Pity the Unhappy Rich Man

There is a saying, “Pity the unhappy rich man for unlike the poor man, he cannot blame his unhappiness on poverty.”  

In a recent film “Ten Questions to Ask the Dalai Lama,” by Rick Ray many wonderful and interesting insights arise.  One of them that the author notes, is the relative happiness of the poor in Calcutta’s ghettos as compared to the richest in the world. 

Many reasons for this are offered in the media.  One, is that the poor have less to lose.  Another is that they realize what is really important in life, personal relationships.  Many philosophers state that they are too ignorant to know of their own unhappiness. 

Regardless of the reason one concludes, many philosophers state that “Dissatisfaction is the mother of all philosophy.”  In other words it is our own discontent which spawns our search for meaning, justice and order.   

In general, when all of our physical needs are met we have the time and wherewithal to investigate the deeper mental, spiritual, and emotional issues.  Images of Mazlow’s Hierarchy of Needs bubble to the surface here.

 

Yet rather than focus on the individual steps in this psychological model, my philosophy of living involves discovering unifying principles which unite them all.  In other words, why do I bother to breath, eat, or make love? 

Yes a starving person initially needs no reason, but what about the ascetic monk?  He meets his spiritual needs whilst simultaneously feeding the physical.  For me, this is the goal of life, an integrated perspective. 

For the first time in the current human epoch, we have a chance as leaders to model this type of behavior: The spiritually and physically realized human.  This is my dream and goal and I feel many share it. 

Reference:

Ray, Rick (2006). 10 Questions for the Dalai Lama.  Monterey, CA: Monterey Films. http://www.thedalailamamovie.com/ 

Swami Krishnananda (2007) Introduction to the Philosophy of Yoga. Rishikesh, India: The Divine Life Society.  Retrieved September 27, 2007, from http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/intro/intro_02.html 

Maslow, Abraham (1943) “A Theory of Human Motivation.” Psychological Review, 50, 370-96. Retrieved September 27, 2007 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow’s_hierarchy_of_needs  

Emotional Alchemy

The heads of liberty is the choice to do what is for the growth of all, to feel good and wonderful.  The tails is the choice to do what is the detriment to all and to feel badly.  Many people believe in liberty to feel good but not to feel bad. 

Some people WANT to feel bad.  Nothing any of us do will change this individual’s desire to experience the dark end of the spectrum. You cannot love someone into changing.  Futhermore, this is an encroachment upon someone’s liberty. 

They are free to feel ill and experience pain.  It is upon those of us with a appropriate philosophy to let them know that this is a choice.  That is right, one can feel good or ill about one’s circumstances. 

When I was young I felt depressed and ill about damn near everything.  This feeling did not stop me from working hard to learn and grow, I just felt poorly about the whole affair.  Once this became my habit, I used it for motivation. 

Rather than feel good about growth, I used a perspective that allowed me to feel “worse” about doing nothing.  This strategy motivated me to grow.  Eventually though, this attitude reached its limits. 

I liken this to twenty steps forward and ten back.  This is emotional alchemy.  When you are despondent barely surviving in life at 60%, or even lower at 40%, you can transform your despair into anger. 

Then utilize this to motivate yourself into passing.  Each iteration of the philosophy you go twenty steps forward and then ten back.  So you go from 50% to 70% and back to ten.  This leaves you with a net gain of 10% at 60%. 

At each of these major transitions in your life, you get a net gain of 10% until you reach 90%.  Now you try to use emotional alchemy to get mad, and to get even with yourself.  Yet you cannot go over 100%.  Thus you keep going ten forward and ten backward! 

You stay at 90% until you learn to change your alchemy.  Anger no longer works, you have reached the limit of this type of change.  You cannot use force anymore.  It is too damaging to yourself. 

This is the most difficult of changes to make for the driven individual.  No more “Push, Push, Push.”  You have to learn a new method.  Now gains of inches are important.  To use the terms of finance, when you a small firm, it is easy to double revenues. 

Yet when you are Microsoft incremental gains are everything.  You cannot double when you are a $500 billion company without swallowing everything else and having nothing to eat!  So you settle for additional or geometric growth versus the exponential type. 

Now inches are good.  One foot forward and 23 inches back is good progress.  Even standing still is a loss as the universe is on an escalator, always moving forward.  If you are not going with the wave, it is overtaking you.

