the golden age

During this golden age of
spiritual awakening,
Will we still be consuming spirituality?
Will it still be for sale?
Will we still need multi-million-dollar sanctuaries?
Will we still be fawning over icons?

Didn't your Master tell you
when you fixate on the individual
the quest stops?

Why the big secret?
Why the air of mistrust?
Isn't this knowledge
already within us?

number eight

Here we go again
plug yourself in
grab your partner
and start the dance all over again

They did it! They did it!
We'll get them, by God!

there will always be "them"
we'll keep counting the years
and listen to the same story each time
and there will always be "them"

what does it mean to love thy neighbour
when I'm told to be afraid of them?

today
we commemmorate
fear
of ourselves.

Strange Days & Fantastic Voyages

The Iranian election result has caused quite a stir, not only in Iran itself with several million people taking to the streets, but also among our major news outlets in the Western world, as trigger-happy media barons pee with glee over this pile of cannon fodder to be used against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that suddenly fell into their laps as if directly from the gods themselves.

Sadly, regardless of who assumes Iran's Presidency, the American war drums will not yield, as both candidates were declared "hostile".

What I find most interesting is our depiction of this series of actions. We provide round-the-clock coverage when people protest against someone our leaders don't like, and portray such actions as "peaceful" and the authorities' counteraction as "repressive". However, when the same thing happens in Mexico, we don't seem to care all that much, perhaps because, in this case, the mastermind behind the electioneering happens to be neoliberal-friendly.

In a discussion yesterday evening, processed food was mentioned, and I contributed by saying I viewed newscasting in the same light: pre-processed information for our consumption with no nutritional value.

There isn't much I can do about the current situation. My hope is this: when you're watching Iran, think of Mexico.

On that note, I'm off to India for five weeks. I may sprinkle an entry or two while there; I may not. Nonetheless, I'm sure I'll have lots to discuss upon my return.

Mahalo.

Cheat to Win

It may not be "hip" in some circles to follow sporting events, but alas, I have been doing so since I was a lad. I adopted many a hero through the television set as he made the key play or scored the winning goal. Though I am not as ardent a fan as I once was, I still keep my eye on the score sheet from time to time.

These days, I flip through the sports pages and notice something different from what I used to read as a youngster: cheating, once a rare occurrence, has seemingly become the norm, as I now see story after story of an athlete failing a drug test. Even our most sparkling of heroes is not immune from the temptation of "performance enhancement" (we need not name names here, as they have received enough scorn already). The respective braintrusts of each sporting federation are scrambling to implement anti-doping protocols in a frenetic effort to "clean" their competitions.

Come to think of it, cheating isn't all that new to us, and no matter what actions we take to purge corruption from our precious pastimes, it always resurfaces.

In the past few years, many professional athletes have been accused of enhancing their abilities through foreign substances, many of whom have been found guilty and punished accordingly. There are countless other examples of cheating in sport; examples include unfair adjustments in automobile racing, match fixing in European football, video-taping opponents' practices in American football, point shaving in basketball, to name but a few. Pete Rose, the all-time leader in base hits in Major League Baseball, may very likely never be inducted into its Hall of Fame over allegations that he bet on baseball. Perhaps the most salient of these is the infamous "Black Sox Scandal" - featured in the film Eight Men Out, which I highly recommend - in which eight members of the Chicago White Sox collaborated in throwing the 1919 World Series because (as I understand the story) they bet against themselves.

Should we be surprised that people are cheating in these competitions? It's happening everywhere, not just in the sporting world. In Canada, scandals are brewing over Minister of Natural Resources Lisa Raitt's mishandling of Government documents (and her comments over isotope production), and Ontario Minister of Health David Caplan's misappropriation of funds, and former Federal Minister of Transportation John Baird's "fuck you" to the City of Toronto in response to a request for funding (rumour has it Mr. Baird withheld transit funding for the City of Ottawa so that his buddy would win the Mayoral election), and former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and the bag of money. In fact, how does one seek election in the first place? You have to scratch and claw and trample any oncomers (even within your own ranks) for the prize.

Furthermore, how many of us cheat on our taxes? How many of us have cheated on exams and assignments without being caught? How many of us cheat the system in other ways in order to get what we feel is owed us?

My question is, how to we pass judgment on our sports heroes for cheating when we are guilty of the same crime? Moreover - and I thank whomever it was who raised this point, though I do not remember her/his name - who are we to pass judgment when the emphasis is on winning? We have long since abandoned the principles of fairness and goodwill in favour of being number one, so why are we so shocked when certain parties do not play the game fairly?

Wait... is the game even meant to be played fairly?

And just who is behind all this cheating? Would the Black Sox Scandal be entrenched in American folklore had Charlie Comiskey given his players a fair shake, thereby attenuating their desire to screw him and get a little something for themselves in the process? Did the sudden rash of home runs not rekindle interest in baseball, and did the owners not need their star sluggers to give themselves a little extra boost in order to create this buzz? Do national pride and corporate bucks not ride on these athletes of track and field to win, win, win and smash every record in the process? If I am running for office, is the goal not to win the election? so what stops me from pulling whatever strings that need pulling in order to do so?

