, and while they get something - the free gift of
our Labor
- they do not get to drive the colors from our souls or the
vital life
from our spirits. Why? Because right in front of
them we
stole the old and dying meaning away, and made it all new and
all our
own. Because we refused to fall completely into the
chaos of
unfettered individualism, and formed mutual aid communities
instead.
And, in this way we chose to be neither Grey or
animal-like, but
rather to be human.
In
America,
this choice has certain special aspects, even though the same
choice is arising in different ways all over the world.
Socially
and culturally America is unlike any other place in the world.
Here all the cultures and peoples and religions meet and
mingle,
or make war. Here, in the New World, the old traditions
have the
least power, - much less than they exercise elsewhere.
Here the
power to create new culture is the most powerful; everywhere
else
American culture, such as it is, is imitated. This is
why so many
upholders of other traditions hate us; they see the effects,
the
imitation - especially among their young - and they blame
America and
Americans, not realizing that an extraordinary world-wide
social/cultural metamorphosis is upon us.
One
of
the realities of this change is that it cannot be
orchestrated.
No institution, or government, or business, or religion
can
manufacture the new which is to come. All such social
change
occurs locally, in the smallest social structures - the
family, paired
relationships, small groups gathered together for any and all
purposes.
How do we talk to each other? How do we treat each
other?
What thoughts do we form inwardly by which we define
those who we
meet and by which we define the context in which such
encounters arise?
What feelings, what colors of soul do we cultivate
toward others,
especially the unknown-stranger-other? With what name,
what
significance, do we adorn the world?
Think
about
how quickly a new word, such as cyberspace, or an old word with a new meaning, such as cool
spoken the way the young spoke it for a while, moves through a
culture.
The deepest thinkers, among our scholars of sociology and
language,
know full well that much that we call reality is in fact
solely that
meaning which is given by a culture to its young through the
acquisition of language. There is no more profound
revolution
then a revolution of meaning, for social and cultural
realities can be
altered totally by such changes.
Think
about
it. Most of these changes occur chaotically and
instinctively. Some are very powerful.
Christianity,
Marxism, modern materialistic science, these are all the
result of
processes of change in meaning. Now just suppose we
undertook to
do such a thing on purpose. Not to force a change in the
organization of society itself directly, but only in what
things mean,
by driving our energies in a struggle to find the truest
names.
There is no accident to the fact that the first thing
which the
God of the Old Testament gave to the human being was the power
to name "the
beasts of the field and
the birds of the air" or that the
Gospel of
John begins with: "In
the beginning was the Word...".
Now
when
human beings, not just outwardly in speech, but more
crucially,
inwardly in thought, begin to take responsibility for the
"naming" -
for the granting of meaning - to themselves, there is no
greater
creative power active on the level of human social existence.
When mothers and fathers, single or otherwise, when
groups or
families, associated for any purpose begin to take conscious
responsibility for the stories they
tell about what
the world means, then the most profound social/cultural power
possible
begins to shine its light and warmth into our lives.
Reflect
simply
on gossip. Small minded individuals gather together to
demean and degrade their fellows. In this act they stand
between
the thing and its meaning, between the person and how the
community
perceives them. We all know the destructive power evoked
in this
most simple and treacherous act. Increase the scale of
this
observation and we begin to understand the frightening power
exercised
by Media and why its numerous excesses are so
destructive.
The question remains, where are we, as individuals and
groups,
before such acts?
Mostly
we
are asleep, or afraid. We ourselves may gossip, or
merely
passively observe, as long as it is someone else being
betrayed.
Against the institutional power of media we assume
powerlessness, or
perhaps much worse, that we must make some extravagant act in
order to
get media attention so as to get our message, our meaning,
across.
If we think on it we will realize that by taking up the
power of
stories, of seeking for the true names, we begin what is not
merely a
creative act, but in fact a stark necessity of the time.
The
gossips, the disinformation specialists, the liars, the truth
defilers,
who will oppose them if not the ordinary people in the
exercise of
their extraordinary freedom - their rights and
responsibilities - of
speech and thought?
Imagine
what
will happen to corporations and governments and other groups
that
seek to suppress human dignity and self awareness, when the
central
means for effecting their treason against their fellow humans
is taken
from them by individuals and small groups who say No! to the
tyranny of
false meaning and oppose it with their own creative capacities
to know
and to name the truth. The power of the Grey Men and
their cold
and heartless God depend upon our passivity and sleep.
If we
awake, although we can not eliminate them for they do have a
place in
the balance, we will take our rightful place as leaders in the
creation
of the future.
And
in
America, with its miraculous diversity of culture and social
structure, the possibilities are incredible. What
stories, what
true names, will be discovered in East LA or in the south side
of
Chicago, or in New Orleans or Miami, or Montana or...
And think
again of how the world culture follows so closely what happens
here in
America. It is not as if we guide - no that is not the
case.
Rather we break ground, and then others know it can be done;
so that,
for example, what was once rock and roll flowed over the world
and then
came back again as World Beat Music, transformed into a
kaleidoscope of
world culture. America is a Dream, the Great Dream in
fact.
People come here drawn by the dream they have made in
their own
minds of the meaning of freedom and equality and brotherhood.
Seeking they come, bringing their dream with them to add
to our
dreams, so that we all dream the Great Dream together. This is
the true
American Spirit, which is not possessed merely by Americans.
It
is a universal dream.
If
we
change our culture, if we change the meaning of things, then
we
begin the universal dissolution of the whole foundation on
which the
Grey Men march to power. It is not necessary to oppose
them on
the political level at all; although as the culture changes
political
change will follow as day follows night. Just consider
that with
these few words, dear reader, how many new doorways have
already opened
in your own mind...
*
We
now
must draw these meditations to a close. Our reflections
on
the American Spirit, and the present context in which that is
active,
have taken us down many roads, have shown us many stories.
At the
deepest level it has been suggested that the American Spirit
is a
universal impulse, a seeking-dreaming not confined to one
culture, race
or people. We have also discovered that ordinary people
possess
extraordinary power through the creation of culture, through
taking
responsibility for the stories, for
the context
of meaning in which life unfolds.
The traditions are passing
away, and individuality threatens chaos. If society has
no rules,
then the individual must provide his or her own.
The
texture
of the current crisis of freedom involves a relationship
between the power of corporations, the power of the Grey Men,
and the
inner well being of individuals and communities. The
cold and
heartless dark god of profit is blind to human need.
Much
of
the power of the Grey Men is a Ghost, an illusion woven of
false
economic ideas. Shatter the illusion and shatter the
power. Find
the true ideas, the true names and give that dissolved power
back to
communities through their own created culture.
On
this
foundation erect new economic organizations. Don't
attack
corporations directly. Take away their meaning and make
them
unnecessary. Against such creative human forces they
have no
defense. On such a path much else follows simply from
the nature
of the already existing social relationships.
A new culture naturally grows new social forms, new kinds of communities, which in turn are the soil from which new political leaders are grown. Laws are the rigidification of living social processes. Laws are the skeleton formed from the living social body. It isn't necessary to make new laws to undo corporations or their abuse of the political process. New culture and new communities will automatically produce such changes in support of their newly understood needs.
The
individual
human being stands in the midst of two relationships in the
world. In terms of our inner life, our soul and spirit,
we live
in a vertical relationship to that which we recognize as
higher than
ourselves. In the horizontal we are connected to each
other, we
are social. In both directions we are yet immature.
Growth,
moral or vertical growth, and horizontal or social growth only
occur
through crisis. This is the basic lesson of life.
It
is
the sea of events, the tides of history, that impel us forward
toward that we might yet become. Knowing this we should
perhaps
be grateful for the Grey Men and saddened that they have lost
the
colors from their souls. For without the pain they
inflict we
would sleep and never grow at all. What a miracle the
human
spirit that it can meet such challenges and make such
sacrifices as the
times makes necessary.
In
the
mystery of time a great moment often comes, when certain
opportunities arise, when certain paths can be chosen, which
if not
taken then, cannot be taken later. We stand on the sword
point of
such a choice. In what spirit do we approach the problem
of
economic tyranny and its abuses of our way of life? Are
we
vengeful, angry, full of hate? Or are we thoughtful,
sober,
deliberate, awake, and creative? This is The Question.
***************************
a very long essay written around 1994-5
Song of the Grandfathers*:
- real wealth (wisdom), and the redemption
of social and political existence (civilization) -
* where the term
"Grandfathers"
is used in this essay, it should be assumed to include the
feminine.
That is, "Grandfathers" is a metaphor for "wise elders".
- wanderings and beginnings -
I dream America,
I sing Her shadow and Her light;
I dream America,
and America dreams me.
America's
original peoples are more than
just the remnants of a dying culture, but they are the
preservers and
conservators - the
stewards - of real wealth, an
unappreciated
richness of social wisdom. If modern America does not
come to
comprehend and integrate this wisdom into its way of life,
then there
is no hope in the future for a human civilization.
It is not my
intention to investigate
this social wealth in detail, but rather to examine certain
particular
jewels and see where their appreciation will lead us.
Principle
among these treasures lies the idea of the Grandfathers, an idea found all over the world in various
forms.
The social life
of the group was always
dependent for its order and direction on the wise counsel of
its older
members. Mostly in our literature (or films) we have
portrayed
this social guidance as having authoritarian and arbitrary
characteristics. Only recently (c.f. Dancing
with
Wolves) have there been hints of the
true dimensions, the depths of individual freedom and
democracy which
inhabited America's tribal cultures. The Grandfathers
needed no
autocratic authority, for they were in fact wise. The
respect was
genuine, not artificial, and their authority was real, based
on trust
and practical success in life.
The
Grandfathers counseled, but never
compelled. Why would they need to do otherwise?
They knew
from their own lives that compulsion leads inevitably to
rebellion.
What they gave came from self honesty, humility and a
profound
and deep religiosity. To not listen was observably
foolish. To
obey was unnecessary. Their advice was followed because
it was
clearly valid, and never forced or coercive. Most often,
in fact,
advice was never given. The Grandfathers merely spoke
what was in
their hearts, and what they would do or not do, what path they
would
take. Others followed because to do so was to go with
goodness
and to walk in the light.
At its core the
idea of the Grandfathers
has a deeper and more difficult mystery. It is an
understanding
of the world that conceives that the dead have not left us nor
lost
interest in our lives. Rather, the most spiritually
mature
ancestors are actively available to provide guidance and
advice, if we
but prepare ourselves in the right way to receive inwardly the
quiet
wisdom offered. This is an idea, by the way, not
significantly
different from the role the Saints are said to play in human
existence
according to the doctrines of Roman Catholicism.
It is to honor
both the idea of the wise
counsel of elders and as well the ancestral heritage that
whispers
quietly in the awake soul, that this essay takes its name.
To
those readers who may unknowingly be confined in the
conceptual
straight jacket of certain odd prejudices still encrusted on
the
scientific world view, I counsel patience. Scientific
reason has
an insufficient grasp of human nature; and without the
cooperation of
the Arts and Religion, science (Reason) itself cannot be a
basis upon
which to restore health and vitality to our civilization.
Do not
make the mistake of prejudging this essay because of the
implications
of its unusual beginning. Our world desperately needs wisdom,
from
whatever sources it may be found.
It is not, by the way, my intention to draw from known Indian sources a collection of wise sayings concerning our social and political existence. Rather my method has been to emulate their effort, to struggle inwardly toward spirit-guarded depths. Moreover, I conceive this work as being simply the opening monologue in what I hope will evolve into a full circle of give and take. Experience has taught me that truth is found only when the whole people in circle conversation consider a question. One alone is a tree falling unheard in the forest.
When I was
sixteen years old, I first
came awake to politics. The year was 1956 and Eisenhower
and
Nixon were battling Stevenson and Kefauver. Having
already
acquired a romantic vision of America, through reading the
many books
in the Landmark juvenile American history series, I was deeply
disturbed by the rhetoric of that political campaign. It
seemed
empty of all the idealism I had, in my naivete, expected to
find.
Since that initial experience I have painfully watched
as the
dialog of politics has further deteriorated. Unwanted
and
increasing despair has filled my soul every four years, while
I
listened to the dissonance in the song of many of our leaders
as they
mislead our people with lies, obfuscation, and meaningless
irrelevancies.
The righteous Song of the
Grandfathers is not to be heard in
the political campaigns.
There is no sense of the need for wisdom, no open
council of
elders; all is done in secret, with hidden motive and hidden
purpose.
We have so far forgotten it, so far lost wisdom from its
central
place in the ordering of our lives, that today all we really
can feel
is a subtle and anguished experience of emptiness. We
feel the
void, but cannot find our way to what is missing.
And not only
the individual political
leaders are unable to find their way to wisdom, the process
itself
works against wisdom's discovery. For true wisdom lies
not just
in ideas but in the means as well. It is the council of
elders -
the circle of wisdom-seeking speakers - that finds its way to
the
needed understanding. No one alone, no President, no
Pope will
enable us to meet and resolve our difficulties. It is
the
community of voices that must be heard, each to the other and
each for
all.
This essay is
my response to this
emptiness in our political dialog and is driven by the pain,
the rage
and the despair I feel as I experience our leaders' amazing
lack of
responsibility, and the equal frustration I feel at the
tolerance of
far too many of our leading citizens toward the tragic and
continuing
deterioration of our political and social existence.
Fortunately, I
am not an academic, a
politician, a newsman or even an otherwise practicing writer.
Experience has taught me that concentration in a
discipline often
makes for a narrowness of vision, and an inability to see
beyond the
limits of ones assumptions. Thus, I believe the reader
will find
that, freed of the constraints of a single discipline,
whatever this
essay may appear to lack in scholarship or literary merit will
be more
than made up for in a richness of fresh ideas - a feast for
the mind.
Having spent over thirty-five years in the pure (almost
mathematical and musical) contemplation of political and
social
realities, I have been quite surprised myself to discover what
could be
understood once the illusions and preconceptions inherent in
our
current political dialog were set aside.
Sometimes I
wish that I were more
aggressive by nature, more inclined to forcefully sell what
has taken
so much pain and so many years to learn. But like the
Grandfathers, I know too well that such methods in the end
bear
malformed fruit, if they bear any at all. How often have
we heard
that all real learning begins with the acknowledgment of
ignorance;
that the first task on the path to wisdom is not the
acquisition of
knowledge but the cultivation of humility? Not often
enough it
seems, when our culture wanders socially backward, entranced
with
pundits, columnists, and other talking heads, whose only
purpose seems
to be to fill the air with random noise and the confusion of
shouted
opinions. Point and counterpoint? One might as
well dig
wells beside the river.
In a delightful
little movie called CHAC,
the leaders of a small agricultural tribal village in central
America
become dissatisfied with their own shaman's failure to end the
drought
they are experiencing. They keep giving him parts of their
tribal
wealth, but all he does is stay drunk and make promises (sound
like any
politicians we know?). In the end the village elders
call upon
the services of a real wise man (a magician) who lives alone
in the
mountains, and whom they fear.
He agrees to
make it rain, but requires
of the elders (and one young man) that they all travel
together first
to the "mother
of
waters". On their journey they
stop for
a night beside a lake, rich with fertile marsh land and filled
with
fish. The elders can't understand why the wise man has
taken them
there. Too obvious of course is the idea that the elders
could
simply move the village to the lake. The wise man cannot
tell
them this, if they cannot see it for themselves, which they do
not.
The best solution is then missed and the film ends with
the rains
made, but at an unnecessary and tragic cost.
If there is one characteristic of our modern way of life, it is this blindness to the obvious and the refusal to change patterns of destruction. In the Song of the Grandfathers can be heard a vision of the means to social renewal and vitality; but who has will to hear and the courage to become?
- the one true means to all true ends -
"Respect for the word
is the first commandment in the
discipline by which a man can be educated to maturity -
intellectual,
emotional and moral. Respect for the word - to employ it with
scrupulous care and an incorruptible heartfelt love of truth -
is
essential if there is to be any growth in a society or in the
human
race. To misuse the word is to show contempt for man.
It
undermines the bridges and poisons the wells. It causes Man to
regress
down the long path of his evolution."
(Dag
Hammarskjold)
"Washington is a town
whose only industry is the making,
shaping, processing, and marketing of words. Words to
define how
citizens should conduct themselves. Words to direct and
limit
industry. Words to calm friends and warn enemies.
Words to
throw at one another in the halls of Congress, or in front of
devouring
cameras. Words that in the end can kill, or impoverish,
or
imprison, or empower. And also recycled words - on
editorial
pages or inside the pages of legal briefs - dissecting other
words,
assessing implications, making distinctions, arguing their
true meaning
as if the words were holy writ. Words without poetry or
music,
whose mastery brings money and authority."
(former Secretary of the Navy, now Senator from Virginia,
James Webb,
in his novel Something
to Die For.)
"In the beginning was the Word..." (the Gospel of St. John, 1:1)
Set out above
are some apparently
different ideas about the role of the word in human existence.
They are not contrary, but represent rather a spectrum
of points
of view. In the first, we are given sage advice, should
we wish
to evolve ourselves or our civilization. In the second,
we are
shown (by one in a clear position to know) just how little
this advice
is acted upon in the centers of political power. In the
third, we
are invited to recognize a genuine mystery, something our
materialistic
age has far too strong a tendency to pretend does not exist.
In what
follows, an attempt is made to
show how, by a common effort to engage each other via the
word, our
people, in fact any people, can through effort and struggle
bring about
a healing of our mutual social and political existence.
The goal of
political life ought to be the health and vitality of society,
both
inwardly in the individual soul and spiritual existence and
outwardly
in the shared material circumstances.
Toward this
goal words are a power.
But their power is not in the abstract symbolism of the
letters
and sounds. No. Words are a carrier wave for
something
else, for the light and the heart of the human being who uses
the word.
It is human intention that fills out the word and
enables it to
be so ripe with meaning. Human goodness, beauty and
truth live in
the words and through them bring about communication.
Words can
bridge the gap from one human
being to the other, light and warmth filled, sun-like in
splendor.
Words mediate true brother and sisterhood, true human
communion
and are the only means to real human community.
Who can doubt
then that we desperately
need today a more mature and moral application of the power of
the word
in human affairs? We have the old adage, "...that the pen is
mightier
then the sword." But we also live in
a
culture which says: "money talks" (and as
well the
counter-image: "talk
is cheap"). The talk-dialog of
recent
Presidential campaigns is a debasement of the power of the
word, and
reveals an almost total impoverishment of ideas among our
political
leaders. The disgusting, trivial and divisive themes of
modern
presidential politics are a thin mask covering a tragic
spiritual
emptiness.
These
every-four-year rites ought to be a
vital ritual of renewal and regeneration, but they continue to
be a
forum of senseless name calling and cheap and thoughtless
criticism.
Clearly, in politics, the word's potential for "poetry and music" has not even begun to be realized.
There can be no
question that this empty
rhetoric is one cause of the apathy and social unrest in our
society.
Our leaders have nothing real to say to us, nothing
which touches
the heart or illuminates the world.
It is my hope
to fill in this void in the
dialog of modern politics with something at once real, yet
also
imaginative - poetic and musical, perhaps even magical.
For we
need more than just new ideas, new understanding, but
something which
stirs the will. If we would begin the healing of those
social
ills whose inflamed symptoms we saw in the riots following the
Rodney
King verdict in Los Angles for example, then we must find a
common
inspiration - become moved as a community. For it
remains an
essential truth that no idea that does not enter into the will
can lead
to change.
One voice, however, can do nothing. As the reader will come to realize at the end of this essay, it is the dialog of the community, of "We the People...", which is both the first step and, at the same time, the desired result. For the dialog is itself both means and end, simultaneously. Too long now we have thought and taught that the power of the people lies in the vote. That is not true. The pollster, the spin doctor, and political campaign advertising director have always known that it is the content of the dialog as it evolves which is determinative. The vote is just the exclamation point to a long, and sometimes exhausting public dialog. For far too long the politicians and their hired help have controlled the content of this dialog. And just that long have the processes of government been lame. It is only when the People speak that real wisdom enters in, and the life of society evolves instead of degenerates.
- first theme -
Right at the beginning we have to admit a regrettable, but obvious, fact. There is to be no short term solution, no quick fix to these social ills. We may, in fact, never be able to heal all of the festering disorders in the social body of humanity. At the same time, we dare not let thoughts of impossibility or improbability deter us from striving for solutions.
The roots of
these symptoms (such as the
riots, past, present and future) are deep, not just in
American
history, but in the whole of Western culture. As a
fundamental
axiom, we should recognize that these social events are always
signs of
the intangibles of human psychology. This is the reason,
for
example, that the Great Society failed (in a sense), because
it's
authors did not acknowledge and did not think their way
through to the
real depths of the problem. Without a true perception of
how
social life is shaped, out of the hidden elements of our inner
life,
there is no possibility of bringing health and regeneration.
At the least
this means that something
has been missing in the political dialog, in the words (and
ideas) by
which we seek to bring out of the facts some degree of
understanding
and insight. The rituals of thought, in which
politicians seem
today to move as in a dream, live on the surface of events,
never even
seeking the depths, never yearning really for the meaning.
When
the motive is solely the pursuit after power, what then can
one expect?
Truth and meaning do not yield themselves up to
opportunism and
greed.
Long experience
has taught me that the
quality of an answer is very much dependent upon the quality
of the
question, and as well the question's impelling motive.
High
quality questions are, therefore, difficult to discover; we
must work
to find them. Mere opinion, while often necessary, is
inadequate
here. In the beginning thinking must move from question
to
question, as if unraveling a complicated set of riddles
arranged like
boxes inside boxes inside boxes. This essay follows such
a path,
but it may only seem like a downward spiral, as if one was
diving
deeper, ever deeper into an ever darkening ocean of
understanding.
The truth can be found, if one has the discipline, by
keeping the
light of intuition cloaked until the yearning is ripe - until
one is
pregnant with the earnest desire to perceive and to know.
In our
insanely rushing civilization, our judgments tend to be formed
too
fast. Wisdom is only found with time and contemplation;
it is the
product of effort, of work, of craft and of art.
Several years
ago, in the late 1970's, as
I struggled to recover from the blows to my idealism delivered
by the
Nixon years, I came to a surprising, yet obvious, realization.
I had
been reading Robert Marcuse's One
Dimensional
Man. Suddenly I understood
that behind all political points of view stood an idea of
human nature,
always present, although often expressed in differing and
subtle
degrees of explicitness. This meant, among other truths,
that
political disagreement most often had its roots in these
different
concepts of the human being. And, as a consequence, that
any
fundamentally true and practical political ideas had to be
based on a
similarly true and practical understanding of human nature.
Along similar
paths I have encountered a
multitude of questions. Some of the very best were asked
by
George Will in his 1982 book, Statecraft
as
Soulcraft, a beautiful (but
ultimately
futile) attempt to adorn the political dialog with the more
profound
ideas of Western civilization (Will is one political writer
with some
instinct for the "Grandfathers" of
Western Civilization). He asked: What does it
mean to govern? Does government have any
responsibilities toward
the inner life of its citizens? And behind this question
is: What
are the fundamentals of human nature as these play themselves
out in
the political arena? At this level of inquiry we can
begin to
have a dialog which is no longer superficial. Here is
also the
answer to the question we have about why our political leaders
have
been unable to solve most of our social problems. They
have never
wandered in serious play among these the foundational
elements, and
thus they build houses on sand. Let us consider some
examples.
The political conservatives and the Christian fundamentalists talk today about the destruction of the family, and look to the changes in individual morality as the cause. Our problem is values (or the lack thereof) they say. These thoughts remain on the surface. The observations are correct, but they are only the perceptions of symptoms. Even the fledgling sociologist recognizes that the industrial revolution, and the changes in work life - i.e. economic forces, have had the effect of destroying, from the outside, the traditional structures of social order in Western cultures. The individual, the family and the community are victims, not cause. Robert Bly's Iron John , written from the special perspective usually only possessed by the poet (another ear attuned to the Grandfathers), begins to get at the depths, because of his use of the imagination - of the eye of the heart.
What has Bly
noticed? He observed
the destruction of a certain natural stream of wisdom, which
once had
flowed from father to son as a consequence of the closeness of
their
lives. Industrialization fractured this relationship and
interrupted this flow. What the father had to pass on to
the son
as an understanding of inner life, as an understanding of soul
and
spirit, and of the wisdom which makes communities possible,
this became
lost. This observation of Bly's is just one instance of
many
similar changes, as the last few hundred years of Western
culture has
seen the gradual, but unstoppable, degradation of the
whole
fabric of the social order.
As a
consequence, the soul of the
contemporary human being is lamed. Our civilization has
fallen, not to
invading masses bent on physical destruction and domination,
but to the
anti-spiritual conceptions of modern science and the
anti-community
effects of unrestrained greed. As a consequence of the
first, the
individual is taught a world view in which the human being is
a mere
animal, living in an uncaring cosmos. As a consequence
of the
second, he is valued only as a worker and a consumer.
Nowhere is
there any larger meaning, only various sterile pleasures of
the moment
to be consumed over and over again.
This is what
signifies the end of Western
civilization. The significance of the human being, which
stood at
the beginning as a rising sun in the classic Greek
civilization, has
faded to nothing. The light by which the human being
defined
himself in a cosmos filled with Gods and the drama of Fate and
Destiny,
has turned to darkness. There is no longer any profound
myth to
fill the imagination of the growing soul; and modern art is
filled as a
consequence with rage, despair and spiritual emptiness.
Are the acts of
the looters in Los
Angeles and elsewhere, or the 9/11 terrorists, uncivilized?
Of
course, but so are the acts of those who looted our savings
institutions and created the sub-prime crisis. The
crimes are
parallel both in consequence and in cause. In both the
soul lacks
the ability to be motivated beyond mere self interest and
avarice, or
to see itself as a constructive co-contributor to the greater
whole.
Yet the looting of the savings and loans. the political
terrorism
of extremists and economic terrorism of the sub-prime crisis
are far
worse, for they require a sustained mood, a continuous cold
and
calculating attitude, which is all the more unconscionable.
The
looting during riots are acts of the moment, fired by
understandable
anger and frustration (for the most part, not forgetting the
many
opportunists who took advantage of the chaos).
In both cases, however, something is missing if we do not strive for a deeper understanding of the psychological element. Merely to see this as a problem of failed morality is to be blind to much that needs appreciation and perception. In the absence of a concrete wisdom/knowledge of the interior spaces there is no hope of comprehension or mastery of these subterranean depths of the soul. It is just here, in a kind of arrogant ignorance of human inner life, that our civilization rests unknowing amidst social chaos and debris.
No doubt more
than symbolically, the
inner city is likewise without order, without civilization.
Notice how much we yearn for something in the
politician, unable
to define it, but soulfully aware of the lack. The
leaders of our
modern cultures have an emptiness - a strange inability to
articulate
what we know in our hearts is wrong. Our communities are
no
longer led by real statesmen, we have no true kings or
magicians seeing
the whole, or thinking effectively of what our acts will mean
for our
children's children's children. The great majority of
politicians
have skill at getting elected - at the pursuit of power, yet
have
little sense of the deep movements of history, and almost no
capacity
to inquire after the mysterious and more difficult truths.
But
isn't this too a consequence of the demise of civilization.
The
soul of the politician is lamed as well.
Modern Western cultures exist under the sign of death. The wealth of meaning upon which civilization once depended has rotted away. The labor saving machine turns out to wear a second face, for the machine, and the industrial milieu which dominates our way of life, is itself derived from knowledge based solely on the mastery of the lifeless.
Science, which
promises so much, has only
delivered into society's hands the means to manipulate that
which is
without life. And, while it seems that the genetic
revolution may
make possible much, an honest appraisal of the history of
science and
technology reveals that each apparently life enhancing advance
bears
with it an equally deadly shadow side. Without some kind
of
change in the civilization and culture out of which
scientific knowledge becomes social fact, the genetic
revolution
promises both great good and great evil.
What else is
industrial pollution but
human evil made physically manifest? Our knowledge of
the
lifeless has seduced us into accepting and tolerating a
constantly
accelerating devouring of the planet, and the reduction
through gross
dynamic processes of much that is living, into more that is
toxic and
anti-life. It is not "better living through chemistry",
because it is chemistry and the chemical corporations which
produce
products and "by-products" that never
before occurred in nature. These twice
dead substances cannot be made part of the living cycle of
nature.
While we made them in ignorance, to continue while
knowing the
realities, is to bequeath to our descendants a planet of
death.
The same has occurred in culture. Civilization has died a death, in part, from the inadvertent toxic side effects of the dawning of the age of science and technology. Science has produced intoxicating vistas of the deep past and even deeper future. Yet these images and ideas are empty of human meaning. Within them the human being has no significance. Between the "big bang" and the "heat death" of the universe, the existence of humanity is made to appear entirely irrelevant.
- interlude and confrontation -
The argument
will be made that Science at
least gives us the truth, but this is false when it comes to
the larger
questions which Science struggles to answer. Consider
this:
Imagine a large room, around the outer walls of which is a
single
continuous blackboard. Draw a line, in chalk, horizontally all
the way
around the room. Now walk up to one part of the line, and
erase just a
finger's width. To the right of this tiny gap draw an arrow
pointing
right and label it "the future" (Heat
death), and
to the left an arrow pointing left and labeled "the past" (big bang).
Now imagine
some beings living in this
little gap, and savor the outrageous arrogance of their
pretense that
from this tiny point of view and this tiny piece of the puzzle
they
have the capacity to come to knowledge of the mysteries of the
deep
past and future - the mysteries of time and space. That
sane
human beings spin such theories tells us something about human
nature -
something very important, but cannot in any circumstance be
credited
with much likelihood of successfully telling us something
about either
the origin or the consummation of human existence, much less
the
distant past and future of the Earth or the Heavens.
Most people do
not realize how much
speculation, and how many unprovable assumptions lie at the
core of
these cosmological ideas. To imagine, that the human
intellect
can of itself form true pictures of the origin of the cosmos,
is a vain
undertaking. Yet, these speculative ideas dominate the
thinking
of modern civilized human beings and have made the older,
longer held,
religious conceptions matters of mere belief.
But, as Bly and
others can show us, it is
not through mere Reason (science) that we will be able to
unlock the
mystery which drives from soul depths the spasm of violence
and hate
that put Los Angles to the torch, and threatens every similar
urban
concentration on the planet. The imagination - the eye
of the
heart is needed as well, for we need to see into the inside of
people,
not just observe the surface through the spurious craft of
dead
mathematical statistics. Civilization is dying, and it
is this
death and its significance we must fathom if we are to find
our way
into a human future.
And while the erosion of meaning which has resulted from the age of Science can
be seen
as a partial cause of the death of civilization, it is not the
sole
cause. The mystery is very deep indeed.
What does this
mean? It means, at
least, that unless there is a new understanding of, and some
changes
in, the interior (psychological) spaces of the human being,
there is no
hope to either redeem politics or to arrest the social decay
in areas
of concentrated living - the urban complexes with all their
darkly rich
vitality.
Society is alive. We have to think of it as just as complexly ordered and textured as the human organism. It has laws, vital processes, organs, conditions of disease and health, form, life and death. How can it be otherwise, given that society's - civilization's - substance is human beings and their myriad desires and dreams, their shadow and their light.
But perhaps we should take a deep breath here, and pause and look a little more closely at the problem we have been dancing around: the limits of Reason (science) for the task of understanding society and civilization.
- resolution -
Many years ago
novelist/scientist
C.P.Snow warned of a dangerous development, the appearance of
two
cultures - a scientific culture and a literary culture - which
had lost
the ability to communicate with each other. More
recently Alan
Bloom in his The
Closing of the American Mind,
decried the
dominance of the sciences over the humanities in the modern
university.
In truth I think neither of them went far enough.
There is,
to me, a psychological discontinuity in our civilization (such as it is) unnaturally separating science,
art (the
humanities) and religion, into in-communicative - even
war-making -
camps.
Science, art
and religion exist, in part,
because something within the human being can only find
expression in
such activities. The human being is healthiest
(psychologically)
when these impulses are all fully developed and work in
harmony with
each other. For some this will be difficult to
understand, since
we do not often discuss problems such as these, except in
certain
limited circles. It is not easy, therefore, to write of
them for
a more general audience, because we are unused to this kind of
thinking. Many may find such a discussion too
metaphysical.
I take my lead
here from S.T.Coleridge,
and attribute the scientific impulse to the existence of
Reason in the
soul; to the artistic impulse, the existence of Imagination;
and to the
religious impulse the existence of Devotion. I relate
these three
(Reason, Imagination and Devotion) to the older ideas of
truth, beauty
and goodness. Reason is the path
(capacity-faculty-means) to
truth, Imagination the path to beauty, and Devotion the path
to
goodness.
If we look to
an Emerson, a Teilhard de
Chardin, or a Goethe, what else do we see but the natural
genius of a
fully developed and integrated soul life?
Nor are these
ideas unknown within the
scientific community, although not as consciously. Roger
Penrose
writes in his recent The
Emperors New Mind: "It seems clear to me
that the
importance of aesthetic criteria applies not only to the
instantaneous
judgments of inspiration, but also to the much more frequent
judgments
we make all the time in mathematical (or scientific work).
Rigorous argument is usually the last step! Before
that,
one has to make many guesses, and for these, aesthetic
convictions are
enormously important..."
Or Karl Popper, in his Realism and the Aim of Science: "...I think that there is only one way to science - or to philosophy, for that matter: to meet a problem, to see its beauty and to fall in love with it;..." --- once more, "...to meet a problem " (reason); "...to see its beauty..." (imagination); and, "...to fall in love with it;..." (devotion).
-return to theme -
Now what is the
point of all this.
To me civilization is not the outside of existence, not the buildings, the land, the
railroads, highways and airports, or even the
electrical-technical
advances. Rather civilization is the inside, the realm of soul and spirit, of ideals and
morals, of
dreams and desires.
That
civilization has fallen means that
the wealth, the real wealth of any culture - its wisdom - no
longer
lives within the human soul in a vital and meaningful way.
We
live in a time of social chaos; the shared cohesive inner
structure
that formerly ordered social existence has died away.
Once children
automatically acceded to
their parents wishes. The daughter never expected to
become more
then what her mother was, a wife and a parent - a homemaker.
The
son took up the father's craft. The roles were defined.
The
values set by tradition.
Those who argue
a return to this way of
social existence delude themselves; and, it is certainly not
being
argued here that the past was in any way better (or worse)
then the
present or the coming future. We are only noting that
there was
order in the social life, and that this order manifested
itself in the
continuity of roles and values from one generation to the next
(oversimplifying the situation of course). Such
structure must
eventually pass away. It is part of wisdom to know that
"...this
to shall pass.". Our question
is more immediate. What do
we do now that this is happening?
On a deeper
level it is no wonder then
that public debate is empty of meaning, because the soul
(inner) life
of the debaters is itself empty (without tradition or other
significant
socially cohesive structure). But even this
understanding is
inadequate, we need to go deeper. To say that
civilization is
dying is not adequate. How is it dying? Of what
cause?
What does the future hold?
The truth would never have occurred to me were it not for certain books it has been my fortune to encounter. From Owen Barfield (Saving the Appearances: a study in idolatry) and from Gottfried Richter (Art and Human Consciousness), I came to realize that a subtle but enormously significant change took place inwardly within Western mankind (at least) about the fifteenth century.
Prior to that
time, the nature of human
consciousness was such that the individual felt himself to
exist within
the world, as a part of it. The world of the senses was
not
perceived as vividly and as concretely as we experience it
today.
Barfield writes about how the Scholastics, for example,
had a participatory form of consciousness. After the change,
after
this form of consciousness passed away, the human being felt,
for the
first time, separated from nature, outside it as an observer.
For
conveniences sake we can call this change as one going from "original
participation" (Barfield's term) to
the "onlooker
separation".
Several facts serve as signs of this change. One is the arrival of modern science itself. This new Way (path) of thinking is dependent upon the point of view that the world of objects exists independently of our own consciousness. If we read, carefully, the Scholastics and the early Greek philosophers we will find that they did not have such an experience of the world. Richter's work is especially helpful, as he observes how perspective first begins to appear in medieval paintings. There is originally no sense of space in them at all. Then all of a sudden, everywhere, space begins to appear, gradually to be sure, but slowly and surely, until paintings acquire a quite definite sense of dimension.
