Costa Rica Guy

A Philosophy of Everything

November 28, 2018 by costaricaguy 1 Comment

The greatest scientific quest of the 21st century has been (and continues to be) a “theory of everything” that ties general relativity and quantum mechanics together. The missing link between the two is a quantum description of the gravitation force that we are all very familiar with.

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about a similar notion of a “philosophy of everything.” That is, a common philosophy that encompasses economics, politics, and science, and melds it all into a general meaning for our existence on this microscopically small revolving blue rock in the middle of a vast universe.

It seems that the “tie that binds” it all together is consciousness. I know that might sound weird, but more and more that’s what “they” are saying. By they I mean many of the current notable philosophical and spiritual thinkers (and even some scientists). After all, one of the greatest mysteries in science, in addition to quantum gravity, is the nature of consciousness…what exactly is it and where did it come from? The conundrum of consciousness is akin to the what came first, chicken or egg, riddle. That is, does the mind (i.e., our biological brain) produce consciousness, or vice versa. In fact, there is growing evidence that the root of reality is indeed, consciousness.

The spiritual, philosophical and scientific thinkers that I’m referring to are the likes of neuroscientist, Sam Harris, spiritual guru, Baba Ram Dass, historian and philosopher, Yuval Noah Harari, among others.

Particularly illuminating to me as of late has been the trilogy of books by Yuval Noah Harari. Those are, in order of their publication, Sapiens, Homo Deus, and his latest book, 21 Lessons for the 21st Century. If you haven’t read them, you certainly should.

Harari tell us that humans now live in a dual reality. Actually, we’ve sort of been living in one since the dawning of civilization, which encompasses only 1/3 of 1% of the 1.5 million year history of our species. There’s the objective reality of the things we can see, touch, taste, hear and smell. And then there’s this fictional layer of reality that has been superimposed by us over that objective reality. The fictional layer is comprised of made-up stories…yea that’s right, fairy tales, more or less.

Now, even though these stories are not really real, they nevertheless have had enormous impacts upon our species. In fact, Harari tells us that these stories are what has allowed mass human cooperation, which has elevated our species above the 9 million or so others that share space with us on planet Earth. Of course, one of the main categories of stories has to do with religion, but there are many others as well…such as democracy, capitalism, socialism, human rights and even money. All these have no objective existence apart from the stories that we’ve made up and that have become widely accepted.

And that’s not necessarily a bad thing…to a point.

Of course, the story of money has been a great benefit to humankind. Even though these small scraps of paper, generally adorned with grainy images of dead notables, do not have any intrinsic value in and of themselves…well, perhaps to light a fire, or substitute for Scott tissue versus dried leaves on an ill-equipped camping trip…they have facilitated widespread economic cooperation that has had great benefits to human society writ large.

However, it pays to remember that these stories, including the one about money, are, in fact, just stories. We made them up and we can un-make them up.

But here’s the thing, the stories have now taken on such an elevated and integrated role in human society that in many ways they now command objective reality itself. Take the capitalist economic story that led to the great industrial revolution that swept across the globe and elevated the quality of life for billions. We have come to realize, through science, that this story and the cooperative action it has spawned across the human race is now actually commanding the objective reality of our planet’s climate…to the potential risk of our very extinction!

Political and religious stories have been both good and bad. While they have given birth to nations and inspired the exploration of new geographic frontiers, they have also given rise to massive and completely unnecessary wars, death and mayhem.

These stories are so powerful that not only do they command the objective “exterior” reality of our day-to-day existence, they command the “interior” as well. In other words, they are so powerful as to effect consciousness itself.

On the level of the ego, which is the level of consciousness where most of us mere mortals live on a day-to-day basis, these stories reign supreme. They deeply influence our almost every conscious thought and thus command the actions flowing from those thoughts.

In short, these stories are powerful things, both for good and for bad.

