See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil (huh?)
In this post, we’re going to be introducing you to a NEW mentor (we’ll be interviewing him “live” on March 4th), via some of our own commentary first. Hang tight… the Monkey train is now in motion.
Well, like a lot of SEEMINGLY well-meaning (even though obviously trite) “goodie two shoes” phrases that have been inoculated into the conscious psyche over the past several hundred decades, the phrase in the blog post title DESERVES some critique.
So does the fact that some people throw them out there without even realizing the implications of what they’re saying.
“Stan,” we countered in unison, “that’s like being in a romantic relationship with another, experiencing some patterns of blame, emotional distance, and one-way communication, yet PRETENDING they don’t exist (denial) or choosing NOT to discuss them (repressed feelings in progress) because it’s all NEGATIVE in your mind.”
Our question to this community member of ours was: What is your greatest concern about where your future is headed?
His response: “I don’t discuss negative thoughts.”
Yup, it was time for another round of GOSS-VALE common sense and whup-ass wisdom.
====== Continued =======
Actually, we’ve been invited (or, inadvertently egged-along by people who set themselves up as an apparent opponent, while refusing to admit that they really want to be) lately to talk OPENLY about a lot of very head-shaking things.
Recently, a teacher and author we’re trying to get to know better (for the sake of passing along someone your way who stands in alignment with his VALUES and his IMPLEMENTATION of those values) has gone out of his way to explain to us that he [paraphrased] views “negative thinking” as the abomination of the world.
He’s on such a beat about it that he takes it to all kinds of radiating levels. Like “critical thinking is the inclination to criticize, and therefore judge things severely negatively.”
Oh, booooooooy…. here we go again !
“Critical thinking,” we had to counter using the accepted REAL-WORLD definition of the phrase as our ally, “does NOT mean ‘thinking that is critical’ as in ‘trying to find fault’. Critical thinking is more related to the other definition of ‘critical’:
Forming or having the nature of a turning point; crucial or decisive: a critical point in the campaign.
In other words, it is doing due diligence (DD) over what is essential, what is crucial, or what needs to be investigated in a subject.”
So, let’s take the Three “Wise” Monkeys and put some DD spin on these little hustlers:
“See no evil…”
The MORE you take the stance of COVERING your EYES to avoid Forest Reality, the LESS you’ll be able to SEE life in full-color mode (ever heard of rose-colored glasses?)
“What you see depends on whether you’re looking at it with blinders or with rose-colored glasses. You’ve got to see beyond what you’re looking at.” – Linda Carter
Trying to shut out what you don’t want to see causes you to see things that aren’t there, based on your own skewed perceptions of what is, and to react destructively rather than respond productively when push comes to shove.
Take the example, appropriately enough for today’s post topic, of the chimp cartoon in the New York Post.
It shows two police officers that have just shot a chimpanzee, while one says, “They’ll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill.”
The cartoon was drawing a parallel to the real-life shooting of a 200-pound chimp in Connecticut; the 15-year-old chimp had been a well-behaved pet for a long time, even appearing in TV commercials, but had suddenly attacked a friend of his owner for no explicable reason.
Tragically, he ended up being shot by a police officer. The New York Post thought it would be a jestful and timely fun-poking to say that the chimp had written the stimulus bill. You know, like if you have 100 monkeys in a room with a bunch of typewriters, one will end up churning out a novel?
So maybe it wasn’t in good taste to make fun of the poor chimp. After all, he was a loving member of the woman’s family for many years, and it must have been a devastating experience to her, not to mention the painful injuries suffered by her friend.
But that’s all it was.
However, some people, especially civil rights activists, claimed it was a racist stab at Barack Obama. The king and protector of any and all suffering from an inferiority complex or being bullied by illusionary bullies, Al Sharpton, went so far as to tell Keith Olbermann, on MSNBC, that [paraphrased]: “we all know, from a historical perspective, the chimpanzee has always been identified with black people, and since Obama is black...”
WHAT? !
First of all, Obama is only half “black”; and secondly, why the hell do you, Al, defender of the oppressed, need to accentuate such an idiotic juvenile association?
We sat scratching our heads as we first heard about the nutty story, trying to figure out what the kerfuffle was all about. After all, to us, the intention was simply to say how ridiculous the stimulus bill was.
When we finally heard the word “racist” from the many professional panels set up to discuss the cartoon on TV, we couldn’t believe some people would perceive that as being the intent.
Today, the New York Post’s owner, Rupert Murdoch, issued a statement saying: “I have had conversations with Post editors about the situation and I can assure you, without a doubt, that the only intent of that cartoon was to mock a badly written piece of legislation. It was not meant to be racist, but unfortunately, it was interpreted by many as such.”
