What Are We Doing?

There was a time in which people with anger management problems and other hostilities, were directed to at least acknowledge these resentments -- instead as they do now, ask them to give the proper assessment of the state of mind for the rest of society as the model to conform to as the current “politically correct” way of thinking. Yet that is precisely what is happening in today’s entertainment of what is going on in the world today -- that celebrities of every repute, are being asked to determine the course the country should be heading, and particularly, advise, what the President should do, on all the most important matters, of critical and historic importance.

That’s apparently what the “news” has devolved to -- that anybody’s opinion is just as valid, if they are famous enough, no matter how they derived that notoriety. And of course, bashing the President vociferously and scandalously, is revered as the highest of attainments. Each interviewee therefore, hopes to shock and scandalize even more than has been achieved thus far -- even while their greatest claim to fame, was successfully “pretending” to be somebody of great importance.

That might even have been a porn star -- if they are endorsing the “politically correct” person. Under those circumstances, one doesn’t know who is endorsing whom. All that matters, is that they are well-known -- as though fame itself is unconditional.

But the end of every excess, is simply being attentive enough to be aware of this -- and not that anything has to be done to reverse and counter this process. In fact, such acts and energies, would be an indication that one isn’t fully aware of these insensibilities that any attentive person would simply not resort to. That is the mindlessness of not thinking for oneself -- but letting others do the thinking for everyone else, and going along, thinking we are solving the problem, rather than manifesting the problem.

There is no good mindlessness; one is either mindful or not, and when there is mindfulness, one doesn’t need to be told what to do, or tell another what to do, which is an indication of mindlessness. People will do everything they can -- to avoid mindfulness -- as the conditioned response, to avoiding knowing who they are and what is going on. But only in being fully there, can any human problem ever be solved. Otherwise, it is only carried over into every other problem -- of avoidance.

Some people become very good at it. They are always solving some problem in the future -- and not the one in the present. And problems can only be solved in the present -- which is the manner of communications and interaction of that discussion. As people are purportedly solving some great problem in the future, there are creating the problems of the present, in the discussion of them. That discussion is always deferred and prolonged by the manner in which it is conducted -- that nobody is allowed to speak authentically with any other, in creating a solution that did not exist before all the parties walked into that discussion.

That was the limitation of mass communications -- that produced the inability to actually communicate authentically and personally -- which solves all problems.

The Problem of Education

When one discovers something for themselves -- and teaches it to others, that action and language is very powerful.

When one merely learns to repeat the jargon one is taught as though they really knew something, only a roomful of people with that same “education”, reporters, and lawmakers may be “impressed,” because they too think that what is impressive to others -- is to speak as much as possible without meaning anything -- which of course, is not critical thinking, or thinking of any kind but only putting each other to sleep in exasperation.

Unfortunately, that’s what contemporary education has become -- this learning and teaching of education jargon and explanations that don’t mean or amount to anything that can be measured or demonstrated. It is just enough to claim they know something that the rest do not.

And so in creating the education degree and curriculum, to learn this, they have contrived a shortage of (qualified) people who really do know something -- and could teach it, if all this phoniness was not propagated in its stead.

That kind of b.s. is unlimited -- while as you may know, the “basics” are just the basics that everyone could learn quite quickly and easily -- if that was clearly their focus and they were not forced through all the mental gymnastics -- one hopes to forget as soon as possible from those with nothing else to do in life but impress us with how “knowledgeable” and “worthy” they are.

So this huge money-draining industry of “education” has replaced the simplicity and most basic instinct of learning -- as though that is impossible to do except for the existence of such professionals. Because of the pervasive of information and newness, exposure and learning is pretty nearly impossible -- unlike the days of the pioneering frontier days when the school room and newspaper were the only contact with the larger world. But such institutions have not evolved to remain relevant -- but are instead insisting that the rest of society cannot go ahead beyond them.

This is the very manifestation of dysfunction -- the dependency of one on another. The great fulfillment of every society is the liberation of every individual from this dependency on others. But now the institutions that were created to promote this freedom, cannot let go of their own codependency, and are insisting that they are needed more than ever before. That just “does not compute” with today’s realities -- in which only minimal supervision is now required for individuals to direct their own learning, according interests, at their own pace.

Of course the most frustrating and futile undertaking in today’s world, would be trying to keep a group from the diversity of lifestyles, aptitudes and exposures, in lockstep adherence to the singular political correctness one has received directives from imagined superiors who know these things better than each is capable of determining for themselves. That is the whole purpose of real education.