However, the ego level is only one lower level of consciousness. There are higher ones. I know that might sound a little “out there” for some who could be reading this. But if you’ve ever tried meditation you’ll quickly learn that you’re really not in control of your thoughts at all. The stories are in control, as well as parts of your brain that have evolved over million of years and still harbor fight or flight notions that dominated the consciousness of our distant cave-dwelling ancestors. The goal of meditation is to quiet all that down and reach a higher level of consciousness where the stories in fact do NOT reign supreme. And that is inherently achievable, as millions of meditators do it quite successfully as a daily practice.

The philosophy of everything that I’m alluding to is one in which this higher level of consciousness, as the root of objective reality, is that which gives meaning to our existence. It is the tie that binds everything together, regardless of which stories we might have individually bought into. At this unifying level of consciousness we feel compassionate towards our fellow humans. We do not allow stories to distract us from our inherent commonality.

The stories are currently causing widespread division in American society and an alarming lack of compassion between those clinging to these competing fictions, such as democrat and republican.

The point is that we need not cling to the stories. We can choose to use them for our benefit and discard, or modify, them when they no longer serve us well.

We can seek a higher level of consciousness in which these stories do not command our inner, nor our outer, objective realities.

We may be at a point where our future existence depends on a philosophy of everything that leads us to do just that.

The Problem with Trump’s Nationalism

October 24, 2018 by costaricaguy Leave a Comment

I have expressed my concern many times in this blog about the concept, embraced by most on the right, of American Exceptionalism. I have long been fearful about what that sentiment could morph into.

Yesterday we had the President of the U.S., Donald Trump, lay claim to the ideological moniker of “nationalist.”

Now, many quickly came to his defense claiming that what he meant was simply that he was a patriot who cared deeply about his country.

However, there is a difference between what patriotism has always been understood to mean and what nationalism has actually and historically meant.

Here’s the way George Orwell drew the distinction in his famous 1945 essay, Notes on Nationalism…

By “nationalism” I mean first of all the habit of assuming that human beings can be classified like insects and that whole blocks of millions or tens of millions of people can be confidently labelled “good” or “bad.”

But secondly — and this is much more important — I mean the habit of identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognizing no other duty than that of advancing its interests.

Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism.

Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved.

By “patriotism” I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.

Of course, historically so-called nationalists have wreaked havoc almost everywhere they’ve claimed the label. And, yes, that includes both Hitler in Germany and Mussolini in Italy, but there are many other examples as well.

So, it should alarm any historically educated thinking person to hear a sitting President of the U.S. claim to be a nationalist and even praise the term and encourage its use. Perhaps Trump has never read Orwell’s essay, or perhaps he is even unaware of the historical baggage associated with the term. I hope that’s true.

Then there’s also the common way the term nationalist tends to be used in the U.S.A., at least in recent years. Here I’m talking about the pejorative term of “white nationalist.” There are some claiming that Trump’s nationalism was actually a “dog whistle” to groups that claim to be white nationalists. I don’t know if that’s true and neither does anyone else.

Even so, anyone reading the above should be able to come to the conclusion that Trump’s expressed affinity for nationalism wasn’t cool.

Nevertheless, it doesn’t surprise me in the least that he did so.

As I said, the whole notion of american exceptionalism has always sounded a bit too nationalistic to my progressive ears. Even before his election Trump was an outspoken leader among the exceptionalism crowd, along with the white evangelicals who now wholeheartedly support him.

What truth is there to the claim in the first place? In what ways is America exceptional, meaning better than all the rest?

One could quickly answer, well, militarily and economically. Oh sure, in terms of military or economic might, no country can match the U.S.A, at least not quite yet. There are a few fast on our heels, but we’re still at least winning by a head in those regards.

However, to claim exceptionalism based on power alone seems to me to be falling right into the nationalistic trap that Orwell lays out in the quote above. Power alone does not make one better than another. If that were the case, the bully would be considered a paragon of virtue, rather than an object of scorn and ridicule.