And then what happens?
Still more expert panels on TV, discussing how the cartoon couldn’t possibly have been taken or intended any other way but deliberately racist, and that Murdoch’s “apology” was in fact a further insult to them.
It kind of reminds us of how people will write into our support desk with “victim vocabulary”, complaining how a certain product didn’t magically fix their life, or how a particular offering “isn’t for them” because of their financial or social or other situation.
Then, when the help desk staff appropriately try to help (which often includes pointing out their victimitis approach, or over-the-top reactions, or defensive accusations so that they can overcome those self-defeating patterns), the customers nearly always react by crying, “Wolf!” (“in sheep’s clothing!”) and claiming that the support staff is “rude”, or “nasty”, or “accusing”, or “insulting” when, in fact, the only person doing all that is themselves (that’s the ever-so-present “mirror effect” in full swing).
Intention always overrules perception, and yet some people stubbornly cling to their own perceptions as being the only way things can be. They are blind to any other possibilities.
They are so bent on “seeing no evil” that they end up seeing evil where it never was.
Shut your eyes to the world, and you won’t like what you do end up seeing, because it will appear to you as far worse than it ever really was.
“Hear no evil…”
The MORE you take the stance of COVERING your EARS to deafen your mind from the people, news, and counsel who pass along constructive (helpful) criticism, investigative facts, and hard-to-swallow truths — whether about the world around you or yourself — the LESS you’ll be able to HEAR life in Hi-Fi surround sound.
“They [the folks who dig putting their index fingers in each ear and yelling out, ‘la, la, da, da, na, na, na… I don’t hear you!’] are like the football receiver who doesn’t understand he must land with both feet in bounds for the catch to count. Don’t be negative and tell him that he was out of bounds. They’re like the musician who’ll never make it because she doesn’t want to be told that the notes she’s playing don’t sound good.” — Our March 4th Simulcast Mentor (link below).
As we asked the “Negativity Busting” teacher, mentioned several paragraphs prior:
“Are you happier with the phrase ‘free thinking’ because ‘free’ is a positive word and ‘critical’ is a negative word? Well, that’s your interpretation and perception based on the fact that you have what you see as an ongoing EXCESSIVE battle with negativity.”
In other words, folks who are adamant about NOT hearing what they deem to be negative (regardless of how 4 out of 5 people could see it as constructive), often end up proliferating the very thing they’re trying so, so hard — and putting so, so much energy on — to avoid.
Our March 4th mentor provides the following definitions:
Law of Attraction — that which you focus on expands or contracts based upon how you focus on it (his definition)
Law of Distraction — that which you ignore may also expand or contract depending on how you don’t focus on it (also his definition)
One of the distinctions the March 4th mentor is talking about, through these definitions, is this: you ab-so-lute-ly can, and for the sake of expediency and effectiveness, should SIMULTANEOUSLY move towards what you want as you move away from what you don’t want.
Ideally they work in harmony, baby! Straying from one to molly-coddle the other is a lesson in foolish manifesting.
Yup, it’s all about where your FOCUS lies, and the meaning you attach to it and for how long.
Those who have a FOCUS (call it a “foundation”) of SEEING life with exploratory eyes — with curiosity, fascination, and appreciation for unvarnished truth — can ACCEPT, and therefore view a phrase like “critical thinking” for what it is. Meaning, instead of pulling it apart in way that’ll justify their identity for being a “negativity buster”, they’ll SEE the following definition:
[ Def ] “Inclined to make nice distinctions, or to exercise careful judgment and selection; exact; nicely judicious.”
Alright, let’s move on to the Monkey who loves covering his mouth (where the hell is the banana going? Uhmm, we wonder):
“Speak no evil…”
The MORE you take the stance of COVERING your MOUTH to satisfy societal norms, to not rock the boat, to not stir the pot, to not ruffle feathers (okay, enough analogies?), the LESS you’ll ever be in a position to effect real change. Self-expression, whether confronting yourself or your loved ones, can be a very transformational tool when used correctly. Without it, however, you can find yourself “in secret” letting emotions boil and self-defeating behavior run rampant.
Can you imagine if you were the ONLY one around who could nudge yourself away from re-creating the same UNWANTED situations over and over?
What if everyone around you believed the more they “stay quiet” — regardless of the incompetency and B.S. swirling around your home, your family, your office, or business — the better it will get?
“Today, I think most people will agree that our nation is in great peril. Yet, it’s amazing to me how many people are playing ‘see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil.’
