Re: Lightworkers of the world, unite!+

[Guest guest]

Jung did speak of some people having a "white shadow" - mebbe yrs is a case in point! That blog has elements of truth, no doubt, the thing is not to see Obama, the person, but to see the energy he is carrying. We can hope that he maintains his humility n continues to play a lot of basketball.

For me, the ego is a donkey [ha!} n sometimes we get an interesting rider - this is the origin of my parable of the Three Donkeys in my Beejum Book. I believe I printed it out for Jung-fire n cld prob do it again, if anyone requests it. It illustrates the 3 kinds of egos - inflated, neg-inflated n healthy (in disguise).

Hot, humid, n yucky here but a lot to be grateful for!

love

aoGet trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

[Guest guest]

Dear Alice,

White Shadow? Sounds like a laundry detergent :-).

Problem is, as you say, that, if Obam is pres., it will be Obama the

man and not Obama the lightworker, projection carrier, or savior who is

in charge. Oh, dear.

best,

Dan

IonaDove@... wrote:

Jung did speak of some people having a "white shadow" - mebbe

yrs is a case in point! That blog has

elements of truth, no doubt, the thing is not to see Obama, the person,

but to see the energy he is carrying. We can hope that he maintains his

humility n continues to play a lot of basketball.

For me, the ego is a donkey [ha!} n sometimes we get an

interesting rider - this is the origin of my parable of the Three

Donkeys in my Beejum Book. I believe I printed it out for

Jung-fire n cld prob do it again, if anyone requests it. It illustrates

the 3 kinds of egos - inflated, neg-inflated n healthy (in disguise).

Hot, humid, n yucky here but a lot to be grateful for!

love

ao

Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

[Guest guest]

>

> Hi All: Sitting across the border, I am awe struck by the sheer

passion and

> vision of this election.

Hi, Frances ... me, too -- on " this side of the border " . Good

to ? " talk with you " ? (*) again on this list. You were one of the

first

people to welcome me to Jung-Fire, and I've been a lot involved --

most

particularly quite recently -- with my " your side of the border "

story,

history, identity ( " or the whatever " ).

But like Dan (Dan, I hope I'm not reading you wrong but as usual I'm

posting a bit late in my ?24-hour-energy cycle?), I'm a lot concerned

about (now this is " me-speak " , not any one else's) a kind of ... and

at

that I pause to try to figure out what words to

use ... " benighted " ? ... what? Voodooism? Self-

deception? " Inflation " , for that fine old Jung 101 term? ... about

all

this Obama/ " Lightworkers " stuff that's (pardon my language if it

offends anyone, but I'm racing against time right now) permeating

some

of the discussions.

I'll be a lot looking forward to all future posts on this thread.

Thanks, everyone!

marte

P.S. I'm not saying that Barack Obama is, himself, the individual

either enlightened or not; or how much either. But I [hello, Dan! ;-

)], who have only once so far in my ?ha ha? " young life " voted in a

public election for a Registered Republican ... and who, yes, didn't

ever go around throwing bombs or outrageously obstreperous

behaviours, am, I confess, in this particular typing-into-my-computer

moment, quite a lot worried about how (or _whether_!) either notions

or experiences of " passion and vision " -- which all of us honor in

(so to say) our wearing-our-?jungian? clothes [or thoughts] -- are

really what's needed for the quite-not-at-all- " jungian " aspects of

choice for individuals in saecular government?

Sorry for length.

[Guest guest]

My mother is 81yo and is a retired university vice president. She was apath breaker. Her comment: 'My being a feminist is unable to indulge beingthe victim at all." Also, of the 13 who turned out at her 60th Bryn Mawrreunion in May, all 13 were for Obama.

Hi All:

I'm trying to be respectful of the feelings that Frances and so many women who supported Hillary express but I am a soon to be 64 year old woman who came of age in women's support groups and I just don't get it. With all of the problems we have to deal with; the wars, lack of affordable health care, gas, food, the condition of the environment, etc. breaking some glass ceiling or fulfilling the dream of some women to see a female president in the white house seems totally irrelevant to me. The time for pushing that agenda has come and gone. While us boomers were busy buying SUVs and land shares, this next generation has leapt right over that. They and many of the women who identify with Obama's world view live in a post racial and a post feminist world. Gender and race don't matter and they all just assume that a woman; the right woman at the right time, will become president....no marching in the streets required.

Even, if we did still need to consciously work on putting female voices and feminine energy in the White House, Hillary Clinton is the last person I know who represents what I think of as feminine principles....Things like compassion and inclusiveness, the ability to bring people together and take care of one another. She ran one of the most divisive, mean spirited, dirty campaigns I've ever seen and managed in the process to get her personal negatives numbers in the high 60 percent. What did she model for young women; that it's okay to lie and cheat and change the rules when you are losing. She didn't lose because she is a woman or because of sexism, although of course some of that exists as well as many people who won't vote for a black man; she lost because she ran a lousy campaign, felt so entitled she didn't even plan beyond Super Tuesday and because she ran into an opponent who isn't the Messiah, but who brings a whole lot of wisdom and inspirational energy to a new generation of young people willing to go to work to make things better for all of us. "Out of many; One" is an Obama slogan. Where Hillary has divided people into voting blocks of woman and white working classes, etc. he has created a huge network of people ready to go to work for democratic causes. He did that on the Internet and has millions of people on the ground in all fifty states ready to write work to get laws passed, to get out the vote and win seats for Democrats in the House and Senate. The Republicans aren't going to know what hit them because this movement has unfolded on the Internet, on Face book and My Space, and You tube. Instead of taking to the streets this generation has taken to their "notebooks" and the world is never going to be the same.

It's their world now; their debt, their dead bodies coming home for a stupid unnecessary war, their planet that is dying because of their greedy, selfish, short sighted elders....what a mess we left them.....

SuzanneVote for your city's best dining and nightlife. City's Best 2008.

[Guest guest]

I thought initially that McCain wouldbeat him handily, but now I am not so sure. There is a psychicinfection spreading - "hope," they call it, although I am not surethat that is its proper name. ("Hope for what?," I want to ask somepeople. Do they think that Obama will somehow make their dreams cometrue? Give them a job? Punish those who make them feel like losers?Make fuel prices come down? Make the very real and inevitabledifferences among peoples' actual interests go away? Enslave thedoctors and make medical care free? What new millenium are theyanticipating?

Hi Dan:

I know you're talking to Marte but here I am butting in. You are mocking something "hope" ...the belief that people can work to make things better that is very real to millions of people who support Obama. Here's a quote off a blog on Huffington post that says it pretty clearly,

"It isn't that Barack Obama is a saint. He isn't. It isn't that he can do everything alone. He can't. This is what it is: He made us believe that if we stood together we could change the country and the world for the better and achieve more justice for more people. If we took financial responsibility for our own political candidates, we could take our government back from the lobbyists and special interests who have been controlling it to our detriment for so long. The great gift that he has brought us is not a messiah figure, but rather a belief in our own power for good if we work together. Don't worry about whether or not we're paying our bills. We are. We're very concerned about what's been happening to our country and we feel an urgency. An America that loses it's moral compass will result in wide spread suffering . The world knows it too. That's why every international poll shows that Obama is more popular than any other lving world leader. They write songs about him in Japan, hang banners in Scotland, form support groups in France, blog from Indonesia and Kenya. They know that the choice we make about who will lead us, will impact their lives too. We think we're spending our donation dollars wisely."

Millions of people are taking ten, twenty dollars a month out of their food budget and sending it to him to be a part of their government and to see what can happen if he isn't owned by lobbyists and corporate interests. Things can be different, even if only small steps are possible. The oil companies can be made to pay windfall profit taxes and CEO's can live on fifty million a year instead of a hundred million; and maybe the health insurance I pay $500 a month for can be provided for $300....maybe corporations can be held accountable for poisoning the land and our food supply and incentives can be offered for creating jobs here. Why on earth not? There's a lot of ground between "pie in the sky dreams" and some solutions to real problems." I think you are going to be surprised by what people working together for causes they believe in can do.

Suzanne

"I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts": Abraham Lincoln Vote for your city's best dining and nightlife. City's Best 2008.

[Guest guest]

Frances, all,

> Still feeling like a lot of women who support

> Hillary, that we¹ve been put back in our place once again. It¹s the old

> wound of having the feminine shut out and it¹s very emotional, that¹s all.

