|
|
|
| A Larger View |
|
A Bi-Monthly Newsletter of the Inner Outer Partnership |
| Volume VI Edition 1 |
January/February |
2001 |
The Good of The Country?
Whatever else the art of politics may be, it is the art of winning. Candidates play to win and do what it takes to beat their opponents. While the values which give rise to such behavior can be justified as the way the game must be played, they nevertheless are in direct opposite to those values that would promote the good of all. Winning can't help but be a self-oriented endeavor. The message is clear: Vote for me, I am the best.
Our elections are set up to intensify personalities rather than issues. They make it easy for egos to prevail, for the worst to emerge. They are based on competition and competition is the diametrical opposite of its spiritual counterpart, cooperation. Political campaigns therefore bolster the ego of the candidates, which is at odds with the self effacement necessary to put the good of the whole first.
In the recent U.S. presidential election Mr. Bush thought it best for the country if Mr. Gore would concede without further ado. Was the call indeed good for the country, or good for Mr. Bush? Similarly Mr. Gore in the name of those who voted for him pressed on. Was it for them or for himself? When a candidate or his representative refers to his position as what is best for the country, by implication declaring that of his opponent as not, or when he calls on his opponent to do X because it would be best for all, implying he or she has the moral high ground, then politics sullies those values which are necessary for our collective and spiritual well being. Politics treads on what we may not be able to presently change, but which we must learn to recognize, lest we allow ourselves to be pawns of egos and ambitions, lest our own vote or support be used to nullify the very good we are seeking.
The present election system does not favor the wisest candidate nor the preservation of the good of all, and neither do our expectations and knowledge. When a candidate invokes the good of the country, are we able to discern whether it is heartfelt or not? The invocation is not in itself proof of genuine intent. As lip service it often skirts a sinister fact, as if it stood for: I know what voters need to hear in order to proclaim me the better person. As such it stems from a self-serving purpose while pretending to be other-oriented. In the election in question, both candidates described their positions as best for the country, when what would have been best ought to have been obvious not in their pronouncements or their actions but in the attitude of caring they ought to have displayed, in the humility and the wisdom one ought to expect from one's president. We deserve better, and it is up to us to better recognize the values that will guide us there.
World Famine Day
What does it feel like to go hungry? What does it mean to go through a famine? To enable teenagers, indeed anyone interested, to experience this and develop an understanding of the plight of others, World Vision International is sponsoring its 5th annual World Famine Day February 23-24. It's a 30-hour fast although one can set one's own parameters such as deciding to have juice, or only fasting for 15 hours. Churches most often sponsor the event and frequently a group of volunteer teens will be locked up for whatever number of hours they have agreed upon.
Started half a century ago World Vision is a Christian organization which helps families and children and has done much work in Africa. The famine program comes with videos and prayer guidelines, and hopefully participating groups will pledge or donate a certain amount to continue the work of feeding and helping suffering millions.
Compassion is not denominational. Learning to identify with the plight of others knows no boundary, and the effort of World Vision International while it may stem from orthodox Christianity, open-heartedly serves the cause of the human family.
If you are interested in participating in whatever way, visit the web site at www.worldvision.org or www.30hourfamine.org or call 1-800-7 FAMINE.
Should Felons Vote?
As part of the post November 7th election felons were discovered to have voted illegally in Florida. It appears that hundreds did so although the state had undergone a multimillion dollar effort to purge illegal voters from registered voter's lists. After reviewing more than 500,000 ballots in 12 counties, several hundred felons were found to have voted. Projected to the whole state it could mean as many as 5,000 felons cast ballots. Felons can vote in Florida only if they have formally applied to have their voting privileges reinstated. And many once presented with a registration card, just voted whether or not they had gone through with the formality.
While this appears to have bearing on the election since it is suspected that many of those felons may have voted democratic, the issue as far as we are concerned is: Should felons vote? We boldly declare yes.
How can we ever expect felons to constructively rejoin society, or learn to participate in it as human beings without voting, a basic aspect of that participation. Their misdeeds do not alter their ability to think, to give, to reason, to contribute.