Even
mathematics reveals this change, for
only at this time is mathematics itself concerned with
perspective, and
a profound change occurs in geometry as the problem of
infinity leads
beyond the older Euclidean geometry to the extraordinarily
beautiful
and symmetric projective or synthetic geometry.
The same trail
of change of consciousness
can be found in language (c.f. Barfield's History
in
English Words). Writer Michael
Dorris
has also noticed this change (without really appreciating its
significance) by writing in The Broken
Cord of a native American language
where it
is not possible to say "I hit him" in
it, only "we hit us". For
not only did the earlier consciousness
experience itself within the sense world, but also within each
other.
Our ancestors were less individuals and more the members
of a
group. One was John's son, or from a place (de Chardin)
before
one was an individual.
A considerable
portion of what we must
confront in modern existence can only be understood by
appreciating
this change and its significance in the general social milieu.
The existence of a common experience of alienation, so
often
observed in the last forty or fifty years in modern culture
(c.f.
Reisman's classic, The Lonely
Crowd), is due to this change. We
have
gradually become more individual, and this also means more
isolated.
Moreover, the
older social forms were
dependent upon the instinctive sense of community that went
with the
prior mode of consciousness. Such a strong sense of
individuality
as we now possess, and assume our natural right, would have
been
intolerable in an old
world village.
This can be
said in summation, although
it must admit of being unjustifiably brief. A general
change of
consciousness occurred around the fifteenth century, an evolution of
consciousness. Modern science
arose from this change, as did our
present sense of individuality. A side effect of the
pursuit of
science has been the creation of a material world view, a view
empty of
the older spiritual conceptions. For many, the human
being is no
longer an intentional creation of a deity, but rather an
animal, whose
existence is an accident in a universe ruled by chance.
The effect of all this is to erode the social order. Marriage, family, community no longer have the meaning they once had. Where before the individual sublimated himself to these forms, today he would destroy them rather then sacrifice his sense of his own I. Not just the forms have become weak, but the ideal superstructure - the common world view - has itself passed away. And this process, this death of the prior civilization - the prior common inside - has made possible the most remarkable fact of all.
- essence -
Previously the moral order came from the outside of the human being. It was a given, dependent upon the community in which one lived (not to say every one followed it, but nevertheless in the time of "original participation" one looked outside ones self for a moral compass). But this moral order has also been destroyed. The ability of the community to cause conformance with its principles is presently dying away. This in turn then forms the soil for a further development in human consciousness, the appearance of an independent and free conscience. All we have to do is to look at the abortion question and we can see the struggle between the remnant of an older authoritative moral structure and an emerging insistence upon a free conscience - upon moral freedom.
The pro-life
movement (in large part)
derives its social force from adherence to the idea of a set
moral
code, a known standard to which the individual must conform.
The
pro-choice side derives its social force from an inner
necessity to
exercise the newly emerging sense of individual conscience.
These
two then represent the clearest possible example of the clash
in modern
life between the psychological past and the psychological
(soul-lawful)
future.
The last
vestiges of the older (dying)
social order can be found in the idea: do the right thing; something we might have heard from the lips of
Ronald
or Nancy Reagan. Here the moral judgment turns to the
community
for a standard. The embryonic new social order (in the
process of
being born) can be found in the idea: do your own thing; a simplistic sense of the emergence of
individual
conscience as appeared in the turmoil of the Sixties.
With this
observation we enter into a new
problem. That civilization can die is now clear.
But what
happens next? Does the Phoenix arise from the ashes?
How
does this happen? What facts can be noticed and what do
they
suggest about the future?
The best idea
(for the purpose of
perceiving the dynamics and nuances of this change) I have
discovered
is that which Goethe found so crucial in his biological and
zoological
studies: the idea of metamorphosis.
Here is
the organic law - the principle of life as process - in its
most
evolved form. As we noted earlier, the social order -
the social
organism -must have characteristics similar to the realm of
the living
in nature, as its substance (as it were) is made up of the
psychological realities of human beings: thoughts, dreams,
desires,
impulses of will, emotions, character etc. It is not the
physical
bodies and their properties that dominate the nature of the
social
order, but the inner elements.
The most
fruitful example of
metamorphosis which I have found is the transformation from
caterpillar
to butterfly. After the caterpillar spins its cocoon, it
essentially dies. The cells lose all differentiation.
There is no
apparent form, no order, no organs. All seems chaos.
When
the butterfly begins to come into being, there appear shadows
on the
outside surface of the cell mass, and inwardly individual
cells begin
to again differentiate. It is as if the chaos is being
sculpted
from the outside inward, while simultaneously being
reorganized from
the inside outward. Somehow a higher ordering principle
has taken
hold of the chaos and transformed it.
It is this
picture which I have found to
be most useful in appreciating the ongoing transformation in
civilization - in social existence - which we all are living
amidst.
The change of consciousness from original participation
to the
onlooker separation lead to a sense of alienation from one
another.
The ideas born out of the new science which sprang from
this
change have lamed the ability of the older religious ideas to
contribute to a cohesive social organism. The
technological
revolutions which followed have contributed to the destruction
of
family and community life. This weakened social
structure then no
longer was capable of providing moral guidance, so that an
independent
conscience became a psychological possibility. All this
has lead
in the direction of almost complete social chaos, which we
observe most
starkly today in the inner city.
Cultural
traditions are no longer a
social force. The individual must find his own way.
And if
we are awake to what this really means, we can see that only
such a
process - the creation of social chaos - makes possible the
development
of a free conscience in the individual human being. Consider,
for
example, the current cultural clash, appearing mostly in the
economic
life, between the Americans and the Japanese. In the
cultural
East, the necessity of conforming to the group standard still
carries
great force, still has the power to bring about conformance.
For
the American, whose culture at present is essentially
non-culture, this
is (for the most part) no longer possible.
Here then lie
the seeds of the future.
Civilization, that is the past social order, was
dependent upon
tradition for its character, meaning, force and form.
This past
has fallen away. Where once the inner life was ordered
by church,
school, family and community, now it is the human being
himself who
must discipline and order his own soul-lawful (psychological)
existence. Whatever qualities that are to inhabit the
next
civilization must flow from that interaction which occurs
between the
individual and his conscience. Formerly this occurred
mainly
between community and individual, with the individual being
acted upon
by community. Now it must flow in the opposite
direction.
Out of the interaction between the individual and his
free
conscience must flow social creative forces toward community.
This is the nature of the metamorphosis - the transformation from the dying civilization to the new one. Goethe's aphorism is most apt; he called such a process: "dying and becoming". The old had to pass away in order for the new to arise. Here then is a deep mystery. For here the changes in the inner nature of the human being and their reflection in society, begin to reveal intrinsic purpose and meaning. Moreover, this is purpose and meaning which is not consciously engendered by mankind, but which flows from some inner wellspring of our nature.
- full theme with modulation -
We have now traveled far down an unfamiliar path. We have seen that social/political existence takes a certain shape from very profound, yet subtle and hidden elements of human psychology: a change in consciousness from an original state of participation within the world of nature and of men, to a state of separation, an experience of the world and of the 'other' as if we were outside it/them looking on to them. This change brought in its wake powerful new impulses, the age of science and its raw social effect, the age of industrialization. Between them, and aided by the growing sense of individuality, the social order once known as Western Civilization, fell into pieces and lost its power to bring about conformance - to order behavior from the outside. Amidst the resulting social chaos, human psychology (soul-lawfulness) has been giving birth to the power of individual conscience - to a freely chosen morality. This is in its infancy, and how this new development plays itself out will stamp the whole next phase of civilization.
- a further expression of known questions -
But, this is as
deep as we dare go.
Now it becomes both prudent and necessary to consider
the
practical implications of this understanding for our future
social and
political existence. Again, I take my start from George
Will's
original questions, previously noted: What does it mean to
govern and
what role should government play in the inner life of the
individual?
And, what are the fundamentals of human nature in this
context?
As Will noted
in his book (Statecraft
as Soulcraft), the tendency in
recent years,
to the extent it has actually been articulated, has been to
practice
governing as if individual self interest was the only motive
which one
could count on. And, even this idea has disappeared into
the
background of another idea, namely: free market competition.
This
last is the icon of our time, so revered in fact that its use
is now
advocated not only in the sphere of economics, but in
education,
culture, and government services. We often have
presidential
candidates trying to tell us that only by running government
as a
business can our problems be solved. This thinking is
not only
wrong-headed, it is dangerous as well; for it makes of
governing a
people an act of bottom line computation, rather then the
grand and
wise psychological and social art it very much needs to be.
Truly, truly Will is right: statecraft must be
soulcraft.
It certainly is
a truth that individual
initiative is better then compulsion. We have a
healthier society
if people choose to act in certain ways, rather than it being
required
of them. But it is a very prejudicial view of the human
being, to
believe that the only motive that can be counted upon is self
interest.
Few parents can fill, in even a minor way, the parental
role
through mere self interest. No true teacher, nor any
real
clergyman is motivated by self interest. And a genuine
leader, a
statesman? One does not serve, truly serve a People,
through self
interest.
Recall the idea of social existence as a living organism - as something partaking of the qualities of life. Among many other aspects, this fact requires of us that we recognize that any change must be organic as well. We cannot just impose anything on the social chaos. What is needed to emerge must be related to the past. The change from community based moral standards to individual free moral deeds is a good example. Something has turned inside out, as it were. But it is not unrelated to what has gone on before.
- intimations of the phoenix, first form -
In a certain
sense we might want to think
of the situation as representing a problem of political and
social
ecology. We are dealing with systems, with growth and
development
(and therefore with the past), and with human potential (and
therefore
with the future). The psychological elements we have
been
considering are like a soil out of which social order or
disorder
grows. Even now, new growths are certain to be found
amidst the
social decomposition of the inner city. Let us consider
more
particularly the problem of urban decay, as an example of
social chaos
awaiting our ecological understanding and creativity.
First we need a
picture of the process of
change which led to the current situation. Four hundred
years ago
in Western civilization, one could find a stable community
usually in
the form of a village. As we have seen, the change of
consciousness and the resulting change in world-view coupled
with the
industrial revolution has dissolved this once cohesive social
structure. Following this initial condition, as people
more and
more concentrated themselves in the cities, neighborhoods
arose, which
retained certain social similarities to the village: common
points of
view and language, and large extended families. But this
social
structure was only transitory as the various forces (both
inner and
outer) dissolved it as well.
Now we are
brought to a condition of
complete social chaos. There is no community anymore;
only a
collection of individuals and their raw social needs.
Drugs and
lawlessness grow like weeds in such a social environment.
Youth
gangs, which seem so terrible, possess an odd but instinctive
wisdom.
Without a community around it as a support, the family
itself is
unable to hold its center. Young people are then drawn
to
whatever meets their social need. This is the gang's
power.
It is a naturally arising urban tribal response to the
absence of
civilization in the inner city.
Initially it
was thought in social work
circles that the gangs should be destroyed, but now there is a
dawning
realization that here is a valid social form, a niche in the
social
ecology is being filled.
We need to see
past the negative media
image and realize that this sub-culture is as much a product
of the
decayed nature of the social organism, as it is a product of
the
individual moral vacuum which accompanies the loss of
civilization.
Many of our young people find their only meaning here;
and if we
are to fulfill our responsibilities toward them, we must make
possible
their discovery of a more socially creative meaning.
And, while
what they find, they will find of their own initiative, we
should never
cease to try to shape the possibilities, if we are wise
enough.
To me the implication of this is that social policy
should
support this form - the gang, but in such a way that it's
further
evolution (and make no mistake, it will continue to grow) will
take a
socially healthy course. Consider this possibility:
As a consequence of the looting of the S & Ls, the taxpayer [not the government, which only represents - stands in for - the citizen] has become the owner of substantial quantities of urban and suburban real estate. [Here the word reveals its misuse. We should write and speak always of the people as the owners of government land. Were our use of language more carefully poetic and musical (magical) in its articulation of certain realities, politicians and bureaucrats would be less likely to forget the obligations of trust.]
What do we do
is to take some of this
[property of the people - didn't our taxes pay for the
bailout?]
material wealth and make the gangs the stewards of it.
We don't
sell it to them; rather we grant them the opportunity to make
creative
use of it, such that it meets their needs. As long as
their
stewardship is creative and socially positive, they retain the
right to
determine the nature of its use.
Several returns
for the whole society can
flow from this. For example, we create a social pathway
toward
legitimacy for something which may well be willing to give up
its
outlaw status, especially if such strings as must necessarily
be
attached do not take the form of knotted and binding vows.
There must
be no quid pro quo or we will destroy from the start that
individual
initiative we hope to see channeled into socially productive
activities. In a sense we make a very much needed act of
faith.
It is this risk which makes possible the necessary
transformation. What we hope for - individual social
responsibility - can't be forced.
Now we have
created a place for this
community to use, freely as it chooses. Next we offer
services to
this community in the sense of support for education, health,
and
business creation. But we do not sell these services or
otherwise
demand they take a certain shape. We say to the
community: "What
do you need?"; and then respond to that self-defined need.
Some will, of
course, find the idea of
granting anything to gangs of lawless youth an abomination.
The
reader needs to realize, however, that this is a worst-case
example,
and the underlying principles remain valid. In a sense we are
taking
care of a certain urban organism which has appeared
spontaneously in
the chaotic social decay, and feeding it, seeking what yet
lies hidden
in its nature by encouraging its further growth [We can do the
same
with self organized homeless organizations]. We can't
know in
advance what form it will take, weed or flower. But we
ought to
know by now that attempts to kill it have only maintained its
outlaw
nature - efforts at elimination offer no opportunity for a
positive
social transformation.
It ought to be
obvious that individuals
in the inner cities cannot contribute to the social order if
they have
no real power to determine the most basic facts of their own
existence.
If they have no real political power, no control over
their
essential needs, if they are constantly made dependent, then
individual
initiative is destroyed, aborted before it can be born.
It is no
wonder then that human desire appears in such a social
environment only
in the form of drug and alcohol dependencies, casual sex.
AIDS,
immorality, fractured families and all the terrible realities
for which
some want to solely blame the individual.
It will help to
use our imaginations
here, not our prejudices - our prejudgments. The gang is
a viable
social unit. It exists because it fills a human need.
It
individuates itself from the general social chaos, and
positions itself
for survival. But the individuals within it are not
purely evil,
nor irredeemable. They are quite capable, given the
opportunity,
of seeing that some acts are unwise, and others more
life-sustaining.
At present the surrounding social organism pushes this
community
away, and insulates itself from this outlaw social form.
What I
am suggesting is that the outside community take a different
posture.
Rather then push away, we create a path, a social space
into
which the outlaws will want to grow, but in ways that are less
harmful
to the rest of us. In this way we honor their humanity.
We
give the gift of trust, which is a spiritual nutrient of
extraordinary
potency.
We can also
recognize that this example -
the gang - is the most difficult to accept because of the
negative
media image through which we normally behold it. Other
urban
social forms are less negative in this way. Homeless
organizations, for
example, will also respond to receiving nurturing
opportunities.
Access to property for which the only expectation for
the
retention of control is a stewardship expectation, offers of
services
to meet self-determined need, and willingness to respond to
what is
asked for - these foods can support the growth of viable
communities in
the seats of urban decay. These growing communities,
then, have
the opportunity to take hold of the decay from within and
transform it.
The decay in
the inner city, both
physical and spiritual, can only be overcome by individuals
standing
inside the dynamic social conditions. No local, state or
federal
agency or legislature can by fiat, law or regulation do what
must be
done by individuals out of their free moral deeds. This
is why
social policy must support these new social forms as they
appear amidst
the chaos and debris.
There is a
tendency for social policy to
try to preserve the past, for example, to try to only give
support to
families with blood ties. Thus, following the Sixties,
as many
people tried to form non-blood social forms (whether communes
or simply
older fixed income people sharing the same house or apartment)
the
policy makers did not support these new forms of association.
Concern was for an ideology, rather than with giving
support to
the wise new ways people found for solving their own problems.
This is, of
course, one of the principle
difficulties of our time: the failure to appreciate that the
past is
dead, and that the future will travel new paths, break new
ground.
In a sense, the intrinsic wisdom of people meeting
life's
problems will always outrun the ideologies of society's
institutional
thinking, whether church or state.
We cannot, from
the outside, provide what
instead must flow from the individual as an ordering principle
into the
social anarchy (chaos) of our areas of concentrated living.
We
can only nurture and support that which is emerging. Nor
can we
move into such areas of decay merely economic positives,
because the
decay is due to a natural weakness in the soul, inside the
human being,
which has accompanied the death of civilization. Let us consider this more closely.
The human being
becomes what he or she
does in accord with natural talent and opportunity. Interfere
with one
and you inhibit the other. If upbringing and education fails
to help
the individual unfold natural talent, then opportunity will
avail
little. If society fails to create possibilities (such as
through full
employment), then education is of little use. And I have in
mind here
not just the poor urban dweller, but the many graduates of our
higher
institutions who are unable to find work in their chosen
fields.
And while we
know that lack of jobs is a
problem, yet it is not the economic aspect of the job that is
the core
difficulty. It is the inward personal satisfaction, the
positive
sense of self, of control over ones life, the sense of meaning
in all
its manifestations, which is missing. Work feeds this
need for
meaning. So does viable community, religion, art and the
myriad
other aspects which make a cohesive culture or civilization.
We
must nurture all aspects of the emerging new civilization if
we want
social health to return to the inner city.
The faith and trust we place in the individual in these areas of decay are essential nutrients for social health. These are like the vitamins without which the human organism cannot live. The social organism desperately needs social policies which enable the individual to take a hold of the chaos and ruination of the urban environment and bring to it creative forces for renewal.
- rural renewal -
To these
considerations we must add
others. Again we need to look to the past, to see the
direction
of flow of the social forces in order to come to some sense of
what
belongs organically to the future. The loss of community
in the
urban environment and the seeds of its regeneration we have
just
discussed. There is an equal effect, so obvious we
almost forget
it, but which cannot be overlooked if we wish to find wise
ways to
social health. Urban concentrations of human beings have
a
counter-pole in the abandonment of rural areas. As urban
populations build up, so the rural populations decrease.
Here
again the industrial revolution - mankind's fascination with
the death
forces - has had a toxic-like social side effect in the
mechanization
and the excessive use of chemicals in agriculture. A very meaning-full way of life has been
lost as
the social chaos of the death of Western civilization has
fallen upon
us.
Again the S & L crisis provides an oddly timely opportunity. Many small farms, marginal in an economic sense, have been abandoned. Here again are properties which have come to belong to the people, as our taxes (and the debts we unjustly bequeath to our children) have been used to save the nation from further economic collapse.
I have no doubt
that were these rural
properties made available to urban dwellers, as long as
support is
given for the educational needs required by such a
transformation of
ones way of life, these could again support viable rural
communities.
The tendency to transform rural areas into agri-business
must be
arrested, and a real agri-culture given an opportunity for
rebirth.
We will gain social health, and inner strength as a
People, if
the exodus from rural to urban areas can be reversed.
Those who
follow these matters are aware
that the demands of consumers for natural foods -
organic/biodynamic
foods - is on the increase, as is the acreage devoted to
growing these
healthier foods. Moreover, it is also well understood
that the
mechanizing and over use of chemicals in farming has lead to
an ever
increasing cycle of the application of death forces (raw
chemicals as
fertilizers - nitrates etc. and as well the toxics used to
curb the
excessive insect populations that have accompanied the over
fertilization) bringing annihilation to the micro-organisms
and
beneficial insect life - slaying the living soil. This
as well is
a unwise tendency that must be arrested.
The long term
effects of agri-business
(as opposed to agri-culture) on the vitality of the land are
more than
undesirable. They are unconscionable given that we have
alternatives. The problem with the alternatives,
however, is that
they are labor intensive. Farming, which will no longer
rely on
vast quantities of petro-chemicals (gas for machinery,
artificial
fertilizers, toxins for insect and disease control), needs a
large
labor pool in order to be economically viable. For these
reasons,
it is clear that the healing of the land from the abuses of
monoculture
and agri-business goes hand in hand with the social healing
that will
be connected to reversing the flow of people into our large
cities.
Social policy then needs to support the growth of embryonic communities (gangs, homeless organizations etc.), as well as decrease the excessive concentration by making possible a return to rural forms of living. But such activities as these (and others like them), by themselves are insufficient. The transformation of a dying civilization into a living one requires changes not only at the bottom of the social structure, but at the top as well. But before we can examine that factor, we should pause and consider the significance of the suburb as well as the latest urban trend, the so-called Edge City, as described by Joel Garreau (see his book of the same name: an "edge city" is a highly developed suburban area, usually elongated in shape, which follows or attaches itself to major highway interchanges.)
- second theme -
Right at the
beginning we have to
distinguish social forms - that is stable sets of human
relationships,
from the physical environment where these relationships take
place.
As previously pointed out, civilization is a
psychological
environment, not a physical one.
Suburbs are
essentially physical forms
arising from two complementary psychological impulses.
One is
that of self interest. From this arises an impulse to
turn farm
land, through processes of sub-division, into a commodity for
purposes
of making money. This links up with a second impulse,
the fleeing
of the degeneration of the inner city. Profit making
always
depends upon meeting a need. The fracturing of the urban
environment into a dying inner core, and only slightly more
vital
surrounding suburbs, is the consequence of two additional
interrelated
factors: one - the failure to plan the living environment of
our
citizens with any degree of wisdom; and two - blind economic
forces,
which when otherwise unrestrained go simply where the profit
is,
regardless of the social consequences.
Edge City is
similarly generated; that is
it arises from unrestrained economic forces, not from the
application
of human intelligence to the problems of social existence.
The
developer's question is: where can I buy cheap and where can I
sell
high? It is not: how may I create a physical environment
which
supports sane human interaction?
Now these unrestrained economic forces are again a symptom of the degeneration of civilization. With the lessening of the community's ability to bring about conformance to a given moral standard, the individual's tendency to excess is made easier. What "I" want, becomes far more important then what "we" need. It is a situation out of balance, badly, perhaps even mortally, out of balance.
[Where once the
Grandfathers might have
been heard, the steady demise of Western Civilization has
produced a
situation, where not only are our Elders no longer listened to
with
respect, but they are presumed to be responsible for the decay
and
debris. As individuals we run every which way, content
in our
freedoms and asleep as to the consequences.]
What is needed
is leadership which sets a
moral course. We need for individuals to appear at the
top of our
social existence (as political leaders, as business leaders)
who
appreciate that unrestrained self interest is the worst kind
of
example. Leaders must be disciplined, moderate, prudent,
honest,
etc., - that is virtuous. Acceptance of a two million
dollar
speaking fee by an ex-president of this nation, excessive CEO
compensation, diversion of capital resources into 60 million
dollar
works of art(?) - these and similar acts by our leading elites
reveals
that there is little, if any, sense of proportion among those
who seek
to rule.
The ethical
behavior of those who pursue
power and wealth gives evidence of a culture-wide madness.
That
such has too frequently been the rule from historical times in
no way
changes the diagnosis, or the prognosis. Our leaders
lack the
ability to recognize the fundamental hypocrisy of criticizing
the
"looters" in the inner city, while at the same time
overlooking that
most concentrated wealth results from illegal and immoral
pursuits, and
very seldom from the pursuit of virtue. ("Behind every great
fortune,
lies a great crime" - Balzac)
The more
civilization is imprinted - is given form and order - by such
weak
moral qualities, the more degeneration and decay will arise.
And when we consider that most of these political and economic leaders have received degrees from our universities and colleges, we can now see how little 'civilization' we really have. An education, which does not result in an appreciation of the absolute necessity of the development of virtue as the fundamental prerequisite for responsible public life, is no education at all.
- principle melody -
The truth is
that the social chaos of
modern life is the mirror image of the moral chaos which
infects our
ruling elites.
We are right,
however, in recognizing
that this situation is not
surprising, given history and human nature. Our
problem is more on the order of appreciating the magnitude of
the
crisis, and the meaning of the problem. That a group of
merchant
princes groomed an actor to rise eventually to the American
Presidency
through an outrageous falsification and control of image-based
media,
shows not only a moral breakdown at the top, but also how
easily we are
manipulated by the clever (but grossly unwise) intelligence of
unrestrained self interest. And, we participate in this defeat
by the
overreaching of concentrated wealth, in part, because the act
of
citizenship has decayed as well. The voter brings little
effort to his
responsibilites, and as a consequence almost no wisdom. If my
thought,
as a citizen, is to ask only what government can do for me,
without any
sense of the needs of the whole people, then my efforts only
led to
more disunity, and therefore more decay and chaos.
Just as with the previous transformations, the appearance of moral chaos at the top (the ruling elites) and of excessive self interested citizenship at the bottom, reveal not just a low point, but a turning point as well. Here again is something which contains the potential to undergo metamorphosis, to turn inside out and lead to a redemption rather than a further degeneration. Finding these transformative 'turning points' will not be easy, however.
- second theme with counterpoint -
The current
campaigns for the Presidency
exposes a very instructive foolishness. Hidden in the whole
process is
an idea which is false at its roots, but which we seldom
acknowledge:
the assumption that if we just get the right person in the
White house,
then it will all get better.
This general
proposition contains several
sub-delusions. First we act as if the President was the
manager of the
economy, a role presidents seem to agree to pursuing, but
which in
truth they are functionally incapable of sustaining. The
President does
not control Congress, the Federal Reserve, the CEO's of our
major
corporations, the labor unions, or the habits of consumers;
much less
the economic activities of other nations. All of the political
dialog
which proceeds as if the President can "heals or "set right"
or "turn
around" the economy is delusional to the point of a kind of
generalized
civic psychosis.
Whether such a
proposition appears in the
editorial of a major newspaper, or comes out of the mouth of a
recognized economic theorist, it remains false. The President
does not
run the economy, although it is possible for him (and his
co-opportunists) to contribute more easily to its ruin
(witness the
Reagan administration), than to its health.
The fact that
such a proposition inhabits
our political dialog does tell us something, however. It shows
us a
general characteristic of human psychology, which the 12-Step
people
call "denial". Everyone who blames the President for the
economy is
effectively denying their own culpability. The rise in
consumer debt,
with its buy now pay later, psychology, reveals a nation
habituated to
instant gratification. The junk bond debacle on Wall Street,
as well as
the S & L crisis, points toward a "anything for a buck"
attitude
among business people. Congress's acceptance of massive
spending and
its corollary, an unconscionable national debt, points to a
"shove it
under the carpet and forget it" mentality in the politician.
The
leveraged buyout orgies unveil a "lets play the game and "damn
the
consequences". Everywhere we turn, human excess plays into the
economy,
and the President is not, and cannot be made, responsible for
these
deeds.
Nor can the
question be put: what then
should the President do? For there is first a great work
needed doing,
which is the disentangling of the dialog from such illusions.
This is a
first task that our leading elites owe us. The President, the
political
parties, the CEO's, the labor leaders - all must own up to
their
individual part. Even the Press has a duty here, to
disentangle
itself from the many impossible conceptions it weaves so
easily
into our every-four-year rite of national rhetoric.
That a
President may lead the way by
refusing to accept this illusory mantel (management of the
economy)
would certainly help. But such an act would have to be meet
with equal
candidness on the part of many others, including the ordinary
citizen
who must begin to rouse himself from an over-long civic nap.
Another
sub-delusion of the same false
general proposition (that our ills will be healed by changing
the face
in the White House) is that: the President should articulate a
"national vision". While it may have been historically true
that
leaders could inspire a whole people, under the present
psychological
realities - especially the dominance of individuality over
community,
this is again something the man or woman in the White House
cannot be
expected to realize. Under the rule of today's individualism
you could
approach almost any aimless crowd and suggest a direction and
more than
half would suddenly have opposite opinions, whether they'd
thought
about it before or not.
This is not to
say, however, that there
is no higher goal which lies latent in the American Soul.
Rather the
President's responsibility here is not to 'invent' a goal, but
rather
to see into the depths of our Character, and then articulate
what yet
remains hidden. When this is done correctly, most of us will
acknowledge it, because something has been pointed to of which
we are
already instinctively aware.
It is also
frequently said that the
American President is the leader of the free world. But this
is again
an essentially false proposition, and again sets before us an
illusory
picture of political and social realities.
For example,
the excessive reliance on
poll-taking as an element of policy formation, means that the
politician is really a follower in a fundamental sense. The
poll
provides a superficial view of the mass-man, and the political
leader
then sets his ideological compass according to this view.
Moreover, the
motive for such an approach is really the pursuit of power,
rather then
any attempt to find some wisdom in the people according by
which to
guide the ship of state. For these reasons it is more accurate
to say
that the American President can dominate the Media in the free
world to
some extent; and therefore has a certain effect. As well, he
or she
does have a certain narrow flexibility in the course that is
set in
terms of policy: but under present modes of political
practice, this is
severely constrained by the statistical poll-driven
ideological
assumptions.
As a
consequence, it is really pure
hyperbole to suggest that he or she is the "leader" of the
democratic
nations. What ought to be a free and statesman like judgment
is instead
coerced by the will to power and its dependence upon
maintaining a
false ideological consistency. In these circumstances there is
no room
to meet the real world, as it is. Instead, the American
Presidency
takes a course which steers itself by political expediency - a
method
which can never succeed, because the real world cannot be
found in
either opinion polls or ideological views.
Bush's production of the international coalition for the Gulf War is a good example of this failure. And, of any event since the fall of Russian communism, this act speaks most terribly of the unfortunate power concentrated wealth has over world history at this time. Here two powers combined. Behind the scenes the elites acted so as to punish the overreaching of one who normally "played the game", but this time stepped over an invisible boundary. On the surface the President dominated the Media and created a certain false picture of the meaning of events, thus manufacturing war hysteria which then lead to the unconscionable destruction that was visited upon an essentially helpless people.
Media dared not
recognize the real
causes, which had little to do with ideals, and a great deal
to do with
raw political power. One wonders whether Media is so foolish
as to
believe its own editorials and headlines. Again, we are made
to realize
the ease with which the American Presidency can bring wreak
and ruin;
effects which have nothing to do with leadership, with social
responsibility, with creative moral will, and much more to do
with
avarice, will to power and pure political egotism.
Yet, in the
same way that a certain
potential exists for the American President to articulate the
hidden
higher purposes of the American People, so the American
President can
be a voice for something yet unspoken in the relations of
nations. But
this again cannot be a personal vision; rather it must only be
the
result of an inner effort to perceive the deeper movements of
modern
history and direct our attention to the more healthy and
viable
pathways as these unveil themselves in the phenomena of the
times.
Moreover, it may well be that such tasks as these (and others related to them), will have to first be carried outside of the office of President. The processes by which our higher leaders are brought to their responsibilities and tasks is itself flawed. A recent election clearly revealed this in the voting patterns in the primaries where it was obvious that most voters did not find any of the major candidates appealing. This was then followed by the oddly temporary appearance of a third party candidate whose instant popularity further verified this observation. The People are looking for something and not finding it. Why is this? And, what are they really looking for?
- third theme: fundamental chord -
There is, I am
certain, underlying the
natural pragmatism of the American, a very real and very
appropriate
romantic nature. We are hopeful idealists. We believe in
possibilities.
We believe suffering can be overcome, problems can be solved,
and
wrongs can be righted. It is this idealism which fuels the
delusional
belief just discussed: that if we just elect a saint to the
White
House, then all will get better. The source of this delusion
is not,
however, the invalidity of this idealism, but rather the
unconsciousness with which this idealism is applied.
The great
majority of Americans are
caught up in some vision of the materialism of the age. We
look for
satisfaction in things, because we are not yet spiritually
mature
enough, as a people, to realize that it is the quality of the
intangibles in life that is lacking. The absence of these
intangibles
(which is due in most cases to the fallen nature of our
civilization)
then becomes the driving itch for more and more seeking after
the
sterile pleasures of sensual and material pastimes.
Our material
satisfactions are then tied
(in our minds) to the cycles of the economy. Therefore, we
seek to have
our political leaders fix the economy, because we misapprehend
the
causes of our dissatisfaction. Yet, even this is false,
witness the
so-called Reagan boom. All the economic indicators were
positive, but
the whole decade was characterized on the level of
intangibles, by
greed, selfishness, and self-centeredness, with the
consequence that
the rot and decay in the quality of life continued. The root
elements,
the lack of civilization - of a wise ordering of our social
existence -
remain seriously diseased.
The truth is
that a healthy economy is
not the prelude to a healthy social order. Rather it is the
reverse
that is the rule. First we heal the social order, first we
rediscover
the role of wisdom in the ordering of existence, and then the
economic
problems will begin to resolve themselves for we will have by
this
(seeking after wisdom) finally begun the healing of the moral
chaos
which so distorts the distribution of material resources.
We have been
holding on to certain
questions: What does it mean to govern? Does government have
any duties
toward the inner life of the citizen? And what of human
nature? What
characteristics of this may we rely upon in the redemption of
political
existence?
I have been, up
to this point, trying to
dissolve the misconceptions we hold concerning social and
political
realities, and to substitute a few alternative pictures - idea
complexes. In this process, I have suggested that we cannot
look to the
Presidency, the political parties, or the elites of
concentrated wealth
for resolution. But where then do we look? Who is to carry out
the
needed renewal and regeneration?
Who else but "We, the People..."
- principle formulation, rediscovering the Grandfathers -
Our system of
government was founded upon
the recognition that not only political power, but more
crucially,
political legitimacy flows from the People. We may even go
further, and
recognize that political and social health also can only flow
from the
People. The elites of themselves cannot provide it, however
enlightened
or unenlightened they may be.
Perhaps it will
help to consider the
following: Is there any reason for believing that the American
democratic experiment has reached its high point? On the
contrary,
might it not be quite possible that the current state of
affairs is
only one stage of something which has yet much unrealized
further
potential? Is it not possible that America is yet young, and
that as we
mature as a People, it is the structure and character of this
development-to-be that will stamp and form the next phase of
civilization?
With the
transition from the old to the
new worlds, we mark the end of Western Civilization and the
beginning
of what the future may well call the American Civilization.
Already
English, in particular American idiomatic English, has become
the
international language; what some call the language of money.
Television, film, rock and roll, blue jeans - the list is
endless of
those aspects of new world culture which are being imitated
and adopted
everywhere as the information age dissolves the barriers of
time and
geography that once separated individual cultures.
This idea is
disturbing only if we focus
on the present, and assume that the raw nature of our youth is
all that
we will have to give to the world. But just as we have noted
the dying
away of the old, we have to expect the birth of the new. It is
not what
America is now that is crucial. No. It is what America is to
become.
This is the hope and the danger. The question is: what qualities yet hidden in the American Character are to emerge in the future? Will there be balance between the light and the dark? We cannot, as far as I know, overbalance in the direction of the light, but we can slide too far into the shadow. Will our citizenry remain asleep, unconscious and immobile? Will the excesses of concentrated wealth and materialism - that is real evil - become the formative core of a new civilization? The dangers and the risks are immense. The habits of the past are a great weight. Yet, it is just these facts which make for so much hope, because it is the risk and the potential loss that reveal the true, but latent, promise. We are still in the infancy of the American Dream - the child is not the mature adult.
- second and third themes in harmony -
This last idea
is inadequately presented
if we do not make it more concrete. Our first question will
be: along
what lines lies the potential for the further development of
American
democracy?
In answering
this question, we should
begin by recalling that the American form of government
emerged from a
situation of crisis. While our democracy (in fact republic,
but that
truth has been lost over the years of superficial political
rhetoric)
was created in the shape of a grand idea, its origin in the
realm of
human motive was in response to an overreaching of the English
aristocracy. First came the necessity - the continuously
increasing
tyrannical acts of the English King; then came the idea - the
how to
form a government for a truly free people.
Unfortunately,
this act could not be
completed. Our founders were able to accomplish much; but
while they
could devise a means to be free of hereditary aristocracy,
they could
not protect us from the eventual overreaching of the successor
aristocracy - the merchant princes. John Adams wrote then: "We
are free
today substantially, but the day will come when our Republic
will be an
impossibility. It will be an impossibility because wealth will
be
concentrated in the hands of a few."
We live today
in that time anticipated by
Adams. We suffer the tyranny of concentrated wealth (are not
our major
symptoms economic -homelessness, joblessness, excessive taxes,
inadequate health care?). The difference between the
overreaching of
the hereditary aristocracy of political power (the King) and
the
overreaching of the aristocracy of concentrated wealth is the
difference between a direct and obvious tyranny and one that
is
indirect and hidden. We can see the advantages and privileges
that
accrue to concentrated wealth, but cannot see the means by
which they
have enslaved us.