Hopefully this emotional sense is subject to conscious transformation. I

know it will be with you Frances.

Meanwhile, over at hillaryclintoforum.net, the self-reinforcing of

bitterness and subjectivity reaches for its nadir: this is where Obama is

deeply hated for hateful and absurd reasons, where a McCain/Clinton ticket

is rationalized to be the ideal choice, and all the implicit causal claim

is that Clinton was defeated by the male power principle.

***

My problem is the implication that the answer to the question of who

should be the nominee was answerable in terms of correct and

incorrect--with respect to femine/masculine, gender. So, a vote against

Hillary was presumed a vote against women and their consciousness. Tis but

magical thinking to believe so.

Yet it plugs into a collective magical infection and does a disservice to

the very feminine eros itself. imo

My mother is 81yo and is a retired university vice president. She was a

path breaker. Her comment: 'My being a feminist is unable to indulge being

the victim at all. " Also, of the 13 who turned out at her 60th Bryn Mawr

reunion in May, all 13 were for Obama.

regards,

[Guest guest]

Dear Suzanne,I am not aware of having "mocked" anyone here.

Well, wake up, Dan. I was so infuriated by your mocking tone that I had to shut down the computer and leave the room before I smashed it with a fire axe.

Blissings,

SamVote for your city's best dining and nightlife. City's Best 2008.

[Guest guest]

Well, I feel better now ;-)

HI Dan:

Well I'm glad for you too. I don't have the time to go line for line with you but it might be fun.

Suffice it to say we see life through a very different lens.

I'd like to live in a world where people care enough about each other so that we work to make sure everybody has food, a roof over their head, a safe place to live, adequate health care and meaningful work. Beyond that if you're especially smart or talented or ambitious and want to spend your time accumulating wealth...good for you.

I also want to live in a world where we have agreed upon rules; just like we have rules of the road we need laws to prevent and/or punish people for making products that hurt other people or making obscene profits in the face of massive human suffering.

I believe in social democracy and responsible capitalism but not a government that has been taken over by unbridled greed. Justice means, "what goes around, comes around"

We are responsible for how our actions or inactions effect other people.....and yes, silly me I believe in the innate goodness and wisdom of human beings; all of them....

I see Obama as a genuinely gifted and decent human being who knows how to bring the best out in people and inspire them to work for the things they believe in.

Well, now I also feel much better :-)

Best,

Suzanne

Vote for your city's best dining and nightlife. City's Best 2008.

[Guest guest]

> I'd like to live in a world where people care enough about eachother so > that we work to make sure everybody has food, a roof over theirhead, a safe > place to live, adequate health care and meaningful work. Beyond thatif you're > especially smart or talented or ambitious and want to spend your time > accumulating wealth...good for you.Oh, dear. It's not just about wealth, or even primarily about wealth.It is, to repeat, about the best being free to be the best. "Beyond that," you say. Why does the lowest thing have to come first?Why not say, let's create conditions where the naturally best willthrive, and then let them sort out poverty as they think best?

Hi Dan:

We will never know the best in anyone until their basic needs are met. The best aren't free to be anything if they are hungry, unsafe, and uneducated. Look at Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. The basic needs I talk about have to be met first then you move to the next level of needs which include belonging, communication freedom of expression, etc. The more we help one another meet our basic needs, the more we will have a population of people striving for their best and the better off we will all be, don't you think.

Best, (see we even wish each other the best)

Suzanne

"I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts": Abraham Lincoln Vote for your city's best dining and nightlife. City's Best 2008.

[Guest guest]

Dear Marte,

Why, " benighted, " " voodoo, " " self-deception, " and " inflation " all work

for me :-) (not necessarily on the part of Obama, but on *some* of his

supporters, certainly not all). I thought initially that McCain would

beat him handily, but now I am not so sure. There is a psychic

infection spreading - " hope, " they call it, although I am not sure

that that is its proper name. ( " Hope for what?, " I want to ask some

people. Do they think that Obama will somehow make their dreams come

true? Give them a job? Punish those who make them feel like losers?

Make fuel prices come down? Make the very real and inevitable

differences among peoples' actual interests go away? Enslave the

doctors and make medical care free? What new millenium are they

anticipating?

I will go out on a limb and predict this - if the hope is that Obama

will end the war in, say, his first term, they are to be sadly

disappointed).

Re: your only voting for a R once. In 2004, I voted against McCain for

AZ Senator, and for the libertarian guy (whose name escapes me, and

who got 3000 votes or something, lol). I thought (still think, really)

that he was a RINO. Times change, and we change with them.

It may turn out that there is nothing to do but hunker down and bear

up, assuming that one can do both simultaneously :-).

best,

Dan

" I see a bad moon risin', I see trouble on the way. "

CCR

> >

> > Hi All: Sitting across the border, I am awe struck by the sheer

> passion and

> > vision of this election.

>

>

> Hi, Frances ... me, too -- on " this side of the border " . Good

> to ? " talk with you " ? (*) again on this list. You were one of the

> first

> people to welcome me to Jung-Fire, and I've been a lot involved --

> most

> particularly quite recently -- with my " your side of the border "

> story,

> history, identity ( " or the whatever " ).

>

> But like Dan (Dan, I hope I'm not reading you wrong but as usual I'm

> posting a bit late in my ?24-hour-energy cycle?), I'm a lot concerned

> about (now this is " me-speak " , not any one else's) a kind of ... and

> at

> that I pause to try to figure out what words to

> use ... " benighted " ? ... what? Voodooism? Self-

> deception? " Inflation " , for that fine old Jung 101 term? ... about

> all

> this Obama/ " Lightworkers " stuff that's (pardon my language if it

> offends anyone, but I'm racing against time right now) permeating

> some

> of the discussions.

>

> I'll be a lot looking forward to all future posts on this thread.

>

> Thanks, everyone!

>

> marte

>

> P.S. I'm not saying that Barack Obama is, himself, the individual

> either enlightened or not; or how much either. But I [hello, Dan! ;-

> )], who have only once so far in my ?ha ha? " young life " voted in a

> public election for a Registered Republican ... and who, yes, didn't

> ever go around throwing bombs or outrageously obstreperous

> behaviours, am, I confess, in this particular typing-into-my-computer

> moment, quite a lot worried about how (or _whether_!) either notions

> or experiences of " passion and vision " -- which all of us honor in

> (so to say) our wearing-our-?jungian? clothes [or thoughts] -- are

> really what's needed for the quite-not-at-all- " jungian " aspects of

> choice for individuals in saecular government?

>

> Sorry for length.

>

[Guest guest]

>

>

>

> In a message dated 6/10/2008 10:41:53 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,

> dwatkins9@... writes:

>

> I thought initially that McCain would

> beat him handily, but now I am not so sure. There is a psychic

> infection spreading - " hope, " they call it, although I am not sure

> that that is its proper name. ( " Hope for what?, " I want to ask some

> people. Do they think that Obama will somehow make their dreams come

> true? Give them a job? Punish those who make them feel like losers?

> Make fuel prices come down? Make the very real and inevitable

> differences among peoples' actual interests go away? Enslave the

> doctors and make medical care free? What new millenium are they

> anticipating?

>

>

>

> Hi Dan:

>

> I know you're talking to Marte but here I am butting in. You are

mocking

> something " hope "

Dear Suzanne,

I am not aware of having " mocked " anyone here. I do get frustrated

with people who wish for impossible or bad things, and do harm as a

result.

>...the belief that people can work to make things better

The people must be led by wise leaders, or their work will almost

always lead to disaster. Regardless of where one comes from or what

one might think of the American revolution, for example, it is clear

that it was completely " top-down " in leadership, and " of the people "

in name only. By contrast, the French revolution was an unmitigated

disaster.

>that

> is very real to millions of people who support Obama. Here's a

quote off a

> blog on Huffington post that says it pretty clearly,

>

>

> " It isn't that Barack Obama is a saint.

Clearly, but that is the projection - the " hope " - that he is at

present evincing. And not saint, even, but savior. No doubt some

cooler heads will prevail in time, though.

> He isn't. It isn't that he can do

> everything alone. He can't. This is what it is: He made us believe

that if we

> stood together we could change the country and the world for the

better and

> achieve more justice for more people.

