Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
[Warning to potential new readers: this is a thread that get’s kind of messy. I apologize for poor wordings and reactive behavior on my part. Please know that it is temporary, even though the words are still there, and please have faith that the wise people running this forum will not let a beginner’s processing mind ruin the forum for you. Practice well and do not get caught up in the content of this thread. Peace be with you.]



Let us play with the idea that humanity some day wakes up in a way that makes it possible for every individual to distinguish between reasonable needs on the one hand and cravings and aversions that cause unnecessary suffering on the other hand. Let us say that it is a combination of full awakening and any additional psychological maturity that would be required, and a genuine wish to benefit all sentient beings. Suddenly the entire humanity is free from clinging to ”me”and ”mine”. They realize that current systems for production and distribution are based on misguided views, and decide that enough is enough. The planet needs to be saved and priorities need to change radically.

What do you think they would do?

EDIT: Just to clarify, I’m not talking about a revolution. There would be no coercion or force involved. I’m interested in how priorities would change in specific issues. No need to overthrow governments or anything like that. When I say ”systems” I mean in a broader sense. There are systems for practically anything we do. I have a system for how to clean my home, for instance, and for how I do grocery shopping.
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 3929 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
Is this one of those political questions masquerading as a dharma question?

emoticon
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0k

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
Is this one of those political questions masquerading as a dharma question?

emoticon



Honestly, I thought it was obvious that this is a political question, as all discussions about the end of suffering on a collective level. It is moral/political philosophy, based on aspects of the dharma. Should I flag this somehow so that people can avoid it more easily?
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
Is this one of those political questions masquerading as a dharma question?

emoticon

Is this a political response masquerading as a dharma question?

(smile)
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 3929 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
To be serious for a minute, I'm not a fan of utopias and theories of human nature that assume utopia is possible and desirable, that human nature is perfectible. I think human nature is what we see of it now, and focusing on what is impossible to achieve (utopia and human perfection) both ignores the reality of human nature and focuses our energies in the wrong direction. I believe we have to deal with the reality of both human nature and how we got to where we find ourselves now if we have any hope of "fixing" the climate crisis.

YMMV

EDIT: And yes, this means that I don't believe it's possible that every human being will wake up in the dharma sense.
thumbnail
Andromeda, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 393 Join Date: 1/15/18 Recent Posts
I'm with Chris on this one. No utopian thinking for me, and frankly it makes me a bit nervous when I see it. I'm too much of a practical realist anyway and not only are the efforts and energies better spent elsewhere, but when utopian thinking goes wrong, it goes REALLY wrong. I prefer to dispense with beliefs and ideals as much as possible at this point in my life. 
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 3929 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
... when utopian thinking goes wrong, it goes REALLY wrong...

Yes. It tends to lead to authoritarianism. It leads to governments that "protect the ideal" and not the human beings who suffer under them.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
... when utopian thinking goes wrong, it goes REALLY wrong...

Yes. It tends to lead to authoritarianism. It leads to governments that "protect the ideal" and not the human beings who suffer under them.


Maybe it wouldn’t have to. This is based on the assumption that people have gone through the stated development and truly wish for a change.

For all I know, their first point on the agenda could be exactly to make sure that this new common interest does not end up as authoritarianism. They might take measures to ensure that any steps towards authoritarianism are called out early on and nipped in the bud in a non-violent way. I think that would be extremely important for the reasons the two of you point to.
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 3929 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
For all I know, their first point on the agenda could be exactly to make sure that this new common interest does not end up as authoritarianism. They might take measures to ensure that any steps towards authoritarianism are called out early on and nipped in the bud in a non-violent way. I think that would be extremely important for the reasons the two of you point to.

We always seem to enter into these things with very good intentions. Yet they go wrong. I wonder why?
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Maybe because that development hasn’t happened yet. Anyway, I can assure you that I don’t have a gerilla army waiting for my orders. I just want to talk about how a sustainable society would look like together with other people who share my interest and who are also committed to non-violent and democratical solutions. Taking part in the discussion is entirely voluntary.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
For all I know, their first point on the agenda could be exactly to make sure that this new common interest does not end up as authoritarianism. They might take measures to ensure that any steps towards authoritarianism are called out early on and nipped in the bud in a non-violent way. I think that would be extremely important for the reasons the two of you point to.

We always seem to enter into these things with very good intentions. Yet they go wrong. I wonder why?

Also, exactly what are you saying here? What would the alternative be? Not having any politics at all? Like that would be possible. Not having any intentions? Yeah well, I suppose if people were really all fully enlightened, at least in one sense there would be no intentions, but that’s not something that you believe in. Entering political issues with bad intentions - that options is discarded, right? So what remains? Keeping status qou? Like that one never turned into authoritarianism. Letting everyone mind their own business? Yeah, Lord of the flies is a really cosy scenario, right? Deliberatly aiming for politics that are tailored to humanity’s worst character flaws? That’s where we are now, and we are destroying the planet. Does that qualify as going wrong?
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
For all I know, their first point on the agenda could be exactly to make sure that this new common interest does not end up as authoritarianism. They might take measures to ensure that any steps towards authoritarianism are called out early on and nipped in the bud in a non-violent way. I think that would be extremely important for the reasons the two of you point to.

We always seem to enter into these things with very good intentions. Yet they go wrong. I wonder why?

cynicism?
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
... when utopian thinking goes wrong, it goes REALLY wrong...

Yes. It tends to lead to authoritarianism. It leads to governments that "protect the ideal" and not the human beings who suffer under them.


You know, taking measures to prevent people from talking about political change tends to lead to authoritarianism, too, so it is good that none of us is prone to use force or coercion to ”protect” anything.
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 3929 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
You know, taking measures to prevent people from talking about political change tends to lead to authoritarianism, too, so it is good that none of us is prone to use force or coercion to ”protect” anything.

Actually, that is authoritarianism. Do you think I'm shutting you down by expressing my opinion?
 

Also, exactly what are you saying here? What would the alternative be? Not having any politics at all? Like that would be possible. Not having any intentions? Yeah well, I suppose if people were really all fully enlightened, at least in one sense there would be no intentions, but that’s not something that you believe in. Entering political issues with bad intentions - that options is discarded, right? So what remains? Keeping status qou? Like that one never turned into authoritarianism. Letting everyone mind their own business? Yeah, Lord of the flies is a really cosy scenario, right? Deliberatly aiming for politics that are tailored to humanity’s worst character flaws? That’s where we are now, and we are destroying the planet. Does that qualify as going wrong?

You're misinterpreting my comments.

I'm saying that the historical attempts human beings have made at governing based on the notions that utopia is achievable and human beings are perfectible have not done well and most have simply failed. It's a fact of history. I'm not commenting on anything else, or any other form of government.

If it matters, I happen to like the limited government models that have taken hold in the U.S. and in Europe over the last several hundred years. Republics that are based on the notion that we need to protect human rights, not protect the ideal of human perfection.

Please try not to take my comments personally. They're not aimed at you



thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
You know, taking measures to prevent people from talking about political change tends to lead to authoritarianism, too, so it is good that none of us is prone to use force or coercion to ”protect” anything.

Actually, that is authoritarianism. Do you think I'm shutting you down by expressing my opinion?
 

Also, exactly what are you saying here? What would the alternative be? Not having any politics at all? Like that would be possible. Not having any intentions? Yeah well, I suppose if people were really all fully enlightened, at least in one sense there would be no intentions, but that’s not something that you believe in. Entering political issues with bad intentions - that options is discarded, right? So what remains? Keeping status qou? Like that one never turned into authoritarianism. Letting everyone mind their own business? Yeah, Lord of the flies is a really cosy scenario, right? Deliberatly aiming for politics that are tailored to humanity’s worst character flaws? That’s where we are now, and we are destroying the planet. Does that qualify as going wrong?

You're misinterpreting my comments.

I'm saying that the historical attempts human beings have made at governing based on the notions that utopia is achievable and human beings are perfectible have not done well and most have simply failed. It's a fact of history. I'm not commenting on anything else, or any other form of government.

If it matters, I happen to like the limited government models that have taken hold in the U.S. and in Europe over the last several hundred years. Republics that are based on the notion that we need to protect human rights, not protect the ideal of human perfection.

Please try not to take my comments personally. They're not aimed at you



I said that it’s good that none of us is prone to force or coercion, so no, I don’t think you are shutting me down. I was merely pointing out that my ideas have as little to do with authoritarianism as your ideas.

I’m very well aware of the fact that no utopia has been successful. I’m also very well aware that the current situation is no success either. I’m not planning to build a utopia. I’m just trying to frame a discussion in a way that allows people to think outside the box.

I haven’t said anything about changing any governmental models. I’m trying to talk about political priorities, in specific issues. Why do you think I’m talking about changing the governmental models? I happen to be a firm believer in human rights.

