Can our elected leaders get any worse?

[rafalpastuszek]

Another update:

http://www.lowenfoundation.org/lowenfor ... ?p=300#300

Best regards
Rafal

Hello Rafalpastuczek!

I cannot convey how gratified I feel to read your reply! I especially want to commend you on expressing such complex awarenesses in a second (or third or fourth?) language!

Perhaps ?complex? is not the right word, as it is clear (if not obvious) common sense for anyone to see, that is, for anyone who can see the reality of our situation. After so many conversations with my Dad over so many years, I feel starved to share these feelings and views with people for whom this has meaning; it is a rare thing, even amongst therapists trained in Bioenergetic Analysis; it is like a desert wasteland, especially in the US. Providing a forum for these views is one of my major motivations for my involvement in The Foundation. I don?t see discussions that address the psychological and biological underpinnings for our dilemma anywhere, and these are the roots of our problems.

As stated elsewhere, this section ?Environmental Spirituality? is intended to be exploratory. It is an attempt to discover meaningful, long term solutions through collaborative discussion. The one thing I do know is that any real solution requires a change in human values, no small task.

You have discussed many points with which I am in agreement:

Homogenization of products and places, with destruction of traditions by extreme commercialism (the need to efficiently maximize profit);

The collective reaction of people to their roots in accord with the oedipal complex had not occurred to me, but it does make sense;

The ability of the commercial and government interests to manipulate to their own ends the suppressed and repressed feelings and energies of people, as so clearly shown in the movie The Century of the Self (I am so glad you have taken the time to view it!);

The illusion of freedom, and the inability to see reality (truth) from the confines of a ?golden cage? of consumer and ego values?I really like the golden cage metaphor!;

I think your numbers, 10+10+10=30% are optimistic, but it is thought provoking: US GDP (gross domestic product) is 3% +/-, world GDP possibly slightly higher just now; which means that if over-all consumption was reduced by only 3% or more, it would result in economic ?recession,? adding a level of stress that could potentially create an environment of crisis in which some meaningful change might occur. That being preferable to a massive collapse and world wide depression and war that current economic trends are leading to, in my opinion; but successful therapy often helps individuals without affecting their cultural values; and healthy individuals and families successfully live within their contemporary cultures; psychotherapy for the individual needs to be supplemented by psychotherapy for the culture;

You speak of the difficulty in shifting the learned and trained consumer behavior, as it satisfies a deep psychological and biological need for identity and fulfillment, to something more meaningful and sustainable, in the face of the Status Quo that reinforces consumer behavior at every level in every way. That is the challenge!

I have more to say on each of these points, and I look forward to expanding our understanding through further discussion. Each of these points deserves to be discussed and examined further, perhaps as separate topics.

Our aim in The Foundation is a two-fold, double-barrel approach: 1) through bioenergetic bodywork to introduce as many people as possible to the value of nature?s way, both on an individual body level, and on a cultural level; and 2) to recognize that the majority (your 70%) of people in the US, and increasingly the developed and developing world, are attempting to live ?the American dream,? which has been hijacked by wealthy commercial and government interests?and that contrary to many well-meaning people?s beliefs, it is not possible to ?wake people up? by showing them truth; it is only possible to get them to live a better, and different dream. If America was a true world leader, it could be a new, and improved American dream. But it may end up being a Chinese, or South American, or European dream, or maybe a nightmare to end all dreams. We need an Edward Bernays with a white hat, not a black hat.

It will take me some time, but I look forward to responding to the post after yours by pbgvkl. While there is no one, unified American view, we are a nation of consumers, and yes, wasters, although most will not acknowledge that. Although consumerism is a nearly universal trait here, (it is considered patriotic to go shopping), there is very little agreement on any one issue. But all words and noise about needed change aside, the only real change that happens is more Status Quo. Pbgvkl has provided a thoughtful post that took some time, and I respect that. It is the mainstream, Republican leaning, American view.

In closing, you entitled your post ?Yes they can!!! But we can do something.? Yes, I know they can get worse too, and you pointed out many of the problems, but what in your view, can we do?

Again, I thank you for your thoughtful and insightful post. Chou.
Fred

Dear Frederic,

Thank you for your very kind and warm response. You have absolutely rised my spirit and encouraged to continue sharing my concerns. Most important for me, thanks to the website I don't feel lonely with my thoughts anymore, its like finding another swams, that is brilliant, speachless feeling, especially that with this focus on the things, most frequently, person is unfortunatelly left as an ugly duck. I would like to respond and expand the topic, I will try to do this in following days.
So far I wish you Happy New Year and beautiful rise of Foundation activity.

Regards,

Dear Frederic,

I was trying to answer at least a little bit on your question: "....but what in your view, can we do?"
that you have asked me at the end of your response to my previous post "Yes they can!!! But we can do something".

I have to admit the answer to that question is not easy, because we can do a lot but in my opinion field of activity is very narrowed.

Please see my quote/respond to sushil_yadav in the topic: Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment: http://www.lowenfoundation.org/lowenfor ... .php?t=116.
I have extended that post recently because I consider it was good post to include also the part of the answer for your question.

Best regards,

[rafalpastuszek]

Hello Rafalpastuczek!

I cannot convey how gratified I feel to read your reply! I especially want to commend you on expressing such complex awarenesses in a second (or third or fourth?) language!

Perhaps ?complex? is not the right word, as it is clear (if not obvious) common sense for anyone to see, that is, for anyone who can see the reality of our situation. After so many conversations with my Dad over so many years, I feel starved to share these feelings and views with people for whom this has meaning; it is a rare thing, even amongst therapists trained in Bioenergetic Analysis; it is like a desert wasteland, especially in the US. Providing a forum for these views is one of my major motivations for my involvement in The Foundation. I don?t see discussions that address the psychological and biological underpinnings for our dilemma anywhere, and these are the roots of our problems.

As stated elsewhere, this section ?Environmental Spirituality? is intended to be exploratory. It is an attempt to discover meaningful, long term solutions through collaborative discussion. The one thing I do know is that any real solution requires a change in human values, no small task.