The Capacity for Deception and Delusion

A great argument for a two-party system is that it prevents the kind of mob-think that enables crowds to be deluded into thinking they are “right” -- or that they are “thinking” at all, rather than just being swept along by the hysteria because there is nobody around to ask them, “What are we doing?” People not used to freedom, think it is just license to do anything they can get away with -- and it is "good" as long as they are not caught, or observed. There is no inner mechanism for determining what is right and good -- but only that which they can get away with. And that is now the Hawaii state legislature -- because of the absence of a counterbalance to the excesses now possible.

Revolutionary France was that way -- “Liberty, Equality and Fraternity,” were resolved by simply chopping off the heads of those who weren’t in the inner circle anymore, in the great excesses that can be confused as freedom in those who have not developed the skills in life to exercise it responsibly and effectively. These are invariably people who were just taught what to do -- under the penalty of having their faces slapped if they did not. That is the metaphor for how they view life -- as the countless humiliations they endured growing up -- and so now it is their turn to unleash their rage upon the world!

These are hardly the kind of people who make good leaders -- in the truest sense of the word. They are like the innumerable ruthless psychopaths who can justify anything they do -- "because they can get away with it." They continue in this manner -- until they are stopped.

Often though, they don’t have to be forcefully stopped. Because they are externally driven rather than internally motivated, it is often enough just to stop supporting these actions with one’s approbations. Conditioned behaviors are extinguished when they are no longer reinforced -- for being the "good boy," one thinks they must seek the approval of their "teachers" by obtaining the largest wage increases they can for them -- dutifully.

The problem with the Hawaii state legislature is that we have too many of these kinds of petty lawmakers and not enough statesmen -- or those who can serve the larger purposes of society. That is the problem with having most of the representatives being lawyers for special interest groups as their chief qualifications for serving all the people of Hawaii. You can’t get there from serving each of the narrow special interest groups -- thinking that amounts to a greater whole; it just fragments society countlessly, hopelessly, futilely -- and so the whole purpose of government then becomes to create the problems in order to create more high-paying jobs and self-important bureaucrats.

The peculiarity of self-important bureaucrats, is that when they see a long line of people behind them, they think that everybody showed up just for the privilege and pleasure of meeting them -- rather than that they need to get out of the way, so everybody else can get on with the important business for which they are there. This overwhelming need to feel important, should not be the characteristic that determines political ambitions and “success.”

The Cultural Evolution

The Lingle-Aiona Administration is touting their Innovation Initiatives package as their legislative achievement -- even if it did not get the funding they hoped for. But just to have those ideas discussed, is significant in itself -- because in the past, they would never have been brought up, or have been derided and dismissed as being a great threat to the status quo of bigotry, prejudice, and the resistance to new and different ideas. So the fact that it is dismissed as mostly talk -- that was what, was mostly needed.

It’s really the ideas that change cultures, and then societies, and eventually, the political landscape -- which is always last, and seldom first. That’s the misperception in politics -- that it is the leading edge, rather than the validation of leading edge ideas pioneered by private enterprises and personal initiatives. Government will always be last in instituting changes -- and never at the forefront pioneering innovative ideas. But they should just be aware of those possibilities -- to follow.

The proper designation for politicos -- is therefore not off leaders, but as followers -- but those who are best, are those most skilled at reading where the future is heading -- but obviously not from the front end, but at the rear end. In the 20th century, government was sometimes at the forefront of change -- but that hasn’t been true for several decades now.

It used to be that government owned most of the computers in existence -- but now they own a small portion of the computing capacity, and certainly, not its leading edge. Ironically, paradoxically, curiously, those who were in times past, “out of it,” have taken the lead in these developments -- because they were not vested in the old institutions that formerly dominated nationalistic, popular cultures.

Now the institutions of mass (popular) culture, have a real problem with ideas that disrupt their whole notion of social purpose and stability. Those leading institutions are that of media, the schools and the universities -- and their surrogates, the unions and the Democratic Party. Their sole purpose is to protect that status quo -- in a world that supports that reality, less and less.

They have to place themselves squarely against the great trends of the 21st century -- of emerging Individualism -- as the greatest protagonists of the mass identity. There’s a tremendous culture clash ahead.

In times of great upheaval, those who are better positioned, are those with little to gain by defending the status quo. They can therefore embrace change and new ideas without the fear of loss -- while those who have been “successful” at doing things the “old way,” are really trapped in those ways -- as the victims of their own success.

