The nature of Politics and what we want to believe

I've been paying attention to politics lately (a rarity) given the upcoming presidential elections. I've begun to notice a lot of things. Firstly, let me establish my already radical point of view.

We have a "two-party" system. But I believe that it is just a convenient concept to give us the illusion of choice, or that the people are really doing anything at all except rattled the cow bells around our necks. Let me put it in different terms: a mother says to a child, "you can have cantaloupe, or you can have honey-dew melon, which would you like?" the child thinks carefully before making his choice, never really realizing that no matter what she chooses, she's still getting a melon.

Same thing with the two party system. While the issues seem to "differ" and one candidate seems less evil then the other, we're getting melon no matter what we choose.

Have you all seen the new remake of The Manchurian Candidate? It brings an important point to the surface (it has been the case for a LONG time, but people don't seem to give a shit): the president is just a face, some figure that we can associate with power, but the truth is, the president is probably one of the most manipulated people in America (staggering considering how manipulated we all are). I don't think that either pres. Bush or Sen. Kerry are aware of their own brainwashing. Our president is a national scapegoat. If something goes wrong, who falls? Who is blamed? Not the money providers, not the manipulators.

"Mr. President, congress voted to impeach this morning . . ."

Someone mentioned yesterday that they would like to see Jon Stewart conduct the debates (which I wholeheartedly agree). Why will that never happen? Not because of the presidential candidates. So, who really has the power?

The daily show actually recently had a man on who wrote a book entitled The Chain of Command. The basic gist is that he did lots and lots of research and talked to a lot of people in the government and discovered whose hands were at the ends of the marionette strings. I have to get this book!

The two party system is an ingenious form of control, which is what our government is about anyway. All you have to do is look around and ask, "why would the government do that?" If you look long enough, and without throwing your own beliefs into it, it really comes down to control. The two party system gives us something to ally with, and something to fight . . . perfect for our minds who have been trained in duality since birth (right and wrong, good and bad . . . )

The way people subscribe to candidates reminds me of how people subscribe to religion. They choose the person who best fits there beliefs that have already been established for many years.

The same useless arguments are thrown around at both candidates, or shall I call them the scapegoats. Kerry is wishy-washy, bush is wishy-washy. The debates are convenient illusions to involve us in a process that really has already been decided. All you have to do is look at history to see that it is not necessarily the candidate who has the popular vote (or even the most votes) to win.

Corruption runs deep. And the funny thing is . . . we're the ones who violently defend it! I am careful who I say these things to; the wrong person might punch my lights out.

It's that reason, the violence that people react to such claims with, that let's me know I'm on the right track. It's not real aggression (real aggression being like, I try to kill your child, you defend it, that is real and appropriate). I see us desperately try to protect ourselves from seeing the truth about our country.

My little joke when I go through customs, "citizenship?" "the best god-damn country in the world!" Hahahaha!

If our country is great, then to be great is to separate yourself from humanity, to be man's enemy, to be our own enemy, even our environment might like to see us dead. Who are our friends? Where is our kindness, generosity, compassion, openness, wisdom, patience, acceptance? Christian country my ass!

Of course, I've said that about many of the Christians I've talked to and been around (especially at Hillsdale). Where is your love when I am lost? Where is your compassion when I need your help? Where is your understanding when I am hurt or angry?

If Jesus were around today, he would be infuriated with the people who do things in his name. Many of the Christians today remind me so much of the Pharisees of Jesus' time. Scared, distrustful, egotistical, violent, abusive, all in the name of God.

So we love our unchanging thoughts, ideas, and beliefs and we look for ways that the world supports them.

There is no sight, no thought, no feeling, no touch, no taste, no sound, no idea, no belief, no security and no lack of security, no wisdom, no mind.


I short time ago I understood why Zen Buddhists do not believe in "God". When you get rid of thoughts, concepts, beliefs (these things are not god anyway), sights, sounds, memories, self, mind . . . . . there is nothing left.
The great emptiness.

Myself vanishes, what was me was just an illusion, a mental idea, all along. Just experience . . . that's all there is. And in the faintest feeling, in the gentle touch (as if there was the smallest breeze moving the hairs of my arm) I can feel the glory. "God" will never describe the experience. It is everything, but no thing at all. There is breathing.