It’s amazing how many people are closing the blinds and ignoring what is going on. It’s amazing how many people think that if they ‘believe’ nothing bad will ever happen — that nothing ever will.” — Our March 4th Simulcast Mentor (link below).
We wholeheartedly KNOW (not just believe) that you grow by not falling into the status quo (hey, that rhymes), by keeping things candid, straightforward and refreshingly REAL.
You grow, and help others grow,when you question, when you destruct identities, when you stay away from the molds that come with pre-programmed (often implied) ways to say things a certain way, to BE a certain way (as in “passive” and “unattached”), or DO things a certain way.
Step beyond boundaries of what’s considered normal; lash out at cherished ideals; don’t be afraid to offend or put your reputation at risk sometimes (i.e., what you feel people will perceive you as by doing a certain thing outside your norm).
To us, LIFE isn’t so much about striving to perfect our ego, or continually evolve into this “beaming light” sort of always-happy being, as much as it is being in a state to appreciate little amazing moments and be awake enough to SEE the magical things that are already happening in our lives.
We see enlightenment simply as an “experience,” not a permanent way of life. We don’t feel somebody “gets” enlightened like they get a tattoo, get a college degree or get married. Instead, it’s just an experience. It begins, it ends, and another one takes its place.
So, to end this little (well, long) Three Wise Monkeys critical-thinking commentary, here’s one more insightful quote from our forthcoming mentor:
“People who automatically associate others who foul as negative, fearful, angry, resentful and so on are acting like the golfer who is totally unaware of the rough, the sand traps, the ponds and the pits — so he is continually in them.”
LISTEN To The Man Affectionately Known As Zen Master of the Internet®
Your Partners in the Quest For
Living a Life Without Limits,
Filed under: Critical-Thinking, Interviews
I hear you ruffling many feathers and I know you are speaking your personal truth.
I can taste many of your community members being bitter and feel touched to my funny bone with the response about someone saying they don’t discuss negative thoughts when asked what is their greatest concern where their future is headed.
I am recently becoming amazed how many people just follow others blindly and do not think for themselves or scared to look at anything that can possibly be negative. Are people starting to not be able to be capable of indepedent thought without consulting their most recent version of a bible of beliefs ?
The amount of homogenous and unoriginal marketing on the internet I am seeing is scary lately for the health of diversity.
Even people apparently woken up after seeing a movie like “The Secret”
There is still so much sleepiness and lazy thinking I’m hearing and reading from others that I wonder whether the Law of Attraction movement has really shaken up people to look at all their beliefs critically or just added a few more layers of conditioning to unravel further down the road of life. The amount of people I been hearing say they believe in the Law of Attraction or The Secret is incredible. That is just replacing one sets of beliefs like religion and new age with others to an apparent identity of an outside force and crux to stand on.
It is good to hear the Vale-Goss team is still thinking for themselves and not just blindly following a movement or against in reaction.
There is so much more to learn and I for one am only intending to go deeper in my inner quest to throw away conditioned beliefs and embrace ones critically looked at and approved by me personally as consciously proven worthy and thinking for myself.
Thanks for another thought provoking posting and all my thoughts are mine or some part of me that is unconsciously conditioned….lol
Now which sand hole can I now put my head in or are they already all taken…
take care and create a great day
Re the chimp “cartoon,” I think you are the one with blinders on. How a chimp from Connecticut being shot could be compared to someone writing the stimulus bill – which was written by our President Obama, who happens to be black, as defined by our culture (i.e., anyone with more than 1/16th black blood is black) – without taking reference to our black President Obama as key, when blacks have been abased by comparison to and called all manner of simians for decades in this country, is looking with blinders through a southern keyhole.
One should not deride someone who does not want to think of negativity when one cannot even see it when it slaps you in the face — like the tasteless cartoon of which you speak.
[Our REPLY]:
Gary,
If the cartoon was tasteless, it was only because the chimp was dead — and the real chimp died too. Why should anyone capitalize on a poor animal’s death?
As for it being “racist” — that was not the cartoonist’s, nor the editors’, nor the publishers’ intention. They were SO far from being racist that they did not even realize it possibly COULD be considered racist.
That was not only not the intention, but not even a possibility in their reality.
The only people who cried “racist!” were people who regularly focus much of their energy looking for racism.
Just like a woman who cries “sexist!” when a man happens to be hired for a job she applied for, even when he was more qualified than her; anyone who looks for racism where it doesn’t exist is the one with racist thoughts in mind.
And yes, anyone who looks for “negativity” where none exists is the one being “negative” (we have a friend who says “CNN stands for Constantly Negative News” even though there are many shows on CNN that do not focus on negative things; that makes him the “negative” one, because he’s finding “constant negativity” where it really isn’t).
