Reader’s Comments

In response to "Reflections on Egypt":

Dan said...

I very much appreciate that the democracy movement in Egypt was (mostly) very peaceful, decentralized, secular, leaderless, courageous, perseverant, inspired and inspiring.

Here's what I posted elsewhere:

I'm another Jew against another Pharaoh!

I oppose all dictators from Cairo to the corporate boardrooms, from the Middle East to the Midwest, from Tahrir Square to Tienanmen Square, from Central Asia to Central America, from the churches and temples to the mosques and synagogues, and from Wall Street to every Main Street and instead support political and economic democracy and justice for all.

All dictators AND their thuggish cronies must go NOW!

My response:

Dan, I agree with the thrust of your comments. However, I believe it is wrong to say that the democracy movement in Egypt was leaderless and imply that the notion of a leaderless movement is viable. Our challenge is to develop democratic, collaborative leadership.

I also disagree that Wall Street, even with its many faults, exercises the power of a dictator. Such rhetoric is neither accurate nor effective.

++

Paul Costello said....

Enjoy your posts-love the Dylan stories

and to add to the mix-I have to say when I hear the lauding of the present, presence, be here now, etc etc  I hear that as someone's escape from the clutches of the past or some  fix on some totally unrealizable future. To get back into the now is the antidote when you are not there, but a narrative take is different.

a story works always with the question, "what comes next?" so staying in the present is not what a story ever allows you, it has this inbuilt trajectory towards some realizable or at least imaginable future, which is what I see from the young people of Egypt, or elsewhere.

They decided not to be stuck in the present, where no one was doing anything to shift anything, 30 years, emergency rule etc, there was no future prospect, but when there is, the present becomes charged with possibility rather than acceptance, and maybe that is what you mean,

but I think the compelling story we are grappling with is not the present, but the future, global concerns, the budget, social security, the deficit, terrorism, its how poorly or effectively we tell the future story now that our future depends,

and the present, even as we speak, is already gone, its past, the present is nothing more than the dawn of the next tomorrow, you can't choose today, because its gone by the time you choose it, every choice is about tomorrow.

The young people of Egypt chose a different tomorrow from the present, and it was en masse, not one day at a time not even one kid at a time, (which is another cliche I would like to retire, because social psychology tells us, we rarely do anything, one at a time), but Egypt seemed to be a mass mobilization, they were on the streets for tomorrow, they were sick of today. The present was not enough.

Cheers

Paul

My response:

Paul, I very much appreciate your extensive, thoughtful comment. I agree with your objection to reliance on “one at a time” change and agree that some advocates of being present do so in a way that suppresses a sense of the future. I also agree that “the present becomes charged with possibility” and “the present, even as we speak, is already gone.” In my post, I approvingly quoted Paz saying, “Reflecting on the now does not imply relinquishing the future or forgetting the past: the present is the meeting place for the three directions of time...”

I also agree with your rejection of a total acceptance of the present that precludes working to change that which we have a good chance of changing now or in the near future.

However, I still believe that it is important to “be present” in a way that includes a sense or awareness of the future at least in the back of one’s mind. To use your example of stories, one can be immersed in the story with a sense of dramatic tension about what will happen next, but with a good story, one gets caught up in it emotionally and intellectually, without trying to predict what is going to happen, preferring to be surprised.

What is needed is a both/and balance, rather than getting stuck in head trips about the future, which seems to be a widespread problem and one that is characteristic of ideologues.

Anonymous said:

One of your best essays!

+++++

In response to "A Tax Fairness Campaign":

JaneAnneJ said...

Well expressed. I support you in this, Wade. I will send it to people I think will be interested.

My response: Good to hear Jane. Thanks for the feedback and the re-posting.

++

Anonymous wrote:

You might compare the income tax rates of China and India (fastest current expansion of middle class with decrease of poor) with the US current.  Also the highest expansions in the US of the middle class with a decrease of the poor also were in higher income tax periods.

The fairest distribution of GDP is obtained through redistribution of wealth through progressive income tax.  Otherwise the "Lords and Kings" take all but minimal subsistence for the poor granting a few extra crumbs to begging supporters.  AKA the Dictator mode.

We are slipping into that mode.  It is only a matter of time until the very rich hire their thugs to keep the poor in line.

My response:

I googled “income tax rates in China,” and the top result reported, “The tax on an individual's income is progressive. As at 2010, an individual's income is taxed progressively at 5% - 45%.” India’s rates seem to vary from zero to 40%. So your point seems well-taken. And I agree that the U.S. economy fared better when we had a more progressive tax structure. Redistribution boosts economic growth. The wealthy get a smaller portion of the pie, but the pie is larger.

In many cities, corporations are already hiring security forces to patrol business districts. I would question analogies to dictators and thugs, however.

+++++

In response to "Looking for Holistic Political Organizations":

Empathy Surplus Project http://www.empathysurplus.com/ said...

Hi, Wade, Please check out this website for an idea we're trying to get started in Ohio. Keep up the good work. Chuck Watts, founder

Chuck, your project looks like a valuable contribution. Best of luck.

++

Rhonda McGee commented:

Great post, Wade! As I think you know, I agree whole-heartedly. I admire you for articulating this need, and for putting this appeal out into the world.

Love live Egypt, indeed! In deep support of the people putting their lives on the line for freedom and the possibility for greater self- and societal growth.

My response:

Wonderful to hear, Rhonda. It is heartening to know that my essay makes sense to one who is as astute as you are.

++

Dave Ewoldt commented:

Hi Wade... Jane Ann Jeffries forwarded your latest blog post to me, and I've been

trying to leave a comment on the blog, but blogspot tends to not be too cooperative

sometimes. Anyway...

I've been having similar thoughts for a while myself, and here's an effort I've been

trying to get off the ground <http://www.reststop.net/NCEP/>. Here's another article I

wrote to briefly explain the thinking behind my platform for AZ State Senate last year http://naturalsystems.blogspot.com/2010/08/in-nutshell.html

As you allude to, in an interconnected universe, we must connect the dots among the

personal, social, and environmental. If we concentrate on just one, the others will

suffer. Since building mutually supportive relationships is how the natural world has

been maintaining sustainability for billions of years, it makes sense to me to follow

that model ourselves since we are, after all, part of the natural world. Our artificial

separation causes all kinds of troubles.

My response:

Dave, I find myself generally aligned with your worldview, though I differ on some points. In your statement of values, you affirm “We encourage individuals to act to improve their personal well-being,” but I see nothing about the need for intentional mutual support in those efforts. And in general, your politics seems to be very idealistic and averse to getting engaged in concrete, short-term reforms. I like your formulation, “Since building mutually supportive relationships is how the natural world has been maintaining sustainability for billions of years, it makes sense to me to follow

that model ourselves since we are, after all, part of the natural world.” Best of luck with your efforts!

++

JaneAnneJ said...

Thanks, Wade. There are a few people with whom I will share this post. I will post their feedback.

+++++

In response to "Various Items":

Judith Katz said...

Dear Wade,

Thank you for posting about your discussion with Sanzgiri. I want you to know that I am part of a group of six people in Berkeley who are meeting twice a month to support one another through compassionate listening (NVC). We also engage in worldly actions with the hope of contributing to greater sustainability, peace and well-being. Over the last year we have connected with hundreds of people at public events ranging from the Harmony Festival to the Oscar Grant demonstrations. We are currently comprised of six committed people. Thank you for tracking the evolution of an approach to change that bridges the personal and the social. I look forward to learning from your work and reporting back to you about ours over time.

My response:

Sounds great. Please keep me posted!