What is meant here by " justice " ? To me, justice in the international

sphere means helping friends, harming enemies, and keeping a close and

jaundiced eye on strangers. The current potus understands this in

principle, even if he could be better on the execution side.

Justice on the domestic side means to me primarily the opportunity for

the best to be the best. Winners win, losers lose, mediocrities land

somewhere in the middle - that's justice. Play what you're dealt as

well as you can, and no whining. Is that what Sen. Obama means by

justice? We have to talk about what justice is, about what we mean by it.

>If we took financial responsibility for

> our own political candidates, we could take our government back from

the

> lobbyists and special interests who have been controlling it to our

detriment for

> so long.

Who's " we " ? Sophisticated, well-read types with some money, like

yourself? You *are* the elite.

That said, I don't know why it is just, at least under the American

regime, to take away from the rich their right to spend or donate

their money as they see fit.

>The great gift that he has brought us is not a messiah figure, but

> rather a belief in our own power for good if we work together. Don't

worry

> about whether or not we're paying our bills. We are. We're very

concerned about

> what's been happening to our country and we feel an urgency. An

America that

> loses it's moral compass will result in wide spread suffering .

What is meant here by " moral compass " What is the basis of its true

North? As used here, it sounds like empty rhetoric - I don't know what

the author means. And why is " wide spread " suffering always so bad?

WWII was wide-spread suffering - should we not then have engaged in

it? I am wary of the implication that relief of suffering - the least

suffering for the greatest number, as it were - is the telos of

government.

> The world

> knows it too.

> That's why every international poll shows that Obama is more

> popular than any other lving world leader.

And does that not bother you? Do you assume that international

competitors and enemies do not want to see the " superpower " (or the

" Great Satan, " as the case might be) taken down a notch, if not

destroyed? International polls by definition are polls of people who

may not wish Americans well. Why should I not be wary of the internal

leader who is most praised by strangers and foreigners?

>They write songs about him in Japan,

> hang banners in Scotland, form support groups in France, blog from

Indonesia and

> Kenya.

I do not wish to be ruled by the Japanese, Scotch, French, Indonesians

or Kenyans.

>They know that the choice we make about who will lead us, will >impact

> their lives too. We think we're spending our donation dollars wisely. "

> Millions of people are taking ten, twenty dollars a month out of

their food

> budget and sending it to him to be a part of their government and to

see what

> can happen if he isn't owned by lobbyists and corporate interests.

I certainly don't trust lobbyist or corporate interests, but I don't

necessarily trust people who live so close to the bone that that ten

or twenty dollars comes out of the " food budget, " either. I don't

think that the ability to earn a decent living is an infallible marker

of ordinary prudence, but on the other hand I don't exactly not think

it either. Why should I be advised on practical matters (and an

election is the ultimate practical matter) by people who can hardly

earn a living in a place where opportunities for money making are

plentiful?

Things

> can be different, even if only small steps are possible. The oil

companies can

> be made to pay windfall profit taxes

And what happens to supply then, when the people who produce the good

in question are punished for doing so? I can tolerate paying high

prices for fuel, but if I can't *get* fuel - if I have to wait in line

for an hour to buy five gallons of motor fuel, as I did in 1974 - then

I *will* be angry.

I won't vote for that prospect.

> and CEO's can live on fifty million a

> year instead of a hundred million;

It's not a question of " living on. " The type of person who becomes a

CEO for better or worse does not think like an ordinary person, nor

are his motives the same. If I had two million in the bank, I would

never turn another lick of paid work again - but CEO types are not

like that. They may not just roll over and accept a punishment like

the one you propose. And what are the consequences if they resist, as

imo they can be expected to?

>and maybe the health insurance I pay $500 a

> month for can be provided for $300

Provided by whom? The real cost is still the same $500.00, if not

more. Whom will you hurt to save yourself $200.00? Me?

.....maybe corporations can be held

> accountable for poisoning the land and our food supply and

incentives can be offered

> for creating jobs here.

My land and food are fine. My food is so good, and so plentiful, that

I am struggling to lose weight.

What sort of incentives do you have in mind? In my observation, big

job creators are not stupid or easily manipulated.

And, while we're on the topic, if job creation is the issue, then why

do so many hate Walmart, the biggest job-creator of them all?

> Why on earth not? There's a lot of ground between

> " pie in the sky dreams " and some solutions to real problems. " I

think you

> are going to be surprised by what people working together for

causes they

> believe in can do.

> Suzanne

>

> " I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be

> depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to

bring them the

> real facts " : Abraham Lincoln

Lincoln here was either disingenuous or wrong. The people, united,

will always be defeated - by themselves.

Well, I feel better now ;-)

best,

Dan

>

>

>

>

> **************Vote for your city's best dining and nightlife. City's

Best

> 2008. (http://citysbest.aol.com?ncid=aolacg00050000000102)

>

[Guest guest]

Dan, all,

Most of the time when I read your stuff and sit back and look at its

propositions I chuckle at the parade of fallacies, especially the ones you

favor, like the appeal-to-authority, genetic-fallacies, and, evidently

your favorite of all, the straw man.

The other thing I note is that many times what you assert as fact, (itself

a fallacious assertion if not demonstrable,) reveals something you think

is true, but, also something that is researchable as true, as a matter of

evaluation of evidence.

Not that you would ever do this in any reasonable sense. Thus, for you the

British Empire proves an awful lot even if you have to cherry pick through

its ramifications and events.

***

> The people must be led by wise leaders, or their work will almost

> always lead to disaster.

Depends on what is meant by wisdom. " always lead to disaster " is

researchable.

We all know you favor wise-virtuous-prudent authority, order, and people

'knowing their rightful role.'

From this, in the past, you have argued for the benefits of slavery, the

male-only vote, the badness of printing presses.

But, because you are so superstitious and illogical I can't really see

over the years where you've been able to make much of your case.

Were a leader elected who embodies every single one of your well

thought-out suppositions and idealizations, would that mean the masses had

become adept at backing the wise, wise themselves? How would you tell the

difference?

See, Dan, what people know and how they operationally reason is

researchable. If you could detail in a profound sense what you mean by

wisdom, it is possible that those qualities could be psycho-metrically

measured.

This would save us all a lot of trouble.

***

Meanwhile...

> it is clear

> that it was completely " top-down " in leadership, and " of the people "

> in name only.

Your " clear " is of course a fallacious appeal. And, your " top-down " would

depend on how you define this.

It might be hard to square a revolution partly against kingly authority

with its being about favoring some other kind of executive authority.

> What is meant here by " justice " ? To me, justice in the international

> sphere means helping friends, harming enemies, and keeping a close and

> jaundiced eye on strangers. The current potus understands this in

> principle, even if he could be better on the execution side.

Luckily for you the current POTUS has embraced your ideas!

> Justice on the domestic side means to me primarily the opportunity for

> the best to be the best. Winners win, losers lose, mediocrities land

> somewhere in the middle - that's justice.

Economic Darwinism is the nest for justice. Turns justice on its head:

more just desserts.

And the measure of winning is how much of what?

> WWII was wide-spread suffering - should we not then have engaged in

> it?

Ooops, fallacy-land!!!

> Why should I not be wary of the internal

> leader who is most praised by strangers and foreigners?

And more!!!

> And what happens to supply then, when the people who produce the good

> in question are punished for doing so?

And more!!! (Actually three by my count.)

> It's not a question of " living on. " The type of person who becomes a

> CEO for better or worse does not think like an ordinary person

Researchable. Define ordinary and then bring me your research.

> The real cost is still the same $500.00

Please, bring me the data to back this up. (I had no idea you were expert

in health care equity and equity analysis. But, because you must be, bring

me the hard figures about real costs and premium costs.)

> And, while we're on the topic, if job creation is the issue, then why

> do so many hate Walmart, the biggest job-creator of them all?

Yet more fallacies (3) piling up!!!

I love your stuff and would use it for coursework if given the opportunity.

regards,

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 6/10/2008 10:41:53 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,

dwatkins9@... writes:

>There is a psychic infection spreading - " hope, " they call it,

although I am not sure that that is its proper name. ( " Hope for what?, " I want

to ask some people. Do they think that Obama will somehow make their dreams come

true?

Comment:

If the opposite of hope is cynicism, sarcasm, despair, then I'll take hope any

day. The above sounds like the opposite though. I have never heard hope

referred to as " psychic infection " ...what a thought!