And what happens when these people are caught? Throw them to the wolves, that's what; make the masses think justice will prevail in the end. Who gives a damn about these people, when newcomers are waiting to take their places in the game? Politicians and professional athletes are as expendable as you and me. Their superiors tell us the whole is tainted by a few "bad apples" when the whole system is rotten to the core.

However, all is not lost - as you know, I attempt to paint that glimmer of hope, faint as it may seem, in each of my yarns of late. Perhaps it's time we deemphasize winning and allow compassion and goodwill to manifest. I learned a valuable lesson as a boy, one that has been reiterated in my adult years: it matters not whether you win or lose, but how you play the game. I realize this is something most of us do not wish to hear, for we must win at all costs, but I ask you, how much do we lose when we seek to win? Many of us have lost careers, reputations and loved ones while seeking a particular triumph; many still have lost our sanity, our scruples, even our dignity, and for what? For how long does a "victory" last? Trophies become scrap metal, and record books turn to mulch.

In my playing days, as I ascended the levels of competitiveness, the fun diminished; the most fun I had was when we didn't keep score, when we played because we loved playing. Perhaps we ought to cease keeping score - goals, points, ratings, whatever measures of "success" we have espoused - and just play.

Mahalo.

Label You, Label Me

Today is the day we in the West commemorate "D-Day", the invasion of Normandy by the Allies leading to a string of defeats by and subsequent fall of the Reich in Germany. Today, I want to discuss labels - I've been meaning to do this all week, but other duties prompted me to wait until now; perhaps there is some sort of divine reason why I'm writing this on "D-Day".

I recently read a study investigating labels and their associated stereotypes. It found that using the noun form of a descriptor rather than its adjective to define an individual prompts the user to automatically associate this person with the stereotypes that correspond to said descriptor; for example, I am more likely to use stereotypes if I label someone "a blonde" or "a Jew" rather than describing that person as "having blonde hair" or "being Jewish". When you ponder it for a moment, it makes sense: if I am labeled this or that, I become that label and everything that is attached to it, though I suppose the "scientific proof" is necessary to put our minds at ease - I'll get to deference to authority soon enough. In the context of war, labels detach us from others (and also ourselves): during World War II, we were the "Allies", the "Krauts" and the "Japs"; afterwards, we were the freedom-loving, God-fearing (notice the paradox?), decent hard-working people and the "Godless Communists"; today, we are the same and they are the "terrorists". If you want the perspective of the other side, we are the "Capitalist pigs" and the "Great Satan".

See what a mess this is? Wouldn't it be easier if we just considered each other as people? As living creatures held to Mother Earth's bosom?

Another funny thing about these labels is their capacity to determine the voices to whom we listen. If I have the label "General" or "Senator" or "Scientist" or "Scholar" or "Guru", chances are you're going to listen to what I have to say. Studies have shown (because we seem to need studies to show us) that by wearing an expensive suit, people will start taking me seriously, moreso than they would if I'm clad in a t-shirt and jeans. Do I suddenly become different by donning the suit? Does the suit provide some magical link between myself and the vast ocean of knowledge? My friend once told me a fable of a wise man who spoke to the masses and was unsuccessfull because they sneered at his garb, but when he returned wearing a business suit, the masses started to take his words seriously. My friend said the moral of this story is, sometimes, you have to adorn yourself with certain garments in order for people to listen to you; my concern is, what does that say about us? that we listen to the image and not the message?

Everything we experience has to have a label as well. Music is classified as this genre or that genre, each containing several sub-genres (and, of course, we end up defining ourselves and each other by our musical tastes), and some musical acts find these lines cutting right through them. We label certain experiences as "pleasant" or "unpleasant", "deviant" or "good", based on the most salient criteria in our minds at the time. We seek "fulfillment" in our lives but aren't quite sure what that means. Some of us claim to be "enlightened" or "aware".

Diagnoses are yet another example. My mother thinks I may have Asperger's syndrome, and she may be right, but should I then be defined by it? Must I carry the weight of another label? Will people see me differently with this diagnosis branded to my forehead? The amount of overlap between labels on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders (commonly known as the DSM) is astounding, and there seems to be a label for just about everyone. I still don't know why the course I took was called "Abnormal Psychology": with a label for everyone, who can really be deemed "normal"? who decides what "normal" is? Do I have to be defined as "bipolar" or "autistic" until my dying day?

I don't know about you, but all these labels leave me confused.

Do these labels really define who we are? Each one of us has more dimensions than we can count, so how do we come to define each other by a single attribute? Do we love convenience that much? Are we afraid to delve deeper? By branding everything and everyone, do we lose sight of them? Do we lose sight of ourselves? So what if I'm a White male? So what if I was raised Greek Orthodox? I'm a lot of other things, too, all of which interact with one another. I am also you, and you, and you, and you.

Why was this day labeled "D-Day"? Because "we" beat "them"? What does it mean to be "we" and "them"? Were we not assisted by the Soviet Union in our triumph over Nazi Germany? If they had lost the battle of Stalingrad, would we be having this conversation? Do we disregard their contribution because "they" are not "us", because "their" values differ from "ours"? Perhaps these wars might be avoided if we ceased classifying ourselves as "us" and "them".