Of course your comments aren’t personal. They aren’t even targeting anything that I have actually said.
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 3929 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
Linda, you said this in the first comment on this topic:

They realize that current systems for production and distribution are based on misguided views, and decide that enough is enough. The planet needs to be saved and priorities need to change radically. 

This comment, at least to me, meant that some changes to the way we allocate resources and decide on what we will do on a collective basis are required should every human being someday "wake up" (in the spiritual sense). That, to me, means changes in the nature of government. Is that not what you meant? How else will we make changes to the way we eat, generate energy, where and how we live, how we get around, and so on? I'm open to ideas on how we can make massive changes in a short period of time - because the time we have left before the earth's climate reaches a tipping point is very, very short.

One thing I've run across recently is that we may need to position the problem using different terms. "Climate change" is a neutral phrase. Some people argue that we need to use words like "Climate crisis" to generate a sense of urgency. People, in general, do not seem to think this is at all a crisis. I see today, too, that the British Parliament has now officially declared the climate crisis a "climate emergency."


thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Ah, ”system” is a word that has many connotations so I see how that was ambiguous. No, I didn’t mean that at all. I’m talking about the unlikely scenario that people would perfectly voluntarily let go of ”me” and ”mine” and stop quarrelling over empty things such as who is paying for what and trust that it would even out if we help each other. People would democratically vote for this. Nobody would be interested in buying or producing things in an unsustainable way, so there would be no market for it anymore. Thus, whole industries would go out of business. People would have to come up with new systems for producing things - that is, cradle to cradle systems. Isn’t it correct to use the word ”system” in that sense too? Is there a better word? And since people would prioritize ”real” needs over mere cravings of material things, at least to a higher degree than today, bureaucratic administrative systems for keeping people out of health care and social welfare would no longer be needed everywhere. Instead, there would be new openings for a livelihood that is actually aimed at helping people. Yeah, I know that it is a very unlikely scenario, and it is totally okay to be uninterested in dreaming about such scenarios. I am however not talking about a revolution. I’m talking about maturity. I’d like to think that there is hope for that. I’m aware that it is normative to call this maturity and that people may have different ideas of what maturity is. It would be interesting to hear from other people about their ideas of what it would entail.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
One additional example would be if people in a country were to vote, in accordance with their current political system, for public transportation to be free of charge and publicly financed.
John Not2, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 71 Join Date: 4/25/19 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
One additional example would be if people in a country were to vote, in accordance with their current political system, for public transportation to be free of charge and publicly financed.

Detach from all: society, government, authorities... (all are Maya)

Refuse to recognize all "authorities", practice civil disobedience...

Refuse to be "domesticated" "humans"...
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
John Not2:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
One additional example would be if people in a country were to vote, in accordance with their current political system, for public transportation to be free of charge and publicly financed.

Detach from all: society, government, authorities... (all are Maya)

Refuse to recognize all "authorities", practice civil disobedience...

Refuse to be "domesticated" "humans"...



So you don’t vote?

Replying to my question is optional. It would be nice if someone who did actually cared to follow the premises I set up.
thumbnail
Andromeda, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 393 Join Date: 1/15/18 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
John Not2:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
One additional example would be if people in a country were to vote, in accordance with their current political system, for public transportation to be free of charge and publicly financed.

Detach from all: society, government, authorities... (all are Maya)

Refuse to recognize all "authorities", practice civil disobedience...

Refuse to be "domesticated" "humans"...



So you don’t vote?

Replying to my question is optional. It would be nice if someone who did actually cared to follow the premises I set up.


People can care very much about all of these things and still not want to engage intellectually. Caring is emotional. I spent a year with the brahma viharas as my primary practice and you might say it was my spiritual or mystical response to the terrible problems of the world which I am helpless to solve. (And yes I do vote.)

Did me spending so many hours radiating infinite compassion to the entire universe have any practical effects at all? Does it matter? Should we reduce spiritual practice to what can be measured in worldly terms?
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
It’s perfectly fine not wanting to engage intellectually, but why do all of you need to tell me that here in this thread? Practically all other threads are not about wordly matters. Is it so provokative that I want to discuss worldly matters in one thread?
thumbnail
Andromeda, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 393 Join Date: 1/15/18 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
It’s perfectly fine not wanting to engage intellectually, but why do all of you need to tell me that here in this thread? Practically all other threads are not about wordly matters. Is it so provokative that I want to discuss worldly matters in one thread?


Perhaps we care deeply that you practice--and practice well!--and so we are trying to give you gentle nudges to do that rather than spending your time giving your conceptual mind a workout. Just a thought. emoticon
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Then I can assure you that these thoughts are not distracting me from my practice. It took me a few minutes to write them down. Assuring you that I’m neither depressed nor sloppy, and certainly not thinking about threatening human rights, did take some time from my practice, though. Seriously guys, this is a thread about ideas such as cooperating globally to divert the energy production from oil to solar cells. If that worries you all so much, maybe you need to investigate your own reactive patterns. Just sayin’.
thumbnail
Andromeda, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 393 Join Date: 1/15/18 Recent Posts
I'm not worried or reactive.

Since you seem interested in the subject of human rights and mass awakening and you practice Mahasi noting, I'm curious if you've yet done any research into the historic roots of the tradition and the current political situation in Myanmar with the Rohingya.
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 3929 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
Seriously guys, this is a thread about ideas such as cooperating globally to divert the energy production from oil to solar cells. If that worries you all so much, maybe you need to investigate your own reactive patterns. Just sayin’.

Folks typically come to the DhO to talk about meditation practice. It's not surprising that every topic turns to practice matters, even the ones that aren't meant to be focused on practice. Like Andromeda, I suggest you might want to review and participate in a similar conversation over on AwakeNetwork, which has become more squarely focused on climate issues, not practice issues.
thumbnail
Stickman2, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 375 Join Date: 7/24/17 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
Seriously guys, this is a thread about ideas such as cooperating globally to divert the energy production from oil to solar cells. If that worries you all so much, maybe you need to investigate your own reactive patterns. Just sayin’.

Folks typically come to the DhO to talk about meditation practice. It's not surprising that every topic turns to practice matters, even the ones that aren't meant to be focused on practice. Like Andromeda, I suggest you might want to review and participate in a similar conversation over on AwakeNetwork, which has become more squarely focused on climate issues, not practice issues.

Anyone evaluated consumption patterns (carbon footprint etc) of contemplatives ?
thumbnail
Andromeda, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 393 Join Date: 1/15/18 Recent Posts
Osho had 94 Rolls Royces. emoticon
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Andromeda:
Osho had 94 Rolls Royces. emoticon

   I lived not far from rajneesh's commune while it was active. It gave all of us communists a bad name, and we despised them. The man was not a contmplative, he was a drug addict. They kept him doped up on valium, and ma anand sheela ran the place by her own dim lights.

   Early on the people of oregon were very accepting of the saffron-robed workers who had jobs in the community. When they started stopping people on the public highway, carrying submachine guns, and turning them around, people started to take notice. When they got into politics, going so far as to attempt to poison potential voters with clinical laboratory stock cultures of pathogenic organisms, they were arrested and shut down.

   All those rolls royces in the desert were absurd and pathetic. Rajneesh was once a respected academic who gave talks illuminating various scriptures, many of which were quite good. He was run out of india when his followers wearing the holy robes of the sannyasin would assault, rape, eat meat, drink intoxicants, and rut in the street. This was ok in america until the voting incident. Many of his folowers were professionals, including doctors and lawyers. Many contributed large sums, thus the cars.

   A low water mark for american spiritual communes. The saffron robe became the mark of a libertine.

terry
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Hi Stickman2! You are very welcome to write about reduction of carbon footprints or lack of such reduction here, and even more welcome to discuss what changes would make reduction of carbon footprints possible. I would also be interested in your thoughts about consumption patterns in the stated fictive scenario.
thumbnail
Stickman2, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 375 Join Date: 7/24/17 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Hi Stickman2! You are very welcome to write about reduction of carbon footprints or lack of such reduction here, and even more welcome to discuss what changes would make reduction of carbon footprints possible. I would also be interested in your thoughts about consumption patterns in the stated fictive scenario.


There's a fictive scenario ?
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Stickman2:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Hi Stickman2! You are very welcome to write about reduction of carbon footprints or lack of such reduction here, and even more welcome to discuss what changes would make reduction of carbon footprints possible. I would also be interested in your thoughts about consumption patterns in the stated fictive scenario.


There's a fictive scenario ?



Yes. Obviously. I haven’t exactly seen the kind of maturity I’m talking about thrive on this planet. Have you?

My scenario is just as fictive as Andromeda’s dystopia about the poisening of all but one water reserve. I haven’t seen anyone lecturing about authoritarianism in that thread.
thumbnail
Andromeda, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 393 Join Date: 1/15/18 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Stickman2:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Hi Stickman2! You are very welcome to write about reduction of carbon footprints or lack of such reduction here, and even more welcome to discuss what changes would make reduction of carbon footprints possible. I would also be interested in your thoughts about consumption patterns in the stated fictive scenario.


