hopelesshappiness.com

If a luxury is “a pleasure out of the ordinary allowed to oneself,” then today's luxuries in America include

• Housing
• Healthcare
• Childcare
• Education
• Opportunity
• Food
• Security

In his most recent book “Poverty, By America” Matthew Desmond says, “Poverty isn't simply the condition of not having enough money. It's the condition of not having enough choice and being taken advantage of because of that.” (Page 78). From insufficient choice one is often required to defer---to yield or submit respectfully---to another to keep from falling deeper into poverty. This deference in turn is interpreted by the overseer as a confirmation of their righteousness and a justification for their thoughts and actions. And the cycle continues.

To break the cycle would require (what would be interpreted as) rebellious disrespect by a large enough number to break the system; and because we are all so heavily invested in the system, the odds of this happening are miniscule.

On page 79 Matthew Desmond says that instead of focusing on the poor by asking questions such as “Why don't you find a better job? Or Why don't you move? Or Why don't you stop taking out such bad loans? – we should be asking “Who benefits? Who is feeding off this?” And the answer, first and foremost, is the system and secondarily but all-important is the wealthy and powerful who work every possible angle to maintain and strengthen the system.

Previously, I wrote, “If the purpose of the system is to gain efficiencies in order to increase production ultimately to grow profits, and if the purpose of Humanity is a respectful, unpretentious, humble compassion for All, then the system and Humanity are at odds. Compassion is not efficient.” We fear Artificial Intelligence, yet we embrace this entrenchment / entrapment in a system that more and more each day robs us of our Humanity and reinforces our roles as heedless, docile automatons. If our humanity is too far gone, I would prefer artificial intelligence over the unthinking intelligence currently enforced.

Just saying…

Imagine a moment. A single, fleeting, beautiful moment. Both sad and joyful, spiritual and indulgent, loving and destructive, bracing and taxing. Just one moment. An epiphany. A bewilderment. An essence. An ideal. A lifetime. An inception. A finality.

Instantaneous. Here and gone. What to think. How to act. Do I reach back for it? The memory but a shade. Or do I allow it to propel me, forward? The memory an accelerant. Or do I ignore it? See it as a vain or idle fancy, here to mislead.

Today if / when this moment comes and goes (infrequently but nonetheless) I don't believe we give it its due. We don't take the time (and implied effort) to contemplate, consider its depth of meaning, or its lack. We don't ask the questions asked above. We are too busy being busy to examine how it may help, or hinder. Often we do not even feel or hear its reverberation for the more strident urgencies screaming all around us demanding our immediate attention. Perhaps some never recognize this moment beyond the actual moment. On occasion it comes on its own. With preparation and focus and some luck, one can also on occasion summon it. It is sad that there are those who may never experience any semblance of this moment before perhaps their final moment. And even then, with no practice, will they see it for what it is?

… A single, fleeting, beautiful, infinite moment.

I lost myself for a moment or two one day last week and declared I was in a good mood, cheerful, some might have even said happy. But it wasn't long before something happened, and I got better. Seriously, I am not just mean and surly to others, I extend my belief that it is better to be truthful than nice to all aspects of myself as well. And perhaps it is an inviolate characteristic of Humanity that individual egos will unwittingly wind and weave their selves into an unbreakable bond of ignorant, unjust scar tissue, but, until my last breath, I will continue to believe in and work toward Truth. And though I realize that my truthfulness, my effort to see outside of my self, is far, far, far from (upper case) Beauty, Truth, Wisdom, Justice, I believe it takes me closer than where I will get with nice; especially when I am truthful with (and not nice to) myself.

