Probing Beneath the Surface

I came across this piece on the recent revelation by America's former chief propagandist, Scott McLellan. By now, I trust you've learned of the book he is peddling on what really happened inside the White House over the last seven-plus years. The author of this article, one Rob Reynolds, argues there is nothing in McLellan's manifesto we don't already know, and that this is an obvious attempt to exploit the situation for personal gain. What Mr. McLellan should have done, argues Reynolds, was resign in the wake of Mr. Bush's decision to invade Iraq, in the manner of Jerald terHorst after learning of Gerald Ford's decision to pardon Richard Nixon.

I'm not here to comment on Scott McLellan; I reckon plenty of others have already done so. I'm here, rather, to comment on Mr. Rob Reynolds' writing, and how it reflects our society's undercurrents. First off, Mr. Reynolds raises some interesting points, such as the notion of the "permanent campaign" and John McCain's hesitance to appear in public with George W. Bush, so I encourage you to read his take on them. Having said that, two instances in his article caught my eye:

"Scott McClellan could have used a bit of terHorst's testicular fortitude."

So, from what I see, courage is equated with the possession of testicles, though Mr. Reynolds' use of this term does not surprise me in the least. The term "testicular fortitude" is invoked quite frequently when referring to courage, as is the poignant phrase "having the balls to..." My lack of surprise is what perturbs me: phallocentrism is ingrained even in our common language, our idioms. I'm not casting stones at Mr. Reynolds by any means - hell, I couldn't tell you the number of times I resorted to similar rhetoric - for I doubt he's aware of the connotations attached to his choice of idiom; my aim here is to bring these things to light, these signs of patriarchy that are now so automatic as to lie beyond our awareness. No doubt, one could argue against it to no end - much in the manner as one attempts to deny the persistence of racism - and succeed for the very reason that the collective conscious is oblivious to it.

My second item of concern is as follows:

"What Happened, McClellan's tardy tell-all, is already number one on the Amazon bestseller list and is sure to be a hot topic throughout the presidential race between Barack Obama and John McCain."

Barack Obama has secured the nomination? Strange. I switched on the television this morning to discover the race is still neck-and-neck, that Mrs. Clinton's bid for nomination remains very much alive. So, why would Mr. Reynolds declare Barack Obama the candidate for the Democratic Party? Does he figure Mrs. Clinton will concede, or perhaps self-destruct? Or is there something he knows that the rest of us do not? Or, speculating further, is this a reflection of his own desire? I suppose we'll simply never know.

Denzil Minnan-Wong

Say hello to Toronto's next Mayor!

He's young!
He's smart!
He's sassy!
He receives plenty of face time, and
He hates David Miller!

Rotating back to the world...

...from the secret realm of the divine to the cold, noxious surface of this planet we call Earth. I know, it's a pretty awful thing to say about the world in which we live, but, after a weekend of venturing deeper into myself, of testing and overcoming boundaries, of being immersed in the unrestrained love of so many others, I find myself again in the shit, as it were, wondering if I should retreat to whatever friendly confines I can find, or stay and fight. Though the temporary relief offered by the former is tempting, it does not do any of us good, for - here it comes - there will come a day when my confines will cease being so friendly on account of my standing waist-deep in the backwash from the pipe down which I had hoped to flush all my cares.

I spent part of yesterday asking random people in downtown Toronto whether or not it is possible to construct a divine society. Normally, I'm too afraid to make eye contact with anyone, let alone engage in dialogue, but I had received a series of important lessons from a series of important people, and they all said for me to stop wallowing in self-doubt, to stop allowing the fear to whip my ass with a belt; in short, to stand on my own two legs and do something. I received mixed reactions to my query: for the most part, I was greeted with a "no", reason being we simply don't care enough to do it; however, I did receive some positive feedback, even seeing a glimmer of hope emerge from one of the nay-sayers.

I thought about this today as I returned to the message boards for the heated political discussions, and was confronted with one's staunch opinion favouring surveillance of the proletariat through closed-circuit cameras in public areas. I tried to persuade him - well, I shouldn't try to persuade anyone to conform to my view, for two people will always see the world from varying perspectives - I tried to highlight the air of mistrust the government creates (and perpetuates) when it legislates surveillance of its citizens, but alas, he would have none of it, telling me I have to "see the positive side of cameras". While I do not condemn him for his stance, I'm afraid I cannot agree, for no good can possibly come from a society whose inhabitants not only live in constant fear of one another, but also seek to capitalize on it. He went on to say it is for our "security"; here, I again cite the same wise persons to whom I alluded earlier when I say seeking "security" by erecting barriers and spying on others because you have no faith in them makes you insecure, and when you lack faith in your fellow human being, you possess none in yourself.