There's a fictive scenario ?



Yes. Obviously. I haven’t exactly seen the kind of maturity I’m talking about thrive on this planet. Have you?

My scenario is just as fictive as Andromeda’s dystopia about the poisening of all but one water reserve. I haven’t seen anyone lecturing about authoritarianism in that thread.

Are you referring to that Sufi spiritual teaching story written by the saint and passed down over generations? 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Yes. Why? Do we believe in people capable of maturity now?
John Not2, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 71 Join Date: 4/25/19 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Yes. Why? Do we believe in people capable of maturity now?

Maturity consists of two tracks: growing-up and waking-up. 

(credit the idea to Ken Wilber)

Since science is our new "world religion", and science does not recognize the "waking-up" (states), unless and until humans detach themselves from beliefs of "science", maturity is not possible.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
There seem to be a lot of people who do not believe in science, though. Unfortunately, that doesn’t seem to help either.

Maybe we just stopped growing up, if we ever did.
John Not2, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 71 Join Date: 4/25/19 Recent Posts
In U.S. parents are required to send their kids to schools to be subjected to science brain-wash, parents could home-school kids but the kids still must take and pass the brain-washing exams (they would need to study and memorize brain-washing materials in order to pass exams), that's law. 

by "a lot", approximately what percentage of the populations in this country that don't believe in science do you suggest? 

and it matters, it matters "a lot" emoticon
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I was referring to the horrible discussions in Swedish social medias before our election, among others. And to the ”autism moms” that think giving their children bleach enema will ”cure” their children from being neurodivergent and to the anti-vaxxers who attack in packs as soon as an autistic adult suggests that being autistic doesn’t have to be the end of the world and that vaccines don’t cause autism anyway. I have been accused of working for ”Big Pharma” in trying to make a plague happen that will contaminate the whole world with autism (!). I have no idea how many they are, and especially not in other countries, but they sure seem like many enough, and they seem to have a lot* of both waking up and growing up to do.

I thought you had schools over there that teach ”intelligent design”. Is that just a myth?

Mocking my language isn’t very mature, by the way, so your scepticism might still need the addition of just a tad more growing up, no offence.

*) Yeah, I can’t even begin to imagine exactly how much, so go ahead and sue me for being vague. Just do it somewhere else than in this thread, if you would be so kind. 
John Not2, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 71 Join Date: 4/25/19 Recent Posts
I am so sorry for causing you to perceive that I was mocking your language, that absolutely was not my intent.  My native tongue is not English and I don't know if "a lot" means, in a ballpark, 10%, 30%, 50%, or otherwise, was just wanted to understand that better. 

My own perception is that less than 10% of U.S. populations don't believe in science.  I don't really think people in DHO are so immature as to wanting mocking other people's language, especially for those whose native language is not English to mocking other people's English.

Again, I sincerely apologize for causing your displeasure by my poor English language skill.  
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
John Not2:
I am so sorry for causing you to perceive that I was mocking your language, that absolutely was not my intent.  My native tongue is not English and I don't know if "a lot" means, in a ballpark, 10%, 30%, 50%, or otherwise, was just wanted to understand that better. 

My own perception is that less than 10% of U.S. populations don't believe in science.  I don't really think people in DHO are so immature as to wanting mocking other people's language, especially for those whose native language is not English to mocking other people's English.

Again, I sincerely apologize for causing your displeasure by my poor English language skill.  



I’m sorry for the misinterpretation, John. In another thread I would probably have asked instead of assuming.

I don’t know enough about the US to make a qualified guess. Do you have reasons to believe that people who do not believe in science are more mature than those who do? I believe it’s more complicated than that. Science has its limitations but also its advantages.

I didn’t think so either, but I honestly don’t know what to believe anymore. If that was the intention of the contributors, to have me see for myself just how impossible the scenario would be (although I explicitly wrote that it was fiction), then mission accomplished.
John Not2, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 71 Join Date: 4/25/19 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
John Not2:
I am so sorry for causing you to perceive that I was mocking your language, that absolutely was not my intent.  My native tongue is not English and I don't know if "a lot" means, in a ballpark, 10%, 30%, 50%, or otherwise, was just wanted to understand that better. 

My own perception is that less than 10% of U.S. populations don't believe in science.  I don't really think people in DHO are so immature as to wanting mocking other people's language, especially for those whose native language is not English to mocking other people's English.

Again, I sincerely apologize for causing your displeasure by my poor English language skill.  



I’m sorry for the misinterpretation, John. In another thread I would probably have asked instead of assuming.

I don’t know enough about the US to make a qualified guess. Do you have reasons to believe that people who do not believe in science are more mature than those who do? I believe it’s more complicated than that. Science has its limitations but also its advantages.

I didn’t think so either, but I honestly don’t know what to believe anymore. If that was the intention of the contributors, to have me see for myself just how impossible the scenario would be (although I explicitly wrote that it was fiction), then mission accomplished.
Since the topic was about human maturity, it is my belief that science is a very limited and immature belief system (a religion, just like most other religions), therefore, if the majority of our human population are still brain-washed to believe this very limited belief system, then we humans are very immature, but, humans are in the evolution progress of both growing up and waking up.  Science, unfortunately, is an obstacle to our waking up, it has been, however, very helpful for our growing up process.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
An obstacle to waking up but helpful in growing up - yeah, that sums it up pretty well. Well put.

Yes, I agree that turning science into a belief system is very contraproductive. It is important to see the limitations of all tools.
John Not2, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 71 Join Date: 4/25/19 Recent Posts
It is said that Buddha had waking up 2500 years ago, we humans today, 2500 years later, are we more awake now than humans in Buddhas time? I am not convinced that we are, this could be an interesting study project for scientifically minded intellects.

Developmentally, no doubt, we humans have grown up a lot in 2500 years time.

Ken Wilber wrote his Integral Theory book in 1973, today if you ask a person randomly if he had heard of Ken Wilber, 99% of Americans (even among the most educated ones) would likely to answer NO, at least that has been my experience.  Waking up is a VERY slow process for us humans, an unawakened person is not a truly matured human being.  Will humans ever wake up? I doubt that too.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
John Not2:
It is said that Buddha had waking up 2500 years ago, we humans today, 2500 years later, are we more awake now than humans in Buddhas time? I am not convinced that we are, this could be an interesting study project for scientifically minded intellects.

Developmentally, no doubt, we humans have grown up a lot in 2500 years time.

Ken Wilber wrote his Integral Theory book in 1973, today if you ask a person randomly if he had heard of Ken Wilber, 99% of Americans (even among the most educated ones) would likely to answer NO, at least that has been my experience.  Waking up is a VERY slow process for us humans, an unawakened person is not a truly matured human being.  Will humans ever wake up? I doubt that too.


I don’t think people are more awake today. Some people seem to believe so, but I suspect that may be due to changed definitions. This was a fictiobal scenario.

As for growing up, we have probably done so in some respects but regressed in others.
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
John Not2:
It is said that Buddha had waking up 2500 years ago, we humans today, 2500 years later, are we more awake now than humans in Buddhas time? I am not convinced that we are, this could be an interesting study project for scientifically minded intellects.

Developmentally, no doubt, we humans have grown up a lot in 2500 years time.

Ken Wilber wrote his Integral Theory book in 1973, today if you ask a person randomly if he had heard of Ken Wilber, 99% of Americans (even among the most educated ones) would likely to answer NO, at least that has been my experience.  Waking up is a VERY slow process for us humans, an unawakened person is not a truly matured human being.  Will humans ever wake up? I doubt that too.

among those who have heard of ken wilber, perhaps many don't find his philosophy especially useful...

t
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
John Not2:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
John Not2:
I am so sorry for causing you to perceive that I was mocking your language, that absolutely was not my intent.  My native tongue is not English and I don't know if "a lot" means, in a ballpark, 10%, 30%, 50%, or otherwise, was just wanted to understand that better. 

My own perception is that less than 10% of U.S. populations don't believe in science.  I don't really think people in DHO are so immature as to wanting mocking other people's language, especially for those whose native language is not English to mocking other people's English.

Again, I sincerely apologize for causing your displeasure by my poor English language skill.  



I’m sorry for the misinterpretation, John. In another thread I would probably have asked instead of assuming.

I don’t know enough about the US to make a qualified guess. Do you have reasons to believe that people who do not believe in science are more mature than those who do? I believe it’s more complicated than that. Science has its limitations but also its advantages.

