A Loving Decision 121.3.21;69;2.9

Love And Peace, Family and Friends.

Over a century ago, there is a legendary civic leader whose status rivals that of Martin Luther King Jr in the United States.  His name is Booker Taliafero Washington, and he rises from the chains of slavery to build a university, establish a “development” machine (before the term is invented), and advocate for the interests of people of African descent.  Within his famous Atlanta Compromise, Washington offers a metaphor for suggested ethnic integration within the United States:  for different ethnicities to be as separate as the fingers when it comes to social interaction, and as united as the hand when it comes to common economic development.

Whilst this policy has its valid detractors (including the renowned WEB Du Bois who is a founder of America’s most prominent civil rights organisation, NAACP), this policy provides an appropriate context to consider the interests of multiethnic people.

Within the past 20 years, a social movement develops, advocating the identity, experience, and interests of people whose heritage comprises multiple ethnicities.  Mixed.  Mixed Race.  Biracial.  Multiethnic.  Mixie.  We are becoming increasingly fortified in affirming our multiethnic identity and building systems, institutions, and communities that strengthen our multiethnic identity and experience.

However, this affirmation of multiethnic identity and experience is met with substantial disdain from respective “monoethnic” communities.  Some monoethnic communities scrutinise the necessity and legitimacy of such multiethnic identity and experience in lieu of a conventional practise of assimilating within a mainstream identity and culture.  And additional monoethnic communities look towards the affirmation of multiethnic identity and experience with suspicion and animosity, concerned with such affirmation detracting from conventional programmes and initiatives that are respectively dedicated for the respective preservation of these monoethnic communities.  However, both of these approaches exist within an antiquated and stagnant myopia that historically pits different monoethnic communities against each other, causing a considerable reduction in aggregate production and efficiency, thereby substantially limiting the wellbeing and prosperity experienced by each monoethnic community.

When any community engages in conflict against another community, the devastation is obvious.  Lives are lost.  Wisdom and skilled labour is lost.  Infrastructure is damaged.  Systems and institutions are distracted from visionary endeavours and discovery.  And innumerous opportunity costs for natural resources, education, productivity, development, and progression are lost.

Whilst the effects may be less severe and readily evident, the same opportunity costs are lost when monoethnic communities are unable to proficiently cooperate with each other.  When this happens, there is convolution, over-complexity, and waste in public policy.  There is dissonance and stagnancy within employment rates, labour productivity, and capital development.  There is tremendous inefficiency within housing development and migration, transportation practices, and community building.  There is an increased amount of poverty, vagrancy, malaise, despondency, and disconnect.  There is an increased amount of dehumanisation, civil transgressions, and criminal behaviour.  There is an excessive amount of resources invested in weapons, fences, security, and police forces.  There is misinformation, miscommunication, and mistrust regarding education, which leads to aggravated circumstances within each of the previously described, and additional, experiences.

It may be considered that these adverse experiences occur whenever 1 person or 1 community is disinterested in the wellbeing of another person or another community;  whenever 1 person or 1 community alienates or dehumanises another person or another community;  whenever 1 person or 1 community justifies transgressive behaviour against another person or another community.  And when 1 monoethnic community intentionally or innately disassociates with another monoethnic community, this process of disinterest, dehumanisation, and devastation intentionally or innately begins.

So the question emerges:  how can different monoethnic communities successfully cooperate and prosper with each other whilst also maintaining the respective, distinct cultures and traditions of these monoethnic communities?  Within multiethnic people, there is a solution.

Multiethnic people may actually be the antithesis to Washington’s separation of the fingers:  blurring the boundaries of ethnicity, as well as the boundaries of cultures and traditions.  But within multiethnic people there is also the ancient solution for the progression and adaptation of civilisations, cultures, and traditions.  Whilst multiethnic people maintain multiple allegiances and a confluence of cultures and traditions, multiethnic people also have respect for the legacy and integrity for each of 1’s cultures and traditions;  even whilst merging cultures and traditions and creating new 1’s. 

Multiethnic people recognise and concentrate upon higher principles and practices to which all monoethnic communities adhere.  And through this recognition and concentration, opportunities for institutional and systemic cooperation amongst different monoethnic communities become increasingly evident and plausible.

The cost for these opportunities is the allowance for multiethnic people to also continue and flourish;  for multiethnic people to be accepted within each monoethnic community whilst also simultaneously being respected when following the culture and tradition of another monoethnic community as well as when following a new “hybrid” culture and tradition.  Admittedly, this allowance may effectively detract from the aggregate of each monoethnic community, but this cost is much less than the cost for outright conflict and dissonance with other monoethnic communities.  In this scenario, the monoethnic communities are still as separate as the fingers (with the integrity and the progression of each respective monoethnic culture and tradition), whilst multiethnic people exist as the joints (the knuckles) that bridge the fingers into the hands and facilitate cooperation between the different monoethnic communities.  A hand can accomplish an increasing amount compared to any 1 finger or thumb.

This can take the form of multiethnic people being hired as ambassadors between different monoethnic communities:  in labour negotiations;  market and demographic consulting;  interreligious diplomacy;  alternative dispute resolution and arbitration;  city planning and community building;  public policy;  education;  and additionally.  It is also beneficial to make provisions for multiethnic people to intentionally and innately build institutions, systems, and communities where multiethnic identity and experience are the pervading norm (the predominant culture and tradition) of such institutions, systems, and communities.

We each exist within our own myopia.  And when we have the courage to accept this, we are increasingly understanding and empathetic with the respective myopiae of others.  We are also better equipped to perceive the entirety of the Universe and the threats and opportunities that exist therein.  May we be further courageous to strengthen the bridges that we build with those who are different from us whilst we continue to remain ourselves. 

We are better together.

Love And Peace,

Peter.

Loathing Into Loving 121.3.21;69;2.9

Love And Peace, Family and Friends.

