In Defense of Activism
The other day a friend told me I was "allowing" the political situation in the world to upset me. I had to meditate on that a bit because he seemed to be saying that being upset about thousands of unnecessary deaths, wasted tax-payer money and manipulation of information by the very people who are supposed to protect us, is something I should let go of--so as not to get upset.
While I understand the concept of taking responsibility for one's feelings, the implied judgment--that I would be more evolved or enlightened as a human being, if I were capable of denying/ignoring (or simply not caring about) the reality of the current situation--did not sit well with me.
It is true that if I didn't read the paper or watch Democracy Now or listen to alternative radio, I could be pretty care-free. In fact, it would be relatively easy. There is just one problem with that approach: it denies a fundamental belief I hold--we are all connected.
This is not to say that I believe all people should feel as I do. But after two years working as a news reporter/co-anchor in listener-sponsored radio (which I began just before the invasion of Iraq) my own life started to look pretty small. In fact, when I contemplated the reality of life for the average Iraqi, I began to see that having to choose between an expensive bottle of champagne or a dinner out were not exactly "big issues." So I shifted my focus to what really mattered. And for me, that meant spreading information that mainstream media wasn't reporting. It also meant devoting a fair amount of time and energy, every day, to keeping informed.
That isn't easy, by the way. If I count the time spent reading the paper, watching/listening to alternative media publications, interviewing people, etc., it's almost a full-time job--and that's just to keep on top of what's actually happening-- forget about doing anything with it.
So I do not mean to criticize or demean anybody who hasn't the time or energy for it. On the other hand, I have to admit to feeling a little hurt and insulted by the idea that I was being seen as somehow weak and/or unevolved because I "allow" myself to be passionate about what's happening in the world around me. And I can't help but wonder where that mentality comes from. What could motivate the idea that it is acceptable, even admirable, to turn off one's natural response to injustice, criminal activity, violence, abuse, lies?
I have given this a lot of thought, and I believe it has to do with the Eastern philosophical influence our Western culture has attempted to assimilate. We learn from yogis and gurus that the highest evolutionary state is that of total rejection of our physical bodies--sitting endlessly in the lotus position--unaware of everything but our breathing. We hear that the truly enlightened are always in a state of peace and harmony. But I have to ask, is this really progress?
I studied Western practical occultism for many years. Here's what I learned: we are in bodies for a reason. What our bodies do matters. As physical beings, we are stewards of this planet, and how we address that responsibility is key to both our physical and our spiritual well-being.
I also learned that the way we think is the ultimate determining factor in how our physical universe unfolds. So while I do understand the concept of "let go, let God," I also know in my heart that God/the Universe/Mother Nature gave me a mind and a heart and, therefore, I am committed to using them. A mind will see injustice and a heart, if not corrupt and/or atrophied from lack of use, will naturally wish to correct injustice.
My concern, I guess, is that our willingness to embrace Eastern philosophical traditions is having a negative effect on our ability to address actual problems. Training ourselves to feel good when serious problems are left unaddressed is not, I think, an evolved response. Telling ourselves to stop feeling bad about a situation when we haven't even taken the time to properly assess and address it, is not what I would call progress.
On the other hand, we can't all be activists, or can we? If activism means taking action when action appears necessary; then it has at its foundation the willingness to look at our world without rose-colored glasses, despite how painful that may be. In addition, it means being willing to experience whatever pain that causes, so that we can understand the full effect of the choices we make, and others (i.e., our elected representatives), make on our behalf. Yet how do we motivate ourselves to do that if we have already bought into the idea that we are not supposed to get upset--even when we see manipulation and abuse all around us?
Our biggest enemy, I think, is not Al Qaeda. It lurks within us. It is our apathy and our willingness to pretend that we live in a world where what we, as individuals, think and do does not matter; where we can justify isolating ourselves from the rest of the planet just as long as our own personal needs are met--even if in doing so we quietly sanction the abuse and even death of others.
