THE ERNEST SONG PROJECT:

Music, Art, Spoken Word

The Ernest Song Project is an emotional exploration of the deepest spark of human potential in response to the massive convergence of change unfolding in the world today. Can breath channeled in song return us to a connection with a healing pattern of life? Do the evocations of art offer a roadmap to wellness inside of profound upheaval?

The Ernest Song Project is a personal journey to remembering our collective capacity for expressing life-affirming impulses in all we do.  Through such acts can we transcend cultural norms and invisible beliefs to facilitate a shift in consciousness toward a sustainable human relationship with Earth?

The questions reorient us to being more fully alive in this moment.

The Ernest Song Project comprises the music of Petrified, If Not for You, a musical allegory of our collective hardening and fear of our own deepest selves and a visual slide show combining images and words called The Ecology of Happiness – a holistic exploration of ‘happiness’ in relationship with current Earth-trends.

Ernest Song asks if it possible to recognize
how hardened we have become to the sacred quality
of all things – and how this has affected our ideas
about love and life.
We are petrified – hardened and afraid –
of this connection.
In seeking his own journey back,
Ernest Song offers an invitation
to a deeper definition
of love, joy and longing

http://www.reverbnation.com/ernestsong

Recovery? There never was hope for recovery, so those words are so interesting. What is being created by continuing to invoke the words ‘hope for recovery?’  What is being created is the stage setting for an invasion of Libya. Ostensibly, it will again be for the purpose of helping/saving the people there and bringing democracy. But, unfortunately, the truth is, it will be about commandeering oil resources.

The reason there is no hope for an economic recovery is because the Earth’s resources, including its ability to absorb the waste of the industrial growth society (IGS), has been exhausted. Yet the economy itself, and the money system that undergirds it, requires constant growth. These system do not work if they do not grow. They fail when they can not grow. Prepare for failure of these systems. No economic recovery.

As with our more recent and not-so-recent invasions (Iraq and the Philippines come to mind), this invasion will involve the loss of incredible numbers of lives (millions, yes). And, to add to the abstract quality of it all, the US military will trumpet the relatively few loss of US servicemen (perhaps even none).  This will be heralded as a good thing, but the fact is, it just keeps the reality of the holocaust that much further from our comprehension.

Just to be clear: I object, in the strongest possible terms, to being a citizen of a country that perpetrates holocausts.

So one question that comes to mind, is what are the contributing factors to the unrest currently happening in the middle east? While on the one hand, this unrest is contributing directly to a sweeping oil price shock in this country just beginning to unfold. And, of course, this oil price shock will remove any possibility of ‘economic recovery’. In fact, it may wreck our economy period.  There will be a very dark period of uncertainty and unrest. It will be a situation that Naomi Klein calls shock and for which her theory of ‘shock doctrine’ applies. The crisis will be exploited to push through policies and activities that are unpopular (ie., invading other countries, restricting human rights).  It might be asked, is it really necessary to put us through this pain as a rationalization for war?

Good question. An even better question might be, why don’t we turn our attention and energy to renewable energy and structural change to our money systems to alleviate the broader human suffering that fighting over resources will ultimately produce? Why is it that we can’t agree on the obvious destruction of the land-base – of the Earth herself, in pursuit of economic growth so as to see the invisible assumptions that bind us to this fate? Why can we not connect the dots as a culture to see where this is going?

No economic recovery? So then what? Is it possible to envision something different? If we can envision something different, why is it so hard to achieve a consensus for moving toward this something different?

How can we possibly be ‘well’ inside of the death rattle of the larger systems of which we are part? That is the question I continue to live. A recent post on Facebook refers to predictions of $200 per barrel oil prices. The author, Guy McPhearson (Nature Bats Last), suggest the absurdity of this idea – not because it can’t happen, but because this simple prediction eliminates so much of the picture that needs to be considered, and will be reflected in profound changes to the global social system.

Those that would talk about oil prices in such an isolated manner offer a hilarious perspective.  Yes, it is imperative to find the humor. Moreover, it is a supremely reductionist view that is disconnected from the reality of the larger perspective. Make no mistake, the larger perspective is now firmly in control. Business as usual is an archaic idea, to say the least.

I’m not down for the how-do-we-pay-for-the-oil game.  Such a discussion does not acknowledge the integral reality to which Guy infers; namely that the system inside of which we are imagining $200 per barrel oil simply won’t be the same as it is now. There are deep interactions that reflect the structural issues in play and to which we are not immune. For example, there won’t be fuel at the filling station because the global financial markets will freeze up. There won’t be food on the shelf of the supermarket, because there is no fuel. There won’t be electricity or water coming from the tap. That’s the sort of deeper implications that are part of any discussion, from here on out, about oil.

Let the 1% of the population controlling 95% of the world’s imagined wealth play the oil game. I’m creating something different thank you very much and it doesn’t require oil, nor money as we now know it. Did I mention that the current wealth in our society is imagined? What is real wealth? From where does it ultimately come? And what are we doing/have been doing for the last 200 years to this ‘mother’ of all things ‘real’? Right, destroying it. As long as we continue to live in the imagined world of money created out of thin air, yet as a result of a system that structurally creates a scarcity mindset, we will struggle to pay for oil and will never have enough. We have hit the limits of not enough, and the result is catastrophe. How could one possibly be ‘well’ inside of this reality?

The only response to what is happening is to take responsibility for the reality you create with your thoughts. The process, thus, is deepening our awareness, but/and then using this insight to strengthen our vision of the new reality emerging all around us, and create beauty that is a reflection of the self-organizing pattern of life offered freely and without effort by the Earth and the Universe.