You have discussed many points with which I am in agreement:

Homogenization of products and places, with destruction of traditions by extreme commercialism (the need to efficiently maximize profit);

The collective reaction of people to their roots in accord with the oedipal complex had not occurred to me, but it does make sense;

The ability of the commercial and government interests to manipulate to their own ends the suppressed and repressed feelings and energies of people, as so clearly shown in the movie The Century of the Self (I am so glad you have taken the time to view it!);

The illusion of freedom, and the inability to see reality (truth) from the confines of a ?golden cage? of consumer and ego values?I really like the golden cage metaphor!;

I think your numbers, 10+10+10=30% are optimistic, but it is thought provoking: US GDP (gross domestic product) is 3% +/-, world GDP possibly slightly higher just now; which means that if over-all consumption was reduced by only 3% or more, it would result in economic ?recession,? adding a level of stress that could potentially create an environment of crisis in which some meaningful change might occur. That being preferable to a massive collapse and world wide depression and war that current economic trends are leading to, in my opinion; but successful therapy often helps individuals without affecting their cultural values; and healthy individuals and families successfully live within their contemporary cultures; psychotherapy for the individual needs to be supplemented by psychotherapy for the culture;

You speak of the difficulty in shifting the learned and trained consumer behavior, as it satisfies a deep psychological and biological need for identity and fulfillment, to something more meaningful and sustainable, in the face of the Status Quo that reinforces consumer behavior at every level in every way. That is the challenge!

I have more to say on each of these points, and I look forward to expanding our understanding through further discussion. Each of these points deserves to be discussed and examined further, perhaps as separate topics.

Our aim in The Foundation is a two-fold, double-barrel approach: 1) through bioenergetic bodywork to introduce as many people as possible to the value of nature?s way, both on an individual body level, and on a cultural level; and 2) to recognize that the majority (your 70%) of people in the US, and increasingly the developed and developing world, are attempting to live ?the American dream,? which has been hijacked by wealthy commercial and government interests?and that contrary to many well-meaning people?s beliefs, it is not possible to ?wake people up? by showing them truth; it is only possible to get them to live a better, and different dream. If America was a true world leader, it could be a new, and improved American dream. But it may end up being a Chinese, or South American, or European dream, or maybe a nightmare to end all dreams. We need an Edward Bernays with a white hat, not a black hat.

It will take me some time, but I look forward to responding to the post after yours by pbgvkl. While there is no one, unified American view, we are a nation of consumers, and yes, wasters, although most will not acknowledge that. Although consumerism is a nearly universal trait here, (it is considered patriotic to go shopping), there is very little agreement on any one issue. But all words and noise about needed change aside, the only real change that happens is more Status Quo. Pbgvkl has provided a thoughtful post that took some time, and I respect that. It is the mainstream, Republican leaning, American view.

In closing, you entitled your post ?Yes they can!!! But we can do something.? Yes, I know they can get worse too, and you pointed out many of the problems, but what in your view, can we do?

Again, I thank you for your thoughtful and insightful post. Chou.
Fred

Dear Frederic,

Thank you for your very kind and warm response. You have absolutely rised my spirit and encouraged to continue sharing my concerns. Most important for me, thanks to the website I don't feel lonely with my thoughts anymore, its like finding another swams, that is brilliant, speachless feeling, especially that with this focus on the things, most frequently, person is unfortunatelly left as an ugly duck. I would like to respond and expand the topic, I will try to do this in following days.
So far I wish you Happy New Year and beautiful rise of Foundation activity.

Regards,

Dear Frederic,

I was trying to answer at least a little bit on your question: "....but what in your view, can we do?"
that you have asked me at the end of your response to my previous post "Yes they can!!! But we can do something".

I have to admit the answer to that question is not easy, because we can do a lot but in my opinion field of activity is very narrowed.

Please see my quote/respond to sushil_yadav in the topic: Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment: http://www.lowenfoundation.org/lowenfor ... .php?t=116.
I have extended that post recently because I consider it was good post to include also the part of the answer for your question.

Best regards,

[pbgvkl]

I have to say that I agree with almost everything that you last wrote - at least as far as the energy ideas. Implementing those ideas would go a long way toward energy independence in the US - a goal that we share in common. I suspect that the pricing issue will gravitate toward higher prices as the economies in China, India, and other developing nations continue to pick up speed. Right now in the US there are 417 automobiles per 1000 people. In China that number is 7/1000. With the advent of the new India "people's vehicle" priced at $2500.00 (and an environmental nightmare) the problem will, and has begun, to spread. China is also adding 100's of old technology coal energy plants every year with no controls on pollution. Meanwhile, population in all countries is expanding. All these factors, and more, will raise the price of oil. In regard to being angry - I am not. Nor do I see any benefit in anger at "what is." I do believe in the power of people to change the direction of the country. It may not be as fast as some people want- and mistakes, missteps, and fraud can be counted on. Any real change requires consensus, agreement, cooperation and compromise. That is where anger gets in the way of any meaningful change.[/img]

[Flowen]

Pbgvkl ?

Although we apparently have areas of disagreement, I want to thank you for your time and thoughts on this topic, as it stimulates my own analysis and thinking further.

I really believe that the ?political? solution to the US energy problem is deceptively simple. A proper solution to the energy problem would also go a long way to alleviating problems in other areas, notably healthcare, foreign policy, national security, environment, fiscal and monetary affairs at every level, and others. Solutions to some of our other problems are admittedly less simple, but we are focused on energy policy here.

In essence, we in the US need to reduce our use of fossil fuels. I think there is broad agreement for that.

As an energy professional in a past life, it is clear to me that the only way that fossil fuel use will decrease is if prices are higher. I repeat, the only way. Yet, nearly everyone, certainly from President to consumer, are totally committed to keeping the price down. A task which is hard and will get harder, increasingly trying to hold back the tide. And, we are paying much more to keep the price low than people realize, just so we can use more of it. It does seem crazy to me.

Through government tax revenues and campaign financing, government leaders heavily subsidize (among other things) oil and gas, coal, nuclear, and recently ethanol energy production and distribution. Simply put, remove these subsidies, and add in to the price the so-called ?in-direct costs,? aka ?external costs,? and our problems go away.

Prices would rise to a point at which suitable alternatives would emerge from a truly ?free market? much more quickly than people believe.

The direct costs subsidized with our tax money include the recently extended $16 billion oil/gas tax credits, artificially low lease rates for production on Federal lands and waters, depletion allowances, research grants for politicians? favorite energy-related projects (?clean coal technology,? nuclear power and related development, many, many others), exemption of nuclear facilities from liabilities and insurance requirements, government guaranteed loans for construction of nuclear facilities, and the most stealthy: the tax deductibility of the use of fossil fuels. These are just broad areas from 5 minutes off the top of my head; diligent research would yield volumes that would exceed the size of the Federal Budget Report.

Even more voluminous are the ?external? in-direct costs of oil/gas/coal/nuclear/ethanol use. These include pollution costs, notably ground contamination around refineries and mining sites, air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions inherent in the acquisition, production, shipping, and use; thermal pollution in the form of warming rivers, air, and even oceans with inevitable sea level rise; unsolved difficulties and undetermined costs in storing waste and dismantling nuclear facilities; frequent oil spills worldwide (do you think they would even tell us of a deepwater drill spill a mile or more deep in the oceans?); over-utilized under-maintained infra-structure: roads and bridges, gas/oil pipelines, electrical generation/transmission systems; health issues due to poor breathing and toxic contamination, currently flying well below the radar, ie. undetermined; whatever degree we expend military resources to ensure our ?strategic energy interests;? rising costs of food worldwide; etc, etc.