A few years ago, I attend a reunion Homecoming at 1 of my almae mater, Hampton University.  As is typical when seeing an old friend for the 1^st occasion in nearly 20 years, we catch up on what we do, who we are with, and where we travel.  A number of my fraternity brothers talk about international travel, going on holiday, business trips, and relocation.  And we discuss whether we have the occasion of being in each other’s respective hometowns.  I mention to 1 fraternity brother that people only visit Cleveland if people have a specific reason.  And I mention that 1 of the advantages to living in Cleveland is knowing that family and friends are Truly visiting our city to share company with us, rather than to simply “see the sights” and holiday.

I am born and raised in Cleveland, Ohio;  what many also refer to as the Cuyahoga area.  Specifically, I spend my first 5 years of life living in East Cleveland and then move a few miles (and a few socioeconomic stratospheres) away to Cleveland Heights.  I go unto graduate from Cleveland Heights High School, before leaving the area to study and work for a number of years.  Over a decade ago, I return to our Cuyahoga area and I currently live in the Coventry neighbourhood of Cleveland Heights.

So, I am a life-long Clevelander.  I am committed to our Cuyahoga area.  And it is through this experience, and particularly from living abroad, that I can safely identify Cleveland as the heart of American self-loathing.

That may take a while to digest, and a few sentences to explain.  Many may readily acknowledge Cleveland as the “armpit” of the United States, the “mistake by the lake,” the “rust belt city;”  the jokes and euphemisms continue on and are widely known, even by the most recent arrivals to the United States.  So, Cleveland’s lowered status on the American totem pole of cities may be a consensus agreement;  and some may further argue that Cleveland is at the bottom.  However, many may take issue with the appellation:  “Heart Of American Self-Loathing;”  particularly as it connotes an imperfection, a weakness or semblance of inferiority, within the larger American identity.  How dare a Clevelander inflict his loser ways on the greatest nation on Earth.

Yet to properly understand America is to understand the nature of its self-loathing.  Within his explanation of impermanence, the Buddha teaches that for every phenomenon in existence, within that phenomenon there is the seed for its extinction.  In a psychological manner, it may be considered that within every individual’s yearning to live, there is also an intrinsic (perhaps often latent) aversion towards the transgressions that facilitate that life.  In a simpler manner, I posit that every phenomena in existence has an antithesis.  So, according to this reasoning, if there is an “American Pride,” there is also an “American Shame.”  And within its few centuries of existence, America has a tremendous amount for which to celebrate as well as that for which to be shameful.  But, to understand the nature of American self-loathing, it is necessary to consider how America originally comes to be and how America continues.

After Iberian explorers find the land of the Western Hemisphere (also referred to as Taínoterranea), colonists from primarily England/Britain and additional European nations inhabit the Northwest Quad of Earth.  Within the hierarchy of European society, these colonists actually rank as middle-level executives who are sent by superiors to determine the economic viability of establishing colonies within the Western Hemisphere.  And as this economic viability proves lucrative, the European hierarchy continues to send its middle- to lower-level executives and plebeians to inhabit the land.  These original American colonists are subservient to the European hierarchy and are deemed comparatively unworthy of direct ascension within European society.  As the years progress, additional European colonists arrive in America, because these colonists search for religious refuge from persecution and ostracisation by European convention.  So, as it turns out, as is the nature of colonists and colonialisation, American society is comprised of rejects from European society.

As the years progress and the nature of the subservience increases, the American colonists throw off the yoke of feudal subjugation by European hierarchy and fight a bloody revolution to become independent;  America.  And as the years progress, America experiences increased innovation and economic prosperity, and the successes multiply.  There is much to celebrate.  And America welcomes additional immigrants from primarily Europe, who also experience impoverishment, subjugation, and persecution from European hierarchy.  And eventually, America becomes the richest and most powerful nation on Earth.  Yet, amidst its dominance and pride, there is the lingering reminder that the foundation and premise of America is based upon an experience of inferiority.

So, Americans go to NFL games, buy SUVs, watch air shows, and buy online, all to revel in what is achieved over the past few centuries.  And when that nagging reminder inevitably emerges, it is necessary to put it somewhere.  Often it is placed against foreigners, however, it also becomes necessary to channel this angst within an inner Realm;  a place that is part of us, but that is also different from us;  a place like Cleveland, Ohio.

So Cleveland takes it.  Cleveland is an appropriate target:  it has a large European immigrant population to coincide with the historic face of America;  along with a substantial African population and emerging Latino, Arab, and Asian populations (and there is even a Native population) to coincide with the emerging face of America.  So Cleveland has a face that is self-recognisable, and for some reason it is simultaneously, tacitly designated as the “other” within us.  Maybe it is because the river catches on fire.  Maybe it is because the mayor’s hair catches on fire.  Maybe it is because it clutches unto an antiquated industry that previously provides so much prosperity and pride.  For what reason does any child ridicule and ostracise another child, other than because that other child is different (and the 1 child is insecure)?

Yes, Cleveland takes it.  Cleveland takes the brunt of American self-loathing.  And it becomes a culture.  Amidst all the specific ethnic biases and xenophobia that exists within America and specifically within America’s armpit, all Clevelanders share this culture of self-loathing.  We are sent here to be part of this.  We settle here and are part of this.  We return here and are part of this.  It is a bond that we share with each other, despite any of our differences.  It is part of being a Clevelander.  So, amidst “the curse,” when we see each other and talk about the most recent sports disappointment (the drive, the fumble, the shot, the departure, the decision, …), we are building upon this bond and upon this culture.

Yet, to be disappointed we must first have optimism.  And to be continually disappointed we must continue to have optimism.  And as Clevelanders, we do continue to have optimism.  We recognise the intrinsic value that exists within ourselves, within our institutions, and within our communities;  and we recognise the tremendous potential that exists within each of these, and within each of us.

If Cleveland is the heart of American self-loathing, Cleveland is also the epicentre for American transformation:  the place where this self-loathing is transformed into self-acceptance and self-love.  To do this, we must recognise the past difficulties that we experience:  the persecution, the subjugation, the rejection, and the accusations of inferiority.  We must also recognise the past transgressions:  what we do to others and to ourselves to establish our experience of prosperity today, and the lingering effects of these transgressions.  We must recognise and strengthen the intrinsic value (I offer also known as a Divine Presence) that exists within each of us and all of us;  and we must be reconciled with each other, beyond our shame and beyond our pride.  And through this reconciliation, through this transformation, we gain invaluable insight towards global reconciliation and global transformation.