I have chosen to take Obama at face value....and I believe he correctly

describes the phenomenon surrounding his candidacy as the " audacity " of hope.

Perhaps it is unlike we have seen in recent history since FDR and JFK first ran

in the 30s and the 60s. Both offered a sharp break from a stagnant past....and

both faced enormous challenges shortly after their election. I would have

preferred Obama to have 10-20 more years of experience (not of politics, but of

life) before jumping in with both feet. But perhaps an older man COULD not

approach the challenges we now face as a nation with such a fresh, bold (and

many would say naive) perspective. And refusing to take money from the special

interests is nothing short of a genius stroke, IMO. But whether our next pres

is McCain or Obama, the poor man will face bewildering challenges, problems and

entrenched special interests who will hang on their positions of wealth and

privilege with a death grip. Obama will do so as US,

while McCain will do so as ME. To me, the true leader always takes the former

approach. Both will make mistakes and will learn the hard way. But I can't see

that McCain's judgement on critical issues qualifies him any more than Obama's

lack of experience disqualifies him for the job.

What I see as the greatest tragedy of our current debacle is the lack of

accountability by those who got us in our present state of discontent. That, to

me, sets a terrible and unjust precedent for the future. And it is precisely

what the Constitution sets forth in terms of remedies of both both impeachment

and removal from office via conviction for high crimes and misdemeanors. Bush

and Cheney's actions, intentional deceptions and decisions qualify them for

both, but the political will does not exist in the Congress to press them

forward, largely now because of political expediency and " running down the

clock " until their terms of office mercifully end our collective misery.

I have no doubt that History will record the negligence of our Congress in

carrying out their Constitutional responsibilities, toward will sure be one of

the low ebbs of our history. I am ashamed and saddened to have endured it these

past eight years. ANYTHING would be better than what we have now calling itself

government. So, for me, a little hope right now is quite welcome indeed. I

will vote for and support " hope " in this election - infection or not, simply

because its opposite is no longer endurable. Sunlight is the greatest

disinfectant of all, and there is plenty of scum and viral growth in our body

politic that will run from it, try as they surely will.

Greg

_______________________________________________

Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com

The most personalized portal on the Web!

[Guest guest]

Dear Suzanne,

>

>

>

> In a message dated 6/10/2008 12:31:51 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,

> dwatkins9@... writes:

>

> Well, I feel better now ;-)

>

>

>

> HI Dan:

>

> Well I'm glad for you too. I don't have the time to go line for

line with

> you but it might be fun.

> Suffice it to say we see life through a very different lens.

>

> I'd like to live in a world where people care enough about each

other so

> that we work to make sure everybody has food, a roof over their

head, a safe

> place to live, adequate health care and meaningful work. Beyond that

if you're

> especially smart or talented or ambitious and want to spend your time

> accumulating wealth...good for you.

Oh, dear. It's not just about wealth, or even primarily about wealth.

It is, to repeat, about the best being free to be the best.

" Beyond that, " you say. Why does the lowest thing have to come first?

Why not say, let's create conditions where the naturally best will

thrive, and then let them sort out poverty as they think best?

>

> I also want to live in a world where we have agreed upon rules;

I don't. I want to live where the rules are local. I don't like that

much homogeneity.

just like we

> have rules of the road we need laws to prevent and/or punish people

for

> making products that hurt other people or making obscene profits in

the face of

> massive human suffering.

What does " obscene " mean? And what have profits to do with " massive

human suffering? " If I get rich selling barbecue grills (let's say) am

I now responsible for causing or alleviating " massive human

suffering? " Do I deserve punishment for becoming wealthy?

Or is it just that some people - sensitive plants! - can't enjoy their

prosperity because of guilt at the knowledge that some others are

doing without, and so want to impose their sensibilities on others?

" Let's get all the poor sorted so that I can enjoy my stuff! " , lol.

I am not my brother's keeper - really. Or rather, they are not my

brothers, they are strangers. I have one brother and one brother only,

and I would gladly give him a lung or a kidney. I wouldn't do that for

a stranger.

>

> I believe in social democracy and responsible capitalism but not a

> government that has been taken over by unbridled greed. Justice

means, " what goes

> around, comes around "

> We are responsible for how our actions or inactions effect other

> people.....and yes, silly me I believe in the innate goodness and

wisdom of human

> beings; all of them....

Well, this is where we differ, and perhaps where people like me differ

from Obama supporters generally. I frankly can't see how you can look

at human beings or human history and reach any such conclusion.

Where's the evidence? If a Romulan scout were sent to observe human

beings and report back to Romulas, do you think that he would report

to his superiors that human beings are " innately good and wise, all of

them " ? I mean, really :-).

>

> I see Obama as a genuinely gifted and decent human being who knows

how to

> bring the best out in people and inspire them to work for the things

they

> believe in.

>

> Well, now I also feel much better :-)

We aim to please ;-).

best,

Dan

>

>

> Best,

>

> Suzanne

>

>

>

>

> **************Vote for your city's best dining and nightlife. City's

Best

> 2008. (http://citysbest.aol.com?ncid=aolacg00050000000102)

>

[Guest guest]

Dear ,

You - like *all* of your tribe - sometimes don't know the difference

between rhetoric and scientific discourse, a failing which may cost

you and yours yet another American election.

Were a wise man, a philosopher king, to be elected, it would probably

be an accident - he would be elected despite his wisdom, not because

of it.

I have never argued for chattel slavery, although I may have argued

that there are worse things (which there are, legal abortion being

one). Things were probably marginally better when the suffrage was

solely male, although the real improvement would be to bring back the

property qualification - I could even live with female suffrage if

only we could have the property qualification.

It is not my purpose to save you trouble, lol. But, I am glad you love

my stuff, and feel free to use it as you see fit. If it is in a

political philosophy class, though, you might want to warn your

students that you are preparing then for life in a city that exists

only in speech. A " scientific " city - LOL!

Always a pleasure, .

best,

Dan

>

> Dan, all,

>

> Most of the time when I read your stuff and sit back and look at its

> propositions I chuckle at the parade of fallacies, especially the

ones you

> favor, like the appeal-to-authority, genetic-fallacies, and, evidently

> your favorite of all, the straw man.

>

> The other thing I note is that many times what you assert as fact,

(itself

> a fallacious assertion if not demonstrable,) reveals something you think

> is true, but, also something that is researchable as true, as a

matter of

> evaluation of evidence.

>

> Not that you would ever do this in any reasonable sense. Thus, for

you the

> British Empire proves an awful lot even if you have to cherry pick

through

> its ramifications and events.

>

> ***

>

> > The people must be led by wise leaders, or their work will almost

> > always lead to disaster.

>

> Depends on what is meant by wisdom. " always lead to disaster " is

> researchable.

>

> We all know you favor wise-virtuous-prudent authority, order, and people

> 'knowing their rightful role.'

>

> From this, in the past, you have argued for the benefits of slavery, the

> male-only vote, the badness of printing presses.

>

> But, because you are so superstitious and illogical I can't really see

> over the years where you've been able to make much of your case.

>

> Were a leader elected who embodies every single one of your well

> thought-out suppositions and idealizations, would that mean the

masses had

> become adept at backing the wise, wise themselves? How would you

tell the

> difference?

>

> See, Dan, what people know and how they operationally reason is

> researchable. If you could detail in a profound sense what you mean by

> wisdom, it is possible that those qualities could be psycho-metrically

> measured.

>

> This would save us all a lot of trouble.

>

> ***

>

> Meanwhile...

>

> > it is clear

> > that it was completely " top-down " in leadership, and " of the people "

> > in name only.

>

> Your " clear " is of course a fallacious appeal. And, your " top-down "

would

> depend on how you define this.

>

> It might be hard to square a revolution partly against kingly authority

> with its being about favoring some other kind of executive authority.

>

> > What is meant here by " justice " ? To me, justice in the international

> > sphere means helping friends, harming enemies, and keeping a close and

> > jaundiced eye on strangers. The current potus understands this in

> > principle, even if he could be better on the execution side.

>

> Luckily for you the current POTUS has embraced your ideas!

Indeed. Two Supreme Court justices, who will matter still when school

kids are asking, " Iraq? Was that like Vietnam? "

>

> > Justice on the domestic side means to me primarily the opportunity for

> > the best to be the best. Winners win, losers lose, mediocrities land

> > somewhere in the middle - that's justice.