If the US government seriously wanted to improve the well-being of American people, it would systematically remove tax source subsidies from the energy and related industries, and be sure those who benefit also pay all the costs associated with their income. Nothing more need be done; at least, it would be the most important step in the right direction. It would also make the US a true world leader again. It really is that simple.

Politically this is impossible in the current broken political system. As you imply in your post, it will only happen if the people lead. Whether that occurs in an orderly fashion, or happens as people pick up the pieces following increasingly challenging crises, depends on how much consensus may be reached that this is the necessary solution. I contend it is the only real solution.

It should be clear that I don?t believe more crazy-making laws and regulations are needed: limits on house size, or vehicle size; even CAF? mileage standards, would become unnecessary. All that is required is to accept that higher prices for oil/gas/coal/nuclear energy are necessary for our well-being, and government subsidy of any energy source should end; and oil/gas/coal/nuclear/ethanol producers should pay the full cost of their operations and resulting damages. Simple.

The perception that energy problems are complex and intractable serves to maintain the Status Quo, and is perpetrated by those who benefit: political, and corporate leaders from a variety of industry groups (oil-gas, auto manufacturers & retailers, utilities, chemicals, agriculture, airlines, truckers, academic universities, media, etc), and obviously, all we consumers as well. But in the long run, the many consumers have paid and increasingly pay for the benefits of the few mentioned above.

Obviously there are a lot of details, and practically would take much time if done orderly. But if we can rise to meet a challenge like WWII, or create an IT industry single-handedly from scratch, we can certainly meet this. Practically speaking, as the government can?t resist subsidies, laws, and regulations, let them focus their social engineering needs on things that are not obviously bad for us: like railroads, or requiring every sun-belt house (at least) utilize solar water heating and day-lighting, if not solar electric rooves, etc, etc. It?s really not rocket science.

Most people harbor opinions and assumptions that have been crafted over many years by those who benefit (follow the money): ?higher gas prices will destroy our economy and life as we know it; we have an inalienable right to use energy without concern or hardship; wind, solar, and conservation can?t possibly make a meaningful contribution; our political leaders and technological companies will solve our problems;? if you believe that, I have a bridge, it?s in Brooklyn, New York?.these are illusions man!

Finally, I again admit to being angry, not only over energy policy, but about healthcare, education, foreign policy, commercialized technology, consumerism, unfair and inequitable taxation, organized religion; the list goes on and on, and to personalize it, I would single out all the stuffed shirts and fancy skirts and suits who believe they know as much as god, and behave accordingly, when in reality they can?t even feel their own feet, let alone compassion, and other important things in life.

So let?s talk anger as it keeps coming up. I?m proud of my anger. I wish more people would express their anger in a real sort of way. It would go a long way to prevent worsening, perhaps even correcting, our current sorry state.

Unfortunately, especially in America, we associate anger with a loss of control and objectivity, and we are afraid of it, so we discourage it in so many ways. Modern American culture does not recognize and provides no space for any spontaneous emotional expression, especially so with anger. This has resulted in insane school and family murders and mayhem, random violent crimes, and even terrorist attacks, and the widespread personal suffering that rarely makes it on to ?the news.?

Frankly, it?s also resulted in the current generation of Americans who are emotionally stunted or immature: either emotionally deadened, or exhibiting inappropriate emotional responses. A nearly perfectly conditioned crop of educated, more and less well paid people that may be separated from the vast bulk of their income; many people working jobs that are wasteful, inconsequential, and ultimately, bad for our individual and collective health.

I?m just howling at the moon hoping that some people will see that there is life ?outside the box.?

[Marco]

Hello folks, I read the above exchanges with interest. You know, it is so hard to deal with the world as it is. I mean, humanity is so sick; I often wonder whether any type of political activism is worth the effort. I oscillate between feeling continually outraged or continually in despair about the world.

[pbgvkl]

There are some areas in which we agree, i.e. autos should be much more fuel efficient, houses should be smaller, alternative energy should be invested in, etc. My views in these areas are fairly radical - I believe that no house, newly built should be larger that 800 sq ft per person living in the house, a family should be allowed to have only the number of cars as there are licensed drivers, and that noone should be allowed to drive full sized SUV's, trucks, or vans without a business purpose. At the same time, we should be increasing alternative energy funding 4X. We also should be drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and in Alaska. Right now China, in an agreement with Cuba, is drilling for oil 90 miles off the shore of Miami and Mexico is drilling in the Gulf of Mexico - yet we aren't allowed there! That is an outrage! In addition we need to add more refineries to process the oil we do control. Nuclear power is a way to meet energy needs in the short term while alternative fuels are developed and AN INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT THEM is put into place. A hydrogen car is worthless without a place to refill. Raising prices on fuel to conserve energy is a tax on the poorest of Americans. The wealthy can afford the fuel at whatever price, the poorer will find that basic transportation would take more and more of their money, money that is necessary to provide the basics. Further - raising prices on fuel also effects everything that travels, or is delivered, by car, truck, plane - putting inflation into the picture. It is clear that you are a proponent of solar and wind power - these could be useful in small venues but in the majority of needs - for example, automobiles, cities, etc. - they are inadequate or worthless. Further- if solar power takes 15-20 years of use to payback its cost (I don't know what the payback period is - but it is substantial) what possible incentive is it to the average person? Is it not possible that reasonable people can disagree about how to obtain foreign oil dependency? We all, or most of us, are in favor of being oil independent - we disagree in how to do it. And - how many liberties are we willing to give up to get it. Are you willing to let the government - who you seem to dispise - determine what you can drive, how big a house you can live in, cut your power when they measure that you've used too much ... - noone that I know is up for that. So who, if not government, should be responsible for making the necessary changes - and what government would have the jurisdiction - the state or the federal? Right now, the majority of Americans believe in our government and believe in our ability to change our government with our votes. It is clear that you do not believe in the citizens ability to change government - I would argue that a reasonable arguement, made by reasonable people, over a long enough period of time, will produce a following sufficient enough to change belief systems and eventually the government positions. I think you are sore that 90% of Americans feel the same way I do, and not the way that you do. Although I have carefully read each of your postings FLowen, all I see is anger at the way things are - please tell me what you would do to IMPROVE the situation with energy, what would your time line be, how would it effect the various citizens of the US, what would it cost, who would benefit, who would control the energy system, etc...

[Flowen]

Dear PBGVKL

It might seem like the fringe to you, but I can assure you, my views are beyond the ?fringe,? certainly far enough outside the mainstream that it probably does seem ?lunatic.?