So by coincidence, black people have been compared to chimps by some people in the past. That doesn’t mean that the cartoonist knew that, or that he intended to draw that parallel.
When people say “looks like a monkey created that,” or “that could have been written by a monkey,” or speak of the 100 monkeys with the 100 typewriters, they are NOT being racist.
They are talking about — ooh, get this — actual MONKEYS!!!
And the cartoon was referencing, again — an actual CHIMP!!!
(When the chimp was shot, did anyone cry “racist!”? No, because it was a CHIMP and not a person!)
So oops, someone without any ill intention created a cartoon based on a real live chimp that got shot. Someone else without any ill intention approved it for publication, and someone else without any ill intention published it.
And you have the audacity to call those people “racist”? If THAT’S not searching for negativity, then we don’t know what is.
As for people being called “black” when they’re only 1/16th black, don’t you find that a bit ridiculous?
If someone’s 1/16th Ukrainian, and 15/16th Spanish, do you call them Ukrainian? No, we don’t think so…
And by calling someone black when their mother was white, do you not see how that’s intentionally disrespectful of the mother that gave that person life?
We have to repeat that INTENTION always trumps PERCEPTION.
And we think there’s more than enough segregation, negativity-seeking, labeling and name-calling going around already, that there’s no need to add to that pile of garbage, regardless of people’s warped perceptions.
Barry & Heather
I have to admit – there’s a little of me in both descriptions – it is VERY refreshing to read your posts – always.
When I can see myself and still laugh through the explanation, you’ve more than done your job.
What a beautiful peace of work!!! Keep it up!
And Shaun – I’ll share, lol, but if we stick around, we’ll be evicting ourselves sooner or later *wink!*
Thanks again, all – its been a tremendous read –
Sue
Barry & Heather,
I most sincerely hope the teacher concerned — the one you referenced as a “negativity buster” and the one who expressed such puerile piffle — thinks a bit more critically most of the time before he opens his mouth. And, as far as I can judge, the Al Sharpletons of this world continually seek offense where none is meant, in ever more pathetic quests for relevance: rather like demonstrators for all manner of ‘freedoms’ except of course in countries where you tend to get seriously hurt for objecting to anything.
A little more critical thinking just might have avoided all manner of evils– World War II springs to mind, and maybe if someone else had pointed out that the Emperor wasn’t wearing any clothes before the lad who did the Emperor might have avoided making a fool of himself a bit sooner.
Me, I’d believe Rupert Murdoch any day over the thousands just dying to prove how ‘liberal’ & ‘sensitive’ they are. Whatever else may be said about the man, he tends to be quite straightforward in what he says.
Unless one acknowledges that a wrong exists how on earth do you fix it?
Have a great day and Keep On Thinking!
I think you have provided a valuable insight with this article. I wish more people could have your understanding of the values you describe.
Reply to chimp cartoon: As a black man in America and knowing that blacks accounts for only a small number of high level positions in most businesses we can expect this type of things to continue to be played down by the majority of individuals who don’t know or care about what blacks have had to endure over time. Racism is no longer put forth in ways like it was years ago but don’t be fool, it is still around and will continue to rear it head in deceptive ways. So for those of you who don’t see or understand why to cartoon may be consider offensive to black americans think about if the chimp had been shot in 1968 and the caption would have read lets see if you still can have a dream.
[Our REPLY:]
Hi Grant,
We certainly understand your sensitivity to this subject.
Racism is NEVER OK… but then, neither is assuming ill intent where there was none.
This blog post (and looking at the bigger picture, this community as a whole) is about critical thinking, in the sense of looking at all sides of the coin (yes, sometimes coins have more than two sides!) to see what’s really going on.
So to take your example, that would be a really tasteless cartoon, and there are several differences:
1. Martin Luther King WAS shot; Barack Obama was NOT.
2. There was no chimp shot in 1968; there WAS in 2009.
To imply that the government must have hired a chimp to write the stimulus bill — especially when we’re talking about a real-life chimp who was trained enough to appear in TV commercials and live peacefully with humans for 15 years before something ticked him off — does not in any way, shape or form suggest that an actual person was that chimp (and do you really think the president himself writes these things?)
We can see how people could think that MAY HAVE been the implication… but only if they were seeking that implication, and in fact, it was not the implication.
Again, intention is more powerful than perception; that’s because perception is relative, and can be interpreted different ways by different people (case in point, the cartoon we’re discussing).