>

> Economic Darwinism is the nest for justice. Turns justice on its head:

> more just desserts.

>

> And the measure of winning is how much of what?

>

> > WWII was wide-spread suffering - should we not then have engaged in

> > it?

>

> Ooops, fallacy-land!!!

An instance of accepting suffering as the better course.

>

> > Why should I not be wary of the internal

> > leader who is most praised by strangers and foreigners?

>

> And more!!!

>

> > And what happens to supply then, when the people who produce the good

> > in question are punished for doing so?

>

> And more!!! (Actually three by my count.)

>

>

> > It's not a question of " living on. " The type of person who becomes a

> > CEO for better or worse does not think like an ordinary person

>

> Researchable. Define ordinary and then bring me your research.

>

> > The real cost is still the same $500.00

>

> Please, bring me the data to back this up. (I had no idea you were

expert

> in health care equity and equity analysis. But, because you must be,

bring

> me the hard figures about real costs and premium costs.)

>

> > And, while we're on the topic, if job creation is the issue, then why

> > do so many hate Walmart, the biggest job-creator of them all?

>

> Yet more fallacies (3) piling up!!!

>

> I love your stuff and would use it for coursework if given the

opportunity.

>

> regards,

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Greg,

>

>

>

>

> In a message dated 6/10/2008 10:41:53 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,

> dwatkins9@... writes:

>

> >There is a psychic infection spreading - " hope, " they call it,

> although I am not sure that that is its proper name. ( " Hope for

what?, " I want to ask some people. Do they think that Obama will

somehow make their dreams come true?

>

> Comment:

>

> If the opposite of hope is cynicism, sarcasm, despair, then I'll

>take hope any day. The above sounds like the opposite though. I

>have never heard hope referred to as " psychic infection " ...what a

>thought!

Can't the wrong hopes, or hope for the wrong things, be infectious?

>

> I have chosen to take Obama at face value....and I believe he

correctly describes the phenomenon surrounding his candidacy as the

" audacity " of hope. Perhaps it is unlike we have seen in recent

history since FDR and JFK first ran in the 30s and the 60s. Both

offered a sharp break from a stagnant past....and both faced enormous

challenges shortly after their election. I would have preferred Obama

to have 10-20 more years of experience (not of politics, but of life)

before jumping in with both feet. But perhaps an older man COULD not

approach the challenges we now face as a nation with such a fresh,

bold (and many would say naive) perspective. And refusing to take

money from the special interests is nothing short of a genius stroke,

IMO. But whether our next pres is McCain or Obama, the poor man will

face bewildering challenges, problems and entrenched special interests

who will hang on their positions of wealth and privilege with a death

grip. Obama will do so as US,

> while McCain will do so as ME. To me, the true leader always takes

the former approach. Both will make mistakes and will learn the hard

way. But I can't see that McCain's judgement on critical issues

qualifies him any more than Obama's lack of experience disqualifies

him for the job.

>

> What I see as the greatest tragedy of our current debacle is the

lack of accountability by those who got us in our present state of

discontent. That, to me, sets a terrible and unjust precedent for the

future. And it is precisely what the Constitution sets forth in terms

of remedies of both both impeachment and removal from office via

conviction for high crimes and misdemeanors. Bush and Cheney's

actions, intentional deceptions and decisions qualify them for both,

but the political will does not exist in the Congress to press them

forward, largely now because of political expediency and " running down

the clock " until their terms of office mercifully end our collective

misery.

>

> I have no doubt that History will record the negligence of our

Congress in carrying out their Constitutional responsibilities, toward

will sure be one of the low ebbs of our history. I am ashamed and

saddened to have endured it these past eight years.

What do you think you should have done?

ANYTHING would be better than what we have now calling itself

government.

Famous last words. Things could be oh so much worse. This is at least

a silver age. Appreciate and enjoy

> So, for me, a little hope right now is quite welcome indeed. I

>will vote for and support " hope " in this election - infection or not,

>simply because its opposite is no longer endurable. Sunlight is the

>greatest disinfectant of all, and there is plenty of scum and viral

>growth in our body politic that will run from it, try as they surely

>will.

>

> Greg

best,

Dan

>

>

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com

> The most personalized portal on the Web!

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Suzanne,

>

>

> In a message dated 6/10/2008 2:00:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,

> dwatkins9@... writes:

>

> > I'd like to live in a world where people care enough about each

> other so

> > that we work to make sure everybody has food, a roof over their

> head, a safe

> > place to live, adequate health care and meaningful work. Beyond that

> if you're

> > especially smart or talented or ambitious and want to spend your

time

> > accumulating wealth...good for you.

>

> Oh, dear. It's not just about wealth, or even primarily about wealth.

> It is, to repeat, about the best being free to be the best.

>

> " Beyond that, " you say. Why does the lowest thing have to come first?

> Why not say, let's create conditions where the naturally best will

> thrive, and then let them sort out poverty as they think best?

>

>

> Hi Dan:

>

> We will never know the best in anyone until their basic needs are

>met.

Oh, I don't know. What about Socrates, who had one cloak, went

barefoot Winter and Summer, and lived in ten-thousand fold poverty?

(Needless to say he had no health insurance, and died owing the doctor

a chicken, if some writers are to be believed).

>The

> best aren't free to be anything if they are hungry, unsafe, and

>uneducated.

Sometimes I think that adversity and need brings out the best in some

people. Esp. lack of safety. A warrior by definition is not safe.

> Look at Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.

I've seen it. It seems to me to assume that the mediocre man or the

average man is the normal man. In that regards, he's like that pop

ethicist who is or recently was all the rage - Rawls.

Why does everything have to be about the common denominator?

The basic needs I talk about have to

> be met first then you move to the next level of needs which include

> belonging, communication freedom of expression, etc. The more we

help one another

> meet our basic needs, the more we will have a population of people

striving for

> their best and the better off we will all be, don't you think.

>

> Best, (see we even wish each other the best)

Sure, but the best I wish for you is that you will adopt my views :-).

best,

Dan

>

> Suzanne

>

>

>

>

> " I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be

> depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to

bring them the

> real facts " : Abraham Lincoln

>

>

>

>

> **************Vote for your city's best dining and nightlife. City's

Best

> 2008. (http://citysbest.aol.com?ncid=aolacg00050000000102)

>

[Guest guest]

Dear brita,

" Hillary Clinton is the last person I know who represents what I think of as feminine principles....Things like compassion and inclusiveness, the ability to bring people together and take care of one another. She ran one of the most divisive, mean spirited, dirty campaigns I've ever seen and managed in the process to get her personal negatives numbers in the high 60 percent. "

Don't hold back. let us know what you really think? i imagine Mc Cain is right up your alley?

but then, my views are so different. I shutter at yours,but it makes for an interesting list.

Toni

Re: Re: Lightworkers of the world, unite!+

My mother is 81yo and is a retired university vice president. She was apath breaker. Her comment: 'My being a feminist is unable to indulge beingthe victim at all." Also, of the 13 who turned out at her 60th Bryn Mawrreunion in May, all 13 were for Obama.

Hi All:

I'm trying to be respectful of the feelings that Frances and so many women who supported Hillary express but I am a soon to be 64 year old woman who came of age in women's support groups and I just don't get it. With all of the problems we have to deal with; the wars, lack of affordable health care, gas, food, the condition of the environment, etc. breaking some glass ceiling or fulfilling the dream of some women to see a female president in the white house seems totally irrelevant to me. The time for pushing that agenda has come and gone. While us boomers were busy buying SUVs and land shares, this next generation has leapt right over that. They and many of the women who identify with Obama's world view live in a post racial and a post feminist world. Gender and race don't matter and they all just assume that a woman; the right woman at the right time, will become president....no marching in the streets required.