One of the points I am trying to make is that Americans collectively harbor illusions, mostly to do with what they believe they are entitled to: energy use without limit; cheap, affordable, state-of?the-art healthcare; a lucrative career with as much car and house as they can put their hands on; a life with plenty of leisure, easy sex, and unending ability to shop; etc. etc. To anyone afflicted with these illusions (which includes all Americans, to greater or lesser degree), the idea that their perception of reality is questionable, seems crazy, and anyone who questions it must be ?crazy.? I can assure you again, I may not be ?normal,? but I am certainly not crazy.

Angry I admit! How can one not be angry at the shenanigans of our elected and appointed political leaders, whose number one ambition is to stay in office as long as possible, and then become an industry lobbyist; and our corporate leaders, who are myopically focused on this quarter?s financial results, irrespective of value added or subtracted from the culture, knowing they have a multi-tens (sometimes hundreds) of millions dollar termination benefits that was negotiated into their employment contract, no matter how they perform. If it was just misguided patriotism, or greedy incompetence, it would be maddening enough, but it is much worse. The wealthy few corporate types, through their government connections and influence, manipulate tax laws and business operating environments that maintain things as they are, the Status Quo, which is to their liking. These manipulations function in ?reverse Robin Hood? fashion: they nickel and dime the middle-class and poor of virtually all their income, and funnel it into their own pockets. And they don?t care if they sacrifice the natural morals and good values of our children, or our children themselves, to maintain their Status Quo.

President Bush?s fortune (I believe he is the wealthiest of all modern Presidents) was made in largest part when he was Governor of Texas, when he assembled a group of investors to purchase the Texas Rangers baseball team cheap (they didn?t have much going for them) in 1990. He then convinced the home city (Arlington, Texas) that if they raised the sales tax by a half penny, a stadium could be built benefiting the city. After seizing lands by eminent domain, and complex leasing deals, and mis-characterization of ordinary income as capital gains, managing general partner Bush and his friends sold the team for a $200+ million profit 4 years later. This is all public record, and because the town had a special, but irregular and poorly attended election to approve the sales tax increase, it is, apparently legal. But it does not change the fact that Governor Bush, while his Dad was President, made this deal, with the help of tax rate manipulation, effectively funneling $15 million from the citizens of Arlington, Texas, into his own pocket. If you think Arlington is better off, check it out.

Ironically, the tax adverse President made his personal fortune by increasing sales tax on one unlucky town. Bush?s background is devoid of personal achievement (except to quit drinking), and full of the appearance of using family political connections to enrich himself, cover up shortcomings, and position himself into political power. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and smells like a duck, it?s highly likely it is a duck! G.W. Bush is so bad he makes his Dad look good.

I chose this example involving President Bush to show this political distortion exists at the very apex of America?s political elite; it gets much worse further down the food chain. The American political-economic system (what the Republicans call our ?free market?) is jammed full of this kind of easy mega-money for the wealthy and well-connected, paid for by taxes of all sorts, and the every-day costs of an ?American dream? lifestyle paid by middle and low income people who are attempting to live it, the other 297 million Americans.

This is demonstrated and well documented in the recent book Free Lunch, by David Cay Johnston. This behavior may be legal, but it is neither fair nor ethical, and it is not what most people consider ?the American way.? At the immense scale it is happening, it will suck our great country down to a shadow of its? former stature.

Please research this for yourself. If you think you already know this stuff, or if you think it?s all a lot of bunk, you should probably re-examine the basis of your own opinions, as I suspect you are participating in the illusion that these people have your (or the country?s) best interest in mind and at heart (think about Cheney and his heart!).

I am down on Republicans, but just as much so on Democrats. I believe you when you say LB Johnson was the largest shareholder of Halliburton. Like I asked in the first post, do you want your BS with vanilla, or chocolate?.....either way it is BullSh*t. As I discussed above, I believe the political system is broken, and because they will not address campaign finance reform in a meaningful way (or anything else for that matter, except more money for their ?constituents?), the political system will not change, and a well meaning President (if such can be found), would not be able to change it either. All the American presidential candidates are yammering about the need for ?change.? I will believe it if I see it.

In the meantime, you can generally tell good guys from bad guys by whether they support the Status Quo or not, by words and behavior; words alone are meaningless. Good guys are there, both in government and the corporate world, in the great minority; and most people are well-meaning and concerned, but they feel powerless to participate in change, or are too confused to know what is in their own best interest, or they?ve accepted the various illusions and live accordingly (in Rafal?s ?golden cage?), or they?re struggling so hard they don?t have the energy to care. All these people also support the Status Quo. I?m not angry with these people, except for arrogant individuals who can?t distinguish their interests from common interest.

As you said in your post, our domestic oil production is 5% of world total (I suspect it?s higher); that?s very appropriate as the US has 5% of the world population. But why then, when our 5% consumes 25% of world oil, gas, and coal, and produce 25% of the pollution, do we incentivize the production of more?...and practice belligerence and war with the large global producers of the oil and gas we seek?... and obstruct any effort to reduce Americans? consumption? As I?ve said elsewhere, we are not leaders in the global economy, we are bullies.

We only need more oil, gas, and coal as an alcoholic needs more drink, or an addict needs more heroin. America is addicted to oil, and just like a drug dealer, the oil companies, auto manufacturers, homebuilders, developers, bankers, Wall Streeters, and many others, want to keep it that way; and the government helps, from the top down.

One of the key illusions we Americans suffer is a feeling and belief that we are entitled to cheap energy. That is an illusion that has been carefully crafted over many years. As we inevitably approach the end of the era of cheap energy, attempts to maintain that illusion become more blunt and more obvious.

When Congress passes legislation to extend oil and gas tax credits worth $16 billion of yours and my tax money (this on top of many incentives already existing), and eliminates credits for solar and wind energy facilities; delays implementation of none too tough car and truck mileage standards for another 13 years; acquiesces to Bush demand for money and a free hand militarily in the oil-producing regions of the Mid-East and now Africa; when Bush declares ?not a nickel more gas tax until the Democrats reduce taxes? for bridge and infrastructure maintenance following the Minneapolis bridge tragedy (clearly a result of truck weights and traffic volumes way in excess of design); and the irresponsible call for 30 billion more gallons/year of agricultural derived fuel; how can anyone conclude otherwise that the Status Quo is bent on maintaining our addiction to oil and gas by keeping prices low, volumes high, and alternatives uncompetitive?

Add the fact that oil and gas already does not reflect the directly related costs of oil spills, ground contamination around refineries, pollution and greenhouse gas emissions; the unquantifiable, substantial health costs; the national security costs to ensure it?s global flow and availability to the US; the cheapening value of our currency as we flood the world with $100 bills as we expand our money supply to off-set the hemorrhaging of our national assets to pay for imported oil, gas, gasoline, and nuclear fuel, especially as most of our suppliers are hostile, unstable, or Russia. It should be abundantly clear to anyone that we need to reduce our consumption, and the only way that can happen is for prices to rise to a true free market price that reflects the cost of getting it to market.