A few years ago, a friend involved with Occupy Cleveland addresses the significance of the Occupy Movement existing in Cleveland.  He references the fact that Cleveland is often disregarded as an insignificant market, an insignificant city in which to invest and build an operation.  And he mentions that it is exactly because we are so often ignored and dismissed that we are so significant.  Because, when we are indeed able to build something within our midst, that means that it can be built anywhere;  that family and friends within other cities can take heart, be encouraged and be inspired, to do likewise within those other cities.

This is part of the irony of rooting for the underdog:  we contribute and rely upon the favouritism that corners the underdog within a position of dubiousness, yet we rejoice in the success of the underdog because it affirms the underestimated potential that exists within each of us.

It is within this context that the most touted active basketball player on Earth returns home to our Cuyahoga area after winning championships abroad.  It is within this context that Clevelanders are researching and developing methodologies for emerging from the scrap heaps and rebuilding a socioeconomically and environmentally enlightened metropolis.  It is within this context that humanity is discovering the systems and institutions for global cooperation and harmony that propels us into a new age of social evolution and discovery.

May we continue to find, concentrate, and build upon, the inevitable merit that exists within all of us.

Love And Peace,

Peter.

A Multiethnic Metropolis 121.3.18;69;6.6

Love And Peace, Family And Friends.

What would happen if multiethnic people form a modern city?  Would Hapas basically run everything?  Would mixed Africans quietly comprise the majority?  Would Latinos be even further populous than the mixed Africans but be even less forthcoming in proclaiming a multiethnic identity?  Would there be a handful of Synagogues full of multiethnic people?  And would the grandparents and elders predominantly comprise of people of European ancestry?  Would Middle Eastern multiethnic people be the emerging population group?

What would 3rd and 4th generation multiethnic people look like?

What would be the rules that govern behaviour?  What would be the culture?  What would be the annual celebrations and festivals that are held within the communities?  Would there be class divides?  And what would education look like?

Love And Peace,

Peter.

Globalism: The Establishment Of Law And Culture 121.3.15;69;4.4

There is a rule of law that pervades the Earth.  Governments, corporations, and even religions are increasingly conforming to this law.  It is a composite law forged through the countless interactions of all the respective traditional laws within humanity, nature, and the Universe.  At this moment, it is a law without any officially recognised nation, court, or citizen;  yet it governs all nations, courts, and citizens.  It is an intrinsic law.  It is a subtle law.  It is a Universal Law.

Yet, there are also entities that refuse to conform to this law.  Militaries refuse to conform to this law;  and thus there is an increasing separation emerging between governments and militaries.  Fundamentalist religious adherents refuse to conform to this law;  and thus such entrenched adherents become increasingly separated from the totality of convention.  Selfishness itself refuses to conform to this law;  and thus such practitioners become increasingly subjected to the consequences of such disobedience.

It is a law, and a culture, that becomes increasingly evident and manageable through a proficient awareness of, and empathy with, the plight of “the other.”  It is the law and culture of “globalism.”

I am a multiethnic man, and I notice that many other multiethnic people tend to share this same globalist culture.  For multiethnic people, it is a globalist culture that is forged within the experience of being unable to fit within the neat confines of an established community, and thus transcending these confines.    But whilst multiethnic people share this globalist culture, it is also shared by many monoethnic people;  monoethnic people who have genuine experience, or at the least a genuine interest, in people from another community.  So whilst multiethnic people are intrinsically in tune with this globalist law, all individuals have an awareness of, and propensity towards, this globalist law. 

The proceeding are some of the characteristics of people who are proficient with this globalist law and culture.  It is appropriate to note that some of these characteristics may vary in intensity within different individuals, as we are all a unique composite of numerous characteristics.  However, these are some of the main characteristics that comprise this globalist law and culture (particularly as it differentiates from contemporary convention).

Characteristics of Globalist Law And Culture:

Agape:  We tend to have a strong empathy towards others, and particularly towards “the other.”  The Golden Rule is a prominent fixture within our ethics (we do unto others as we would have others do unto us), as we strongly identify with the experience of “the other.”

Ahimsa:  We highly value the abstinence from violence.  We build cultures of Ahimsa and we work towards making Ahimsa increasingly systemic and pervasive throughout our aggregate community.

Honesty:  Truthfulness is important;  and beyond this, we look for transparency and probity within those with whom we interact.

Humility:  We tend to be continuously humble, recognising our comparatively novice stature within convention and continuously engaging within the steeped traditions of others.  We have respect for all.  And like water, we tend to acquire the lowest seat and wait for others to promote us to higher honour.

Deliberation:  When confronted with a disagreement between 2 other parties, or when simply confronted with a dilemma, we are cautious within our judgment.  We refuse to presume having a totality of all circumstances and experiences, so we listen to all the sides involved before making a decision.

Diplomacy:  We have a second nature for being an ambassador amongst different communities;  we are Peace-builders, and we negotiate harmony.  We also develop the ability to disagree with others without explicitly arguing or contradicting someone else;  we are in accord with our beliefs and remain stoic when others voice an opinion that differs from these beliefs.

Positivity:  We tend to avoid speaking negatively about others.  When it is appropriate to communicate a criticism of someone, we tend to contextualise that criticism within a larger consideration of positive, affirmative characteristics of that individual or group.

Egalitarianism:  We highly value horizontal cooperation, where each individual is respected at the same level.  We recognise higher wisdom, skill sets, proficiencies, and responsibilities within different individuals, whilst simultaneously recognising that each individual maintains such and is to be respected on an equal level.

Consensus:  We value decision-making processes that include the interests and opinions of all participants.  We progress beyond the archaic and divisive paradigm of “majority rule,” to recognise that all individuals and groups are part of the collective community and the collective decision.  As such, we exercise patience, compromise, and additional discipline to facilitate the conclusion of consensus and the continuing cohesion of the group.