By deepening our awareness of what is actually happening, and why, we create a foundation for imagining something completely different that emerges from deep, profound structural changes. For example, our debt-based money system requires – yes, requires, with no exception – that there never be quite enough and that we continue to grow the overall system – forever. Of course that can’t happen.  So what happens if we create a different system? Did those unsolvable problems just start looking slightly more manageable? Is there at least a possibility now that didn’t previously exist? Have we strengthened our imagination?

Moreover, we can develop our capacity to have faith in these possibilities by experiencing the powerful response of life self-organizing.  What does this look like? As a result of our separate-self perspective, an illusion of separation that has been invested in for the last 10,000 or so years (if not more as Charles Eisenstein would argue – that this trend is an inherent aspect of life evolving set in motion from the very beginning), we have lost touch with a real experience of this self-organizing ability. Yet it is constantly unfolding and used as a tool by each and every one of us all the time, as Mike Dooley (and others) argues in his book, Manifesting Change.

If we are able to ground our selves in the reality that life will/must respond in a way that is life affirming, because this is a fundamental principle of the Universe, then we can help with the process of letting go of old beliefs about control and separation.  I know that it might sound whoo-whoo to some to offer something along the lines of learning more about the ‘manifestation’ process, instead of specific ‘solutions’, but this is a response to the nature of the predicament.  Have you ever noticed that the ‘experts’ are the ones that offer ‘solutions’ and they are the ones doing well in this economy? If this economy is at the heart of the problem, are these really solutions being offered?

The definition of a paradigm is that it defines what we are capable of seeing; what we can imagine – because it is a framework in which we are immersed. Thus the framework is invisible. So seeing beyond the framework is not possible as long as it is invisible. The first step to seeing beyond the framework, to what might be, is to allow our self to see the framework. And, in fact, the framework consists of a history – a collective consciousness characterized by tyranny, exploitation, separation, atrocity, injustice…I could go on.  And the unintended consequences of this invisible framework are equally abhorrent.  So repulsive is this current consciousness, that we are, well, repelled. So this process of deepening awareness is ultimately an act of courage and faith – undertaken by those that understand we create our own reality based on our thoughts and that these thoughts are limited by the invisible framework of our collective consciousness, and in order to see beyond this framework, we must first make it visible.

This bears repeating.

1. We create our reality with our thoughts.

2. Our thinking, and thus the reality we create, is limited by our collective consciousness that is ascribed by the invisible social and culture framework in which we are immersed.

3. We can see expand our imagination,and thus create a new paradigm, by making the invisible framework apparent through deepened awareness.

If you go deep enough, as I know Guy has by virtue of the discussions he offers, then a response that is free of the trappings of the current paradigm is the only alternative. This deepened awareness makes clear how urgent and essential the so-called whoo-whoo stuff actually is. Ultimately, it is the only response: to stop giving away our creative energy and power by ‘fighting the system’ or trying to manufacture (literally) solutions to the problems inherent in the broader status quo, and instead manifest something quite different and quite beautiful.  Can thoughts become things? If so, what would you/we create?

When you ask that question and there is no answering pouring forth, what does that tell you, and how might you respond to such a limit of imagination, knowing how important this imagination is right now? This is a good question and I don’t suppose to have the answers. Yet I am responding – moving forward as best I can by exploring this process through the expression of my own life. What this means in terms of personal wellness is a sense of walking a tight rope between the anxiety of leaving the safety net of our failed social structure, and the exuberant joy of creating a life that is vastly more life-affirming.

It is truly unfortunate that the meme of ‘rapid economic growth’ still is promulgated in the face of peak resource reality: From press release below quoting  Gov. Malloy: “Under this new agency, we will better integrate and coordinate our state’s energy and environmental policy in order to strengthen our ability to protect the environment; to clean, conserve and lower the cost of energy; and to set the table for rapid and responsible economic growth.”

Unfortunate because every time we focus on so-called economic growth (rapid or otherwise, neither of which is reasonable) rather than a reasonable response to resource depletion and environmental collapse, we further increase the disconnect between the current situation and sustainability based on economic, social and environmental justice. Might we consider starting by simply shifting the words from economic growth to economic activity? Might we then take an honest look at the deep problems with our debt-based money system? Might we consider that what needs to be restored is not our ability to protect the environment, but the environment’s ability to protect us?

It is my prayer that those of us that know better not be silent when we experience this kind of rhetoric from politicians and the media and, rather, we speak for whatever might be true for each of us. I encourage everyone on this list to do so.

This Sunday ECCoLoV (Earth Charter Community of the Lower Valley, Inc.) presents a program at our monthly meeting called Why Your Grocery Bill Will Double In 2011 and What You Can Do About It. We will discuss the vulnerability of the US food supply. Is the US really the world’s bread basket? What are the three biggest factors pushing up food prices? How do we get started with backup food supplies? How do we increase our food self-reliance?

On March 6, noted author Charles Eisenstein will present Money and the Turning of the Age. Mr. Eisenstein will talk about the fundamental shift taking place in our society right now – from where it springs and what its implications are. His book, The Ascent of Humanity, is a radical exploration of the history and future of civilization from a unique perspective: the human sense of self. Like many philosophers, Eisenstein traces all of the converging crises of our age to a common source, which he calls Separation. It is the ideology of the discrete and separate self that has generated these crises; therefore, he argues, nothing less than a “revolution in human beingness” will be sufficient to transform our relationship to each other and the planet. Even in this dark hour, he says, a more beautiful world is possible — but not through the extension of millennia-old methods of management and control.