In this upcoming election, may we remember that we're simply voting on ideas and concepts. The future is not real, but we think we can control it by voting in the right person. Do not be ashamed. We all walk in the darkness. But are we willing to open our eyes if we have the option? Do we have the courage to look at things for what they are?

If Jesus held out his hand, offering the long journey through the dark forest . . . could we let go of our precious security to follow on the seemingly dangerous path. Are we willing to look, and see him for what he is? Can we let go of our ideas that keep us safe? Can we confront our real history, experience the loss. Can we mourn the loss of ourselves?

Where we look, there is no beauty. We listen, but there is no sound. We feel, but only what we are told is acceptable. We seek peace, but peace is unattainable as long as we are unwilling to be peace.

Gassho.

Some things . . . you can't keep to yourself

Had you asked me a year ago I would have laughed in your face and pushed you over my friend who was on hands & knees behind you.

Today, I applied to be someone's nanny. The child is an infant and the parents live in Sylvania (maybe they're loaded?). It said, 'great rate of pay.'
Could be a good deal, could not.

Scruptious.

Like I said, some things you just can't keep to yourself. This is too funny for just me. But really, I hope it works out. I think I'll make a really great nanpersun.

something about this argument seems wrong . . .

Haven't we all heard the various permutations of a similar theory as to what follows:

In a discussion of Psychotics and mental illness . . .

"People are labelled 'psychotic' because they deviate from the norm, assuming (big assumption for some) that there is no inherent value in morals (that is, killing in and of itself is not wrong, but under circumstances, it becomes murder).

Then, let's observe some of the crazy behavior of 'normal' people.

We can think of anything, but mostly it's the stuff that's accepted, like being upset when your boyfriend dumps you, saying 'ouch' when something hurts, overeating, apathy. We can all think of a lot of these 'normal' things that barely, and subtly tweak our awareness.

What if we look at some 'psychotics' and what they say, their story, seems just as absurd as some of the stories we have heard. We've all had that friend who obsessed about their loved one, then lost them, and completely lost it. But we gave validation to all his claims. We said, 'yeah, she was such a bitch to do that.' or, ' man, that really sucks.' The judgements themselves are considered 'normal'.

What if what was 'normal' was really seen for what it was? Would we call it normal, or would it be closer to neurotic?"

Finish this discussion later, I forgot what I was going to say about the argument I just mentioned . . . >:^0

K, finish it: The point that I was originally going to make is actually contained in the argument (that was supposed to be what I was going to argue against).

What if normal was seen for what it is? Arbitrary. A man that likes to see women naked is a pervert, while a woman who likes to see men naked is considered desirable. Men who have sex with a lot of women are said to be "completely normal" because men want to have sex all the time, right? A woman who wants to have sex with a lot of men is considered a slut.

If you look at our unquestioned beliefs without regard to history, they seem completely arbitrary. However, I'm sure there is history to all the unquestioned assumptions we have. I'm not aware of much of the history, as it's not really in history books, or taught.

too bad.

Psychotics are considered social outcasts. I think that some of them just have the courage to go with their own twisted assumptions . . . it's as if the guy who thinks he's Napoleon really just didn't care if what anybody thought about his perverted belief.

I think that if we knew what was going on in a lot of people's heads, we'd try to commit them, too.

A brief example to drive my point home: if jesus is reincarnated and walks on the earth again . . . how fast do you think it will be before he's thrown in prison or the asylum and considered a loon?

=^0

. . . a quick response to E.

I think that all people need their feelings validated, especially when they're young (which is when it really matters anyway). However, many parents try to keep their babies from crying.

Why is that?

I mean, sure we think it's annoying, but have we stopped and thought about why?
Hush, baby, don't cry. It's a polite way of saying don't express that right now, but the child inevitably (at it's early stage in mental/emotional development) thinks that that means not to have the feeling itsself (I dont' negate that THAT IS what some parents are saying, however unconsciously, to their children).

I think that our fake attempts and validating each others' feelings (the attempts being designed to fail in the first place) are our way of keeping up the beliefs we made as children when our parents didn't validate our feelings. At least, this is the case for me. We belief that our survival is at risk (on an emotional level, and unconscious one) if we have some of our feelings.
Many of us would violently defend these beliefs, having no idea that they do not represent reality, however representing their reality.