To Unite in Body

During the last five years, Wal-Mart became the Microsoft of the retail industry.  Their position grew so dominant as to earn the ire of everyone else.  Claims of anti-competitive practices, and corporate abuse began to rise.  Just like when Bill Gates’ empire had succeeded in practically owning the desktop PC market, people took notice of the giant. 

Yet Wal-Mart has taken this opportunity to show why Walton’s Mart stays on top.  Their strategy managers chose to move into the growing green movement.  What greater way to soothe, placate and even adopt its greatest critics?  Many of course will scoff, claiming that this is just another corporate move to manipulate and buy people.  Others though will be much more understanding. 

As I often tell my clients, it is easier to maintain and heal one’s arms and legs rather than to cutoff and grow new ones!  In this same way, the corporation offers an incredible way of uniting and organizing human endeavors.  The term incorporate comes from the Latin root, incorporatus, “to unite in body.”  What could be better than a flexible entity based upon unifying logical principles rather than divisive national, religious, and ethnic ones? 

Opponents of corporations often state that they are evil entities with all the rights of individuals yet none of the responsibilities.  These same individuals regularly state that government is the cure for the abuses and depredations of multi-national behemoths.  Yet governments have infinite lifespans as well.  What are the key differences between a corporation and a government? 

These are the questions which our planet’s social systems will wrestle with over the next twenty years of consolidation.  Witness the many social movements which incorporate into nonprofits and “green” firms.  As an example, Wal-Mart has gone even further than governments to start a program to measure carbon emissions.  For seven product lines “from DVDs to vacuum cleaners and beer.” (Birchall and Harvey, 2007) 

Look how quickly the corporate entity has adapted to the environment of changing consumer tastes.  It takes government decades to move its unmotivated bureaucracy.  Part of the reason is that governments seek stability while corporations seek change.  Although, this distinction is in no way definitive.  In actuality, large controlling monopolies seek stability and rigidity, while competitive players seek change. 

Thus, governments, which hold total monopolies on legal systems, authorized use of force, and taxation, seek to maintain the status quo.  While most corporations on the other hand, constantly jockey for new positions, trying to take power or become more efficient.  What incentive is there for government to reduce its size and increase efficiency and productivity? 

I posit that great political thinkers, social scientists, financiers and diplomats will spend a great many hours over the next five years studying and writing about how to balance the competitive forces raging across our planet.  The increased integration of global markets coupled with the dominance of corporations generates a new volatility, as the recent credit upheaval illustrates.  Ironically, quasi-governmental agencies performed the stabilization roles. 

Central banks are public-private entities that manage the stability of the financial system.  They are neither wholly governmental nor totally private.  Expect these joint-ventures to grow as governments decrease in power.  Some governments react to these changes with totalitarianism, while others expanded social service nets.  Hybrid entities will emerge as the intermediaries in many Western Democracies. 

Our world grows ever closer together.  In this same way, our allegiances are set to cross national, and governmental boundaries.  Corporations are the vehicle through which we will implement much of social policy.  Look for many “greener” movements to sprout and grow.  Some claim that corporations behave like individuals with predatory antisocial instincts.  Yet these are the character of only a select few firms run by individuals of similar mindsets.  A firm reflects its leadership. 

Nonetheless, as a caveat, I do not believe that governments will disappear, only that they will become infrastructure based organizations.  Their main purposes will be to create and maintain the playing field of international relations, legal systems, and physical infrastructure such as roads, telecommunications et cetera.  Libertarians of the world unite, for Atlas is about to shrug.

Reference: 

Birchall, Johnathan and Harvey, Fiona (2007). “Wal-Mart maps our grand plan to go Greener,” Financial Times, September 24, 2007

Incorporate. (n.d.). The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Retrieved September 25, 2007, from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/incorporate 

Jesus and God**n

The legendary comic Bill Cosby presents a great skit about child rearing.  First he talks about how his brother and him originally though their names were “Jesus,” and “Goddamn.”  His father would say when they were in trouble, “Jesus, Goddamn it, Get over here!”  He goes further to give another very important quote, “I brought you into this world, I will take you out of it…And make ten more just like you.” 

In some modern industrialized countries children have taken the legendary status of a form of Sainthood.  They can do no wrong.  “There are no bad children, only bad parents.”  Whereas this latter statement may be true, looking at the children I had to raise every year in the military, I imagine there must be an abundance of bad parents.  Or at least a booming crop in them! 

Regardless, what I often see, are children in whom their rights were stressed at the detriment of their responsibilities.  “Rights, what about my rights?  You are violating my rights!?”  This even led to soldiers in the Army claiming that they needed a timeout because their Sergeant was too hard on them.  What does this mean?  I mean, were we training for the Bozo Olympics?  Is your stomach going to give you a timeout because you are too stressed to go find food? 