I didn’t think so either, but I honestly don’t know what to believe anymore. If that was the intention of the contributors, to have me see for myself just how impossible the scenario would be (although I explicitly wrote that it was fiction), then mission accomplished.
Since the topic was about human maturity, it is my belief that science is a very limited and immature belief system (a religion, just like most other religions), therefore, if the majority of our human population are still brain-washed to believe this very limited belief system, then we humans are very immature, but, humans are in the evolution progress of both growing up and waking up.  Science, unfortunately, is an obstacle to our waking up, it has been, however, very helpful for our growing up process.

   I would draw a distinction, brother, between "science" and "scientism." Between "scientistic" and "scientific." Science, like technology, has an objective existence. One "does" science. I have tested many thousands of samples of "body fluids" (a phrase which refers to a number of disgusting substances), and belief did not enter into it. We can prove our results are accurate, within specified limits. You don't see planes falling out of the sky, or people getting incompatable blood products; science works. We depend on it all the time.

   "Scientism," on the other hand, perpetuates the subject object view of the world that nondualists know is false. The scientistic think only what may be "proven" "objectively" is really real. This is very naive, and most scientists realize it. You are right in observing that the scientistic world view is the lowest common denominator of common sense in the west. 

   One may practice science and still be a nondualist. One may respect science regardless of the opinions of a particular scientist. Or because of them.


terry
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
John Not2:
In U.S. parents are required to send their kids to schools to be subjected to science brain-wash, parents could home-school kids but the kids still must take and pass the brain-washing exams (they would need to study and memorize brain-washing materials in order to pass exams), that's law. 

by "a lot", approximately what percentage of the populations in this country that don't believe in science do you suggest? 

and it matters, it matters "a lot" emoticon
aloha john,

   My son once attended a school in oregon where the school board agreed with certain parents to provide all students equal time for creationism. Whenever darwinism came up, it had to be explained that there were folks who saw it otherwise.

   The constitution is only protective if you are inclined to litigate, I discovered. Science is better than nonsense. At least the scientists are more or less consistent and sincere, and not overtly nuts.

terry
thumbnail
Andromeda, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 393 Join Date: 1/15/18 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Yes. Why? Do we believe in people capable of maturity now?

Is that sarcasm? I honestly can't tell. At any rate, I don't think it's valid to compare a Sufi teaching story with your highly speculative thought experiment. Do you? I'm really not understanding why you made the comparison, so it would be helpful if you could fill me in a bit more as to why. Your comment reads to me as snarky.

At any rate, what I (and perhaps others) don't agree with is your premise that all of humanity is going to achieve full awakening (and let's not forget that what "full awakening" means or if it even exists at all is hotly contested). No, I do not believe that is possible, nor do I personally know any awake long term practitioners or teachers who think this is possible (although I do know some who DID think it was possible but changed their minds). In fact, the number of people who actually manage to achieve anything close to "full awakening" seems quite low among practitioners, and those are the ones who made the choice to practice. If people don't want to practice, how would they wake up? Spontaneous awakenings occur, but they are rare. You are new to this forum and dharma in general, but this type of thing has been discussed on the DhO at least since I first landed here around 2011 so it may be "common knowledge" to most people reading your post. That may be why people are not engaging with your thread as you would like. Why should anyone invest time and energy into a speculative discussion with a premise they think is baseless? That wouldn't make sense.

Or it could just be that people, like myself, already spend a lot of time discussing and reflecting on politics and culture and the problems the world is facing with close associates and do not wish to do so on this forum, where most people come to discuss practice (and this may be the ONLY place they get to discuss practice). 

Just some thoughts.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
If you are tired of discussing newbie questions, you could just ignore the post. Maybe there are other newbies here who would be interested in the topic. If nobody is interested, that’s just fine. I don’t expect answers to all my posts. I’m fine with people just replying to the posts that do interest them.

I have explained over and over again that I was interested in a discussion that did not end up with depressing remarks about how impossible all change is. Engaging in the discussion is entirely optional. So is derailing it, I guess, and common decency is perhaps also Maya, what do I know, being so new and all.

Of course I’m not comparing myself to a saint. It was a relief to see that you at least believe that some people are capable of enough maturity to be talking about possible scenarios without it turning into a catastrophy. I honestly wondered.
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Yes. Why? Do we believe in people capable of maturity now?

I do.

The buddha was mature, in this sense.

t
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
terry:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Yes. Why? Do we believe in people capable of maturity now?

I do.

The buddha was mature, in this sense.

t


I do too. Not in the sense of somebody being super mature all the time and in all respects, but in the divine glimpses that can make real change.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I appreciated the wisdom of that story, but I really don’t see why imagining what mature people would potentially do to save the planet is so dangerous whereas allegories about the poisening of water supplies are completely safe. So the person who authored it was considered a saint, and maybe also was one, whatever that is. It’s a construction like everything else. A construction made by people. A construction about people who are more spiritually and morally mature than the majority. The man in the story did try to save people. It didn’t end that well, but it didn’t make anything worse either.
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 3929 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
Linda, your responses are getting more and more angry sounding and are being aimed at folks who very clearly enjoy your presence here and who have contributed to your DhO participation in positive ways. Are you aware of this? Maybe it's time to take a break from this topic and gain some perspective? Just a thought.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Maybe I would notice that people appreciate my presence if they did not assume that I want to throw away human rights, comment on my language, point out to me in so many ways that I’m new and that my question is naive/stupid/dangerous, pathologize my behavior and insist on derailing my thread over and over again instead of just ignoring it. If that’s how you show people that they are welcome here, we seem to have a cultural barrier. Also, in most forums moderators do not moderate threads in which they are actively engaged. Are awakened people so free from bias that you don’t need such precautions? That assumption would be kind of ironic, given the topic, wouldn’t it?

EDIT: Well, at least there was no intentional mocking of language. Good to know. Appologies for the misunderstanding, John!

EDIT again: I do feel welcome. I very much appreciate the kindness, wisdom and helpfulness you all have showed. This particular moment felt very surrealistic, though.
thumbnail
Andromeda, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 393 Join Date: 1/15/18 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Maybe I would notice that people appreciate my presence if they did not assume that I want to throw away human rights, comment on my language, point out to me in so many ways that I’m new and that my question is naive/stupid/dangerous, pathologize my behavior and insist on derailing my thread over and over again instead of just ignoring it. If that’s how you show people that they are welcome here, we seem to have a cultural barrier. Also, in most forums moderators do not moderate threads in which they are actively engaged. Are awakened people so free from bias that you don’t need such precautions? That assumption would be kind of ironic, given the topic, wouldn’t it?

EDIT: Well, at least there was no intentional mocking of language. Good to know. Appologies for the misunderstanding, John!

Linda, you're obviously very angry--it comes through loud and clear in your last few comments--and you seem to be misinterpreting a number of people's good intentions including my own. I'm happy to talk about this further, but not until you've cooled off and I have more time.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I’m just trying to make conversation with those who are interested in the topic, if there are such people, and if they dare showing it. Also, I’m vain enough to care about not being mistaken for a potential terrorist or something. I never claimed to be one of those mature human beings. They are fictional, after all. Thus, when people feel the need to point out my lack of experience and so on, that does hurt. Maybe all of you are above that and have forgotten how that feels, I don’t know, but it’s actually not very nice.

I’m not angry. I’m sad.
thumbnail
Andromeda, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 393 Join Date: 1/15/18 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
I’m just trying to make conversation with those who are interested in the topic, if there are such people, and if they dare showing it. Also, I’m vain enough to care about not being mistaken for a potential terrorist or something. I never claimed to be one of those mature human beings. They are fictional, after all. Thus, when people feel the need to point out my lack of experience and so on, that does hurt. Maybe all of you are above that and have forgotten how that feels, I don’t know, but it’s actually not very nice.

I’m not angry. I’m sad.

Linda, you've been an excellent forum contributor and so this thread and your comments in it took me by surprise. I've gone out of my way to make you feel welcome and comfortable on this forum and shared a lot of my own process in attempts to help you over the last however many months since we seem to have some similarities in wiring. To my knowledge, we haven't had any issues prior to this.

Nobody starts off with experience and I've shed plenty of tears over illusions lost along the way, and occasionally (to my regret) spewed venom at people who've been trying to help me. But mostly I've been grateful to those who pointed my illusions out and generally appreciate it when people are honest and forthright with me and so I try to pay it forward. You stated clearly in the first post of your most recent practice log that you wanted and were receptive to receiving help and a number of people including myself have tried to do that. Of course, good intentions aren't enough and communication sometimes goes awry, especially on internet forums. Nobody here is perfect in any way, myself included, and I apologize that my attempts to help didn't work out.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Thankyou for acknowledging that communications went awry. It’s okey. I’m sorry that I snapped. I needed to protect my boundaries, and neither you nor Chris seemed to get that I needed that. I know that both of you meant well but this was not helpful. You were unintentionally forcing (I can’t find a better word for it right now, so the nuance sounds stronger than I intend) your insights on me before I was ready for it. I will probably make many similar mistakes along the road (I may already have), and I can only hope that I’ll be able to listen when people tell me that it’s not helpful.