Diligence:  We recognise that amidst our egalitarianism, we each have the responsibility to optimally contribute to our community.  We have the autonomy to pursue the endeavours that interest us, and we engage within these endeavours with passion, dedication, and vigour.

Self-Motivation:  Amidst our level hierarchy of leadership, we take the initiative to address the needs of our community and start projects for the benefit of our community.

Pluralism:  We recognise and respect our differences, and we recognise and adhere to the need for our differences to coexist in harmony.  We are hyper-sensitive and averse towards practices that unduly subordinate 1 tradition or community to another.  We protect the integrity of cultures and communities.

Stewardship:  We emphasise our responsibility to care for our natural habitat, rather than fighting to claim ownership.  We recognise the impermanence of all material phenomena and strive to maintain balance within our cycles of consumption, production, and recycling.

Natural Harmony:  We are aware of, and appreciate, the harmonious interdependence between sentient beings, nature, and technology.  We cultivate understanding for the intrinsic characteristics of each of these phenomena and how these respective phenomena can exist in accord with each other.

Celebration:  We rejoice in life, within our cultures, and within the cultures of others.  We recognise the importance of cultural observances and rituals as a means for strengthening the esoteric connexions between ourselves, our natural habitat, and the Universe.

Awe:  We maintain a profound respect and wonder towards the Universe and towards Ultimate Reality, often referred to by different names and concepts;  and often understood within the English language as “God.”  We have different traditions and conclusions regarding the Universe and Ultimate Reality.  We also tend to progress beyond the bias tendencies of perceiving God as a male authoritarian figure, and instead, we recognise God as an “omni-” phenomenon (-present, -potent, -scient) of both compassion and indifference.

Trust:  We tend to have an inexplicable confidence within the unseen and the unspoken.  We recognise the limitations of language and proofs to explain, predict, and account for the experiences of life.  Beyond all calls for justice, we believe in the inevitability of Karma and miracles.  Indeed, beyond the odds and hostilities, we are each born into this Universe through acts of love.

Amidst these characteristics, there are also contemporary challenges for those of us who practise this globalist law and culture.  1 difficulty is finding ourselves:  becoming confident within our identities and asserting our beliefs.  There seems to be a certain tendency towards promiscuity and sexual deviance, although we are working to become increasingly settled and conservative within our sexual ethics and practices (emphasising the importance and integrity of families and relationships).  And because of our extensive deliberation, there is frequently difficulty in reaching decisions (both individually and as groups).  Our pensiveness is also often perceived as a lack of productivity.

We also experience the general dissonance that emerges within convention as this globalist law and culture becomes increasingly conventional.

The emergence and predominance of this globalist culture can be evidenced through many different ways:  globalisation of national economies, the internet, travel and immigration patterns, arts and entertainment, and additionally.  Even within the most technologically advanced militaries, there is a fundamental paradigm shift from nuclear weapons to drones:  from the ability for causing the most amount of damage, to the ability for causing pinpoint harm from a distant insularity.  Rather than destroying and imposing empires, militaries are learning how to become increasingly influential within standing empires and civilisations.  It is a recognition of the validity of “the other,” even amidst the selfish tendency of attempting the control of (or at the least, manipulation of) “the other.”

Amidst our selfish tendencies and the dissonance with convention, humanity is becoming increasingly aware of, and intentional with, this globalist law and culture.  Indeed, it may be considered that globalist law and culture increasingly asserts itself as humanity continues to interact with itself.  Individuals and institutions are learning to become increasingly proficient with this globalist law and culture in order to merely achieve the respective objectives and purposes of individuals and institutions.  Through these efforts, globalist law and culture is becoming increasingly systematised;  and through this systematisation, this globalist law and culture is increasingly becoming “the norm.”  And as the norm, students are increasingly studying this globalist law and culture in classrooms throughout the Earth.  Indeed, according to our globalist law and culture, students would inevitably gravitate towards this globalist law and culture regardless of whether it is taught inside or outside the classroom.  Such is the nature of our globalist law and culture.  

Love And Peace.

Nature-Based Culture And Religion (1st Draft)

“Originally, human cultures evolved as part of a natural ecosystem, part of a natural bioregion, and the cultures that evolved, in part, evolved out of that natural harmony and relationship between nature and human culture, human groups.”  John P Milton (Shaman, Founder, The Way Of Nature), “With One Voice”

Within the documentary, “With One Voice,” John Milton describes a rather logical sequence of human evolution that explains much of the differences within humanity.  Milton posits that human beings are creatures that inhabit many different natural habitations throughout the Earth;  from the mountains to the seas to the deserts to the lakes to the prairies to the islands to the hot to the cold to the temperate to the rainy to the windy, and additionally.  There is even the consideration (given the many different renderings of the Creation narrative), that human beings physically emerge from each of these different natural habitations. 

In either event, human beings settle within these natural habitats and learn how to survive and procreate within these different environments.  Human beings develop methodologies, amidst the respective natural habitats, for living and interacting with each other.  And these methodologies evolve into cultures;  with the purpose of these cultures to preserve and progenerate the lives of the human beings living within the respective natural habitats. 

But it gets even deeper than that:  human beings become living extentions, biological manifestations, of these respective natural habitats.  The Buddhist Monk, Thich Nhat Hanh explains that a flower exists much beyond the basic petals, stamen, stem, leaves, and roots that comprise the flower.  The flower needs soil, needs water, needs Sunshine (and some may offer:  needs a positivity of consciousness), in order to grow and thrive.  And Thich Nhat Hanh explains that when you look at the flower, you can cultivate a vision that actually sees the Sunshine and all the additional, perceivably separate, elements that feed the flower;  the flower is the Sunshine.

In a similar manner, we are all the manifestation of the natural habitat that sustains us.  Throughout our historic generations, we drink the water that flows in our nearby streams, we consume the vegetation that grows in our midst, we utilise the healing qualities of the herbs and plants that grow around us.  Now, within our post-modern, post-industrialised communities, much of what we drink, consume, and utilise is frequently derived from locations that are very distant from our dwelling places.  However, this is a comparatively new phenomenon:  the majority of our respective biological constructs still carry the heavy influence of living within a very homogeneous natural habitat.