Obviously, if
the few have more, the many
will have less. What is not understood is how the political
power, that
has resided in the hands of concentrated wealth for many
years, has
been able to form the economic order so that all advantage in
economic
affairs resides with those who already have. The U.S.
Constitution
forbids a tax on income, but we have come to have one (it
required a
constitutional amendment). Central Banking (the Federal
Reserve System)
permits the creation of wealth out of nothing, wealth which
immediately
then belongs to those who already have. The change from a
silver or
gold standard to purely paper money, backed by nothing,
enhances this
power many times over. All this has been accomplished
consciously by
the hand of concentrated wealth, for their own advantage, and
through
means which kept the real consequences from being understood.
The result is
an economic system which
claims for itself the mantle of free enterprise, but which in
fact is
just the opposite. This system produces an ever increasing
underclass,
which is forced to live on the garbage and debris of a society
unable
to understand the causes of such suffering. This system
produces a
middle class that lives from paycheck to paycheck, a delicate
situation
which can easily fall apart sending another family tumbling
into the
abyss of poverty and dependence. This system sustains a
culture
addicted to drugs, shopping, and political apathy. An
invisible dragon
sits astride a hoard of American material wealth, consciously
weaving
illusions about the real nature of our political and economic
existence
through its control of media and information.
Is there a way
out?
As long as
government is just reacting to
various crises, then it is creating nothing. There is a grave
difference between merely being able to retard the onset of
chaos, and
actively and intentionally founding a new civilization. And,
in
America, where is the root power of government? In the People.
Do we merely react? Are we just against, but never for? The chronic civic sleep of the ordinary citizen will be broken in either of two ways. One is that things become so painful, ignoring them becomes impossible. The other involves a self-generated effort. Obviously the latter is preferable. What I have come to believe is the major inhibitor, of such a self generated effort, is the absence of a common understanding, a common idea of what is really wrong and what can in fact be done, successfully, to bring health and renewal. We have the will, but we lack the common vision, and we look (out of understandable habit) to the political leaders, not realizing that the fall of civilization has incapacitated them.
Here then we
have the seed thoughts for
perceiving certain necessary transformative turning points.
As Western
civilization was beginning to
end, American democracy was born; an experiment which
succeeded in
setting limits to hereditary aristocracies, but which failed
to protect
us from the overreaching of concentrated wealth. Thus, we have
before
us the task demanded by the time, and which will involve the
further
evolution of the American experiment. We must find the means
to set
limits on concentrated wealth and unrestrained self interest,
while not
diminishing our freedoms, but in fact enhancing them.
Moreover, we
must realize that these
goals can only be accomplished by another further evolution,
one which
involves a much more conscious application of the fundamental
principles of a way of governing which finds its power and
legitimacy
in the people themselves. The truth is that our power as a
people lies
not in the vote itself, but in the creation of that very thing
we have
been falsely yearning to find in a political leader: the
articulation
of a vision. We must ourselves, as a common act, create that
vision. We
will find our goal, not in the end result, but in the means.
In the act
of reaching for a community ideal, a common vision, we take
hold of the
fundamental powers of government, because we ourselves
determine the
answers to the questions: what does it mean to govern? Does
government
have any responsibility toward the inner life of the people?
We are that government ourselves. We are only truly self-governed when we are engaged in a dialog with each other - in the act of defining ourselves and our ideals. This is the crucible for the forging of a new civilization. Everything depends upon our learning to move out of the passivity of our individuality, and into the painful but necessary dialogs of a community. We must become whole and find that for which we will stand together, or we will not be able to overcome the excesses of the age.
But we are
many: individuals, races,
cultures. How do we find the whole?
As a youth, I
was given the image of the
melting pot. The confluence of the different races and
national
identities would disappear into some kind of intermingling of
blood and
culture. While this does appear to have happened with many of
the
European immigrants to America, it is clearly not so as
regards the
more stark differences of skin color and religion. Lately, I
have heard
more and more of the image of the mosaic. That America will
find a way
for the differences to abide with each other, in peace and
mutual
cooperation, resulting in some kind of marvelous, ethnically
varied,
work of art.
There is
something here worthy of a
deeper appreciation. The genius of history has set before the
America-yet-to-be an extraordinary challenge. Regardless of
the
morality of the means, the fact is that history has moved so
as to
bring to our shores all the great variety of peoples from all
over the
world. No other nation has before it the vital necessity of
finding a
means for such differing peoples to live with each other.
Students of the
patterns in individual
biography are aware that character is most often formed by the
overcoming of adversity. This is one of the mysteries of life;
that our
higher qualities find their formative impulse in difficulties
and
trials. This is no less true for nations.
If we step back
from our racial troubles,
and take a more objective long view, we ought to be able to
see that
there is to be no easy way to racial, ethnic or religious
tolerance and
cooperation. It has been, is, and will be a hard and stony
path. Only
through pain and failure and unceasing struggle will we find
the
answers. But just here we discover something quite remarkable.
The genius of history has writ it large and bright. It is the destiny of America to be the People of Peoples. "...and crown thy good with brotherhood..." No other People has received such a task. And, I believe, we will find that no other People has been gifted in its natural endowments with just those capacities needed to meet such a challenge.
The American
Character ought not to be
considered a fixed thing, something already determined. We
have too
much yet to experience. We are not old like the cultures of
the East,
much less the European cultures. In truth we do not lack
culture, we
merely haven't got around to creating its full flowering.
Nor are the
roots of this embryonic
Character to be found in the old world. Careful observation of
the
cultural dynamics of America will reveal that culture is
destroyed
here. Just as civilization must go through dying and becoming,
so it is
that the social chaos of our age has the effect of washing out
of those
who immigrate to our shores their past cultural heritage. The
imported
cultures must die before the indigenous one can be born.
Now this is not
something best done
overtly, such as by passing laws against the speaking of
languages
other than English. Such activity misses the whole point. What
dies
away dies because it is abandoned. It is only for the
immigrant to
decide what of the past to let go of and what to preserve. In
this way
a very wise pruning occurs. Each immigrating people then
brings to our
shores gifts of inestimable value.
In those cases
where some overzealous
individuals made the effort to forcefully wash away these
gifts, great
tragedy has resulted. It is a goodness that peoples of African
origin
are seeking to rediscover what was stolen. It is a goodness
that
so-called native Americans seek to renew what was
misunderstood and
unappreciated. What America is to become as the People of
Peoples is to
be enriched by all these gifts.
We cannot find the true American cultural past in Europe, it has been washed out along with much else that was brought to these shores from other dying civilizations. Does this mean there is no cultural precedent to the American Character?
Oddly enough,
there exists a relationship
between our general characteristics as Americans and the
general
characteristics of this land's original peoples. A wise and
patient
investigation of the American Character will reveal that many
of its
central qualities are the mirror images of the "Indian". I was
aided in
coming to this conclusion by an obscure pamphlet I
encountered, called:
American Indians and our way of life, by Sylvester M. Morey,
published
by the Myrin Institute of Garden City, New York.
Mr. Morey
writes: that, that aspect of
the American Character, which once having an idea is impatient
to act
upon it, has more kinship with the Indian, than with the
European; that
the European came here looking for individual freedom, only
later
aspiring toward a democratic government -democracy being an
essential
of Indian cultures (not so much as an idea, but more as the
actual way
of practice); that the kind of competition carried on in
business and
exemplified by team sports has its origin in the American
Indian, there
are no European roots to team sports; that our natural
generosity is
not an European trait, but one found solely among the Indian
in the
many traditions of the Give-away; that the many struggles for
freedom
of women has arisen stronger in America than in Europe,
mirroring in
its goal what was already achieved for women in many Indian
societies;
and that the impulse to form confederations owes its
inspiration to the
Indian.
Morely ends his
dissertation with the
following, from a speech given by Iroquois chief, Canassatego,
on July
4th, 1744, at a meeting between many colonists and Iroguois:
"We have
one thing further to say, and that is We heartily recommend
Union and a
Good Agreement between you our brethren. Never disagree, but
preserve a
strict friendship for one another, and thereby you as well as
we will
become the stronger. Our wise Forefathers established union
and Amity
between the Five Nations; this has made us formidable. This
has given
us great weight and Authority with our Neighboring Nations. We
are a
Powerful confederacy, and by your observing the same Methods
our wise
Forefathers have taken, you will acquire fresh Strength and
Power;
therefore, whatever befalls you, never fall out with one
another."
We are far from
having achieved what was
truly meant here. In our cultural youthfulness we compete
excessively,
especially economically. Our system of justice is again
excessively
adversarial. The races make war, as do the religions.
This is a core
element of our weaknesses,
before not only other nations and cultures, before not only
the lower
impulses of our natures, but most especially before the
overreaching of
concentrated wealth - the principal antagonist of human
freedom in our
time. The stakes could not be higher. For what is resolved
just here,
within American society, will be the model for the whole next
phase of
civilization.
And, finally,
the resolution of this, the
essential crisis of the time, will not be found in either the
realm of
economics, or even politics. But rather in the realm of
community and
individual conscience - in the realm of the human spirit.
The wise social
understanding of the
American Indian, while remaining the root mirror of the
potential form
of an American Civilization, was in its origin and application
essentially instinctive and semi-conscious. Consistent with
the living
laws of social dynamics, it had to pass away so that it could
then be
rediscovered as the answering idea to the social chaos of this
time,
while nevertheless requiring a fully conscious implementation.
We must
wake up to the crisis and choose the way out, as a whole
people. If we
leave it to mere chance the forces of evil hidden in
concentrated
wealth will lead to a civilization which will be an
abomination not to
be contemplated.
Yet, if we look beyond the front page and the sound bite, we will find that just such a will exists in the most ordinary people. The candidacy of Ross Perot in 1992, such as it was, showed how quickly our people were willing to come together from many classes and races in order to do something about the many desperate problems we all share. The fire of will exists, as does the idea. But the idea has not yet been perceived by this will. It is complex and multifaceted and we are not finished yet in our contemplation of it.
There yet
remain two core problems. How,
in a practical sense, do we foster the necessary dialogue
among the
various ethnic, religious, and racial factions which make up
the People
of Peoples? And, by what means do we set the necessary limits
to the
overreaching of concentrated wealth?
It has been a
central theme of this text
that social dynamics are organic in nature. The future is not
unrelated
to the past, although the transformations may involve a
turning inside
out. Consider the following...
Original
participation consciousness was
a group consciousness. Thus, for example, the democracy and
cooperation
of the Indian was in large part possible because the
individual
instinctively gave over to the group a certain authority.
Behavior -
morals - were guided from outside the individual. We are now
passing
through the elimination of that way of social being,
throughout the
whole of Western Civilization, and, perhaps as well, the whole
world
(although not at the same time or rate of change). Instinctive
community has/is passing away, and the individual is now on
his own.
Whatever
community we are to have in the
future must come from the will forces of the individual, and
these can
only have as their moral nature that which results from the
interaction
between the individual and his own free conscience. What we
have called
the onlooker separation has an anti-community consequence and
represents something that can only be overcome in its
individual and
social effects, through the conscious activity of the
individual. A new
kind and form of community participation must arise, one
flowing from
the free deeds of the individual, rather than the dying-away
traditional standards of the older social order.
We cannot
overestimate how difficult this
will be. Just consider the many apartment buildings in
America, which
are, physically, natural communities, but which remain,
socially, the
last illusory refuges of individuals who hardly know each
other at all.
Do we take the poor, the ill, the old into our sanctuaries of
individualism? No, we do not. We abandon them to institutions
or to the
streets. Is this morally wrong? Yes and no. In truth I believe
many
feel the pain and are not unwilling to offer comfort, warmth,
food and
companionship. But, something is still missing. As individuals
we have
yet to give birth to that within our natures which has the
capacity to
carry out such acts of grace. Something needs to happen inside
us,
first, or at least at the same time as we struggle to create
new forms
of human community.
When there was
a vital community
standard, one knew what to do, and what to do fitted in
socially with
the whole. But today, there is no standard. We are alone
(almost) if we
wish to act. And, alone we cannot carry that which needs to be
carried.
However, what is a burden to an individual can be a joy to
many hands
and hearts. "...united we stand, divided we fall..."
There is a
necessary first step. The
ultimate journey is long, and its goal may never be reached,
but peace
with our own conscience depends upon striving, upon the
reaching for
that which exceeds our grasp. In a redeemed politics and
social
existence (for these are inseparable), we must first learn to
talk to
each other. The cliche', which says never to discuss politics
or
religion, has lost its meaning. These passion-arousing
realities can no
longer be buried under the pretense of the mask - the false
face we
present to the social world. Just as there is a social dying
and
becoming active in our time, so is there the need for an
individual
psychological death and resurrection. There is no community
becoming
without an individual one as well.
Only the
individual can step outside of
himself, and make the necessary sacrifice of psychological
comfort for
the anxiety of genuine social interaction. Social and
political health
require that we begin to talk to each other about the ultimate
questions of how it may be that vital communities can be born
and
nurtured to maturity. The individual, alone, cannot find his
way
outside of new enfolding social structures. Alone we only
become
inwardly onesided, excessive, crippled and lame.
First we must
risk something, first we
must admit chaos into our own inwardness before the new can
arise.
Psychological safety is psychological immobility.
Yet, this brave
step can be made with
greater emotional security than we might imagine, when it is
done with
others. We step out of ourselves, we set aside the mask,
together. This
again is a special trait of the American Character; for where
else is
there so much ferment of this type, so much group work,
whether 12-Step
or otherwise?
In a sense, we might see the developments in the various 12-Step groups, in the stronger religious communities, in the various spiritual and political developments from the Sixties, as a preparation, as the necessary practice needed for a new kind of social/political dialogue. All of these need to go now one step further.
A very wise
man, whose work I have
studied quite seriously, by the name of Valentin Tomberg, once
wrote a
small pamphlet about the life of spiritually striving groups:
The
Philosophy of Taking Counsel Together. In it was discussed the
practical psychological problems of having a dialog among
individuals
that is able to achieve the desired community without a
sacrifice of
individual freedom. This is no simple accomplishment.
We have to keep
in mind that we live a
way of life formed by some very unfortunate consequences of a
profound
change in human nature. As a result, the invisible tyrannies
of the
economic order determine in very tragic ways the time
structures of how
we live day to day, and have, under the influence of the
onlooker
separation, accelerated enormously the rhythms of existence.
We live
too fast. We have had stolen from us that time we need for the
contemplation of the meaning of our lives, for the
consideration of the
wise ordering of human existence. There are many things we
would not
do, and many other things we would do, were we to have the
time to take
counsel together.
The invisible
dragon, hidden in the
raging passions of unrestrained greed and materialism, must be
made
visible. We must have knowledge of the underlying themes of
modern
existence, common-communal knowledge and understanding.
Moreover, this
must be knowledge which is born of a community process. We
need to seek
it together. We need to ask ourselves: What does it mean to
govern; and
what is the relationship between government and the inner life
of the
people?
I think, as
well, that it will not be
necessary for all our people (in the beginning) to undertake
such a
task. Were only a serious small portion, perhaps less than a
tenth of
the eligible electorate, begin to meet and have this kind of
dialogue
with each other; this would have the effect of changing the
whole
political conversation. In the communal contemplation of what
it means
to be a free people in the age of technology and information,
the ideal
element of our way of life will be raised out of the fog of
myth and
cliche;. The cold and lifeless illusions of America as the
number one
world power will be dispelled, and a warmth and light giving
dawn will
occur.
I expect that
such a dialog will
encounter one major difficulty. There will be a desire for
information
and a related wish for privacy of communication. This means
that such a
process will bring to a head the need for a bill of
information rights,
a need which has been hidden just beneath the surface of
events form
some time now. A change in our fundamental laws will be
required in
order to compel an overreaching concentrated wealth to expose
its web
of lies, and at the same time prevent this same overreaching
from
further tyranny through the amassing of excessive information
about the
individual.
Any attempt at
a real and practical
dialogue can be choked to death by the withholding of
information and
by the use of information for the intimidation of the
participants.
Make no mistake. Things will be taken to the edge, and
violence used.
Too much is at risk.
Thus, we need in this "bill of information rights" to make a second declaration of independence - independence from the tyranny of concentrated wealth - making clear that both natural justice and reason grant to the People a right to know about that which orders and effects their lives, and a right to an inviolate personal sphere of privacy.
Then, if we can
arrive on the other side
of this rite of passage, if we can mature the dialog and
protect its
further evolution, the task of mastery of the temptations of
concentrated wealth can be faced. Here again the resolution is
both a
simple transformation of the past, and was, as well,
prefigured in that
same past.
The American
Experiment inherited the
common law of England as regards the significance of private
property.
This law was largely formed by the impulses connected to the
hereditary
aristocracies. They mostly formed laws with themselves as the
central
beneficiaries. It was on this foundation that concentrated
wealth has
been able to achieve its (hopefully) temporary dominance of
our way of
life.
As the dialog
matures, as we reach
further into inquires seeking the fundamentals of a wise
social
existence, it will be necessary to call into question the
future
utility, for the whole people, of the idea of private
property. We have
the advantage, at this time, of being able to review the
mistakes made
by the various communistic and socialistic attempts to resolve
this
dilemma, as they stand before us now in the contemporary
social
experiments of other nations. Many, who have lived under the
overt and
covert tyranny of these systems, now live here. Their
accumulated
wisdom will be of much use in the evolution of our
considerations.
Just here a
marvelous mystery confronts
us. For in the unappreciated wisdom of the original peoples of
America
can be found the seed of the resolving idea of the troublesome
nature
of private property. The "Indian", in the manifestations of
his highest
cultural achievements, did not own either the Earth of other
material
wealth. Rather, the relationship between the human being and
the
objects which were necessary for life, was as a steward. One
did not
own, one took care of; and not just for the self, but for all
succeeding generations.
We seek to
enact then, laws which neither
preserve private property, or state-owned property. In such a
system of
laws, property is not owned at all. The whole way of thinking
has as
its objective the enhancement and preservation of material
wealth for
the benefit not just of the whole people, but for all those
yet to be
born. Such an approach then takes as its guiding principle not
the core
of our lower nature, self interest, but the essence of our
higher
nature, love of the other.
We erect then a
civilization based upon a
appreciation of the need to set limits upon the excesses of
self
interest, and open doors for the unfolding of our highest
aspirations.
Nor need we think of this as an impractical and impossible
goal, merely
because many will claim it to be so and will work mightily to
prevent
it. There is nothing here which ignores that human beings will
often
fail to unfold their higher natures. All we really do is to
recognize
that the purpose of laws in a civilization is to set some
standards
whose violation the community will not tolerate, and as well
to make
possible those developments of human nature which are yet to
occur.
Again, at this crossing point the only necessary act is to undertake a dialogue which embraces these questions. It is by taking up the means of remaking civilization that we take the first step. And, as in all first steps it will be the hardest. Overcoming our natural tendencies to rest content in our individuality and to instead give over psychological forces, forces of soul and spirit, to the formation of community, is the only path on which we can raise up a new civilization amidst the chaos and debris of the older social order.
First we need
to talk about it. If we can
do this, everything else will follow as a natural course.
As a practical
matter we need two levels
of dialog. One is with our neighbors, face to face. This is
the hardest
act of all. The boundaries that have arisen with the formation
of the
cocoon of our alienation are formidable. We experience pain
and
vulnerability in the crossing of them. But the caterpillar of
our
individuality has latent within it a real butterfly. How are
we to know
who we might become if shed the protective covering?
Likewise with
our communities. A great
deal is latent, waiting only for us to take the first steps of
an
encounter with each other. Once we set limits to our own self
interest,
once we make a new social order in our immediate relations,
then
community will naturally arise. It is our nature to be social.
The only
difference between the dead past and the embryonic future is
that we
must consciously choose the social forms, make of them what we
will out
of our own free moral deeds.
As this happens
a further evolution will
arise. The face-to-face communities will want and need to
reach beyond
themselves, to form a Community of Communities. The emerging
technology
of interactive computers offers a special aid here, if we but
tame its
potential for enslaving us, rather then being our servant.
Perot's
electronic town hall is an intuitive reach for this latent
possibility,
but makes the mistake of wanting to impose this as an
institution, from
the outside.
Whatever use is
made of the potential for
an electronic commons must come from those impulses first
nurtured in
the face to face communities. The computer must not impose its
sterile
nature in between face to face human contact. Why is this?
Without
expressly making it conscious, I
have been all along working with that which was mentioned at
the very
beginning of this essay: The potential hidden in the word,
hidden both
in the use of language itself, and in the inner core of the
human being
as well. What else is the dialogue - the taking counsel
together, we
have been contemplating - but an awakened and fully conscious
bringing
of individual conscience to play in the use of the word for
the
development of a new sense of community.
But this taking
counsel together cannot
be done via an electronic medium, because the machine reduces
(presses
out) the human element which can only be communicated by tone
of voice
and gesture. The bare written word cannot carry the whole of
the
intended meaning, nor really represent who we are as
individuals. And
it is the meeting of individuals face-to face that is the
central act
of community building.
We must take
counsel together which only
really happens in the face-to-face dialogue, where individuals
meet,
confront and moderate the cultural, racial and ethnic
differences. And
what glorious differences, whose potential to enrich the
unfolding of
the America-yet-to-be can hardly be imagined. In support of
this , we
must use the word in all the ways, and more, that Dag
Hammarskjold
wrote so eloquently about. We must infuse our dialogue not
just with
truth, but with goodness and beauty as well. Or rather, we
must aspire
to do so, to reach for such as this, if we want to build
something new
out of the social chaos of the time.
For here we
engage a special mystery.
Latent in the word is not only the sole means for the making
of the
true American Dream, the making of a People of Peoples
("...and crown
thy good with brotherhood..."), but for this process to also
evoke the
formation of a new civilization, a new Community of
Communities, a
transformation and evolution of the whole idea and incarnate
reality of
the political and economic State.
This is a
staggering possibility. And who
else but the American People, with all their rich diversity,
is capable
of leading this transformation. We need be neither number one
politically, economically, or militarily. We are instead faced
with a
truly humbling task. We will not accomplish this by a
self-inflation of
our idea of who we are as a People, but rather by a sober and
disciplined self examination of what history requires of us as
we
search for our maturity.
With this last,
we encounter a final
realization. True self government is not just a form or kind
of order
in the organization of the State, but is rather a
psychological-spiritual act. We must govern our-selves. We
must learn
to exercise the free conscience which evolution grants to us
in this
time. For of what good or use are our freedoms unless they
realize
themselves in the striving for the highest to which we may
aspire.
As individuals we then strive to master our own inner nature, a mastery formerly coerced by the outside community standard - by expectations. This striving for self-mastery is the only healthy foundation for a system of self government, because only such a personal struggle grants the individual that necessary practical understanding of human nature - of the other - required on the path to the birth of a living new civilization.
- finale -
Latent in all that has gone before has been an understanding of the correlation between individual and community development - a mutual interactive and interrelated dying and becoming. I would now like to express this relationship in its deepest form. The reader is cautioned not to make too much of the Christian element, or too little. The Song of the Grandfathers is enriched by all sources of true wisdom.
the State as a reflection of the psychological (inner) environment of the individual and the individual as a reflection of the ideal environment of the State
or
the wisdom hidden in the saying of Christ Jesus:"Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are Gods." (Matthew 22:21)
These words
were the response of Christ
Jesus when the Pharisees tried to trick Him with the question
of
whether the Jews should pay taxes to the Roman Emperor. While
this
could be narrowly interpreted as just meaning that money,
being a thing
of Caesar already, should be given to Caesar, my personal
experience is
that long and thoughtful consideration of the teachings of
Christ Jesus
will always be rewarded with depths of understanding that
cannot be
discovered in any other way.
As to this
particular saying, I had
thought of it off and on for many years, as I continued to
struggle for
the right understanding of man's political existence. Just
like the
scientist, who after years of living with a particular riddle
finds
himself suddenly filled with the answer to his question, so it
was only
after a long preparation that it finally dawned on me what
wisdom lay
hidden in this simple statement.
The State (that
is any type of
government) has no existence but what the humans, who conceive
it and
act it out, make it to be. Unlike sense-perceptible objects,
the State
is a social form entirely, built up out of man's ideation and
deeds.
This principle remains the same, even though in many instances
(e.g.
fascism or communism) a limited number of the individuals or
groups are
able to form the State according to their particular
individual vision
and actions. The State lives (has its only being) in the minds
and
wills of its members.
This is a
rather complicated relation
involving both individual and group action. We normally put
the
question: What ought the State to be? Thus we have the various
theories
of government from Plato and Aristotle to Machivelli and More
to Nozick
and Rawls. The thinking which asks the question - what ought
the State
to be? - occasionally makes a contribution to the ideas a
People hold
of the nature of their government, but I am trying here to
direct our
attention not to our theory of government, but to the actual
conceptions held by a People of what their particular State
is, and how
that is then reflected in the actual nature (being) of the
State in
fact.
These
conceptions vary from person to
person, and as well, change over the course of any individual
life. Nor
are these ideas likely to be the result of any particular
political
philosophic effort, but rather will tend to be the
consequences of a
combination of schooling, the types of groups one has
associated with,
and the practical experience of government acquired in the
course of
one's life. Thus will arise an odd mixture of cliche,
prejudice and
truth.
That we have
names and words for these
ideas (such as liberal, conservative, rightist, leftist,
democrat,
republican, freedom, capitalist, communism, and so forth) is
also not
related to the point I am trying to make. Especially today,
when so few
have really given any thought at all to these matters, most of
us use
such words with so little precision that we very often use the
same
word to mean quite different things, in spite of perhaps
belongin to
the same political party and espousing the same positions.
Nevertheless,
each individual citizen
will hold some idea of the State, and will act according to
this idea.
Some will believe in freedom, but not for certain other
classes of
citizens. Some will believe in law abiding-ness, but at the
same time
cheat on their taxes. Some will form groups to demand that
laws follow
their ideas of what is right. Some will court such group's
favor in
order to get elected, only to do something else later. Some
will do
nothing, convinced that government is an oppressor, best to be
avoided,
and certainly not relevant to the real problems of life:
getting a job,
raising a family, struggling in a difficult relationship, and
so forth.
Some will be completely lawless, believing only in their own
code, or
desires, acting on impulse and taking whatever they want.
Wherever a
single human being stands,
having some kind of idea of the State and acting out some kind
of
behavior in which this idea is more or less central or
irrelevant, in
this place the State in miniature exists. Finally then, out of
the
totality of these miniature States, comes into being the State
as a
whole, a mixture of an enormous variety of ideas and deeds,
acting in a
complex arrangement as the various collective associations
dance
together in their struggle to dominate.
The point of
this is to recognize that
the being of the State is created by these ideas and deeds, by
what is
"rendered" it by its People.
Now because
certain common themes will
live in the ideals and deeds of a particular People, each
characteristic People has an individual historic and
characteristic
State. America, for example, has a kind of State which is
given
dominate thematic character by the ideas embodied in the
Consitution,
and the experiences which are derived from the land. Because
we all
live in the same land and because we are to a somewhat similar
degree
educated in the ideas of the Constitution, there tends to be a
kind of
order and consistency in the nature of the State throughout
our history.
At the core of
this process, which is a
kind of psychological process, lies that element of our inner
life - in
our soul life - which might be called: our feeling for what is
right.
This feeling for what is right exists in all Peoples, but
varies in its
content somewhat from People to People, and time to time. We
should be
noticing today, for example, that in Eastern Europe, as the
domination
of the Marxist-Leninist "rendering" of the idea of the State
recedes,
that what these Peoples make most important will not be the
same as
what we would conceive as most significant. In fact, if we
observe
closely enough we will see an effort to accept the democratic
ideal,
but reject the materialsm, and the consumerism. While there
are depths
here we cannot in this place go into, the point must be
understood that
what a People "render" the State reflects certain cultural and
ethnic
characteristics of no little importance
The principle
that the State is what it
is through what is "rendered" it, has been known instinctively
to our
wiser political leaders. Our constitution begins: "We the
People...".
Lincoln said: "...a nation of the People, by the People, and
for the
People...". And Kennedy said: "Ask not what your country can
do for
you, but what you can do for your country."
While this may
all seem too simple, it is
not, and really understanding it will make other things much
clearer.
For example, we have in recent years been more interested in
this
country in our rights as individuals, without any thought to
there
being any correlative duties. We don't like conscription (the
draft),
paying taxes, thinking much at all about government unless we
can get
something from it, or it is taking something from us. Yet, the
two go
hand in hand. There are no rights without duties. There is no
State
from which to receive rights without someone having "rendered"
it
certain duties. A great deal we take for granted was first won
by blood.
When we lament
today the sorry condition
of our political life we need to reflect that its initial
being was
created out of the passionate deeds of our ancestors, whose
sacrifice
left behind a kind of political wealth upon which we lived
until, as
today, we begin to exhaust it by taking without giving (all
rights and
no duties). The sorry condition of our modern political life
is due to
the gradual depletion of its being through the absence of
sufficient
"rendering" to keep it vital and alive.
This being has
a quite definite
qualitative nature; that is, it is not so much what it is
because so
many people give it so many hours, or years (quantities of
time), but
because of the ideal and moral element of what they "render".
It is the
higher or lower qualities of our human nature which become
aspects of
the being of the State. When a voter votes only his
prejudices, not
having troubled himself to really understand the needs of the
whole
People, and when the politician encourages through advertising
and
speeches the People's expression of their baser instincts,
then the
being of the State can only reflect such qualities. When the
corporations and unions lobby only so that their self interest
is
gratified, then the being of the State reveals no higher
qualities. Did
the rich get richer and the poor get poorer under recent
administrations? Without a doubt, but what else did the most
powerful
elites "render"? The phrase of the computer programmers is
quite apt:
"garbage in, garbage out".
This brings us,
of course, to the other
pole of Christ Jesus' saying, because the crux of the problem
is the
need for the State to receive something from the higher
elements of our
nature. What then does it mean to "render unto God" and how do
the two
statements relate to each other as a whole?
While the being
of the State can be seen
to be dependent in its nature for what is "rendered" it, this
cannot be
said to be true of the being of God. It is not the being of
God which
becomes what is rendered it, but the being of man. The human
being who
"renders unto God the things that are Gods" is himself
transformed by
the act of devotion. Those who would doubt such a proposition
simply
have to look closely at history. The Founding Fathers, Abraham
Lincoln,
these and many more political figures, whose stature and
importance to
the being of our Government is unquestionable, have been able
to
contribute what they have in large part because of the moral
nature of
their character. Just as the State becomes what is rendered
it. so we
humans become according to whether we act so as to unfold our
individual higher nature.
No one doubts
today the validity of
making an effort to maintain, care for and develop the
physical body.
Yet, the development of virtue is as much ignored as physical
well
being is advocated. No amount of physical fitness, however,
will change
the character of what is rendered the State. Only moral
development,
only transformation of the soul and spiritual nature of the
human being
can enhance the qualitative characteristics of what is
rendered the
State.
The statement
we have been examining, the
wisdom out of the Gospels of Christ Jesus, has two meanings,
dependent
upon which principle we emphasize. These meanings are not
contradictory, but rather are complimentary. One: The State is
what it
is out of what is rendered it in their ideation and their
deeds by its
People...and...the qualitative nature of what is rendered, is
higher or
lower according to the development of virture as that has
proceeded in
the individual. Simultaneously (Two): Only through devotion to
God does
the human being develop in himself those characteristics which
flow
from such an act...and...as a devote of God, one needs to
recognize one
yet remains a member of a society, which will only have as
necessary
characteristics what one gives to it.
As a last point
we must again notice that
Christ Jesus says to render unto Caesar and unto God. Man must
direct
his activity both toward heaven and toward earth, in order to
unfold
his essential being, his "I"ness. Both the State and man need
to
become. It is a reciprocal relationship. If the State does not
become,
then man's potential development is limited. If man does not
become
then his capacity to render unto the State, and the being of
the State,
is likewise limited.
Now there is a
difference, subtle and not
insignificant, whether or not one approaches self development
through
devotion to God. At the same time freedom of conscience is
especially
important here. One must choose for oneself both whether to
pursue self
development, and the manner and nature of that pursuit. The
future
evolution of the individual and of society will take its
dominant
characteristics from that choice.
Just here, however, a few practical words must be said about what a free conscience really is. It is not license to do what ever we choose. The human conscience is not unlike a sense organ, only in this case instead of perceiving the outer world, conscience is the awareness of an inner moral world. What we experience as the quiet pricks of conscience, the still small voice, are the expressions of the higher human nature in our ordinary discursive inner dialogue. This organ of moral understanding can only develop if exercised. If it is not developed, we enter then upon a path away from the human, and toward the mere animal, driven by raw desires and appetites. Even so, no one but ourselves may judge whether we act out of conscience or not.
- a last, lingering, note -
What then do we
seek? Do we want a
civilization dominated by self interest, and driven by fear of
the
other? Do we want an America known for its materialism and is
racism?
Will we leave to the power seeking politician the
determination of the
content of the political dialogue? Or will we really be free?
Not just
free to buy and sell, but free, as well, to become? For
there is no true self government, in a political sense, if
there is not
an equal proportion of self governing by the individual, of
himself, in
a moral sense.
Fundamentally,
just like an individual,
our real measure as a People will not be seen in what we have
achieved,
but rather in that ideal for which we have reached, and whose
character
only we ourselves may legitimately judge.
And then,
finally, we will in this way
truly become: "...a government of the People, by the People,
and for
the People..."
This then is the "Song of the Grandfathers", heard in the dialogs, in the seeking for wisdom, in the inner listening, in the quite voice of conscience...
We dream America
We sing Her shadow and Her light
We dream America
And America dreams us.
************************
the Rape of the Republic
(best read
aloud)
It began in the womb for she was magnificent even then
a star brought to earth to shine brightly into human hearts
but there were those who could not bear this light
and had their own darker visions
so that even before She was born our Republic
she was plundered, scarred, violated,
such that what was born
was born lamed, not whole, but only a part of the original magnificence
Yet, She lived and began her work of holding dear
on the earth that version that could be seen
of truth, goodness and beauty in answer to the question:
How shall human beings govern themselves?
before Her birth there were Kings and Queens, tyrants mostly
abusers of human dignity despisers of freedom
But human beings could not any longer tolerate the disdain of aristocrats
and so through bloody revolution deposed the arrogant and powerful
or so it seemed for a time
great words poured forth from equally great minds
who held in their hearts (at least most of them)
Her truth our Republic
at conception these were the words in which She first was seen and felt
self evident truths, unalienable rights, just powers, consent of the governed
the tyranny of blood and inheritance was pushed away
and human beings stood up and declared their inviolate divinity
such power, such light what could stand in the way
of such goodness and beauty that holds each individual human
divine by self evident truths unalienable rights
and declares that the only just powers
come from the consent of the governed
but even there the rape began, just a little pinch or two
in places sacred in ideas sublime
a minor argument about just what unalienable rights
would be enumerated and while the ideal won
namely: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness
another darker idea had been urged, and thought by some
to be important a right to property.
so even though the words were clear and property not mentioned when
our ancestors declared our truth in certain hearts this darkness lived,
festered and grew.
so that when the birth came out of minds holding to this ancient darkness,
the Republic was born lamed
and our true divinity not able to fully appear
for property was there in that Constitution
how else could it be, given that most of those who
wrote down the words had property themselves
and owed to others , who likewise owned property, allegiance
so She was given a fated body lamed in nature, bound in spirit
and the truth of the Republic its cosmic star-like presence
was not able to fully shine forth in our lives
why was property a flaw some will ask
and the answer is simple for if we are, in the Republic,
declaiming rights unalienable for all then property as an idea
means exclusion some will have and others will not
or property has no meaning
thus it came to be this lamed and scarred Republic
laid open now to exclusive rights of property
that only some would have when the very idea of the Republic
was rights for all
What had in the declaration been just a thought held back
was now embodied, fixed defined
so the Republic grew, and open now to exclusive rights the power
of property and money grew, and a new aristocracy of wealth
replaced the one of blood and being more clever
than kings and queens who flaunted their powers
the rich ones hid and from behind the scenes acquired their rule
and thus we find ourselves in this time and place
looking upon a raped and bloody Dame our Republic,
held in chains, blindfolded unable to move anymore
unless in whipped obedience to Party hacks and their owners
so we suffer, not quite knowing what went wrong
only seeing that when unalienable rights include the right of exclusive
property our Republic cannot work,
and so we too become owned wage slaves
creating the wealth but not owning the wealth
not even really owning ourselves for even our education makes of
us good workers and consumers servants at the table at which wealth eats
while we have scraps and sleep with dogs
invisible our chains, for wealth is clever beyond our senses
and has by granting credit chained us with debt
binding us to jobs and work while it sits calmly
engorged on a feast we are forced to provide
but clever is not wise and even wealth and property can error
and error they have, slothful in their sated repose
they took and took and took too much,
so that now we notice what has been done
although we still are not quite yet ready to see the full truth
and see Her chained there raped and beaten our Republic.