But only the person having a thought or doing an action is in control of the intention. It is firm and unwavering, unlike perception, so we have to give it the winning decision.
You say: “Racism is no longer put forth in ways like it was years ago but don’t be fool, it is still around and will continue to rear it head in deceptive ways.”
But what about looking at it this way: Racism will continue to SEEM to exist for those who are looking for it and expecting it to be there.
It will not exist nearly so much for those who don’t seek it out.
People that are intent on being advocates for the underdog always need something to protect, so they will find it… otherwise their mission becomes meaningless. That is why by trying to “see no evil” (i.e. by stamping out racism) they are creating a situation where they “see evil” where it wasn’t (i.e. find racism). Kind of like that spiritual catch-phrase you’ve probably heard, “What you resist persists”.
People EXPECTING racial slurs against Obama are going to be able to see it in almost anything that’s said about him. Those who don’t focus on his skin color will see criticism for what it is — that is, his performance as president, regardless of what he looks like.
After all, spirits are all the same color. Any apparent differences in our beings is only temporary, and chosen by those particular beings, if you believe the foremost school of thought (and why would god-like beings choose to come to earth WITHOUT making any decisions about what kind of experience they would have here?)
So enough with the segregation and labels (as in “He’s a black president,” “She’s an Asian woman,” “He’s a gay man”) and let’s start looking at us all as the spiritual beings having a human experience that we are.
cheers,
Barry & Heather
This blog is not only poorly written, but it contradicts itself at every turn. I suggest you start pointing the fingers in a direction closer to home. And to be pointing fingers AT ALL suggests to me that you haven’t even gotten close to enlightenment.
I can’t unsubscribe to LWL fast enough. You clearly have a MUCH more research to do. But you might want to start with even a little bit.
The Rev. Al Sharpton was on Keith Olbermann’s show, by the way. Not Chris Matthews. They are actually two different people. I hope you and others like you can someday realize that the world cannot continue to uphold the notion of “us against them” and hope to be prosperous — or even survive. Or maybe that’s not what you want. It’s certainly not in the forefront of Rupert Murdoch’s mind.
Ralph Waldo Emerson said “People do not seem to realize that their opinion of the world is also a confession of character”. – we all need this reminder at times.
Gandhi (another “king and protector of any and all suffering from an inferiority complex or being bullied by illusionary bullies”) said “be the change you want to see in the world”.
Rev. Al Sharpton said — in reference to asking for a lenient sentence for the man who stabbed him, said — “At some point you have to say whatever you do reflects you.” I happen to agree.
What is wrong with being an advocate for those who don’t, can’t, or aren’t willing to understand?
Seems as though you two have not had to deal with much adversity in life. I’m very happy about that. I wish everyone were so blessed.
[Our REPLY]:
Meredith, you are absolutely right — it WAS Keith Olbermann (damn, those white guys all look alike!) 😉 We had put Keith Matthews as a joke because Al is a regular guest for both MSNBC hosts, but apparently it was too subtle so we changed it.
As for the rest of your comment… whoo-wee, what a lot of “negativity”! It seems you are missing some of the key points of the article, so perhaps we can help you better understand.
Let’s take it bit by bit:
You say: “This blog is not only poorly written, but it contradicts itself at every turn. I suggest you start pointing the fingers in a direction closer to home. And to be pointing fingers AT ALL suggests to me that you haven’t even gotten close to enlightenment.”
We say: OK, so you don’t like our writing style. Everyone’s a critic, and we know we can’t change the world and please everybody at the same time.
As for “contradicting itself at every turn”, we’d like to know where you see the contradictions, since you didn’t point any out. We, on the other hand, see many contradictions in your comment, and will point them out so you can see them too (this is the “mirror effect” in full action; you see contradictions in what we’ve said because you don’t like them in what you believe).
As for “pointing fingers”, here’s one contradiction of yours; you are the one pointing fingers as you say this (the mirror effect again). You’re “pointing fingers” at us for what you view as being a poorly written blog post, and you’re “pointing fingers” at Rupert Murdoch about not having the right mindset (more on that in a moment).
Other people were “pointing fingers” and yelling “racism”; we were not.
If we really wanted to point fingers, we would have named the teacher that we mentioned in our opening discussion, and we would have named the community member we talked about (we only gave his first name, which is not even his real name).
But yes, we do investigate and pull things apart to see what makes them tick, and in the process we judge them (and judgment, of course, implies coming out with a fair and accurate deduction). Oooh, scary… well, that’s what we do, and if you don’t like it (and apparently you don’t like it enough to complain vehemently) then yes, please do unsubscribe.