Do we really need to be slaves to these labels we create arbitrarily?

Fallen Angels Revisited

I can't profess to know the story of Lucifer, the angel who fell from Heaven - how many of us can? - but I can't help but ponder the possibilities.

I postulated that Lucifer grew displeased with how Heaven was being run - perhaps Divinity became too bureaucratic - and was cast out for daring to change things. I wonder if Lucifer didn't simply drive himself to madness and subsequently land himself in the Underworld to dwell for all eternity. I wonder if Lucifer just couldn't take trying to conform to Heaven's rules when he was incapable of doing so, and rather than adapt to his needs, he was rejected by his surroundings. I wonder if Lucifer could no longer stand being met with blind eyes and deaf ears.

Earlier in the week during which I wrote my entry on Lucifer, my horoscope prognosticated the coming of an angel. After searching hither and thither, the angel finally came to me as I was riding my bicycle one sunny Friday morning, that angel being Lucifer. I wonder if this visit was intended to dispel the propaganda and posit the possibilities of how this fallen angel's fate was sealed.

I wonder...

Nosce Te Ipsum

I'm sure I've touched upon this topic over and over, but what the hell? I feel like writing, so I'll write again about my favourite topic: us.

I used to feel dreadfully alone in the world. I could be in a sea of people and feel no connection to them. I would sit and commiserate and lament my not being able to relate to anyone. I hear friends describe the abyss in which they find themselves, seemingly unable to escape.

I also see the incessant need for many of us to distance ourselves from societal affairs. Most of us feel that, because we are not directly involved in, say, one person's poverty or injustice, that the problem is not ours. I also see the tendency for many of us to point fingers at others, to divert the attention away from ourselves, and blame them for their plight.

I had a conversation with my mother about how certain people think too highly of themselves. She claimed these people love themselves too much, while I argued to the contrary, claiming they adopt this persona as a means of defending themselves against their own self-loathing; in other words, they fear being inferior to the group, so they act as superior (I believe Alfred Adler theorized this).

What does all this mean? Is this simply another of a long series of my crazy bantering? Are you wondering when I will finally begin to make sense? Perhaps even I don't know what I'm saying most of the time.

I suppose the point I'm hoping to make is: Why must we feel so alone?

For whatever reason, we seem to focus on how different we are from one another. We have trouble relating to others because they don't know how we feel, but is this true? We cast stones at each other because we feel we have the answers and they don't, but is this true? We blame others for their problems while washing our own hands clean, but is this true? We label others as burdensome to us, but who is the true source of the burden?

We see people as "us" and "them", but is this true? Who are "us" and "them"? Do "they" not also think and feel? Do "they" not also interact with the universe and form beliefs about it? Do "they" not also fear and doubt and worry? Do "they" not also love? Do "they" not also desire to live?

There was an open question posed asking what the solution is to all society's ills. Many shared their opinions on the matter, and some subsequently attacked the opinions of others. I wonder if any of these people know where the solution actually lies. I've had this discussion plenty of times with people from some political stripe or another claiming theirs is the answer, and I wonder if they really know. When I see these debates, I'm always left wondering if anyone wants to identify the problem, or spend their energy clinging to their solution.

Here I go, pointing fingers at everyone again. I cannot profess to knowing what the solution is, either, for I have come to my own conclusions that may or may not be accurate. Perhaps I can suggest a starting point, though I'll leave it to you to take what you will from it.

I wonder how many of us know ourselves - I mean really know ourselves - enough to know where the solution lies. I wonder how many of us actually look at ourselves; I wonder how many of us desire to do so. We seem to want to focus the spotlight outward, on "them", yet are afraid to look critically at "us".

I believe there is an old proverb that say for every time I point my finger at someone, a thousand are pointing at me. Right now, your fingers are probably pointed in my direction, and you may be passing judgment on me based on what I write here, as I'm sure I've done to you along the way. Perhaps each time I put myself out here, I call upon your assistance in seeing myself, should I choose to accept what I see.

My feeling is, these problems are allowed to perpetuate because we are afraid of ourselves. We distance ourselves from them because we cannot bear the thought of our being connected to them, which in turn exacerbates our being part of the problem. We deny ourselves each day, when we idolize this person and denigrate that person and distance ourselves from those people. We are all such beautiful people capable of so much; our potential is limitless, yet we incessantly erect barriers around ourselves.

The burden does not lie within anyone else; we create the burden ourselves. I can decry the use of my tax dollars being "wasted on losers", but all I am doing is burdening myself with my own insecurity. Similarly, by denigrating others, are they burdening me by disagreeing with me, or by being "stupid", or am I placing the burden on myself by resorting to bickering and name-calling? Do I see this in myself while engrossed in the act?

In the grand scheme of things, we are akin to water molecules in an ocean; I may be this molecule and you may be that molecule, but together, we comprise the vast ocean, and not one of us is any more or less important than any other. If I could give advice - moreso to myself than anyone else - it would be this: don't let your being this particular molecule detract your vision from the ocean.

Nosce te ipsum: know thyself!