She waits for us, for She is something we drew down
from heaven, and heaven is a part of Her
She waits for us to wake and see
to wake and see to wake and see Her bloodied form
and see the hidden light within
for waiting She has been because not all those who wrote
Her words not all those who were forced to give
way to property and exclusion failed to leave a path
a hidden yet obvious path for just our time
when wake we must and see Her, see Her truly
See She still has power still has magic still can be whole
If we just honor Her and see Her and set Her free.
Beaten, raped She still is divine and still wants to serve us
if we can but learn to know Her in those most intimate ways
as did those who first wrote Her words.
For the wisest ones, our Founders, first speakers of Her words
kept Her true nature intact, for Her words begin and end
with that which saves the day
We the People rings out the words, do ordain and establish sings the chorus
We the People do ordain and establish
and there it is, what property couldn't hide forever,
that the Republic is what WE say it is, not what they say it is.
Oh they tried. They tired to bind us to their lamed and broken version,
but their ambition and greed has undone them
they have gone too far taken too much and
now they wake us up and we see Her
clearly not the lamed and broken Dame,
the chained and raped Woman our dear Republic,
but we see Her true, as she was meant to be
and we also see that She has kept faith with us, while we slept
for the very words with which Her broken form
began...we the people do ordain and establish
and the words with which She ended in that lamed version with
powers not delegated are reserved to the people.
that raped form those who loved their exclusive rights of
property gave to us, still was true, for property was held in between our powers of ordination and establishment
and that which is not delegated we retain.
Government still only has that which we consent for it to have
and if we choose to take from our legal framework that
diseased exclusive right of property, then we are free to do so,
and nothing nothing can stop us.
So we can unchain Her unbind Her
heal Her and so unchained, unbound and healed,
She will give us all, as it was meant to be when first She fell to earth.
in words written in blood and carved from the stone of wisdom
She fell and wants to fall again,
if we but wake up and see Her chained there
waiting for us to make new words
words unbloodied this time we hope words free of exclusive rights
words now truly self evident unalienable rooted in the
power of our consent
so She calls to us give me a new body now
free of chains and violation free of exclusive rights free of rights not for all
so She calls to us seeking our new words
carved from a new stone of wisdom a living stone
a philosophic stone a heart stone.
so She calls,
softly in a near whisper...
now... now... now
**********************
Basic Conceptions:
-
fundamentals of a new social view -
It is possible
to see the social world as
a living organism. But to do this requires of our
capacity
of thinking that it overcome not only a certain amount of
inertia, but
also that we let go of - that we sacrifice - most of our
previously held conceptions. The
mental past
that we carry around with us can too frequently be like a dark
cloud,
masking the reality. Yet this same dark cloud is also
like
a rich loamy soil, full of life and seeds and future
potential.
The process of letting go of the mental past does
not
destroy these seeds but rather creates just that environment
in which
they can grow and mature.
Let us begin first with a
diagram - something at once simple, yet based upon a quite
real and
extraordinary complexity:
upward into Being
the ideal
downward into
living incarnation
SOCIAL FORM
upward toward rigidity
an ideology
downward
toward disorder
Social Form arises from a combination of ideology and the ideal as that is lived out through the individual human being in his collective social structures - family, clubs, churches, communities, nation states, peoples and so forth. Both the ideal and the ideological are necessary. For example, ideology is at its most ideal when embodied in the Law, while the ideal is most ideological in codes of moral conduct (such as the Ten Commandments).
Too much ideology makes social form excessively rigid and leads to
too
much order. This then leads to the paralysis and
eventual
death of the living element of the social form within the
social
organism that is its living environment. The rise and
fall of
Russian Communism is an example of this type of excess.
Too much of the ideal
keeps the social form from being fully incarnated, a
fate that befalls all utopian social schemes.
With these simple
ideas in
mind, please now consider the Nature of the State in the light
of a
certain bit of wisdom. The following is from Part
I of the
essay: Waking the Sleeping Giant: the mission
of Anthroposophy
in America, the totality of which
can be
found elsewhere on these pages:
"the State as a
creation of
the psychological (inner) environment of the individual, and
the
individual as a reflection of the ideal environment of the
State; or,
the wisdom hidden in the saying of Christ Jesus: "Render
therefore unto
Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things
that are
Gods." (Matthew 22:21)
"These words were
the
response of Christ Jesus when the Pharisees tried to trick Him
with the
question of whether the Jews should pay taxes to the Roman
Emperor.
While this could be narrowly interpreted as just meaning that
money,
being a thing of Caesar already, should be given to Caesar, my
personal
experience is that long and thoughtful consideration of the
teachings
of Christ Jesus will always be rewarded with depths of
understanding
that cannot be discovered in any other way.
"As to this
particular
saying, I had thought of it off and on for many years, as I
continued
to struggle for the right understanding of man's social and
political
existence. Just like the scientist, who after years of living
with a
particular riddle finds himself suddenly filled with the
answer to his
question, so it was only after a long preparation that it
finally
dawned on me what wisdom lay hidden in this simple statement.
"The State (that is
any type
of government) has no existence but what the humans, who
conceive it
and act it out, make it to be. Unlike sense perceptible
objects,
the State is a social form entirely, built up out of man's
ideation and
deeds. This principle remains the same, even though in many
instances
(e.g. fascism or communism) a limited number of individuals or
groups
are able to form the State according to their particular
individual
vision and actions. From this point of view, the being of the
State, in
such instances, includes oppressors and the oppressed, each a
component
of the totality. The State lives (has its only being) in the
minds and
wills of its members.
"The point of view
being
expressed here is in a very narrow sense value neutral.
We may
justifiably find certain forms of government to be egregious
and
unconscionable, but our sense of justice does not change the
fact that
the being of the State, even a totalitarian state, is the
summation of
the deeds and ideas of its members.
"This is a rather
complicated
relation involving both individual and group action. We
normally put
the question: What ought the State to be? Thus we have the
various
theories of government from Plato and Aristotle to Machivelli
and More
to Nozick and Rawls. The thinking which asks the question,
what ought
the State to be, occasionally makes a contribution to the
ideas a
People hold of the nature of government, but I am trying here
to direct
our attention not to our theory of government, but to the
actual
conceptions held by a People of what their particular State
is, and how
that is then reflected in the actual nature (being) of the
State in
fact.
"These conceptions
vary from
person to person, and as well change over the course of any
individual
life. Nor are these ideas likely to be the result of any
particular
political philosophic effort, but rather will tend to be the
consequences of a combination of schooling, the types of
groups one has
associated with, and the practical experience of government
acquired in
the course of one's life. Thus will arise an odd mixture of
cliche,
prejudice and truth.
"That we have names
and words
for these ideas (such as liberal, conservative, rightist,
leftist,
democrat, republican, freedom, capitalist, communism, and so
forth) is
also not related to the point I am trying to make. Especially
today,
when so few have really given any thought at all to these
matters, most
of us use such words with so little precision that we very
often use
the same word to mean quite different things, in spite of
perhaps
belonging to the same political party and espousing the same
positions.
"Nevertheless, each
individual citizen will hold some idea of the State, and will
act
according to this idea. Some will believe in freedom, but not
for
certain other classes of citizens. Some will believe in law
abiding-ness, but at the same time cheat on their taxes. Some
will form
groups to demand that laws follow their ideas of what is
right. Some
will court such group's favor in order to get elected, only to
do
something else later. Some will do nothing, convinced that
government
is an oppressor, best to be avoided, and certainly not
relevant to the
real problems of life: getting a job, raising a family,
struggling in a
difficult relationship, and so forth. Some will be completely
lawless,
believing only in their own code, or desires, acting on
impulse and
taking whatever they want.
"Wherever a single
human
being stands, having some kind of idea of the State and acting
out some
kind of behavior in which this idea is more or less central or
irrelevant, in this place the State in miniature exists.
Finally then,
out of the totality of these miniature 'States' comes into
being the
State as a whole, a mixture of an enormous variety of ideas
and deeds,
acting in a complex arrangement as the various collective
associations
dance together in their struggle to dominate.
"The point of this
is to
recognize that the being of the State is created by these
ideas and
deeds, by what is "rendered" it by its People.
"Now because certain
common
themes will live in the ideas and deeds of a particular
People, each
characteristic People has an individual historic and
characteristic
State. America, for example, has a kind of State which is
given
dominate thematic character by the ideas embodied in the
Consitution,
and the experiences which are derived from the land. Because
we all
live in the same land and because we are to a somewhat similar
degree
educated in the ideas of the Constitution, there tends to be a
kind of
order and consistency in the nature of the State throughout
our history.
"The State, as a
social form,
is not unlike a wave form created in a stream by the existence
of a
rock just beneath the surface. As the water flows past the
rock a wave
form rises up, and remains present. Even though water
continually flows
through it, the general "shape" of the form remains. If we now
turn our
imaginations to the creation of a social form, in this case
the State,
the flowing water is the People moving through time, who come
into
being, live out their lives, and pass away. The rock is the
reality of
the spirit, which in this instance is active in the commonly
held ideas
related to the Constitution, and the characteristics induced
in the
soul by the common experience of the land. The social form -
the State
- arises out of the interaction between the two - the lives of
the
People and the presence of the relevant spiritual and soul
elements,
and maintains a certain continuous nature and quality, just as
the wave
form in the flowing stream remains the same, although the
water itself
(the People) continually moves through it.
"At the core of this
process,
which is a kind of psychological process, lies that element of
our
inner life - in our soul life - which might be called our
feeling for
what is right. This feeling for what is right exists in all
Peoples,
but varies in its content somewhat from People to People, and
time to
time. We should be noticing today, for example, that in
Eastern Europe,
as the domination of the Marxist-Leninist "rendering" of the
idea of
the State recedes, that what these Peoples make most important
will not
be the same as what we would conceive as most significant. In
fact, if
we observe closely enough we will see a struggle to accept the
democratic ideal, but reject the materialsm, and the
consumerism. While
there are depths here we cannot in this place go into, the
point must
be understood that what a People "render" the State reflects
certain
cultural and ethnic characteristics of no little importance
"The principle, that
the
State is what it is through what is "rendered" it, has been
known
intuitively to our wiser political leaders. Our constitution
begins:
"We the People...". Lincoln said: "...a nation of the People,
by the
People, and for the People...". And Kennedy said: "Ask not
what your
country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."
"While this may all
seem too
simple, it is not, and really understanding it will make other
things
much clearer later on. For example, we have in recent years
been more
interested in this country in our rights as individuals,
without any
thought to there being any correlative duties. We don't like
conscription (the draft), paying taxes, thinking much at all
about
government unless we can get something from it, or it is
taking
something from us. Yet, the two go hand in hand. There are no
rights
without duties. There is no State from which to receive rights
without
someone having "rendered" it certain duties. A great deal we
take for
granted was first won by blood.
"When we lament
today the
sorry condition of our political life we need to reflect that
its
initial being was created out of the passsionate deeds of our
ancestors, whose sacrifice left behind a kind of political
wealth upon
which we live; until, as today, we begin to exhaust it by
taking
without giving (all rights and no duties). The sorry condition
of our
modern political life is due to the gradual depletion of its
being
through the absence of sufficient "rendering" to keep it vital
and
alive.
"This being has a
quite
definite qualitative nature; that is, it is not so much what
it is
because so many people give it so many hours, or years
(quantities of
time), but because of the ideal and moral element of what they
"render". It is the higher or lower qualities of our human
nature which
become aspects of the being of the State. When a voter votes
only his
prejudices, not having troubled himself to really understand
the needs
of the whole People, and when the politician encourages
through
advertising and speeches the People's expression of their
baser
instincts, then the being of the State can only reflect such
qualities.
When the corporations and unions lobby only so that their self
interest
is gratified, then the being of the State reveals no higher
qualities.
Did the rich get richer and the poor get poorer under recent
administrations? Without a doubt, but what else did the most
powerful
elites "render"? The phrase of the computer programmers is
quite apt:
"garbage in, garbage out".
"This brings us, of
course,
to the other pole of Christ Jesus' saying, because the crux of
the
problem is the need for the State to receive into its being
the higher
elements of our nature. What then does it mean to "render unto
God" and
how do the two statements relate to each other as a whole?
"While the being of
the State
can be seen to be dependent in its nature for what is
"rendered" it,
this cannot be said to be true of the being of God. It is not
the being
of God which becomes what is rendered it, but the being of
man. The
human being who "renders unto God the things that are Gods" is
himself
transformed by the act of devotion. Those who would doubt such
a
proposition simply have to look closely at history. The
Founding
Fathers, Abraham Lincoln, these and many more political
figures, whose
stature and importance to the being of our Government is
unquestionable, have been able to contribute what they have in
large
part because of the moral nature of their character. Just as
the State
becomes what is rendered it. so we humans become according to
whether
we act so as to unfold our individual higher nature.
"No one doubts today
the
validity of making an effort to maintain, care for and develop
the
physical body. Yet, the development of virtue is as much
ignored as
physical well being is advocated. No amount of physical
fitness,
however, will change the character of what is rendered the
State. Only
moral development, only transformation of the soul and
spiritual nature
of the human being can enhance the qualitative characteristics
of what
is rendered the State.
"The statement we
have been
examining, the wisdom out of the Gospels of Christ Jesus, has
two
meanings, dependent upon which principle we emphasize. These
meanings
are not contradictory, but rather are complimentary. One: The
State is
what it is out of what is rendered it in their ideation and
their deeds
by its People...and...the qualitative nature of what is
rendered, is
higher or lower according to the development of virture as
that has
proceeded in the individual.
"Simultaneously
(Two): Only
through devotion to God does the human being develop in
himself those
characteristics which flow from such an act...and...as a
devote of God,
one needs to recognize one yet remains a member of human
society, which
will only have as necessary characteristics what one gives to
it.
"As a last point we
must
again notice that Christ Jesus says to render unto Caesar and
unto God.
Man must direct his activity both toward heaven and toward
earth, in
order to unfold his essential being, his "I"ness. Both the
State and
man need to become. It is a reciprocal relationship. If the
State does
not become, then man's potential development is limited. If
man does
not become then his capacity to render unto the State, and the
being of
the State, is likewise limited. "
Hopefully the above
will help
fill in, in more detail, the basic conception of how the ideal
and
ideological, as they live in individual human beings, become
rendered
into social form. All social form arises in the
same way,
whether it is a family, some kind of small organization, or
some larger
social form such as the State.
Now our
participation in many
of these forms is very often dependent upon tradition.
Traditions already exist when we are born into
them, and we
are certainly trained by our families and our eduction on how
to play
our role in their life and continuance. Moreover,
these
traditions are often rooted in the best wisdom of the past.
They are not arbitrary or capricious, but rather
are
frequently quite purposeful and wise.
Just consider
marriage.
This is an aspect of a social form we call the
family.
It has a quite definite legal (ideological)
component,
supported by the State; and it also has a quite ideal form as
concieved
by our religious traditions. Each member of the
basic
partnership brings an individual understanding of their role
in the
whole. Not only this, but the surrounding social
environment, also influences this totality. All
small
social forms are embedded in larger social structures, which
can, or
can not, nourish them and keep them vital and alive.
For
example, a marriage, embedded in a large family structure, may
suffer
ultimate failure if the surrounding family members treat one
of the
partners in certain negative ways.
We should also
distinguish
between a type of social form, such as marriage, family or
State, and a
particular marriage, family or State. The type may
continue
from age to age (there have been families and marriages for
millennia),
but in particular times the individual expression of a type of
form may
be more difficult to maintain in particular instances.
In
our time, for example, marriages and families have a great
deal of
difficulty holding themselves together.
Here is what I wrote
in
another essay: Beyond Columbine...:
"Imagine, if you
will, the
panorama of recent human history as having an outward visible
structure, and an inward invisible structure. We know
the outer
elements in the many stories we have concerning persons and
events as
this history has unfolded itself over the last and most recent
millennia. If you will, however, picture behind these
stories
something else happening, something that leaves its traces in
the outer
stories, but is of a nature not visible to the mind in the
same way as
the events.
"Consider that human
inner
life is not fixed, immobile, or forever known and formed.
Rather,
it too, like the biological organism, evolves. The inner
organism
changes as does the outer visible organism.
"In order to discuss
this we
need some terms. These terms can be fairly arbitrary if
we wish -
they could even be nonsense words. Yet, we do have
certain
historically used terms that will not only serve, but whose
use it will
help us to resurrect - in this case the terms soul and
spirit.
In the age of science these have come to be seen as
metaphors,
but not as realities. For our purposes, let us consider
them as
possible realities, whose character and nature will enable us
to do
that act we so much desire - namely to reinsert wisdom into
our social
existence.
"To make these
matters most
concrete to the individual reader, let us consider that soul
is what we
call conscious and unconscious experience, whether it be the
experience
of the senses, of thoughts, of feelings, impulses of will and
all the
other aspects of inner life our language and culture
recognizes.
Spirit, on the other hand, is not experience but that
which
experiences. Soul is the unseen content known to the
knower and
actor - the human spirit. I don't know your experience,
but I do
know experience and I do know myself as a self. I
interpret the
world (usually, if I am not a sociopath or other seriously ill
individual) as containing other individuals of like nature -
who also
have a self and experience.
"In order to
understand the
social context of the Columbine tragedy, it is necessary to
appreciate
how soul and spirit are currently evolving over time. It
is this
invisible order which helps us appreciate the need for the
return of
wisdom to our social life. This understanding of the
evolution of
consciousness need not be theoretical, because, as mentioned
previously, these changes have left their traces all over our
outer
history.
"A particular change
occurred
in this invisible organization around the 14th century.
Prior to
that time the soul was more dominant than the spirit in the
dynamics of
the inner life of the individual. Experience was more
determinative of self, than self was determinative of
experience.
Among the Scholastics of the 12th Century, we find the
word
participation in frequent use. The soul felt embedded in
the
world, not separate from it as we do today. Thus we have
people
with the names, John's son, or Telliard de Chardin, that is of
a
certain place. We were part of the community and of
nature, and
much less individuals.
"Other facts point
toward
these prior conditions. In a book by the writer Michael
Dorris,
The Broken Cord, he writes of an American Indian language in
which it
is impossible to say "I hit you", but only "we hit us".
The ideal
of ancient Taoism, so often repeated in the television series
Kung Fu,
is: "Be at one with nature", for it is the recollection of the
taoist
experience that self and experience - self consciousness and
consciousness - (spirit and soul) was in a state of
integration with
outer nature.
"Yet, this was not a
stable
and fixed condition, but rather one which changed.
Spirit became
stronger, more individual, and began to determine soul, rather
than be
its semi-prisoner. As a consequence soul itself emerged
more from
the surrounding environment, both social and physical.
This also
brought historical changes in its wake, changes we can
observe.
"For example,
science arises
from this change, for now it is possible, nay mandatory, for
the self
(spirit) to see the world as over there, and no longer
something of
which one is a part. This leads to a kind of onlooker
consciousness, or what some have called the onlooker
separation.
It is as onlookers, rather than as participants, that we
begin to
develop modern natural science.
"A rather remarkable
fact
arises at this time. For the first time in the history
of art,
paintings begin to exhibit space. Prior to this time
there was no
perspective in paintings, then everywhere, slowly to be
sure,
space arises as the change of consciousness that is everywhere
occurring takes place. There are many other changes, far
to many
to list in this short article. The reader who wants to
go more
deeply into this is invited to direct their attention to: Art
and Human
Consciousness by Gotfried Richter; and, Saving the
Appearances: a study
in idolatry by Owen Barfield.
"It is the changes
in this
inner landscape of the soul and spiritual life of humanity
that has
lead to most of the current social conditions. This is a
complicated relationship, and I will only sketch out those
matters
connected to events about which we tend to have common
knowledge.
"The increase in the
powers
of individuality, of a more dominate inner spirit nature,
begins to
affect the course of social life from within. Sons and
daughters
slowly lose interest in following in the footsteps of their
parents,
until in our time it is a social given that the children will
take
their own paths.
"The view of the
world that
flows from the onlooker separation results in a science which
proceeds
to see the world as an object, empty of consciousness and
being.
All the old ideas of Nature, as a place of spiritual
workings,
die, to be replaced by pictures of natural events as
predictable
clockworks. Demeter and Persephone disappear, and laws
of gravity
and particle interactions replace this old view. The
social
structures, once held together by these common religious
impulses and
understandings, begin to fail.
"Science brings
forth great
powers over the material world. From the technological
implications, the industrial revolution arises, which also has
a social
effect. Villages and farms no longer contain the greater
concentration of people, as cities and industrial concerns now
draw the
majority of the labor pool to their environs. The father
(see
Robert Bly's Iron John) and then finally, in our time, the
mother, are
pulled by the operation of economic necessities from the home.
Children raise themselves now in the industrial West.
"Language itself
undergoes
many changes. The idea of evil comes less to the fore,
and
individual characteristics become more the product of
bio-chemical and
electrical properties of the brain. The individual grows
stronger, and the ability of community to restrain it through
social
pressure lessens. At the same time we are given a
picture of a
mechanical human being, who is more a product of his genetic
heritage
and less a product of his own freedom and responsibility.
In the
psycho-babel of modern life, we become victims of our
undisciplined
inner life, not the participants in an inner battle between
good and
evil. We know a great deal about the material dynamics
of brain
neurophysiology and almost nothing about how to have inner
discipline
in a practical sense.
"In outer social
life this
loss is named "the family values crisis" and becomes a
political issue,
rather than an issue of possible human knowledge and wise
understanding. Science having become disconnected from
Art and
Religion lacks the resources to appreciate what is happening.
"Yet, the evolution
of
consciousness is not ended, but is rather a constant ongoing
process of
growth and/or possible decay. The diminution of the
power of the
community to determine individual moral behavior becomes an
alchemical
social crucible for another development. This
development
is one of a free moral conscience being born within the
self-conscious
spirit.
"The phrase, "do the
right
thing" begins to be replaced with the phrase "do your own
thing".
A great debate over the right to life and freedom of
choice
arises within political life around the legal abortion
question.
"In one place, a man writes a book called The Philosophy of Freedom, bringing out in full consciousness these delicate inner issues. In another place, two drunks found a movement called Alcoholics Anonymous, in which the same problems are approached in terms of terrible real life experience. In a third place, a young man starts a change among the ordinary Christians, with his "what would jesus do" movement. Self determined moral freedom, as distinct from acquiescence to community standards, tries to emerge everywhere in the twentieth century, from its beginning to its end."
Hopefully the
reader can now see that
social form arises from two interacting processes. One
process is
somewhat vertical in nature, being a kind of interaction
between what
the individual renders within his own inner life, and how that
activity
becomes an aspect of the social present. Two kinds of
"rendering"
are involved, the one proceeding from a self determined ideal
/ moral
sense, and the other an outside influence created by the
totality of
individual renderings. This totality we call the
community, and
it as well influences the individual within it, while the
individual
also influences the community. Both processes are
active, and in
various circumstances, quite different results will arise.
There is a
secondary influence, in that
in addition to the somewhat vertical relationship, with its
lemniscate
like movement, there is a horizontal gesture arising from
changes over
time. The community is not one fixed thing, but changes
in all
manner of ways, while the individual is also not of one fixed
nature,
but also evolves as time passes. The lemniscate movement
travels
through time, taking one shape at one time, and another later.
Elsewhere on
these pages we will look at
these same phenomena from other points of view.
*******************************
The Future
Without doubt, the future is unknown. It may be unknowable, although there are many who seek to penetrate the mists in which the future is hidden. Some claim to be seers - to know through spiritual experience some content of this dark realm. Others think that there might be some kind of science, such as statistics, which would allow for predictability. Not a few find in various prophecies some indication of what lies yet unknown. It certainly is very human to want to know the future.
In our time
there are a lot of very
specific attempts to see into the future in these various
ways. I
will add my own voice to these attempts and the reader will
have to
decide whether there is anything of value here.
My own method
bears some resemblance to
those who look to science. Thus, it might appear
that I
have attempted to extend ongoing tendencies, in the existing
social and
political realities, on into the future. Yet, this
is not
quite correct. What I did was try to understand the
social
present, and in the process of that search discovered various
kinds of
long term dynamic processes active in social life, which would
seem to
effect the shape of the future. My method of
research was
largely based upon the scientific work of J.W. Goethe , and is
in some
circles called Goetheanism .
Goetheanism, as
I have used it, involves
the use of the picture creating capacity of the mind - the
imagination.
All thinkers use this capacity, but only a very few have
yet
realized its fullest potentials. Discursive
thinking and
analytic thought can, to a certain extent, come to an
appreciation of
those aspects of reality which they mirror - namely the most
material
aspects. But the imagination has more kinship with
the life
processes of reality, as well as with the hidden spiritual
aspects.
Just as discursive thinking is the mirror of the
mechanical/material, so the imagination is the mirror of the
life
sphere, for the mind is not separate from the world, but
rather its
counterpart. Each aspect of the world has a
corresponding
and analogous quality in the mind.
But the
application of Goethean
principles to social scientific studies raises certain
problems.
Goethe applied his method to sense perceptible
forms, such
as the world of plants, wherein he recreated in his
imagination (by
what he called exact sensorial phantasy) the changes in the
form of the
plant over time. Through this process he obtained
his
results. His discovery was that the inwardness of the
plants
would appear in the imagination, if the imagination faithfully
recreated their appearances. In a like fashion I have
attempted
to create in the imagination an exact picture of the dynamics
of our
social existence. The results of this work appear on
this website.
But social
forms don't exist to the
senses. I don't see, with the physical eyes, such things
as
family, communities, the State, or other kinds of social
order. I
only see them with the thinking. So in my work I
had to be
mindful of the fact that I was engaged in two kinds of acts:
one,
wherein I created in the imagination the specific form, and
the second,
where I recreated the changes in this form over time. In
addition, a lot of care had to be taken so as not to introduce
my own
subjectivities - my sympathies and antipathies - into this
process.
So I found it a difficult struggle to manage to maintain
a
similar kind of exactness to that which Goethe was able to
find in his
sense observations. In aid of this struggle the
work of
Rudolf Steiner was very helpful, in particular his book: "A
Theory of
Knowledge Implicit in Goethe's World Conception".
As a general
statement I have written of
the method I used as: "Listening to the World Song ". It
was my
intuition from the beginning that social realities were a kind
of
"speech", and that all one really needed to do was to bring
them alive
in the thinking with as much objectivity as possible.
These
"facts" would then speak, and all that was required of the
cognitive
capacity was to be able to inwardly behold, as images, social
reality.
Let us begin to
test my methods by
becoming aware of certain very simple observations.
We live, in the
industrial West, in a
time when there has arisen the term "nuclear family".
A
modern family frequently consists of only one parent and
child.
Moreover, this small social form will often be separated
from
other aspects of "family", such as the parent's siblings,
parents and
so forth. Even more intact families, where both
parents are
present in the home, the other relations - grandparents,
uncles and
aunts, cousins etc. - these will live in quite separate
geographical
locations and often there will be little social intercourse.
If we step back
in time, say to the turn
of the Century (from the 19th to the 20th), we will find quite
large
family organisms living in the same neighborhood.
There
will be many "relatives", sets of grandparents, a dozen sets
of
parents, and many many children. Moreover, this
family
organism will be embedded (usually) in a micro-culture, a
neighborhood
of same or similar people in the sense of language, ethnic
origin, and
religion.
If we go back
even further, perhaps three
or four hundred years, we find the family organism just as
large, but
usually embedded in a village environment, which might have a
single
isolated cultural milieu. Whereas, in the turn of
the
Century neighborhood, we will find other cultural systems
existing side
by side and quite busy influencing each other, in the village
everything was quite singular This requires, for our
social
observations, that we not isolate the family from the
community, and
that we have to include in our pictures the various changes
over time
in community as well.
In this way we
become conscious of
something at once very obvious, but nevertheless quite
extraordinary.
For centuries now a certain kind of order in the
social
world has been slowly dissolving. Well, perhaps
not so
obvious, but many have mentioned it (see, for example, Robert
Bly's
books: Iron John ; and, the Sibling Society .
The fact is
that over time it appears
that the family organism, as a social form, has become smaller
and
smaller. It is as if it is somehow flying apart, so that
it is
not surprising that the metaphor "nuclear" (as in small,
charged and
potentially explosive) is applied.
But this kind
of observation is only of
the outside of social phenomena. Families and
communities
are made up of individuals, and each individual is a node of
consciousness. Thus, the psychological changes - the
inner
environments - becomes relevant. That is they are
part of
the whole. We can't just picture the changes in
the outer
social form, but must include the changes in the inwardness of
the
individuals.
I was greatly
helped in this part of the
effort, by the work of Owen Barfield . His
investigations
of the phenomena of language changes over time gives us the
best
evidence of the changes taking place in the inwardness of the
individual over the same time period. The name generally
given to
this phenomena is "the evolution of consciousness".
Readers, who want to know more of this, need to
take up a
serious study of his work, including but not limited to:
Saving the
Appearances - a study in Idolatry; Speakers Meaning; History
in English
Words; and, Poetic Diction.
Barfield, and
others (see Gotfried
Richter's Art and Human Consciousness ; as well as Ernst
Lehrs' Man or
Matter , have identified as an aspect of this process of
inward
evolution a particularly significant change as having begun
around the
15th Century. This change has been called a change from
"original
participation" to the "onlooker separation".
Whereas before
this change the individual felt him or herself more as a part
of either
nature, community or others, following this change the
individual
experienced him/her self as separate. Where once
one might
be called John's son, or de Chardin, that is identified with a
specific
town or family, now more and more individuals sought their own
identity. Once upon a time the son and daughter
assumed
certain well defined roles for their future - namely following
in the
footsteps of the parent, while today it would be considered a
egregious
breach of inner freedom to expect a child to be a clone of the
parent.
We can now
bring these two streams of
change into relationship with each other: one in the nature of
the
social form and the other in the nature of the individual
within that
form. Holding both picture streams in mind leads to a
clear
perception of their mutual reciprocal interdependence.
The
slow development of greater individuality becomes a force from
inside
the family and the community, tending to dissolve these forms.
The individuality needs these forms to cease inhibiting
its
growth. But this is not all that has happened in the
past which
effects the shape of the social present.
Families and communities, and the individual members, are all embeded in culture. It is culture as well which has undergone all manner of change over the same time period.
The "onlooker
separation" gives rise to
natural science, for now the knowledge seeker has a clear
experience of
nature as being "over there", and that he or she is inside,
"over here"
- there is a distinct outside and inside, and the two seem
quite
separate (see also Coleridge's remarks about "outness", as
discussed in
Barfield's What Coleridge Thought). Science, in
turn,
creates two powerful trends. One trend we see in what
has been
called the industrial revolution, and which involves our
discovery,
through science, of vast powers hidden in nature. The
other trend
is the change in world view - the paradigm change - which
replaces for
many the previously held religious beliefs with a scientific
materialism.
The industrial revolution effects the social quite directly, first by driving the father from the home and into the factory, and second by coagulating people near urban centers and their industrial concerns and away from viliages, the more rural ways of life. This same process of challenge to the existing social forms of family and community has continued, until today the mother as well has been taken from the central axis of the family and into the work force.
This, of course, was an outer change in social form. But the second trend spawned by natural science has more effected the inner environment.
Scientific
materialism has produced a new
idea of the nature of the human being, and of the universe in
which we
find ourselves. It very much seems likely to be a
temporary view,
but it nonetheless dominates the image of self that many
people have,
as well as our sense of larger meaning.
It also is
possible to see these changes
as being very undesirable, and many do just that, yearning for
a return
to some prior imagined time. But if we seek an objective
social
knowledge, then we cannot indulge our antipathies, and must
learn to
see these processes and changes as whole in themselves.
It is possible
to go into more detail,
and there is some justification for this. For example,
the
individual biography must be acknowledged. While we can
see great
trends in the social world, in the world cognized by the
discipline of
history, it remains a fact that this is experienced
individually.
The fact that there are apparently great
innovators in
history (Jefferson, Newton, Goethe, Gandhi etc.) needs not to
cause us
to overlook the existence of each individual life. These
individual lives are not irrelevancies, even though some
students of
history tend to see the individual as a passive canvass upon
which the
great and the mighty paint their deeds. For our purposes
it will
do to see the deeds of the significant as a kind of social
radiating
force - effects pass outward into the social organism from
these deeds.
Let us make
here a hypothesis.
Let us imagine that it is not just the great and
the mighty
who are essential in the vast streams of history, but also the
individuals. Let us imagine that history exists,
not for
itself, but for them. History, in this sense then, is a
created
context with a distinct purpose for the individual lives which
are
lived in each particular age. The great and the mighty
are called
to perform a service to this context, but they are not the
deeper cause
of it.
How could we
know if this is true?
We should begin
by calling to mind a
particular biography, of which the best is probably our own.
We can examine this biography and find therein any
number
of elements that are common to all biographies: life and
death, inner
and outer growth, moments of moral crisis, times of remorse
and guilt -
almost endless is what happens within the experientially rich
environment of an individual biography.
In our
particular time there is a very
significant common aspect to human biographies - one which is
quite
consistent with the various dynamic processes we have already
been
observing. One of the effects of the changes in
family and
community life, and in culture in general (this is more true
in the
industrial West, but is also emerging in the Third World), is
the
lessening of the coercive effect upon the individual of the
family's
and community's moral standards. As we have more
and more
emerged into the change of consciousness that began in the
15th
Century, there has been an increasing loss of the ability of
traditional ways to determine individual moral behavior.
This has not
gone unnoticed. For
example, in the cultural milieux of America there has emerged
a
particular form of television drama. It is best
exemplified
by the work of David Kelley, the quite prolific writer of most
of the
scripts for several television series: L. A. Law; Picket
Fences; Ally
McBeal and The Practice. In one of the episodes for
Picket
Fences, at the end, a lead character summarizes the situation,
where he
says in a few sentences: No one knows what is right to do
anymore, we
are all on our own.
We live in a
age of moral ambiguity,
which places us in life situations that compel our making
individual
choices, free of the older paternal security of an outside
source of
moral teaching. Moreover, this same age has been growing
its own
ways of being self aware of this very phenomena. For
example, in
the 12 Steps of Alcoholics Anonymous, in the basic idea of the
What
Would Jesus Do movement, and in Rudolf Steiner's book The
Philosophy of
Freedom, we find practical cognitions of this problem and how
the
individual can relate to it. The same underlying
source,
which creates for each individual in this age the possibility
of moral
freedom, arranges for the needed idea of it to be present for
our
support and edification.
We could say
this then about our age - it
is a womb for the development of individual moral freedon
through
processes of alchemical social crisis.
So we look at
the world, at its surfaces,
and see AIDS spreading all over the third world, we see
individuals and
groups trying to dominate the world economy, we see cultural
decay in
many of the arts, and we can have an almost endless list of
terrors and
horrors that brings deep pain of heart when we have to observe
them.
Yet, all of this is necessary for moral crisis to arise
in
individual biographies, without which the possibility of moral
freedom
cannot appear.
With these
ideas in mind, let us add to
our considerations: the future
.
As we have
noted, the above situation
really only is fully developed in the industrial West.
Now
so as to appreciate this condition, let me summarize it a bit.
We have
observed the increasing disolving
of the family and the community, from that cultural and moral
cohesion
they once enjoyed. Eventually we get the so-called
nuclear
family, the family values crisis, and other phenomena
connected to what
is essentially an end to Western Civilization.
Whoops, did he
really say that!?!
If we consider
that "civilization" is the
inside of something, rather than the outside, we will realize
that the
moral and value systems which engendered what we tend to call
Western
Civilization have been falling apart for some time.
