hopelesshappiness.com

There is a difference between exercising power and acting tough. To exercise power is to methodically, consistently, thoughtfully work accessible power in a conscious effort to improve. To act tough is merely a muscle flexed to feel good about one's self and/or to impress others. Flexing a muscle is a spurious reaction with little or no thought to consequence. And because a flexed muscle is a threat, this single-minded act is that of a bully. Some bullies learn to flex different muscles in rapid-fire succession in an attempt to disguise and/or reinforce their abuse of power.

I believe that the more muscle flexed, the more insecure one is. And I believe that the more muscle flexed, the more tenuous one’s hold on power. Those who are more secure in their power allow and even encourage this lesser flexing of muscle because the alternative, (methodical, consistent, thoughtful power worked to improve circumstance), would threaten their security. It is interesting then that to bully the powerful and wealthy, we must choose to not be a bully. Furthermore, it is the movement toward more widespread improved circumstance that tends to transform greater power from condescending confidence to fear-mongering intimidation. And finally, the unabashed onslaught that is fear-mongering intimidation allows those who are seen as merely condescendingly confident to claim the mantle of good guy; because the opposite of bad guy, must be good guy – right? By definition, good-cop bad-cop is a staged production designed to manipulate, control, victimize. And this nicely sums up the cluster that has become our nation’s two-party political system.

Anyone who has ever been taken advantage of by good-cop bad-cop, in hindsight would attest to the fact that ‘good’ is a misnomer. As a nation we should have long ago passed into hindsight, but here we are – still believing in the good cop and still suffering exploitation and oppression at the hands of two bad guys. An actual good guy would find a way to empower from the bottom-up. Instead we flirt with progress and improve only incrementally because one-half of our powerful, wealthy leadership, (the condescendingly confident), play good-cop through top-down paternalistic policy, while the other half play bad-cop keeping us off balance by prompting us to fight back with an uncoordinated, disjointed rapid-fire lesser flexing of muscle. And we (the majority) choose sides pretending we are a part of something and believing it is real.

It is a staged production that benefits power and wealth. And we (the majority) are victims.

This week I was not allowed to use the restroom that is only steps away from my office.

I remember when I was in grade school in the 1960’s and walking home with a friend, there was a gas station about halfway whose restroom had a sign that said “Whites Only!” My friend wasn’t white. I didn’t understand that then and I don’t understand this now.

It is apparently still okay to put people in their place; to overtly, blatantly, screamingly remind people that they are less – purposeless, meaningless, defenseless, worthless, powerless.

I am not good enough to save myself. But I am good enough to help save others. Perhaps this is an indicator of which is more important. In this country, we have a contrived system of wealth and power that encourages us to save our self and gives the false impression to some that they are doing or have done exactly that. I will never believe, under any longstanding practice or elaborate system, that I can save myself by amassing or pretending power and/or wealth. If that is the point, we are a sad, misguided lot. Today, in this country, we are a sad, misguided lot.

Ultimately, to be saved is to actively seek then find Beauty, Truth, Wisdom, Justice. But because these Ideals in their perfection are not possible in a single lifetime, existentially, to be saved becomes momentary glimpses of their potential. And, that being the case, because I am not in a position of great (or even vey much) influence I believe to work at helping others, I am better served when my efforts center upon maintaining a constancy of awareness and setting an example in the active hope that this will encourage others to (on occasion) also glimpse the potential of these Ideals, and that this will drive us all to move closer and closer to their perfection and away from our current path that winds around bureaucracy, convention, certainty, division. Additionally, existentially, (which is all I will know in this lifetime), I must also help to save myself, understanding that I can only momentarily glimpse and/or move closer to Beauty, Truth, Wisdom, Justice if I in turn, also, have the help of others. Existentially, to be saved cannot be an individual pursuit. How can I not concern myself with all of Humanity when we as a species are on a trajectory towards extinction? Power and/or wealth will not save me or my descendants from dying out alongside everyone else.