Feedback on my practice log is highly appreciated, and feedback on posts where I ask for advice. This wasn’t that kind of post, and I made that as clear as I could. This was one of those political threads for people who do want to take part in such discussions. Both you and Chris had made it very clear that you did not want to take part in such discussions. I respect your wish to not engage in them, and I thought you would respect my wish to engage in them, even if you think it’s unwise and even if my posts are utterly naive. It’s not your call to make.

It hurts but I’ll be okay. Unless you actually think I’m dangerous; that would hurt as hell. 
thumbnail
Andromeda, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 393 Join Date: 1/15/18 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Thankyou for acknowledging that communications went awry. It’s okey. I’m sorry that I snapped. I needed to protect my boundaries, and neither you nor Chris seemed to get that I needed that. I know that both of you meant well but this was not helpful. You were unintentionally forcing (I can’t find a better word for it right now, so the nuance sounds stronger than I intend) your insights on me before I was ready for it. I will probably make similar mistakes along the road, and I can only hope that I’ll be able to listen when people tell me that it’s not helpful.

Feedback on my practice log is highly appreciated, and feedback on posts where I ask for advice. This wasn’t that kind of post, and I made that as clear as I could. This was one of those political threads for people who do want to take part in such discussions. Both you and Chris had made it very clear that you did not want to take part in such discussions. I respect your wish to not engage in them, and I thought you would respect my wish to engage in them, even if you think it’s unwise and even if my posts are utterly naive. It’s not your call to make.


Thank you for acknowledging that you "snapped."

But if someone posts something that appears unwise and naive, why should this not be pointed out on a forum dedicated to awakening? Because your post wasn't JUST political, but started off with a premise that was spiritual. 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Maybe because I’m a beginner at this and you have had several decades to think about it, and sometimes newbies need to talk about stuff and process it for themselves.

And maybe because the premise was not the point. It was a fictional framing.
thumbnail
Andromeda, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 393 Join Date: 1/15/18 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Maybe because I’m a beginner at this and you have had several decades to think about it, and sometimes newbies need to talk about stuff and process it for themselves.

And maybe because the premise was not the point. It was a fictional framing.

You edited your last post after I replied to it and added: "Unless you actually think I’m dangerous; that would hurt as hell." 

A few months back, I made a poorly worded comment to a practitioner with more experience than me that was interpreted as a statement that was very similar to your premise and nearly got my head bitten off. "That's dangerous!" I had to backpedal and explain that wasn't what I'd meant. Why do you think that might be?
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Did that more experienced practicioner have compassion enough to listen when you explained what you actually meant?
thumbnail
Andromeda, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 393 Join Date: 1/15/18 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Did that more experienced practicioner have compassion enough to listen when you explained what you actually meant?

It was compassionate to bite my head off in that case and I didn't take it personally. I am not suggesting you are dangerous and never have. This is about ideas. 

At any rate, I hope we can move on from this conversation. Thoughts on this?
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Andromeda:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Did that more experienced practicioner have compassion enough to listen when you explained what you actually meant?

It was compassionate to bite my head off in that case and I didn't take it personally. I am not suggesting you are dangerous and never have. This is about ideas. 

At any rate, I hope we can move on from this conversation. Thoughts on this?



I’m still not following why it would be dangerous to explore the idea of what humanity would do if we were not so attached to the way things are now.

Sure, we can move on. I don’t have anything against any of you. Just please do not make a diagnose of my ways of caring about wordly suffering. You be you and let me be me.
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 3929 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
And maybe because the premise was not the point. It was a fictional framing.

Yes, Linda. I know what you were proposing and that you invented a framework within which to propose a thought experiment. I responded with my own thoughts, which were not aimed at you personally, but at the framework you suggested we work under. To me, that framework is a fantasy and, if applied to the real world, potentially dangerous. I was not then and am not now calling you, the person, dangerous. You're obviously a sensitive and caring human being. You don't appear to me to be any kind of authoritarian. You took offense at what I said about utopian thinking and it's been downhill ever since. Please know that at no time did I think anything negative about you as a person. I was engaging in a discussion that matters. You started a good topic. It's still a good topic. I'm truly sorry that you've taken offense and have been upset by my comments. I'll do my best to be careful in the future when we talk. Can we move on?


thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I don’t know what you mean when you say ”work under”. For the sake of discussion, then yes, for those who are willing. In our practice? No. We can’t base our practice on fictional premises. In politics? If people vote for a solution democratically and voluntarily, such as cooperating to install solar panels in the Sahara desert, then sure. Otherwise, of course not.

Maybe it’s a cultural thing, but in Sweden it is in most contexts considered very disrespectful to invest one’s energy in telling people over and over again that the entire discussion is pointless. It makes other people wary of entering the discussion, especially when the persons who do it are authorities. As moderators, you are authorities, and the two of you combined were quite persistent in tearing down the plausibility of a totally fictional premise and make the case that the topic therefore was pointless. And dangerous, for that matter. As for the latter, I have heard both Shinzen Young and Culadasa talk about the same premise in their dharma talks. I don’t know if they have changed their mind since then, but as far as I know, these talks are still available on youtube. I don’t know which talks, because I wasn’t aware that I would need the reference. I’m not blaming them for my thoughts, but I do think it’s unfair to hold me to standards that not even they live up to.

Thankyou for making explicit that you do not consider me authoritarian or dangerous and so on. You did not reply when I explained what you seemed to have mistaken for a possible violation of human rights and... I don’t know what you thought - a coup? - so I didn’t know.

Sure, we can move on, but I’m not sure what it is in this that you want to discuss. Also, I don’t want to press you to talk about politics if you are not comfortable with that, and the politics - as in specific issues, not governmental forms - are what I wanted to discuss in this thread.
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
I don’t know what you mean when you say ”work under”. For the sake of discussion, then yes, for those who are willing. In our practice? No. We can’t base our practice on fictional premises. In politics? If people vote for a solution democratically and voluntarily, such as cooperating to install solar panels in the Sahara desert, then sure. Otherwise, of course not.

Maybe it’s a cultural thing, but in Sweden it is in most contexts considered very disrespectful to invest one’s energy in telling people over and over again that the entire discussion is pointless. It makes other people wary of entering the discussion, especially when the persons who do it are authorities. As moderators, you are authorities, and the two of you combined were quite persistent in tearing down the plausibility of a totally fictional premise and make the case that the topic therefore was pointless. And dangerous, for that matter. As for the latter, I have heard both Shinzen Young and Culadasa talk about the same premise in their dharma talks. I don’t know if they have changed their mind since then, but as far as I know, these talks are still available on youtube. I don’t know which talks, because I wasn’t aware that I would need the reference. I’m not blaming them for my thoughts, but I do think it’s unfair to hold me to standards that not even they live up to.

Thankyou for making explicit that you do not consider me authoritarian or dangerous and so on. You did not reply when I explained what you seemed to have mistaken for a possible violation of human rights and... I don’t know what you thought - a coup? - so I didn’t know.

Sure, we can move on, but I’m not sure what it is in this that you want to discuss. Also, I don’t want to press you to talk about politics if you are not comfortable with that, and the politics - as in specific issues, not governmental forms - are what I wanted to discuss in this thread.

In keeping these overactive authorities honest I think you are doing them a real service.

It is not you who are unwise and naive, I think.

These people are far more about power and control than they imagine.

We should stick together. It will make it harder to bounce us.

(winks all around)

t
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
terry:

In keeping these overactive authorities honest I think you are doing them a real service.

It is not you who are unwise and naive, I think.

These people are far more about power and control than they imagine.

We should stick together. It will make it harder to bounce us.

(winks all around)

t


I appreciate the validation but I won’t comment on this at a level that is aiming at any person. I really have no interest in that and hold no grudges. (Should anybody be bounced, in any situation, I really hope that I would somehow show my support.)

At a more general level, this is relevant to a discussion we just had at this workshop I’m on right now together with other autistic people. I will comment on this as a general issue that takes place in human interaction. I’m not talking about this thread. Just think this aspect is of relevance to the topic of maturity.

I think it is very common for most of us human beings to deny when we act from a position of power, and what our actions do. Impact and intent are different things. I think it’s important to be able to separate those from each other. Sometimes the communication becomes very infected because talking about impact is taken as aggressiveness towards a person, and so power dynamics go uninvestigated in a way that doesn’t help anyone. Many different kinds of power can be at play at the same time, so this can occur on different levels and in different directions at the same time. For some reason, power is often seen as something ugly. That normative view doesn’t really help, because it creates resistance to seeing what is.
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
terry:

In keeping these overactive authorities honest I think you are doing them a real service.

It is not you who are unwise and naive, I think.

These people are far more about power and control than they imagine.