I don't know how else to say it. When I look around at the big picture outside of my self, I am disillusioned. And I am unhappy with myself for not doing more. We could, and we should, take better care of each other. It is taxing to be truthful with one's self; less so to be nice to one's self. I can attest to a mental toll, but I believe it is necessary. I cannot say though with certainty that there is a physical toll. I have had heart attacks but once I pulled together and maintained strong efforts toward weight loss, diet, and exercise, it has been more than six years since my last visit to a hospital, so who's to say that my truthfulness, (because I have become more truthful in recent years as well), has not also contributed to my physical health? Perhaps the endorphins or the electrical impulses or the gestating waves of asperity or whatever it is that's brought forth from truthfulness actually strengthens the heart muscle. Who's to say? Or perhaps it is my sincere and unrelenting desire to relieve the suffering of others that keeps me going. Some would argue that I cause others to suffer with my truthfulness. Perhaps so, especially those closer to me, but most other individuals (sadly) can (and do) choose to ignore me, and those close to me have learned to make adjustments. And I will continue to believe that it is a small sacrifice for all of us for the tiny bit of reality that may seep through (even to those who work to ignore me). I believe that tiny bit of reality may contribute to a tiny bit more awareness and a tiny increase in compassion; and I believe every tiny bit has the potential to help. Many of those inconvenienced by me may not like me, but it is not about me and it is not about any one individual.

Am I suggesting then that one should Love everyone more than any one? Including one's self? One's family? It is an old idea. It is difficult. I believe the Bible suggests loving God before all else. And for practical purposes, here on Earth, if one believes in God, which is more representative? All of Humanity? Or just Me? And if one does not believe in God, which is more important? More relevant? More necessary? Now include a third consideration, “All of Nature” (of which Humanity is a part), and revisit these questions, for practical purposes, here on Earth. And if one believes that God will ultimately judge, on what basis will She judge? Will She judge on how much you professed to Love Her while here on Earth? Or will She judge on your efforts to take care of Her manifestation here on Earth; (i.e. All of Nature, All of Humanity). And if one does not believe in God, on what basis will All of Humanity and All of Nature judge? On what basis (if they're here to judge) will future generations judge? Regardless of one's belief, it is clear to me that to love God first, here on Earth, one must Love everyone more than any one. And to do this, one must be more truthful than nice; most especially to one's self. I may not like it, but it is not about me.

I said above, and I want to believe that it is my sincere and unrelenting desire to relieve the suffering of others. So I should spend some words on suffering. Here on Earth, for practical purposes:

• Suffering is never being heard, or asked to contribute.
• Suffering is inequitable opportunity from birth, from the wrong side of the wealth gap.
• Suffering is food insecurity.
• Suffering is fear of eviction.
• Suffering is homelessness.
• Suffering is confinement.
• Suffering is the receiving end of unshakable certainty.
• To relieve suffering, global consideration is necessary.
• The necessity of global consideration is hard work.
• Working hard is not suffering.
• Short-lived, trifling inconvenience is not suffering.
• Being questioned or challenged is not suffering.
• Not knowing is not suffering
• Listening and learning to understand is not suffering.
• Accountability is not suffering.
• Entitled indignation is not suffering.

Fiona Apple singing Alanis Morissette. Granted, the only Taylor Swift album I have seriously listened to is Folklore, and, at my daughter's insistence I have watched the film Long Pond Sessions. And, my gut insists this is Fiona singing Alanis. The cadence, the writing, some intonation, the emotion, the controlled anger. Listen to track 6; Mirrorball. “I --- want --- you to know.” And after verbalizing this epiphany I went online and discovered the Alanis / Taylor duet of “You Oughta Know” from August 24, 2015. And I was intrigued by the similarities between Fiona’s “Criminal” video and Taylor's “Lavender Haze” video. Not to take away from Taylor. From my limited exposure I have gained respect and I am looking forward to one day listening to Evermore. But I believe my discoveries might help substantiate the argument that in some ways Taylor Swift is overrated. Or perhaps I just want to make that argument.