However, that is exactly what the nationalist does. He claims to be better and desires to demonstrate that to others via aggressive exertions of raw military and/or economic power. The result is often alienation, much like the playground bully who no one wants to play with. Trump’s entire presidency seems to be about doing just that. In that sense I guess he really is a nationalist, but not in any way that is morally laudable as he seemed to allude to in that regretful speech.

As I was embarking upon my meditation this morning using the app called HeadSpace, the message conveyed at the beginning of the guided session resonated with me and I believe is consistent with the underlying message of this post. And that is…

whether we think we’re the best in the world, or the worst…both ideas are nothing more than concepts of the mind. Neither possesses any real objective standing, or truth.

The truth is that we’re all in this boat together and none is more valuable in any basic human sense than any other. We’re going to have to face that fact sooner or later.

The problem with Trump’s nationalism is that the world is changing. Ideas like nationalism, or even exceptionalism, just aren’t going to have a place in the world to come. That is, if humans are expecting to survive as a species to enjoy it.

We’ve all got to learn to get along in this rapidly shrinking (and expanding) world. We’ve all got to learn to respect one another’s basic right to human dignity, regardless of place of birth, color of skin, or professed faith.

Trump’s nationalism, which foments the idea that “we” are inherently better than “them”, just won’t cut the mustard.

The Age-Old Conflict Between Property and People

July 7, 2018 by costaricaguy Leave a Comment

Has political identification become synonymous with sports team identification, with the democrats and republicans being the two arch rivals in a blood sport? Is this what we now call “tribalism?”

What’s really at the heart of the division in American society these days?

And who are the good guys in this ongoing debate? Who’s right?

I’ve been trying to apply some big-picture thinking to this dilemma. What I came up with might surprise you…

I believe what’s really going on is part and parcel of the age-old conflict between property and people. If you think back through history you will notice that this conflict has always been present and has invariably led to societal problems. The problems tend to arise when those who have all the property treat those who have none unfairly to an extent that becomes intolerable. And we may be nearing that point, again.

From the ancient ages when emperors had all the property to medieval feudal lords and serfs to modern-day capitalism run amok, there has always been this tension between property rights and human rights.

Capitalism is based on the idea that property should be privatized and traded between active participants in a free market. No one should be denied access per se into this market. However, some are unable to participate to the extent of others because they lack the economic power to do so. Therein lies the problem with the capitalist ideal. From the outset there are those who have greater ability to participate than others, often due to non-meritorious factors, such as birthright, heritage, or color of skin. The playing field is thus far from level and that disequilibrium tends to become greater with time.

Government should serve to both protect the property rights guaranteed in the capitalistic system and to ease out some of the imbalances that invariably crop up in such a system.

This push and pull naturally gives rise to political division. Those in favor of unfettered property rights decry any interference with the “free” market by government. Those who believe property rights are less important than human rights applaud government interference that smooths out the imbalances and resulting inequality.

Is one side right and the other wrong?

The point of this post is not to pass judgement on either, but only to identify the problem and suggest a better way to deal with it than outright civil war.

Before you think to yourself that I might have been a tad hyperbolic with that last statement, consider history. The civil war was at its heart based on the very conflict I am speaking of. The south did not want the government interfering with their rights to property, i.e., slaves. The north regarded the institution of slavery to be a grave derogation of human rights. The division became so deeply entrenched that a war was fought over it in which Americans killed other Americans…over 600,000 of them. Incidentally, that’s about 1/2 of Americans killed in all the wars our nation has ever been engaged in. Civil wars tend to be the nastiest (and deadliest) of all wars.

Could the current division result in something similarly catastrophic?

You bet it could.

I believe that all conflicts between humans can be resolved by seeking common ground. By stepping back and asking what do we agree on.

And in this case, I believe both sides in this age-old conflict between property and people do in fact have something in common. And that is that we’re all human and therefore have a basic human desire for freedom and dignity. We all want to be free to participate in a system that guarantees the right to own private property. That’s the stuff of the American Dream, right? We all want to get ahead in life.