If you don’t resonate with, or are not ready for, our approach to personal growth, then we don’t want you in the community because it’s not serving you, nor us (this is the same thing we keep telling our community members — you can’t like every teacher, so pick who you resonate with to learn from. That’s why we do the multi-mentor approach).
As for “enlightenment”, apparently you missed the latter part of the post that talks about how we view “enlightenment”. Please read it before ripping it apart.
You say: “I hope you and others like you can someday realize that the world cannot continue to uphold the notion of “us against them” and hope to be prosperous — or even survive. Or maybe that’s not what you want. It’s certainly not in the forefront of Rupert Murdoch’s mind.”
We say: Here’s another contradiction of yours. Both Rupert Murdoch, and us, are saying that life should NOT be about “us vs. them” (i.e. racism) and in fact that thought never crossed either of our minds. It’s the people that are “defending” Obama that are drawing this as an “us vs. them” situation.
You say: “Ralph Waldo Emerson said “People do not seem to realize that their opinion of the world is also a confession of character”. – we all need this reminder at times.”
We say: Yes, exactly. So what does that say about people seeking out racism, or people who take offense to blog posts? 😉
You say: “Gandhi (another “king and protector of any and all suffering from an inferiority complex or being bullied by illusionary bullies”) said “be the change you want to see in the world”.”
We say: Yes, exactly. And in seeking that change, we are going to ruffle some feathers, because the Universe is in balance and there can NEVER be 100% support from all the people, all the time. That’s cool, we accept that in our mission (as did Gandhi).
You say: “Rev. Al Sharpton said — in reference to asking for a lenient sentence for the man who stabbed him, said — “At some point you have to say whatever you do reflects you.” I happen to agree.”
We say: Yes, that’s true. So by him being so adamant that the cartoon could be nothing BUT racist, and not accepting the fact that the intention was NOT racist… what does that reflect from him? That he’s, perhaps, oh, umm… racist? Hmm… certainly could be!!!
You say: “What is wrong with being an advocate for those who don’t, can’t, or aren’t willing to understand?”
We say: One of the basic tenets of personal growth is that you can’t change those who don’t want to change. Similarly, you can’t make people understand who “don’t, can’t, or aren’t willing to understand”. So being that kind of advocate is really just enabling victimitis thinking, and we all know that thinking like a victim is the fastest way to become one.
On the other hand, investigating issues and bringing a different view to the public eye, as we are doing, will help those understand that want to or are able to understand. When the student is ready, the teacher appears.
You say: “Seems as though you two have not had to deal with much adversity in life. I’m very happy about that. I wish everyone were so blessed.”
We say: Thank you. A lot of what we (as in, all of us) experience in this life as “adversity” comes from what we expect to happen. People who expect adversity experience adversity, and again, they are the people that often cling to an identity as a “victim” (i.e. “this was done to me, that happened to me.”)
Just like people who look for racism will find it, people who look for adversity will find it. It’s all part of the victimitis mindset that they try to make look OK by veiling it in an ironic “speak no evil” kind of way.
We like to promote a more healthy view of the world: Be aware of what might happen based on what’s going on around you, but don’t cling to the worst possible outcome unless you want it to happen. The awareness is so you know how to act accordingly so the worst does NOT happen, and it’s not meant to be focused on; only examined, and then let go, so you can focus on the outcome that you do want.
And, bottom line, most of what people claim victimhood for is what they could prevent by taking self-accountability instead of reacting poorly to it. The buck needs to stop somewhere — and on this planet, your buck stops with you.
Barry & Heather
To Gary:
I love what Rush Limbaugh frequently says! “The most expensive commodity we have in this country is ignorance!”
First of all, Obama did not write the stimulus bill. Nancy Pelosi was the driving force behind it! Congress writes the legislation, the president only approves or vetos them. (Government 101)
Now this should be enlightening, and I will let you carry the torch to your liberal friends inthe media! The cartoon was ultimately ‘sexist’. 🙂
Keep ignoring the fundamental facts about what is happening in this country (hear no facts, see no facts) so that you can consistently open your mouth and spout cliches that remove all doubt as to your ignorance.
To Dave:
Rush Limbaugh is ignorance personified.
And you fall for it every time.
By the way, you are by far not the first person to point that out. Should we then take it as a reference to kill Nancy Pelosi? Would that make it better? The “liberals” — which is just another word for people who hold values in high regard (or better yet – the majority of citizens in our country), have few friends in the media.
[Our REPLY]:
Meredith we see that you are still “pointing fingers”! 😉
You complain about people “pointing fingers” and then you slam Rush Limbaugh, Dave, and this blog. There’s that mirror effect again!