Keep yer powder dry.

. . . as too much rest?

I don't think there's such a thing as too much rest. After a while of what people usually refer to "resting" (or, not having anything to do), I think the body stops resting.

I've been "resting" for quite a few months now, but I get no rest.

I do what I want, when I want to, but I am not free. If I don't want to brush my teeth, I don't have to, but then my teeth get all scummy. And that's not good for anybody, baby.

I can sleep as late as I want, but I wake up exhausted. I have the option to stay up late, but do I have the option to go to bed early? It doesn't feel like it.

I wander around the hallways, and outside, my thoughts running, searching for something interesting. I can work on my resume, apply for jobs . . . these things are not fun, but must be done (soon enough).

I've grown up in a place that did not encourage creativity, play, being connected with one's world of emotions. I've learned how not to feel, how not to play, how not to enjoy.
My first impressions of this world were ones where I believed nothing was much fun, nor was it okay to have fun, enjoy much of anything (except pain), or be spontaneous.

I have no illusion that my problems are outside of me. I know that I'm responsible for my life now.
But I have a message for all the parents that are out there, or ever will be:
It makes life so much harder to teach your children to be disconnected from themselves (what really matters anyway) and then throw them into the world with messages of ought to be happy and successful, but without any tools to do it.

I also have no illusion that this is the fault of parents. It's just inherited behavior. Children whose parents did not allow them to be connected to their full spectrum of emotion (will you love me if I am upset, tired?) will grow up with an incredible degree of emotional control (since they could only have a few feelings -- not all -- if they wanted to survive and be approved of) but will pay the price of an emotionally vacant, and unfeeling life. In turn, these children won't really ever grow up and will have children of their own, whose feelings they will unconsciously squelch, continuing the cycle.

As I am entering into my sixth year of Berglarian Analysis (a type of analytical therapy), I am wondering if the cycle is possible to stop. My mind says yes, my feeling says no.

I mourn for all the moments I have lost, and am still losing. All the days I have experienced more intense emotions than I can remember, but were not aware of them. I mourn that things are the way they are. That I have another member of my family, inherited, living in my mind, who filters everything that can't come out of me, lest I not survive.
The situation has changed. If I throw a temper tantrum, I will still eat. If I get angry or aggressive, I will still have friends. If I am sad or cry, I'll still have a place to stay. This wasn't true before, but now it is. And it does not matter if you don't see it . . . I still live in a very old, dead world. There is no taste, smell, words, sights. It is empty, invisible. The world can be anything I want it to be, anything that will fulfill my beliefs that are already in place . . . that have been in place for as long as I can remember.
It looks like this world, but it isn't. I am not here.

I live in a loveless, distrustful place. Honesty is temporary. Real connections with people are freak mistakes. The sun does not shine through thick clouds. Even my own body is full of thorns, pain and discomfort if I move. Pain and discomfort if I don't move.
Trees, sunsets, all sorts of animals, mountains . . . these are all things observing me, but not a part of my world. I look at the world through glass.

"Look, but don't touch."

"Be human, but do not feel"

Would you love me if I were a liar? If I were a thief? If I were sad, crying, and weak? You loved me when I was strong, successful, had direction, knew what I wanted, was sure, quiet, respectful.
Would you still love me if I weren't what you wanted me to be?

No, you would not; you did not. I was all of these things. It was your fault, but it's I who feels unlovable.

It's me with the vacant stare in my eyes. It's me with the body who is increasingly unhealthy, sedentary, becoming unattractive.


It is not that we don't get enough rest, but that we don't rest in the time that we have. Resting seems to be a lost art. It's assumed that we know how to do it . . . it's easy right? How many 'yes's ' there just were? I laugh, and I say, "go on vacation . . . where is your mind?"
Easy . . . with practice.

It's not so much that I enjoy it here, it's that I'm addicted to it, to how familiar . . .

I still live, and so I mourn. Nobody asked me if I really wanted to survive my youth. I don't think anybody really asks anybody. What would we say if someone did?

If I had known what my life would be like, if I had known what kind of person I would be, would I have chosen to keep going. Would I if I knew what my life would be like in 5 years?


It's so dark. I can't see where I am. Maybe if I just start walking . . .

There is no light in this tunnel. The walking is the light itself.