We should stick together. It will make it harder to bounce us.

(winks all around)

t


I appreciate the validation but I won’t comment on this at a level that is aiming at any person. I really have no interest in that and hold no grudges. (Should anybody be bounced, in any situation, I really hope that I would somehow show my support.)

At a more general level, this is relevant to a discussion we just had at this workshop I’m on right now together with other autistic people. I will comment on this as a general issue that takes place in human interaction. I’m not talking about this thread. Just think this aspect is of relevance to the topic of maturity.

I think it is very common for most of us human beings to deny when we act from a position of power, and what our actions do. Impact and intent are different things. I think it’s important to be able to separate those from each other. Sometimes the communication becomes very infected because talking about impact is taken as aggressiveness towards a person, and so power dynamics go uninvestigated in a way that doesn’t help anyone. Many different kinds of power can be at play at the same time, so this can occur on different levels and in different directions at the same time. For some reason, power is often seen as something ugly. That normative view doesn’t really help, because it creates resistance to seeing what is.

yes

power is one thing, domination and control another...true power is never used...

t
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Andromeda:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Thankyou for acknowledging that communications went awry. It’s okey. I’m sorry that I snapped. I needed to protect my boundaries, and neither you nor Chris seemed to get that I needed that. I know that both of you meant well but this was not helpful. You were unintentionally forcing (I can’t find a better word for it right now, so the nuance sounds stronger than I intend) your insights on me before I was ready for it. I will probably make similar mistakes along the road, and I can only hope that I’ll be able to listen when people tell me that it’s not helpful.

Feedback on my practice log is highly appreciated, and feedback on posts where I ask for advice. This wasn’t that kind of post, and I made that as clear as I could. This was one of those political threads for people who do want to take part in such discussions. Both you and Chris had made it very clear that you did not want to take part in such discussions. I respect your wish to not engage in them, and I thought you would respect my wish to engage in them, even if you think it’s unwise and even if my posts are utterly naive. It’s not your call to make.


Thank you for acknowledging that you "snapped."

But if someone posts something that appears unwise and naive, why should this not be pointed out on a forum dedicated to awakening? Because your post wasn't JUST political, but started off with a premise that was spiritual. 
dear a,

   To the really enlightened (and perhaps also those who think they are), everyone's posts seem unwise and naive. Rumi talks about the teacher who is teaching a child her letters, and when the child produces a shaky "alif" the teacher says, oh yes, that is very good, just maybe correct it a bit here and there and it will be even better.

   Whatever linda may have said that was unwise or naive certainly got past me without me noticing.

   But I am not an appointed judge, one who as the prophet has said has been "killed without a knife."

terry
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
I’m just trying to make conversation with those who are interested in the topic, if there are such people, and if they dare showing it. Also, I’m vain enough to care about not being mistaken for a potential terrorist or something. I never claimed to be one of those mature human beings. They are fictional, after all. Thus, when people feel the need to point out my lack of experience and so on, that does hurt. Maybe all of you are above that and have forgotten how that feels, I don’t know, but it’s actually not very nice.

I’m not angry. I’m sad.

I sympathize...

t
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Thankyou! <3 _/\_

Lots of really interesting input here. I will respond properly when I have time to find the right words.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I would appreciate it if you didn’t insist on being helpful in a way that is not helpful for me.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Crossposting:

I need to find my own balance in dealing with wordly suffering. Nobody can do it for me. When people interfere with my mourning process and tell me that I’m doing it all wrong, that doesn’t help. I have faith in the process. It knows the way. I need to make my own mistakes. That’s part of the journey. I’ll let go of false hopes when I’m ready for it. Trying to take them away from me prematurely will only cause me to hold on to them even more. I know what they are. I also know my limitations in this respect, so that’s why I set boundaries. I would appreciate if people would trust me enough to respect those boundaries. It’s okay to just look the other way. I can take this.

You know that exercise when you make a muscle as tense as you possibly can, in order to notice clearly that letting go is the effortless part? That’s what I’m doing. Pulling and tugging my limbs to make me stop kind of disrupts the process.
thumbnail
Nick O, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 317 Join Date: 11/5/17 Recent Posts
It's hard to fathom the inertia behind the forces driving the world into the future. For me, it has been helpful to explore what interconnectedness really means. As in "I am one with all the horror and all the tragedy and all injustice and all the love and all the miracles". The world's greed is my greed. The world's hate is my hate. The world's joy is my joy. The world's love is my love. Our own personal shit is the world's macro-shit. Working from that view, you don't feel powerless because the change you make in yourself is reflected in the world. Lately, I've noticed that when I get wrapped up thinking or discussing politics, I suffer a great deal as do those around me with whom I have disagreements - even if I know we all have the best intentions for the most helpful outcome (this thread for example). If I throw the politics aside and just practice Right View (suffering and no suffering) with Right Sati, cultivating joy and cultivating compassion, the world becomes brighter, lighter and richer. I can adequately love and support the people around me. In this way I feel I am really making a difference in the world that transcends political ideals or philosophy. In the information age we get so caught up in what's happening around the world we forget that real change starts in our own minds and the community around us.

..Or maybe I'm just spiritually bypassing ;)
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I’m glad you have found something that works for you.
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Nick O:
It's hard to fathom the inertia behind the forces driving the world into the future. For me, it has been helpful to explore what interconnectedness really means. As in "I am one with all the horror and all the tragedy and all injustice and all the love and all the miracles". The world's greed is my greed. The world's hate is my hate. The world's joy is my joy. The world's love is my love. Our own personal shit is the world's macro-shit. Working from that view, you don't feel powerless because the change you make in yourself is reflected in the world. Lately, I've noticed that when I get wrapped up thinking or discussing politics, I suffer a great deal as do those around me with whom I have disagreements - even if I know we all have the best intentions for the most helpful outcome (this thread for example). If I throw the politics aside and just practice Right View (suffering and no suffering) with Right Sati, cultivating joy and cultivating compassion, the world becomes brighter, lighter and richer. I can adequately love and support the people around me. In this way I feel I am really making a difference in the world that transcends political ideals or philosophy. In the information age we get so caught up in what's happening around the world we forget that real change starts in our own minds and the community around us.

..Or maybe I'm just spiritually bypassing ;)

   Right on, bra.

   I quit reading the newspaper and watching tv news - even topical comedy, which I used to enjoy - since shortly before the last american presidential election, between hitler and the devil. I used to vote but since democracy is so obviously non-existent  in the usa I gave it up. Why encourage them, eh?

   All we can do is stay high and speak the truth. Since those endeavors are quite satisfactory, indeed great fun, there is no problem.

   "Life's a beach, and then you dive," as we say in hawaii.

(still smiling)
terry
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Andromeda:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Maybe I would notice that people appreciate my presence if they did not assume that I want to throw away human rights, comment on my language, point out to me in so many ways that I’m new and that my question is naive/stupid/dangerous, pathologize my behavior and insist on derailing my thread over and over again instead of just ignoring it. If that’s how you show people that they are welcome here, we seem to have a cultural barrier. Also, in most forums moderators do not moderate threads in which they are actively engaged. Are awakened people so free from bias that you don’t need such precautions? That assumption would be kind of ironic, given the topic, wouldn’t it?

EDIT: Well, at least there was no intentional mocking of language. Good to know. Appologies for the misunderstanding, John!

Linda, you're obviously very angry--it comes through loud and clear in your last few comments--and you seem to be misinterpreting a number of people's good intentions including my own. I'm happy to talk about this further, but not until you've cooled off and I have more time.

   Frustration is one thing, anger another. You don't think of yourself as provocative, obviously. 

   Confucius said, "When the superior man sees someone doing good, he imitates it. When he sees someone doing bad, he examines his inner self."

t
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Stickman2:
Chris Marti:
Seriously guys, this is a thread about ideas such as cooperating globally to divert the energy production from oil to solar cells. If that worries you all so much, maybe you need to investigate your own reactive patterns. Just sayin’.

Folks typically come to the DhO to talk about meditation practice. It's not surprising that every topic turns to practice matters, even the ones that aren't meant to be focused on practice. Like Andromeda, I suggest you might want to review and participate in a similar conversation over on AwakeNetwork, which has become more squarely focused on climate issues, not practice issues.

Anyone evaluated consumption patterns (carbon footprint etc) of contemplatives ?

   I reduced my footprint consciously and drastically at my cabin  in ocean view (2 story but only 12' square, plus a balcony/lanai). I haul water from the public tap, and conserve every gallon, even using the grey water for flushing. I conserve every gigabyte on line. I generate my own electricity and watch every watt. I burn propane and watch every gallon, and every gallon of gas. I use solar light almost exclusively. A deliberate reaction to babylon. It simply makes me feel better. I always hated waste. (And carol is seriously frugal; besides, she can wade in a drop of dew.)