In
fact, there must be birth and life and death to such complex
social
form structures as what we call "civilization".
Our studies
of history make clear the endings and beginnings of many of
these
complex organisms of social existence.
In fact, with
the discovery of the New
World a certain watershed was reached as regards the life
processes of
Western Civilization. What had been for centuries
written into
the cultures of various nations and peoples of the Old World
now had a
geographic gap to bridge, which it could not really do, for
the
Americas are not by nature a place hospitable to these last
remains of
quite old traditions. We could study Europe endlessly,
and never
really have a clue to what is to be born over time culturally
in the
Americas (for example, if we look just at the phenomena
emerging in the
present from America, we can see clearly quite unusual forces
are at
work).
But I am not
here going to attempt to
unfold these possibilities, for that would take us quite far
afield.
Rather the point of this is to realize that Western
Civilization
(the inward elements) has fallen, and its collapse outwardly
in its
institutions and infrastructures is bound to follow.
Yeats
had it quite right at the beginning of the 20th Century when
he wrote:
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; The ceremony of
innocence
is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst are
full of
passionate intensity."
Let me go into
this a bit more, so there
is no confusion. Just as there is a physical community,
there is
also the possibility of a community of ideas and values.
It
is this inner community which has been shattered through the
social
forces unleashed by scientific materialism.
Everyone wants
to go their own way, and this is true even in governments and
boards of
corporations. The individuals responsible for
managing our
most essential institutions can't find any longer a community
of values
by which they can form a cohesive and cooperative path into
the future.
Now it may
appear that they do find such
views, but if you listen closely to the language used in the
Babylon of
current political and economic discourse, you will see that
only in the
most superficial way is there any consensus.
Within these
superficial ideas one will find the flawed imaginations of the
present
(what are essentially political and economic myths).
These
flawed imaginations do not accord with social reality, and
actions
based upon them are thus doomed to failure. The
managers
don't understand the world they live in except in cliches and
myths,
and so the structures they try to create in response are
castles built
upon sand (for details on this see The Coming Collapse:
Civilization at
the Brink , these pages).
This vision is
a bit dark, for it only
sees the end of Western Civilization. But endings are
really only
transition points - social form (the life sphere of the social
organism) also can undergo metamorphosis. We are not
falling off
a cliff into an abyss (although individually and inwardly we
do face a
spiritual crisis which is like standing at the edge of an
abyss - see:
The Abyss of Aloneness , these pages). Instead we face
social
transformation. In an age which is hallmarked by
the need
for individual biographies to face intimate moral crisis
sufficient to
create the possibility of a kind of inner awakening (Rudolf
Steiner
calls this the Consciousness Soul age, and the Hopi Indians of
America's Southwest call it the Age of Purification ), we
should expect
nothing on the macro social level but a mirror image of this
individual
crisis. What first appears most clearly in the
industrial West,
must go onward to encompass the whole world, and the whole
world will
burn from this.
Why?
Because the
individual biographies
require it. The need for moral crisis is a great
hunger in
the inwardness of individuals. They are drawn to
it like a
moth to a flame, for in it they sense the latent image of
their own
yearnings for freedom. Each "I am" wants complete
antonomy,
particularly in the inner realms - in the realms of moral
freedon and
of self created world view. We want no one to tell us
what to
think, or what is right to do.
To have a more concrete picture, think about it this way. The AIDS crisis, for example, does not arise because some madman has attempted to destroy the world by passing out some kind of biological weapon (although such may accompany the actual collapse of civilization), it arises because of millions of individual moral decisions. The acts of individuals in this sense are a kind of "suctional", or scuptural, social force, drawing the stream of events into a certain kind of order through their massive common nature. Rather than the great and mighty just radiating effects on the passive canvass of the masses, it is the needs of the individual biographies, through taking common form, that pulls the world into various kinds of crisis, toward which, in response, might well appear those few great souls we hope will guide us through the burning social fires of purification (see Strange Fire: the Death, and the Resurrection, of Modern Civilization , these pages)
As we can
imagine, the more this develops
the more we enter into a condition of a kind of social chaos.
Modern individuality seeks to completely overcome any
aspect of
social form which would inhibit this development. The
two are
absolutely necessary for each other. Rampaging
individuality has
to have the weakest form of surrounding community. The
less
cohesive the community, the greater potential field of action
for the
unfolding of the individual "I am".
There are, of
course, contrary impulses
and we should acknowledge them. Some people have
not the
inner strength to pursue such a goal. Whether through
fear, or
through a need to be a part of something else, they will then
not heed
the call of their own "I am". Some others will see
themselves as
guardians of traditional ways, and in their own individual
form of
moral crisis, choose to interfere in the choices of others.
Many
others, of course, faced with moral choice will choose the
Dark, rather
than the Light. The varieties of possibilities are
nearly as
endless as are the number of individuals participating in this
Age.
We need then to
be inwardly prepared for
outer events to get much worse. At the same time
we need to
have what is essentially a social aesthetic. Just
as the
catastrophic aspects of Nature rise to the heights of the most
dramatic
beauty, so life on the Earth was very well characterized by
the Bard,
when he wrote: "All the world is a stage and all the men and
women
merely players." What in human history that is great
drama has
its origin in the thoughts of an equally great dramatist.
So we
play our parts, and with grace and effort we might also
discover how to
have a say as to the staging and nature of the next act - the
form and
qualities of the new civilization.
The burning
fire of the death of one
civilization is the fiery womb for the embryonic phoenix of
the next
one. But given the nature of what has brought
about the end
of the old - that is the appearance of the striving for inner
autonomy
- there certainly must be an opportunity for this to become a
creative
power giving new form to what emerges. The danger is to
be so
involved in issues of survival, that the organizing of new
social forms
is left to old powers and their habitual patterns of thought.
The fundamental
issue is one already well
understood - how to have communities in which our hard earned
personal
inner autonomy can be maintained. Clearly this must be
possible,
but how to do this will mean drawing something further out the
mystery
of our own "I am".
This is then
one of the challenges we
face - a very creative challenge. Since we can see
the
coming of a certain intensity of social chaos, this does not
mean we
have to be passive in the face of it. What the future
really is,
is not the shape of the trials by which one age is ending.
Rather, the real future is something we create out of
the new
capacities gifted to us by this Strange Fire of the Age of
Purification.
So, the future,
as always, lies in choice
- to stand by passively wringing our hands at the terrible
conditions
of the world, or to take what this rite of passage has created
within
us, and use this new moral strength to forge a more human
civilization.
Of course, if
we wish to act, we must act
not just as individuals, but as communities.
Various
possibilities along these lines will be found on this website,
especially in: Civil Society: its potential and its mystery ,
but also
in The Plan .
******************************
The Coming Collapse:
-
civilization on the brink -
This is
something we know instinctively
is happening.
We can't help but notice the odd kinds of decay everywhere. Somehow things keep getting worse instead of getting better. If we have some understanding of complex systems, we know that when certain kinds of basic changes in the totality are about to occur, the whole system begins to oscillate in a rather wild fashion. This goes on until some kind of crisis point, after which the whole finds a new equilibrium. In a sense, the principles of order that previously gave our civilization its cohesion have become exhausted. They can no longer provide stability. Something new must now be called forth. Will it be based in the darkness of our lower impulses, or arise in light of our highest hopes. In such
circumstances we approach a great battle. What will happen is not fixed, although one can say that we do live in interesting times.
It might seem
like this is predicting the
future. It is not. It might seem like
this is
about paranoid conspiracies, or efforts by elite groups to
control the
future. It is not. It even might seem
to be
about some kind of religious fantasy. But again,
it is not.
It is about
rather predictable things
though. About systems failures. About
structures that
reach the end of their life. About people
not
understanding what they are doing, and the inevitable
consequences of arrogance and stupidity. It is about
very natural
and expectable happenings in the life cycle of a
civilization,
and about how people react, or don't, in a crisis.
Let's consider
a very concrete example.
For a long time
now, human beings have
been trying to discover the secrets of living organisms.
Whole departments of universities are devoted to
these
studies - zoology, botany, micro-biology to name but a few.
With the discovery of DNA in the middle of the
20th
Century, it was assumed that a giant stride forward had been
made.
In fact, many think that we have found, in DNA (and
related work)
the fundamentals of all life.
Based upon this
work, human beings have
begun to attempt to engineer living organisms. DNA
has been
altered in plants and animals, sometimes for pure research,
but most
often in the search for profit. Huge corporations have
spent
billions trying to find profitable ways of applying this kind
of
understanding of life processes. Patents have been
applied
for and received, and the new (altered DNA) organisms have
been sold
widely as products, especially in agriculture.
We now have out
in Nature organisms that
have been lifted out of the web of life, altered in a
laboratory, and
then returned and set free in the womb of these very
complicated and
delicate ecology's. Does anyone really think we
have a
mature enough understanding to act in this way?
Clearly we have
not. For the
fact is that already we have had altered plant organisms
acting in the
environment in unpredicted ways. In spite of the
assurances of
leading scientists, working for these corporations, our
knowledge is
clearly limited, and unwanted consequences are already
occuring.
Here is a link to an article on problems with
altered corn.
And, here is a link to Barry Commoner's Harper's
Article:
Unraveling the DNA Myth - The Spurious Foundation of Genetic
Engineering.
This is a
situation which will only get
worse.
Basically we
have profit driven
organizations seeking to apply deep alterations of the natural
environment at the same time as they believe in an illusion.
They think they understand the natural world, but
do not.
What is worse is that they have every reason for
appreciating the limits of their knowledge, but greed exceeds
caution.
Here is the testimony of a leading scientist on
the
scientific background for the corn situation:
STATEMENT FOR
THE FIFRA SCIENTIFIC
ADVISORY PANEL OPEN MEETING ON STARLINK CORN
Arlington,
Virginia November 28, 2000
JOHN HAGELIN, Ph.D. Director, Institute of Science,
Technology
and Public Policy
"I speak to you
as a scientist who is
striving to ensure that our best scientific knowledge be
applied
for the solution--and prevention--of society's problems. I am
a nuclear
physicist who has published extensively in superstring
theory
and, during the last three elections, I have been the
Presidential
candidate of the Natural Law Party.
"I want to
address an issue much deeper
than whether the CRY9C protein in StarLink corn is likely to
be
allergenic. I want to address the assumptions that underlie
the entire
agricultural bioengineering enterprise. I am deeply concerned
that life
scientists are implementing bioengineering technologies
without
adequately understanding the lessons we have learned from the
physical
sciences. One of the key revelations of modern physics is that
phenomena unfold in a far less linear and predictable fashion
than
eighteenth and nineteenth century thinkers assumed.
Today we know
that there are inherent limitations on our ability to make
precise
predictions about the behavior of a system, especially for
microscopic
systems and nonlinear systems of great complexity.
"Numerous
eminent molecular biologists
recognize that DNA is a complex nonlinear system and that
splicing
foreign genes into the DNA of a food-yielding organism can
cause
unpredictable side effects that could harm the health of the
human
consumer. Yet, the genetic engineering of our food--and
the
widespread presence of genetically altered foods in American
supermarkets--is based on the premise that the effects of
gene-splicing
are so predictable that all bio-engineered foods can be
presumed safe
unless proven otherwise. This refusal to recognize the risks
of
unintended and essentially unpredictable negative side effects
is just
plain bad science. It is astounding that so many biologists
are
attempting to impose a paradigm of precise, linear,
billiard-ball
predictably onto the behavior of DNA, when physics has long
since
dislodged such a paradigm from the microscopic realm and
molecular
biological research increasingly confirms its inapplicability
to the
dynamics of genomes.
"Moreover, the
premise of predictability
is not just scientifically unsound; it is morally
irresponsible. The
safety of our food is being put at risk in a cavalier, if not
callous,
fashion, not only in disregard of scientific knowledge, but in
disregard of recent technological history.
"Here, too,
lessons should have been
learned from the physical sciences. Time and again, the
overhasty
application of nuclear technologies led to numerous health and
environmental disasters. For example, in the early days
of
nuclear technology, the rush to commercialize led to the sale
of radium
tipped wands designed to remove facial hair. Nine months later
the
cancers came. Similarly, the failure to comprehend the
full range
of risks and to proceed with prudence has led to many
disasters in the
nuclear power industry.
"In the case of
genetic engineering, even
greater caution is called for: a nuclear disaster only lasts
10,000
years, whereas gene pollution is
forever--self-perpetuating and
irreversible.
"The
irresponsible behavior that
permitted the marketing of bio-engineered foods has not been
limited to
the scientific community, but includes the executive
branch of
the federal government. The FDA's internal records reveal that
its own
experts clearly recognized the potential for gene-splicing to
induce
production of unpredicted toxins and carcinogens in the
resultant food.
These same records reveal that these warnings were covered up
by FDA
political appointees operating under a White House directive
to promote
the bio-tech industry. It is unconscionable that the FDA
claimed
itself unaware of any information showing that bio-engineered
foods
differ from others, when its own files are filled with such
information
from its scientific staff. And it is unconscionable that it
permits
such novel foods to be marketed based on the claim they are
recognized
as safe by an overwhelming consensus within the scientific
community,
when it knows such a consensus does not exist.
"The StarLink
fiasco further demonstrates
the shoddiness of the government's regulation, since the
system failed
to keep even an unapproved bio-engineered crop out of our
food. Indeed,
the contamination was discovered not by the government, but by
public
interest groups. The FDA had no clue and had taken no measures
to
monitor. This incident also demonstrates how difficult it will
be to
remove a bio-engineered product from our food supply if it is
eventually found to be harmful and, therefore, how important
it is to
prevent the introduction of new ones and to phase out those
currently
in use.
"It is high
time that science and the
truth be respected, and that the false pretenses enabling the
commercialization of bio-engineered foods be acknowledged and
abolished. I call upon the members of this panel to uphold
sound
science so that you can hold your own heads up as the facts
about the
hazards of bio-engineered food become increasingly well known.
I
call upon you not only to resist the pressures to approve the
pesticidal protein in StarLink Corn; I call upon you to
honestly
acknowledge the inherent risks of genetic engineering and to
affirm
that, due to these risks, neither StarLink nor any other
bioengineered
food can be presumed safe at the present stage of our
knowledge." (end
of quote)
For a deeper
understanding of these
issues go to:
http://www.southerncrossreview.org/19/gmcrops.htm
Let us return
to the initial question,
which concerns the collapse of our present civilization.
In the above
example, we have looked at a
situation where those who understand our limits of knowledge
are being
ignored by those who prefer their own profits and powers over
the risks
to the rest of us. This is essentially a moral
failure, or
better yet a moral weakness in the fundamental structures of
our
society. This problem of moral weakness in the social
order has
been discussed in detail in the essay Basic Conceptions:
fundamentals
of a new social view .
In this case we
have not just a simple
moral failure, of the kind that happens all the time in the
relations
of individuals to each other, but rather a fundamental
structural
dissonance at macro levels of the social organism.
The food
supply of our civilization has become dominated by
agribusiness, which
continues to demonstrate that it is incapable of acting for
the benefit
of the whole. While Civil Society (in its present
configuration) opposes this, it currently lacks the capacity
to heal
the dissonance.
Now it is not
the thesis of this essay to
suggest that this macro dissonance is going to be the cause of
a fall
of our civilization. The point is otherwise.
This particular
dissonance is an example
of a certain type of flaw or disharmony in the social
organism.
These kinds flaws involve a gap between our knowledge
and the
nature of reality. We believe we know something, but the
reality
is different. Our ignorance means we will error in
our
acts. In a civilization, this type of gap occurs
at
multiple levels, and the more fundamental the functional level
at which
the gap exists, the worse the consequence when reality refuses
to
conform to our ignorance.
If one looks
around at the current
phenomena of our civilization, a number of such fundamental
functional
dissonances can be seen to exist. Moreover, they
frequently
interact and often are interdependent. A collapse
of one
system, may weaken, or even bring about the collapse of
others.
Before taking
this any further, let's
take a look at some other forms of dissonance in our current
civilization.
While this next
is also connected to
science, it does not take the form of a gap between knowledge
and
reality. It does concern something we all know
about, which
we recognize as the creation and proliferation of weapons of
mass
destruction.
Now there is a
level where this involves
a gap between knowledge and reality, namely in that we created
these
weapons telling ourselves that it would be possible to contain
or
control their use. This is a kind of psychological
illusion
- this belief that we can somehow keep these weapons from
being used.
History certainly does not support such a view,
and the
fact that their use is to many "unthinkable", we know that
they will be
used. The atomic bomb has been used in Japan, and
bacteriological weapons were used in Iraq and Iran. The
real
foolishness is to not expect them to be used. In
fact, if
there is a serious environmental collapse, or an economic
collapse, the
likelihood of the use of weapons of mass destruction (now that
so many
nations - and even some individuals or small groups - have
them)
increases.
Of course,
there are efforts (at the time
of this writing, March 7th, 2003, the potential war of the USA
against
Iraq over its weapons of mass destruction looms, and North
Korea
threatens nuclear attack against the USA), by various
governments to
solve these problems, the fact remains that their use is much
more
likely then their not being used.
Weapons are
really made to be used, and
why anyone is surprise when they are used is certainly beyond
reason.
Genetic research has weapons implications, as does the
emerging
research into nanotechnology. Cyber-warfare is certainly being
planned,
if not covertly active in the present. Everywhere there
are
belligerents, and those seeking to dominate. We can
expect that
these weapons will be used.
Especially
delicate our are economic
relations. We are all aware now that the dot.com
revolution
turned out to be just another stock bubble (a lot of hot air
and no
real wealth being generated). It also has come to the
fore that
Corporate managers have taken to all manner of interesting
ways to
falsify their balance sheets in order to inflate the value of
stock
(and thus line their own pockets selling inflated stock before
the
truth catches up to them). Everywhere in the financial
world,
choices are being made on the basis of short term gains, with
little
thought to the long range consequences.
As it says in
the index page of this
website: "Civilization burns". In almost every field of
endeavor,
where there has arise large institutional social forms, basic
flaws are
emerging, and in what we have depended upon for social
coherence is now
showing all manner of "cracks".
It is not a
question of if the collapse
comes, but only of when and how bad does it get.
Civilizations
fall for reasons, and ours
includes as a basic element of its collapse, the excesses of
individuals in pursuit of their own pleasures and vices.
In a
sense we suffer from too much individuality, and not enough
community.
This is probably why cancer is a disease common to this
time, for
cancer involves a part of the whole taking a course of growth
all on
its own. In our civilization, all manner of
individuals and
groups want something for themselves, and the rest be damned.
Their selfishness is like a cancerous growth in the body
of the
community.
Elsewhere (The
Future), it is discussed
how the slow collapse of social form within Western
Civilization has
led to a change of consciousness, in particular the
possibility of a
new level of individual moral freedom. The point here is
to
recognize that, while the coming collapse is clearly a tragedy
of the
first order, it is also a necessary step in those organic and
spiritual/moral processes by which one form of civilization
passes away
so that another, new and more developed, form may arise.
There is within
the essence of the human
being that which is eternal. It is from this source that
morality
and Civil Society arise. It is from this source that Art
enters
the world. The world's various religions are patterns
woven in
the texture of history revealing the spirit hidden within.
Even
in our own consciousness, in the very act of thinking, our own
eternal
spirit engages in a dialog with the Eternal Spirit of the
Universe.
The Burning
Fire of the Day of
Purification, which is the name the Hopi Prophecy gives to
this time of
ending and beginnings, shows in all its details that the
coming
collapse has purpose and meaning, and that we are being
invited to
cross through this Rite of Passage, hand in hand, on the
threshold of a
dream. The age which gave birth to all manner of
excesses of
individualism is dying, and we now stand together at the Dawn
of a New
Age, where cooperation and community hold the true and only
keys to
survival.
******************************
Beyond Columbine:
- appreciating the patterns of social meaning
hidden in the
Columbine tragedy -
Here we examine
the unseen patterns in
the social context in which all the participants
in this
tragedy found themselves embeded, yet did not recognize or
understand.
While the social organism has many properties of a
macro
nature, most of us live our lives in much smaller contexts.
Just as it is possible to find ways to bring
social health
to our large social organizations, so is it possible (in fact
quite
necessary for the health of the whole) to bring social health
to our
local communities. For it is just here that the
sources of
darkness in the soul are best comprehended and healed.
On April 20,
1999, two young men ages 17
and 18, named Eric Harris and Dyland Klebold, entered their
high school
in Littleton Colorado in the United States of America,
carrying several
guns, pipe bombs and propane bombs. They had apparently
hoped to
kill hundreds of students, and destroy the large and complex
school
building itself. They succeeded in killing 14 students
(including
themselves), 1 teacher, and caused relatively small amounts of
physical
damage (fortunately the propane bombs did not work - had they
worked,
huge explosive fire bombs would have gone off in a lunch room
filled
with four to five hundred young people - so perhaps we can see
a
miracle as well as a tragedy). Another 20 plus students
were
injured, some permanently.
About five days
after this event, while I
was watching an analysis of these two young men on CNN, with
my 16 year
old son, he said: "That could have been me", revealing his
identification with the two young men. As we
explored this
over the next few days it became apparent that my son was just
one of
thousands of high school students, who saw Harris and Klebold
as
victims of a social climate of hate directed by the so-called
jocks and
the popular toward the individual or unusual. Moreover,
these
young people were clear that they felt that their parents and
teachers
were responsible for this diseased social milieux that was so
painful
to so many. The internet played a crucial role in this
last
element, in that without it, these thousands of young people
would not
have known of their common feelings.
Clearly this
was an event that had social
meaning far beyond its surface nature. Even today, as I
write
these words almost 18 months after this tragedy, one can find
millions
of words and hundreds of web sites (if not thousands) on the
Internet,
devoted to aspects of this event. In the essay below I
hope to
add another dimension to the struggle to understand.
I have often
thought of certain kinds of
tragic and violent human events as not unlike, in certain
characteristics, natural events, such as sudden lightning
storms or
tornadoes. I don't mean to suggest that this is so from
their
inside, but rather in how we can relate to them. For we
do have
to make some kind of relationship, to find for ourselves some
kind of
personal sense-meaning.
I have in mind
these natural events,
because for those of us who experience these matters at a
distance,
such tragic human events are not within our will powers to
either
determine the causes or ameliorate the effects. We are
too far
removed.
Sometimes I
form a picture of a kind of
psychic storm, crashing and thundering across a given inner
social
landscape, easily as powerful and dynamic as a sense
perceptible
thunder storm and the following flash flood that destroys
lives and
property before one has time to really draw a breath.
What
is interesting in all this, is that both with the physical
cataclysmic
nature event, and the social cataclysmic event - people not
only want
some way to predict these events, they believe such prediction
might be
possible. One of the deep questions asked about
Columbine, is how
could the parents, teachers and law enforcement officials not
see what
was coming?
I believe the
existence of this question
is probably the most crucial fact to emerge from this tragedy.
Let me make this as clear as possible - the existence of
this
question itself is an essential fact of the event.
People believe
that someone could or should have seen this coming.
People
believe that what was going on within the inner life of these
young men
was not so mysterious as to be beyond human knowledge and
cognition.
Yet, the fact was that in spite of many indications (a
violence
promising web site, known criminal activity, etc.) no one
anticipated
what came to be.
I would like us
now to begin to slowly
step back from the immediate events themselves. My own
considerations of these problems have lead me to understand
that the
answer to this so poignant question is to be found more in the
social
context, than in the immediate particular facts. The
failure to
anticipate what these young men were contemplating is a
phenomena
reflecting something of the nature of modern social
communities - for
this event was not alone, but rather was a member of a whole
class of
similar violent events that have been happening in communities
all over
America. Moreover, these violent events have been
endemic in
minority communities for more years then it is they have been
happening
in white communities. Guns have been coming to schools
for
decades now, and being used there. It is only in the
last decade
that this crossed over into white communities and thus became,
in this
still racist society, a media event as well.
At the same
time as we recognize this,
let us keep in mind that the central question from the
standpoint of
this essay, concerns why the community is unable to perceive
and deal
with this excess among the young. We are looking at the
community, not the individuals who violate its norms.
One of the
facts, about human psychology
that we know, is that very often, in the absence of its idea,
phenomena
will arise that cannot be perceived because we have no word or
concept
for it. For example, if we take a young child and show
them a
field of flowers, they will only see (as parts of the whole
experience)
those differences and distinctions for which we have given
them words.
Oh, they might see that something brown is in the center
of
something yellow, and that the shapes of some parts is more
like
leaves, while others look more like little bulbs. But
they won't
"see" what these parts mean in terms of the whole and what
their
function is.
In a like
fashion, Western Culture has
many ideas about human inner life - about motives and
complexes and
passions and flaws - but not everyone knows all these ideas
(many of
which conflict with each other), and most ordinary communities
know
very little. In fact, most communities have social rules
which
suggest that ones inner life is a matter of utmost privacy, so
that
even though many gossip, few have real knowledge of what we
all seek to
maintain as our own very personal and secret inner territory.
We
may see the consequences of the psychic storms crashing
through a
family, but we really don't know the true texture and
structure of what
is going on inside the soul landscape of the individual
members.
This does not
mean we are totally
ignorant, however, for many of us know to some degree our own
inner
environment, and will usually be able to at least project, an
approximation of what is happening inside another person, from
out of
our own experiences.
Let us now
review some of the above with
a bit of a different idea. We could ask the question if
whether
what we know, in any of the above instances, is either the
truth or
reality. Does Western Culture know the truth of human
inner life?
Do communities possess such knowledge? What about
individuals?
With these questions I mean to wonder whether we, as a slowly more self knowing species, know all that there is to know about human inner life, or human nature, either in general or in specific individual instances. Are we not like that child in a field of flowers, knowing some things about what we see when we survey the inner landscape of our families and communities, but not nearly knowing all that we might? Does the language we use, whether inherited from the so-called professionals or not, really enable us to see the hidden psychic storm clouds gathering inside another person's mind? In fact, does not the existence of the Columbine tragedy, and its relatives, suggest rather starkly the truth that we exist in a condition of almost complete ignorance?
Many would not
like this conclusion.
Practitioners, of much of scienc
e, and much of those disciplines
which wish they were science (psychiatry and psychology),
believe they
know a great deal about mind, emotions, brain chemistry,
emotional
evolution, cognition and so forth. Who could argue with
this
assertion? The whole weight of knowledge of Western
Culture
descends on the side of this idea in such a way as to suggest
that we
know a great deal and are close to knowing all (genetic
manipulation of
states of consciousness).
Well, yes, of
course, who could doubt the
power of science to know and determine the truth?
Yet, we still
have wars, child abuse,
race crimes - an almost endless list of social horrors.
Science
can make a claim for understanding the world of matter with
some degree
of success, for we live surrounded by the resulting
technological
achievements. At the same time, a claim of success in
matters of
understanding the inner life of human beings will not stand
this test
of practical success. Science, and its acolytes, may
claim to
know, but in practice they have little to offer.
Something is
missing from their world
view.
What science is
blind to is clear, for
almost everywhere this question spills out, the same dynamics
arise.
For all of human history, and pre-history, human beings
have had
a spiritual view of themselves and of the nature of life and
existence.
That is, up until the arrival of science. Science
has
unfolding its powers of knowledge in such a way that it has
pushed back
a spiritual view of the human being, and frequently denigrated
such a
view. A revisiting of the various old and ongoing
debates is
unnecessary, as this essay is simply going to proceed on the
basis of
what happens to our practical understanding of individual,
family and
community life if we just re-include the spiritual.
What science
has pushed away, and
systematically left out, we will reinsert and see if something
practical results. The test is not to be found in
arguments and
learned papers, but rather in how we conduct our social
existence.
If knowledge of the spiritual allows our social life to
improve,
what more do we need to know?
Eric Harris and
Dyland Llebold were young
men, members of families, parts of a community and students at
a
respected local high school. Yet, they felt invisible,
unknowns
in the social circles in which they found themselves -
unrecognized
differentiated flowers in a field of apparent sameness.
This they
decided to change, in the most horrible fashion we could
imagine.
Why didn't the
community see them?
Perhaps the
community itself was ill
served by the larger surrounding cultural influences.
Perhaps the
absence of the spiritual in the understanding of the world
means not
just different names for the phenomena of human inner life,
but more
crucially the absence of something else, something which we
might call
wisdom. The psychiatrists and psychologists and teachers
and law
enforcement professionals were all experts, but is expertise
the same
as wisdom? Is it possible the community had knowledge,
but lacked
wise understanding.
How could
communities arise in this time
of great scientific knowledge and expertise, and lose the
capacity for
the wise understanding of its members? Is it a basic
flaw, or
something in the natural order of social existence?
I would now
like to sketch out certain
facts that can be seen when someone includes the spiritual in
their
examination of social conditions. In this process we
will create
some new terms for the dynamics of social life, some new names
for the
parts of the whole of the field of flowers of our common
community life.
Imagine, if you
will, the panorama of
recent human history as having an outward visible structure,
and an
inward invisible structure. We know the outer elements
in the
many stories we have concerning persons and events as this
history has
unfolded itself over the last and most recent millennia.
If you
will, however, picture behind these stories something else
happening,
something that leaves its traces in the outer stories, but is
of a
nature not visible to the mind in the same way as the events.
Consider that
human inner life is not
fixed, immobile, or forever known and formed. Rather, it
too,
like the biological organism, evolves. The inner
organism changes
as does the outer visible organism.
In order to
discuss this we need some
terms. These terms can be fairly arbitrary if we wish -
they
could even be nonsense words. Yet, we do have certain
historically used terms that will not only serve, but whose
use it will
help us to resurrect - in this case the terms soul and spirit.
In
the age of science these have come to be seen as metaphors,
but not as
realities. For our purposes, let us consider them as
possible
realities, whose character and nature will enable us to do
that act we
so much desire - namely to reinsert wisdom into our social
existence.
To make these matters most concrete to the individual reader, let us consider that soul is what we call conscious and unconscious experience, whether it be the experience of the senses, of thoughts, of feelings, impulses of will and all the other aspects of inner life our language and culture recognizes. Spirit, on the other hand, is not experience but that which experiences. Soul is the unseen content known to the knower and actor - the human spirit. I don't know your experience, but I do know experience and I do know myself as a self. I interpret the world (usually, if I am not a sociopath or other seriously ill individual) as containing other individuals of like nature - who also have a self and experience.
In order to
understand the social context
of the Columbine tragedy, it is necessary to appreciate how
soul and
spirit are currently evolving over time. It is this
invisible
order which helps us appreciate the need for the return of
wisdom to
our social life. This understanding of the evolution of
consciousness need not be theoretical, because, as mentioned
previously, these changes have left their traces all over our
outer
history.
A particular
change occurred in this
invisible organization around the 14th century. Prior to
that
time the soul was more dominant than the spirit in the
dynamics of the
inner life of the individual. Experience was more
determinative
of self, than self was determinative of experience.
Among the
Scholastics of the 12th Century, we find the word
participation in
frequent use. The soul felt embedded in the world, not
separate
from it as we do today. Thus we have people with the
names,
John's son, or Telliard de Chardin, that is of a certain
place.
We were part of the community and of nature, and much
less
individuals.
Other facts
point toward these prior
conditions. In a book by the writer Michael Dorris, The
Broken
Cord, he writes of an American Indian language in which it is
impossible to say "I hit you", but only "we hit us". The
ideal of
ancient Taoism, so often repeated in the television series
Kung Fu, is:
"Be at one with nature", for it is the recollection of the
taoist
experience that self and experience - self consciousness and
consciousness - (spirit and soul) was in a state of
integration with
outer nature.
Yet, this was
not a stable and fixed
condition, but rather one which changed. Spirit became
stronger,
more individual, and began to determine soul, rather than be
its semi
prisoner. As a consequence soul itself emerged more from
the
surrounding environment, both social and physical. This
also
brought historical changes in its wake, changes we can
observe.
For example,
science arises from this
change, for now it is possible, nay mandatory, for the self
(spirit) to
see the world as over there, and no longer something of which
one is a
part. This leads to a kind of onlooker consciousness, or
what
some have called the onlooker separation. It is as
onlookers,
rather than as participants, that we begin to develop modern
natural
science.
A rather
remarkable fact arises at this
time. For the first time in the history of art,
paintings begin
to exhibit space. Prior to this time there was no
perspective in
paintings, then everywhere, slowly to be sure, space
arises as
the change of consciousness that is everywhere occurring takes
place.
There are many other changes, far to many to list in
this short
article. The reader who wants to go more deeply into
this is
invited to direct their attention to: Art and Human
Consciousness by
Gotfried Richter; and, Saving the Appearances: a study in
idolatry by
Owen Barfield.
It is the
changes in this inner landscape
of the soul and spiritual life of humanity that has lead to
most of the
current social conditions. This is a complicated
relationship,
and I will only sketch out those matters connected to events
about
which we tend to have common knowledge.
The increase in
the powers of
individuality, of a more dominate inner spirit nature, begins
to affect
the course of social life from within. Sons and
daughters slowly
lose interest in following in the footsteps of their parents,
until in
our time it is a social given that the children will take
their own
paths.
The view of the
world that flows from the
onlooker separation results in a science which proceeds to see
the
world as an object, empty of consciousness and being.
All the old
ideas of Nature, as a place of spiritual workings, die, to be
replaced
by pictures of natural events as predictable clockworks.
Demeter
and Persephone disappear, and laws of gravity and particle
interactions
replace this old view. The social structures, once held
together
by these common religious impulses and understandings, begins
to fail.
Science brings
forth great powers over
the material world. From the technological implications,
the
industrial revolution arises, which also has a social effect.
Villages and farms no longer contain the greater
concentration of
people, as cities and industrial concerns now draw the
majority of the
labor pool to their environs. The father (see Robert
Bly's Iron
John) and then finally, in our time, the mother, are pulled by
the
operation of economic necessities from the home.
Children raise
themselves now in the industrial West.
Language itself
undergoes many changes.
The idea of evil comes less to the fore, and individual
characteristics become more the product of bio-chemical and
electrical
properties of the brain. The individual grows stronger,
and the
ability of community to restrain it through social pressure
lessens.
At the same time we are given a picture of a mechanical
human
being, who is more a product of his genetic heritage and less
a product
of his own freedom and responsibility. In the
psycho-babel of
modern life, we become victims of our untrainable inner life,
not the
participants in an inner battle between good and evil.
We know a
great deal about the material dynamics of brain
neurophysiology and
almost nothing about how to have inner discipline in a
practical sense.
In outer social
life this loss is named
"the family values crisis" and becomes a political issue,
rather than
an issue of possible human knowledge and wise understanding.
Science having become disconnected from Art and Religion
lacks
the resources to appreciate what is happening.
Yet, the
evolution of consciousness is
not ended, but is rather a constant ongoing process of growth
and/or
possible decay. The diminution of the power of the
community to
determine individual moral behavior becomes an alchemical
social
crucible for another development. A free moral
conscience is born
within the self-conscious spirit.
The phrase, "do
the right thing" begins
to be replaced with the phrase "do your own thing". A
great
debate over the right to life and freedom of choice arises
within
political life around the legal abortion question.
In one place, a
man writes a book called
The Philosophy of Freedom, bringing out in full consciousness
these
delicate inner issues. In another place, two drunks
found a
movement called Alcoholics Anonymous, in which the same
problems are
approached in terms of terrible real life experience. In
a third
place, a young man starts a change among the ordinary
Christians, with
his "what would Jesus do" movement. Self determined
moral
freedom, as distinct from acquiescence to community standards,
tries to
emerge everywhere in the twentieth century, from its beginning
to its
end.
And at
Columbine High School, in April of
1999, two every angry young men scream with the most horrible
violence
imaginable - "we too are free spirits!", to a community
blinded by
expertise and lamed by the absence of wisdom.
Harris and
Klebold, besides the obvious,
share much kinship with the canaries coal miners used to carry
into the
mines. The dangerous mine gases would kill or cause
unconsciousness in the canaries, providing, sometimes,
sufficient
warning for the miners to escape. Harris and Klebold are
our
"sensitives" to invisible changes in soul and spirit not yet
recognized
consciously in our communities and social life. They
knew they
had more value than that which was reflected back to them by
their
social environment. But, the same lame and retarded
social
structure could also not give them what they needed to
understand about
themselves. They looked inside at the dark, and when it looked
back at
them they were undone.
