Naming a blog "REALLY taking America Back" strongly suggests faith that it can happen. I remember exactly when I got the faith. It was probably the juiciest aha moment of my ten years hosting talk radio on an NPR regional network. I couldn't get it out of my mind until I laid it out in a magazine essay called "The Hidden Agreement," which was reprinted at the end of As If We Were Grownups (I'll try hard not to overpitch that book in this blog; if I'm not trying hard enough I'm trusting you'll let me know).
I hope you'll take a few (5-10) minutes to read "The Hidden Agreement." This is important, because if its central premise doesn't work then the chances of taking America back drop down to, oh, about...zero, best I can tell. Go ahead, I'll wait...
...Okay. I'd like your gut check on this essay, ranked 1-10. 1 means "this essay's a complete crock" and 10 means "this is EXACTLY how it seems to me." Any particular experience about all this come to mind?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I am not sure who you are. I know that I read an Oregonian piece on you that sounded good.
I have done a lot of work on the issue of campaign finance reform for over 20 years.
I have concluded that neither contribution limits nor public financing is the solution. As scary as it seems there needs to be an amendment to the US Constitution making it clear that money does not = speech.
This US Supreme Court and Oregon's are highly unfavorable to any attempt to curtail "political speech" unless of course you are a high school student in Alaska holding up a banner that says "Bong Hits 4 Jesus." That has to be stopped of course.
I am with anyone who wants to make a real change. But this one requires a constitutional amendment. Anything short of that will again I am afraid not work.
Oregonrain oregonrain12000@yahoo.com
For me, the scale is 9 - 10. I hear similar stuff when I talk to people. Maybe it's because that's what I want to hear.
I participate on a couple sites that are working to increase this awareness world wide. http://www.zaadz.com/ and http://www.global-mindshift.org/
Check them out.
I'd honestly have to say having read "The Hidden Agreement" it resonates to me with about 9-10 as well in the sense that I do believe that:
a) people want a better world/society/culture
b) people feel that they are "alone" in wanting that
It's also funny how this ties into Camus' theory of the "Absurd" if anyone is intersted in having a look at that.
Having talked to a bunch of people about issues what I have heard most of all is, "OK maybe that's true but what can "I" do.. what can "I" as one person do?" and I think that leads alot of people to become frustrated and complacent
I do think a really good example of how some groups have banded together and really succeeded in trying to change the world and trying to feel "together" has to be the majority of the Christian movements and organizations in the United States. When one looks at what James Dobson has done, whether or not you believe in Christianity (and I personally don't) one has to admit that they've been able to find a common and shared belief system and articulate an actionable set of goals as a result of that. The fact that it became a key issue in the 2000 and 2004 elections has more to do with the fact that alot of people in the US share that belief system. Check out "The Jesus Machine" by Dan Gilgoff for a very unbiased non-partisan look at that whole movement.
I'd say the biggest challenge that we as a culture face in changing anything is the ability to get the word out in a clear and actionable way that "you are not alone" and "we all share common fears, beliefs and needs"
In my judgement, the new-age movement hasn't done a great job of articulating that for the same reason that most religious movements haven't... one has to have a certain amount of agreement with the belief system a priori in order to participate. If one doesn't believe in Jesus, Buddha, Allah, L Ron Hubbard, Energy, Spirit or Good Vibrations then chances are that they aren't going to participate.
What might be best is that we could all agree on that at the end of the day all forms of spirituality are in essense really just offering "shelter from the storm" and take that part of the equation off the table. Which is probably why Church(es) and State were separated to begin with and should remain so.
If one takes spirituality of the table, we are left with rational, need-based motivations and objectives that can be quantified and met rather than desire-based motivations with are more abstract, individual and generally unattainable.
On a slightly more sobering note and based on the embedded video in Jeff's blog... and with all due respect to the spirit of the embedded video
What do the following individuals who "thought differently" have in common?
Thomas Becket
Cicero
Michael Collins
Indira Ghandi
Mohandas Ghandi
John Kennedy
Robert Kennedy
Martin Luther King
Malcom Little (Malcom X)
John Lennon
Huey Long
Leon Trotsky
Emiliano Zapata
I only offer this up to say that to be "one" individual is not enough, I think we need bigger change. The Apple commercial is great in spirit but at the same time, it's an affectation.. it's a bumber sticker, it's an effing Che Gueverra T-Shirt... it's lip service... it's dissent conveniently packaged with the teeth removed.
I think there are STILL plenty of "individuals" who want change, who want to express their thoughts and ideas and make the world a better place. But one cant do it alone.. we've proven that to ourselves time and again. We don't need Ghandis or MLKs or JFKs, that takes the onus off of "us" and "ourselves" while we wait for the next "great hope" to come along and deliver us from ourselves..
But what we really need is eachother.
Then we've got a movement that will transcend race, income, education, religion, political party and country.
Then we CAN change the world.
Post a Comment