   For what it is worth. 

t
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Andromeda:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
It’s perfectly fine not wanting to engage intellectually, but why do all of you need to tell me that here in this thread? Practically all other threads are not about wordly matters. Is it so provokative that I want to discuss worldly matters in one thread?


Perhaps we care deeply that you practice--and practice well!--and so we are trying to give you gentle nudges to do that rather than spending your time giving your conceptual mind a workout. Just a thought. emoticon

perhaps this is gently patronizing...

I can see where linda might be having a bit of trouble separating the tone-setting and authoritative expressions of chris and andromeda from their ordinary participation as fellow contributors. Personally I relish ambiguity, and love you guys.

t
John Not2, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 71 Join Date: 4/25/19 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
John Not2:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
One additional example would be if people in a country were to vote, in accordance with their current political system, for public transportation to be free of charge and publicly financed.

Detach from all: society, government, authorities... (all are Maya)

Refuse to recognize all "authorities", practice civil disobedience...

Refuse to be "domesticated" "humans"...



So you don’t vote?

Replying to my question is optional. It would be nice if someone who did actually cared to follow the premises I set up.
The last time I voted was over 30 years ago.
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
Linda, you said this in the first comment on this topic:

They realize that current systems for production and distribution are based on misguided views, and decide that enough is enough. The planet needs to be saved and priorities need to change radically. 

This comment, at least to me, meant that some changes to the way we allocate resources and decide on what we will do on a collective basis are required should every human being someday "wake up" (in the spiritual sense). That, to me, means changes in the nature of government. Is that not what you meant? How else will we make changes to the way we eat, generate energy, where and how we live, how we get around, and so on? I'm open to ideas on how we can make massive changes in a short period of time - because the time we have left before the earth's climate reaches a tipping point is very, very short.

One thing I've run across recently is that we may need to position the problem using different terms. "Climate change" is a neutral phrase. Some people argue that we need to use words like "Climate crisis" to generate a sense of urgency. People, in general, do not seem to think this is at all a crisis. I see today, too, that the British Parliament has now officially declared the climate crisis a "climate emergency."



   You can kiss the climate goodby. It is already far too late. Arousing people to take conservation seriously involves the usual misrepresentations and hullabaloo.  Fomenting a crisis atmosphere may not help much. Asking individuals to sacrifice when the goverment spends half of our (huge!) tax revenues on making war may be missing the point. The point may be for each of us individually to make our peace.

   I already lament the incipient loss of all beaches and reefs, but we won't save them. We'll have to wait until new ones form. We have a new black sand beach on the big island which just formed last year, during the fissure 8 eruption. I haven't been there yet but I hear the sand is still a bit coarse and sharp. Also no shade, and black sand will burn your feet in the sun, and your dog won't walk on it.

  Last I heard - I hardly pay attention - the government was still saying global warming was a hoax perpetrated by the chinese to deter western production and help them compete.

   Building wind machines and wholesale solar power plants to feed a swollen appetite for power may be counter-productive. The "government officials" ostensibly "solving the problem" may be creating more problems. I remember when nuclear energy was touted as "clean power."  A plutonium reactor has a lifespan, in practice, of maybe 35 years, and will be giving off lethal radiation for the next 10,000 years. By the same token the oil we burn in a day took over 10,000 years to form. And hydroelectric dams silt up and become useless (and ruin the river) after fifty years or so. 

   When I was a kid we built hotrods and worshipped speed and power. By the time my children were young, speed and power meant the latest computer. For gaming, of course. Still, a positive trend, it seemed to me.


terry

   

   
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Chris Marti:
You know, taking measures to prevent people from talking about political change tends to lead to authoritarianism, too, so it is good that none of us is prone to use force or coercion to ”protect” anything.

Actually, that is authoritarianism. Do you think I'm shutting you down by expressing my opinion?
 

Also, exactly what are you saying here? What would the alternative be? Not having any politics at all? Like that would be possible. Not having any intentions? Yeah well, I suppose if people were really all fully enlightened, at least in one sense there would be no intentions, but that’s not something that you believe in. Entering political issues with bad intentions - that options is discarded, right? So what remains? Keeping status qou? Like that one never turned into authoritarianism. Letting everyone mind their own business? Yeah, Lord of the flies is a really cosy scenario, right? Deliberatly aiming for politics that are tailored to humanity’s worst character flaws? That’s where we are now, and we are destroying the planet. Does that qualify as going wrong?

You're misinterpreting my comments.

I'm saying that the historical attempts human beings have made at governing based on the notions that utopia is achievable and human beings are perfectible have not done well and most have simply failed. It's a fact of history. I'm not commenting on anything else, or any other form of government.

If it matters, I happen to like the limited government models that have taken hold in the U.S. and in Europe over the last several hundred years. Republics that are based on the notion that we need to protect human rights, not protect the ideal of human perfection.

Please try not to take my comments personally. They're not aimed at you



I said that it’s good that none of us is prone to force or coercion, so no, I don’t think you are shutting me down. I was merely pointing out that my ideas have as little to do with authoritarianism as your ideas.

I’m very well aware of the fact that no utopia has been successful. I’m also very well aware that the current situation is no success either. I’m not planning to build a utopia. I’m just trying to frame a discussion in a way that allows people to think outside the box.

I haven’t said anything about changing any governmental models. I’m trying to talk about political priorities, in specific issues. Why do you think I’m talking about changing the governmental models? I happen to be a firm believer in human rights.

Of course your comments aren’t personal. They aren’t even targeting anything that I have actually said.
aloha linda, chris,


   I am fascinated with utopias. I highly recommend fredric jameson's "archeologies of the future," which work introduced me to the utopian sci fi of kim stanley robinson. "Years of rice and salt" was particularly great, following the millennial adventures of hsuan tsang's Monkey and friends  through many reincarnations punctuated by periods in the bardo. The book postulates a world in which all the white people were wiped out early by the plague, thus no christianity and very different forms of imperialism. Fascinating.

   In might be useful to consider the etymology of "utopia." Until reading jameson, I always assumed it meant "the true place" from the greek  "eu" meaning true and "topia" meaning place. Actually, it is from "u" meaning "no" and "topia," thus "no-place." Sir thomas more coined the word in his book "utopia" (1516).

   Utopia is an ideal. It exists here and now as an ideal. It is worthwhile to attempt to live an utopian existence, on the local level. We referred to our ideals in the commune as "communism with a small 'c'." Now I think of our selves and our fellow vendors at the farmer's market as "capitalism with a small 'c'." Some of the young people gather produce and sell it to tourists and locals by the bunch for "four to seven dollars, depending on how much you think it is worth." 

   When I lived in wallowa county the whiskey creek gang would go into town on the day the checks came in the mail, and since it was an off day at the food cooperative, we would pick up the key at mary's cafe, open the co-op building, weigh out our produce, put our stamps and money into the till, lock the place up, and drop off the key back at mary's. We thought this the most cool way to shop ever, and valued the trust involved. Some of the board members fielded complaints and worried that this trend could lead to abuses. They held a meeting which we did not attend, and after some discussion decided that trust was what we were all about and that to limit that trust would be to undermine our collective values. So we were allowed to continue as before.


terry




from timothy leary's "translation" of the tao te ching 


VI − 17
Walk Carefully When You Are Among


"holy men" and
"righteous" deeds
Distract from the internal

"Learned men"
Distract from Natural wisdom

Professional know−how
Addicts people to the contrived
And the external

Be respectful and compassionate
But walk carefully when you are among−

learned men
holy men
doctors
government officials
reporters
publishers
professors 
religious leaders
psychologists
rich men
social scientists
women with beautiful faces
artists and writers
men who charge fees
city men
movie makers
men who want to help you
men who want you to help them
Christians and Jews


For such as these
However well meaning
Place you on their chessboard
Addict you to their externals
Distract you from the TAO within


The lesson of the TAO is more likely to be found among−

gardeners
hermits
mountain men
smiling eccentrics
men who build their own homes
children
parents who learn from their children
loafers
amateur musicians
serene Psychotics
animals
men who look at sunsets
men who walk in the woods
beautiful women
cooks
men who sit by the fire
wanderers
men who make bread
couples who have been in love for years
unemployed men
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
You know, taking measures to prevent people from talking about political change tends to lead to authoritarianism, too, so it is good that none of us is prone to use force or coercion to ”protect” anything.

Actually, that is authoritarianism. Do you think I'm shutting you down by expressing my opinion?
 

Also, exactly what are you saying here? What would the alternative be? Not having any politics at all? Like that would be possible. Not having any intentions? Yeah well, I suppose if people were really all fully enlightened, at least in one sense there would be no intentions, but that’s not something that you believe in. Entering political issues with bad intentions - that options is discarded, right? So what remains? Keeping status qou? Like that one never turned into authoritarianism. Letting everyone mind their own business? Yeah, Lord of the flies is a really cosy scenario, right? Deliberatly aiming for politics that are tailored to humanity’s worst character flaws? That’s where we are now, and we are destroying the planet. Does that qualify as going wrong?