Those are the lessons of history, evolution and progress: this is the manner in which the first becomes last, and the last shall be first -- in the way that rewards those who best can handle BOTH winning and losing.

A Tale of Two Worlds

More and more, the world seems to be divided into the free and independent thinkers on one side, and those being told what to think by the Big Brothers in the media, schools, universities, unions and “Democratic” Party on the other.

Unless one is firmly entrenched in some institutional affiliation, it is difficult to impossible to maintain the “party” discipline. If one is in that system however, one sees nothing wrong with some members of their party being paid twice as much for the same work -- or more accurately, being paid twice as much for doing nothing.

So while all the fuss is made about how much the new beginning teacher's salaries will be among the highest in the nation, what is conspicuously overlooked, is that those with the easiest jobs will be paid twice as much -- for those “seniority” privileges, validating the right of the most entrenched to exploit the newest members -- who haven’t been as thoroughly indoctrinated in those injustices.

We could pay the beginning teacher's even more, if we paid all the teachers the same, instead of paying those with the easiest jobs, the most -- thereby institutionalizing unfairness and exploitation of the few over the many.

In the negotiations, emphasis will be entirely on what the lowest paid are receiving -- because of the exploitation of the highest. It will be argued that seniority implies a greater competence when that can not be proven because those are usually not even on the front line jobs but have moved into "educational administrative" positions. Finally, they will resort to their only argument that it is payment for “loyalty” -- of maintaining the status quo -- of inequity and "socially approved and politically correct" exploitation.

In the other world, there is no entrenched entitlement for selecting unquestioning loyalty as the singular virtue -- and so merit must play a bigger role. One can see it in the appearances of the people involved in those two worlds of different survival realities: one must remain sensitive and adaptable to change and new challenges, while the other, in their comfortable lifetime sinecures become increasingly fat, lazy and unresponsive, even resistive to change and challenge.

Their days are measured in the number of Cheetos consumed for that day -- to mark the passing of time in unvariable and interminable boredom. A few, realizing this fate early on, will break free -- into life on the other side.

A few will align themselves with the Republican Party, but far more will remain fiercely independent and rebellious against any group-think. Learning how to mobilize that army of independents is the skill the Republicans have to master -- rather than hoping to out-Democrat the Democrats. That is one vision of the future -- that is the fulfillment of a “more perfect society” -- and not just greater loyalty, to increasing inequality and inequity -- under the guise of being a “democrat.”

Who Will Emerge a True Leader?

While arguably this past legislative session has set new lows for disgraceful representation, the rightful question and focus should be, did any legislator emerge from the pack to display genuine and authentic leadership -- or did they all think bullying, intimidation, manipulation and deception, is all there is to it?

If leadership were simply a matter of strong-arming nickels and dimes from everyone on the playground, then the most ruthless among us, would become our leaders -- except when they have to distinguish themselves among their peers -- in ways beyond mere seniority. Leadership by seniority -- obviously has no merit, and always leads to merely preserving the status quo by which the least able, are allowed to maintain their positions of status -- for as long as they live.

The challenge of change comes a little faster than that convenient schedule for change. Perhaps the greatest breakthrough of this past session, was being able to witness the obstinance to the will of the people in so many different media and manner -- that in the past, were limited by the lack of this accessibility. In the world of the Internet, public access television, and better communications, many more witness what is going on -- without the intermediation of self-designated propagandists for the political correctness.

So while things do get worse before they get better, when they get so bad, it has to create its own solution, or human civilization would devolve rather than progress -- despite what the most regressive might call themselves. Of course they’re not going to call themselves “Demagogues.” They are far more likely to call themselves “Democrats, while imposing their totalitarian will on the masses. The Nazis called themselves “Democrats” too -- not to mention, “Socialists.”

But that all gets rewritten and edited out, and thus we become vulnerable to the next group proclaiming themselves “socialist and democrats” as the wonderful future of humankind with themselves doing the thinking for everybody else -- always with the same disastrous results.

It always begins in the same way -- of the Leaders overriding the will of the people. But this time it’s different because awareness is much greater -- which creates the context for which every human action derives meaning and purpose -- otherwise, it is just arbitrary, that the truth is whatever those in authority tell us it is, and demand we believe.

In the land of the ignorant, the teacher is king; in the land of the wise, there is no need for teachers. In the land of the criminal, the lawyer is king; in the land of the just, there is no need for lawyers. In the land of the oppressed, the leader is king; in the land of the free, there is no need for leaders.

So we should ask ourselves, do we really need leaders like this?