There was a
time in Europe, and certainly
it is part of the spiritual wisdom of the original peoples of
the
Americas, that the shadow or double or doppleganger of the
human being
was recognized as real. Knowledge of evil was not wished
away by
thought structures that made of soul a determined mechanism
and of
spirit a helpless victim in the face of genetically fixed
characteristics.
To speak of
soul and spirit is merely to
point in the direction of a whole field of human knowledge
desperately
needed in our time for the healing and future meaning of our
common
social life. How much further tragedy will it take to
wake human
societies up from the dreams and sleep concerning the failure
of
scientific materialism to render practical aid to the
understanding of
social existence? Columbine speaks to us in the
strongest social
language possible. What comes next if we remain locked
in the
illusory trap of expertise and the resulting absence of
wisdom?
Let us consider
this last point more
closely as we drawn near the end of this essay.
Expertise
places knowledge outside the
individual, and only within the realm of someone trained.
But a
community is a whole, and at its core are fathers and mothers
(hopefully), sisters and brothers, grandmothers and
grandfathers, and
all manner of little children. If I say to a mother and
a father
that they should deny their own instincts because we live in
an age of
knowledge and education and training - i.e. if we say
constantly, as we
do today, that who you are as a person is only a relatively
empty
mechanical organism that has to be trained in order to know,
how is a
father or a mother to appreciate what might be latent in them
as self
knowing beings of soul and spirit. Our education turns
off as
much as it teaches. Our idol is the Einstein, the great
intellect, and not the wise old woman and man, the
grandfathers and
grandmothers of American Indian cultural traditions. Is
not this
same problem more and more true all over the world?
One of
America's great wise men, Emerson,
wrote: "In self trust all virtues are comprehended".
Over the last
couple hundred years,
humanity has quite systematically begun the destruction of
most of its
traditional social structures. One could lament this,
but only if
one isn't paying attention. What is new cannot emerge in
the face
of a coherent old. Tradition always carries the danger
of keeping
the new and coming essential from entering in. The
evolution of
consciousness has brought about a new condition in the inner
life -
soul and spirit have been strongly reconfigured and the
resulting
social consequences have yet to be cognized, appreciated and
taken
account of.
One might
wonder at this point -
shouldn't the next matter be an exposition of how communities
should
move forward in the light of the realities and new conditions.
Yet it is precisely this attitude that is of the old.
One
is just substituting more expertise and placing it upon the
basis of
some kind of superior spiritual knowledge. On the
contrary,
wisdom arises within the given social context itself, out of
that
context, and not through the imagined illumination from other
outside
sources.
A community,
such as Columbine, doesn't
need outside help, but rather it needs trust and encouragement
to
discover what is true for it. It is only from within a
given
social situation that real wisdom arises, because wisdom comes
from the
reflection on life of those living it. Wisdom is almost
the
opposite of expertise - the latter being something one goes
away to
learn. Wisdom is inherent in life, a natural endowment.
We
grow it out of ourselves, not from a book or a teacher,
however
enlightened.
In a sense, in
these last days of Western
Civilization, we are all trapped in the ideas of a most
powerful recent
past - the ideas and ideals of natural science, with its anti
spiritual
materialist orientation. This relatively new tradition
has
overpowered most of the best of the old. But in
fostering the
ideal of expertise, it makes impossible wise social existence.
Wise social existence needs thinking which is free of
any
tradition at all, whether it is apparently modern, such as
Steiner's
anthroposophy, fairly young such as natural science, or much
older.
Let us come at
this once again, in the
context of a certain question. We could ask: Does
knowledge of
the kind needed exist - that is knowledge that would have lead
to
understanding and appreciating these young men before they
fell into
the black hole of soul/spiritual ignorance?
It is not
enough merely to have stated in
this essay that if wisdom was returned to our communities,
much would
be different. We live in an age of very concrete
knowledge of all
kinds. Science, even though oriented materialistically,
is not,
in its own nature, in error. Science puts forward a very
basic
view as regards the search for truth. It asks this: If
one wishes
to assert the truth of a thing, then it is necessary to show
how that
truth was obtained, and in such a way that others may discover
it as
well.
Any new wisdom
should be able to pass
this test.
If we reflect,
in a concrete way, upon
the family and community life of these young men, we have to
ask: What
was the nature of conversation and discourse on human inner
life?
Did mom and dad and teacher sit besides their young
charges and
discuss with them their own (the parent's and teacher's)
reflection on
the shadow side of the soul, or how this can be mastered by
the
conscious elevation of the spirit?
Sadly, we know
no such discussion took
place. There is no language of spiritual wisdom alive in
Western
Culture. There are certain traditions, often jealous of
each
other and their own prerogatives, but no outer common seeking.
On
the contrary, the tradition of scientific discourse relegates
such
conversation to only places outside the school, and then only
as belief
systems, not as a discussion of realities. With the rise
of the
idea of the family values crisis some attempts to bring alive
moral
discussion has occurred, but this has looked at the human
being as if
morality and character were something one poured into an empty
soul,
rather than being a feature native to the human spirit, which
it could
manifest if it was truly educated in the broadest sense of
that term.
Let us be frank
about something else.
There is to be no mac-wisdom, a fast food spiritual
enlightenment
that will sweep through modern culture and reform and deepen
our social
life. There are far too many obstacles.
Science, for example, looks at the question of consciousness and precedes to examine it as if there were no deep spiritual traditions, with thousands of years a practical maturity already existing. Science still looks at human inner life through the dark lens of its own assumptions concerning the absence of spirit and consciousness in the universe.
Besides these
limitations of science,
there is also the prejudices created by the needs of the huge
business
and financial organizations that dominate modern life.
In the
light of their current habits and practices, workers and
consumers that
were self aware of their true spiritual worth would not
necessarily be
desirable.
There is an
enormous structural inertia
to the kind of social changed needed to bring wise
understanding alive
in our communities. In fact, the re-awakening of wisdom
in our
communities would be a revolution that would stand the current
social
milieu on its head. Yet, at the same time, the evolution
of
consciousness, with its emergence of the community and family
dominating individuality and the birth of the free moral
conscience, is
a social force that cannot be stopped by any such inertial
social
resistance.
But, exactly
this is the danger, and one
of the deep lessons of Columbine. If wisdom is not
returned to
our communities, by the conscious reflection of its members
upon the
deeper aspects of existence, then this power of the "I too am"
can only
continue to express itself violently and in other terrible and
unwanted
socially dysfunctional ways. The psychic storm clouds
gather
everywhere, and as long as humanity remains ignorant of the
true
dimensions and dynamics of the inner landscape, then more and
worse
tragedies will occur. It is really a matter of choice.
Do
we return the seeking of soul and spirit to its true
centrality in
social existence, or do we deny it and suffer the
consequences?
*************************
Civil Society:
- its
potential and its mystery -
While the social body itself is life-filled in its nature (organic), it is moved, just as our human bodies are moved, by the higher (and lower) principles of soul and spirit active within it. Thus, the emergence, out of the general conditions of modern civilization of Civil Society, is the result of moral/spiritual impulses arising in human hearts.
These have
reached a critical mass, in
part as a response to the excesses and extremes of our lower
nature
that have to date seemed to dominate the formation of the
global
economy. Even so, there is much more here than
meets the
eye.
------------------------------------------------------------
It might help
to look at the social world
without coloring it with our values, with our likes and
dislikes.
We do have this habit of mind that evalutes people,
events,
history - everything we might call the social world, the world
of human
beings and their associations and activities. Now even
though we
evaluate this shared social existence, we don't evaluate
Nature in this
way. Nature we accept as a given, transformable yes, but
not
evil. A great storm that floods and kills millions in
Bangledesh
is thought to be an act of chance (or god), and the poor who
live on
these flood plains often considered fools.
But a war we
lay at the feet of human
hearts. Crime is the fault of criminals (or poverty if
we are
knee-jerk liberals). Depending on our upbringing and
many other
factors, we all have our likes and dislikes, our loves and
hates, and
our assumptions about who is bad and who is good and who
should be
punished and who should be forgiven.
What is
especially odd, if we bother to
think about it, is that each individual has a different set of
such
values, and while we tend to join various communities with
those who
share ours, the fact is that many of the value systems
consider the
same social phenomena, but do not agree on their rightness or
wrongness. If we follow this out to its real logical
conclusion,
we will see that the social world, in itself, is not the
values, but
rather the values arise because of our individual relationship
to the
world. Let's restate this, as it is central to the
theme.
The social
world, in itself, does not
have the values by which we color it. In fact, if
we just
think about how frequently others misjudge us, and how often
we become
aware of how others' interpretations of who we are is wrong,
then we
can see that this is true everywhere. The valuations
come from
inside us, but are not implicitly on the object (person,
community,
race, religion) that is being judged.
Now if we
remove these colors, these
personal values, from how we see the world, how will it look?
Perhaps, if we
can learn to do this with
the right warmth of heart, we will see that the World is a
great and
wondrous Play, unfolding in Theme a grand Mystery.
This is not to
belittle, by the way, our
own vision of the Good, the truth we hold dear when we look at
the
world and find it wanting, or full, as the case may be.
It
is possible, and this I say from experience, to hold both
views without
contradiction. In the one view, the one free of our
personal
sympathies and antipathies, we see a thousand miracles
pregnant with
life and surging human passion. This view of the social
world
shows something apparently unbound, seemingly unfinished, and
largely
unknown in its most intimate depths. The other view, the
one
colored by our values, tells us more about ourselves than
about the
world. Think about it, for here is one of the miracles.
Perhaps we pick
up the newspaper.
We read of the acts of politicians, criminals,
terrorists,
businessmen, armed youth in our schools, an endless collection
of
matters sometimes too terrible to contemplate, served up to us
by
educated men and women in the name of our right to know the
gory
details of the darkness in human souls. Small wonder we
are
appalled, and spend our days in contemplation of how screwed
up the
world is and how, if just this or that was done in accord with
our
personal understanding, then the world would be better, be
more light
filled, and humane.
Or we go to
work, and our bosses make
unreasonable demands, while co-workers gossip, and our best
friend
sneaks out to have an affair with our spouse. And
then we
get home, and the house needs cleaning but we are tired until
mom calls
and says she is coming over and out of guilt we rush about,
meanwhile
parking the children in front of the TV to watch a video with
too much
violence.
For truth to
tell, we can turn our value
seeing eye upon ourselves, and find that we too are wanting,
weak,
empty of high purpose, and not at all what we planned to be in
our
dreamy youth.
The Plains
Indians of North America
called this aspect of the world, the mirror. The
world,
when we start to awake to its real nature serves to reflect
back to us
something of our own. We value the world, we color it
according
to our likes and dislikes, our hopes and dreams, our vision of
the
Good. That we do so is in no way a wrongness.
What a
wonderful thing that we care, for
in the heart is the seat of why we value. We yearn for
justice,
for wrongs to be righted, for children to be perfect, for love
for
ourselves and all we know. It is the heart which
feels pain
at failure, especially our own. Sure we may feel
guilt, but
even more we feel loss, a small kind of death at the
difference between
what we really are and what we wish we could be.
Let us consider
this some more, for it is
central to approaching the Mystery of Civil Society.
One way we can
see all this is to notice
that the social world has an inside and an outside. The
inside
seems intimate to us as individuals. It is a
psychological
milieu, quite personal in its texture. In fact so much
so that we
consider it the most private realm at all, one we have trouble
even
sharing with our closest friends and companions.
The outside
would be the behaviors we
observe in others. Like the inside, this outside
is
incredibly rich and complex, although in thinking about the
behaviors
of others we often reduce our understanding of them to the
most simple
terms. We see someone act in a way we do not like, and
easily it
comes to our mind an idea of their motives and reasons.
Yet, this
is so odd, for at the same time we know in ourselves that our
own
behaviors are not at all based on simple motives and reasons.
In fact, we know that often we ourselves are
unsure as to
why we do what we do, even though we know more about our own
inner
realm than any other person possible can.
Now it is not
the purpose of this essay
to investigate this most intimate matter of our inner lives in
great
detail. Those aspects I have placed under the section
Mysteries
of the Mind. Rather what I want us to do here is sum up
these
facts, to make wholes out of them for the purpose of a better
understanding of the social world.
To make this more concrete, let's consider some examples, both on a micro-level (intimate and personal) and a macro-level (large movements of communities of people).
We have a
co-worker. They are
overweight. We, on the other hand, eat right and work
out.
We see this person everyday and there arises in us a
reaction to
this person, to their shape and form and to their habits of
eating (we
see them in the lunch room five days a week). This
reaction is
not really thought out. It is just there in our
consciousness.
We have a value of a certain kind of health
discipline, and
someone not demonstrating that value is judged. Not only
that,
but we might think to ourselves that this person has no will
power, and
that if they would just exercise their will, then they too
could be
healthy and fit.
The fact is, of
course, that we walk
through the social world constantly evaluating the behaviors
of others
of our acquaintance, and supposing we have insight into the
whys and
wherefores behind those behaviors. It is also a fact
that many of
us, when they face this process of judging and evaluation
directly
(moving it from the semi-conscious realms into the conscious
realms of
our inwardness), exercise a deeper inner behavior.
We
notice we have been judging and we alter that view and become
more
charitable.
On the
macro-level, consider the Middle
East, the nation of Israel and the Palestinians. These
are large
congregations of individuals and we will often have
discussions and
thoughts where we conceptualize communities of individuals in
generalizations. We might think that Israelis do this
and
Palestinians do that. Like the individuals of our
acquaintance,
we judge and evaluate - we "see" - the world of macro-social
events in
the light of our likes and dislikes.
Now everyone
does this. Everyone
shines the light of their values, their likes and dislikes,
upon the
world. Moreover, we tend to form associations in accord
with
finding others of similar points of view. We might join
a church,
a political party, a protest movement - the list is endless of
communities of common interest that arise because of shared
values and
world view.
I realize that
this seems all to obvious,
but it is in our clear thinking about the obvious that it is
possible
to find our way to the deepest social truths.
Let's step back
a bit from these facts
and try to have a more global view.
Imagine we are
seeing the world from
space. We see before us a big physical place, upon which
very
large numbers of human beings live. These individual
human beings
are also parts of various kinds of groups - some in accord
with matters
of language, culture, religion, race and shared values and
interests.
Many individuals act toward each other with violence, as
do many
groups. We could observe from space, over long periods
of time,
all sorts of behaviors and movements of associations and
communities.
This is the outer social world, a world of moving and
changing
social forms.
Now imagine we
can see into the inside of
these human beings. Here lies a whole other world - one
of
desires, and the most complex kinds of motives, thoughts and
judgments.
No one would question that there is a relationship
between these
two worlds, the outer world of social form and the inner world
of
invisible psychological dynamics.
Among the
elements of this invisible
inner world are a wide variety of views as to what it all
means.
We have religions and sciences, mysteries and theories.
Then, among all this vast collection of points of view,
there
might even be some elements of truth. But the fact that
there are
all these points of view, which frequently do not agree with
each
other, this I want us to include in our global picture.
For
consider, these views themselves have changed over time, and
give no
evidence of coming to final rest, in spite of what ultimate
truth any
current view might claim for itself. These views of what
it all
means are just one more aspect of the inner invisible dynamics
of the
social world.
I urge the
reader now to read my essay
The Future , if that has not yet been read. If it has
been read,
then it might be well to call to mind the pictures contained
therein
concerning the changes over time of the outer elements (social
form) of
the social world, and the corresponding inner elements
(evolution of
consciousness). Basically as we go forward from
this point
I want us to remain simply within the most obvious social
facts, as we
have come to know them in their dynamic movement and
complexity.
Clearly what we know of as "civilization" is undergoing dramatic changes in the present. The social world, of outer form and behavior and inner dynamic psychology, is not static, but rather full of change. Moreover, these changes give evidence of much order. Chance hardly seems a word to describe what is actually observed. But the ultimate conclusion to such a question I will leave with the reader, for there is no place here for a debate on causality. The existence of order is obvious, its source a bit more mysterious.
Let us now turn
to Civil Society, the
true theme of this essay.
First, we need
to accept that the
existence of this social phenomena (civil society) is a matter
of
debate for many. To some it does not exist, or if it
does it
really is only something already described in the social and
political
sciences. The fact is this term is just a pair of words,
whose
meaning we are free to determine. So for the purposes of
this
essay, I will use Civil Society to mean a very particular
thing, which
is only partially grasped by noticing certain outer social
form
manifestations (for example, the loose collective activity of
many NGOs
- non-governmental organizations).
As expressed in
the essay The Future, our
time is an age of individual moral choice. It is as if a
fundamental human power was coming awake, a power in times
past more
imposed by some authority upon individuals. In
ages past we
had commandments, religious, moral systems and teachings,
everything
but a recognition of the primacy of individual conscience.
But
today this is not longer true. Out of our own striving
for
selfness has emerged a demand for a free and individual
rendering of
what it means to do the Good.
Directed by our
sense of what is wrong in
the world, and in response to our personal values - our likes
and
dislikes, we form associations to accomplish the Good.
Whether it
is a Green Peace or Amnesty International or the Alliance for
Democracy
- the names make little difference, in each case human beings
join into
communities to act upon the world out of impulses of the
heart.
And, behind these impulses lives our individual
moral
authority.
Now this in
itself would seem nothing
new. But in our time other events have occurred, which
have made
the context, in which this emerging moral freedom arose, have
a special
flavor. One of these events is the globalization of the
economy.
The second is the arrival of the Internet. It is
no
accident that these elements have come to be at the same time
in human
history.
Globalization
is a natural result of
economic forces, which have to grow and combine until a
certain limit
is reached. If we really understand "economia" [c.f.
Barbara
Gardiner's: Aesthetics of Economics and the Scottish Masonic
Tradition
], we will realize that a true economy can only include the
whole - the
world. Partial (national and regional) economies were
only stages
of growth, before the true natural scale was reached. It
would be
more accurate to see what we have in the past seen as local or
national
economies to be local conditions in the Global Economy, much
the same
way we understand our local weather as aspects of the Nature
of Climate
of the whole world.
As many
believe, the global economy is
not dominated by moral ideals flowing from our individual
sense of the
Good. Rather it is driven largely by fears, mostly fears
of
death. Those individuals, who dominate the global
economy through
their connections to the tyranny of concentrated wealth (the
successor
to the older aristocracies), have other gods than the Good.
They
serve themselves and as a consequence the values driving the
global
economy have brought it about the globalization has arrived
with few
truly human ideals at its center.
In earlier
times, the suffering produced
by the social domination of the selfish was only known
locally.
But with the arrival of the Internet and modern media,
our
awareness of these tragic elements of human existence became
more
common. The result of this non-accidental confluence of
events
(emerging moral individuality, economic globalization and wide
spread
information access) was the creation of a moral social organ
within the
world community - Civil Society. This organ is young,
and only
somewhat self aware, but it is nevertheless a seed with
remarkable
potential.
But to really
appreciate this we have to
expand our understanding of the world social organism, so that
we can
see the real relationships between it and Civil Society.
To do
this we have to become familiar with an Idea, in this case it
is
called: the threefold social organism . First introduced
by the
philosopher and seer Rudolf Steiner, this idea is essential to
our
understanding of modern social conditions.
In general on
this website, I have been
trying to point out that the social body of humanity has
qualities of
an organic nature. These are not the only qualities, but
this
organic aspect cannot be denied, given that the social
organism is made
up entirely of living beings. There is nothing
theoretical
or abstract about this situation. It is a quite simple
and
observable fact.
This social
organism can appear to our
seeing-thinking if we take proper care to observe how
organization
appears in our social arrangements. This organizational
aspect
can be seen in certain functional relationships, which are
essentially
polaric in nature. This fact requires that we first
understand
the idea of polarity, which is something quite different from
the idea
of mere opposites.
In the pure
mathematics of projective
geometry , the idea of polarity comes to full expression in
the various
relationships of point, line and plane. In this sense,
point and
plane are the twin poles, while the line is the middle or
mediating
element.
In the human
form, the head organization
is one pole, while the limb organization is the other.
For those
unfamiliar with this way of thinking, this will appear quite
strange.
However, if you follow this out carefully enough, the
true nature
of what is being discussed can be apprehended. The head
is soft
inwardly, while the bony part is on the outside. The
limbs, on
the other hand (pole), have the bony parts on the inside,
while the
soft parts are on the surface. It is this relationship
between
the two that unveils the polaric aspect. In polaric
systems, one
pole is related to the other almost as if they were inside-out
versions
of each other. In the human form, the middle (the trunk
organization) is upwardly bony on the outside (rib cage and
sternum),
while as we descend in the form, the lower trunk is all soft,
with the
lowest parts of the spine being on the inside. This
polaric
relationship of the human form is true in all details, and a
deep and
wonderful discussion of it can be found in the book Man and
Mammals, by
Wolfgang Schad.
Moreover, while
the form is polaric, this
is due to the non-physical inwardness also being polaric.
That
is, the head carries out certain functions (form follows
function) of a
sensing and contemplative nature, for which it needs to be at
rest,
while the limbs propel us through space according to our
spirit and
soul's will and direction. I have here, of necessity,
only been
able to hint at the details, the full expression of which
would take us
too far afield.
[In the
following I am going to be
referring to certain "ideals". To understand the
importance of
this, there is a detailed consideration in the essay: Basic
Conceptions: fundamentals of a new social view .]
What Rudolf
Steiner pointed out, in his
book Towards Social Renewal, is that human activities can
basically all
be described in such a way that it is clear that a certain
kind of form
or organization arises in the social order, from the inside
out - form
follows function. For example, inwardly we have certain
impulses
of freedom, and these efforts to express this ideal appear
most
dominantly in what Steiner called the Cultural Sphere, in
which he
included science, art, religion and education. Thus, in
the main,
the impulse to freedom is most realized in Cultural Life.
At the opposite
pole, is the ideal of
brotherhood. Freedom is very much an individual
expression - we
do it out of ourselves. But the ideal of brotherhood
requires
that we join together. It is the Earth we share
together, and
thus, at the root of Economic Life is the ideal of
brotherhood.
In the present, of course, we do much in our
social life
that deconstructs this naturally appearing order. For
example,
many assert freedom in the realm of Economics, they want
wealth only
for themselves or their associates. Yet, there is only
one Earth,
and only so much wealth, and the ideal which seeks to emerge
in
Economic Life remains brotherhood - the sharing of what is
available
among all.
In between
these two poles, the
individual pole of the ideal of freedom and its polaric
counterpart,
the sharing pole of the ideal of brotherhood, lies a middle
realm.
This is the Political-legal Sphere, or the Rights Life.
Its
ideal is equity, or equality. In law we balance the
apparent
competition between the impulses to freedom and the necessity
of
brotherhood. Through political processes we determine
what rules
apply to all - or, how we are equal to each other and in what
circumstances.
This then is
how the threefold social
organism tries to appear in human societies. Profound
Ideals seek
to emerge, through human activity. This functional
process then
forms our social order. We should keep in mind, however,
that
this process of the forming of the threefold social organism
is
something that is occurring over vast periods of historical
time.
It develops according to rules, and depends upon our
slow
maturation as human beings. As we mature, more and more
the
social organism will acquire this form. Globalization and
Civil Society
are interim phenomena appearing in the history of the
development of
this threefold organism - natural stages in long term
processes, whose
eventual full realization will require our conscious
participation.
Let me give a
very brief sketch.
The older social structures, such as the ancient
Egyptian, were
theocratic in nature. The kings were also priests.
Even in
modern times, remnants of this way have continued, for
example, up
until the Chinese invaded Tibet, it was a functioning
theocracy.
In this sense, something out of Cultural existence
dominated
societies. Yet, this form of social organization was
incomplete.
It only really was valid for the particular stage of the
evolution of consciousness applicable to that time.
Today, a
theocracy is a dam to the real needs of any people (witness
Islamic
Fundamentalism).
The theocratic
approach to social
organization eventually gives way to some kind of idea of the
political
State. With the early Greeks and Romans, we have the
emergence of
the first iteration of the Political-legal life in the
formation of the
State and the recognition of the Citizen. So, now (or
then
actually) we have a Cultural Life and a Rights Life
simultaneously.
The threefolding process is still immature, while yet
being
appropriate for humanity's inner condition.
Now we come to
more modern times.
Human individuality is flowering. The Economic
Life has
reached a kind of youthful climax with Globalization.
The Rights
Life has matured, and in the latent ideal of citizen
governance a seed
planted at America's founding begins to grow into the light.
In
the Cultural Life, human freedom in the realm of science, art,
religion
(as in choice thereof) and education (think about the real
issues
underlying current struggles) is exhibiting tremendous power.
More and more
we are determined to think
what we want to think (our society, family, education,
religion,
science be damned), especially about the moral, the nature of
the good,
and what is right to do in any circumstances of life.
If I may make a
personal note, my life
spans an interesting period of time, having begun in 1940.
As a
youth I was taught to do what was expected, something that was
thrown
over in a quite revolutionary way in the 1960's. This
insistence
on freedom of moral choice has since matured (although between
the
generations there is a lot of misunderstanding). Even
so, out of
this emerging moral freedom is forming a new social power in
the form
of Civil Society. That which lives in the
moral
center of individuals is slowly finding various forms of
community, and
these communities themselves are gathering together in the
secure
knowledge of their common moral strength. At the
time of
this writing (early March, 2003) this community opposes the
efforts of
the sitting government of the United States (the 2nd Bush
Administration) to start a war against Iraq. A new power
awakes
in the world, refusing any long to let elites of wealth or
blood
maintain their historical dominance and self serving rule.
If we step back
a little from this
situation, we can come to see the World itself threefolding,
with a
global economy on the one hand, an emerging cultural-spiritual
force in
the moral power of Civil Society on the other, while in
between,
whether in the United Nations, or the International Court in
the Hague,
a mediating world life of Rights also surges forth from the
inwardness
of many human beings.
We need to look
at this again.
Less than a
hundred years ago, when the
various European nations that brought us World War I were busy
doing
what nations do when they get ready to kill a lot of people,
the
ordinary people of the world basically had to stand by,
passive guests
to the machinations of powerful elites. That is no
longer the
case.
Now the
ordinary people of the world are
beginning to know and experience their moral power as a group.
They no longer stand by passively, nor do they accept
their own
government's choices. Everywhere, people resist the excesses
of those
obsessed with power, and it is now clear that sitting
governments are
near the end time of that mischief they can cause the ordinary
and once
powerless gentle folk to whom this planet really belongs.
Where once,
ages ago, hierarchical castes
ruled the ordinary human being, such as the Pharaohs of Egypt
or the
Caesars of Rome, this time has passed. A new ordering
principle
awakes in the world, rising from inside the individual human
being as a
heart directed moral impulse, forming from there into
communities of
action, determined to impose its collective will on world
social order.
This will can
not be expected to achieve
all that it might wish to overnight. But no one - no one
- should
any longer fail to see its active presence in the unfolding of
the
future.
**************************
America sings
written
September 26th 2004
an army marches toward me now hungry to destroy
it seeks to devour ideas this army it wants to eat reason like a tide of locusts on a field of ripe wheat
nothing of the truth is to stand in its ravenous way, and
at its head, is a man, who in his vanity and ambition
believes his own righteousness, a terrible hubris that cannot but try to
kill: reason, truth, and ideas
so falseness is pasted everywhere, for no lie is too much for this army
no truth too precious not to be murdered
its just politics, says the chief apologist we are right to assert our beliefs
say the masses following blindly
truth is not relevant, says the watching media, we should know, we have had no use for the truth for years
so the army marches towards me, a hideous mouth filled with teeth
and the blood of children
who and what am I, that I might, or might not, fear this army?
who could possible be afraid of that which tries to eat ideas,
to devour reason, to bury truth
are ideas and reason not real, but rather just vain dreams, and wishes, something that should fall before beliefs?
Should not those who wish, get to assert their opinions over truth,
if it suits their purposes?
who is concerned about what an idea feels, or what the truth cares about anyway.
these are just passing fancies, while beliefs are holy and sacred.
Or so some say, who don't bother to think at all.
I will tell you now my most secret name,
for I am an idea and only that
America is my name, and I am more real than
this army or its vain head can imagine
I am more powerful too.
Why?
Because I cannot be killed, tho' armies rush and gnash their teeth
I am immune to violence, and not only that, to seek my
death is to grant me even greater life.
To push me down is to raise me up to hide me is to expose me
to lie about me is to unveil me
for I am everything the lie is not everything the hate is not
everything the unreasoning is not
so, if you want to know me then just listen to the politicians
and think of that they do not say
for there I am, hidden in plain sight, just beyond the limits of
the lie, for not only can I not be killed, not only am I inviolate,
I am immortal
I am spirit, I am divine for true ideas live outside
of time, and space and the vain posturing of politicians
I am America, and these dark ones cannot have their way with me.
Do you have the courage to face me do you have the courage to face the truth do you have the courage to look at reason square in the face and test your beliefs against my being and nature?
Listen then, if you dare, listen to the truth, to pure reason
and see if all your politics has even one ounce of reality
America is not any political party
neither the Democrats, or the Republicans
or the Greens nor do any of the ambitious ones
running for president own me, or even know me
Many take my name in vain, America this and America that
but each such statement is a lie meant only to serve the speakers
vanity
America, I am, but I am not a sitting government
or a Nation or even a People
Although any can, if they would, pledge their allegiance
to my reality
I am not a war on terror or a war in Iraq
although I can be a soldier dying
I am not an arms manufacturing business
or a pharmaceutical company although I can be the one who
cleans the toilets there
I have no need for wealth or for power
I have no need to announce my presence, for when I
am truly there, anyone with eyes will see me
I am invisible to that which is not like me
and visible to all who know me in their hearts
I am not patriotic, although any true patriot will love me
You see me first as a dream a dream of freedom from oppression
a dream of fair pay for reasonable work a dream of quiet streets where children play
I live in the imagination of people everywhere, who know that their
dignity and their humanity is ignored in that dark place
where they are yet forced to live.
I even live in the land that is named after me, although
still more in dreams than in the realm of social justice
That land, named after me has forgotten me more than any
other place now.
Covered me over, buried me in a coffin of lies,
yet, even tho' buried I am everywhere yearned for
So strongly that I am kept alive outside the continent on which I first
touched earth,
but in that land, even I would be glad to call home,
the politicians seek my death while the wealthy fight over
my spoils
Do you seek the good? Then you seek me.
Do you run from hate? Then you run to me.
Do you know your brothers and sisters all over the world
then you know me.
Do you worry now, do you cry inside
fearful of the dark ones who seek to rule?
Then come to me, and lean on me,
for there is no burden I cannot bear that you can feel
You need not believe in me by the way,
for I am your own heart set free
and when you dance and sing and share and love
and seek peace, not war, I am there with you and in you.
Are you angry against the dark ones?
Do you wish their defeat, their end, their demise?
Please no, for by such thoughts you separate yourself from me
I mean no harm and need to defeat no one.
Yes, the dark ones, and their masses of unreasoning believers
spread all the worst of lies but think how they are driven
not by reason but by fear.
It is fear from which they need release.
And while they thrash about in fear, and push and shove
the piles of lies that seek to hide me,
you fear not, for even though ages pass, I still will come to all
and while many are too filled with fear, too filled with hate
too filled with belief at the expense of reason
you need not fall into their dark dreams
Do not let them drag you down into their lost land,
but kept your own council, keep your own ideas,
keep me near your heart, and seek those like yourself.
Where you have the company of like minded, there I live,
and you will have me, whatever the fear mongers claim or insist
the true, the good, the beautiful
are such a light that no dark can hide or cover over
Be what is in your heart, and in any circumstance
then I will live in you
You are my true home, the only place an idea can really live.
Invite me in, I
have been waiting for you
for a very long time.
***********************
Citizen Governance
- the future
of the Republic form of government -
The United
States of America is the first
Nation where a certain fundamentally human impulse toward true
freedom
emerged on the Stage of History. Long in preparation,
this
impulse was/is connected to the gradual appreciation of the
individual
of his/her fundamental personal sovereignty - our individual
free power
of choice. It is only out of the choices of the I am ,
or the
spirit , of the individual human being, that governments
obtain their
just powers. From the authoring of the U.S. Constitution
forward,
governments were to be seen as only having those powers
granted to them
by the community of sovereign individual human spirits, which
constituted a particular Nation or People.
If we can
appreciate how long it took for
this principle to emerge onto the Stage of History, then it is
possible
to also appreciate how it is that this principle will require
considerable time to grow into maturity. The appearance
of this
principle, in its present restatement as part of this
presidential
campaign, is simply one among many other iterations of the
reappearance
of this impulse in modern times. It is not new,
nor is my
articulation of it the only possible one.
The Declaration of Independence, states among its very first principles: " .., Governments are instituted among Men, deriving the just powers from the consent of the governed ,.. "
and the U.S.
Constitution begins: " We
the People ... ".
The central act
is the uniting of the
individual sovereign power of free choice into a community, a
Nation
and a People, from which then the siting government receives
its powers.
However,
against this striving out of the
hearts and minds of individual sovereign spirits was arrayed
the vast
weight of the Past. Having its own momentum, the Past
did not
easily step aside for the birth of this just power with its
fundamental
right of Consent. Men and women were too used to the old
ways,
where power lived in the aristocracies of blood and
inheritance.
Thus, even though a fundamental shift had occurred at
the level
of our understanding, the outer forms of social relations were
slow to
evolve. The aristocracies of blood became replaced with
aristocracies of wealth.
Such is the
condition of the world today.
Oligarchies of wealth constitute the most typical form
of rule
over various peoples all over the world. It some cases
it is
fairly obvious, and in others, such as apparent democracies,
the ruling
elites have worked at keeping their activity hidden.
One of the most
interesting aspects of
this situation is that a core element of the reasoning of
concentrated
wealth, in support of its point of view, has considerable
validity.
This is the view that the average citizen lacks the
understanding
and capacity to participate in macro decisions - the kind of
decisions
that determine the stability of markets, and the free flow of
trade
upon which the modern world has become dependent.
According to
this reasoning, only the financially astute know what is
needed to know
in order to maintain an economic environment in which wealth
can
continue to be generated. This apparent truth then
justifies all
manner of manipulations of the inner workings of various
governments.
On the surface
then, it appears that the
world is locked into a what is essentially a class struggle,
between
the rich and the poor, over the determination of the social
rules of
modern and future societies. In fact, is there any
reason to
expect the aristocracies of concentrated wealth to abandon
their
positions of power and privilege without a very great battle?
Here then is
the moral riddle at the
heart of the modern age. If citizen governance is to
emerge into
the light of world affairs in a responsible manner, will it
take a
course that violently destroys the Past, or will it find
some
other path through this Rite of Passage that the Hopi
Prophecies call:
The Day of Purification. And, in parallel, will the
existing
powers hold so strongly to their position and privilege such
that all
their considerable forces are spent trying to hold down the
emergence
of this sovereign individual community impulse.
If such a War
ensues, then the Republic
that the founders of the United States of America created will
dissolve
into chaos, to be replaced by either anarchy on the one hand,
or some
form of dictatorship (fascist or otherwise) on the other.
If we wish to
avoid Battle, then the
issues come down to this: By what means will we proceed ?
If the nature
of our choices involves the
assumption of a proper end goal - a certain right way the
future needs
to turn out - then we will automatically pursue a course of
conflict,
for the very fact of our individual sovereign natures assumes
that we
each will have a different end in mind. On the other
hand, if we
choose to place the emphasis on how we go about stepping into
the
future, the basic form of the Republic that was bequeathed to
us
remains the most viable, healthy and just way .
To help
understand this, we should notice
that citizen governance is young. It has so far rested
mostly in
an ideal form, as the main principle of the form of government
of the
United States. Our present time offers us the
opportunity
to take this ideal further into reality - further into
incarnation.
There are two
ways that I recommend.
Both are essential, and one can participate in either or
both as
one wishes.
One is for
ordinary citizens to run for
office. Such activity was certainly in the minds of our
founders,
and it is much needed in the present, for the class of
professional
politicians has, in the main, lost its way. I have
chosen this
path myself.
The second
means is the formation of
conversation groups, or what I have elsewhere called: renewal
groups.
I have used the term renewal to emphasize the fact that
this idea
is not new, and was central from the very beginning of our
Republic.
But it has fallen into a condition of sleep and disuse,
so that
if we are to return it to is pivotal place within our form of
government, then we must - out of ourselves - call it forth in
conversation with each other.
