Scum People Are Arguably Necessary to Our Spiritual Ecology — Comments on — (a) the Occasional Appreciation We Owe the Low-Lifes among Us — (b) another Way of Looking at the October 2013 Government Shutdown and Debt Ceiling Crisis — and (c) the Spiritual Conundrums that the Mess Raises

© 2013 Peter Free

 

18 October 2013

 

 

As an attorney and occasional quasi-Buddhist-like philospher, I am given to the perspective that Dualism’s black and white does not accurately describe very much

 

Virtually everything involving living systems forms an interrelating ecology, from which we can pluck individual elements only at our spiritual peril.

 

I was reminded of this during the just past October 2013 government shutdown and debt ceiling crisis.

 

From one perspective, this (American) month — and the decade or two that preceded it — pitted the Stupids against the Marginally Sensible.

 

For example, it was easy to see Senator “Teddy the Consistent Dick” Cruz as a peculiarly loathsome example of narcissistic intelligence gone malevolently awry.

 

It was similarly tempting to perceive his Tea Party supporters — and their supposedly moderate Republican Party enablers — as gene sources, whom a benevolent eugenics program would have modified in the direction of fact-appreciating intelligence, rather than bigoted and obstructionist ignorance.

 

On the other hand . . .

 

 

Spiritual Conundrum 1 — Life’s Theater makes the point that it is difficult to be sure who’s a scumbag and who’s not

 

I cannot say that I have modified my low opinion of Senator Cruz’s conduct and persona.  He is, sadly, a cynically intelligent, self-centered and socially destructive ass.  But Senator Cruz and his staunch allies provided the background that gave other people the opportunity to somewhat redeem their low reputations for competence and moral worth.

 

To wit, take this insightful political analysis of the crisis and its prominent players from John F. Harris:

 

 

The past three weeks are widely, and correctly, understood as a reflection of the weakness of Washington leaders, who in both parties hoped to avoid the confrontation that just ended but proved powerless to prevent it.

 

At the same time, however, the episode clearly highlighted that these leaders got to their positions for a reason — through skill at partisan maneuver and acutely sensitive instincts for self-protection.

 

Conservatives now say they have gained new respect for [Republican Speaker of the House John] Boehner, who stood with them on a strategy that he privately did not support even amid denunciations from Democrats and plummeting poll ratings.

 

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi emerges stronger, too. Although she never became a key player in the negotiations to end the shutdown, she was able to keep her Democratic Caucus united in a way that stood in stark contrast to the GOP drama.

 

[Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid was the most effective voice arguing against any concessions from Obama, and keeping his own party . . . in line. With his taciturn personality, Reid may never be a beloved Washington figure, but he is now a more feared one.

 

[Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell] . . . . was central to the deal that got cut, and he can portray himself in Washington and back in Kentucky as the adult in the room who can get important work done.

 

[President Obama] has shown that he is willing to stand firm to stop conservatives from imposing their agenda on him.

 

The conflict may look irrational — Republicans force a shutdown, tumble in public esteem, and get no policy achievement in return — but it showed individual actors acting rationally in pursuit of their own self-interest.

 

© 2013 John F. Harris, The Shutdown Winners Club, Politico (18 October 2013) (extracts)

 

 

Spiritual Conundrum 2 — “Acting rationally in pursuit of their own self-interest”

 

The political ecology that Harris describes is reflective of our times.  Our culture is increasingly devoted to narrow definitions of personal self-interest and the harms to Community that come with them.

 

We see the Selfishness Phenomenon in:

 

the recurrence of rampant, unregulated, predatory Robber Baron capitalism,

 

the cult of celebrity worship,

 

the narcissistic impulse that leads to rapt participation in Facebook, Twitter, and other social media.

 

The developed world — and especially the United States — have largely become all about Me, to the exclusion of the balanced interpersonal selflessness that viable communities require.

 

 

Spiritual Conundrum 3 — how to react to all this — effectively and without losing spiritual wisdom and the compassion that almost certainly goes with it

 

If legitimate scumbags are hard to identify — from the non-dualistic perspective that is the foundation of spiritual wisdom and compassion — how are we to react to these folks’ ineradicable presence among us?