My grandparents’ generation has become extinct. My parents’ generation is nearly there. My generation – soon to follow. Having had some health challenges, I could make my contribution to that end tomorrow. Instinctively, thoughtlessly, I wrote tomorrow; but it could as easily be today. It truly is thoughtless putting off necessary action because we believe in tomorrow. And again, instinctively, thoughtlessly, I caught myself feeling let down by tomorrow, but in actuality, every day in which I don’t do enough, (which is every day), I am a disappointment to tomorrow. Tomorrow does not care how much money I have, or how many people I supervise, or how many rules I make. Tomorrow only wants the consideration it is due, but tomorrow is constantly overshadowed, shoved out of the way, bullied, by today. One day when tomorrow has had enough, it will go away mad and never come back.

To consider tomorrow I must work to understand potential consequences of today’s action or inaction. To consider today is to seek comfort; avoid discomfort. To existentially help save others (and myself) I should 1) consider tomorrow, 2) choose, 3) act, 4) consider tomorrow. In theory, today is vexing, decisive action reconsidered. In theory, tomorrow is happy with me. In actuality, today is pretentious, rhetorical inaction. In actuality, tomorrow is for another day. In actuality, by myself I am not good enough to do enough.

Often because our individual desire to seek comfort and avoid discomfort aligns with today’s objectives, today is able to vanquish tomorrow with little or no help. But perhaps as often, if or when tomorrow pushes back, today calls on yesterday to reinforce its flanks and rear. Today, in this country, tomorrow is no match for the combined forces of a misremembered, glorified yesterday and a substantial, complacent today.

Individuals who justify their efforts to save their self by calling on longstanding practices and elaborate systems do not understand what it means to save one’s essential self. Yesterday and today are sufficient for individual, superficial substance and meaning. Tomorrow though is necessary for the Salvation of Humanity. Why can’t we see this?

In the late 1800's there were men vying to be the one to kill the last buffalo. They were encouraged by America’s destiny – our right as god-fearing white overlords to parcel and own all the land from sea to shining sea. Nothing was going to stop us. At that time there were perhaps 500 buffalo in the United States and maybe another 500 in Canada. For many policy-makers and expansionists though, the buffalo were merely a more expeditious means to a predetermined end: resolution of the Indian Question. By killing all the buffalo the white man forced the Indian (literally and metaphorically) into a corner. At this same time our far-reaching government also overtly encouraged us to “Kill the Indian, save the man.” This was the stated goal of our government’s residential school program in which Native American children were forcibly taken from their families and relocated to these schools where they were methodically stripped of their identity and culture. Half of the children did not survive the experience. The phrase (Kill the Indian, save the man”) was first uttered by Captain Richard Henry Pratt in a speech in 1892 during the National Conference of Charities and Correction, held in Denver, Colorado. Pratt was founder and superintendent of the Carlisle Indian School (founded in 1879) and his phrase became a rallying cry for those claiming and/or believing it a noble cause to civilize, Americanize, assimilate and educate. Kill the buffalo. Kill the Indian. For the sake of Progress, Power, Wealth, America. For the sake of the white man. Genocidal Patriotism.

Darkness flows, moving over, under and around a person. Light permeates, becoming a living part of a person. If darkness solidifies, it will not become a part of a person, but persons nearby are in danger of becoming a part of it. If light dissipates, surrounding light rushes to fill the void, leaving persons nearby in danger of becoming two-dimensional, character-less, formless. Darkness is most likely to solidify where light dissipates.

Like-minded groups, (such as the powerful and wealthy), who are disconnected from Humanity as a whole, create their own artificial light often spread, broadcast through rhetoric, (such as “kill the Indian, save the man”), to pretend they are keeping the darkness at bay.

Today I feel like our day-to-day existence is defined, driven, dictated by nothing but artificial light. We no longer even recognize and/or acknowledge the essence of light. Native, essential light has become foreign to our indoctrinated senses, and God knows we cannot consider anything that is different or that might require learning, growth, change.

So, when it suits us, we will practice Genocidal Patriotism. And when it suits us, we will further manifest our high-handed arbitrary destiny. And when it suits us, we will believe we have saved the world. And when it suits us, we will condemn Genocidal Patriotism. And when it suits us, we will know; with certainty. And when it suits us, we will pretend we are changing for the better. And when it suits us, we will say, “Let there be artificial light.” And when it suits us, we will declare that the light is good. Amen.