Now I am not saying that all children ought to be raised on military discipline, but I can tell you that a method that lies closer on the spectrum to human responsibility is needed.  Children are neither saints nor innocent.  Everyone has a genetic and ancestral past, and our children represent our own.  They are only as good as we are.  Their capabilities are never in question; their choices are. 

So where do we draw the line?  What are the key variables?  Parents have a responsibility, society has a role, and children have their culpability.  My son was born to me and I chose to have him as a son.  As a result, we have a partnership.  I do my duty and provide him with love, education, and feeding.  Anything else after that is choice.  He listens to me and does his best to understand given his rapidly evolving self.  Society makes sure to provide a structure which includes consistently applied rules. 

Yet he is my legacy and society’s.  People often state that children ought not to be punished for the life of the parents.  This ignores the fact that children are us.  They are 50% of each of us and our own personal legacies.  If we do not take care of them, it is not society’s responsibility to ensure our own personal immortality.  It is society’s job to provide a system that individuals can use to sustain or change themselves.  Or in the saddest cases, such as Howard Hughes killing himself on drugs in Mexico, a place where one can deteriorate without taking anyone else along unwittingly. 

For my work with my child I gain a form of immortality, my genes continue physically while spiritually myself, in him.  He gains a freedom and liberty relative to his ability to exercise discernment.  Society gains an ever growing standard of living for itself and its people.  Its immortality comes from its ability to spread its ideas, wealth, and produce throughout the world.  Maybe someday, Earth will mesh well enough to spread its ideas and children into the stars. 

These are not popular ideas.  Most people cringe at my statements and feel that there is something wrong with what I say.  “Oooh, you are a facist Gouthum.”  “You are evil.”  I am only sharing the nature of reality.  It is upon the individual to discern where on the spectrum to lay.  I love the truth and justice more than myself and any other.   

One asks, “What is that truth?” 

“We are all one, part of the immortal energy and consciousness of the universe that never dissipates or decays.  It only experiences endless apparent transformation.” 

Based upon this fact, it is upon me to find the balance and sustain that.  Each of us has his or her own role.   I advocate discovering our own personal role and place in the system rather than complaining about someone else’s.  Some of us even maintain, improve and adjust the system.  Find out what you are, and be that.

Eyeing the Candidates

In a recent NY Times article several presidential candidates for 2008 weighed-in on the recent remarks by General Petraeus in front of congress.  John Meluso, CSP, the creator of Eyetalk™ gave the author a quick rundown of what the candidates’ eye types might be.  Although the real eye types will be discerned more fully when they visit Truth or Consequences, NM on October 12, 2007, we give our own armchair estimates of what they might say based on physical traits.  Then we compare our best guesses to what they actually said.

 

Being the only combat veteran and former POW from the bunch, John Mc Cain has the most interesting read.  Due to his history he will operate from the apprehensive area of his type.  As a Left Brained Kinesthetic, Mc Cain will naturally express resistance to any withdrawal or apparent surrender.  Thus he is expected to make contrasting questions which show his feelings of being stymied by the current policy. His remarks centered on his support of the General, but desire for no pullback of troops whatsoever.  Here he resists change here.  The consummate trooper Mc Cain remarks, “I have to trust [the General’s] judgment,” though, “I am a little nervous about it.”

 

The next Republican in our list is Rudolf Giuliani a possible Left Brained Auditory eye type.  This self-proclaimed opponent of terror’s style will project one group as outsiders to his own producing contradictions that highlight his own view.  Naturally he took the opportunity to state that “Unlike Hillary Clinton, [he believes], that General Petraeus is telling the truth.” 

 

Romney’s type appears to contrast with both tough-guys above.  With Mitt’s unique combination of Left Brain, Haptic, and Auditory he is likely to use contradictory questions to show how others’ views contrast with his own and those of the target goal.  Then he might offer a unity solution.  Romney’s remarks focus on the beauty of Sunni-American cooperation and the need to resist Iran’s influences, “It’s clear that we must craft an assertive and comprehensive strategy to get Iran to back off.”

 

Moving to the Democratic field, we begin with front-runner Hillary Clinton whose Left Brain Haptic style suggests interrogatives used to show her distrust of authoritarianism as when she worked for the Watergate Commission.  Her oft-repeated quote, “I think that the reports that [General Petraeus] provides to us require the willing suspension of disbelief,” says it all.