Dave is being very tongue-in-cheek with his accurate comment, and did NOT in any way say that it means Nancy should be shot. Why would you even come up with such a violent view of his comment? It’s a little unsettling that your focus is on intentional killing when the chimp was shot in self-defense, not by ill-intent, in the first place.
(And just so you understand the intent of the cartoon, it was in essence saying “oops, we’ve accidentally shot the animal who wrote the stimulus bill”… meaning that the actual chimp that was shot could have written the legislation because it was poorly written.)
By the way, the media is traditionally liberal in stance. Yes, believe it or not, the media aligns itself with the underdog (hence all the focus on calling this cartoon “racist”, and all the mention of rich people being greedy — we can’t go into all that, but Randy Gage has some fascinating discussions on those memes if you’re interested).
After all, the media knows that it’s the mass populace who butter their bread. If the people don’t watch, the media can’t sell advertising to continue on. So of course they’re going to side with the people.
Now, if you can’t believe this blog exists, and want to unsubscribe, why are you hanging around and leaving more comments?
We are for people who like to examine life, how they fit within it, and make their personal growth decisions from that place of strength. Even though you seem to want to examine life too, you keep complaining (we welcome intelligent debate, but powerful debate needs to be done from a place of mutual respect, not just condescending complaint).
If you’d like to play nicely in our sandbox, come on in. The rules are that throwing sand in the air to make a point is fine, but please don’t throw it directly in other community members’ eyes (we want them to be able to continue to view, examine, and question the world with eyes wide open).
It’s OK to point out that someone is ignorant about a certain topic, because ignorance just means they don’t know; but it’s not OK to call someone “ignorance personified” unless you can prove that they are ignorant (uneducated) about absolutely everything.
If you’re not the type of person we seek to serve, then that’s fine too; we encourage you to find your happiness in another sandbox, another blog, another community, or another style of looking at the world.
Barry & Heather
We live in a dualistic universe, a universe of opposites: hot and cold, rough and smooth, good and evil, positive and negative etc., That is the way it is, whether we like it or not, whether we approve or not.
Philosophers like Whitehead have said that it is the tension between these opposites that allows life to continue; that kind of thinking goes back to the times of Plato and Socrates.
All you have to do to understand this is look at the planets that are frigidly cold or burning hot all the time, where only one condition exists all the time, and the weather is very static. On planet Earth, heat and cold balance each other, moderating each other and creating endless variety.
And so too with all the other opposites that we have to deal with. We may not “like” negative experiences, but those experiences also contain seeds for good and positive change, for progress and personal and collective growth. Positive experiences can also have seeds for the negative and destructive. Many people do not want to see this.
People who refuse to look, see and speak about negative situations are not getting the bigger picture.
The people I have personally known who are like this, tend to be shallow, ie, looking only at what’s on the surface, often rigid and unwilling to even consider alternative points of view, and see everything as “either/ or”, right or wrong.
I have given up trying to discuss things with them, and have moved on to folks who are more open minded and willing to at least consider that life is not “either/or” but “and”;eg, positive and negative, good and bad.
The French Revolution was a very bloody, negative event, but out of that bloodshed was born democracy, which has changed the lives of millions for several centuries. What if all the feudal serfs refused to acknowlwdge their pain and degradation because it was “negative” and “not nice” to complain? Might we be feudal serfs to this day?
Should we look away from the ugly effects of strip mining, the crap and toxins in our waterways, the ugly grey brown pollution that hides a beautiful blue sky, because all that stuff is negative? By doing so, we are allowing further destruction to the planet. Is that really positive, or just plain stupid?
Should we look away from the thousands that die daily from starvation and the millions that are dying a slow death from a subsistence existence, drinking filthy water and living in subhuman conditions? Because those images make us uncomfortable, and therefore are “negative”. How cold blooded and heartless!
It is very easy for those of us in the western world with our comfortable lifestyle to tune out those “negative” images, but what if each “positive thinker” had to spend a year or two in the shoes of those starving millions? Would they still be as positive? If those images make you feel bad, imagine what those starving individuals feel like.
Those “negative” uncomfortable feelings we don’t want to face can also be a call to action; they are a communication from our higher selves telling us that something is wrong and needs to be corrected.
In the same way that nausea and vomiting is a symptom that something in our body needs to be corrected, negative feelings, sensations, experiences etc can be symptoms that something is wrong in our relationships, work, society and planet.
So we all have choice. We can bury our ostrich heads in the sand and ignore all those”negative” things that make us feel uncomfortable. Or we can learn to face those feelings, and take action to correct the situation, whether it is personal, interpersonal, social or global.