It is pretty straightforward. As long as the top 10% continue to make the rules, the rules will continue to favor the top 10%; and in the comfort of our complicity we will continue to serve the top 10%. To wrench one's mind free of our entrenched complacency is not at all comfortable; and then to translate said discomfort into drastic, compelling, constructive action leading to actual widespread improvement, would not only require considerable effort but would also be met with large scale resistance. Instinctively, that should not be an excuse; instinctively, we should still put forth the effort; realistically, it is lonely. And in the face of this, the question remains – how do we dethrone the top 10%?

I have previously made the following suggestions:

• We could let go of our illusion of stability. 4/16/22.
• We could embrace uncertainty. 4/23/22.
• We could change our focus from bureaucracy, convention, certainty, division to Beauty, Truth, Wisdom, Justice. 5/7/22.
• We could differentiate between substantial and essential. 5/14/22.
• We could reverse the dollar flow to narrow the income gaps. 3/16/24.
• We could cap wealth and implement a meaningful universal base income. 3/11/17.

These are all drastic actions that would require considerable effort in the face of large scale resistance. As said, I see the resistance as large scale for two predominant reasons: 1) the power held by the top 10%, and 2) our complicity. At this point, some may unpretentiously claim “things are not that bad” and ask the question, why do we want to dethrone the top 10%? The closer one is to the top 10%, the more likely one is to ask this question and make this claim and perpetuate complicity. I would answer this question by first pointing to the previous thoughts linked above and summarizing as follows:

• The income gap and the wealth gap are unnecessary and they are knowingly, intentionally maintained at the expense of the bottom 50%.
• “To unnecessarily act in one’s self-interest knowing it is at the expense of another is a trespass against all of humanity.”
• Those most righteous are most culpable. And today those who are most righteous are those who define and justify their misguided morality on the basis of faulty fundamental principles including bureaucracy, convention, certainty and division.
• Garbage in, garbage out.

To me, sitting here in the bottom 30%, it is obvious. But even from here, it is only obvious when I make myself see it. As one moves to the bottom 20%, the bottom 10%, circumstance becomes increasingly dire. But for me, as it is for most of us, there are times when I am watching Netflix, listening to music, reading a good story, preparing a good meal, that it is not so obvious.

So in my mind, the first step to dethroning the powers that be would be to continuously, consciously shed the comfort and warmth of our complicity; to take a leap of faith toward Beauty, Truth, Wisdom and Justice. If we believe in erroneous presuppositions or if we idly hope for future just rewards, we are complicit.

But still, because for most of us it is not as consistently obvious as it should be, how do we reduce the immensity of the resistance? How do I make others look? How do I get the attention of the flocking masses? How do I wrench our heads, our minds from our grazing grasses and get us to look up? And ahead? This is the hurdle I am currently unable to get over. My experience, when I work to turn someone’s attention to the illusion of stability and to the dangers of bureaucracy and convention and certainty and division and to the difference between substantial and essential and to the growing income gap and the widening wealth gap, I drive them away; they begin to work at avoiding me. And I do understand that. Complicity is so much more comfortable. And then when I do drive someone away, I feel bad and I go back to my Netflix. But when I graze and sit on my hands and gag my tongue, I also feel bad. And when I do for myself, when I walk and read and learn and think and write, I feel better momentarily, but then when I realize it is not drastic, compelling, constructive action leading to actual widespread improvement, I feel bad. And when I do for others, when I complete a task and help and serve and improve a process and create a pivot table and put forth substantial effort, I feel better somewhat beyond momentarily, but then when I realize it is not drastic, compelling, constructive, essential action leading to actual widespread improvement that could contribute to the long-term well-being and survival of Humanity, I feel bad.

So, in my own way, even when I force myself to take notice, even when I am learning, thinking and writing, even when I am creating, serving, producing, I am still complicit. I don’t do enough, we don’t do enough, and I still feel bad.

So, I am at a loss. But perhaps I should be. Perhaps we all should be. Last week I said “To embrace certainty is to defy one’s impermanence.” It is also true that to embrace certainty is to defy one’s natural (God-given?) state of bewilderment. I feel bad for all the reasons stated, but I feel sad because I often feel like I am alone in my bewilderment. We could do more, better together.