Conversation is
the crucial aspect - the
essence. We have tended to think, having lost a true
understanding of the nature of the Republic form of
government, that
the power of the people resided in the vote - that is that we
were some
form of democracy (which we are not). More essential
than the
vote is our mutual spiritual work at expressing, out of our
own
insight, what we consider to be the nature of the good as that
applies
to the form and order of society. It is our individual
sovereign
moral will, conveyed in the form of ideals from one to the
other, that
is the essential act of citizen governance. Out of these
heart-felt conversations then emerges that vision of the
future toward
which we then direct our elected representatives to strive to
achieve.
Those, who also
take the other path -
that of seeking to represent us, very much need our guidance.
They (and hopefully I) work for you (us).
But the
eternal truths to which we form allegiance, these are to be
discovered
in the renewal groups. At present, the situation is
almost the
opposite. The powers of concentrated wealth, and their
political
allies, work very hard at forming public opinion. What
we think
is not so important as what we can be made to think.
Knowledge of
true facts is routinely withheld. What is provided is
warped into
that meaning most convenient to the speakers. A
representative
form of government (our Republic) cannot thrive when all that
the
People are provided is a sea of lies and half-truths.
At the same
time, this apparent abuse of
power, by the wealthy elites and their servants, cannot (yet)
imprison
our hearts and minds. Having free speech, and the gift
of the
word , we have the capacity to meet with each other and
consider the
fundamental and essential questions facing our society.
In this
process of asking ourselves questions, and listening to each
other
offer responses, we begin that work - that means - whose
pathway
offers us the most sane passage through the historic crises of
the
moment.
For the truth
is this. Our
fundamental sovereignty as individuals is a reflection of our
divine
nature. In this age of materialism, where we have
unnaturally separated matter and spirit, we have also lost
confidence
in the moral. Today people are content to limit their
acts to
what is legal, which my law professors described as the lower
limit of
the expectations that can be placed on human behavior.
To do only
what is legal is to do the least socially acceptable act.
No society has
life and vitality if its
members not only expect of themselves the least, but even
worse,
intentionally pass downward through that boundary for reasons
of
personal greed (witness the massive failures now apparent in
our
business communities). The renewal of the Republic
can only
come out of moral deeds, deeds of conscience - deeds first
born in acts
of individual conscience, which are then merged through
conversation in
to a community of ideals.
At the same
time such deeds need to
proceed in moderation. Individuals, meeting in renewal
groups and
learning to express their hearts to each other in mutual
tolerance,
while considering the fundamental goals and purposes of human
society,
perform a sacred art. This art of conversation then
spreads from
one to the other, eventually merging with other conversations
in
a vast cooperative act of public ideal self examination.
Where we
have been asleep, now we are awake, and our considerations
become the
light by which our public servants can then do those appointed
tasks
that we so much need for them to do.
It will not be
easy. To rise from a
public expectation of behavior directed toward the merely
legal to an
understanding of individual moral insight will be no simply
matter.
This is hard work, for not only do we have a political
Past, but
we also have a religious Past, and a scientific Past.
The vast
weight of these ideas can be a terrible prison for the future.
Yet, if we take the time to live with trust in each
other's
hearts, then the mutual work of the sacred art of conversation
will
lead us to just that community of ideals we need to light the
way.
We need have no
end in mind at all.
The means - the conversation arising out of our
understanding of
the principle of citizen governance - will ensure that we
travel the
roads of life in all the mutual faith and company that we
need.
******************************
the Future of Business Corporations
- individual
self-development and economic leadership -
In my writing
on politics, in
relationship to economic matters, I have often referred to
what I call the Lords of Finance.
This concept concerns the fact that in spite of
the hopes of America's Founders, that a viable constitutional
democratic republic would be our form of government, the
holders of
concentrated wealth chose to go their own way, and to create
what is
essentially a hidden oligarchy of power behind the scenes of
an
illusion of electoral freedom. Americans vote, but the
money
power is so pervasive that government clearly supports the
needs of
financial institutions and business corporations over the real
needs of
the ordinary people of this country.
For example,
those, who follow intimately
the reality behind the so-called sub-prime crisis, are well
aware that
every move made by the Federal Reserve Board and every move
made by the
Bush II administration has been directed at saving the
financial
resources of the banking industry, without out any real
consideration
of the ordinary people who are losing their homes, and
jobs.
I wrote about
this problem extensively in
my small book: Uncommon
Sense*: the Degeneration, and the Redemption, of Political
Life in
America. I wrote there (and
elsewhere)
that the arrival of this hidden oligarchy of money power was
expectable, and that what has happened is that the American
Experiment
has merely substituted an aristocracy of wealth for the
previous
aristocracy of blood, thus: the Lords of Finance.
A kind of class
warfare has been in place
for some time now, with the Lords of Finance ruling our
political life in such a way that ordinary people have
essentially
become, in the economic life, the equivalent of serfs and
peasants.
Yes, we (ordinary people) have the apparent highest
standard of
living (in a material sense) of any serfs and peasants before
in
history, but the fact is that we are essentially powerless
(under
present conditions), and have little real access to the
ownership of
land (what we would need in order to feed ourselves, for
example).
This absence of power over life and work, connected to
having no
real ownership of land, is what has characterized serfs and
peasants
throughout history. That American common speech calls us
wage
slaves is a apt perception of this
stark condition.
What is most
tragic about all this is
that the gross hubris of the elites of wealth is so huge that
they have
put the whole economy of the world at risk. The
extremely fragile
nature of the interlocking dependencies of speculative
financial
instruments, and the whole way money as created out of nothing
but the
debt obligations of the wage slaves, suckered
into
believing they get to own land, when in fact with the
foreclosure
industry now in full operation, once again (as in the Great
Depression), should the economy recover, the Lords of Finance
will
claim to own everything.
There is more
evidence that this is a
condition intentionally fostered from the higher circles in
the Lords,
than there is evidence it is simply a by-product of blind
economic
forces (the myth we are taught). We are, by the
intentional
efforts of the Lords, not a nation of
the people, by the people and for the
people, but a nation of workers (serfs) and consumers
(peasants)
serving the grossly extravagant hungers and appetites of a
small group
of families and individuals, who with callous indifference to
our real
needs, have subverted our democratic republic for their
personal
benefit.
In Uncommon
Sense and elsewhere, I have written
of what
the ordinary citizen can do to heal this cancer that has
spread itself
throughout the body social. This essay is written for the
Lords, and
for their more immediate servants
within the
large business corporations that today have forced their way
to almost
complete freedom (via trade agreements) from any future
restraint by
the various Nation States of the Earth. They place
themselves
outside the internal laws of Nation States, by creating in
these trade
agreements a supposedly superior to any Nation State
international
legal system (designed of course entirely for their own
benefit).
At the same
time, the basic assumption of
this essay is that not everyone, who works in our corporations
and
financial institutions, is as immoral and indifferent to human
suffering as is sometimes assumed. The question taken up
here
then is what can individuals do, who believe the business
corporation,
as a social form, has continued value for a more human future,
and who
work in or lead such institutions, and would like to further
human
civilization.
individualism and corporate
culture in the fields of high
finance
There are no
doubt all manner of fine
books and academic papers analyzing this subject, so I will
try to add
some dimensions grounded in a somewhat more organic view.
Please
note that I described this section as concerning corporate culture in
finance, for not all corporate
culture is the same, and while
some of the same problems exist everywhere, it is in finance
where
these kinds of problems are more acute. Other
corporations in
other fields (dot.coms for example) show a more modern and
responsible
tendency, but at the same time a number of the observations to
be noted
below apply across the board.
Corporate
culture is hierarchical.
This is a given. Certain elements of power and
decision
making move downward from the apex of what is essentially a
pyramidal
social organism. The whole is given direction from the
top and
moves (as much as is possible) as a single organism.
This organism
exists within the wider
social body, and is to varying degrees, restrained and given
order by
the nature of this wider social environment. For
example, legal
requirements (of dubious value for the future, see the essay
below: law and
the spirit) of due diligence and the
like
force the corporation to make choices more favorable to
shareholders
than to workers and consumers.
In addition,
corporate leadership (as a
consequence) is forced to pay an excessive amount of attention
to the
value of their stock in the various markets. This would
not be
too much of a problem were stock values based on rational
decision
making, but stock markets are essentially gambling
institutions, and
the movement of the values of stocks is determined by a
psychology of
risk taking often itself driven by fear and other strong
emotions.
For example, the stock markets during the current (at
the time of
this writing) challenges posed by the sub-prime mortgage
crisis (which
is really a crisis generated by excesses of greed among very
large
financial institutions) are today what is superficially
called: excessively volatile (that
is, essentially irrational).
The buying and
selling in stock markets
(including those markets specializing on highly abstract
derivative
debt instruments) today seems constantly on the verge of
outright
panic. Basically traders are making bets on the movement
of the
values of stocks over the course of time intervals as little
as a few
minutes. While the whole thing is often called investing
(which
is really only true of new stocks, the trading in already
issued shares
from moment to moment (3 billion plus shares a day on the New
York
Stock Exchange alone), does not always create capital directly
for
those companies, and is really just a set of bets that will
have to be
covered by the so-called investor, whether the stock goes up
or down.
This means that leaders of corporations are making decisions in an environment where the principle measure of the quality of their leadership is driven by the choices of others (the gamblers), and has no real relationship with the actual economic viability of any particular corporation. This has actually always been the case with stock companies, whose shares are publicly traded in markets, - just that this time (the sub-prime crisis), where the whole system is under a great deal of stress, its systemic flaws become more apparent.
The deeper we
go into such matters, we
find that the way that economics is discussed in general, and
taught in
schools, as well as practiced in life, - all these places
where we come
upon economic ideas, we find
ourselves living amidst myths and illusions.
A main one is that capitalism (as presently practiced)
is itself
a viable social economic form. We come to the root of
this when
we encounter the idea of the free market.
Free market
capitalism is in reality what we usually know as an oxymoron -
a
statement so untrue on its face that one wonders how rational
and sane
people could actually utter such a term.
Markets,
similar to all gambling
institutions, operate on the basis of rules, and are run not
for the
benefit of those who gamble in such markets, but for the house
(the
financial institutions and brokerage houses that take the fees
and loan
the money which the buyers of stocks need in order to
participate in
the so-called market). A few of
the rules come from government, which
under recent Republican leadership has failed miserably to
actually
engage in rule making - given the ideological / theological
principle
(myth) applied here, which is: all
regulation hurts
the imaginary free aspect of
these markets.
The result has
been that there is no rule
of law in higher end economic decision making (no regulation,
no
criminal prosecution with any meaning). The resulting
economic
anarchy then becomes an environment which can only breed
lawless
self-advancement at serious costs to the whole.
Individuals and
certain companies make a great deal of money, while the
economy and the
ordinary people at the bottom suffer all the real negative
consequences
(millions are losing their homes to foreclosure, recession if
not
depression is coming, and the social consequences may turn out
to be
quite horrible - the Western democracies are on the verge of
becoming third-worlded - that is
losing their first world status for ordinary
people, while the elites use their illegally acquired wealth
to
separate themselves out into private enclaves. See the
movie Children
of Men for a well-grounded artistic
vision of
this much too potential future).
All of this is
mostly a direct
consequence of the rule of the Lords of Finance, who
corrupted the political life of the Western Democracies in
order to
have a system of banking and finance rules most favorable to
this small
elite; and at a terrible price for workers and consumers in
the first
and third worlds as well as resulting in quite near-sighted
and
irrational approaches to the care of the natural world upon
whose
fertility, riches and generosity we all depend.
If we want to
step behind the curtain of
these social processes, and seek to understand how they came
about, how
in the so-called Age of Science, so much irrationality could
come to
rule our economic life, it becomes possible to find one more
or less
common element as the root cause: education. Our business and political leaders, most
having
been trained (as
against educated) in our current
universities and colleges, are ill prepared to understand
present day
social, economic and political realities. Flawed economic myths are taught, which can only
be
overcome by individuals who would rather know the true nature
of
economic life, than the vain system of thought wrapped up in
what is
essentially a religion (a system of economic beliefs to which one
must adhere in order to advance).
In point of
fact, it is one of the
principle ways the Lords of Finance (the hidden aristocracy of
wealth)
engage in social control. By determining the underlying
principles of our school systems (through their hidden
influence on the
power of the State), the Lords ensure that education is not
about
developing latent human potential (its true purpose), but
about
training the next generation of compliant workers and
consumers (serfs
and peasants).
Human beings
can, however, actually be educated to enlightened
self interest (see the essay above
on the
Re-imagination of the Presidency), rather than a self interest
that
sees itself at necessary odds with other human beings (social
Darwinism). At the same time, we cannot expect the
system -
corporate culture - itself to change in the typical fashion.
Certainly we cannot expect change to come from the top
down, for
the pyramidal principle itself is a flawed social
understanding.
Not even our great Universities clearly recognize the
problem,
and corporate culture already only willingly promotes within
its ranks
those who demonstrate the same callous indifference modeled at
the top.
Corporations
are lead by example, and the
dominant winning examples are essentially all predatory.
In a
way, corporate culture is (like prison cultures) a social
design that
produces a kind of unnatural survival of the fittest, in the
raw sense
that those who succeed are those most willing to climb the
ladder of
success on the backs of those below. A real education, would help the educated to understand that the
pyramidal principle (dominion over), which
is an
outcome of a long term social process in Western Civilization
that is
essentially patriarchal, is no longer workable. It has
outlived
its utility (except for the winning elites).
From out of the social below - the social commons - another principle is rising - a circle principle (communion with) rather than a pyramidal principle. The patriarchal principle of dominion over is slowly being replaced in the social commons with a matriarchal principle of communion with (for the underlying spiritual background here, read my book the Way of the Fool). Competition has proven it is no longer socially viable (or responsible), and is being replaced, out of the wisdom of ordinary people, with cooperation.
As the reader
might expect, to penetrate
with our individual thinking to a real understanding of this
in
practice, would require an intentional re-education or
self-education.
Because many of the problems are systemic, some of this
new
education would have to be society wide, a project under
current
educational thinking that would be impossible to achieve.
For
example, even if we found corporate leaders, who became more
self-enlightened through self-education, they are still under
the
pressure of due diligence and other current rules required to
place the
benefit of the shareholder over and above the benefit to the
consumer
and the worker.
Where this
takes us, unfortunately, is
the need to recognize a coming time of great tragedy.
The formerly
workable patriarchal
principle of dominion over, having outlived its social
utility, cannot
continue without causing further illness to the body social.
If
our education has been a little bit adequate, we are aware
that
civilizations fail, especially when the flaws within are so
systemic as
to be irreparable. The current crisis in finance
markets, coupled
with the environmental difficulties and the endless
warmongering of the
leaders of many Nation States, shows us that fracture points
are
everywhere. People in positions of leadership and power
don't
know (are not properly educated) in how to handle these kinds
of
crises. Their collective hubris is leading toward the
ruination
of us all.
At the same time, what some see as the failure of civilizations is really something more (again a decent self-education would enable the reader to see this). A more accurate term is: metamorphosis. Western Civilization is undergoing a process of metamorphosis - it is a dying into a new becoming. If we can recognize this principle in action, we can then also recognize how to ride the wave (as it were) in a sane and healthy fashion by understanding that the transformation is at its roots one from dominion over to communion with.
As our social
(institutional) forms fail
(and many of these will be corporate as well as governmental
and
religious), individuals will have opportunities to participate
in the
metamorphosis, rather than oppose it. Those who do
oppose it will
only increase the stress on the intricately interwoven
systems, causing
in the wake of their opposition greater social harm.
Those who
seek cooperation instead of increased competition, will find
that, in
community with others, chances of survival increase, and a
flexible
social form (such as a business entity that sets aside a
pyramidal form
for a circle form) will be able to constantly adapt to the
changing
conditions.
The end result
of the tragic aspects of
this metamorphosis is difficult to predict (there are positive
aspects
as well). Certainly there will be many who will seek to
ride it
out at the top, and use the advantages already gained through
money and
power to lord it over those below. We could end up with
(after an
indeterminate time of considerable social chaos) a new static
social
equilibrium that is basically one of the end of Nation States
and the
coming into being of what are essentially feudal-like
corporate
entities, with their own private armies. The world would
then be
re-tribalized, and dominated by rigidly ordered corporate
pyramidal
social forms (some of which will continue to hide behind a
Nation State
- whether of a democratic or theocratic - structure).
This social
condition of re-tribalized
corporate feudalism is not, however, necessary.
Enlightened
self-interest may realize that the health of the whole
contributes to
the health of the part. It isn't necessary to compete
endlessly
as the descent into and through social chaos moves toward an
ascent
into new social form (metamorphosis). In fact, the Lords
of
Finance could make a compromise with the social commons - the
pyramidal
form and the circle form do not have to compete, and a kind of
peace
could reign.
Yet, in order
for this to happen, the
truth has to be able to step out from behind the curtain - the
Lords
need to admit to their hidden rule, and offer the application
of their
elite powers to the health of the social commons. There
is no
reason a bargain can't be struck, in which the Lords maintain
certain
elements of their wants and hungers, that could be freely
given to them
from out of the wisdom of the social commons.
The original
Constitution was a
compromise between competing interests. If the Lords
will admit
to themselves that they need the social commons to be healthy
in order
for their lives as elites to have the qualities they want, the
hidden
oligarchy could step out from behind the curtain and seek an
open
agreement with ordinary people. The world of
finance is in
fact a world requiring all manner of expertise, and a
world-wide
economy needs this expertise in order to be orderly and
healthy.
The Lords can provide this by rediscovering the moral
aspects
once called noblesse
oblige (the idea that with power
and
privilege comes social responsibility).
This is one of
the possibilities inherent
in a new education that leads and builds a lifetimes interest
in
self-education. At the present, however, the rule of
elites is
causing so much harm that the social commons is more and more
forced
into violence (terrorism for starters) in order to simply not
be
crushed under the power wheels of the engines of commerce
(think oil
and the middle-east as an example).
Since we cannot
reasonably expect the
pyramidal corporate structures, or the Lords themselves, to be
so
enlightened as to cease their efforts at rigid social control,
it
remains then for individuals within
these social forms to take up their own
self-education; and, by this means become a source within that
advocates the true good for the social
whole.
This self-education impulse could include a look at my
book: the Way of
the Fool: the conscious
development of
our human character and the future* of Christianity - both to
be born
out of the natural union of Faith and Gnosis. Or not.
self-education by new
corporate leaders
People will
continue to be drawn into the
economic life, for there is much opportunity for creativity
there.
The entrepreneur (one who
organizes, manages, and assumes the risks of a
business or enterprise) is one of the principle creative
actors in
modern civilization, even when civilization is engaged in the
dying
into a new becoming. If we look at the social commons we
can see
all kinds of creative activity there, and the whole of the
dot.com
revolution is really an example of such creativity, for how
many of
these huge business began in someones garage.
Opportunity is
everywhere, and the business risk taker is really a principle
source of
what is new in the world.
Dot.com
businesses, for example, have
frequently created working conditions in which instead of the
great
temple of a corporate glass and steel skyscraper, one finds
the
physical work environment thought of as a campus. The dot.com temple is modeled on the university,
not the
feudal castle.
Whether one is
creating a small business,
or anything larger, it is the individual who has the idea,
sees the
need, and tries to fill it. It is only the old style
structures
that have adopted the policy of taking their waste products
and selling
us junk through advertising that makes us ashamed of our human
nature.
As we go through the crucible of social metamorphosis,
the most
creative opportunities will be for those who see a need and
fill it.
Many such examples abound today, whether it is micro
financing in
the third world, or small useful products in the first.
The dying
civilization and its
patriarchal approach of dominion over
are no longer
viable, except that they more and more maintain themselves
through the
application of force (thus the tendency to end up with a new
feudalism). The healthy new business models are healthy
precisely
to the extent that they abandon the old, and seek for
something never
seen before.
In this the
last section of this essay in
this little book, I merely want to offer some help to those
who would
consider it possible to advance their opportunities for
success by
recognizing that part of what they can do is change
themselves.
They recognize that not only can they be creative in
their
operational business modes, but they can be creative in what
they take
into themselves as influences. If fact, if we observe
the
details, we see that this is already instinctively happening.
Cultural influences have been changing strongly since
the 1960's
and it is people born into these new influences that are the
most
creative.
What books are
read? What movies
seen? What plays? What music heard? What
poems?
The mind is a
garden that can be
cultivated accidentally, or with purpose. Our current
universities, with their MBA programs whose trainees are not
really educated, and certainly not helped to understand how to
be moral
in the amoral world of corporate finance, are also part
of the
dying of civilization. These universities are no
longer
vital, and without a capacity to provide proper inner
development for
the individual personality, whose strengths of character are
so vitally
needed in today's world of moral confusion and ambiguity, the
former
great universities bear a considerable responsibility for a
large part
of what has happened in the Western Democracies, for it is the
graduates of such places (Yale, Harvard, the Sorbonne and the
London
School of Economics) that have lead us right into the descent
into
social chaos.
The Founders of
the American Experiment
knew well that without an enlightened public and public
servants, there
was no chance the Republic could be maintained, and all the
folly we
now experience comes from this fall from grace of our once
great
universities. We live in the results of what Alan Bloom,
in his The
Closing of the American Mind,
predicted, as
did President Eisenhower in his Farewell Address (see appendix
below) -
a time in which we no longer have truly educated individuals
in places
of social responsibility
Since the
educational institutions have
failed, it becomes only the individual who can through
self-education
overcome what our culture and society has not been able to
provide.
We can cultivate our own minds, and if the reader of any
of my
works has found there something of value, it must be noted
that all
that I am able to think is in large part due to my having in
my early
thirties (around 1972-3) recognized that my education,
including Law
School, had not prepared me for the world in which I found
myself - I
simply could not understand it out of what I had been taught.
Thus began a
long journey, whose details
are unimportant, but the best that I can offer to the reader
here is to
simply list (in no particular order) a number of the books I
have read
over the last 30 years that have cultivated the garden of my
mind and
enabled me to learn how to think the way that I do today.
If my
thinking seems at all admirable to the reader, then these
books are the
best stimulation I can offer. I will also include movies
and
music.
No one, by the
way, is being asked to
duplicate my reading list. On the contrary, if you find
just one
book of interest, that would be a considerable benefit.
Each of us, in fact, has to make our own choices
here.
There will also be a number of comments as seemed
interesting to
me, and hopefully interesting to the reader...
I have also
tried to give some
organization to this list, and a few explanatory comments as
seem
worthwhile. For the fun of it, I have given the
beginning of this
organization an old form, now mostly forgotten, but well worth
being
reborn in a new form: the Seven Liberal Arts, or the
Quadrivium and the
Trivium. In the old system these were: the Quadrivium:
Arithmetic, Geometry, Music and Astronomy; and the Trivium:
Grammar,
Logic and Rhetoric. All the same, into this form I will
be
putting books few in our aged universities have ever heard of.
The beginning form is old, the content is new (for the most part), and other matters
besides
these traditional themes will be added.
Please keep in mind we are not merely engaged in adding various groups of facts to our minds, but of stretching them - causing them to become more elastic, and to the degree possible: more self-aware. It is knowledge of the own mind that is crucial. By challenging it with situations in which it needs to make an effort, we do the same as we to today when we join a health club and exercise our bodies. Only in this instance, we exercise our minds - our individually unique soul and spirit capacities.
Arithmetic: obviously anyone
in school these days is confronted with demands for the study
of
algebra, and if they are to go into any higher level science
or
engineering, calculus, differential equations is so forth.
Here I
am going to suggest the reader actually go backward and try to
get
their hands on something from the 18th Century: Thomas
Taylor's
remarkable The Theoretic Arithmetic of the
Pythagoreans. ($10 and up on
Amazon.com). When you are done
playing with this book you will never look at the natural
number system
in the same way again.
Geometry: Here is a great
difficulty, for most of the best books are out of print.
Normally
one thinks of the geometry of Euclid, but in this instance the
newest
and the best is the study of Projective Geometry. George
Adams Physical
and Ethereal Spaces has only one
copy on
Amazon at $75. Olive Whicher's Projective
Geometry:
Creative Polarities in Space and Time is out of print, but one might be able to borrow
a copy
from any institution connected to Rudolf Steiner and
Anthroposophy
(libraries, Waldorf Schools etc), for these places often will
have
copies of these books. The importance of Whicher's book
is
significant and its being out of print a major tragedy, for it
offers
us the study of this profound and new geometry through
drawing, and the
use of our imagination (no need for proofs and analytic
thinking).
To give a hint, there is a major flaw in astronomical
theory in
the development of the idea of parallax, which in using the
rules of
the old Euclidean geometry instead of the rules of the new
projective
geometry, this present day astronomical theory has given us a
completely illusory view of Cosmic Space.
Music: I am really going to mess with people's minds here and recommend a science fiction novel: The Memory of Whiteness by Kim Stanley Robinson*. The point here is to read something that inspires us to take an interest in music theory, for the Universe (and even our selves and our social life) is organized on such musical principles as the ten forms of change: retrogradation, inversion, retrograde inversion, augmentation, dimunition, inclusion, textural, partition, interversion and exclusion.
[*a music leads the
mind through the starry night; and the
brain must expand to contain the flight; like a tree growing
branches
at the speed of light."]
Astronomy: No one, who has
seen the night sky far away from city lights (and even today
atmospheric pollution has made this worse), comes away
unimpressed.
Actually the development of astronomy fell into disarray
when
certain themes of Kepler were lost to modern understanding.
Kepler's Third Law, in particular, where Kepler was
convinced
that he now understood the ancients concepts of the Music of
the
Spheres, is more significant than most imagine. Two
books can
help here: The Harmony of the Spheres - a source book of
the
Pythagorean Tradition in Music,
edited by
Joscelyn Godwin. Here we come upon the synthesis of
musical,
arithmetical, geometric and astronomical ideas, for none of
the Seven
Liberal Arts stands alone. In addition, something very
modern: Weather
and Cosmos, by Dennis Klocek.
Klocek is
the foremost predictor of weather phenomena alive today (see
his:
doc.weather.com), and the key for him was found by
rediscovering
certain aspects of the thinking of Johannes Kepler forgotten
in the
rush to (as Kepler himself put it) thrown the baby out with
the
bathwater of the astronomical ideas of the ancients.
Grammar: Almost anything by
Owen Barfield: Speakers
Meaning; History
in
English Words; Saving
the
Appearances: a study in Idolatry
etc.
None of this is strictly about grammar per se, but we
really need
to begin to rediscover the latent potentials in language, for
language
can do so much more that sell and persuade.
Logic: For many reason is the
jewel in the life of the mind.
Unfortunately, the effort to make everything so formal,
and also
to study the mind from the outside instead of the inside (as
do the
spiritual savants of the East) has blinded most Western
thinkers to the
real nature of what makes reason so
powerful and
profound. So then the reader is invited to take up
epistemology,
or the study of how we know what we know. From many
years
experience (35 now), I can state unequivocally that these two
books by
Rudolf Steiner lead the reader to the deepest understanding of
the
nature of their own mind possible today in the West, through
the
scientific practice of introspection:
A Theory
of Knowledge Implicit in Goethe's World Conception; and, The
Philosophy of Spiritual Activity
(always in
print). Want to really understand reason? Then study what is right in front of you
in your
own mind.
Rhetoric: This subject is only
mastered in one way. By the actual practice of writing
and
speaking. It is more something we learn by doing that
almost all
the above subjects. The legendary science fiction writer
Ray
Bradbury is said to have, in his youth, written 10,000 words a
day.
As a result, when he finally found his distinctive voice
(his
individual art of Rhetoric) all those pages of material become
treasures that could be polished and published. I'm not
saying
the reader should do this much writing and speaking, but
nothing can
substitute for practice.
beyond then the
Quadrivium and Trivium
there exists:
the development of a moral
life: as this is rather personal, I
suggest for the Christian: The
Unvarnished New Testament, by Andy
Gaus.
Over the centuries, the dogmas and theological views of
all kinds
of late comers has come to inhabit most of the versions of the
New
Testament provided to us by the various sects, churches and
rites.
There is a great deal of power in how the New Testament
was
actually first written down, and Gaus has given us a direct
translation
from the original Greek into idiomatic English without adding
any
doctrinal interpretations. I also must, with some
degree of
modesty, offer my the Way of
the Fool: the conscious
development of
our human character, and the future of Christianity - both to
be born
out of the natural union of Faith and Gnosis.
and last...
understanding the times we
live in and the potentials for
the future: this book you now hold
in your
hands, of course, as well as my Uncommon
Sense. In addition: America's
Global
Responsibility: individuation, initiation and threefolding by Jesaiah Ben-Aharon; and, Paul Hawken's Blessed
Unrest.
I've also
produced something of a
bibliography for the appendix, which is simply a bare
unorganized list
of books I've read that helped me think about politics and
social life,
many of them novels.
*****************************
a gift from another's eyes
written, September 11th, 2004
he stood beside me, silent yet loudly proclaiming his truth
he grabbed my soul and offered his eyes, his dead ghostly eyes
some would say
but seeing out of them I could not say ghost or dead, but only
flaming living spirit!
I could not look away and we became one, and so I had to speak
to witness what we saw, or if you will, what he showed me.
first a high tower view and a desk full of papers
needing attention, and work
inside him a pain, a fight at breakfast the partner edgy, the children afraid
the marriage in jeopardy.
mind floating, he/we can't concentrate, something is not right, an hint of anxiety as if all stood balanced on the abyss
then the building shudders, a deep moaning cry, and while sounds of
explosions echo away into screams of fright
we run now, this way and that up and down
looking to escape the danger and the rumors
there is no hiding place, only the rock
panic now, smoke filling lungs, flames licking at windows,
sirens rising from below and panic wins
A chair through a window, which shouldn't break, but does
Insane now, we fly...out with no wings
tumbling over and over free somehow of most of fear,
except the dread of waiting for the pain of impact!
Finally it comes, and just as quickly passes,
and so we descend this ghost and I
our eyes united, our souls one
descend into the earth as if having jumped into a swimming pool
floating falling, gliding down and down a sense of maybe drowning in concrete and dirt, but then a hand
luminous, gentle, we are gripped taken hold of and lifted.
rising now, up through earth and then out
into sky and light seeing flame and smoke
but not alone
there are others with us, souls, spirits, what is in a name?
the luminous hand lets go, and we float now have the sense of a lifetime's companion protector, teacher, for whom the naked
words guardian angel hardly touch its meaning
then we watch as others are drawn up from falling or other forms of
life's end until first one and then the other
tower falls, and as each lets go, there is a tone, a deep bell
that rings through everything
finally, the smoke clears, and we can see that we are many now
thousands easily we circle round and above
the place of doom and the grief below rises through us
and we can not but breathe it in
for air is not our sustenance anymore, just feelings, raw sometimes and light filled when others below pray, and we breathe it in and witness.
we circle round some more, for this is our first new task
to witness and bear within the grief of that which
we have left behind
eventually, one by one we are drawn higher, and he who has given me his
eyes, turns, and sees his grandmother who holds him, and us, close at first
drawn higher we are, the many witnesses, knowing just our
witnessing itself is sacrifice received into the Heart and Root of all the World
sacrifice received, a date and time and place made sacred
but even as we left this hallowed place, following
the grandmother's kindness, we could see behind us
a darkness forming, for already some hearts, cold and wrong
made ready to steal what they could of this sacrifice
made by both the still living. and the newly gone
a theft more terrible then the doom of
falling towers themselves so like a child needing comfort, we two
turned away from this flooding darkness seeking the grandmother
to rest there in such embrace as never before needed, or felt.
touched this way we travel through
a quick remembering of life, and sensing shame at those all
too frequent dark deeds,
she leads us on, and takes us to a school wherein we will
live how it felt to others to know us.
the girl we teased for a torn dress, whose soul we scarred with shame
the boy we tripped whose nose was broken in the fall
and whose father beat him later for a coward he was not
the teacher who lost her job and later killed herself for the
lie we told about the touch that never happened
all this and more we lived inside what they felt,
and the years passed, while the earth below
continued its ravages of light and pain
yes there was light, even in our story...
the child we loved and held when sick, walking the night away
the friend we stayed with when the drink was too much
and life more than they could bear
the year we volunteered at the shelter
we knew it all, our deeds of dark and light, and how they felt to
others
early once, in this long school of others feelings,
there came a break and grandmother took us from
this labor for a time
down to earth again, to a place of strangeness
a people not like what we had been
A small room, a woman rocking a child and crooning a wordless
tune, yet something more she felt than love
fear it was, a nameless dread too soon to be fulfilled
as the night exploded with light and sound
and the ground shuddered until after a moments pause
a great stone fell from the sky
thrown by a bomb made in America, the stone hurled
up and up and then fell through the roof, crushing mother
and daughter, and for the little girl a lingering death
innocence shattered and life ended in enduring only pain
but then we saw the angels come and drawing them up they too
stood around, in groups with varied faces, foreign and domestic
in the nearby invisible realm of true light they too witnessed for a time, until we watched the older relatives take them up, and on to that school of
mirrors of life felt and not seen
But his grandmother was not through, and she pulled us down, down and down beneath the earth, and we knew we followed
where Christ had once gone, on a Saturday, straight to Hell!
Down she took us, this wise elder woman, down and down
through realms of bestial screams and inhuman cries
places so dark and mean that mere words cannot find names
until a realm is seen, somehow on the other side
of Hell there is a place of Light
How could this be we think, but pulled ever on by elder
wisdom we come to a place so gentle and kind of feeling
so safe, so much like home remembered
and then we see them, there in the Root of the World,
sitting in a circle, individual and joined at the same time
names fly through our mind Demeter, Diana, Persephone,
Sophia and the Holy Mother
What Mystery! that on the other side of Hell
lives the deeps of the Divine Feminine, the realm of the true
Dark, the Dark in which the Light Itself was born
Then we saw it falling from above, a constant endless rain of evil deeds,
of pain and hate and violence and more
a rain of poison, and theft of innocence and all the most
terrible of human actions falling like darkest, vilest
blood, on the circle there - the circle of deepest Holy Dark
into them it streamed, this evil dark substance unredeemed
where breasts had once given milk it entered in
where the womb had once given birth, it entered in
streaming hate and crime, moving into the Holy Mother through
all Her wounds that should but bear the most wondrous gifts
But that was not the end of it, for once inside such a power
eyes could not bear took hold, and rendered
all this hate and evil Impotent! Powerless! Undone!
through the wounds of giving went the evil, and inside
it lost its nature, for there a great and holy power transformed
our darkest acts, until
from out the eyes and mouth of Feminine Mystery
came tears and words of love golden, light filled, rising
not falling, back through the realms of Hell came tears
and words of love
all to soon now, before we could contemplate this miracle
divine, his grandmother took us back and up
to a new place of vision, outside the earth, as if
on the moon, yet closer, and so we saw
the earth naked in its spiritual truth
there before our gaze we saw the man on the cross, His image
fading out to earth and then fading back in again
in the ever pulsing Heart of the World, first the one image - just the earth,
then the other - the man on the cross
but even that was not fixed, for the man on the cross
shifted as well, sometimes sitting on a rock, holding children in his lap
or blessing a woman or becoming a dove
or sitting at the feet of the highest
but as we watched we saw more...more evil, more hate, more crime, more
theft of innocence for not all evil fell downward through Hell
toward the Holy Mother, resting in the Root of the World
not all for evil's hunger could not rest
in just one place, but sought to despoil all that lived
or loved the Light
so an equal portion rose up and out especially that most terrible
of lies, hypocrisy - to say one thing and do another
here too, in the Heart of the World, the wounds were
entrance points, and evil flowed into Him as well
five wounds two on hands two on feet
and one opposite the heart itself
but there too, within Him, it was made impotent, unbound,
and healed, so that now from a second place
tears and words of love fell inward from without
fell from how He surrounded and held the world to his bosom,
falling slowly toward the earth tears and words of love
falling inward, from the surrounding Heart of the World
meeting that which was falling upward from
the Root of the World
meeting each other, these tears and words of love,
mingling, touching, mixing, changing into a fine mist
invisible to the eye but everywhere,
an atmosphere of healing feeling breathed in by human hearts,
wherever and whenever they opened to each other
human open hearts breathing in the mist
of tears and words of love the Mother and the Son
having redeemed evil and changed it into love
sustenance, nourishment, a Eucharist of being.
enters open human hearts and graces them,
granting courage, wisdom, and even more love
it was too much to see such Holy Craft and Art
And while I did not want to leave his eyes which saw so much,
and witnessed such as could not be imagined
yet leave I had to, and so the grandmother returned him
him she sent back to school and me she sent down
down once more into substance and matter,
to my keyboard so as to record and witness
what was seen
and felt, this day of
September the 11th, 2004
*****************************
Surfing the Coming Tsunami
of History
part one
the descent into madness
- government
during the end of a civilization -
A lot of people
look at the Bush II
administration and see culpable and intentional mismanagement
leading
to gross and destructive failures, which is to a degree
accurate.