Please consider these programs, visit our website at www.earthcharterct.org for more information, and contemplate offering important feedback to state government about the true nature of our energy and environmental predicament, and ‘reasonable’ responses to them.

From: 20by2010cleanenergy@googlegroups.com [mailto:20by2010cleanenergy@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Roger Smith

Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2011 6:04 PM

To: 20by2010CleanEnergy@googlegroups.com

Subject: [CleanEnergy20by2010] Breaking news: Governor proposed consolidated

Energy/Environment Department

Editorial comment: I don’t know what this will mean but you’re among the first to hear about this. It’s unclear what happens to the CT Energy Advisory Board as well as the Efficiency/Clean Energy Funds. It’s a positive sign that OPM energy office would be folded into this centralized entity.

- Roger

(HARTFORD, CT) – Governor Dannel P. Malloy today announced his plan to create a newly consolidated Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP), an agency that will consolidate Connecticut’s widely dispersed energy functions, including the Department of Public Utility Control, with the Department of Environmental Protection to allow for a more effective coordination of state energy and environmental policies.

“Merging these two functions under one leader will allow the state to act cohesively in two vitally important and directly related policy areas, particularly in terms of economic development, siting, permitting and other issues,” Governor Malloy said. “Under this new agency, we will better integrate and coordinate our state’s energy and environmental policy in order to strengthen our ability to protect the environment; to clean, conserve and lower the cost of energy; and to set the table for rapid and responsible economic growth.”

Creating the new Department of Energy and Environmental Protection will enable the state to continue its environmental conservation and regulation functions and to couple them closely with energy policy and pricing. Organizationally, the state’s energy policy will become centralized in the agency through the creation of two new bureaus: the Bureau of Energy Policy and Efficiency and the Bureau of Utilities Control.

The Bureau of Energy Policy and Efficiency will be responsible for the development and analysis of energy policy as it affects all of Connecticut’s citizens and businesses through its Division of Energy Policy and Program Development. The bureau’s Division of Government Energy Management will be responsible for the effective management of energy costs and energy usage by and within state government buildings and facilities. Existing staff from the Office of Policy and Management Energy Unit will be transferred into this bureau.

DEEP’s second energy bureau, the Bureau of Utilities Control, is formed by transferring the Department of Public Utility Control, which will continue to be responsible for conducting management audits of the public service companies; scheduling, coordinating, and issuing legal notices, and conducting public hearings and adjudicating all contested cases; conducting investigations into generic issues and conducting or sponsoring management audits of specific utility functions.

http://www.governor.ct.gov/malloy/cwp/view.asp?Q=473626&A=4010

This note consists mostly of writing by author Derrick Jensen. I am on page 450 of his 700 page book, The Culture of Make Believe. If you wish to learn deeply about the subject of social and economic justice, then reading this book is a very good start. Social and economic justice are one of the four primary principles of the Earth Charter. I am the president of the Earth Charter of the Lower Valley, Inc. (ECCoLoV), in Connecticut – a non-profit group organized under the principles expressed by the Earth Charter. Sometimes one wonders what to do with that. This note is a response to that question. In addition to the obvious relationship of social and economic injustice to human beings, this note also touches on the wider reach of the underpinnings of this injustice on the nonhuman realm, ie., environmental integrity – another Earth Charter principle.

Yesterday, after much thought, I decided to view a video on Facebook. It was a video taken from a rooftop in Egypt. It showed a large, white diplomatic vehicle surrounded by thousands of milling people, which, in turn, were surrounded further by teeming, crowd-filled streets. In the video the car suddenly begins to surge ahead. As it begins, the pedestrians are able to get out of the way, but as it picks up speed this becomes impossible. Tens of people begin getting mowed down. There is the clatter of the impact of their bodies being hit by the car, being run over, striking one another; of bones breaking. The car gets faster, swerves from side to side taking out even more people – literally mowed down, run over by this bullet-proofed, multi-ton armored limousine used to transport and protect the very most cowardly people on the planet. It is sickening.

I am profoundly pained from this experience, and confused as to whether it serves some larger purpose. I can only turn to a spiritual interpretation, one that transcends the physical-ness of our existence. I will probably remember this image for the rest of my life. I do not know what to do with it. Other than this:

Having read some three-quarters of Jensen’s excellent book, I have been wanting to post excerpts of it the entire time, but have not done so. Forthwith is an excerpt from pages 448 and 449, offered as some sort of perspective, some sort of cathartic reaction to the abstract horror I watched yesterday. May it lead, or at least contribute to a deeper peace, and a shift of consciousness in the world. Aho. May it illuminate the structural deficiencies, and remedies called forth, inherent in where we are in the evolution of life, the evolution of the Earth, the evolution of the Universe, now. Aho.

While, from a spiritual perspective, I believe time is simply another dimension that is transcended by the oneness the underlies all, as a physically manifest, living aspect of that all – as someone that is going to die someday – time is of the essence. Time is of the essence if we wish the human experiment to continue to exist at the leading edge of the universe’s evolving consciousness – its awareness of itself, God’s awareness of its self. Time is of the essence if we wish to see that our being-ness and our doing-ness has a simple choice: between that which helps life organize and emerge, a fundamental quality of the Universe, and that which leads to increased randomness (entropy) in the Universe, a fundamental quality as well. In my writing, when I speak of ‘coherence’, this is what I mean; to choose to seek always greater coherence with the informational pattern that begets life is to be more fully alive.