The result will be personal and social growth, and a better life for more people, including ourselves.
Irene
ps I am not advocating bloodshed, that was just a historical example
You said:
(And just so you understand the intent of the cartoon, it was in essence saying “oops, we’ve accidentally shot the animal who wrote the stimulus bill”… meaning that the actual chimp that was shot could have written the legislation because it was poorly written.)
And how did you come to that determination? The cartoon came from a paper that is known for it’s stance against the “liberal” cause, and so is Rupert Murdoch known so – although his thinking has changed somewhat since his latest marriage (at least as the pundits say).
It was Murdoch himself who came out with the second almost apology for the cartoon, and saying again that they had no idea that it could be thought to be racist.
And why? Because there is no diversity of thought apparent in Murdoch’s media holdings – probably because there is no actual; diversity.
I’m sorry, but your all-knowing expression of the intent of the Post is belied by the well-founded perception of the goals of Murdoch media.
[Our REPLY]:
Where do we come to that determination? From the horse’s mouth (and no, that’s not a racial or detrimental slur saying that Murdoch is somehow like a horse!)
Gary, some of us honestly have never uttered certain racial slurs, and therefore it would never occur to us that something could be taken the wrong way (obviously there is always somebody who will be LOOKING to take things the wrong way, and that’s what we’re taking a stand against).
If Murdoch says neither he, nor his staff, was thinking “chimp=black man=Obama” when the cartoon was created and published, why should you say “No, Rupert, you’re wrong — I KNOW you were being racist even if it really DID never cross your mind!”?
Come now, that’s more than just a bit extreme.
It doesn’t matter what someone’s perception is, because perception can be proven right or wrong. Intention is what matters — certainly someone could lie about their intention, but since we also didn’t make the “racist” connection until we heard someone come out and say it, then we are fully confident that others, including the publisher, also did not make that connection if they say they did not.
When you hear someone say, “That’s the pot calling the kettle black,” do you think it’s a racist comment? Or do you understand that it refers to a pot being put on a fire becoming black with soot, and for that pot to call a kettle black (when kettles aren’t usually put on a fire and do not become so blackened) would be hypocritical — and engaging in the metaphorical “mirror effect” we keep talking about?
Bottom line, there is no benefit to looking for bad intent where it doesn’t exist, unless you prefer to go through life name-calling, hiding from the truth, and refusing to give people the benefit of the doubt.
Thinking critically and investigating is great, but we need to draw the line somewhere… and that line is wherever the investigation becomes paranoid rather than beneficial.
Barry & Heather
In regards to the New York Post cartoon, “Seek & ye shall find.” Just what the heck are or were people looking for here!!!!! Why were so many people looking for a mole when there are no holes in the yard? We need to believe in our fellow man /woman and never stop looking for the best !!!!!!
Because sure as night follows day you will find that which you seek. Anything can be twisted to sound a certian way or look like there is some hidden agenda when you are looking for it . We have to believe in change if we want something to change. Even in the face of diversity we should look for the best in humanity (as my 17 year old would say). And yes, she was raised to love all people rather than look for their weaknesses and transgressions (ie: looking for the good).
Consequently, she has two very dear friends that are black and hispanic, and sees them for their character instead of their exterior. This is not to say that our family doesn’t recognize when someone is being racist, however we don’t go racism hunting for sport. It’s the people who draw the lines between color that are mistaking this cartoon as a racial slur, and if it’s not racism it’s sexism and if not that it’s homophobia etc… Looking at people differently helps them to become different. Is that so hard to see? I hope not, for I have hope, faith, and belief in this world of ours!!!!
Thank You Barry and Heather for the deep insight
Ken Patterson (No, I’m not black…but I’m 1/16 Indian…1/16 German…1/16 French…Oh, yeah I’m Irish too…Go figure.)
I’m kind of a liberal guy and I thought the cartoon was funny. What upsets me are the clowns (that see something “wrong” in this cartoon) would NOT have had the same reaction if it had been shown anytime in the last administration. If anybody has any self-awareness they know that this is true. You guys need to drop your blinders to see any truth and that includes you too B&H (and of course me). As a side note, your definition of enlightenment is pretty watered down and apparently now makes people such as Mr. Furey enlightened – but then I have doubts about Krishnamurti since he insisted on a comb-over.
I agree… a holy person recently made an positive public remark about Obama but it was interpreted negatively by 1 of the listeners (probably black him/herself).
[…] passing reference to them, and perceive bashing whether it exists or not (we talked about this when the chimp cartoon came out, we’re talking about it in reference to the last blog post, and I’m sure […]