I have long maintained there is too much credit and too much blame and not near enough accounting for circumstance. It is circumstance that leads to opportunity. And yes, there is readily available anecdotal evidence for bootstrap pulling but big picture, with more than 8 billion statistics, it is anecdotal: i.e. “based on personal observation, case study reports, or random investigations rather than systematic scientific evaluation.” I hate to say what I am about to say, so I will preface that with this: within my limited exposure, Taylor Swift appears to be serious about what she does and (if this is consistently the case) she deserves credit for it. Now for that: Taylor Swift provides hope to those with very little hope. The reason I hate to say that is because I may be interpreted as attacking her fan base and I may have created an adversarial dynamic in which, if I had any readers I would likely lose some. But I know very little of Taylor's background and I believe that a great many, (a fairly large majority) of us, not just Taylor Swift fans, (whether we will admit it or not), have very little active hope. I believe what I am actually working to do, whether Taylor is a product of her circumstance or an anecdote, is to contrast her work ethic with her acclaim. The fact, (again, if it is a consistent fact), that she is serious about what she does, for me substantiates a small degree of her accorded devotion. And because all 8 billion plus of us are confused and divided humans seeking answers, there are far worse products/anecdotes in which we could invest our hope-filled energies. A vicarious sort of hope is better spent following serious effort than it is flocking to rabble-rousing rhetoric. But better yet would be that aforementioned active hope working to change the status quo. Perhaps Taylor could use her swiftie sway to refocus energies toward wider-reaching Beauty, Truth, Wisdom, Justice. Wider-reaching…

Of course it is absolutely easier to jump on a bandwagon than it is to stand up to a bully; meaning it is easier to become a fan, a groupie, an acolyte, than it is to independently work to save the world. And if you can be a successful musical artist, like, say, I don't know, for example, Taylor Swift, why would you want to trade that comfort and security for the headaches and heartaches of fighting villains? Yet I can't help but imagine what might happen if Taylor traded her singer / songwriter Cape for that of a Superhero, and called for Swift Justice.

Enough of dreaming the (if not impossible) highly unlikely. Whether Taylor began as a product or an anecdote, I am comfortably confident she has become a product and will remain so. I will never be a successful musical artist, I will (likely) never have a fan base or groupies or followers (and if I did I would have to seriously question my direction), and though I am also (so far) completely unsuccessful in my efforts to save the world, like Taylor, I am serious about my work. And that counts for something. Right Taylor?

Production works to satisfy consumption and consumption works to affirm production. It is better when production works to satisfy consumption and in turn consumption works to affirm production. If they do not work together, in some way communicating with each other, each adding value to the cycle, the disconnect at best frustrates efficiency and at worst creates an oppressive power dynamic in which the boss demands production exclusively for his or her own consumption; and bureaucracy is born.

There are multiple examples, too many to count, of ridiculous bureaucracy completely, totally separated from any kind of value contribution to any production cycle. And I could spend thousands of words beating this drum. But this week I am thinking more about the less obvious disconnect between good intentions and thoughtful planning. To a large extent, that speaks for itself. Good intentions implies a desire for production that adds value, but thoughtful planning is necessary to maximize efficiency and enhance the potential for consistent improvement. No matter the good intentions, if a boss is oblivious to the oppressive power dynamic they have created, be it from duplicitous hypocrisy or simple ignorance, it is likely they will drive production down their path and it is unlikely they will become aware of any possible better path, thus creating enough bureaucracy to frustrate efficiency.

But say we could remove the existing power dynamic, how then would we determine the better path? Would a democracy really work to find the way? Or would the power shift to the most insistent? Or the most eloquent? Or the best liar? In theory, perhaps we should turn to experts; the one or one’s with the most knowledge. But that would involve verifying credentials which may take us once again dangerously close to bureaucracy. I would argue though that expertise would more often result in a better path than the oppressive power dynamics we currently utilize. Because one has or makes more money, or because one is an expert in one area, one is not an expert and does not necessarily know better in other areas. For example, because one has an advanced degree and is a credentialed expert in pulmonology, this individual is not suddenly or automatically an expert educator. A degree and expertise in accounting does not make one an expert manager. And inheriting the franchise from daddy does not make one an expert in anything.

Yet here we are.

Yes, the bosses fear the experts because it makes a tremendous amount of sense to narrow gaps. But I believe bosses are even more afraid of thinkers who listen because experts are often already entrenched in their field of expertise and not in positions to implement change, whereas thinkers who listen, given the power, would listen to experts and implement change that would narrow gaps. For bosses, that is scary. So in our current political incarnation, the wealthy, powerful, insistent, eloquent liars will continue to talk over all the experts and all the thinkers busy listening, and the best we can work for is oblivious bosses with good intentions. For all of us, that is more scary…

…and way more sad.