“The relationship between economics and hatred is far deeper and more formative than what I’ve said earlier, that any hatred felt long enough and deeply enough feels like economics, tradition, religion, what have you. There’s more to it than that. First, because our economics (and our society) is based on competition, it breeds hatred, insecurity, and fear. In a Language Older than Words, I discussed how the anthropologist Ruth Benedict tried to figure out why some cultures are fundamentally peaceful and others are not, why women and children are treated well in some cultures and in others they are not, and why some cultures are cooperative and others are competitive. She found one simple rule that covered all of these. It has to do with our need as social creatures for esteem. In what she termed good, or synergistic, cultures, selfishness and altruism are merged by granting esteem to those who are generous. Cultures that reward behavior benefiting the group as a whole (and specifically that siphon wealth constantly from rich to poor) while not allowing behavior that harms the group as a whole are peaceful, respectful of women and children, and cooperative. Individual members are secure. If, on the other hand, your culture grants esteem to those who are acquisitive, that is, if your culture rewards behavior that benefits the individual at the expense of the whole (and if your culture funnels wealth from poor to rich), your culture will be warlike, abusive toward women and children, and competitive. Individuals will be insecure. She also found that members of the cultures with the former characteristics are, unsurprisingly, for the most part, happy. Members of the cultures with the latter characteristics are, just as unsurprisingly, not….

“Because competition is so central to our culture, because acquisition is so deeply rewarded, because this cultural urge to acquire is insatiable, and because this acquisition is inevitably based on the exploitation of others, there can be no limit to how thoroughly our culture will exploit others, both human and nonhuman [emphasis added]. And because increasing competition leads so easily and obviously, when our lives are at stake, to increasing hatred of our competitors (as well as hatred of those who resist our exploitation), there can be no limit as to the depth and breadth of our culturally induced hatred, both of our direct peers and of those from whom we wish to steal.

“But it is even worse than this. As discussed earlier in this book, another of the central movements of our culture-along with movement toward monolithic control-has been toward increasing abstraction, that is, away from the particular, away from Buber’s joining of will and grace, and toward perceiving others as Its, objects, numbers, resources to be used, or, as Kevin Bales said of modern slaves, to be used hard, used up, and thrown away. Thus there can be no limit, then, also to the abstraction of our hate, that is, to the increasing emotional and physical distance over which we can and do destroy, to the veils we place between ourselves and those others we may no longer consider as existing.”*

So on February 4, 2011, I watched the tiny screen in the middle of Facebook, and saw the abstract representation of an atrocity that I will never forget. The experience wells in me, churning with energy.

*Derrick Jensen, The Culture of Make Believe, 2002, Context Books, pages 448, 449

I was dropped from 11,000 feet. Contained in some sort of metal cage, a plate of steel was below my feet ostensibly engineered (with enough safety factor) to make this a statistically safe experience for me and my fellow passengers. The air was cold (and thin) as I expected it would be. The speed of falling grew rapidly to terminal velocity. My hands were at my sides and apparently could not be raised, so I fell to earth in a vertical orientation, feet first thanks to the weight of the steel floor.

Wikipedia suggests that terminal velocity is 200 mph, although the world record of a streamlined free falling aerialist is over 600 mph. Knowing this now gives me insight into my own trepidation about the ‘engineered safety factor’ of the cage meant to protect me.

I knew I had been dropped over water. The concern was about the impact, obviously. I had no idea where I was in relation to the ground. Simply falling very fast. I was full of fear of the impact and waited. My breath quickened and got shallow. I tried to breath deeply, to relax, to prepare, to be in the best possible, strongest posture and state for the impact. That’s when I woke up.

Before being dropped, I remember flying in an airplane and seeing a dredging operation below. “Where do they put the tailings?. I asked. “Right back where they got them”, was the response returned. “But how does that work”, I said. “They drop them from 11,000 feet”, was the answer.

The four steps of dream processing taught to me by Susan Morgan of the Mystic Dream Center, and learned from her mentor Robert Moss, are, as best I can remember, 1. What title would you give to the dream? 2. What is the most notable image from the dream? 3. What do you or does your subconscious suggest for the meaning of this image? 4. What can you do in your waking life to incorporate the information provided to you in this dream?

1. The title for this dream is The Plunge.

2. The most vivid image is the feeling of fear, the shortness of breath as a result of my experience of falling. There is some, perhaps a lot, of dream-time that came before the falling, but I can not remember those parts of the dream. So it is just this segment with which I can work.

3. The immediate answer that comes to me, when I ask the question, what does this fear and falling mean, is this: that I fear catastrophe; the other shoe dropping, some way in which the ordered life that I currently experience will suddenly fall apart. It speaks to a deep-seated sense of tenuous-ness of my place and existence in the world.

4. What the (hell) will I do about this? Good frickin’ question. Again, an answer is immediately forthcoming. I will talk about it. I will shine light upon it. I will embrace it, reveal it, revel in it. I will hold it as mine and learn it, love it and live it. I will become consciously one with this fear just as I am already one with it unconsciously. Only now, I will have more choice in the ways in which it motivates (or demotivates) me.So I am writing about it; sharing this dream process as well.

After waking, I lay in bed thinking this through. The idea of writing about it accompanied my decision to talk about this fear. As I considered this activity, I began to weep. Tears welled, my abdomen convulsed; I thought of it as energy released. I offer this in healing. Even as I type these words, I feel those same tears. What is that? Is it gratitude? Is it a sense of being more fully alive? Is it movement, god-forbid, progress? What is healing anyway?

I honor this dream. I am grateful for it and its message.

