A Human Being. Not a Human Doing.

Meditation challenges my insect mind.

A few years ago, an experience in the Peruvian Amazon revealed the interconnectedness of all living things. Plants, animals, single celled organisms, we are all connected on an atomic level.

I always suspected this interconnectedness and am attracted to spiritual beliefs that tap into this as a universal truth.

So I started meditating.

I need a DVD to do it - with yoga poses, and a guide telling me to breathe and not to think and the occasional sound of waves or gongs chiming. But I'm doing it. Not the once a year painful vision quest when I sit down in the middle of the night in front of a burning candle and wait for the big revelation (never came), but a short, consistent meditating for folks with insect minds.

The whirring and clicking stops. The buzzing diminishes and I actually relax. I am not doing anything but breathing - yet I can check it off my list as a task completed. And what a task! Expanding consciousness to lose myself and blend into the universe.

The post meditation feeling is of peace, quiet and just being. By doing nothing, I accomplish quite a bit.

No More Fighting For Peace

Gaza. It's breaking my heart.

"Israel has a right to defend itself from attack", cries the editors of The New York Observer, The New York Times, The New York Daily News among others.

Many groups joined together to purchase a full time advertisement in the New York Times railing against the disproportionate Israeli attack, and bringing a new fact to light - the Hamas were retaliating against 6 Palestinians that were killed by Israeli soldiers.
(Thanks http://mercypolitics.blogspot.com)

For me, the argument stops here. Both sides have merit. Both sides are right. Now what?

In his inauguration speech, President Obama vowed that he would not resort to the false choice between liberty and security.

Hope is alive.

Does this mean we will do what is right and good for all the world?
Does this mean we can stop fighting for peace?

Let's assume that peace is what is right and good for the world, then in Gaza and in Israel, both sides will have to shift their stance to give up their optimal choice, and move toward a mutually beneficial position.

It is mutually beneficial to end the conflict, although because some nationalists will want to continue the fight, it is difficult to believe a solution will come soon. But let's look again to
President Obama's inaugural speech for words of hope. "To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect."

A recent New York Times Op-Ed, Muammar Qaddafi offers a plan for peace.

The United States has wrestled with its' own oppression and unrest, and President's Obama's election has given the people some comfort that we can overcome our past differences and unify for the greater good. It took many strong people and much conviction to get there.

But there is a glimmer of hope. As the president said "... a man whose father less than 60 years ago might not have been served at a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath."


Times can change. It is time to change.

Eliot Spitzer's New Gig

Check It Out!

(Thanks to the folks at Capitol Confidential)

5 Parties are better than 2

My opinion of John McCain changed after reading this New Yorker article, "The Fall", by David Grann. McCain in 2000 was his own man seeking reforms through force of personality and conviction. On the political spectrum, he was not too far from the more conservative leaning democrats.

For one, he doesn't want to dismantle the federal government:

"We have had regulatory agencies always to curb the abuses or potential abuses of the capitalist system. This is not a totally laissez-faire country"

For another, he complied with campaign finance reform.

For the 2008 election, he had to appeal to the conservative base, and that was the beginning of the end for him. He had cozy up to the folks who elected Bush, twice. This was not easy. In fact, McCain's top political strategist had considered running on a third party ticket, but he

"quickly concluded that the American political system made it all but impossible for such a party to win. 'This system, as it's presently set up, automatically pulls good people to a darker side of politics'".

Why are the American people left to choose from only two parties? How are two parties supposed to represent all of our interests from Brooklyn to Berkeley and all the vastness in between?

I agree that a three party system will not work because a viable third party would take votes from both sides of the spectrum. The Republicans and the Democrats would not allow that to happen.

We need 5 parties.

In a multi-party world, McCain could support campaign finance reform and all of his core beliefs without sacrifice and changing his message.

Voters would have the choice to vote based on issues important to them without being forced to clamber up on a campaign platform straining to accommodate the masses.

Granted, the federal level will be the last level to change.

The "parties" reform must take place at a local level.

Imagine, Democrats and Republicans in our city councils and state legislatures being replaced by candidates from the Green Party, Working Families Party and Libertarians.

The result would be twofold:

1. A more representational government could eliminate the lock hold that special interests have on our political process
2. Individuals will become more engaged in civic endeavors if they feel their specific interests are represented

You see, the more we are engaged, the more we know, the more we know, the more powerful we become. Who knows? With some hard work this nation could move from being a corporatist state to a democracy with a strong moral core. Capitalism with a conscience. The conscience being we the people, of course.

humanNATURE

Surprisingly, it begins with a biologist. E. O. Wilson.

In his book, Creation, he lays out some goals of present day biology:

"Bridge, if not outright unify, the natural sciences and humanities by exploration of the biolgocial foundation of mind and human nature. In the process, unveil the co-evolution of genes and culture". (emphasis added)

Can we change the course of the evolution of culture?

Genetic changes abound: There are fish genes in our strawberries. Monocultures of corn and soy threaten to harm irreparably the environment and local agriculture.

Let us dissect some of our modern cultural DNA and blend it with past cultures, bringing back our appreciation of our place on the earth, and our recognition that we are part of the food chain. We do not have power over the earth and the earth's inhabitants - plant, human, animal, insect - but we are part of the earth.

Again, E.O. Wilson

"The place of humans on the planet has been misconstrued. Humans are not conquerors, humans are part of the ecosystem".

Change our culture. Save the planet.