Evolution, Revolution, Diversity and Healing.

I am up for a happier more empathic society.  A diverse range of happier, healthier and empathic cultures.

I wouldn't call it evolution, I'd call it a healing. We live in a wounded Political society that is in denial. This is painful.

Healing is very much a natural part of life, and nature tends to support healing rather than block it.

Using the word evolution sort of justifies the existence of this hierarchically violent system and all it's horrors over such a long time as part of the 'natural flow of things'. Yet we know that there have been many diverse cultures where empathy was at the heart of how they organised themselves. Is this not also part of the natural healthy expression of being human, biologically speaking?

Beating a child to terrorise and control the child can hardly be called 'the natural order of things' yet during the past 6 centuries in Europe it was the traditional approach, just as leaving infants to cry it out to go to sleep is not the 'natural order of things'.

Google the phrase 'poisonous pedagogy' and find out more.

Nor is a 'revolution' where the oppressed engage in organised violence to beat the oppressors to terrorise and control them, any better. Cuba has some merits, yet it also shows signs of unresolved trauma.

What we see in the middle east is that peaceful thoughtful movements have all been undermined by the introduction of violence on their 'side'.

It hasn't worked in terms of delivering better,healthier and more empathic political socialism systems.

Were the Middle Eastern Springs 'evolutions', revolutions or just the result of a more well informed empathy, being expressed by large numbers of people seeking a healing, a healthier society?

Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe

Unity, Empathy and Diversity.

Unity, Empathy and Diversity.

Many people are talking about A New World Order, and the imposition of the ‘one good way’ to do things.

From religions to corporations to ideologies through to governments, many are espousing, what appears to me at least, an singular or monotheistic approach to how humanity ought best ‘advance’ in the near and distant future.

“Our way is the best and only way!” is the common cry.

“Democracy!”, shouts “George Bush!”

“No Condoms!”, squeals the Pope!

“Sugababes and I-pods”, blare the media adverts! “

”Free Trade!” , shouts Gordon Brown!

“Education, Education, Education!”, shouted Tony Blair!

“Pharmaceuticals!” trill the medical Authorities!

“Caesareans or forceps”, roar the birthing surgeons!

“More Exams!”, bluster the Educators!

“Off with their heads!”, scream the fundamentalists!

All of these fanatics (and lets be clear here - they are fanatics) are, it would appear, lacking in at least one quality essential to a healthy and enjoyable human life : true empathy. They also harbour a deep distrust in native intelligence.

They all seem to take the view that there is no real need for diversity, no need to trust localised intelligence, no room for assuming that those on the ground in different places may have the ability to adapt to those unique sets of circumstance in ways that are essentially their own. In ways that are essentially successful and sustainable.

An example is the comparison between the range of types of apples available in supermarkets and the range of apples to be found in the English countryside.

Supermarkets - 6 to ten, English countryside 14,000. This can be applied across the board to all foodstuffs. And all habitats and climates. Why so few when we have so many to chose from? Why not have the local varieties in the local supermarkets? Duh! Instead they will seek to grow a few species in concentrated areas, pick and pack them, then ship them to their distribution centres and sort and pack them again, then ship them back to their shops! And in order to make this process cheap they squeeze the prices the producer gets, making it more difficult for producers to keep the local variety! Doh!

What I am saying here is that local adaptation is driven by local knowledge that can only be gained through intimacy, and that the universal imposition of ‘the one good way’ is essentially a profound lack of intimacy. Or empathy.

Empathy is described as the capacity to recognize or understand or feel or sense another's state of mind or emotion. It is often characterized as the ability to "put oneself into another's shoes", or to in some way experience the outlook or emotions of another being within oneself. It can also be used to describe sensitivity to the nature of the environment. A sensitivity that embraces the basic scientific method in itself, for it is fundamentally an observation of the factual world. Thus theories about what is toxic or otherwise in food are likely to be lethal. Knowledge is required.

Nature is extraordinarily good at the localised unique adaptation process and produces more than enough food, water and shelter for the billions of creature and plants that abide across our home, the surface of planet Earth. There is no scientific evidence nor any reasonable way to assume that human beings are anything but of nature. And therefore innately and perfectly well equipped for that localised adaptive process.

So why is there this incessant demand for a unitary way? And what evidence is there to support it’s evangelists assertions?


Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's your gift to universe