Even, if we did still need to consciously work on putting female voices and feminine energy in the White House, Hillary Clinton is the last person I know who represents what I think of as feminine principles....Things like compassion and inclusiveness, the ability to bring people together and take care of one another. She ran one of the most divisive, mean spirited, dirty campaigns I've ever seen and managed in the process to get her personal negatives numbers in the high 60 percent. What did she model for young women; that it's okay to lie and cheat and change the rules when you are losing. She didn't lose because she is a woman or because of sexism, although of course some of that exists as well as many people who won't vote for a black man; she lost because she ran a lousy campaign, felt so entitled she didn't even plan beyond Super Tuesday and because she ran into an opponent who isn't the Messiah, but who brings a whole lot of wisdom and inspirational energy to a new generation of young people willing to go to work to make things better for all of us. "Out of many; One" is an Obama slogan. Where Hillary has divided people into voting blocks of woman and white working classes, etc. he has created a huge network of people ready to go to work for democratic causes. He did that on the Internet and has millions of people on the ground in all fifty states ready to write work to get laws passed, to get out the vote and win seats for Democrats in the House and Senate. The Republicans aren't going to know what hit them because this movement has unfolded on the Internet, on Face book and My Space, and You tube. Instead of taking to the streets this generation has taken to their "notebooks" and the world is never going to be the same.

It's their world now; their debt, their dead bodies coming home for a stupid unnecessary war, their planet that is dying because of their greedy, selfish, short sighted elders....what a mess we left them.....

Suzanne

Vote for your city's best dining and nightlife. City's Best 2008.

[Guest guest]

yes, Brita, I spent 5 years in Europe living among the citizens,a few years ago, and i saw

the good and the not so good. How is it that there is as much dissatisfaction in the working classes there as here among those who feel "left out"? Material safety is wonderful and I agree socialism has much going for it. Canada also...I wouldn't mind moving to Canada, New Zealand or Australia IN PRINCIPLE.( No, I am too American and too old ...i have spent enough time as an ex-patriot.

But the US has not grown as old as Europe and still is too young to deny "rugged individualism" and zillion dollar CEOs. Do not, please think that Europe is without pain. there are still outsiders, have-nots and the disenchanted. it is not paradise.Materialism does not cure human nature, nor riots, nor firefights and strikes, nor loneliness. And poverty is a matter of degree even in Europe.

We could not wash our cars in our parking place, nor cook outside on our deck of our apartment house. We could not mow our lawn between 1-3 each afternoon or play TV or talk loudly in the garden because it was "quiet time" We could not hang laundry outside and took turns with everything. I doubt many Americans would have liked that.

If you want socialism here, I'll be happy to urge you on, but listen to the Europeans about how long it takes to get a place in college and how difficult the completion is even if it is free in the end. In some countries one cannot major in any subject but only in what is "needed" operations. Medicine in general causes a longer wait and less choice.( 900 and more old people died in France during a heat wave a few years ago because they had no way to stay cool enough to survive.) The bureaucracy is still pretty fierce also...i can attest to that myself. And remember a national ID card and one must register with the police in any town one intends to move too in many countries.

Human nature does not change quickly if at all and xenophobia is visible still

But yes, fewer people go hungry. but the employment rate was way above ours until this downturn. Even a fed body wants to work if one is still the typical human who wants to have meaning.Choices will always have to be made.

I know about those other countries and i do give them credit....Just think how bad things there were before, and it took violence at first to overcome those conditions.

Toni

Re: Re: Lightworkers of the world, unite!+

Oh my, There never has been a decision made by populations of modern cities states, anywhere, where people have decided that everyone's needs will be met.

People cannot even decide what basic needs are? And they will never decide, unless a truly Christian government as in the early days of Christianity (for a short while only), or in a communist state that is not a tyranny.

Well, it seems to me that most European countries, England, France Germany, Sweden, Denmark, and Canada among others, have long ago made that decision and manage to provide some basic safety nets for their citizens, including food, housing and health care, education. They are not communist states, just social democracies; places where people choose to have their government provide for basic needs....Basic human needs include food, shelter from the heat or cold, healthcare, education. We already do most of those things here, albeit not fairly well and if the democrats get their way we will be adding some healthcare for everyone as well.

Suzanne

Vote for your city's best dining and nightlife. City's Best 2008.

[Guest guest]

Dear Toni,

There are worse things to be than young

and idealistic. Speaking as a representative of the post-baby-boom generation,

I say that our parents never had it so good, screwed up the world for us, and

now refuse to move over and retire so that we can have our chance, LOL!

Seriously, Obama is 47. To me that is

young enough to have energy and old enough to have experience. If we are

talking psychological maturity, it was Hillary who resorted to name-calling and

even bordered upon racism. I suggest that you look properly at his policies

before deserting the Democrat ticket.

Dan – as an advocate of returning to

the British Empire, you should care what Brits

think. According to the latest poll, if we Brits had a vote (as we should,

being just another state of the US!!)

Obama would win by a landslide. This despite the fact that conversations in

most pubs are every bit as racist as anything one might overhear in Texas!

Obama has done what no politician here or

anywhere else as far as I know has done – he has got young people

interested in politics and full of hope again, and that has to be a GOOD THING.

fa

" Show me a sane man and I will cure

him for you. " CG Jung

From: JUNG-FIRE

[mailto:JUNG-FIRE ] On Behalf

Of toni

Sent: 10 June 2008 20:33

To: JUNG-FIRE

Subject: Re: Re:

Lightworkers of the world, unite!+

Dear Dan,

There are always those who think " hope " is enough. It would be if the

collective unconscious made a concerted effort. But that, in this splintered

country and world is a dim hope in my view.

We get the government we deserve; young, immature and untested,and Black

( so we can show how broadminded we all are). They, will find that

presidential power can not bring about all these hoped for changes...even if

one has a " preacher " s voice and vocabulary. I realize getting someone

experienced yet not doddering is too much to ask, yet there were good

candidates who fell along the way.

You and I will be given,what the young and idealistic want...or will it be

the old and a little dim who win?

In any case the US

will muddle through.

Toni

Re: Lightworkers of the world, unite!+

> Dear Marte,

>

> Why, " benighted, " " voodoo, " " self-deception, "

and " inflation " all work

> for me :-) (not necessarily on the part of Obama, but on *some* of his

> supporters, certainly not all). I thought initially that McCain would

> beat him handily, but now I am not so sure. There is a psychic

> infection spreading - " hope, " they call it, although I am not

sure

> that that is its proper name. ( " Hope for what?, " I want to ask

some

> people. Do they think that Obama will somehow make their dreams come

> true? Give them a job? Punish those who make them feel like losers?

> Make fuel prices come down? Make the very real and inevitable

> differences among peoples' actual interests go away? Enslave the

> doctors and make medical care free? What new millenium are they

> anticipating?

>

> I will go out on a limb and predict this - if the hope is that Obama

> will end the war in, say, his first term, they are to be sadly

> disappointed).

>

> Re: your only voting for a R once. In 2004, I voted against McCain for

> AZ Senator, and for the libertarian guy (whose name escapes me, and

> who got 3000 votes or something, lol). I thought (still think, really)

> that he was a RINO. Times change, and we change with them.

>

> It may turn out that there is nothing to do but hunker down and bear

> up, assuming that one can do both simultaneously :-).

>

> best,

>

> Dan

>

> " I see a bad moon risin', I see trouble on the way. "

>

> CCR

>

>

>

>> >

>> > Hi All: Sitting across the border, I am awe struck by the sheer

>> passion and

>> > vision of this election.

>>

>>

>> Hi, Frances ... me, too -- on " this side of the border " .

Good

>> to ? " talk with you " ? (*) again on this list. You were one of

the

>> first

>> people to welcome me to Jung-Fire, and I've been a lot involved --

>> most

>> particularly quite recently -- with my " your side of the

border "

>> story,

>> history, identity ( " or the whatever " ).

>>

>> But like Dan (Dan, I hope I'm not reading you wrong but as usual I'm

>> posting a bit late in my ?24-hour-energy cycle?), I'm a lot concerned

>> about (now this is " me-speak " , not any one else's) a kind of

.... and

>> at

>> that I pause to try to figure out what words to

>> use ... " benighted " ? ... what? Voodooism? Self-

>> deception? " Inflation " , for that fine old Jung 101 term? ...

about

>> all

>> this Obama/ " Lightworkers " stuff that's (pardon my language

if it

>> offends anyone, but I'm racing against time right now) permeating

>> some

>> of the discussions.

>>

>> I'll be a lot looking forward to all future posts on this thread.

>>

>> Thanks, everyone!