But we also all want basic human dignity. And most of us do not like it when that is denied to us, or to others, especially when it’s unfairly denied.

I realize there are nuances that I’m not addressing. That the issue is far more complicated than this post makes it seem. But sometimes simple solutions are the best ones. In fact, most of the time that’s the case. At least that’s been my experience.

The solution I’m suggesting is to recognize the human-ness in those you disagree with. To recognize that what it all comes down to is that we all really want the same things, just in different degrees, or we have different notions about how to achieve those things.

In that light, Trump supporters are not bad people. Being from the south I have many friends who are ardent Trump supporters. In fact, I just had one of them pay me a visit here in Costa Rica for a few days. I always try to stay away from making harsh political judgements that could provoke unnecessary conflict in those face-to-face situations. Instead I sit back and listen and try to understand where the other person is coming from. In fact, my doing so has inspired the post you are reading right now.

I see on Facebook and other social media that quite the opposite is happening. Both sides are quick to condemn the other. We engage in exchanges that we probably wouldn’t engage in were we face to face. The problem is that the debate is becoming so heated that face-to-face confrontation is creeping in and becoming more of a norm. The next step from here could in fact be civil war. Again, it wouldn’t be the first time that has happened.

What I am therefore suggesting is to (1) recognize the true source of the problem, i.e., the age-old conflict between property and people; and (2) find common ground in the midst of that conflict based on the fact that we all are people, and as people, deep down, we all want the same things, i.e., freedom and dignity.

So, let’s find a way to guarantee those two basic human desires for all of us…the Big US…that we can agree on. One that respects both property and people.

Does that make sense?

In essence, what I’m saying is that maybe there’s not some evil conspiracy fomenting the ideas that you don’t agree with. Maybe what’s really at the heart of the division is the age-old conflict between property and people and the different perspectives people have about it.

Here’s a short video I shot the other day in the spirit of Facebook-inspired conflict-resolution…

Don’t Concede the Now for the Later

June 15, 2018 by costaricaguy Leave a Comment

I haven’t been writing in the blog as of late. The reason is that I’ve been busy writing a book. It’s a memoir of my experiences in Costa Rica, entitled “A Coming of Age in Costa Rica” (at least at the present moment that’s what the title is).

The following is an excerpt from the next to final chapter…

Meditation is a concept that comes to us from the East. We westerners are far too busy trying to improve ourselves and our situation to have possibly come up with such a sedate concept. That’s probably why American infrastructure is much better than it is in India. But having great infrastructure is not always the key to happiness, now is it? Costa Rica is annually ranked as one of the happiest countries on earth. But I can tell you one thing for sure, the infrastructure here isn’t all that great!

The western mindset sets us up for a lifetime of struggle. We simply can’t stop wanting. We want things to be better. We want to be better. We want our relationships to be better. We want to be surrounded by beautiful things. And we strain and strive our entire lives to have those things. We even call it the “American Dream.” However, for many it’s more like a nightmare that you never wake up from.

It didn’t take too long to dawn upon me here in Costa Rica that these ticos already have something, for free, that we in the States pay dearly for…beauty. They are surrounded by it. They wake up to it, walk through it, and work in and around it. I’m speaking of the incredible natural beauty that surrounds you here in Costa Rica. Of course, we have plenty of natural beauty in the U.S. as well, but we hardly recognize it. And what’s worse we work hard to destroy it in our constant effort towards “infrastructure improvement.”

What meditation does is allow the mind to quiet down and stop all that wanting, all that desire and struggle. In allows us to live for a moment in the present. To accept things exactly as they are in this moment. As Ram Dass says, it allows us to “be here now.”