Within the course of humanity (and even through to today), there is previously substantial competition, conflict, and warfare between different cultures;  different methodologies for living and prospering.  But this cultural conflict is both asinine and futile.  It is like telling an arid jasmine to live as a mountain lily, or an arctic hare to live as a meadow rabbit.  Each culture and each natural habitat has its rationale, its legitimacy, and its inevitability.  There are reasons why people in Africa behave in a certain way, why people in the Mediterranean behave in a certain way, why people in Europe behave a certain way, why people in Asia behave a certain way, and people in the Western Hemisphere behave in a certain way.  Imposing 1 culture over another culture abstains from accounting for the rationale, legitimacy, and inevitability that originally establishes that other culture.

Now, eventually during the course of this human evolution, an innovation emerges within a community, and certain individuals reap the benefits from that innovation.  In order to compete amidst the power shift, other individuals look for additional innovations to establish a competitive advantage.  And often, these other individuals travel to other communities to find these additional innovations.  As the competition escalates, civilisations form and spread.  And the other individuals begin looking for innovations that are derived further and further away from the community’s natural habitat.

So, during the evolution of human existence, communities and civilisations increasingly lean upon each other’s innovations.  During this same process of human development, we each experience the necessity of preserving the integrity of the perception of ourselves:  our thoughts and ideas, our knowledge, our language, our relationships, our material prosperity, and even our leisurely pursuits:  our cultures.  So, we historically engage upon egocentric-based subjugation or annihilation of the thoughts and ideas, knowledge, language, relationships, material prosperity, and leisurely pursuits that are different from our own.  Whilst some look for innovations from other communities, others look to conquer or annihilate other communities in a process of expanding others’ own communities and cultures.

Whilst religion can be arguably considered as part of culture, for the purposes of this exposition, we consider religion (and with increased accuracy, spirituality) as a distinct phenomenon of “belief.”  So in this respect, religion/spirituality/belief exists as a means of reconciling our natural existence with our esoteric existence.  Organised religion exists as that tangible medium where nature-based culture is fused with the intangible experience of an esoteric Ultimate Reality. 

It can be arguably considered that we all share this same esoteric Ultimate Reality, though we each have a different religious experience and means of communicating this esoteric Ultimate Reality.  And indeed, there are numerous historic accounts of conflict that previously emerges through these differences of religious experience and belief.  Yet, it is very much our nature-based culturalistic differences, (including the manifestations of our self-involved egos) that lead individuals into conflict, rather than our spiritual/esoteric-based beliefs;  because violent conflict is a physical manifestation of our physical, nature-based beings.  Of course there are differences between tangibly communicated experiences of esoteric/spiritual beliefs, but even these are also manifestations of nature-based cultural differences (language, words, and similar contextualisations).  Mystical pursuits of respective religious traditions reveals that there are commonly held beliefs amongst our many different religious traditions of humanity.  And it may be considered that the very highest composition of our respective religious/spiritual/esoteric beliefs and traditions exists within these commonly held beliefs/principles as the Ultimate Reality.

Today, amidst this progression and evolution of human civilisation, we substantially exist as international entities, with some exceptions.  Through the emergence of international economics and additional phenomena, our physical beings and nature-based cultures are increasingly derived from, and dependent upon, a comprehensive set of ideas, innovations, and natural habitats that respectively exist from throughout the Earth and throughout humanity.  We acquire produce and spices to/from distant lands with distant people, we manufacture and transport products to/from distant lands with distant people, we acquire services and labour to/from distant lands with distant people, we travel for recreation and solace to/from distant lands with distant people, and we make spiritual/religious pilgrimages to/from distant lands with distant people.  As these exchanges are made, we increasingly become a part of these distant lands and distant people, and the respective, coinciding ideas, innovation, principles and nature-based cultures of these distant lands and people.

Today, people frequently communicate or intimate the notion of “white people” (meaning people of European ancestry) ruling the Earth.  This, however, is very much a woeful inaccuracy for numerous reasons. 

1^st, we can briefly review the course of human civilizational development.  With respect to religion, Judaism (in Israel of the Mediterranean) and Hinduism (in India of Asia) both emerge, emphasising familial lineage, social rank and order, and relationship with God.  Then, after a few millennia, a Prophetic figure respectively emerges in both traditions, teaching radical compassion and turning the conventional hierarchy of social rank and order on its head.  And territorially in-between these epicentres of the Mediterranean and Asia, a number of traditions emerge, at different, intermittent stages, as voices of mediation and temperance:  Zarathustrianism, Islam, and the Baha’i Faith.

During this same process of religious development, there is exists an evolution of philosophical development within these areas;  and this evolution of philosophy is intertwined with the previously described esoteric-based belief systems.  This includes Taoism and Confucianism within Eastern Asia (China), and Socrates, Aristotle, Plato in the Northern Mediterranean (Greece).  And through to this past century, the Japan-China binary is very comparable to the Britain-Deustchland binary (considering the respective development of empire and competition with both regions, utilising the respective philosophical and religious constructs and cultural innovations).

But before we even reach today (when considering the perception of European dominance), it is appropriate to consider the development of culture and civilisation.  Over a millennia ago, Europe exists as a disparate collective of rather homogeneous communities.  Religion and culture are both substantially derived from the experience of being reconciled with 1’s immediate natural habitat.  Eventually, the Roman Empire, travelling from its base within the area of the Mediterranean, arrives within Southern Europe, bringing Mediterranean innovations (also from Greece, Egypt, Persia, Asia, and additionally).  The Romans also bring the foreign belief-system and ethics of Judeo-Christian religion.  As these innovations are utilised, the power dynamics in Europe are altered, and Judeo-Christian religion becomes increasingly dominant compared to indigenous belief-systems.