>>

>> marte

>>

>> P.S. I'm not saying that Barack Obama is, himself, the individual

>> either enlightened or not; or how much either. But I [hello, Dan! ;-

>> )], who have only once so far in my ?ha ha? " young life "

voted in a

>> public election for a Registered Republican ... and who, yes, didn't

>> ever go around throwing bombs or outrageously obstreperous

>> behaviours, am, I confess, in this particular typing-into-my-computer

>> moment, quite a lot worried about how (or _whether_!) either notions

>> or experiences of " passion and vision " -- which all of us

honor in

>> (so to say) our wearing-our-?jungian? clothes [or thoughts] --

are

>> really what's needed for the quite-not-at-all- " jungian "

aspects of

>> choice for individuals in saecular government?

>>

>> Sorry for length.

>>

>

>

>

> ------------------------------------

>

> " Our highest duty as human beings is to search out a means whereby

beings

> may be freed from all kinds of unsatisfactory experience and

suffering. "

>

> H.H. Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th. Dalai Lama

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dear fa,

josefa wrote:

Dear Toni,

There are worse

things to be than young

and idealistic. Speaking as a representative of the post-baby-boom

generation,

I say that our parents never had it so good, screwed up the world for

us, and

now refuse to move over and retire so that we can have our chance, LOL!

Seriously, Obama

is 47. To me that is

young enough to have energy and old enough to have experience. If we

are

talking psychological maturity, it was Hillary who resorted to

name-calling and

even bordered upon racism. I suggest that you look properly at his

policies

before deserting the Democrat ticket.

Dan – as an

advocate of returning to

the British Empire, you should care what Brits

think.

Now, I don't advocate anything of the kind. That ship has sailed, and I

do mean sailed.

Surely there have to be some good old Tories left, though?

According to the

latest poll, if we Brits had a vote (as we should,

being just another state of the US!!)

Obama would win by a landslide.

I'm sorry to say, and don't mean to wound, but some of you (present

company excepted of course) are not the people you were. Imagine some

trying to abolish the House of Lords. Madness!

This despite the

fact that conversations in

most pubs are every bit as racist as anything one might overhear in Texas!

I lived in Texas for several years and never overheard any racist

conversations.

Obama has done

what no politician here or

anywhere else as far as I know has done – he has got young people

interested in politics and full of hope again, and that has to be a

GOOD THING.

It doesn't have to be a good thing. It's only a good thing if the

interest is in the right thing.

The young people have been galvanized before, and will again - until

the next (beer) party. It's us old farts who have the staying power.

best,

Dan

"Get you the sons your fathers got,

And God will save the Queen"

A E Housman (my very favorite English poet, another huge surprise I'm

sure ;-).

fa

"Show me a sane

man and I will cure

him for you." CG Jung

From: JUNG-FIRE

[mailto:JUNG-FIRE ] On Behalf

Of toni

Sent: 10 June 2008

20:33

To: JUNG-FIRE

Subject: Re:

Re:

Lightworkers of the world, unite!+

Dear Dan,

There are always those who think "hope" is enough. It would be if the

collective unconscious made a concerted effort. But that, in this

splintered

country and world is a dim hope in my view.

We get the government we deserve; young, immature and untested,and

Black

( so we can show how broadminded we all are). They, will find that

presidential power can not bring about all these hoped for

changes...even if

one has a "preacher"s voice and vocabulary. I realize getting someone

experienced yet not doddering is too much to ask, yet there were good

candidates who fell along the way.

You and I will be given,what the young and idealistic want...or will it

be

the old and a little dim who win?

In any case the US

will muddle through.

Toni

Re: Lightworkers of the world, unite!+

> Dear Marte,

>

> Why, "benighted," "voodoo," "self-deception,"

and "inflation" all work

> for me :-) (not necessarily on the part of Obama, but on *some* of

his

> supporters, certainly not all). I thought initially that McCain

would

> beat him handily, but now I am not so sure. There is a psychic

> infection spreading - "hope," they call it, although I am not

sure

> that that is its proper name. ("Hope for what?," I want to ask

some

> people. Do they think that Obama will somehow make their dreams

come

> true? Give them a job? Punish those who make them feel like losers?

> Make fuel prices come down? Make the very real and inevitable

> differences among peoples' actual interests go away? Enslave the

> doctors and make medical care free? What new millenium are they

> anticipating?

>

> I will go out on a limb and predict this - if the hope is that

Obama

> will end the war in, say, his first term, they are to be sadly

> disappointed).

>

> Re: your only voting for a R once. In 2004, I voted against McCain

for

> AZ Senator, and for the libertarian guy (whose name escapes me, and

> who got 3000 votes or something, lol). I thought (still think,

really)

> that he was a RINO. Times change, and we change with them.

>

> It may turn out that there is nothing to do but hunker down and

bear

> up, assuming that one can do both simultaneously :-).

>

> best,

>

> Dan

>

> "I see a bad moon risin', I see trouble on the way."

>

> CCR

>

>

>

>> >

>> > Hi All: Sitting across the border, I am awe struck by the

sheer

>> passion and

>> > vision of this election.

>>

>>

>> Hi, Frances ... me, too -- on "this side of the border".

Good

>> to ?"talk with you"? (*) again on this list. You were one of

the

>> first

>> people to welcome me to Jung-Fire, and I've been a lot

involved --

>> most

>> particularly quite recently -- with my "your side of the

border"

>> story,

>> history, identity ("or the whatever").

>>

>> But like Dan (Dan, I hope I'm not reading you wrong but as

usual I'm

>> posting a bit late in my ?24-hour-energy cycle?), I'm a lot

concerned

>> about (now this is "me-speak", not any one else's) a kind of

.... and

>> at

>> that I pause to try to figure out what words to

>> use ... "benighted"? ... what? Voodooism? Self-

>> deception? "Inflation", for that fine old Jung 101 term? ...

about

>> all

>> this Obama/ "Lightworkers" stuff that's (pardon my language

if it

>> offends anyone, but I'm racing against time right now)

permeating

>> some

>> of the discussions.

>>

>> I'll be a lot looking forward to all future posts on this

thread.

>>

>> Thanks, everyone!

>>

>> marte

>>

>> P.S. I'm not saying that Barack Obama is, himself, the

individual

>> either enlightened or not; or how much either. But I [hello,

Dan! ;-

>> )], who have only once so far in my ?ha ha? "young life"

voted in a

>> public election for a Registered Republican ... and who, yes,

didn't

>> ever go around throwing bombs or outrageously obstreperous

>> behaviours, am, I confess, in this particular typing-into-my-computer

>> moment, quite a lot worried about how (or _whether_!) either

notions

>> or experiences of "passion and vision" -- which all of us

honor in

>> (so to say) our wearing-our-?jungian? clothes [or

thoughts] --

are

>> really what's needed for the quite-not-at-all-"jungian"

aspects of

>> choice for individuals in saecular government?

>>

>> Sorry for length.

>>

>

>

>

> ------------------------------------

>

> "Our highest duty as human beings is to search out a means whereby

beings

> may be freed from all kinds of unsatisfactory experience and

suffering."

>

> H.H. Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th. Dalai Lama

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Toni Wrote:

Did Jung ever even give houseroom to a social order of "everyone's needs met"? Jesus surely never did...until we get to His father's kingdom...he just wanted everyone to be as righteous as possible and he knew a little about the unrighteous, no? Does any spiritual path expect all to live in a world you describe? reality is Reality.

Maureen wrote:

I won't answer for Jung, but Jesus surely did - that is what his ministry was about. Every time he performed an act of healing (returning someone to the state of wholeness), *that was the kingdom of God. It did *not only refer to some place in the (very, very, very) distant future, nor some place we would go when we died - it referred to an actual reality that was created each time someone chose to follow God's laws, rather than human desires.This is the heart of the social gospel. This is the Christianity I have been raised with, and this is the Christianity I understand and try to live out. It is about taking care of each other, literally feeding each other, so no one goes hungry, providing a home for each other if they have none, about forgiveness free in the open market, rather than paid for in the Temple.

**Yes and this is the audacity of hope that Obama brings to the table; the hope that we will remember our longing to live in a better, more just, more loving world and come together and place the real needs of people above profits and "isms" and just take care of one another....He's not talking perfection or socialism, or wanting everybody to be the same...just some basic taking care of one another....Strange to me that so many people find that instinct so threatening....

Suzanne

..

Faith is the bird that feels the light when the dawn is still dark.- Rabindranath TagoreVote for your city's best dining and nightlife. City's Best 2008.