Our biggest enemy is our failure to understand that no matter how small we are, we are part of something bigger--and our reluctance to be responsible for our part in that bigger thing.
--Laurie Fosner
While I understand the concept of taking responsibility for one's feelings, the implied judgment--that I would be more evolved or enlightened as a human being, if I were capable of denying/ignoring (or simply not caring about) the reality of the current situation--did not sit well with me.
It is true that if I didn't read the paper or watch Democracy Now or listen to alternative radio, I could be pretty care-free. In fact, it would be relatively easy. There is just one problem with that approach: it denies a fundamental belief I hold--we are all connected.
This is not to say that I believe all people should feel as I do. But after two years working as a news reporter/co-anchor in listener-sponsored radio (which I began just before the invasion of Iraq) my own life started to look pretty small. In fact, when I contemplated the reality of life for the average Iraqi, I began to see that having to choose between an expensive bottle of champagne or a dinner out were not exactly "big issues." So I shifted my focus to what really mattered. And for me, that meant spreading information that mainstream media wasn't reporting. It also meant devoting a fair amount of time and energy, every day, to keeping informed.
That isn't easy, by the way. If I count the time spent reading the paper, watching/listening to alternative media publications, interviewing people, etc., it's almost a full-time job--and that's just to keep on top of what's actually happening-- forget about doing anything with it.
So I do not mean to criticize or demean anybody who hasn't the time or energy for it. On the other hand, I have to admit to feeling a little hurt and insulted by the idea that I was being seen as somehow weak and/or unevolved because I "allow" myself to be passionate about what's happening in the world around me. And I can't help but wonder where that mentality comes from. What could motivate the idea that it is acceptable, even admirable, to turn off one's natural response to injustice, criminal activity, violence, abuse, lies?
I have given this a lot of thought, and I believe it has to do with the Eastern philosophical influence our Western culture has attempted to assimilate. We learn from yogis and gurus that the highest evolutionary state is that of total rejection of our physical bodies--sitting endlessly in the lotus position--unaware of everything but our breathing. We hear that the truly enlightened are always in a state of peace and harmony. But I have to ask, is this really progress?
I studied Western practical occultism for many years. Here's what I learned: we are in bodies for a reason. What our bodies do matters. As physical beings, we are stewards of this planet, and how we address that responsibility is key to both our physical and our spiritual well-being.
I also learned that the way we think is the ultimate determining factor in how our physical universe unfolds. So while I do understand the concept of "let go, let God," I also know in my heart that God/the Universe/Mother Nature gave me a mind and a heart and, therefore, I am committed to using them. A mind will see injustice and a heart, if not corrupt and/or atrophied from lack of use, will naturally wish to correct injustice.
My concern, I guess, is that our willingness to embrace Eastern philosophical traditions is having a negative effect on our ability to address actual problems. Training ourselves to feel good when serious problems are left unaddressed is not, I think, an evolved response. Telling ourselves to stop feeling bad about a situation when we haven't even taken the time to properly assess and address it, is not what I would call progress.
On the other hand, we can't all be activists, or can we? If activism means taking action when action appears necessary; then it has at its foundation the willingness to look at our world without rose-colored glasses, despite how painful that may be. In addition, it means being willing to experience whatever pain that causes, so that we can understand the full effect of the choices we make, and others (i.e., our elected representatives), make on our behalf. Yet how do we motivate ourselves to do that if we have already bought into the idea that we are not supposed to get upset--even when we see manipulation and abuse all around us?
Our biggest enemy, I think, is not Al Qaeda. It lurks within us. It is our apathy and our willingness to pretend that we live in a world where what we, as individuals, think and do does not matter; where we can justify isolating ourselves from the rest of the planet just as long as our own personal needs are met--even if in doing so we quietly sanction the abuse and even death of others.
Our biggest enemy is our failure to understand that no matter how small we are, we are part of something bigger--and our reluctance to be responsible for our part in that bigger thing.
--Laurie Fosner
posted by LA Fosner at 5:07 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home