Within the next few centuries, as Judeo-Christianity becomes widespread, the psychical dynamics of European thought significantly shift.  The narratives, ideas, and principles of Rome, Greece, Christianity, and Judaism (amongst others) are increasingly indoctrinated and become authoritative within European nature-based cultures and religions, spirituality, and beliefs.  A Creation narrative takes hold where Europe is other than the epicentre.  All of this intrinsically challenges the authority, legacy, and influence of European forefathers;  and that effectively and innately establishes an inferiority complex with much of the European psyche.  So, in the recent centuries when Europeans experience increasing innovations and technological advancement (that prompts exploration and colonial expansion/conquests), it is at the cost of becoming subservient to culture and religion that is other than its own.

As Europeans and Mediterraneans arrive in the Western Hemisphere, there is a similarly disparate collective of communities with religions and cultures that are significantly informed through respective natural habitat;  that of the respective indigenous people.  Europeans and Mediterraneans continue colonising Western Hemisphere, effectively establishing an unprecedented phenomenon:  people respectively of European and Mediterranean biological constructs, governed substantially by Mediterranean innovations and religion, relying upon additional innovations (substantially labour, agricultural, and additional acumen) of Africans, and living upon (and learning from) the natural habitat and culture of the Western Hemisphere. 

As the centuries of this colonial period develop, the very nature of all the people (particularly the colonialists) changes substantially.  Individuals continue to culturally evolve and are called to hold ideas and beliefs that include, and are accepting of, the different areas of civilisation (Mediterranea, Europe, Africa, and the Western Hemisphere) that form the communities in the Western Hemisphere.  Amidst the joy, there are also tremendous difficulties (particularly as individuals attempt asserting 1 specific nature-based culture on all other cultures).  But amidst these joys and challenges, there is tremendous prosperity;  and this significantly influences other communities around the Earth (further evolving the cultures and beliefs of other communities).

Within the past few generations, another new phenomenon emerges:  the influx of Asian civilisation within the Western Hemisphere.  This poses additional challenges, but it also provides new ways for individuals to be reconciled amidst the diversity of cultures and beliefs within the Western Hemisphere.  This also provides the prospect for reconciliation throughout humanity as lessons and innovations are shared:  a new consciousness;  a new awareness, where respective spiritual, esoteric beliefs are increasingly synonymous with respective nature-based cultures.

Thus, there is relief for people of European ancestry and people of all ancestries.  To experience this, it is helpful to recognise that there is purpose for all paths and evolutions;  there is validity in all paths and evolutions, even within those paths that are previously abandoned.  And there is encouragement all individuals to explore a spirituality/religion that harmoniously coincides with individuals’ own nature-based construct;  and to find harmony with all other individuals of other natures and spiritualities and religions.

Postscript.

Amidst the internationalisation of humanity, there is also a reactionary call for greater homogeneity:  the preservation of perceived nature-based culture and spirituality/religion.  This reactionary call for homogeneity is actually reasonable, but it is important to abstain from inter-cultural conflict, and it is important to pursue and maintain this homogeneity in a genuine manner.  1^st, this homogeneity is unattainable as a colonial entity (living on a land that is different from the nature-based culture that is being pursued and maintained).  To pursue and maintain such homogeneity, 1 must 1^st relocate to that original land of that nature-based culture.  2^nd, 1 must refuse to accept, as much as possible, any advantages derived from the emergence of ideas and innovations from any foreign nature-based cultures.  The extent of the purity of this homogeneity of 1’s own nature-based culture and religion is dependent upon the ability to genuinely abstain from utilising the innovations and advantages provided from other nature-based cultures and religions.  The 3^rd protocol is to avoid attempts of expanding 1’s own nature-based culture and religion to other lands and other people.  Such attempts inevitably result in a fundamental transformation of the nature-based culture and religion attempting to be preserved homogeneously.  Amidst adherence to these protocols, the rest of humanity should respect the interests for being homogenous and autonomous from the rest of our internationalised humanity.

Love And Peace.

Inter-Movement Weaving Initiative IMWI Mantra v1.2

Inter-Movement Weaving Initiative

IMWI Mantra (v1.2)

1.)  Within each of us, there is a Divine Presence, a Spirit, a Power Of Thought:  an esoteric existence.

2.)  This esoteric existence is manifested within the physical Realm:  within our bodies, within our physical surroundings, and within the whole Natural Universe;  extending all the way back to the infinity of our esoteric existence.

3.)  Our wellbeing is sustained through proficient harmony amongst our bodies, our physical surroundings, and the whole Natural Universe.

4.)  “Economy” is derived from the Greek, “oikos” (οἶκος) meaning “home,” and “nemein” (νέμω) meaning “management”;  we recognise “economics” as the behavioural management of our bodies as home, our physical surroundings as home, and the whole Natural Universe as home.

5.)  We establish a compassion-based economy upon the foundational practices of Agape and Ahimsa; 

6.)  We build our compassion-based economy with the framework principles of:  Honesty, Modesty, Moderation, Respect, Patience, Trust, Productivity, Efficiency, Prosperity, Sustainability, AlTruism, and Reconciliation.

7.)  We are guided by:

Welt Ethos

Charter For Compassion

United Religions Initiative Charter

Earth Charter

Universal Declaration Of Human Rights

8.)  Within our compassion-based economy, we establish the monetary unit, “CoCas” (“Compassion Cash”), with 1 unit having the equivalent value to 1 kilogram of a composite of international grains (rice, corn, wheat, oats, quinoa, amaranth, barley, rye, potatoes, chickpeas, lentils, and beans).

9.)  Our compassion-based economy is governed by the honour system.

10.)  We promise to care for each other.

IMWI Cooperative Economic System Mantra v1.1

Inter-Movement Weaving Initiative

Cooperative Economic System Mantra (v1.1)

121.1.1;68;5o2

1.)  Within each of us, there is a Divine Presence, a Spirit, a Power Of Thought;  an esoteric existence.

2.)  This esoteric existence is manifested within the physical Realm, within our bodies, our physical surroundings, and the whole Natural Universe;  extending all the way back to the infinity of our esoteric existence.

3.)  Our wellbeing is sustained through proficient symbiosis between our bodies, our physical surroundings, and the whole Natural Universe.