Aho

Namste’

I read with some interest various comments and debates about the role of political advertising – specifically that sponsored by Sarah Palin – relating the use of gun images to a role in the horrific events in Tucson, Arizona this week in which a gunman shot 20 people, including U.S. Representative. Gabrielle Giffords. Thirteen others were also wounded and six people killed, including a federal judge and a 9-year-old girl.

There are two common schools of thought in the discourse. One, that the gun references employed by Palin’s advertising contributed to an atmosphere of violence that facilitated the event’s genesis. The argument most often offered in contrast to this idea is that these thoughts are an unfair ‘politicization’ of the tragedy itself.

First, let’s be clear, I consider myself a ‘Radical Liberal’. I use this term because of my increasing sensitivity to the frames of reference that are prevalent in the world, our culture, and our collective consciousness  – both today and always – that are ultimately controlling in terms of our rational ideas and discourse. I inherently have a bias against typical conservative values that argue for the benefit of extending the status quo, or of returning to a former version of it reflected in the continued faith in current structures, systems and institutions. This view is unproductive when one begins to understand the nature of the challenges facing the world today as resulting from deep elements of these very structures, systems and institutions. Thus emerges the idea of structural change being needed to address rampant problems in the realms of social, economic and environment justice. Moreover, while these terms are the best available, at least to me at this time, I want to be clear that the word justice applies to all of creation – all living things and ecological systems  – ultimately all form and even the embodiment of spirit in that form. My point is that if we delve into ideas about justice, it is important to be open to understanding it beyond simply the human  realm.

So based on the above comments, one might begin to understand why the term Radical Liberal seems fitting in my self description. Which brings us to the corollary of political liberalism that is offered today as a counterpoint to political conservatism. Unfortunately, the discourse of the liberal left is inside of the very systems, structures and institutions that represent the most embedded aspects of the world’s challenges. These ideas immersed in the status quo, then, tend to strengthen the very foundations of the problems to which they would respond. As such, politically liberal ideas offer little or no vision into the kind of change that is needed to restore ‘justice’ in the sense described above. And, just one more point further to my efforts at disclosure here;

it should be said that the current level of injustice is a threat to all of life on the Earth right now. Given the overshoot of population, the convergence of peak resource issues including energy, commodities, debt and pollution loading of the Earth’s ecosystems, and the enormous inertia inherent in these issues, it is fair to say that there is an unfathomable level of urgency with regard to restoring this comprehensive ‘justice’.

All of that as a context for the simple point of this blog, which is to say that the event in Tucson was a political event. So the objection that inquiry and discourse about the connection between Republican advertising sponsored by Sarah Palin using gun images, and the violence unleashed in Arizona is an unfair politicization of the tragedy, is not accurate. The event was political to begin with. The advertising in question is political. The personality involved is a political one with a clear record of engagement on this very topic. In fact, one of the victims,  Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, pointed out in a television interview on March 25, 2010 that the advertising sponsored by Sarah Palin involved gun sights over ‘targeted’ districts and that there are consequences from this kind of imagery. So engaging in discussion about this event and possibly contributing factors is not ‘politicizing’. This should not be a reason to avoid raising awareness about the deeper conditions that give rise to the kind of tragic event that occurred in Tucson – particularly when the events are so clearly political.

But the fact is, political discussion by its nature will not address injustice as it has been defined in this discussion. In fact, one of the elements of this blog is to suggest that there is a role for the concept of spirituality in all of this to the extent that it is supportive of a shifting of consciousness and the ability to envision a world – systems, structures and institutions – different from those to which we have become so accustomed as to prevent our ability from seeing, and thus ‘saving’ our selves; or at least, from actually addressing injustice. To bring this simply around full circle, the Tucson event and the violence associated with it, are aspects of deep, genuine injustice. I won’t go so far as to say that violence is exclusively unjust. It is perhaps more enlivening, more constructive to say that the conversation ultimately needs to hinge on whether our thoughts, words and actions are supportive of justice, in the deepest sense, or injustice. So I would ask, is the senseless killing supportive of justice? Are advertising campaigns using violent references, such as the idea of ‘reloading’, or gun images, whether promulgated by Republicans or Democrats, conservatives or liberals, supportive of justice? If not, then how can we shift our thoughts, words and actions toward those that nurture the kind of justice to which I allude?

But what is politics anyway? From Wikipedia, it is “a process by which groups of people make collective decisions. The term is generally applied to the art or science of running governmental or state affairs. It also refers to behavior within civil governments, but politics has been observed in other group interactions, including corporate, academic, and religious institutions. It consists of “social relations involving authority or power“^[1] and refers to the regulation of public affairs within a political unit,^[2] and to the methods and tactics used to formulate and apply policy.^[3]“

While this definition opens up a whole realm of discussion about our collective consciousness and its ability to collectively make decisions, one thing that is clear – politicizing events like the one in Tucson – in fact any event that involves us collectively, is not unfair or inappropriate.

Anyone that offers up the argument that the event in Tucson shouldn’t be ‘politicized’ is just plain wrong.

When I first started this blog, I only had the inspired thought to name it after a koan that I was given at a nearby Zen monastery during a week long meditation retreat. ‘What is the Buddha nature of the sky?’ Since then, I have written when I could, as authentically as I could, from a place of truth that I feel dwells in me – or I in it. I have written blogs and unpublished non-fiction pieces about the nexus of spirituality and sustainability, a fictional novel about my own mid-life crisis; I have written book reviews. I have written about experiences in nature that moved me, about creative insights, about process and about people and events.

