Defeat Is In the Air

There are times when I've felt like a loser: like I didn't know what to do, that I owed something to someone else, or "they are right and I am wrong." These are all ways that I've felt less than myself-basically feeling sorry for myself. Of course this isn't all the time, I'm like most others in that I have "highs and lows", but I have found something about those low times. When I feel like there is no hope, or I've screwed up beyond redemption, like some other is better than me or has "shown me up", it's not the end until I think it is.

What I'm talking about here is being in a state of helplessness, or feeling vanquished. The concept of defeat is only with in the acceptance of the confines of win/lose, or "zero-sum", thinking. One can only be defeated if one believes in it. When you refuse to stop struggling even though you lie broken and crying at the feet of those who wish you harm, when your mind is still saying, "I'll get through this, I can make it!", you are still winning. When you refuse to slink off with your head down, when someone has taken their best shot and you simply carry on, there is nothing of defeat about you. How can you be beaten when you don't give up? It is only in your attitude, thinking that "once X happens, then all is lost" is just a way of cheating one's self. In essence, the only way to be beaten is to think so; the only one who can defeat you is you. Once again, it is thinking that makes reality and truth.

"It's Perfect!"

Sometimes we may be tempted to wait to do something: to improve the item, take stock more fully, or study the problem and find a better solution. If we put off doing it until it's a better time, we risk not doing it at all. It becomes a trap we fail to recognize, and we end up not accomplishing anything. I imagine that many artists, leaders, scientists, and presenters have been dissatisfied with what they put out. I could even picture Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. being unhappy about the content of one of his speeches, as amazing as they are to this day. It is easy for someone to find fault and nitpick their own work, to think they can do better. It isn't important, because if it were any more refined it might seem unnatural, or it may fly over another persons' comprehension. It is better to do the best one can at the time and go with what one has. The only reason this is here for you to read is that I finally gave up editing and just posted it! It is better to make a move and trust in, and hope for, the best than stand rooted and not accomplish anything. Don't wait until it's perfect, because it never gets there.

A Series of Rules, or Rulers

Society is nothing more than a collection of expectations, things that have come together to shape who we are and what we think. It would not occur to many of us to live another way, to have a different approach to living. It may seem odd to consider as anything other than the natural way of things having ones' life in two parts: "a job" and "life outside of work" . Yet things were not always this way, indeed, even the concept of money is relatively new. Life would continue if drastic changes were made, it was in the past when people lived simpler lives and it will be different in the future, in some way. Lives not filled with toiling at one thing all day, something that had no relation to one's life. Rather, in the past people were constantly connected with all aspects of their lives, and were not dependent on only one thing to sustain them, instead they were intimately familiar with everything around them. Life was filled with connections, between people and land and the world. I do, in fact, question those who think or say they would prefer to live in another time period, given how acculturated we are. Though there are still some remaining who continue historical lifestyles in parts of the world, and some vestiges of it in our own culture. I think people are beginning to figure out this separation is why they feel hollow and isolated, and how to reestablish themselves in the world. For a fun treatment on this, read "Ishmael" by Daniel Quinn.

Do what you want to the girl...

I know that many people say they wish that their kids' lives will be better than their own, that their children should have all the opportunities possible. They say, "I want her to have all the things I never did"...not me. I want my own life to be the best and certainly to be better than it was growing up; my kid can fend for himself, it's alright if I let him do without a few things. I should get all the treats and gifts because, really, I'm who is important in this world; I count for more since I'm older and have more to offer than a child who can't do anything on his own. Not that I want him to have a horrible life, or plan on creating drama, or trauma, for him-all I'm saying's that me and my life are what matters. Besides, it'll be good for him in the long run: it will give him more character and provide great "life experiences". In fact, allow me to explain more fully my attitude, and say that the same reasoning applies to my wife. She's on her own when it comes to what she wants; I'm not here to provide, to be her supplier of joy or support-she should be happy just to have me in her life. Yes, sir, I'm out for myself, only looking out for my needs, and not to worry about anyone else's. No one else is going to do it for me, that's for sure, and why should I do it for anyone else?

This is all farce, of course, I don't believe in this attitude, nor do I think anyone would say they do subscribe to it. On hearing it, I think most people would say it sounds completely ridiculous: that is backwards, we cherish our children and need to protect them, to provide for and enrich the lives of children; we are even willing to give our lives for them if necessary. Yet for all this lip-service a lot of people actually apply the attitude I outlined previously when it comes to their lives, and act as though it were what they truly believe. Since it is the actions that count, rather than what we claim we will do, then it is our actions which indicate who we truly are (though that is a topic for another time). So these people behave as though their selves and their own lives are more important to them than those who they "care most about" and "love", showing who and what is truly important to them. They will treat their intimates as if only their own needs and desires matter, and that others should accommodate this attitude; as though those around them should somehow serve them. I've seen it and experienced it myself, with intimate relationships in particular: no matter how much I could give, it would not be enough because I still want to be treated as a human and live my own life according to what works for me and makes me happy. Another way this attitude can play out is if the first person tries to give and do "all" for the second, making themselves the "willing servant". This is actually another form of control, as it allows the subservient person to manipulate others by pointing out their own sacrifice and how much it takes for them to do so. Thusly, the child or spouse becomes a pawn, rather than an individual, just another means to their own needs. The needs that will be filled are those that the "subservient one" feels like allowing.

So now we've explored this issue and seen behind these attitudes a little, we find we're talking basically about two sides of the same coin. We know that we cannot give all of ourselves for any other individual, it is not a rational means of obtaining our own or others' fulfillment. Moreover, it leaves only a shell of a person with no means of provoking true challenge to and reward for others. Neither should we be so careless and selfish as to wish for others to react this way. Else we risk becoming entirely self-centered and attempting to be self-sufficient all alone. We should have care for those around us and their individuality, as we expect them to do for us. Somewhere between these two extremes we can find a balance, without feeling we have to sacrifice ourselves or others to achieve happiness.

Where Have All the Heroes Gone?

People enjoy their legends, their superhuman heroes-they wish they could emulate and strive to become those people. Our history is dotted with examples and stories: Beowulf, Jesus the Christ, Buddha, Superman, Robin Hood, Mahatma Gandhi, Valentine Michael Smith, Abraham Lincoln, the Kwisatz Haderach, Mohamed, and so on. We have to ask ourselves then, where are our modern-day heroes? Who do we look up to as these people have been celebrated? Do we wish to copy Bill Gates? Are we really supposed to idolize George Bush or Tony Blair? Or do we favor the Hilton crowd, the Anna Nichole Smiths and Britney Spears of the world? Because it seems more and more that people are respected and idolized solely for being famous instead of doing something to deserve that respect. In fact, the whole notion of these people being role models is absurd because they do nothing that can be emulated. Unless that is the goal, now; if it is fashionable to instead lead a pointless life filled with trivia and never use ones' gifts to improve things. If the pinnacle of success is to have everything done for you, then it is no wonder people feel so unfulfilled all the time. What is there to strive for if when one arrives nothing is there: no meaning, just continued existence? Life is only worth living when it has a purpose, when there is a reason and a goal one is attempting. Since that is the case, what we need are idols who never stop trying and helping. Some leaders who can show us how to keep our interest in ourselves and our lives even when we've "made it". Who do we have that is leading a revolution, who is on a mission to save us all and lead us to a new dawn in our poor world? Is it really that we have too many options? Are we bombarded by people who claim to have "The Answer"? Indeed, we must ask how many are trying to help everyone rather than just themselves. That is the only way we can tell who actually has it.