More thoughts on December 21, 2012 The end of the world as we know it :-)

Ideally, love is a superior form of unity, where two become one but in a way, which preserves their consciousness, so that they can perceive they are one. The problem is that that is very difficult to achieve in practice because we identify consciousness with our ego, and I believe that was what Buddha was referring to. 

It is a bit of a paradox: love is good; attachment is bad. However, in order to perceive love, one needs consciousness. We identify consciousness with the ego. Therefore, our ego-oriented consciousness automatically turns love into attachment.

One conclusion is that love is just another name for a tendency that exists in the universe to dissolve the walls between individuals and achieve a degree of stable unity between isolated souls. Attachment' is only a side effect of love, or a kind of love gone wrong, a love that misses the point. The idea (or the ideal) is to dissolve the walls between the subject and the object of love, not to attach the object to the subject.

So yes, love can be a pure, life-giving force but I also think we are structurally designed to corrupt it and it is very hard to get around that. All religions try to give an answer to this problem and they succeed to some extent, but to turn theory into practice is a completely different story.

"Organized" religions, as in those who push a belief to rule others’ lives and take their money, are probably invented. Perhaps there are there are two rules and we can choose which one to live by. Mother Nature's rule: Kill or be killed, eat or be eaten. God's Rule: Do unto others, as you would wish others to do unto you. 

As we move into the new calendar, we have to decide which rule we will live by.

So if you wish to be loved, then love. You do not have to love what another does to love them. In addition, you can always wish on them their true intentions in spades. Thus without judging them, you can make sure they get their just reward.

Think like an optimist

Many experts will tell you that when you change the way you look at things, you will change your life – and it’s true. If you’re sitting around expecting the worst of things, you’ll be certain to find the worst of things. You’ll find all of your mistakes along the way to your goals. You’ll notice all of the problems with your plan. And then you’ll stop trying because you’ve noticed that everything is going wrong.

Optimists look at the world as though it only has good things to offer and in that thinking, they see the opportunities for learning and growth, rather than the obstacles in their way. Instead of getting upset about the car that cut them off in traffic, they hope that there wasn’t an emergency that caused the driver to need to go so fast.

Optimism takes practice. What you might want to do is start thinking about your life as though it were the life of a good friend that you have.

When you start treating yourself and your life the way that you would treat a good friend, you start to see possibility in life, rather than problems. An optimist is simply someone that strives to look for the good in everything. Just for today, you can try to do the same. Is it a realistic way to be every day?

Don’t have any expectations

How many times have you been disappointed? Probably hundreds of times, right? However, if you think back to your times of pain and loss, many of these instances were the direct result of having some goal in mind that wasn’t reached or some expectation that wasn’t met. What if you gave up your expectations for a day? For one day, what if you said that you don’t really care about what happens?

There’s nothing wrong with having goals and wanting certain things, but when you start relying on the outcome to derive any happiness from it, you can actually be stifling change and growth in your life. In truth, expectations are just wishes and hopes.

The point of eliminating expectations is to start focusing on what’s happening right now – what you can control and what you can’t. If you’re in a bad situation at work and your boss is yelling at you, you can’t control that. However, you can control how good of a job you do – though your boss might still yell at you anyways.

Just for today, try to remember that all that you have in your life is what is right in front of you. Step back and recognize that true change can only come when you stop making it the end all, be all of your existence. 

Ten things Stephen Harper hopes you forget by 2015

As we move closer to 2015 this article posted in June is important to Federal Politics, what else would Harper want us to forget, the list is longer and keeps growing. Canadian voters are not as stupid as Harper thinks, I hope.

Ten things Stephen Harper hopes you forget by 2015 Posted on Wed, Jun 13, 2012, 5:05 am by Michael Harris

Tyranny, the arbitrary exercise of power by a government, usually pads up behind you in stocking feet. It has to. In a democracy, stealth is the only way it can succeed.

But in Canada these days, it pokes you in the chest with an index finger while shoving you backwards with the other hand. As it turns out, Blaise Pascal might have been right: mankind can get used to anything, including the breathless loss of democratic freedoms when the usurping party masquerades as strong, competent government. Six years in to Harper rule, blue eyes and mascara

1. Bill C-38 is the first thing Stephen Harper hopes you forget in time for the next election. It is passing through parliament like an institutional kidney stone the size of the Ritz. Wags in Ottawa who briefly portrayed it for what it is, the demise of parliament, are already slipping into discount mode. There have been omnibus bills before, they say; all’s fair in love, war and politics, they say; why, it’s just Elizabeth May’s slumber party, that’s all. Bottom of Form

2. The PM also hopes Canadians will forget 20,000 police on Canadian streets during the obscenely expensive G-8 and G-20 meetings of 2010. In Toronto, the guys in the riot gear would have done Hosni Mubarak proud. The security arrangements included kettling, beatings, unlawful arrests, and other examples of excessive force not normally associated with Canada.  According to the Office of the Independent Police Review (the sort of office Harper has done away with at CSIS) there was no legal justification for arbitrary searches by police and the debacle ended with the largest mass arrests in Canadian history. And now we find out that one of the threats to national security identified by Canadian Forces was “embarrassment to the Government.”