4.)  “Economy” is derived from the Greek, “oikos” (οἶκος) meaning “home,” and “nemein” (νέμω) meaning “management”;  we recognise economics as the behavioural management of our bodies as home, our physical surroundings as home, and the whole Natural Universe as home.

5.)  We establish an economy based upon Agape and Ahimsa; 

6.)  We also include the principles of:  Honesty, Modesty, Moderation, Respect, Patience, Trust, Productivity, Efficiency, Prosperity, Sustainability, AlTruism, and Reconciliation.

7.)  We are guided by:

Welt Ethos

Charter For Compassion

United Religions Initiative Charter

Earth Charter

Universal Declaration Of Human Rights

8.)  Within our economy, we establish the monetary unit, “CoCas” (“Compassion Cash”) with 1 unit having the equivalent value to 1 kilogram of a composite of international grains (rice, corn, wheat, oats, quinoa, amaranth, barley, rye, potatoes, chickpeas, lentils, and beans).

9.)  The honour system governs our engagement within our compassion-based economy.

10.)  We promise to care for each other.

Declaration Of Liberation (v1.0)

Declaration Of Liberation (v1.0)

In Congress, 121.1.1;68;5o2

The unanimous Declaration of the infinite united selves of always:

When in the course of existential progression, it becomes necessary for one collective to dissolve the political bands which previously connect that collective with another, and to assume among the powers of the Universe, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of the Universe and of the Highest Authority, known by many names, entitle that collective, a decent respect to the opinions of humanity requires that this collective should declare the causes which impel the collective to the separation.

In the Name of the Highest Authority we respectively and collectively recognise, known by many different names, including God, El Shaddai, Eloheinu, Elohim, Adonai, Hashem, Brahman, Nirvana, Dharma, Karma, Tao, Gud, Dieu, Dios, Deus, Dominus, Jah, Jehovah, Allah, Ahura Mazda, Vayu Guru, The Divine, Infinity, Logic, Wakan Tanka, Ultimate Reality, and additionally:  we recognise our necessity to be reconciled with ourselves, each other, and our natural Universe, to atone, and to separate ourselves from our previous transgressions.

We hold this Truth to be self-evident, that all beings are created equally with Divine Presence, that we are endowed by the Highest Authority with this certain unalienable Divine Presence;  that amongst this is involved Wellbeing, Prosperity, and the pursuit of Liberation;  that life is the confluence of material and esoteric existence, and all beings are entitled to promote our respective personal existence with modesty and moderation;  and that to secure this entitlement, Governments are instituted amongst beings, Heaven, and Earth, deriving governments’ just powers from the consent of the governed;  that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the Sentient Beings to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organising its powers in such form, as to us shall seem most likely to effect our Peace, Prosperity, and Liberation.  Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should abstain from being changed for light and transient causes, as such governance satisfies certain needs;  and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that sentient beings are increasingly disposed to suffer, whilst transgressions are sufferable, than to right ourselves by abolishing the forms to which we are accustomed.  But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce us under absolute Corruption, it is our right, it is our duty, to throw off such Government and to provide new Guards for our future security.  Such has been the patient sufferance of these united selves of Always;  and such is now the necessity which constrains us to alter our former Systems of Government.  The history of our previous forms of governance is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Corruption over our selves.  We previously transgress against Truth, against Nature, against, Life, and against ourselves.  To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid Universe:

Through our governments, we previously murder each other through military warfare and conquest.

Through our governments, we previously murder each other through police violence.

          Through our governments, we previously murder each other through domestic violence.

Through our governments, we previously murder each other through street violence.

Through our governments, we previously murder each other through the consumption of flesh.

Through our governments, we previously cause violent harm towards each other through rape.

Through our governments, we previously cause violent harm towards each other through torture.

Through our governments, we previously cause violent harm towards each other through domestic abuse.

Through our governments, we previously cause violent harm towards each other through physical fights.

Through our governments, we previously cause violent harm towards each other through physical confinement.

Through our governments, we previously cause violent harm towards each other through abduction.

Through our governments, we previously cause violent harm towards each other through failing to provide sufficient healing.

Through our governments, we previously sexually exploit each other through prostitution.

Through our governments, we previously sexually exploit each other through pornography.

Through our governments, we previously sexually exploit each other through commercial advertising.

Through our governments, we previously sexually exploit each other through adultery and promiscuity.

Through our governments, we previously sexually exploit each other through immodesty.

Through our governments, we previously sexually exploit each other through lust.

Through our governments, we previously sexually oppress each other through chauvinistic prohibitions.

Through our governments, we previously sexually oppress each other through excessively championing the aggressions of masculinity.

Through our governments, we previously sexually oppress each other through undermining manhood.

Through our governments, we previously enslave each other.

Through our governments, we previously accuse each other of being evil.

Through our governments, we previously accuse each other of being devoid of Divine Presence.

Through our governments, we previously economically exploit each other.

Through our governments, we previously cheat each other.

Through our governments, we previously lie to each other.

Through our governments, we previously steal from each other.

Through our governments, we previously impose usury upon each other.

Through our governments, we previously impose debt upon each other.

Through our governments, we previously extort each other.

Through our governments, we previously become woefully intoxicated.

Through our governments, we previously burden ourselves with both sloth and excessive labour.

Through our governments, we previously prevent each other from being educated and uplifted.

Through our governments, we are previously greedy against each other.

Through our governments, we are previously apathetic towards each other.

Through our governments, we previously devastate our natural environment.

Through our governments, we previously overconsume resources.

Through our governments, we previously harmfully extract resources.

Through our governments, we previously commit deforestation.

Through our governments, we previously cause pollution of the air, water, land, outer atmosphere, and our bodies.

Through our governments, we insufficiently recycle.

Through our governments, we wastefully manufacture products.

Through our governments, we inefficiently utilise energy.

In every stage of these Oppressions We previously Petition for redress in the most humble terms:  Our repeated Petitions are previously answered only by repeated injury.  Rulers whose character is thus marked by ever act which may define Tyranny, are unfit to be rulers of free beings.