I have to drive about 40 minutes from the mountains where I live down to my office at the beach. I make these drives early in the morning over a coastal mountain range that offers up some of the most beautiful landscapes that can be found in the country, perhaps anywhere. It is simply breathtaking and it never gets old driving over those vibrant green mountains, set against the backdrop of the deep blue Pacific. This beach road, as it’s called, is also the supply route between the city of San Isidro and the beach towns of Dominical, Uvita and Ojochal.

The other day I was driving through on a beautiful morning, enjoying the scenery, with the Grateful Dead supplying the background music. I was in the present to a large extent, even though I was thinking about my plans for the day. Then I encountered one of those supply trucks. It was plodding along at an excruciatingly slow pace and blocking my forward view of the landscape. I started to feel anger and impatience building. In short, the frigging truck became an obstacle to my bliss. I was finally able to get around that damned truck. I was once again free and happy and in the moment…until the next truck. That process continued all the way up and down the mountain until I finally arrived at the beach about an hour later, thoroughly depressed.

And that’s the way life is. People say that happiness is elusive. The reason is because you really can’t think your way to happiness. Because if you “want” to be happy then you’re basically conceding the now for the later. You’re admitting to yourself that somehow the future can be better. Of course it can be. We should plan for a better future. But what we shouldn’t do is what I was doing on my mountain ride. Don’t concede the now for the later. We will never truly attain happiness by doing that. We will always be unsatisfied, thinking (the operative word) that the next moment could be better than the present one.

Costa Rica has gradually and painfully taught me better how to be here now. My current meditation practice is helping even more. But Costa Rica in and of itself did play an important role. I gradually learned how to want less from life. I learned that happiness promoters tend to be happier than happiness pursuers. That rather than wanting so much from life, perhaps a better way to look at it is, what does life want from me? After all, life is a very precious gift bestowed upon us by the universe, against all odds. And our response should be to always want more and constantly be miserable because we don’t have what we want? I don’t think so.

We can’t think our way to happiness. Thinking is the obstacle. It’s the truck that’s blocking our bliss. The problem is that self, or ego, that takes the form of that little voice inside your head, constantly whispering, or screaming, that the next moment might just be better than the present one, if only…

If only I had this or that thing or the emotion I believe that having that thing might bring me. It’s a continuous cycle of misery, much like my trip to the beach turned out to be. One of the greatest lessons I’ve learned is that acceptance of the way things are, right now, is a much better way. Doesn’t mean I don’t plan. I sell real estate. I love those commissions. But I don’t let the fact that I have a “deal pending” become an obstacle to my bliss, or at least I strive not to. I do so by meditation. I do so by writing. I do so by taking long walks in the mountains. I do so in many ways that suit me. You must find your own path to bliss. And the place to look is not in the past or in the future…it’s where you are…

And where is that?

Here.

And when is that?

Now.

The best advice you can glean from this chapter and perhaps this entire book is just that…don’t concede the now for the later…

Be here now.

Homeopathic Utopia

January 17, 2018 by costaricaguy Leave a Comment

Being decent is hard, it’s a process…

Jaron Lanier

I recently listened to an episode of the Ezra Klein podcast (my absolute favorite podcast, by the way). He was interviewing Jaron Lanier. You’ve probably never heard of this guy, but he’s an American computer philosophy writer, computer scientist, visual artist, composer of classical music and a pioneer in the field of virtual reality. He’s also a guy who “trip-sat” a dying Richard Feynman on LSD…

Anyway, something I heard on the show that resonated was this idea of “homeopathic utopia.”

What in the hell is that?, you ask…

Well, according to Lanier being decent is hard work. It’s a process that takes a lifetime, or perhaps several lifetimes, to achieve. Rather than trying to change society all at once, by, for instance, revolutionary force, perhaps incremental change on an individual level, properly motivated to bring about desired results, is a better way.

It’s more of a homeopathic, or natural, remedy to societal ills…hence this idea of homeopathic utopia.

Haven’t we seen that throughout history sweeping changes to systems of status quo don’t always bring about those desired results. Revolutionaries that have replaced dictatorial regimes with totalitarian communistic ones is a great example.

