30 October, 2008

Political Ascention if You will.

A friend emailed me a link to maps that support my theory discussing educational achievements to political affiliation and philosophy. Now as I have been having this dialogue here, she has been sharing a financial perspective that many of you may connect with. I suggest reading her story and the comments section in order to gain a better idea of the financial issues faced by middle America.

This idea I propose between level of education to level of development to political party affiliation or support is not far fetched. Development theory is based on how people evolve in this human form throughout our lifetime. It basically shows how our thinking is either stunted or morphed to new levels of understanding and comprehension. It is not stretch to apply it to a political philosophy, even though, hardly anyone will do it. Because if they do, those who fancy themselves as highly educated will not be able to defend their support of a GOP ticket. The GOP supports base philosophies. This is not saying right or wrong, but factual. It is the conservative party. Here is a list of definitions for the word conservative found on Google:

Definitions of conservative on the Web:

* resistant to change
* having social or political views favoring conservatism
* cautious: avoiding excess; "a conservative estimate"
* button-down: unimaginatively conventional; "a colorful character in the buttoned-down, dull-grey world of business"- Newsweek
* a person who is reluctant to accept changes and new ideas
* bourgeois: conforming to the standards and conventions of the middle class; "a bourgeois mentality"
* a member of a Conservative Party

It is right there in black and white... resistant to change, dull, reluctant to accept new ideas.

Bourgeois defined in Google: The Marxist term for the middle classes whose interest it is to preserve the status quo.

Hmmm Marxist? Isn't this what the conservative party has been trying to blame Obama for? Really get it straight people!

I wish this educational link and development of people was discussed more in the media. Personally, I want to live in a society where we can progress beyond level 2/3. The republican’s are about a 2 and the Dems are about a 3 /4. There are around 8 levels roughly give or take, pending the theorist. How awesome it would be to achieve level 8 as a society!

Achieving the highest level moves beyond politics and goes straight to the core of life, meaning and purpose. We move directly into spiritual space and time. This is my focus in this life, so yes I will support anything that gets us to this goal. Funny how religions really don't care to push this idea, because it would usurp their position in the world. Or so they think.

As this is my focus, to achieve the highest level of development in my lifetime, I want our society to progress. If the society does not progress it is very difficult for an individual to achieve this goal, unless the individual lives in seclusion. Because I interact with society at large, I have to climb down my ladder of development from time to time in order to function in society. Trust me some of the places I have lived, well lets just say it was more frequent than other places. I am not saying anything false or rude, but factual. When you are around a person that doesn't speak your language, you have to start off with the more base forms of communication. Only when you both can start to better understand are you able to introduce more complex language. The same idea is applied to your development. If you are at level 6, how can you expect a person at level 2 to understand what you can see? They have to go through each level first before they can see the vista you are witnessing.

There is a self proclaimed theorist, Ken Wilbur, who took all the levels of development, and put them in one single spot on a map. It is fascinating to go through the process. As I have studied each theorists separately, I was excited to see the integration on a mass scale. After I went through his process, I was blown away by the realization of where our society could actually be. It is a futuristic place that I am not scared to dream of, but would love to witness. Some would say it parallels the theories behind the disappearances of the Mayans… maybe they just all rose above consciousness simultaneously and ascended! How freaking cool!

But we will never see this with war, discrimination, poverty of the soul, corruption, greed, ego, power, etc. I am saddened and this is precisely why I strive to find a place to live that is in tune with mother earth, so I can hear her rhythms. I go back to it time and time again, but Europe is special in how they treat people. Yes they have some of the same issues, but there is a difference in the treatment of people. The philosophy of living is different. Maybe it is due to the fact, they don’t attempt to separate church and state, maybe they allow for the spirit to be alive in the country. Maybe it is due to their connection with food, the land, and not overachieving greed. Maybe it is because they were around longer and already made it through some of these levels, after all America is a younger country. I don’t know the answer, but when I am in Europe, I feel different like I struck a common cord. I see something smart about these people, as a whole, mind you. You catch glimpses here in the states among certain communities but as a whole.. it isn’t here yet.


If anyone asked my dream for America? It would be that as a society we would link with countries around the world and truly integrate life as we know it. Maintain our individual beauty, but allow for sharing on a level that is heavenly. Why not reach for this dream? We all have some form of higher power inside each of us. We all have a soul that is already connected to a "Heavenly" idea, but we forgot our purpose, our starting position and our final goal. We forgot the beauty we came from, that tiny starlight spark of purity.

2 comments:

Ally said...

I have been thinking a lot of what it means to be politically conservative in this country. My grandparents were republicans, yet grandma hated G. W. Bush. I don't know if you've read the long list of conservatives who have endorsed Obama, but there are definitely conservatives who disagree with where Bush, Cheney, and Rove have taken the party and the conservative movement. The link I sent you was posted by a conservative blogger, one who has been anti-Bush for several years now. He also has a top ten reasons for conservatives to vote for Obama here: http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/10/the-top-ten-rea.html

As for education, I get where you are going, and I am a big believer in education, and access to quality education for all, but there is also the fact that the Democratic party has long been the party of the working class - labor unions are a powerful component within the party, for example. (see this video for an inspiring speech from labor http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/10/confronting-rac.html) I think there is a danger of buying into the Republican's painting of Obama as an elitist and their portrayal of his supporters as latte-drinking yuppies. That's not how I think of the Democratic party at all.

MystikMomma said...

I agree with Democrats being linked to the labor party and working class. The point of education and ascension, is more the idea that in development the more open you are to ideas, the more accepting you are of change the further developed you are. I use the term education more liberally, in terms of being accepting and open to new ideas.