It took many years for me to learn to see myself in others and them in me; the events of the past weekend served to hit me over the head with it like a sack of hammers. We cannot expect to build a divine society when we remain apprehensive of one another, when we fail to see ourselves in one another, when we detach ourselves from one another. The powers-that-be - those men who hide in their motorcades and ivory towers - wish to have their eyes on us at all times because they fear the consequences of our unleashing the good within us, of allowing it to flourish. They seek to suppress this awesome force because they are afraid to surrender the temporal power to which they cling so dearly.

We will never create a divine society if we continue to succumb to our own collective ego and "other" people: by affixing labels such as "criminal" or "terrorist" or "junky" or "politician" or "tyrant" or "Black" or "White". A society is not divine when its inhabitants systematically reject people on the grounds mentioned above. Solzhenitsyn said, and I paraphrase, the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. This is what it means to see oneself in others.

I still harbour the urge to discard all hope and return to my comfortable coma, but as I entertain such a notion, I ask myself what good it will do? I might as well slash my wrists in the bathtub (do everything one hundred percent, as the spiritual masters say - after all, paraphrasing Castaneda, a warrior either lives or dies; there is no in-between).

This will not be easy, but it can - nay, must be done, but it cannot be done alone. Perhaps I'm the wrong person to extol the cry of oneness, of divinity, for I am still struggling with my own demons, aptly named Fear and Doubt. It pains me greatly to see what we do to each other and ourselves - in essence, what we do to each other, we do to ourselves - how we destroy the beauty in this world without batting an eyelash.

Alas, I'm rambling, so here is where I will take my leave, but before I retire, permit me to wish you all a splendid evening/day. And I will say again: you are the light of the world.

Mahalo.

We want to play with the big boys!

Thus saith the Prime Minister of Canada:

"If a country wants to be taken seriously in the world, it must have the capacity to act. It’s that simple. Otherwise, you forfeit your right to be a player. You’re the one chattering on the sideline that everyone smiles at, but no one listens to."

That's right, kids. Just as in the schoolyard, if you haven't any muscle to flex, you might as well go on home and hide under your bed because you'll never share it with anyone, except maybe your pets. Put down those books and pick up your fists: there are assets to grab and asses to kick.

All mockery aside, let us return to Mr. Harper, who professes himself a pious man. Perhaps he should revisit Paul's first Epistle to the Corinthians:

"Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are" (I Corinthians 1:25-28)

The CBC's take on the story can be found here.

You are the light of the world.

I wish to announce a proclamation - yeah, I know; who am I to announce a proclamation? I'm not standing on a mount with stone tablets in either hand - as I was saying, allow me to proclaim the end to the term "stupid". There is no such thing as "stupid". It is all an illusion. If you feel yourself to be stupid, it is because you were conditioned that way. You are wonderful and brilliant and it's high time you start believing it.

I don't know how I can possibly be a scientist; I'm far too opinianted. They have a clever name for feeling: bias. It's fitting, though, that this term rear its head: we're programmed to believe them. It's time we put a stop to this.

A degree from such-and-such university does not make you brilliant: you already were; you didn't need the validation. If only I had known this ten years ago, but I cannot undo what is done. Neither can we. But that's another story. What's important is, we're capable of doing something.

What has school taught us? How to remember material? How to get good grades? How many credits to obtain? How to dress at graduation? How to perform tasks at work? How to fill out an application for school? for the credit card? for your home? When - when! - are we ever taught to think for ourselves? We're always told, told, told what to do. And it has worked beautifully because we're all buying into it. We believe ourselves incapable of anything beyond protocol, and we convince those in our tutelage of the same. Have we lost the faith, or we ever have it?

It pains me greatly to see so many believe in so little, including myself. I see too many people being branded with this horrible moniker, and I'm tired of it. I'm tired of it. I'm tired of so much negativity, and I hope one day to see us released from its death grip.

You are all wonderful, beautiful people. I mean that. I hope you believe it, too. The solution doesn't lie within some book or degree or job or church: it is within you, and has always been. That was the message all along.

I know it may not sound coherent or complete, for I have not spent much time thinking about the form of my response. Forgive me; my brain tends to be all over the place. Sometimes, though, in these moments, it's important to throw the thoughts out somewhere. Perhaps a revision is in order. Right now, I don't wish to be bogged in syntax.

I'll stop rambling now.

Oh, egocentrism.

You are the light of the world. Remember that.

The people of Burma pay for our sins.

By now, I trust you've learned of the devastation wrought upon the people of Burma by a cyclone. The latest estimate I've seen has the death toll exceeding 22,000, with still thousands more missing and feared to have suffered the same fate. I don't know what I hope to accomplish by sharing my thoughts on the matter; nonetheless, I hereby present them in as coherent a manner as my limited vocabulary allows.