Karl Rove's contribution is deeply clever (callus and
indifferent
logic), but without any heart. The actual appreciation
of the
nature of government, and the wise exercise of its powers, is
something
that neither Bush II or Dick Chaney had any real abilities to
discern.
As a social
phenomena, this
administration is a disaster for the reasons outlined above.
Most
of the power players, including many Congressional Republicans
and
Democrats, as well as various bureaucrats, simply lacked any
developed
capacities from their education and upbringing that made them
capable
of handling the power they held or even of understanding their
opportunities and real powers.
Any careful and
thoughtful examination of
political speech, and various kinds of elaborated government
policies,
reveals a complete absence of rational coherence. Many
personalities involved in government do not even really follow
their
stated ideologies, but rather are (in varying degrees)
basically
addicted to power, the ultimate addiction. The kinds of
excesses
and depravities known to have unfolded during the last years
of the
Roman Empire are everywhere today in Washington D.C. (albeit
modern in
taste, not ancient). At the same time, this moral swamp
(inhabiting a land area that was originally a real swamp,
which is why
the relevant States gave it away), is able to hide its
excesses from
the lame powers of a press that is more interested in its own
celebrity, than in actually playing a role in our polity.
Without
real investigative journalism, but instead a kind of commerce
driven
infotainment, rational discourse on public issues simply does
not arise.
Everyone has
opinions of course, but
given how weakly educated (see the above essay on real
education) many
are, as a consequence of the failure of all of our schools of
higher
education, unable to display any ability to think with
penetrating care
through the illusions of the times. Yes, it is true that
certain
academics (such as Noam Chomsky) do engage in
penetrating
analysis of flawed government policies. At the same
time, even
such as these have been unable to come to a sufficient
understanding of
how the world actually works, so as to lead us to the
knowledge we
require to heal the situation.
They
understand, to a degree, that
something is wrong, but they have missed out on appreciating
what is
right. The world is a delicate balance of powers that
are more
psychological-emotional then logical - more of psyche and
spirit than
grounded rational thought. This is why I characterized
our
current state of governance as a descent into madness.
We suffer an
essentially psychic
disturbance that is profoundly spiritual in its nature, and
until we
understand that dimension of political and social reality, we
cannot
take hold of the real levers by which to move our civilization
through
this process of metamorphosis with an appropriate wisdom.
(Again,
see my book the Way of the Fool).
For example, no
modern political speech,
of whatever party or persuasion, would pass muster in a court
of law,
where rules of evidence, and the ability to cross-examine and
otherwise
test the credibility of the speaker are in play.
Political speech
is irrational speech, and sometimes acutely so.
The recent
demands of Sam Harris, in his
book the End of Faith, that religion
needs to be rationally tested, could also be applied to the
religion
that is politics and the religion that is economics. Our
political leaders and our business leaders, believe several
dozen
irrational things all before breakfast (as the cliche goes).
Even
Harris's book fails the same test of reason he tries to apply
to
religious thought.
In the previous
essay I pointed to two
books required by a modern self-educated mind, that really
wants to
know true
reason as an experience (A
Theory
of Knowledge Implicit in Goethe's World Conception; and, The
Philosophy of Freedom - both by
Rudolf
Steiner (1861-1925).
One way to
appreciate this, something in
part recognized by Harris in his book on religious Faith, is
that if we
lay along side each other the various views of politicians,
and
business leaders (and leading economists) we find that they
are
universally in fundamental disagreement. While those who
pursue
the dismal science (economics), do at least act as if they
seek the
truth, politicians show no evidence whatsoever of wanting or
needing
the truth. Karl Rove has clearly stated for
example, that
an empire can create the truth by its actions. But even
he, if he
had to present his ideas in a court of law, would be unable to
prove
the rationality of the views he holds, and acts upon.
This is not to
say our courts of law are
free from the ongoing degeneration of civilization, but the
rules of
evidence do provide a kind of test that would work soundly to
help us
through certain otherwise insane political and economic
dialogs.
Only when the courts undertake the strange ritual of
so-called
"expert testimony" do they wander into the nether world of
irrationality, for clearly when two entirely conflicting views
are
presented, one (at least, it could be both) has to be false.
If
the person who is in error is an expert, then by what standard
was the
other expert thought to be his equal. Anyone who follows
the Law
and Order television series has seen this strange rite of
competing
experts, which in the end oddly enough gives over to the
common sense
of the jury a determination of which imaginary expert makes a
more
persuasive case.
Now if we step
back from this situation a
bit, and make it a part of the phenomena that we need to
understand,
this situation of poor education and near rabid irrationality
(opinion
and belief seek to trump the search for truth on all levels),
then we
can begin to discover that the underlying reality of human
affairs -
(if we wish to understand it even in a rational fashion) -
this effort
to discover this reality has to include in its point of view
just why
it is that what we call irrationality, and what others call
evil, exist
at all.
Harris and
others seem to think that
rationality is superior to all other forms of human expression
(although his own political ideas fail miserably at the bar of
rational
thought). This approach wants to pretend the irrational
and the
immoral have no part to play in human affairs, and that
science's
rationality will save us all. Now that's an irrational
thought!
In the end we
have to come up with a view
of the world that takes account of that which is not rational,
which
includes a great deal of what we call religious ideas and the
expressions in art. Once we can appreciate that the
descent into
madness that characterizes the nature of government, in this
time of
social metamorphosis, is rooted in some kind of real
aspect of
human nature, we end up with a whole other level of questions.
Harris and
those like him, would exclude
from consideration, with the wave of a vain assumption, all
that is
irrational simple because it is (in their view) irrational.
In a
very real sense this approach says that what is phenomena in
the social
(irrationality and evil) can be dismissed from having any
meaning.
Once we've put these real social events in the black
hole of
meaninglessness, then all we have to deal with is our personal
gods of
rationality, and the rest are lessor beings (those who hold
what we
deem to be irrational thoughts), while we are superior and
ought to
rule.
This picture at
this point then is
crucial. The decision making processes of modern
political
leaders and economic thinkers, as well as many many others,
does not
arise solely from human reason. Our collapsing
civilization is
descending into a quite definite state of social madness, at
the top as
much as at the bottom. The main proof of this is that
there is no
universal coherence of thought. Not even science (which
likes to
pretend that it does) possesses this coherence, and certainly
neither
politics, or religion or art (for that matter) do either.
People swim in
a sea of beliefs and
opinions, and we are in a time where the conflicts between the
differences lead more and more to impassioned conflict, many
times
violent and destructive. We try to appear reasonable in
many
circumstances, but since there is no common result of our
individual
application of reason, we have to consider that something else
is going
on - if we wish to understand the world in which we live.
Given this
situation (and leaving the
debate is to why and what from my point of view to what is
written in
my book the Way of the Fool), the next
step arises in the following essay, and is quite justified in
the mind
of the reader: Wendt, if you are right in insisting
government in
this time is inherently irrational, what do you think would
be....
***************************
part two
what a sane government might look like
- how the power of the presidency could be applied
in the
coming time of social chaos -
In a certain
sense this material below
would have to be considered a kind of fantasy. But,
let's face
it, most political promises are already a kind of fantasy, so
in
imagining something different coming out of the Executive
Branch we
haven't really gone outside ordinary political speech at all.
Just to be
clear on this, consider a
presidential candidate that promises a certain governmental
action that
would naturally require the passage of legislation. Why
any sane
person would think this a promise that could be keep is beyond
me.
The process by which a presidential intention becomes
legislative
action is difficult, and a simple check of history shows how
infrequently such promises are kept. Granted the Bush II
administration was able to work in such a way that the
Republican
legislative majority acted with considerable unity and in
coordination
with the White House, really only proves the case.
Most of what
was done was not only not
promised by Bush and Chaney during the campaigns, but in many
cases
what they promised was the opposite of what they did. If
we want
to reason about this in terms of causal relationships - i.e.
seeking a
kind of why, we end up with something that was really a kind
of
collective psychology of a small group of men, who found
themselves in
seats of power, yet who also had no self-understanding.
The Neo-cons
(small group of men) created
a collective world view, one in which they hungered to be able
to act
upon the world out of this somewhat demented set of policy
conceptions
(America as Empire). Their fantasies, worked out in
elaborate
think-tank papers, became at an odd historical moment capable
of being
acted upon. These policies where argued about for many
years
before they were applied, and the method by which these people
came to
power is itself a remarkable subject for investigation, for if
we
examine it carefully, they were hardly in control of events at
all.
Certainly they tried, especially under the influence of
Karl
Rove, to rise to power by intention, but the collective
madness of the
times played a much greater role than any political skill.
For example,
the real dominant power as
to much of what government does is to be found in the banking
industry.
These folks work at being nameless for the most part,
and have
successfully (up to this point) hidden from the general public
the
nature of their influence. A additional lot of what is
possible
influence comes from the historical relationships between the
Defense
Department, and the major industrial corporations that supply
armaments. The reaching into Republican politics
of the
Christian Right is another excess, which coming from an
entirely
different section of our society, also can't be causally
related to the
rest.
Because of the influence of corporations (not just armaments makers), the legislative branch is filled with individuals who owe their continued election to their willingness to sell their favors to the highest bidder. Thus we have the Abramoff and other similar scandals, which give evidence of multiple kinds of corruption everywhere.
If we just step back, and don't look at things as having a kind of simple explanation (Bush did it, Rove did it, whatever), then we see there is a kind of collective political madness, rooted in greed and the love of power, which eventually so possesses the holders of power in Washington that a kind of crisis arises - the whole explodes into a kind of weird excess that pours its own irrationality all over the world.
In my book Uncommon
Sense, I describe the degeneration
of the
nature of the Republic - of the American Experiment - as a natural
social-political process, that has also turned a kind of
corner, if we are paying attention. The very fact, for
example,
of the present day financial crisis involves the beginning of
a kind of
collective waking up from a very bad political nightmare.
Now
this waking up is not over. We will (as near as I can
anticipate)
have to endure additional kinds of very serious troubles,
because (if
we look at history, for example) we will suffer much
more before
we find a way to action (just like our Founders had to endure
serious
privations and abuses of power by the English Crown before
they acted,
and then even after they started to act they had 10 years of
conflict).
Only out of such a process is a next step in the
American
Experiment to become possible.
What this means
for this essay (and this
book) is that the below imagination of a more sane executive
branch
hopes to serve just how we consider what might be done that
makes this
next phase of the Republic find its right shape and healthy
foundation.
Hopefully this little story will show that there are
wise
alternatives to what politicians currently promise, such that
we, as
Citizens, began to alter not just our expectations of
electoral
processes and candidate selection, but more crucially our own
political
behavior. Americans really get the kind of government
they seek,
and if they continue to remain asleep little will change.
Yes, I know,
everyone has a better idea.
But what I am advocating is that this fact of everyone
having a
different better idea suggests that something else is going
on, that is
not being taken account of. The Christian Right thinks
its
smarter than the Liberal Left. The rational scientist
thinks he
is wiser than the career politician. The gossip
mongering
reporter thinks the public's right to know includes all manner
of
private (as against public) facts. Glance across the
spectrum of
magazines, newspapers, blogs and whatnot, you will find a
colossal
absence of fundamental agreement on any basic facts.
Everyone
insists they are right, and few
of them bother to notice that this claim by everyone to be
right is
itself the most significant fact of all!
If we are going
to understand human
social-political life at all, we have to find a way to take
account of
such basic realities, and to find processes by which the whole
(to a
degree) can find enough consensus to move forward for the
benefit of
all, even though disagreement is everywhere.
The Founders of
the American Experiment
understood this, and the Constitution was meant to accommodate
this
problem. Yet, what we live in today is a struggle by one
or
another point of view to dominate the others, often through
extreme
variations of lying and cheating, if not outright violence.
If a
president were to try to heal such a situation, what could he
or she do?
Its actually very simple to state: Get the combatants to sit at the same table. The president, instead of leading his own group to its dominance (an excess with terrible consequences that we have just all witnessed), takes us all toward mutual comprehension and understanding. The president is no longer partisan, but a true statesman.
What could this
look like?
Here is how I
would do it. The
assumption here is that I have been elected, so that now the
problem is
what to do, not how to go about getting in a place of being
able to do
something. As explained elsewhere in my political
writings
(Citizen Governance, for example), the core gesture is to
focus on the
means not the end. A true statesman will follow the same
peaceful
means, recognizing that it is how we travel that is crucial,
not that
we arrive at a certain place by any cost. It is the mode
of
travel, and its nature that is crucial.
I actually wrote a blog entry to Al Gore, suggesting that he stood in such a place (had such an opportunity), so lets start with that before proceeding to how to act in office:
"Dear Al, or
how to win the election
without getting trapped in any of the old political BS.
"Dear American
Statesman, Mr. Al Gore,
"I know you
would like to be president,
and a lot of us would like that too. I also know that campaign
politics
is not any longer to your taste, and that all your so-called
political
advisers will probably want to talk you into the same methods
of
political campaigning everyone else is doing. We all (even the
advisers) know this is stupid, but no one seems to have a
better idea -
except me and I am giving it to you for free. Be grateful -
you'll
never get better free advice anywhere (you could of course pay
me, I
need the money, but I'm also not going to hold my breath).
"Your present
stature (well earned) is as
a Statesman. Don't give it up to become just another ambitious
politician. It is possible to conduct an election campaign as
an act of
service and stay away from all the self-serving BS so common
to
everyone else.
"The first act
(very crucial) is to throw
out the ambition. Don't run for president in order to win!
Don't do it!
This is the big mistake that everyone else is making and you
can avoid
it if you try. Why?
"As soon as we
inwardly form the desire
to win, we start to make compromises, and it is as someone not
making
compromises that makes us a Statesman. Of course, some will
say you
have to have money to win and so forth, or even to campaign,
and that
is all true in the old way, but the new kind of
service-directed
campaign I have in mind here is not going to require much
wealth at
all. In fact, you'll succeed even if you don't get elected
(which I
suspect you will anyway, but cheaters are out there so who can
say for
sure), and you'll be such a good example that this very act of
yours
will change political life everywhere entirely. You'll set an
example
so high that others will look like fools not to copy it, and
before the
election even, you'll find them running around trying to do it
like you
are doing it.
"Lets start by
remembering the stupid way
politicians now campaign. They raise a lot of money and travel
around
trying to get voters to vote for them in primary elections so
as to get
the nomination. Have to get on ballots advisers say. Have to
raise
millions advisers say. Have to run lots of TV ads, have huge
state by
state staffs, and at the same time run around giving speech
after
speech after speech (often the same damn one all the time,
which has to
be boring and not very good for your mind). In my method you
don't have
to do any of this.
"You also don't
have to court the media,
for the very same process that will make the other candidates
look like
fools, will make the media look like fools. You see, there is
this very
strange fact (true in the present, and could be an opportunity
lost if
not acted upon). The American People are fed up with business
as usual.
Neither Congress or the President now gets even 30% in the
polls.
People are screaming for something different, and you have
achieved the
status of Statesman, and they love you for it. So the big
danger for
you is to come down from that status and becoming again a mere
politician. Don't do it!
"Plus, this
process of campaigning (I
know this is a big build up, but I'll deliver) will fold over
into an
entirely new way as to how to conduct yourself in office.
That's right!
You campaign the same basic way you operate as president, the
one
seamlessly blending into the other, all the while never
leaving the
status of being a Statesman.
"The question
to ask yourself is what do
people want. What do the voters (and non-voters - don't leave
them out)
want? They want to be heard! It is the most simple need in the
world,
to have leaders who come to them and just listen. How strange
(not!).
The Press will go nuts, saying where is your position on the
issues,
why don't you have big policy papers, why aren't you telling
everyone
what to do (so as soon as your back is turned we can criticize
you for
your ideas).
"But you aren't
being a politician
anymore, you are being a Statesman!
"Now lets do a
basic run through of the
fundamental idea. Imagine...
"Iowa. Al
Gore's buses come to town,
after a little advance work. There's a community hall set up,
with
certain technical functions (you bring them), which include
some good
lighting, some comfortable chairs around a big circular table,
and some
digital cameras (sort of YouTube stuff). You sit at the table,
dressed
casually (you aren't meeting bigwigs, just working people and
farmers,
school teachers and parents - all the really important people
in our
society). [Someone in the Press might make fun of King Al and
the
Knights of the Round Table - let them, and ask them if they
know a
better way for people to speak from their hearts to someone
who might
be THEIR president. And, ask them why they (the Press) think
they know
better than the ordinary people in America. You see, the Press
isn't
liked either, and you'll only gain stature and interest by
being
equally critical of the Press when you see all this stuff from
the
point of view of the guy having to make 14 ends meet in a
economy that
is getting queerer by the minute.]
"You see the
way this is going to work is
that the Press will first criticize and act all snotty. Then
after a
while they'll realize that folks are paying attention to you,
perhaps
more attention to you than to them. As this unfolds, the
actual
political conversation is going to change. Lets return to our
picture... A local store or whatever has been paid to provide
some
refreshments of a local variety - stuff the people at the
table will
enjoy. You are going to sit and break bread with the people
you are
going to serve, and find out about their needs and listen to
their
voices. You do get to ask a question or two, but not in order
to
represent your views. Rather your role is to bring your
experience in
government to the situation, and to help the people talking
find good
questions. They might want Washington to do a certain thing,
and you
are going to be very honest with them about how difficult that
is. They
might then say what do we do to fix that, and you ask them why
they
keep voting for the same people all the time. Not hard
questions meant
to make them feel bad, but honest questions, neighbor to
neighbor about
what to do about the bad dog down the block who is making
everyone's
life miserable.
"They will ask
you questions. The first
rule is tell the truth, even if it means confessing to having
done less
than your best in the past. All of these people know about
failure and
mistakes - they live life in the real world, not in the
fantasy America
that exists in the language of most political speech.
"The point is
not to always have glib and
easy answers. There aren't any easy answers! Just shared
problems and
maybe good hearted intentions to work together. Someone might
say to
you, that you are just going to be another politician
regardless of
this "listening" meetings you are having, and you say that you
hope
not, but they could be right. In point of fact, they will say
a lot of
stuff that might be painful to hear and the best response will
be
agreement.
"They are going
to ask you about money,
your money. You should ask yourself first. How did you get so
rich?
What are you doing with it? Why are you charging so much money
to do
speeches? You need to recognize that in the present time, as
the middle
class is disappearing and more people are falling downward
economically, that an excessive display of wealth is getting
to be just
as egregious in the eyes of ordinary people as the thoughtless
displays
of wealth of the aristocrats in pre-revolutionary France.
"People will tolerate it if they believe you understand how insane this all is, and how America needs to change course economically as well as politically. Think of this work as a kind of steam valve - letting people talk about difficult questions, perhaps presently unsolvable questions - lets the pressure off a bit. They not only get heard, they get a release.
"Now expand the
above imaginative
scenario a thousand-fold. Instead of giving speeches you go
around
listening to people. Then, to top it off, you get them to sign
releases
so that their thoughts and ideas get on the Internet. You also
make CDs
of each event, and distribute them locally for free. Everyone
you talk
to gets one, and all their neighbors. In the beginning it will
all seem
strange, but as you do it there will be a kind of
informational wave
front running out ahead of you. People coming to events like
this will
after a time have already looked at other people's stuff.
Maybe your
advance people can make prior conversations available in the
upcoming
communities. Instead of dividing the country up with hard and
fast
positions, you are actually enabling the country to talk to
itself!
Getting the picture yet?
"Some questions
might need some experts
to ponder. So for every 10 meetings with ordinary people, you
do one
with experts from a specific field that has come under
question by the
people to which you have been listening. You put the questions
to the
experts, and these are people you can make sweat. Don't let
them dodge
into cliches and other usual BS. Invite folks across a
spectrum of
point of view in that field, but stay away from the usual
talking heads
on TV. People are tired of yelling and screaming. They want to
see
intelligent discourse. That too goes on the Internet and on
ahead via
CDs.
"CDs should
also go backward. After
talking to farmers in the center of the Country you take their
questions to the so-called experts (actually a lot of farmers
know a
great deal more than the experts). So you loop around again,
visit some
of the same folks, making sure that they've had a chance to
see how the
dialog went onward after it came by them the first time. Maybe
you put
some ordinary folk in with the so-called experts. You invite
competing
candidates to sit down with ordinary people and talk to them.
Everyone
gets included!
"This then is
your work as a Statesman.
You facilitate a huge national conversation, one that gets
taken into
the deepest questions (the content of many of the great
speeches you
gave the last few years about the real nature of government,
our
constitution and the troubles that face us). I guarantee
you'll blow
minds everywhere, and even if not elected, you will change the
face of
American politics forever. Plus, if you do get elected, you
will not be
carrying into office the baggage of a lot of self-serving
semi-honest
useless positions on the issues. You'll find yourself free in
a way you
never felt before, and if in office you then get to...
"Continue to do
the same thing!!!
Imagine...
"A government
cable channel, where you
and every Secretary and Under-Secretary of a department has to
sit at a
round table with citizens discussing with them their needs,
and
listening to their concerns. The variations on this theme are
considerable and will lead to huge transparency. The corporate
folks
will go nuts, because their whole power base is rooted in
secrecy.
Think what it will do to the Legislative Branch, and maybe the
Judicial
Branch as well. They will be under tremendous pressure to
institute
similar kinds of relationships to the People for whom they
work. Such
dialogs don't have to always generate answers, but its well
past time
the folks in government that work for the People had to
actually sit
down with those People in a public (cable) forum and answer
questions.
"Of course, you
could get shot on the way
to doing this, but as John Perkins, the author of Confessions
of
an Economic Hit Man, is going around
saying: Isn't it time we all took the same risks and pledges
as our
founders, when they signed the Declaration of Independence,
with its
last line: "And
for support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the
protection
of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our
Lives, our
Fortunes and our sacred Honor.""
That's the
basic idea I gave away to Al
Gore in my blog of June 26th 2007. You saw above the
transition,
to being actually in office, but next I'll try to put some
more flesh
on that aspect of this idea.
A true
statesman, instead of insisting
his point of view is right, understands that all points of
view have to
be heard, and in a forum where they also have to justify
themselves.
Anyone can offer an opinion on any subject.
Explaining to
others why its such a good idea is, however, a great deal
harder.
So here's what
my day and week would look
like if I was president.
Many meetings
around a round table with
others of differing points of view (including experts and
ordinary
people) about subjects of mutual concern, all done in a format
that is
cable, Internet, and CD (or DVD) ready.
I ask them
questions, keep them focused,
call bullshit bullshit when its spoken. I don't pretend
to have
the answers. I don't pretend to even have the best
questions.
What I do have is a wise process by which public
(transparent)
conversation about what government is about and what it should
do is
out there for everyone to participate in.
In essence,
what the Founders discussed
among themselves, and wrote about in the various Federalist
and
anti-Federalist papers, leaves the realm of elites, and enters
the
realm of the ordinary common sense wisdom of ordinary people.
What the Press and the politicians have failed to do for
years,
gets done right out there where everyone can see it.
As president I wouldn't be the star, I'd be the mediator, with the People being the stars. Of course, the facts of the nature of government will for a long time require the executive branch to make crucial decisions (the buck does stop there). But if the ongoing dialogs are healthy and vital, and free of spin, lies, secrets, etc., then when the executive has to act the basis for that action will have been collectively debated, and the People will understand it, for they will have been a major factor in the conversation leading to the decision.
You see, in the
present, its easy to give
a public announcement and say the most illogical ill-informed
crap, and
nobody really questions what is said. In this new kind
of
government, where the basic task of the statesman-leader is to
foster
dialog, the whole quality of the public discourse will be
lifted.
It will become impossible for any loud and angry
minority to
proclaim it knows better than anyone else what should be done,
because
someone from their point of view will have had to present and
justify
that view before the conscience of the People's Round Table.
Of course there
are all kinds of
questions as to the details, but I think the reader should by
now
understand and appreciate the wisdom of the basic idea, which
then
leads us to one of the main consequences of public dialog -
laws and
legislation, so naturally we now go on to...
part three
on the law and the spirit
We all
understand we are a nation of
laws, but few of us actually step back from that and ask why
we need to
have laws in the first place. How do you have real
freedom and laws? What social value does the existence
of law
serve? Do we have good laws today, or has something gone
wrong
there too, as appears to have gone wrong just about everywhere
else?
We have a
cliche about the difference
between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law.
Above,
in discussing irrationality we noticed that it is everywhere,
and that
sometimes we can only look at social phenomena and recognize
that
somewhere inside them is something that has to be called
madness or
evil or both.
In my book the
Way of
the Fool, I provide an elaborate
discussion
of the relationship between the truly spiritual and our social
existence. Here I am going to address these questions
from a
quite different direction.
We have
thoughts, feelings (emotions) and
actions. The U.S. Constitution is an action, from one
point of
view, but is also a very profound idea from another. Our
Founders
felt their freedom being compromised by the English
Aristocracy, and
after many years of abuse finally said: no more!
I am going to
suggest something, but not
insist it is the only way to look at things social and
political.
Hopefully it will be useful.
Our Founders
had a lot of wisdom, not all
wisdom to be sure, but they were careful thinkers and had
basically
good hearts. They didn't agree on everything, but in
creating the
U.S. Constitution they did something never before done in
history,
which I (and others) have been calling: the American
Experiment.
They saw that
there seemed to be three
natural divisions of process in government. The making
of laws
they put first, that is the Legislative Branch (Article I,
comprised of
ten Sections) is elaborated first in the Constitution, a fact
that
ought not to be ignored. Then they elaborated the powers
of the
Executive Branch (Article II, comprised of 4 Sections), before
finally
setting out the powers of the Judicial Branch (Article III,
comprised
of 3 Sections).
With intention they divided up the various powers that they understood government needed to have, but clearly they also tried to give the most power to the Legislative Branch, not the Executive or the Judicial. Everyone who wants to actually be a citizen and vote in our constitutional Republic ought to consider it their primary duty to be familiar with this document. All the political wisdom of Western Civilization was translated into a seed form in this very precise, elegant and short work on practical political philosophy.
We could say
that a description of the spirit of the
laws of the United States of America is expressed
in these Ideas. When this document is joined to the
Declaration
of Independence, and also to Thomas Paine's remarkable Common
Sense, we
will understand the spirit out of which our
way of
life was born.
Everyone, I
believe, who is not entirely
asleep, realizes that we have lost a connection to this spirit
of the
law. A modern legislator, in justifying his 1000 page
legal
mumbo-jumbo allowing pharmaceutical companies to basically
regulate
themselves, will hardly try to connect his proposed letter of
the law
to this spirit. Rather he simply exercises a power,
granted him
by the People under the Constitution, which he (the
legislator) no
longer appreciates is a grant of
power. Such
legislators act is if the power was theirs to use in any
arbitrary way
they desire, and the spirit of the Constitution be damned.
One of the
important ideas, which was
assumed by the Founders, and exposed to modern minds in the
recent HBO
series on John Adams, is the idea of the rule
of law. The Constitution is in fact an agreement, a
social
contract, in which the Citizen, via his representatives in
Congress,
agrees to abide by this concept of the rule
of law. No
longer is the arbitrary power of an hereditary aristocrat to
rule, but the law,
the social contract is to rule.
So far then we have brought forward three important concepts: spirit, grant and rule. Spirit is the idea of the law, a grant is the process by which the law is generated, and the rule is the law itself to which we, out of our freedom, choose to submit. One is a kind of thought, the other comes from a kind of feeling, and the third is an action, or act of will.
Unfortunately,
in this time of great
madness, few in government or banking and finance (as well as
a lot of
other places) any more believe we are a nation of laws, but
rather that
we are just a collection of competing Darwinian animals,
justified in
any excess in their hunger for domination.
As Richard
Dreyfuss pointed out about a
year ago on Bill Mahre's show on HBO, no one anymore is taught
basic
Civics, and without that there is no way to understand why our
nation
was meant to be the way that it was meant to be, or why we are
presently in so much danger. The richest and most
powerful long
ago stopped following the rule of law, and since then only
have sought
the application of such rules when it was for their benefit
alone.
The social contract was broken and the Republic - the
American
Experiment - died with it.
A tragedy?
Sure. A historical
necessity? Probably? A solvable problem? You
bet your
sweet ass!
In spite of all
the aspects of the
Experiment that failed to live, some very important parts did
not quite
die. The basic skeleton was there, in the words of the
Constitution. Government acted through somewhat well
defined
channels. The river of the application of power was
directed
though a maze of rules that made the death of the Republic
take a very
long time. It is only now, where our civil liberties
(the Bill of
Rights) is under a conscious attack, that the final battle
comes to its
climax.
We can still
talk to each other and still
assemble (gather in groups). Thus we have free speech
and times
of conversation. A great deal can happen if we take hold
of those
rights and apply them to a conscious process of reeducating
ourselves
in the fundamental questions. What is the spirit of a
law?
Why do we have a nation of laws? How do laws
arise?
Are they a temporary grant of power from the people to
others?
You see, one of
the ways we are defeated
is by being told to think of certain things as "issues".
From
that point of view we lie to ourselves about a more
fundamental
question, which is whether the system is working at all
anymore.
So people argue over policy and clean air acts and green
house
gasses, and never bother to figure out that the reason there
is so much
insanity in the world is that we have lost the connection to
the
fundamentals - to an appreciating that the rule of law is a
social
contract, for example.
Its not whether
the policies of the Bush
II administration are insane and ought to be something else,
but
whether or not anyone in Washington anymore follows the rule
of law, believes in its spirit, or
understands that
this social contract is something to which we consent (or not, out of
our freedom), and by which we grant
limited power to others in order to make government run in a
practical
fashion (reread the preamble to the Constitution here: We the People of the
United
States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish
Justice,
insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense,
promote
the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to
ourselves
and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution
for the
United States of America.)
Once we start
to have that discussion,
then what to do to fix things will come to us far more easily
than it
does when we focus on the illusory realm of "issues".
"Issues"
are the symptoms of the failure of the social contract, and
what we
need and want to do is to renew that contract, from the ground
up.
To do that we need a long and thoughtful discussion to
be going
on, at the same time we fight all the other battles for
survival the
next years are going to place in front of us.
People really
need to have faith in their
government, especially if they recognize that they,
themselves, are
that government*. The more faith the People of the
United States
of America have in each other, and the less faith they have in
politicians, financiers and talking news heads on TV, the
better off
all of us are going to be.
*a government of the
People, by the People, and for the
People
***********************
Appendices
Eisenhower's
Farewell Speech
From the Public Papers of the Presidents, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1960, p. 1035- 1040
My fellow Americans:
Three days from now, after half a century in the service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor.
This evening I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen.
Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all.
Our people expect their President and the Congress to find essential agreement on issues of great moment, the wise resolution of which will better shape the future of the Nation.
My own relations with the Congress, which began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war and immediate post-war period, and, finally, to the mutually interdependent during these past eight years.
In this final relationship, the Congress and the Administration have, on most vital issues, cooperated well, to serve the national good rather than mere partisanship, and so have assured that the business of the Nation should go forward. So, my official relationship with the Congress ends in a feeling, on my part, of gratitude that we have been able to do so much together.
II.
We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.
III.
Throughout America's adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.
Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology -- global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger is poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle -- with liberty the stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.
Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research -- these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.
But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs -- balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage -- balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.
The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only.
IV.
A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.
Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.
Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present
* and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system -- ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.
V.
Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we -- you and I, and our government -- must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.
VI.
Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.
Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.
Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose differences, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war -- as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years -- I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.
Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road.
VII.
So -- in this my last good night to you as your President -- I thank you for the many opportunities you have given me for public service in war and peace. I trust that in that service you find some things worthy; as for the rest of it, I know you will find ways to improve performance in the future.
You and I -- my fellow citizens -- need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle, confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nation's great goals.
To all the peoples of the world, I once more give expression to America's prayerful and continuing aspiration:
We pray that
peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their
great
human needs satisfied; that those now denied opportunity shall
come to
enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for freedom may
experience its
spiritual blessings; that those who have freedom will
understand, also,
its heavy responsibilities; that all who are insensitive to
the needs
of others will learn charity; that the scourges of poverty,
disease and
ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that,
in the
goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a
peace
guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.
*****************************
the gift of the word
Speech, / Words, letters, sounds, / heard by both the inner ear and the outer.
Letters, sounds, words, / linked invisibly to ideas and thoughts.
Ideas, thoughts, letters, sounds, words, / a woven tapestry of meaning,
carried by Speech, / sometimes with grace, / but most often just carelessly.
Meaning, / a weaving of thoughts, sounds, words, letters and ideas,
spoken into the air and left there, / abandoned.
Words, spoken and heard. / Meaning intended. / But what is heard?
That which is heard is also intended. / Two intentions, two purposes, two meanings.
How difficult then communication, / suffering as it does the contrary pulls of multiple intentions, purposes and meanings.
I speak, you listen. / I mean, you grasp. / Somewhere in this delicate dance of words, sounds, letters, thoughts, ideas and purposes; / understanding is sought after.
Perhaps. / Sometimes.
Voice. / Speech reveals the unspoken. / Anger, fear, pride, arrogance, true humility.
The ear of the heart hears what is hidden in voice.
Posture, gesture. / Speech is more than sound. / The eye hears things the ear cannot, just as the ear sees things the eye cannot.
One mind. / Two minds. / Speech a bridge of woven light between two minds, and sometimes, although rarely, / between two hearts.
Speech, rich and full of flavor, / a light bridge, / joining two separate beings.
Speech denatured, / No sound, no gesture, no posture, no voice.
Speech reduced to lines of dark on light. / Written. / A treasure map in code spilled across a page.
Words, letters, ideas, thoughts, sounds, / reduced to marks upon a parchment. / Speech dying.
Yet, / even in death, murdered by pen or pencil mark, / some essence of Speech still.
Meaning embalmed. Understanding buried. / Until read.
Reading. / Words, sounds, letters, thoughts, ideas, meaning, purposes, intentions,
Speech resurrected in the silence of another mind.
Speech. / Light bridge dying into print, / reborn when read in the inner quiet of another soul.
Speech, / The Spoken Word. / Writing, / The Word entombed. / Writing read, / The Word resurrected.
That this is so, / that human beings live in such an exalted state having Speech, this is Grace.
The spoken word, the written word. / Things so ordinary, so taken for granted, so pregnant with possibility.
The emptiness between two souls is always / chaste, virgin, pure, / waiting for Grace, for the bridge of light, / for Speech.
*
Speech was written on Epiphany, Jan. 6, 1997, in the evening,
in about a
third of an hour.
*****************************
bibliography
- it doesn't include everything by any means,
particularly the obvious (such as Common Sense)
which should
not have to be mentioned in any event -
1) the six Dune novels by Frank Herbert - an extraordinary imaginative discourse on religion, politics and social existence.
2) the novel The Dispossessed, by Ursula K. Le Guin - on social life, language, freedom and politics.
3) Rudolf Steiner's books on his idea of the Threefold Social Order: The Threefold Social Order; The Social Future; and World Economy.
4) George Will's Statecraft as Soulcraft: what government does.
5) Barbara Gardiner's Aesthetics of Economics and the Scottish Masonic Tradition.
6) Neal Stephenson's novels, collectively called the Baroque Cycle: Quicksilver; the Confusion; and, the System of the World - the history of how we got here in imaginative glory.
7) The film by the Wachowski Brothers of Matrix fame: V for Vendetta. (contains my favorite quote: people shouldn't fear their government, the government should fear the people.)
8) America's Global Responsibility: individuation, initiation, and threefolding, by Jesaiah Ben-Aharon.
9) Blessed
Unrest:
how the
largest movement in the world came into being and why no one
saw it
coming, by Paul Hawken.