 

Following her we mention the next most well-known candidate, John Edwards, known for his uniting and supportive style clearly reflected in his Right Brain Kinesthetic eyes.  Edwards’ right brain orientation makes for a different read than most of his peers.  He likely uses the General’s remarks to show a common goal and a way for us to see our way out of any dilemmas.  Further, the candidate may read between the lines to highlight the group’s positive ambitions and options.  Thus, he describes the presentation as another way for the current president to “pass Iraq on to the next president,” rather than “the withdrawal the American people voted for.”

 

Finally we get to Obama, the new kid on the block, another Left Brain Kinesthetic.  Similarly to Edwards he is likely to find the united solution.  But unlike him, Obama will use an interrogative method to show the contrasts of the General’s message to the one he sees as unity.  His common goal is to figure out “At what point do we say, ‘Enough’?”  Obama further calls the report a way of “setting the bar so low that a modest improvement….is considered success.”

 

Despite the fact that none of these eye readings are definitive, they provide valuable and interesting insight into communications style and authenticity on the campaign trail.  As we spend more time evaluating their statements and character the assessments gain power.  Please enjoy this small insight into what will come out when they speak the “Truth,” and face its “Consequences” this October in New Mexico.

 

Gouthum Karadi, MBA with  John Meluso, CSP

goukaradi@perfectparadox.org

john@meluso.com

 

 

Reference:

  

Luo, Micharel, and Santora, Marc (2007).  “For G.O.P. Candidates. a Common Talking Point on the War.” NY Times National, Friday September 14, 2005.  NY, NY.

 

Meluso, John (2001).  eyeTalk™: Bridging from Communication to Connection.  Retrieved September 16, 2007, from http://www.meluso.com.

 

Tribal Miasms Part I

TRIBE /traɪb/ Pronunciation Key – Show Spelled Pronunciation[trahyb] Pronunciation Key – Show IPA Pronunciation, –noun 1. any aggregate of people united by ties of descent from a common ancestor, community of customs and traditions, adherence to the same leaders, etc.  (Tribe, 2007) 

MIASM – This term is used in homeopathy to describe an underlying pattern of energy. These patterns of energy are similar in nature to specific diseases. Thus, they are named after these diseases. There are many theories about miasms. Hahnemann originally described them as inherited tendencies passed down from generation to generation. For example, if a grandfather had Tuberculosis, the grandson might have asthma. Although asthma is a different “disease”, it would never the less be energetically connected to the grandfather’s T.B. (Miasm, 2005) 

In other places I have written about the latent tendencies passed on from generation to generation.  Ancient philosophy and spiritual schools all state that the greatest “sin” upon mankind is the visiting of the sins of the father’s upon the sons.  These statements refer not only to some esoteric fall from grace, but to real physical and emotional tendencies. 

The whole of the Middle East is one giant crucible for the tribal miasms of a large portion of human genetic inheritance.  One often wonders whether the tension exists there because of the oil or the other way around, oil from the tension.  In other words, this concentrated energy is a result of the long standing polarity of the human spirit which now manifests physically as well. 

Yet what is this miasm that we refer to? 

We specifically discuss tribal miasms. 

These are the ancestral ties that come down as ethnic cleansing, or the more popular term in Iraq, of “Sectarian Violence.”  Clan on clan, or tribe on tribe.  Most of us in the modern world shake our heads at such provincial thinking while manifesting it in our own ways.  We are Americans, or Jews, or Christians, for example.  These trends do not need to manifest in dangerous ways. 

Take the Oakland Raider and Denver Bronco American Football fans of last weekend.  None of them killed each other, though if you look at the Raider Nation, you may wonder how close that is to their minds! 

As long as we identify ourselves by nation, creed, religion, or philosophy there is risk of conflict.  When we can channel this activity into productive endeavor we as a human family transcend violence into competitive growth such as Olympic ambitions.  Everything on the planet can be used for either good or ill.  It is upon us as individuals to make the transformation.  This is the ancient alchemy of spirit, of lead into gold. 

 

Reference:

Miasm (2005). Center for Homeopathy (Homeopathic Glossary). Retrieved September 19, 2007 from http://www.centerforhomeopathy.com/glossary.html.

 

 

Tribe. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Retrieved September 19, 2007, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tribe

The Law of Attraction Revisited

Imagine that you are the object of the world’s desire.  Rather than chasing material manifestation, how about it chases you? 