There have been cries calling for attention to "climate change", as the frequency and ferocity of these storms is a likely result thereof. To me, this seems a logical assumption, but I wish to take it a bit further. At least as far as my awareness goes, most of the attention has been on the pollutants we release into the atmosphere - the so-called "greenhouse gases" - and whether or not they have any effect on the planet's climate patterns. The nay-sayers still insist the planet is only coursing a natural rhythm, and we happen to be caught in a certain state. I agree with the notion of a rhythm, but not with any assumption that we have had little influence on our surroundings. Permit me, faithful reader, to outline my synopsis of the situation.

We were once a simpler people: we hunted, gathered, washed our garments by hand, cooked our meals over an open flame, shat on the ground, walked and rode horses. Then came the birth of industrialization: soon, our lives would become as rapid as the machinery we were using. Nowadays, we have eight-hour work days book-ended by a viscous flow of sludge we call "rush-hour traffic", microwave radiation to heat a factory-prepared meal in less than two minutes, high-definition television sets with surround sound blasting into our fragile ears, video games and cellular telephones and washing machines and flush toilets, food delivered by fuel-powered truck for our consumption at the nearest supermarket, and so on, with seemingly little cost to us, save for the heaps of energy required to keep the machinery moving.

From my spiritual teachings, I learned a very poignant lesson - well, I learned several, but I wish to share the one bit of knowledge that most applies here: the universe is who you are; in other words, the happenings in the world around you unfold according to your person. In the twenty-first century, we are a hectic people leading a hasty lifestyle, so it is fitting we require an exorbitant amount of energy to maintain all that is. Furthermore, bearing in mind the fundamental law of thermodynamics, the energy we waste - be it through hot exhaust gas, or radiant heat from engines, or excessive worry or anger - is rejected into the atmosphere, which might very well explain the increased frequency and ferocity to which I alluded earlier (I, myself, have noticed this city in which I live become windier over the last two decades).

There you have it, at least according to my understanding of the world. I could stop here, but alas, there is more I must expel from my chest, for as I sit here, writing this in the cozy confines of my living room, several thousand kilometres from the chaos and carnage, I wonder if this is an exercise in futility, if it's worth my while to care; I could simply let it pass with the rest of my conversation pieces.

What kind of question is that? Of course, I should care. These are lives, like my own, ruined in one fell swoop, and I'm worried about my grocery shopping? There are living creatures in this world who are lucky to receive so much as a handful of nourishment, let alone a meal. So, what do I do to help? I suppose I could physically travel there, but, lacking the necessary skills to do anything useful, is this an option to consider? I suppose I could donate a sum of money to my favourite NGO who assures me it will be well spent, but is this so? I don't know the exact figures, but, given the bureaucratic structure of the more popular outfits and the frequent international travel, a lot of that money donated by us layfolk gets sucked up by overhead, leaving a small fraction to the country that ends up in the pockets of the ruling regime, who decides how it is to be dispersed, ensuring (presumably) its needs are addressed first. In the end, how many cents for every dollar I donate actually helps those who need it?

At the risk of tangentially veering off course, I feel the need to comment on the ruling regime, and the business it conducts with certain governments who profess to love freedom and democracy. As I trust you are already aware, Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi, elected by the people of Burma (known now as Myanmar, as per the wishes of the ruling junta), was declared an honourary citizen of Canada by our rulers, presumably for her dedication to the freedom of her people, despite her condemnation to house arrest. Upon first glance, this appear a noble act by our government, affirming its commitment to the sanctity of democracy - how fitting that we see, on our national news network, a tribute to her - however, I wouldn't be here if I drew my conclusions upon my first glance. A while back, I read a piece outlining Canada's business dealings with the military junta of "Myanmar", affirming my commitment to the end of this fleecing of my sisters and brothers by the thieves for whom they vote every few years. It appears there is mining to be done, and our Canadian crusaders of capital are seeing fit to be the ones to supply the junta the means to do it, for a handsome sum, of course.

How does this all relate? I could have written a piece on climate, or corruption, or just plain apathy, but alas, I bored you with all of the above. Why? I'll tell you (I really should curb my use of the pronoun "I", for this isn't about me): we mistreat each other and the home in which we live in an effort to reap what we feel is ours (hence the folly of my use of the pronoun "I"); our Earth Mother is trying desperately to get us to listen, though I fear her efforts may be in vain, for we do not seem to care that the people of Burma, along with the people of every other part of the world who suffer needlessly, are paying for our sins? We are bearing witness to the Tragedy of the Commons: selfish gain means collective doom.

The universe is who we are. It's time to start looking within ourselves for the cause of, and solution to, the chaos we see before our eyes.