As a result, I have had the chance to read and comment on a number of books, and that has lead to the interesting result that books have started to come to me. These are books for which I most likely have an interest as the offer to read them is a result of a related review. One such book arrived in February.  I immediately felt compelled to write about it. It is that good; that important, that pertinent.

You can also find this review on Amazon.

Seldom does a book come along that has me bursting to tell others about. The simplest sign of such an emerging episode is the experience of being moved to tears by that which I’m reading. In the case of The Love of the Fifth Spiritual Paradigm, that experience repeated itself over and over. I wanted to give this book to everyone I was falling in love with at the time. I called the author; I wanted to know her. I bought copies and sent them, sometime sneakily, to people to whom I wished to share the book. The Love is clarity. The Love is comprehensive. The Love is dedicated to speaking the truth about our experience on this plane of existence, its source of this thing called Love, and our relationship with all that is. The Love offers context, and that it is what I like the most about it. It is an idealistic book, but unlike so many other books, it does not attempt to analyze in a reductionist way, it seeks to understand the relationship of our need to remember Love in an integrated way; with where we are as a species, as a planet, and what might be done about it. It is a book that marries the spiritual quest, our personal healing, with our collective healing and the possibility of healing the Earth. In doing so, it makes the case for continuing to find our place in the cosmos.

The Love is not naive. It recognizes that our place in the cosmos is not assured. That the catharsis of our current evolutionary journey, like previous inflection points, is fraught with peril; that there is no guarantee that the Universe’s human experiment will continue. It calls forth the obvious imperative that the most pressing task of our time is to delve into our own ideas about Love, to learn what it is more truly: what it can do – to see that it is the key to creating a sustainable world, enjoying enriching relationships, and experiencing a satisfying life

“We no longer need bind ourselves to the cosmology or mythology of our ancestors. We currently possess the scientific knowledge and advanced moral code to reject these outdated and often ridiculous belief systems.”

“On the other hand, we apparently lack the wisdom to craft a more sophisticated religion, as no unifying theosophy has been presented to or accepted by the masses. The result is a spiritual vacuum, in which some people desperately cling to the old religions for comfort, while others struggle to synthesize primordial mysteries with the latest discoveries. Clearly the world is suffering on a spiritual level.”

The Love is an anthology. So the author, Laura George, is actually the editor of the book. She has managed to assemble an amazing array of articles, many of which were written by other superb writers just for this book. Authors like Bill McKibben, Susan McElroy, Kenneth Porter, Brenda Schaeffer, Margaret Starbird, Robert Hardison, and many others.

Still other articles are culled from archival material by folks like Wendell Berry, Mahatma Gandi, Desmond Tutu, Maya Angelou, Alex Grey and Rumi. The combined result of the articles interspersed with George’s interpretations, contextual orientations, personal anecdotes and other commentary, is truly engaging. From the beginning of the book we realize that the feminine perspective provides much of the book’s power; a perspective that has been repressed and lost to our current world at our own peril.

“Sophia is emerging in this time of immense change to challenge us once again with her wisdom.”

“She instructs us through her basic principles: the creative tension of opposites; descent journeys; and transcendence to a new form. Repetitive experience with each of these principles changes the nature of our ego, our reality, and our relationship to the “other”.

George does not hold back in synthesizing the perspective she generously shares. “Today, the continued denigration of the Sacred Feminine and of the material world is a direct result of a Christian worldview which lacks an awareness of Sophia as an equal component of the godhead and the Earth as a living entity.”

George’s other book, the first of a trilogy of which The Love is the second, is called The Truth. It chooses as its starting premise the idea that religion is divisive and not unifying. As soon as you pick up this book, The Love, you find on the inside of the title page a note about George’s organization, The Oracle Institute, and its choice of the Pentacle as its symbol. “The Oracle Institute chose the Pentacle as a symbol for its humanitarian work….because of its noble history and the fact that the Truth about this ancient symbol-like all Truth-needs to be revealed….Today, at the close of the Fourth Spiritual Paradigm, it is fair to say that the Pentacle represents the five primary religions: Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, and Islam. May these now ancient religions update their teachings and unify their wisdom traditions in order to guide humanity toward the Utopian state described by their prophets as “heaven on earth.”.

The book is well organized offering commentary and analysis on Love as it relates to love of earth, of animals, of family, of community; romantic love, of learning, of arts, of freedom, of God and unconditional love. My personal experience while reading this book while at facilitator training for the international initiative called ‘Awakening the Dreamer, Changing the Dream’, was one of profound catharsis. The book is captivating intellectually, but it is also incredibly motivating emotionally. It is this motivation, the energy in motion that was and has been so profoundly trans formative for me. So my unabashed recommendation for this book doesn’t just come from a rational place. As those that know me might attest, using the rational as a sole means of evaluation is in my opinion insufficient. I recommend this book as the result of a deeply heartfelt inspiration; a sense that someone has put together a book that seeks and honors truth genuinely, with great effort and equal humility; as a process, a journey, an adventure.

“For example, Sophian philosophy relates to the sustainability of the Earth as opposed the “Rapture,” an apocalyptic myth that Christian fundamentalists believe will be fulfilled when the Earth is destroyed and they are transported to heaven.”

“Such a belief system is based on fear and represents the improper use of will – a quick fix when spiritual paradigms are shifting, as they are now. In other words, many evangelicals welcome the demise of Earth because they think it will hasten their entry into heaven.”