A true leader would implement such a strategy (not that he would be elected if he talked about it), while providing assistance to those who can least afford it. Even the argument that it would be unfair and unworkable for the poor is a myth. First, they could be assisted. Second, higher prices will result in materially less demand, buffering price increases. Third, gas and oil prices would not have to get much higher before alternatives kick in by the strength of a true free market and American ingenuity and entrepreneurship.

Even at $3+/gallon of gasoline, it is obscene how wasteful we Americans are. On a recent trip to Connecticut, hardly a center of four-wheeling, half the automobiles were 4500 pound (2000 kg) behemoths, tank-like SUVs with only the soccer Mom driving (it makes her feel secure); and so many cars on the road all the time, everyone is on the go, even if there?s nowhere to go; we have very little public transportation outside the largest cities; and railroads, the best most efficient short and long distance mass transit is painfully slow, unreliable, uncomfortable, and expensive; people leave their cars running, their lights on, multiple large flat screen TVs lit with no one watching, all sorts of electronic gizmos that never turn off and are obsolete in two years; houses too big to live in with heating systems unchanged from the ?50s, but now air conditioning in every room, and appliances that last 3-5 years instead of the 20-30 our parents enjoyed, etc, etc.

America could reduce energy consumption maybe 20% without a recession or material effect on our ?standard of living.? It is another illusion to think life as we know it ends if we conserve energy in our mutual interest of national security, environment, health, and sound economics.

There will be tough times, but guess what?...times are tough now and getting tougher under the Status Quo?and what are they offering aside from more of the same?... ?targeted investments to ?jump-start? the free market.? If you believe that, I?ve got a bridge?it?s in Brooklyn, New York, maybe you?d buy that?

In closing, I would point out that it is not my ?myopic view? that is getting crammed down people?s throats, it is President Bush?s and his crony friends? (or the crony friends? President Bush?s) policies, laws, and taxes that are getting crammed down people?s throats, typical treatment for consumers. And he is only the last, but the worst, of a long line of mis-guided leaders. President Carter was one of the best in his recognition of energy issues. He presided over the only reduction of energy use and imported energy this country has ever seen. It was obviously too much for the Status Quo: when the military attempt to rescue the embassy hostages in Iran failed under Carter (by the way, he wasn?t flying the helicopters that crashed), he was replaced by President Reagan who first reversed all the progress that had been made in reducing consumption and oil imports below 50% (now they?re over 70% of a much greater volume), at the same time illegally trading arms with the Iranians to fund death squads in El Salvador and insurgence in Nicaragua, resulting in nothing but innocents suffering, outside of corporate benefits.

It is my contention that it is not how the American people would choose to live: paying for government and corporate profiteering; it is how they have been conditioned and trained to live. Freedom and democracy?...there?s a bit of myth there too.

[rafalpastuszek]

Hello Rafalpastuczek!

I cannot convey how gratified I feel to read your reply! I especially want to commend you on expressing such complex awarenesses in a second (or third or fourth?) language!

Perhaps ?complex? is not the right word, as it is clear (if not obvious) common sense for anyone to see, that is, for anyone who can see the reality of our situation. After so many conversations with my Dad over so many years, I feel starved to share these feelings and views with people for whom this has meaning; it is a rare thing, even amongst therapists trained in Bioenergetic Analysis; it is like a desert wasteland, especially in the US. Providing a forum for these views is one of my major motivations for my involvement in The Foundation. I don?t see discussions that address the psychological and biological underpinnings for our dilemma anywhere, and these are the roots of our problems.

As stated elsewhere, this section ?Environmental Spirituality? is intended to be exploratory. It is an attempt to discover meaningful, long term solutions through collaborative discussion. The one thing I do know is that any real solution requires a change in human values, no small task.

You have discussed many points with which I am in agreement:

Homogenization of products and places, with destruction of traditions by extreme commercialism (the need to efficiently maximize profit);

The collective reaction of people to their roots in accord with the oedipal complex had not occurred to me, but it does make sense;

The ability of the commercial and government interests to manipulate to their own ends the suppressed and repressed feelings and energies of people, as so clearly shown in the movie The Century of the Self (I am so glad you have taken the time to view it!);

The illusion of freedom, and the inability to see reality (truth) from the confines of a ?golden cage? of consumer and ego values?I really like the golden cage metaphor!;

I think your numbers, 10+10+10=30% are optimistic, but it is thought provoking: US GDP (gross domestic product) is 3% +/-, world GDP possibly slightly higher just now; which means that if over-all consumption was reduced by only 3% or more, it would result in economic ?recession,? adding a level of stress that could potentially create an environment of crisis in which some meaningful change might occur. That being preferable to a massive collapse and world wide depression and war that current economic trends are leading to, in my opinion; but successful therapy often helps individuals without affecting their cultural values; and healthy individuals and families successfully live within their contemporary cultures; psychotherapy for the individual needs to be supplemented by psychotherapy for the culture;

You speak of the difficulty in shifting the learned and trained consumer behavior, as it satisfies a deep psychological and biological need for identity and fulfillment, to something more meaningful and sustainable, in the face of the Status Quo that reinforces consumer behavior at every level in every way. That is the challenge!

I have more to say on each of these points, and I look forward to expanding our understanding through further discussion. Each of these points deserves to be discussed and examined further, perhaps as separate topics.

Our aim in The Foundation is a two-fold, double-barrel approach: 1) through bioenergetic bodywork to introduce as many people as possible to the value of nature?s way, both on an individual body level, and on a cultural level; and 2) to recognize that the majority (your 70%) of people in the US, and increasingly the developed and developing world, are attempting to live ?the American dream,? which has been hijacked by wealthy commercial and government interests?and that contrary to many well-meaning people?s beliefs, it is not possible to ?wake people up? by showing them truth; it is only possible to get them to live a better, and different dream. If America was a true world leader, it could be a new, and improved American dream. But it may end up being a Chinese, or South American, or European dream, or maybe a nightmare to end all dreams. We need an Edward Bernays with a white hat, not a black hat.

It will take me some time, but I look forward to responding to the post after yours by pbgvkl. While there is no one, unified American view, we are a nation of consumers, and yes, wasters, although most will not acknowledge that. Although consumerism is a nearly universal trait here, (it is considered patriotic to go shopping), there is very little agreement on any one issue. But all words and noise about needed change aside, the only real change that happens is more Status Quo. Pbgvkl has provided a thoughtful post that took some time, and I respect that. It is the mainstream, Republican leaning, American view.