Perhaps what we need more of is just good-ole-fashioned common decency, as Lanier suggests.

And that brings me to the salient point of this post…

You see the whole point of this blog, despite its revolutionary moniker, is just that…to inspire decency. The title of the blog, Revolutionary Misfit, probably misleads some to believe that what I’m advocating is sweeping, or “revolutionary”, change, but I’m really not at all. I believe that should become apparent to anyone who actually takes the time to read some of the posts contained herein…

However, many don’t do that and quickly jump to faulty conclusions…and that’s never a good idea.

You see, Impact Mindfulness and common decency are synonymous.

The concept of mindfulness is one you hear a lot about these days, usually in the context of a more meditative day-to-day existence. And I am advocating a sort of meditative, or better yet, contemplative, mode of existence. One in which you actually think, or reflect, before acting. Isn’t that what we have a brain for?

It’s easier to just go through life reacting. My idea is that one can achieve a far better quality of life, for oneself and others who are influenced or impacted by us, by focusing on that pause between stimulus and response.

And what should be the object of our focus? In a word often heard within this blog…

impact.

Impact mindfulness suggests that the best way to manage our impacts, so that they are more positive for people and planet, is by…

If the above sounds confusing, then think of it in these much simpler terms…

Impact mindfulness suggests that the three most important components of impact are…

Altruism
Inclusion, and
Open-Mindedness.

And if you step back and give that some deep thought, I believe you’ll agree that those three ideas, or states of being, comport far better with reality than their opposites.

For instance, the Ayn Rand-inspired, look out for number one only, ideology that has spawned neoliberalism has reaped some pretty harsh havoc on people and planet. In this blog you’ll find many posts about just that.

Despite what Ayn Rand once said, altruism is good for us. It’s good for others. And it’s good for our planet…pure and simple.

At least that’s what I strongly believe.

Now, if you think altruism is a waste of time and that you should live your life completely self-interested, then I suggest you reflect a bit deeper on what it might mean if everyone thought that way. In actuality, enough already do and that type of thinking has unleashed evils upon us all, such as inequality that’s spiraling out of control, a planet that’s rapidly overheating, and the realistic threat of the 6th great extinction of life on earth.

Embracing the concept of the Big US simply means what Bernie Sanders and Pope Francis often say themselves…that we’re all in this together.

Could anything be more true?

After all, we’re all occupying this revolving rock called planet earth. At present, it’s the only home we have. And the land masses that we occupy are rapidly shrinking as a rising ocean overtakes them inch by inch. So, we’d better learn to get along and think more inclusively.

Nationalistic thinking of the kind inspired by Donald Trump, in the face of a rapidly rising population and a shrinking area of land mass to accommodate it, just doesn’t make a lick of sense and will ultimately lead to disastrous consequences.

Finally, who can argue with the idea of keeping an open mind?

Well, in fact, many do. Usually the main culprits behind close-mindedness are religion and politics. Lately, especially in America, those two have combined to create a sort of tribalism that widely claims legitimate news to be fake and science that is not part of our day-to-day experience as nothing more than unproven theory.

Impact Mindfulness suggest the better way is to keep an open mind about such things. That is, to eagerly search for the truth and not let preconceived notions about the way things are, or ought to be, get in the way of that search.

What I am suggesting here is that the world could become a better place, not by sweeping revolutionary change, but incremental change via mindfulness…impact mindfulness.

This idea of a homeopathic utopia isn’t just pie in the sky, but could become a reality that future generations might enjoy.

Why not start now…before it’s too late?

Along those lines, here’s a quote by Martin Luther King during a famous speech at the Riverside Church that I found inspirational…

We are now faced with the fact, my friends, that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history, there is such a thing as being too late. Procrastination is still the thief of time. Life often leaves us standing bare, naked, and dejected with a lost opportunity. The tide in the affairs of men does not remain at flood—it ebbs. We may cry out desperately for time to pause in her passage, but time is adamant to every plea and rushes on. Over the bleached bones and jumbled residues of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words, “Too late.” There is an invisible book of life that faithfully records our vigilance or our neglect. Omar Khayyam is right: “The moving finger writes, and having writ moves on.”