Laura George and the Oracle Institute are enthusiastic seekers of enlightenment. They understand the personal quest of each of us as physically manifested spirit. Yet it is the book’s grounding in Love of earth and Love of animals that most grabbed and moved me; Love that arises from our relationship with that from which we have emerged. It is an experience of this Love that is so strongly called forth both in our world today, and by this book. It is the recognition of the planetary catharsis we are currently undergoing: the environmental crisis, the mass species extinction, the threats to food systems and truly the doubtfulness of continued participation by the human species in the universal evolutionary trajectory. This has been called The Great Turning, or George calls it The Great Cusp.

In the book’s epilogue, George writes, “The world is spinning madly right now. The Great Cusp has firmly taken hold and fear is rampant. What is so interesting about this Great Cusp is not that its effects are being globally shared-that is always the case with a millennial change-but that its impact is being globally analyzed and communicated. In the 21st Century we are all connected, so we will witness how each country and each culture handles the chaos…So today I am left wondering: How close are we to the paradigm shift if the most fortunate people on the planet are fixated on money and infatuated by power? If people still cannot discern Truth, practice Love, or accept Light, what hope is there for the utopia described in all the holy books and foretold by all indigenous wisdom cultures?…Now we have another chance to manifest a utopian state. However, those who predict dystopia, those in total denial, and those who sickly and secretly crave Armageddon presently outnumber the light workers who are trying to build a new Atlantis. Consequently, we are witnessing another crescendo of duality – polarization of Dark and Light energies – a complex topic that the Institute will address in the final book of our foundational trilogy: The Light….Despite the spectacle of the Christian version of the Apocalypse-a gory drama portrayed by all Fourth Paradigm religions – the truth is that no one is coming either to condemn or save us. We, collectively, hold the power and promise, since it is our destiny to become the “gods and goddesses” of this realm. Thus, the Fifth Spiritual Paradigm depends upon human, not Divine, intervention.

And so we are left, as I wish to leave you, with an essential message embodied by the proponents of evolutionary consciousness such as Andrew Cohen: that the here and now is the leading edge of the Universe’s inexorable reach to evolve, to become more of itself so that it might experience more of itself. Our own evolving consciousness, our deepening awareness of this consciousness, is the very tool with which we can step into our role as an aspect of God, as co-creators in the determination of the next phase of the cosmic turning. Cohen writes in his article called ‘Liberation of the Soul’: “If you want to be free, if you want to be a liberated human being, then it is essential that you become interested in what it means to be simple…shockingly simple….The movement from bondage to liberation is the movement from complexity to simplicity…Wanting to be free more than anything else not only liberates us from the endless burden of having so many choices, it also releases us from the often compelling attraction to all that is false, wrong, and untrue…Why? Because inwardly our attention is one-pointed. It is now focused upon a mystery in which there exists no sense of limitation whatsoever”

“…those who cannot be swayed from their one-pointed interest in liberating themselves from fear and ignorance in this life – have a lot in common with one who has actually succeeded…What matters is whether we have the passion to seek liberation now, and whether we recognize that the power to go that far lies in our very own hands…when you experientially get in touch with what simplicity actually means, you can then begin to look into its opposite, which is complexity…What choice am I making in every moment? Do the choices that I make express a Love for the truth and a preference for that which is sacred? When we look into such questions, everything becomes simple and obvious…To succeed, we must be convinced beyond any doubt that liberation is a living possibility – that it is real – and start making the right choices over and over again until a new momentum is born. That new KARMA is the energy of liberation itself. If pursued, that energy also become self-generating and will eventually, overtake the ego. That is liberation – when the Absolute reveals itself through us in this world.”

Cohen tells us that to truly experience the so-called Oneness that is getting more and more linguistic attention, we simply choose, with ferocious attention, to liberate our soul. With out saying it directly, he is addressing the seeming paradox that our true freedom lies amongst the abundant connections we have with each other, the web of life and the cosmos. Our current cultural, libertarian push for freedom is a perversion of our own soul’s – each and everyone of us – desire for the kind of liberation Cohen writes about. A living experience of being connected and responsible for each other in a complex, diverse web of cooperation and support that defies our limited notions about freedom.

The result of the kind of liberation written about by Cohen is a transcendence of our ego, and a channeling of source – Love – through us.

“Most seekers are interested in enlightenment only for their own sake, only for their own personal liberation. But there comes a time when some seekers being to recognize that the spiritual experience is not only for their own welfare. Because they have gone deeply into the spiritual experience, they have discovered something sacred – the revelation of oneness…What is of the greatest importance is that our passion for liberation be not only for our own sake but for the sake of the whole – which means liberation for everyone else…When you cease to live for yourself, when you give everything you have and everything you are for the sake of the whole…it’s the end of becoming. It’s the end of having a problem that you need to overcome. It’s even the end of striving for enlightenment. And it is the beginning of an unconditional response to a life that says “YES”…Then a new passion emerges…And what we discover out there at the edge is that the power of absolute Love to affect this world – so overcome with self-created pain and misery – is entirely dependent upon us.”

Saturday, March 6 brought to closure the long planned and slowly assembled speaking event in East Haddam, Connecticut featuring noted author James Howard Kunstler. Kunstler’s blog this week builds on the experience of his visit. Hosted by the local Earth Charter group, the Earth Charter Community of the Lower Valley (ECCoLoV), the event featured commentary on the converging trends of the day – and none to soon.

Speaking to a packed house of 180 people, Kunstler explained the loss of capital from our economic system, and the reality of peak oil’s fragile balance between strained world supply and vacillating demand that shifts with the vagaries of current global economic activity. Many had come because they know and respect Kunstler’s analysis and clear opinions about the interminable trends of resource depletion, our ‘suburban predicament’, and economic collapse. Some, such as public servants and politicians came as a result of being prodded by local citizens. Many of these folks left dazed. Feeling a deep disagreement with the message of the event, but being unable to dismiss it given the energy in the crowded room, they seemed confused and unable to unravel the phalanx of emotions, or to even articulate how they felt. Some ran from the room as soon as the talk was completed.