Lewis is an average working stiff at a machinist’s shop.  Every pay day he takes a significant portion of his earnings and sinks them into “investment opportunities.”  Some of the funds go to his retirement funds, others to his savings, and yet more still to his children, his ultimate legacy. 

The final portion available he spends in speculation.  He invests in stocks and options, and the lottery.  Louie buys Scratchers’, and Powerball tickets.  Much of the wealth is spent chasing dreams.  Imagine if the dreams chased him.  In other words, rather than trying to possess an object, he became the object to be possessed. 

In other words, he sought to become the kind of father that his children sought to have.  Lewis became the type of winner that lottery winnings seek to be spent by.  The former is easy to imagine, be the kind of parent that you might wish to have.  You would need the right mixture of firmness, give, and take; love, intelligence, and discipline. 

But the latter, how would that look?  Most people may dispute that money has any anthropomorphized attitude.  Can inanimate objects truly possess any type of desire?  In esoteric wisdom, or philosophy of consciousness, all objects only exist as reflections of the Self.  The center of all beings and so called reality is You. 

Hence, these objects are only aspects of your internal self which you have not internalized yet.  So the question becomes, not, “how do I get,” rather, it is, “how do I become?”  Technically, it is truly, “How am I <blank>?,” though this is really only another definition of the same.  Once a person knows the internal nature, life becomes about expressing that in all things. 

Which leaves us again at the point of “how do I manifest what I am such that what I want, wants me?” 

Since your reality only mirrors your unrealized characteristics, you ask yourself, “how do I see that which I want, and how do I become what it wants.”  An example may help to illustrate this difficult and reflexive process.  For me the universe seeks endless variety in creation and entropy.  It abhors restrictions and will break all boundaries at one point as much as it will create them at another. 

Because I seek infinite abundance in all things, I would have to become the type of entity that spreads wealth around in a way that leads to growth rather than stagnation.  Thus I choose to think, feel and see the world as a wonderous opportunity for dynamic creation and transformation.  Now wealth comes toward me, as my idea of it behaves in this manner. 

One naturally wonders, “Does this actually work?”    

My first response, is watch and see.  A more elaborate one is that seeing the world as a “wealth of opportunity” directs your intelligence toward creating and expanding wealth anyway.  So, in short, it works on a strictly material level.  On a spiritual level, that is a separate question for the philosopher within you as well as a deeper realization.   

What I can tell you without doubt, that it works in my life.  Through a process of self-realization, concentration, and contemplation, all of my desires reach fulfillment and manifestation.  A difficult situation with my son reaches resolution, deep meaningful companionship with my dream woman has developed, career and destiny align. 

All of these things appeared to take some time.  And although I never floundered, sometimes it seemed as if I did.  If I were to suggest this method to readers, I would ask that they concentrate on why they want a given object and determine what they can do for that object that would make it feel fulfilled.  It is easiest to use this method with a person first, as their desires are clearer.  Eventually though an adept can utilize this process for anything.

Rythym and Flow: How Philosophy Helped My Golf Swing

Last week I went to the driving range for the first time in five years.  Before that, it was eleven years and before that seven.  Thus, I have been to the range twice in nearly twenty two years.  Thus I had some trepidation.  To enlighten those of you who do not know, golfers practice their swing at these ranges.  I polished my slice.  This is when your ball swings out and to the left and then to the right, also known as the “banana ball” due to this profile.   

Nonetheless, a close friend of mine and minister invited me to go.  Luckily for me, and unluckily for him, he injured his bicep in the first twenty minutes.  This gave him the opportunity to give me some pointers.  It was quite fun for me.  For in less than one hour he successfully improved my stroke immeasurably.  So much so that I plan on finally taking lessons again. 

The true measure of the change, is how I felt after he helped me.  Rather than feeling stress, trepidation and apprehension, I felt love, joy and excitement.  Just the change in my posture alone added this.  Instead of trying to tower over the ball and dominate my will upon it, I scooted up close to it to loft it high.  My change in posture adjusted my feeling to less of driving and more of lofting. 

This reminds me so much of how my attitude and life has changed.  As a child my mind matured much faster than the rest of me.  Yet emotions and physical skills lagged behind.  This imbalance often reinforces itself to the point where the highly intellectual often stunt their own physical and emotional growth. 

Aggressive socialization processes further teach the child that he needs to push harder, further, faster.  It encourages the youth to become more intense with each failure.  Eventually the strong may succeed by sheer force of will, though at what cost?  I became a competent triathlete, soldier, engineer, and divorcee.  Each time I found something too difficult to get on the first try, I stoked my furnace and burned my fuel. 

