lunar ramblings
steam

It is exactly wrong to speak of government
as some monolithic them that gives and takes,
controls.
Government, when rightly understood,
is us doing as we decide,
projects to meet our goals
as organized society.

*

I have clear prejudice against
those I feel disrespect me,
salving my perceived wounds
with nasty names and stories
to castigate them in
my private square.

*

The salient feature of "conservative" humanity
is ownership of property.
People with no property have no value,
and therefore no entitlement
to rights.

*

drenched in liminality

*

Can you look at your moment to moment and laugh with the cosmic humor of trying to make it happen faster? It can take a very long time, all that resistance to serious change. We get used to thinking of how it should be, what is expected, looking to improve to be better. It can be the hardest thing to accept, smile, smell the ambient air, taste the moment, and enjoy the dance. Not saying I’ve got it anywhere near down. Just, you know, bit by bit, easing the attention from some goal or guilt to simply feeling into a gentler frame.

*

If we can go beyond the everyday conditioning and experience reality directly, we discover that ALL is a state of bliss. We can move into that place any and all times, or not, as our individual consciousness feels directed (or our mind allows). This is the essence of all of the great spiritual teachings. It is what many traditions have named "God" or "God consciousness". When we understand "God" not as some big old guy in the sky, but as essence, this is the essence we are heir to for the price of simply becoming aware.

It is easier to explain in poetry; but it seems people are afraid of poetry as well as bliss.

*

Isn't that the point, to be self-aware physical manifestation rather than merely undifferentiated merging molecules? Isn't it a dance, a story, poetry, philosophy, love, compassion, all the "virtues" and "arts" that we discover, immerse in, enjoy, carry forward, learn to share?

People get so caught up in their own mythologies that they miss the actual point of trying to have better lives.

*

It would seem that what was "wanted" is "happiness" -- any intermediate desire being merely on the way. Change? Of course -- otherwise how would we ever get to a state of acquisition of what was previously "wanted"? Or, then, we could realize that happiness or that which we thought would bring it are not the true desire. So wanting helps us move along the continuum to find our true desire. Is that suffering? Perhaps. But then, suffering is a signal to tell us that something is not appropriately balanced. Suffering too is our ally. Enjoy the ride.

*

The root cause of pain is imbalance within a system thus that it is unable to function optimally.

Suffering is not punishment. It may lead to compassion, or not. Suffering is a warning, a signal, a siren, telling us that we are inappropriately out of balance. The sane response is to figure out what is "wrong" and how to create a new balance.

*

I feel we are all insulted by the myth of happy childhood. Childhood is not meant to be some fantasy playland. Children are not pre-adults. At all ages we are people, learning how to survive until survival is no longer an option. Parents, "professionals" too are (just?) people, struggling along. We would do better, I believe, to be honest with the young among us, as well as more generally.

*

There are ever so much better therapies than drugs for depression. Mindful meditation is found to be quite effective in many cases, as well as Cognitive Behavioral Therapies and Expressive Therapies. Spontaneous remission happens all the time, especially when the system hasn't been confused or compromised with pharmaceuticals.

depression is another of those catch-all we don't know what's wrong with you so it must be all in your mind diagnoses. I am lately theorizing that "depression" is a symptom of mind/body/spirit issues that cause chronic pain.

*

We obviously are a society that condones, celebrates, enjoys, and employs drug use. There is a big mixed message. Law in general is much too complicated to be a means of making a clear message. If we had sane laws, based on getting along together, locking up those who commit acts of violence until they prove it would be safe to let them back on our common ground, giving assurance to those ill-treated that restitution would be made, that kind of thing, we could have an intelligent discussion about law. In too many instances laws are used as bludgeons against those not in favor by those in charge.

When drugs were legal, used in patent medicines, available to any and all in this country, there were a small percentage of people who became addicted or otherwise suffered adverse effects. There was no funding of terrorism from huge drug profits or gangs of murderous profiteers. Often those who were addicted could still lead basically normal and productive lives. There is always a small percentage of people whom, for whatever reasons of nature and nurture (or lack thereof) become helpless, hopeless wastoids -- on drugs or off. Of course there are often impurities or unknown dosage issues in street drugs that add significantly to the danger of fatal events. If we were a sane society, we would legalize, regulate, tax, and open the market to a vast variety rehab modalities.

Taking drugs may well say "I am interested in finding out what this experience will tell me." or, probably most often "I am uncomfortable and would like to feel differently for awhile." Taking a drug for a purpose in a specific time/space is not rejecting any "consciousness". It is only when we have a desperate perceived need to reject our own natural being (or temporary situational but perceived as natural responses) or "find enlightenment" that any of your "subtle point" obtains. Thus, it is not use of drugs, but misuse in desperation that is of concern in this context. This, of course, can be said of any of those habituations we immerse in to avoid our selves, or what we mistakenly believe ourselves to be.

*

So, the old, half-blind, arthritic, or young mother, or honor student scared of gangs in the neighborhood is going to what? Hold off a gang with a because legal somehow super gun? My point is that having a gun in such a situation is false security. It won't help. It may well exacerbate a situation. No, I am not counting on police. I am saying that without the false security of a gun, people might find real security in acting together, or learning the various tricks of staying out of harm's way, or finding long-term solutions to complicated issues.

*

Perhaps the very violence of violent revolution reduces the impact in terms of creating a more benevolent system. When the people can be persuaded of the benefit to them of systemic change, when there is a real plan with dedicated leadership, there is a greater chance that the change will be meaningful.

*

Yes, protection of the rights of the people is an ideal directive for governmental controls, rules of law, peace officers who actually protect; but this is not even close to the government we have. Even if it were, there would be a clear conflict of interests involved -- not just the interest of the innocent fetus, but the interest of the woman who needs to be seen as much more than a biological incubator. This is not the classic protection of the innocent from the powerful, but really (no matter your position on religion) interfering with a sacred relationship. Because of the nature of mammalian biology, we have a newly forming creature growing within the body of a more mature creature of its kind. When that relationship is desired by the mother, it is wonderful and fulfilling. When that relationship is not desired, it is horrendous, nightmarish. Then, of course, there are the situations when the pregnancy is actually dangerous to the health of the mother, when she has to choose, or to the health and well-being of her other children, or when the fetus is malformed to the point of surviving, if it does, in a horrendous nightmarish state which the mother would need to endure with the child. These are not the kinds of choices that government should have to make. These are issues much too personal to belong to the impersonal state.

I have no argument with teaching responsibility. I have no argument with honoring life. My point is these are not issues appropriately adjudicated by government. These issues are far too personal.

• SCJ Louis Brandeis famously espoused that the cure for bad speech is more speech. Yes, protest the false stories, make noise, make more speech. Let those who lie or misapply or simply don't understand make their case, then you make yours, we make ours, he/she/it make theirs -- somewhere along the line if we are all very lucky communication will occur.
  *

Never argue with a bigot. It does no good; and it makes the bigot feel important.

*

Cast opening eyes into vast days,
All that is to be, brightly arrayed
as grand parades
All possibilities,
waiting to be played
as you are ready