In closing, you entitled your post ?Yes they can!!! But we can do something.? Yes, I know they can get worse too, and you pointed out many of the problems, but what in your view, can we do?

Again, I thank you for your thoughtful and insightful post. Chou.
Fred

Dear Frederic,

Thank you for your very kind and warm response. You have absolutely rised my spirit and encouraged to continue sharing my concerns. Most important for me, thanks to the website I don't feel lonely with my thoughts anymore, its like finding another swams, that is brilliant, speachless feeling, especially that with this focus on the things, most frequently, person is unfortunatelly left as an ugly duck. I would like to respond and expand the topic, I will try to do this in following days.
So far I wish you Happy New Year and beautiful rise of Foundation activity.

Regards,

[Flowen]

Hello Rafalpastuczek!

I cannot convey how gratified I feel to read your reply! I especially want to commend you on expressing such complex awarenesses in a second (or third or fourth?) language!

Perhaps ?complex? is not the right word, as it is clear (if not obvious) common sense for anyone to see, that is, for anyone who can see the reality of our situation. After so many conversations with my Dad over so many years, I feel starved to share these feelings and views with people for whom this has meaning; it is a rare thing, even amongst therapists trained in Bioenergetic Analysis; it is like a desert wasteland, especially in the US. Providing a forum for these views is one of my major motivations for my involvement in The Foundation. I don?t see discussions that address the psychological and biological underpinnings for our dilemma anywhere, and these are the roots of our problems.

As stated elsewhere, this section ?Environmental Spirituality? is intended to be exploratory. It is an attempt to discover meaningful, long term solutions through collaborative discussion. The one thing I do know is that any real solution requires a change in human values, no small task.

You have discussed many points with which I am in agreement:

Homogenization of products and places, with destruction of traditions by extreme commercialism (the need to efficiently maximize profit);

The collective reaction of people to their roots in accord with the oedipal complex had not occurred to me, but it does make sense;

The ability of the commercial and government interests to manipulate to their own ends the suppressed and repressed feelings and energies of people, as so clearly shown in the movie The Century of the Self (I am so glad you have taken the time to view it!);

The illusion of freedom, and the inability to see reality (truth) from the confines of a ?golden cage? of consumer and ego values?I really like the golden cage metaphor!;

I think your numbers, 10+10+10=30% are optimistic, but it is thought provoking: US GDP (gross domestic product) is 3% +/-, world GDP possibly slightly higher just now; which means that if over-all consumption was reduced by only 3% or more, it would result in economic ?recession,? adding a level of stress that could potentially create an environment of crisis in which some meaningful change might occur. That being preferable to a massive collapse and world wide depression and war that current economic trends are leading to, in my opinion; but successful therapy often helps individuals without affecting their cultural values; and healthy individuals and families successfully live within their contemporary cultures; psychotherapy for the individual needs to be supplemented by psychotherapy for the culture;

You speak of the difficulty in shifting the learned and trained consumer behavior, as it satisfies a deep psychological and biological need for identity and fulfillment, to something more meaningful and sustainable, in the face of the Status Quo that reinforces consumer behavior at every level in every way. That is the challenge!

I have more to say on each of these points, and I look forward to expanding our understanding through further discussion. Each of these points deserves to be discussed and examined further, perhaps as separate topics.

Our aim in The Foundation is a two-fold, double-barrel approach: 1) through bioenergetic bodywork to introduce as many people as possible to the value of nature?s way, both on an individual body level, and on a cultural level; and 2) to recognize that the majority (your 70%) of people in the US, and increasingly the developed and developing world, are attempting to live ?the American dream,? which has been hijacked by wealthy commercial and government interests?and that contrary to many well-meaning people?s beliefs, it is not possible to ?wake people up? by showing them truth; it is only possible to get them to live a better, and different dream. If America was a true world leader, it could be a new, and improved American dream. But it may end up being a Chinese, or South American, or European dream, or maybe a nightmare to end all dreams. We need an Edward Bernays with a white hat, not a black hat.

It will take me some time, but I look forward to responding to the post after yours by pbgvkl. While there is no one, unified American view, we are a nation of consumers, and yes, wasters, although most will not acknowledge that. Although consumerism is a nearly universal trait here, (it is considered patriotic to go shopping), there is very little agreement on any one issue. But all words and noise about needed change aside, the only real change that happens is more Status Quo. Pbgvkl has provided a thoughtful post that took some time, and I respect that. It is the mainstream, Republican leaning, American view.

In closing, you entitled your post ?Yes they can!!! But we can do something.? Yes, I know they can get worse too, and you pointed out many of the problems, but what in your view, can we do?

Again, I thank you for your thoughtful and insightful post. Chou.
Fred

[rafalpastuszek]

I really don't see how anyone can suddenly decide that their energy policy, and their beliefs, are the only ones that are valid. FLowen - your posting is so angry that dialog and compromise is impossible. You have gone to the "lunatic fringe" that believes that everyone in government is not only incompetent, but evil, and is trying to bring down the country. It is just as likely, in fact, much more so, that they also have the best interests of the country in mind - but they have a different idea, than you, of how to proceed. While you are on your Halleberton rant - you should know that the largest shareholder of Halleburton is, or was, Lady Bird Johnson - last I checked, a democrat! Secondly, Halleburton was the only company large enough in the US, a multi-multi billion dollar company - able to handle all the facets of the rebuild. That having been said, like all government programs, billions of dollars have been wasted. Secondly, the United States only controls 5% of the world's oil. The rest is controlled by unstable countries that currently hate us. That hatred started long before Bush was in office - remember the incompetent Jimmy Carter? These countries, all Muslin by the way, also are currently involved in wars and disturbances with every other country that borders them, and currently are attacking every country that is not Muslim.
In regard to alternative energy - I agree that the United States has moved remarkably slowly toward the goal of oil independence. A lot of that inertia is directly due to the "lunatic fringe" on both sides that refuse to believe that compromise on any issue is beneficial. Currently, the United States relies on oil and coal to produce energy. Both of these fuels damage the environment. But currently there is no alternative. A safe and non-polluting, temporary fix would be to increase nuclear power - currently France supplies 85% of its power needs with nuclear. They also use technology that cools and reuses the spent fuel. If compromise could be obtained in the United States over this one issue - emissions could be cut dramatically while new sources of renewable energy are developed. As for ethanol, I agree with your position 100%. We are taking needed food from the poorest of countries to burn. Milk prices have doubled, meat prices are on the increase, and there have been food riots in Mexico because of this ridiculous, feel-good, fake panacea - which, by the way, takes more energy to produce that it provides. Further on the production side - China recently signed a deal with Mexico to drill in the Gulf of Mexico - we are not allowed to search for oil there! Most of the fertile fields of oil in Alaska are off limits. No petroleum refineries have been allowed to be built in the United States since the 1970's. On the conservation side - cars should be made to go 35mpg but it is not the car companies that are fighting that - it is the people. Car companies just want to sell cars - they don't care how many miles they get. But just try and take the SUV away from soccer mom's! Wind power and solar power are currently not viable options unless you live in very specific parts of the country and you are willing to pay 2 and 3 times the cost of coal generated electricity. Also, just speaking of wind power - how many birds does each one kill a year - you'll never get that past the lunitic fringe of your own side! Ted Kennedy is the major foe of the wind generators off of Nantucket - he said, and I quote, "Not where I sail!" Quite a leader of the democrats! You seem to believe that the exorbitant prices of gasoline that European consumers pay, is what the United States needs - although that would certainly cause people to conserve it also would have many negative effects;
1. It would create a very negative burden on the poor who need to travel to work
2. It would devastate the trucking business and raise prices on all shipped goods - most likely causing a recession
3. It would destroy the airline industry
4. It would bring down the small, independent farmer and business man
Those are just 4 - but there are also other differences between the United States and European countries - for one, the typical American can drive 1-2 hours each way to work - in Europe, you can be in another country in that time; secondly, most of the extra cost in European petroleum is due to taxes to support their social system which hampers their ability to compete in the world market - anybody watching what the current President of France is trying to pass? - overturning many of the social benefits that keep the citizens in a stagnant economy.
Regardless of your political beliefs, you have to admit that the United States has one of the healthiest economies in the world - we have managed to have steady growth with extremely low unemployment - and this has been so through numerous administrations on both sides of the aisle. People living in the United States that we list as living "under the poverty level" are so poor that 85 % of them live in a residence with more square footage than the average middle-class European, they have a TV, a computer, 2 cars, and have not gone hungry in the past year!!! Check it out. The average person living under the poverty level in the US lives at a higher level than middle class Americans of 1950.
This country needs more people that need to be willing to compromise for the benfit of all, not just force one person's myopic version down everyone's throat. But compromise starts with being civil and actually believing that "government by the people and for the people" includes people currently elected and those that are elected in the future - which ever side they might be on.