There was a time when voting was restricted to the few, landowners for example. In those days voting requirements were commonplace. In our modern democracy, at a time when we purport to be enlightened about such matters, qualifications imposed against those who have been convicted of a felony are obsolete. If one believes in the one man, one vote principle, then felon and non-felon alike ought to cast their ballot. By giving felons a stake in the Society in which they are a part of, we empower them and give them a reason to "go straight".
Restraining their voting rights may be punitive but it is not constructive.
The Challenge of Giving Money Away
Now that he's the world's richest man, Bill Gates is giving away his money, and plans to give all of the $21.1 billion of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation during his lifetime. Through his Seattle-based foundation with offices above a pizza parlor he's been giving away a billion dollar a year, which averages to $20 million dollars worth of checks each week.! But that's not what distinguishes the foundation from those of many other wealthy philanthropists. Bill Gates struggled to decide how to best give this money where it would do the most good. Unlike many of his cohorts sponsoring issues which tend to function as extension of themselves, Bill and Melinda Gates looked at the need and tried to answer it.
They have come up with two priorities: making sure every library in the United States is connected to the Internet so that all children may have access to the same information, and global health, funding projects as diverse as polio vaccines, maternal care and MDS.
They are flooded by hundreds of requests weekly, and often give small grants such as $50,000 for a program helping AIDs shut ins. As a rule, however, they have two main criteria, that the grant contribute to attack root causes instead of symptoms, and that there be a ripple effect so that results can be seen and change occur.
In more than one interview Bill Gates admitted to the challenge of giving away money. If the work of his foundation is a guide, he has placed need before ego, others ahead of fame and he ought to be commended.
Who Owes Whom What?
When someone makes an error and that error ends up creating an extra expense for you, is it right to pass the cost on? There may be legal precedents enabling you to recover costs and even damages under certain circumstances, but would these solutions hold from a spiritual point of view? In this case the decision ought to be made on what is best for all concerned, and not just whether you are entitled to be compensated. Whether your income can sustain the extra expense is a consideration, and certainly the financial status of the other person is a factor too. If the person who made the error is far less able to afford it than you are, does that alter the equation? If so in what way, and why, they are after all still just as responsible? If they pay for the extra cost of the mistake, what has been achieved if in the end it creates a severe hardship for them? The motive of the culprit does matter. If the error was accidental how does that alter how the consequences are handled.? There's a bigger picture too in deciding how to proceed, one transcending our own wishes and desires, and including the welfare of all concerned. Wouldn't the world be a better place if that was our goal, if we could learn to handle mistakes according to what is best for all concerned.
Charles, a young married man with three daughters to support, came to do some tilling in the kitchen for us. He was quite ill with a bad cold but still did a really beautiful job. That evening, after he left, all the circuits in the house blew and appliances with a standby setting came on-TV, stereo, computer. The next day the refrigerator wouldn't work at all and that evening when we tried to turn the TV on with the remote control, it started emitting smoke. We got a repairman for the TV and found people to take our frozen food and perishables until the refrigerator could be repaired. Eventually after the appliances were fixed and the circuit breakers were back on, we learned that Charles, when replacing the electric outlets in the kitchen, screwed partially through a wire and created a short. We considered not saying anything to him since he had been well meaning and his self esteem seemed already shaky. (He was studying to qualify for a computer-related job and had already failed his first attempt at the certification test). We suspected his self confidence would suffer even more. Our reading of him was that as a responsible person he would want to pay for the damage although it was clear he could ill afford it.
For us, on the other hand it wasn't that big a sum. But Charles was due back to replace two cracked tiles and would have to take off the electric outlets which called forth our fears that the same problem might happen again. So we felt it right to say something and decided to simply say there had been a problem with the refrigerator outlet because of a screw coming into contact with a wire and to be careful of the wires when screwing the outlets back on.
It wasn't the kind of solution that can become a template, but it was for us the only
way we knew to preserve his well being as well as ours.
Seed Thought
"Love is the incentive of our aspiration on the Path;
Love is the substance of our living in the world.
Love is the light and the light of freedom for all creatures;
Love pulses through the universe in a divine rhythm.
Love is the consciousness of God."
From Alice A. Bailey, Discipleship in the New Age, Vol.1
|
|