You're misinterpreting my comments.

I'm saying that the historical attempts human beings have made at governing based on the notions that utopia is achievable and human beings are perfectible have not done well and most have simply failed. It's a fact of history. I'm not commenting on anything else, or any other form of government.

If it matters, I happen to like the limited government models that have taken hold in the U.S. and in Europe over the last several hundred years. Republics that are based on the notion that we need to protect human rights, not protect the ideal of human perfection.

Please try not to take my comments personally. They're not aimed at you



aloha chris,

   The american "democracy" is based on the notion "that all men are created equal." This notion was formulated and written into the declaration of independence by one of the worst slave-holders to ever live. Charles peirce in ridiculing conventional  logical syllogisms proposed: "All men are created equal. Negroes are men. Therefore, negroes are equal."

   If you have been to an airport lately, or have any concern for privacy, our "republic" may seem to be leaning a little. And government is the least of our worries. The big three of amazon, google and facebook are beginning to emerge as the monsters they are. Facebook, for example, has 2.7 billion subs. Zuckerberg says it is more of a government than a corporation. Now, ask yourself: who elected him? Who ever would? Ditto jeff bezos and larry page. And their ilk. Great power is greatly corrupt. Where is our teddy roosevelt to break them into bits? Who even dreams of protecting privacy anymore? When I was a kid you needed a court order to read mail or listen to calls. Ancient history, eh?

   It is not abourt activism, it is about being awake. Not hiding from truth because it is uncomfortable or unpleasant. Telling the truth to power, to authority.

terry


from "oppression and liberty," by simone weil, this written in the 1930s:


Every human group that exercises power does so, not in such a way as to bring happiness to those who are subject to it, but in such a way as to increase that power; it is a matter of life and death for any form of domination whatsoever. As long as production remained at a primitive stage of development, the question of power was decided by armed force. Economic changes transferred it to the plane of production itself; it was in this way that the capitalist system came into being. The development of the system later restored war as an essential means in the struggle for power, but under a different form; superiority in the armed struggle presupposes, nowadays, superiority in production itself. If the free play of competition is the final object of production in the hands of the capitalists, its final object in the hands of technicians organized into a State bureaucracy would necessarily be preparation for war. Besides, as Rousseau had already understood, no system of oppression is interested in the welfare of the oppressed; it is on their miserable condition that oppression can rest the more easily the whole of its weight.
thumbnail
Andromeda, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 393 Join Date: 1/15/18 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Chris Marti:
... when utopian thinking goes wrong, it goes REALLY wrong...

Yes. It tends to lead to authoritarianism. It leads to governments that "protect the ideal" and not the human beings who suffer under them.


You know, taking measures to prevent people from talking about political change tends to lead to authoritarianism, too, so it is good that none of us is prone to use force or coercion to ”protect” anything.

Linda, I have no idea where you currently are map-wise and so I'm just throwing this out there--please don't take offense...

I have seen practitioners getting caught in loops of utopian thinking when in the dukkha nanas. The conceptual mind seems to be trying to fix the suffering "out there" rather than letting go so we can see clearly the self-created suffering "within" ourselves. It can be an avoidance mechanism. Again, I'm not saying that this is what's going on with you, just that I've seen it happen to others and it might be worthwhile to do some investigation. Trying to feel deep into the urges leading to this train of thought might be fruitful. Or maybe not--again, I'm just throwing this out there in case it might be useful to you. 

Of course, you're more than welcome to continue making conversation here on this thread, but you might also consider checking out the dharma of climate change thread on awakenetwork as it's been fairly lively lately with a number of participants.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Andromeda:

Linda, I have no idea where you currently are map-wise and so I'm just throwing this out there--please don't take offense...

I have seen practitioners getting caught in loops of utopian thinking when in the dukkha nanas. The conceptual mind seems to be trying to fix the suffering "out there" rather than letting go so we can see clearly the self-created suffering "within" ourselves. It can be an avoidance mechanism. Again, I'm not saying that this is what's going on with you, just that I've seen it happen to others and it might be worthwhile to do some investigation. Trying to feel deep into the urges leading to this train of thought might be fruitful. Or maybe not--again, I'm just throwing this out there in case it might be useful to you. 

Of course, you're more than welcome to continue making conversation here on this thread, but you might also consider checking out the dharma of climate change thread on awakenetwork as it's been fairly lively lately with a number of participants.


No offense taken.

I’m not sure where I am in the maps either. All I know is that I am exactly where I need to be right now, and that’s a pretty good place.

These thoughts are not new, and they are not loops now, although they certainly have been before. I’m aware of the potential problem there. Right now I just think that it might be a good idea for humanity to think outside the box and embrace that potential for impermanence in a good way. Also, I think it’s an interesting question.

I haven’t been active on awakenetwork lately due to a busy schedule, but I’ll certainly read that thread. Thanks!
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
... when utopian thinking goes wrong, it goes REALLY wrong...

Yes. It tends to lead to authoritarianism. It leads to governments that "protect the ideal" and not the human beings who suffer under them.

   Ideals are often misused by exploiters. It is often said that the best argument against christianity, or taoism, is the christians and taoists themselves. To err is human, to be ideal is divine.

   You are throwing the baby out with the bathwater. 

   You are cynics. If it weren't for bread and butter idealism we'd still be fighting in viet nam.


terry
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Andromeda:
I'm with Chris on this one. No utopian thinking for me, and frankly it makes me a bit nervous when I see it. I'm too much of a practical realist anyway and not only are the efforts and energies better spent elsewhere, but when utopian thinking goes wrong, it goes REALLY wrong. I prefer to dispense with beliefs and ideals as much as possible at this point in my life. 


Beliefs and ideals are not remotely the same thing.

We all need somthing to live up to, at some point in our lives. I'm not sure ideals are ever really "dispensable."

Unlike beliefs, ideals don't need to be defended. Beliefs, says krishnamurti, always eventually lead to violence.

t



from "the songs of kabir" trans tagore:


LXXIX

I am neither pious nor ungodly,
I live by neither law nor by sense,
I am neither a speaker nor a hearer,
I am neither servant nor master,
I am neither bond nor free,
I am neither detached nor attached.
I am far from none: I am near to none.
I shall go neither to hell nor to heaven.
I do all works; yet I am apart from all works.
Few comprehend my meaning: he who can comprehend it, he sits unmoved.
Kabir seeks neither to establish nor destroy.


LXXX.

The true Name is like none other name!
The distinction of the Conditioned from the Unconditioned is but a word:
The Unconditioned is the seed,the Conditioned is the flower and the fruit.
Knowledge is the branch, and the Name is the root.
Look, and see where the root is: happiness shall be yours when you come to the root.
The root will lead you to the branch, the leaf, the flower, and the fruit:
It is the encounter with the Lord, it is the attainment of bliss, it is the reconciliation of the Conditioned and the Unconditioned.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 5450 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Your skepticism is duly noted.

I don’t believe in a ”human nature” because to me that sounds like believing that there is an essence to what is empty. I might change my mind later, though, as I’m only beginning to grasp what emptiness might implicate.

I think of this as a way to brainstorm about possible solutions to urgent problems without discarding all ideas prematurely because they seem impossible. It is important to discard all potentially harmful ideas before taking action, of course, but in a beginning phase it could perhaps be helpful to believe in the potential for human development, impermanence if you like, rather than assuming that people will always remain the same.
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Your skepticism is duly noted.

I don’t believe in a ”human nature” because to me that sounds like believing that there is an essence to what is empty. I might change my mind later, though, as I’m only beginning to grasp what emptiness might implicate.

I think of this as a way to brainstorm about possible solutions to urgent problems without discarding all ideas prematurely because they seem impossible. It is important to discard all potentially harmful ideas before taking action, of course, but in a beginning phase it could perhaps be helpful to believe in the potential for human development, impermanence if you like, rather than assuming that people will always remain the same.

Your idealism is duly noted.

With affection and respect.

t
thumbnail
terry, modified 2 Years ago.

RE: Sustainable priorities for humanity 2.0

Posts: 1669 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
To be serious for a minute, I'm not a fan of utopias and theories of human nature that assume utopia is possible and desirable, that human nature is perfectible. I think human nature is what we see of it now, and focusing on what is impossible to achieve (utopia and human perfection) both ignores the reality of human nature and focuses our energies in the wrong direction. I believe we have to deal with the reality of both human nature and how we got to where we find ourselves now if we have any hope of "fixing" the climate crisis.

YMMV

EDIT: And yes, this means that I don't believe it's possible that every human being will wake up in the dharma sense.

   Without a concept of utopia - and we don't have one - humanity is aimless and lost.

t

Breadcrumb