I am not going to answer in the name of Flowen, but I would like to speak as average European (born in Poland, left Poland 1 year ago, spent 2 years in Belgium and UK).
Few years ago I was happy to visit US and live in your country and legally work for 4 months, except fantastic country I have seen some things that I don't really appreciate. US are consuming like crazy. I can't imagine such a waste of food, materials, space and energy nowhere in Europe. No way! (Our average car engine is 1.6, most popular is diesel 2.0). If we put average European in your car we don't have already icebergs on the world, if you put average Chinese in your car we don't have a steel any more on the earth. You are proud owner of two cars per person, pleaseee! I even don't want to compare ecology approach, materials usage approach, pollution maintenance etc. It is a shame If you are proud of:

---- "United States that we list as living "under the poverty level" are so poor that 85 % of them live in a residence with more square footage than the average middle-class European, they have a TV, a computer, 2 cars, and have not gone hungry in the past year!!! Check it out. The average person living under the poverty level in the US lives at a higher level than middle class Americans of 1950."----

Someone out of US has to pay for that by buying your gun (cheap with this dollar prices) running your wars (in Europe we call it your bestselling product), live with earth pollution level.

---"you have to admit that the United States has one of the healthiest economies in the world"---

This must be joke!!! Take into account that US has a highest internal debt in the world (over 32 trillions of dollars!!! And it is raising every year so don?t be surprised with your life standard rise inside of US) it means that you are consuming goods that are not paid by you, (however with this money you can manipulate almost every economic system in the world maybe except China), it is high time to start savings! You are bankrupt and you live your luxury consumer life for someone else money. If you won?t stop that it can lead to very serious economic disturbances all over the world and weaker systems based on US currency will have to pay for that, sometimes by crash of economy and war. That waste politics leads to more and more aggressive foreign politic also in economic way of meaning which is nowadays very visible out of US, maybe you consider it different.

[pbgvkl]

I really don't see how anyone can suddenly decide that their energy policy, and their beliefs, are the only ones that are valid. FLowen - your posting is so angry that dialog and compromise is impossible. You have gone to the "lunatic fringe" that believes that everyone in government is not only incompetent, but evil, and is trying to bring down the country. It is just as likely, in fact, much more so, that they also have the best interests of the country in mind - but they have a different idea, than you, of how to proceed. While you are on your Halleberton rant - you should know that the largest shareholder of Halleburton is, or was, Lady Bird Johnson - last I checked, a democrat! Secondly, Halleburton was the only company large enough in the US, a multi-multi billion dollar company - able to handle all the facets of the rebuild. That having been said, like all government programs, billions of dollars have been wasted. Secondly, the United States only controls 5% of the world's oil. The rest is controlled by unstable countries that currently hate us. That hatred started long before Bush was in office - remember the incompetent Jimmy Carter? These countries, all Muslin by the way, also are currently involved in wars and disturbances with every other country that borders them, and currently are attacking every country that is not Muslim.
In regard to alternative energy - I agree that the United States has moved remarkably slowly toward the goal of oil independence. A lot of that inertia is directly due to the "lunatic fringe" on both sides that refuse to believe that compromise on any issue is beneficial. Currently, the United States relies on oil and coal to produce energy. Both of these fuels damage the environment. But currently there is no alternative. A safe and non-polluting, temporary fix would be to increase nuclear power - currently France supplies 85% of its power needs with nuclear. They also use technology that cools and reuses the spent fuel. If compromise could be obtained in the United States over this one issue - emissions could be cut dramatically while new sources of renewable energy are developed. As for ethanol, I agree with your position 100%. We are taking needed food from the poorest of countries to burn. Milk prices have doubled, meat prices are on the increase, and there have been food riots in Mexico because of this ridiculous, feel-good, fake panacea - which, by the way, takes more energy to produce that it provides. Further on the production side - China recently signed a deal with Mexico to drill in the Gulf of Mexico - we are not allowed to search for oil there! Most of the fertile fields of oil in Alaska are off limits. No petroleum refineries have been allowed to be built in the United States since the 1970's. On the conservation side - cars should be made to go 35mpg but it is not the car companies that are fighting that - it is the people. Car companies just want to sell cars - they don't care how many miles they get. But just try and take the SUV away from soccer mom's! Wind power and solar power are currently not viable options unless you live in very specific parts of the country and you are willing to pay 2 and 3 times the cost of coal generated electricity. Also, just speaking of wind power - how many birds does each one kill a year - you'll never get that past the lunitic fringe of your own side! Ted Kennedy is the major foe of the wind generators off of Nantucket - he said, and I quote, "Not where I sail!" Quite a leader of the democrats! You seem to believe that the exorbitant prices of gasoline that European consumers pay, is what the United States needs - although that would certainly cause people to conserve it also would have many negative effects;
1. It would create a very negative burden on the poor who need to travel to work
2. It would devastate the trucking business and raise prices on all shipped goods - most likely causing a recession
3. It would destroy the airline industry
4. It would bring down the small, independent farmer and business man
Those are just 4 - but there are also other differences between the United States and European countries - for one, the typical American can drive 1-2 hours each way to work - in Europe, you can be in another country in that time; secondly, most of the extra cost in European petroleum is due to taxes to support their social system which hampers their ability to compete in the world market - anybody watching what the current President of France is trying to pass? - overturning many of the social benefits that keep the citizens in a stagnant economy.
Regardless of your political beliefs, you have to admit that the United States has one of the healthiest economies in the world - we have managed to have steady growth with extremely low unemployment - and this has been so through numerous administrations on both sides of the aisle. People living in the United States that we list as living "under the poverty level" are so poor that 85 % of them live in a residence with more square footage than the average middle-class European, they have a TV, a computer, 2 cars, and have not gone hungry in the past year!!! Check it out. The average person living under the poverty level in the US lives at a higher level than middle class Americans of 1950.
This country needs more people that need to be willing to compromise for the benfit of all, not just force one person's myopic version down everyone's throat. But compromise starts with being civil and actually believing that "government by the people and for the people" includes people currently elected and those that are elected in the future - which ever side they might be on.

