Slouching Towards Loserdom

Kathy Shaidle all 'Five Feet of Fury' churning in her poor mind gives compassion brand new meaning:

Today's "poor" are the rich Jesus warned you about: fat, slovenly, wasteful of their money and other people's.

Up is down. Poor is rich. 1984 is 2009.

God bless you Ms. Shaidle, and godspeed with your Truth.

It is easier for a bicycle to go through the eye of a sidewalk, than for a "poor" man with a cellphone eating risotto with brocolli (and, most likely, tattoos and drugs and booze and other crap) to enter into the kingdom of God.
~The Gospel According to Kathy, kind of

This is the disconnect we are dealing with in politics these days. Whether all of this is sincerely believed, or whether it's some kind of goof, doesn't really matter. It's the game of ends justifying the means. Actually, it may be worse than that. If the wisdom of Jesus and Buddha and Lao Tzu and Shankara and all and one point to the political truth of Gandhi and his means and only means action, then this kind of politics points to ends and only ends.

There's a reason why, to quote our last President, this sucker is going down, and Kathy and her ilk, be it Dems or GOP, are it. The Politics of the Ends. Means be damned, mocked, and ignored.


~Peace to All and One,
Son Rivers

Will Obama Heed the Lessons of Gandhi?

As of today, I’m changing the direction of this blog towards a nondual view of politics. It might last a day. It could last longer. In so doing, the name on the masthead has been changed to The Nonduality of Politics.

When I began this blog, I had one question in particular I was attempting to answer. To a certain extent, in December, I did. As much as one can.

Now I have another question concerning the answer. As will always be in the this life. But given surrender, and paying attention to intuition and signs, what does action guided by universal flow look like?

I’ve been reading Gandhi's commentaries on the Gita. And that entails a good starting point as any. We all know his accomplishments and non-violent means. But his understanding of ends is possibly even more important.

We should do no work with attachment. Attachment to good work is that too wrong? Yes, it is. If we are attached to our goal of winning liberty, we shall not hesitate to adopt bad means. If a person is particular that he would give coins to me personally, one day he might even steal them. Hence we should not be attached to even a good cause. Only then will our means remain pure and our actions too.

This may be the opposite of any politics, never mind the American variety. Maybe in our lifetime, there is only Martin Luther King. And although it could be argued that his eyes were on the prize, his actions never cheated. For as Gandhi also said, God has told us “we may work if we wish, but that reward of work is entirely for Him to give.”

We find ourselves at a turning point in American history. The unmitigated greed of decades in financial markets has eaten away at its own core.

We have the party basically in charge for the last thirty years unable to recognize that global shift and trying to sell a dead vision with downright lies. That’s why Jindal was so bad last night. We have a new party in control looking at the moment as an opportunity to press its long dormant agenda. Pelosi was so enthusiastic to lead the rally around the new quarterback after years of being on a losing team. And we have a President who appears to be a pragmatist at heart.

Where will it all lead? And, yes, I know, nobody is leading no one nowhere. But I'm just playing in the game right now. Humor me.

~Peace to All and One,
Son Rivers