Eventually I torched a hole in my colon and burned out my adrenals.  In Chinese five element theory, I boiled the water right out of my kidneys.  Regardless of how you classify my condition, too much vata and pitta in ayurveda, I was beaten.  MORE of anything would not solve my condition.  More relaxation, more mediation, and more contemplation all sound good.  But they were not the fix. 

Less was the more that I needed. 

Instead of trying to tower over and dominate the little white ball, I squatted low and sidled up to it.  Everyone who has ever tried golf knows that domination never works over the tiny white spirit.  One needs to smoothly and gracefully work with it.  My friend called it rhythm like a pendulum.  To me it definitely became a dance rather than a fight.   The change in my position changed my position. 

Or more clearly, the change in posture changed my posture.  Er, uh, the change in my stance changed my stance. 

Sheesh! 

Let me try to say this clearly!  I changed the way I stood over the ball and this changed my entire feeling.  Suddenly I started giggling and laughing.  I was no longer angry and frustrated without even swinging the club.  Changing my philosophy inspires all that I now do.  The world is not my enemy.  If I do not get something on the first try, I use flow.  Swimming, rowing, dancing, running, thinking, reasoning, relating, they all have a rythym amd flow.

Recovering from Domestic Abuse in Politics

The USA is recovering from an abusive political relationship with the voters being the children.  Democrats are often seen as the party of the mommy-state, creating rules for everything, while Republicans, the father-state dominating everything.  It is ironic that our own immaturity often condemns us as a people to such treatment.  How do we recover? 

One way is to take control of our destiny by moving out.  Thus, one could immigrate to another country.  Another is to stand up for your siblings by demanding that some respect be shown.  This may involve taking the power back from both the father, or mother, or both.  Sometimes this looks like revolutions such as when the colonies rebelled against England. 

What I might suggest is that we mature as children and surrender our naivety.  Father is neither all-knowing nor all-powerful.  Mother cannot protect us from all harm or heal every wound.  We need to learn to look after and think for ourselves, double-checking all that is done for us or in our names.  Since our government is deliberately complicated by special interests and captured groups, our best bet seems to elect a different type of leader. 

How can we know what to look for and how to validate this new type of character’s credentials? 

On October 12, 2007 the community of Truth or Consequences, NM seeks to try a new method of evaluation by using Eyetalk®, the province of creator John Meluso, CSP.  This system combines well-tested tools of Irridology and NLP to measure the sincerity and coherence of an individual’s message based on general phenotype.  Or, in plain terms, this system compares one’s inherent communications style to the one he or she presents in public. 

By comparing and contrasting the presidential candidates’ eyes to their presentation, voters can get a simple yet clear evaluation of sincerity.  Eyetalk® does not guarantee that the individual will not change of deviate from a given genetic hand, it does show whether they are now.  It also gives a window into general communications characteristics, for example, whether a person favors teamwork or a “go-it-alone” approach. 
I don’t know about you, but the Federal Treasury and the rest of the world can do with a little less of the latter method.

Elections and Familial Dynamics

More often than not, people choose candidates based upon the feeling that they get from listening.  Then, they choose the parts of the candidate’s arguments that agree with their own personal views.  Whether this is the correct method of choosing or not is debatable.  Executive leadership is often like a marriage with the voter the feminine and the candidate the masculine. 

Thus varying aspects of familial relationships manifest in representative governments.  For example, this blog has posted about the family relations of Democrats and Republicans in the US government, with the Republicans manifesting the masculine dominance and Democrats the feminine. 

Ironically, one could state that the Rovian era of political maneuvering is a natural outgrowth of Clinton’s permanent campaign.  Unfortunately the former sought to use Realpolitik to govern domestic relations instead of only foreign policy.  As a result, the father became a tyrant in the household. 

In this metaphor, the father sets policy and delegates while the mother executes.  Although this dialogue uses the terms of gender, it really means the roles of masculine and feminine or Yang and Yin respectively.  It could be two men or two women.  Nonetheless, the Yang must not become a dominator or abuser in the household where everyone tiptoes around fearing reprisal. 

Imagine journalists, newspapers, and political representative sulking around.  Enter Joseph Wilson, a man who showed courage and was attacked, his wife’s career ruined.  “Do not disagree with Father publicly.  Or he will punish you.”  Naturally this form of structure is inherently unstable and never lasts.  It always ends in divorce or murder. 

NEXT: Ways of harnessing one’s natural ability to choose a candidate.