For the most part, the room was held in rapt attention. The facts presented resonated with truth and are, indeed, hard to deny.  Kunstler more than once derided those that would call him a gloom and doomer to point out his viewpoint as that of an ‘actualist’ – someone interested in what is actually happening. What is actually happening, he described, is that the world is broke. Our current economic system is based on growth – needed to service interest on debt. Our growth depends on ever more consumption of resources and we have come to the end of the line for virtually all of the resources that for so long have been treated as inexhaustible.  He went into some detail with regard to the character of peak oil – that it has never been about ‘running out of oil’, but rather about the fragility of the ever-more complex systems upon which our consumer economy depends. Now, at the peak of global oil availability, there is still about half of the Earth’s oil still in the ground. But it is this half that becomes increasingly difficult to access. This difficulty will serve to increase the volatility of our social systems.

While world oil demand will continue to climb as the rest of the world pursues the Western version of progress, the availability is about to decline. The cost of oil will escalate as it becomes harder to obtain. Access to less expensive oil will lead to competition, and to the extent the oil is deemed ‘in the national interest’, powerful forces will be deployed to ‘secure’ the resource.

Besides the simple economic strain, basic physics make it clear that when it takes as much energy to obtain oil as is delivered, the oil will no longer be viable. At one time, 1 barrel of oil equivalent in energy invested yielded 100 barrels of oil. That number is now below 10, and dropping. The writing is on the wall.

Kunstler emphasizes the need to talk about what is 'actually' happening.

Speaking as President of the non-profit organization that sponsored the event, I offered commentary based on my own views including ideas expressed elsewhere in this blog: that our challenges are not the result of a shortage of money, but rather a disconnection from that-which-really-matters, including compassion and respect for all of life, and a deep reorganization of our understanding of the place of humans in the ecological order of the Earth.

ECCoLoV President, Michael Harris - introductory remarks.

The late afternoon sun filled the room with light reflected off of the Connecticut River, streaming through the partially shaded west-facing windows of East Haddam’s famous Gelston House restaurant. Although the audience found themselves elbow to elbow waiting for the program to begin, while the audio-visual crew fretted about the room’s brightness, a curious air of expectation pervaded the place. While a lot was asked of the crowd as they waited for the main attraction, a lot was given in return, in terms of insight, information, thought-provoking commentary. No one complained about the transaction.

F

Bright sun slowed things down briefly.

The talk was followed by a panel discussion that featured local architects Hans Lohse and Patrick Pinnell, sustainability consultant Maureen Hart, former Wesleyan professor Don Meyer, transition town activist Bernard Brennan and spiritual director, Laura George.

Kunstler talks with panelist Laura George.

Comments by the panelists and questions from the audience drew out aspects of a collective vision for a more Utopian future; one in which our sense of oneness, cooperation and not competition, and unconditional love play a much more vital role in behavior and policy making. Competing points of view, though, expressed deep concerns about being out-competed by China, the need for national security, and continuing struggles with questions of property tax and land use policy. Kunstler pointed out that many questions seemed steeped in the idea that things were going to simply continue as they have been, a perspective with which he disagrees.

For more information, visit ECCoLoV’s website, earthcharterct.org.

Someone stole the license plate off the front of my car – so I followed the instructions on the DMV website. Replacement plates cost $25 unless you get a police report, then they are $5. So I called the state police. Trooper McElroy #1147 showed up, but didn’t want to write up a whole report. ‘We only do that for crimes’, he said. He offered to give me a case #.

‘But someone stole the plate,’ I thought. So I printed out the DMV website page where it says a case #isn’t acceptable and showed it to him. He relented and told me the report wouldn’t be available for a couple of weeks. ‘That’s seems kinda funny,’ I thought. That I would have to call the barracks to request the report.

So I did. They told me the report would cost $16! I wrote an email to the DMV, the Dept of Public Safety and Representative Linda Orange asking if it would be possible to coordinate these silly policies. That they are actually a deception – of us, taxpayers. I haven’t heard back yet, but I only just wrote the email.

What do you think? Is this a ridiculous run around? More example of what I call ‘smoke screen’ polices that lull the public into thinking something is one way when in reality, it is not? See my prior blog about WTO and World Bank policies that just don’t seem to work. Is there a similarity here? I recognize that the State is strapped for money -  this is a reality of our time. But rather than cut the budget, they want to divert the subtle tax we all pay on our electric bill for clean energy rebates. They want to reduce incentives for the most cost effective approach to energy – energy efficiency – by stealing the money from that program. They want to charge top dollar for replacement license plates, but pretend that if you are the victim of theft, you don’t have to pay quite so much.

So let me see, I should wait a couple of weeks for the police report and pay $16 plus $5 to DMV for new plates. Or maybe I should drive there, stand in line and fill out forms and pay the $25 – maybe be done with it?

I’m not sure if I’m done with it yet! What do you think? Did you notice any similar blogs:

http://roaminholiday.wordpress.com/2009/12/09/besting-the-ct-dmv-priceless/

http://harobedretsiger.wordpress.com/2008/06/14/keep-an-eye-on-your-license-plate/

This one is a crack up:

http://kylebaxter.wordpress.com/2009/07/11/thieving-and-leaving-a-license-plate-mystery/