[Guest guest]

Hi Toni ~

I don't often disagree with you, but I do on this . . .

if everyone had their

" basic needs met " do you honestly believe we would suddenly

become awake and conscious? in what world are you living? You set

yourself up for constant disappointment and frustration because your idea

of the perfectibility of man leads you into never-never

land.

No I don't, but I do know that if people are hungry, cold and ill, they

will never become conscious. If they are fed, warm in the winter,

and healthy, they may have a chance to turn their attention to the state

of their soul (or consciousness, if you prefer).

Did Jung ever even give

houseroom to a social order of " everyone's needs met " ? Jesus

surely never did...until we get to His father's kingdom...he just wanted

everyone to be as righteous as possible and he knew a little about the

unrighteous, no? Does any spiritual path expect all to live in a world

you describe? reality is Reality.

I won't answer for Jung, but Jesus surely did - that is what his ministry

was about. Every time he performed an act of healing (returning

someone to the state of wholeness), *that was the kingdom of God.

It did *not only refer to some place in the (very, very, very) distant

future, nor some place we would go when we died - it referred to an

actual reality that was created each time someone chose to follow God's

laws, rather than human desires.

This is the heart of the social gospel. This is the Christianity I

have been raised with, and this is the Christianity I understand and try

to live out. It is about taking care of each other, literally

feeding each other, so no one goes hungry, providing a home for each

other if they have none, about forgiveness free in the open market,

rather than paid for in the Temple.

/end rant.

Maureen

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

Your vision will become clear only when you look into your heart. Who

looks outside, dreams. Who looks inside awakens.

-- Carl

Gustav Jung

[Guest guest]

Dear f,

Absolutely correct ...there are worse things than idealism, but nothing will get done if we are not realistic about what is possible. changing human nature is not. changing our stance to present day problems is.We can do that and then back to 1x1x1x1

As a member of the "greatest generation" full of idealism in the US between 1950-1970 especially I and all my generation were told life would always get better and we believed it. It did for many of us. Even now many of us are "privileged by having "enough" of all we need.

Now those days are over for much of the world....at least for a time. but some places and people never had the chances we were given. I am not one who believes justice will ever triumph universally, or your G-d and mine would not keep reminding us of " Righteousness"

We can only do the best we can over a small circle. The older generation will always be blamed for being human and carrying more about themselves than others...This is was, thus it is and thus it will ever be. idealism is not going to change that. In fact idealism will only lead to cynicism in the long run as idealists see that they work so hard for so little progress.

yes, I am old, but I care for the planet and the universe and the hungry and the hopeless. I see around me what you see, but I did not choose the circumstances around me, so I can observe them and then decide who I am in regard to them. I care, I vote and I am as compassionate and yet I can work only in a small area.

Now to Obama and Hillary. We disagree and we will have to live with that. Please don't patronize me. I am probably as conscious and as knowageable about the political picture here as is possible for someone who is not an "insider" into either campaign. I read, I watch, i think and i use my knowledge of political science (it used to called "government" at when I majored in it.

I care a lot about what you think, and I know how much you care.I used to spend a lot of energy feeling guilty about my state of life in comparison to the poor, hungry and miserable. It didn't do me much good except made me feel "so aware" Inflation is what it was in my case....I cared so much and i did what I could , from afar. I am older and wiser and I hope less inflated.

As an "oldster" I care more about EXPERIENCE AND KNOWLEDGE, ability to find one's way around politicians and institutions otherwise known as the other 2 branches of our government, the Congress and the Supreme Court, as well as knowing how to deal with the powerful and the power hungry.

As for name-calling, you haven't seen anything yet. Wait till it all heats up a bit.Racism is alive and well in the US, I know i saw it everyday for all those years i lived in the south, and I see it here also in Pennsylvania.As for deserting the Democratic ticket, I don't cut off my nose to spite my face. I have been a life-long liberal and so is Ray.

I know you are all charged up. Good for you. But your elders are neither deaf nor dumb (either meaning). besides my love, I have children and grandchildren whose future I also an concerned about. And most of all i love my country for the fact it saved our lives as well as for a long time in my lifetime having been the fairest in many ways. Now it has lost its way and i want to get back to even a small bit of justice as soon as possible.

Obama means well, could use a lot of humility and less trying to be the "poor Black, fatherless, mother- alone ghetto child...none of which he really was. He tries to be the regular Black of our day...he has not a clue from the inside, only from watching them at private school and Harvard. Give me a break! He is what Blacks call "high yellow" the upper class among Blacks, and they vote for him because he is nearer at least in color to other American of HALF his race. He would never have been picked as a possible candidate if he had been white. Even he knows that, and he uses his Black half to accent it. No white candidate would have even come close to Hillary.

So am I racist, no. You would have a hard time proving that, and all my hundreds of Black students and friends would stand behind me. but facts are facts. reality really is important.

We live on love, faith and hope, most of us, but in my case on hope that is a possibility, and equal justice for all is still only a dream in this world.

I will vote for Obama, but he is not, in my estimation going to be able to do very many of those glorious things he talks about. he is not alone in this Washington, this country or the world.

I love you fa and i am so sorry we have to differ on this but we do. My reasons are valid for me as yours are for you. Don't be in a hurry, you and your generation will take over soon whether you want to or not and will you do better? I hope so. I HOPE

Toni

RE: Re: Lightworkers of the world, unite!+

Dear Toni,

There are worse things to be than young and idealistic. Speaking as a representative of the post-baby-boom generation, I say that our parents never had it so good, screwed up the world for us, and now refuse to move over and retire so that we can have our chance, LOL!

Seriously, Obama is 47. To me that is young enough to have energy and old enough to have experience. If we are talking psychological maturity, it was Hillary who resorted to name-calling and even bordered upon racism. I suggest that you look properly at his policies before deserting the Democrat ticket.

Dan – as an advocate of returning to the British Empire, you should care what Brits think. According to the latest poll, if we Brits had a vote (as we should, being just another state of the US!!) Obama would win by a landslide. This despite the fact that conversations in most pubs are every bit as racist as anything one might overhear in Texas!

Obama has done what no politician here or anywhere else as far as I know has done – he has got young people interested in politics and full of hope again, and that has to be a GOOD THING.

fa

"Show me a sane man and I will cure him for you." CG Jung

From: JUNG-FIRE [mailto:JUNG-FIRE ] On Behalf Of toniSent: 10 June 2008 20:33To: JUNG-FIRE Subject: Re: Re: Lightworkers of the world, unite!+

Dear Dan,There are always those who think "hope" is enough. It would be if the collective unconscious made a concerted effort. But that, in this splintered country and world is a dim hope in my view.We get the government we deserve; young, immature and untested,and Black ( so we can show how broadminded we all are). They, will find that presidential power can not bring about all these hoped for changes...even if one has a "preacher"s voice and vocabulary. I realize getting someone experienced yet not doddering is too much to ask, yet there were good candidates who fell along the way.You and I will be given,what the young and idealistic want...or will it be the old and a little dim who win?In any case the US will muddle through.Toni

"Our highest duty as human beings is to search out a means whereby beings may be freed from all kinds of unsatisfactory experience and suffering."H.H. Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th. Dalai Lama

[Guest guest]

Maureen, all,

Doesn't read as a rant at all.

> This is the heart of the social gospel.

" Blessed are the poor in spirit,

for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are they who mourn,

for they shall be comforted.

Blessed are the meek,

for they shall inherit the earth.

Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness,

for they shall be satisfied.

Blessed are the merciful,

for they shall obtain mercy.

Blessed are the pure of heart,

for they shall see God.

Blessed are the peacemakers,

for they shall be called children of God.

Blessed are they who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness,

for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. "

Gospel of St. 5:3-10

***

Connection. Thanks Maureen.

It's interesting to reflect how we can explore psychological understanding

of both individuality and sociality, including the heretical extremes of

both complete absorption in one's ego identity and total submission to a

collective, itself absorbed in the group version of the ego.

***

Mr. and Mrs. Obama

It is often the case that the psychological requisite of heartfelt

sincerity is daring naivete. So, there is something of the golden child

offering out her hand.

Obama not only is sincere and naive. His may be a deeply Christian

consciousness; (this being a description only available to us per Jung's

insights.)

The Obama's marriage also is apparently the real 'thing.'

regards,