 

Admittedly, I still see little emulable merit to Senator Cruz’s performance.  He is almost certainly using his Harvard-fueled intelligence to manipulate and personally profit from an especially sturdy branch of Humanity’s ever present portion of Angry Ignorami.

 

Yet, without him, the rest of our Feet of Clay would not look so good.

 

So what to do — without imperiling what we often call Soul?

 

My judgmental statements about so many of our unworthy leaders are often overstated for purposes of making a point about trying to achieve a better societal future.  In my personal life, I have trouble coming to and holding demeaning opinions of every one of the people I meet.  Familiarity does not breed contempt.

 

On the other hand, without standards for leadership (or anything else), we are likely to drift into a personal and professional complacence that sabotages achievement of the human potential.

 

Resolution of the perennial conflict between non-dualism and the need to “direct according to at least some standards” is a dynamic process — too much here, too little there, and the unending corrections that link both.

 

Personal solutions to these conundrums vary with our spiritual development, social position, and mission.  The same person may speak and think differently, depending on context.  His or her perspective is likely to change over a life time.

 

What is spiritually necessary to the achievement of wisdom — in most situations — is the recognition that “but for this (or that), I am he and she.”

 

For example, as much as I have detested President Obama’s cynical exploitation of our military and our national security, I am pained to see the world weariness newly on his face.  Life take its toll.  And I often question whether our personal courses could almost ever have been other than what they turned out to be.

 

 

The moral? — Ambiguity

 

If our eyes are open, and our brain agile, ambiguity rules.

 

“Do no harm” may be a valid spiritual minimalist’s approach to wise living.  Compassion might be the single most necessary ingredient to spiritual wisdom — assuming that we see love at Spirit’s core.

 

That said, too much compassion — indiscriminately distributed — keeps us from effectively resisting and chastising those who damage the innocents around them.

 

This is one of my criticisms of Buddhism’s arguable overemphasis on compassion, to the detriment of direction.  Just because I understand why “you” did it, does not mean that you, and what you did, are okay:

 

Relevant here, I quarrel with the oft-quoted line that we should “hate the act, but not the person.”

 

Sometimes the person and the act are essentially the same thing.  I have known no one who loves the malevolent people among us, in anything but a meaningless amorphously detached and abstract sense.

 

People who spout this (love person, hate act) spiritual superficiality are, in my experience, among the sentiment’s most frequent violators.

 

On spiritual matters it is easy to become either a hypocrite or an ineffectual bystander.

 

In closing, nothing I have written here is especially helpful as a guiding framework, particularly for those whose insecurities impel them to ride their spirit bicycle along the road’s Religion-imposed striping.

 

But that’s the point.

 

It “ain’t” clear.  And those who pretend it is are either inexperienced — regarding Life’s unending series of contextual permutations — or in psychic denial.

 

That was spiritual sage Jiddu Krishnamurti’s constantly made argument against setting up an inviolable framework of “do this” and “not that”.

 

His emphasis was always on the good of the whole — which he (paradoxically) implied can only be seen by those spiritually and meditatively practiced enough to be magnificently aware of it.  In other words, for him, there were no spiritual guidelines to give those people, who (as yet) did not have the tools to see the big picture.

 

In part, Krishnamurti was reacting against the damage done by Religion’s unnuanced certitudes.  He saw them as posing barriers to Truth’s recognition.  Though I agree with him, I also think that it is unhelpful not to provide the unseeing with techniques that may allow them to eventually open to the larger view.

 

Krishnamurti’s thinking and mine may diverge on the issue of the suddenness of “awakening”.  He implied that it is sudden and now.  I tend to think that expanded spiritual perspective can sometimes be experientially and meditatively gradual.  Admittedly, I am unsure whether the seed of awakening has to be already present in the eventually "enlightened".  That aspect may be what Krishnamurti was pointing to.  If so, I will not argue with him.

 

Pertinent here, I frequently remind myself of the thought that I once shared with a friend, who was befuddled by stupid people’s frequently indulged tendency to do and believe dumb things:

 

If they are stupid, they don’t have the brainpower to follow the avenues of the intelligence that eludes them.

 

Just imagine us trying to do the innumerable things that we are not gifted at.

 

Ambiguity.

 

It becomes a solace to make friends with it.  The process confers a sense of self-humor and the ability shout, without taking oneself too seriously.

 

This is the ecology of soul.