The time for impact mindfulness is not tomorrow…it is now.

This idea is not unrealistic and utopian. It is essential to the betterment of people and planet.

The Individualism Collectivism Dichotomy

December 12, 2017 by costaricaguy Leave a Comment

With all the sexed-up political storms driving the news lately, I thought I’d shift gears and indulge in a more philosophical discussion this morning…one that concerns the individualism collectivism dichotomy.

An overly simplistic way of addressing the issue is to say that on the right individualism is thought to be good and collectivism bad.

For those on the left, the opposite would be true.

Getting back to the news of the day, sex is perhaps humankind’s strongest motivator for individual achievement…why the rich and powerful are so damned horny. So, if one is clamoring for a society that’s less sexually obsessed, as many seem to be these days, they’d better embrace Bernie Sanders’ brand of collectivism over Trump’s rugged and ruthless individualism…

But I digress.

I’m for the right mix of both…individualism and collectivism…working together for the benefit of what we all share…our humanity.

However, all of the above is really far too simple a way of looking at this issue.

Individualism in the extreme is certainly bad. On the other hand collectivism in the extreme can be equally bad, perhaps even worse.

The worse form of collectivism is totalitarian communism. I really don’t believe even the most die-hard left-wing liberal or progressive wants that.

Collectivism and individualism are values, as opposed to actual political philosophies, like socialism or capitalism. A good definition of the value of collectivism is “a cultural value that is characterized by an emphasis on cohesiveness among individuals and prioritization of the group over self.” In my mind that makes it a laudable cultural value and one that is entirely consistent with impact mindfulness.

However, checks and balances are required in order for individual freedoms not to be impinged upon by the collective…

For instance, collectivism should not prevent me, an individual, from owning a business and getting wealthy from it…

On the other hand, collectivism should indeed prevent the wealthy from “owning” a country and exploiting its resources at the expense of the whole. A phenomenon we’ve seen take place in the U.S. over the last 40 years.

The proper balance between these two competing values is very hard to achieve, but it’s a worthwhile endeavor to try to do so nonetheless.

FDR tried and succeeded in limited ways. Bernie talks a lot about achieving it, but so far…just talk.

In my opinion, the real difference between Bernie and FDR relates to the historical times in which each campaigned and governed. FDR did so at a time when the nation was ready for collectivist-oriented change. So far, Bernie has not had that luxury.

Nevertheless, as the disaster that is the Trump presidency unfolds and brings us ever closer to the precipice of the second gilded age, with its individualism-driven excesses, we might soon be ready…

The election in Alabama today could be foretelling.

Conservatives like to couch their policy initiatives in the seducing language of individualism…it’s all done in the name of clearing a path to individual, economic, success, or so they say…

But the end result has been a collective (if you will) gathering of wealth and income at the very top of the economic pyramid…and a shrinking middle class. What we’ve gotten as a result is more individualism for the wealthy and less for the rest.

Is that result really consistent with the “value” of individualism?

An interesting article on the topic is Understanding Collectivism and Individualism – Fact/Myth. In it the author makes the following quote concerning the complexities posed by the individualism collectivism dichotomy…

There is nothing wrong with general stances on collectivism or individualism…but hardline absolutist stances that don’t consider the complexity (in my opinion) are constantly underwhelming and create unnecessary tension and misunderstanding in politics.

The bottom line is that this issue is much more complex than simply saying right-wing = individualism good/collectivism bad and left-wing = collectivism good/individualism bad.

Unless and until we can learn to strike a proper balance between them, and avoid stigmatizing bold and perhaps good ideas with the labels that each often engenders, we will likely continue to suffer…

And our country and the world has suffered enough from the excesses of both.

impact.

Connect with RM