3. Mr. Harper hopes you forget the F-35, an unprecedented fiscal, military, and political fiasco brought to you by a corrupt military procurement system in the U.S. and a rogue DND in this country unchecked by the civilian side. Too many zeros on the cheque is the government’s best defense; that, and the availability of robots like Julian Fantino, who will apparently read anything that is put in his hands. The public money about to be wasted is unimaginably staggering and on that account meaningless – or so the government hopes. But lying about the program’s costs to the tune of at least $10-billion, as the Harper government has done, is different. It offends the stuff they taught in Sunday School. People get that.

4. The Harper government would like you to forget that the Liberals in Canada haven’t been the only fiscal drunken sailors of Confederation. Only once in the 20th century did a Conservative government balance the budget – Robert Borden in 1912, thanks to a surplus handed to him by Sir Wilfred Laurier. By the next year, Borden was back into deficit. So far, the Conservatives have repeated the feat once again in the 21st century, in 2006. This time the surplus was inherited from Paul Martin. Within a year, the government was back at the job of building the largest deficit in our history.

5. It would also be convenient for you to forget that Stephen Harper once promised that he would not change the Old Age Security system to fight the deficit. He did just that. Stephen Harper doesn’t want to meet his Solange Denis, but certainly not because he has any idea of backing down the way Mulroney did. He’d rather you just forgot about it.

6. As he would like you to forget about the Accountability Act, that dress rehearsal for better Tory governance that never went into production. Other politicians give you their word, Stephen Harper gives wording. His gift as a rhetorical trickster has rarely been more in evidence than in the voluminous charade known as the Accountability Act. Duff Conacher, the founder of Democracy Watch, has graded this piece of legislation appropriately – a belly-flop from the high-diving board of political BS. It features a commitment to language and an aversion to acting on the language that conjures up the PM’s greasy undermining of the Atlantic Accord. Best forgotten.

7. It would also be appreciated by the Harper government if you took a nice long drink from the Lethe on the subject of what used to be called federal/provincial relations. The prime minister has eschewed a meeting with the premiers like a man making a detour around a leper colony. In Mulroney’s day, the view was that consensus was the only way for the country to compete and prosper. That’s what his National Economic Conference and fourteen First Ministers’ gatherings were all about. Stephen Harper’s idea of a meeting of the minds is his mind and a lot of stenographers. Just ask Jim Flaherty’s provincial counterparts on the matter of health transfers.

8. It would also be nice if you could forget that the Harper government’s first instinct on regulating the Internet was giving police the right to snoop into the private lives of Canadians without warrants. This they called law and order. Government, the hapless Vic Toews assured us, has business in the computers of the nation. And if you didn’t see it that way, you stood with the child pornographers. Yes, exactly the way that you were a subversive radical if you had misgivings about the government’s lust to build pipelines, leaky or otherwise, while paying lip service to environmental issues.
9. The government would be especially grateful if you could just let slip into oblivion that whole unfortunate incident about the beautification of Tony Clement’s cottage-country riding, that exercise in rural renewal that came at the small price of misleading parliament and misappropriating money – from the Border Patrol Agency to the Conservative Party of Canada. And if you are good enough to forget that slushy little fact, the government would be doubly grateful: that way you might not wonder before marking your ballot the next time how this particular fox could have then been put in charge of all those chickens over at Treasury Board
10. Finally, Stephen Harper would really like you to forget that he is a niche prime minister who has consistently served the wealthy and the corporate while “managing” the great unwashed as the problem children of society – the ones who go on strike, who dare to disagree, who expect too much, who cost rather than contribute to the treasury – even if they have spent a life-time doing just that. There is little patience, tolerance, proportional thinking or moral imagination in his government. What there is, spun out of a weird amalgam of Austrian economics and American neo-conservatism

The metamorphosis of democracy into something else begins with forgetfulness and ends with an eerie silence where once there was a multitude of voices.

Stories of life

We create our reality out of stories around us, those we create for our self, stories our mind accept, and our senses create emotional sensations inside us. The stories, which create an emotional sensation within us, are hard to knock out, as they can create patterns within us. To get back in balance we may use therapy, rehab, diets, but we have to remember it is just a story we have bought and believed.

We may see the story as reality, and believe it to be real but our senses and feelings can also misguide us, as we only understand sensations from them.

Everything is a story, where there is life, there is a story, the question is what sort of story? Is a story that is created out of the environment or a story that is created through understanding and conscious observations without judgement a better or just a different story?

I am starting to see those stories as streams of sounds, images, words passing around me, as streams of energy.

All life on earth is a social experiment; no one owns the truth. Only consciousness will set you free, and freedom is movement of thought, not options to buy stuff. However, remember it is just movement, everything we see as real is just movement of time, and with time they will no longer be real