Nor do we abstain attentions to our fellow beings.  We previously warn our fellow beings from moment to moment of attempts by these governments to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us.  We previously remind our fellow beings of the circumstances of our settlement here.  We previously appeal to our fellow beings’ native justice and magnanimity, and we previously conjure our fellow beings by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connexions and correspondence.  Our fellow beings too are previously deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity.  We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold our fellow beings, as we hold the rest of the Universe, Students in Transcendence, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the self-proclaimed united selves of Always, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Highest Authority of the Universe for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the benevolent beings of these united selves, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Selves are, and of Right ought to be Liberated and Independent beings;  that we are Absolved from all Allegiance to the previous governments, and that all political connexion between us and the previous governments, is and ought to be totally dissolved;  and that as Liberated and Independent beings, we have full Power to levy teachings, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and endeavours which independent beings may of right do.  And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Prosperity, and our sacred Honour.

To My Wife 27

I tell another
of my affinity
towards the Sunrise.
She says
she has less of an interest,
and attempts
passing me unto her suitor.
I decline.
Marriage is a precarious endeavour.
And I long to engage.
I wonder if I see you,
the other day;
when my assembly adjourns
and you gather with your friends.
What keeps me
from speaking
with you.
Perhaps I have yet
to summon the courage
to experience success;
A dream,
perhaps.
But sitting in that lobby
provides me confidence
that you are here,
somewhere,
and we are becoming
closer.

A Tale Of 2 Cities; Love And Peace 120.12.13;68;1o14

Love And Peace, Family And Friends.

A number of family members and friends recently talk or reference the dilemma of Israel and Palestine.  1 of my initial thoughts to this issue is that there are numerous humanitarian issues and conflicts within our global community;  this is only 1.  It is also only a comparatively recent conflict in humanity, substantially emerging upon the establishment of the Jewish state of Israel.  But I understand that this issue involves millennia-old questions, and it morally affects billions of people in a rather immediate manner.  So I recognise the relevance of delving into this issue.

When I am asked about this question, I usually begin by stating that this is a family feud;  and rather than a conflict over land, it is a conflict over righteousness.  It just so happens that both sides, Jews/Israelis and Muslims, directly link the position of “most righteous” with stewardship of the “Holy Land.”  The overwhelming paradox (that few seem to want to recognise) is that the increasingly righteous community is the community that lets the land go. 

I cite the example our far, Avraham.  His tribesmen begin quarrelling with the tribesmen of his nephew, Lot, because both camps become increasingly prosperous and numerous (thus competing for an increasingly smaller area of land to graze the respective cattle).  Avraham allows Lot to decide the area of land in which Lot prefers to settle, and Avraham chooses the other area.  That is righteousness.  And that is the highest and overarching principle governing this land dispute. 

However, there are additional principles of stewardship.  Candidly, I side on the favour of a “1-state solution,” where the entire land of Israel (Eretz Israel) is governed as an Israeli (Jewish) state.  I may be accused of being bias, given my Israeli heritage, but everyone has a bias.  I may also be accused of being insane, given my Islamic behaviour, but everyone has idiosyncrasies.  I emphasise concentration upon Universal and Ahimsic principles of stewardship.

I provide another comparison.  There is a boy playing on the playground and he has 2 toy trucks.  Another boy is also on the playground, but he has 0 toy trucks with which to play.  The “rule of playground equity” generally stipulates that the boy with 2 toy trucks provides 1 of his toy trucks to the boy without any toy trucks.  The fact is, the land of Israel is increasingly important to Israelis than it is to Muslims.  It is the Holiest of Holies to Israelis.  Muslims have another Holy Land, in another area (Mekkah and Medinah), that is the Holiest of Holies to Muslims.

Some may argue that the boy has possession of the 2 toy trucks (or that he has the 2 toy trucks 1^st), so it is the boy’s prerogative what happens with the 2 toy trucks.  When it comes to the specific issue of Israel and Palestine, that argument (as vehemently as people want to make it) is comparatively shaky.  The question is:  at what point does humanity recognise the “original stewards” of the land of Israel?  The land of Israel experiences a series of numerous occupations before the British transfer the mandate to the current Israeli government (via the United Nations).  And when that mandate is transferred, there are, indeed, many Palestinians living on the land.  And, also according to Universal and Ahimsic principles of stewardship, this residency establishes certain legitimacy of stewardship.

When something (a toy truck or a homeland) is unduly taken from someone, Universal and Ahimsic principles of righteousness generally stipulate that this something (a toy truck or a homeland) be restored to the original steward.  1 of the challenges is that the collective common memory of many civilisations only travels for a few centuries.  It just so happens that the collective common memory of Israelis travels for a few millennia.  And within this collective common memory, before the Palestinians establish residency and stewardship of the land of Israel, Israelis establish residency and stewardship of the land of Israel.  And it is essentially, and ironically, through this very residency and stewardship that the land is considered Holy by Muslims (through the civilisations of Avraham, Israel, David, Solomon, and additionally).  1 may argue the right of residency and stewardship on the behalf of the descendants of the Canaanites whom the Israelites remove from the land, however Muslims seem to abstain from making that specific argument.

But, even with that communicated, the dilemma has yet to be resolved.  Simply legitimating the stewardship claim of Israelis for the land of Israel is insufficient in addressing the comprehensive circumstances.  Even as stewards of the land of Israel, Israelis have the responsibility for providing appropriate, alternative habitation opportunities for Palestinians.  Whilst some argue inclusion as citizens of the government of Israel, this may be less preferable.  Another, perhaps far-fetched, option is for Israel to acquire land from neighbouring nations (Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and/or Egypt), establish aqueducts from the Mediterranean Sea, construct numerous desalination facilities, and cultivate cities and agriculture that can support thriving and prosperous Palestinian communities.  That may be easier done than said.

So, in the meanwhile, I regress to my initial statement.  This is a dilemma of righteousness.  Who will allow the other side to make the choice of where to settle?  Perhaps Muslims will take the high road.  Perhaps Israelis will take the high road.  Or perhaps 1 of these 2 sides will select the less righteous option, and begin developing those cities and agriculture for the other side to resettle.

Love And Peace,

Peter