[rafalpastuszek]

Dear Flowen,

I can honestly shear your feelings about governments and corporate leaders. It is so clear to me that great slavery is growing around the world very intensively. Casino capitalism comes and holds everything in hands, money are the only power which is able to create destroy and rule ? this is where we are starting to be now. Upsetting thing is that great wall of electronic money can change or destroy local environment because they have artificial potential expressed in numbers not covered in goods and earth. This artificial capital can be translated to goods and possession literally stealing whole generations work effort and place on earth - those things happens even in center of Europe now. Those things partially happen to my homeland, Poland. I still remember from my childhood non-commercial places in Europe, which now are getting intensively transformed in one efficient McDonald like way. Why should I travel if everywhere I will buy soon the same vanilla ice creams in the same wafer because they appeared to be most profitable on statistic group of people and are sold by chain food company that have destroyed local market first with great help of global economy mechanisms.

Simplifying: Why people should protect things which are original, valuable for their emotional side of life and brings them feeling of their roots and origin? Most of the people are deeply dipped in our culture popular problem which is oedipal complex and rather hate their roots. Moreover, if original things that stands for our freedom, taste, pleasure, place on earth, peace, love are not economically optimized then people don't feel they are worth to be protected because most of the people don't feel. They think and judge and then buy. But if people don't feel then they store in their bodies great energy which staying for denied feelings and has great economic potential, if used with good marketing tools (see movie century of the self on foundation website). Of course good marketing tools are owned by those who have money, so they can sell anything they want to that mass of people: goods, ideas, identity, governments and in this way they(owners) can multiply their incomes.

I have no luck in my life to see many grounded people. Maybe in your case as a therapist it is a different case. From my perspective most of the people doesn't realize their situation and they have no knowledge nor experience about any possible change that can happen to their life. If they are unhappy they don?t realize that. They are not going to vote for freedom, because there is no need for freedom. If someone grows from the very beginning in a cage (made by ego due to denied childhood trauma experience) with food and water then why he should escape. Most of the people prefer to keep their cages. Due to that fact and due to lack of feeling and feeling intensity fading, there is a great need for buying identity, and there is a market where you can buy it with new cars, houses etc. Your father was writing a lot about this, but I think nowadays it is becoming even more intensive process. So how can we ask for wise choices made on democratic way if there is no majority that can ask for that. And majority as a customer is preferred to be frightened and stay in a ?golden? cage because then is consuming and buying like crazy.

Reaching for freedom from traumatic (or at least from oedipal complex dominated) childhood is like taking a painful pill of truth (matrix movie situation, take a pill and see reality, there is no way to come back, but you will not like what you see, however it would be truth). If people can choose (of course they first need to know that there is a choice, they need to feel a need to change, and they need to believe that this effort is possible to be potentially successful, for that they need to have some contact with their bodies, but lets say all above conditions were somehow obeyed and we have a person who for example feel a need for therapy) what they will choose? Now they have carrier, money, goods, lovers, fun for ego almost in every aspect of life and great fear of life so fear for any change (life is like wave full of peaks and low points so in constant change), on the other side of the choice they have unwanted feelings, sadness, fears, long and difficult journey, stubborn ego which doesn?t like those changes, strange feeling toward surrounding peoples, possible lack of success in fixing a past misery, and what most important they need to face a failure of their up to now ego journey. Will they choose that path, will they choose a pill of truth? I am not so sure, if I need to bid I will say matrix for majority now. And that journey for consciousness and freedom is starting from grounding in reality, in body, so needs body centered attitude.

Whenever people will start to argue about those things as you mentioned at your post, first person on the other side must be grounded to fully understand a power of importance of your arguments, otherwise sooner or later it would be your enemy, even if you speaking in the name of that person health, freedom, rights (what is always dangerous considering possible mistake). Short look on politics bodies and you can be sure there is no sense to argue with that class of people, but they express majority. Personally I have chosen a pill of reality due to my almost perfect marriage finish - then I have asked myself, what is wrong, if this so beautiful thing was almost destroyed. My marriage was saved, my wife also have chosen a truth and we are growing for already 5 years supporting each other in this journey, but honestly speaking if not our love I think none of us would be able to get that. That was horrible difficult 5 years and I think we still have some mileage to get considering our body tensions and everyday experiences. I know that some people are getting that journey with a help of therapist. How many of them is in our society? Guessing, If I say 10% that would be optimistic, add additional optimistic 10% for healthy one and additional 10% for those who have at least temporary good instinct or point of view. Then we have 30% of society which is delicate, feelings respectful, non violent and their life is going to be centered around real pleasures of life. On the opposite side we have all the rest who doesn't care but also posses great potential with their denied feelings energy for being manipulated, and for defend their status quo as a perfect consumer.

They don't care until someone manipulates then they really care. In your post you have mentioned about tragedy of German nation when Hitler was elected as a great German emperor. As Alice Miller describes in her fantastic book, 8 million of severely beaten and mistreated in their childhood Germans in the name of ?Bismarck way of proper children growing up?, with their denied fanatical anger were almost praying to the Hitler for being so great and giving them possibility for destroying a parents in a transference on Jewish nation. Hitler given a possibility for those 8 millions to be angry, to express anger and they finally had a first taste of the happiness conected with denial feelings expression, they started to believe that under those specific conditions they will be happy. Anger of those 8 millions was enough to stop rest of the nation from saying this is craziness, was enough to exterminate some millions of people. Now when we speak about stopping consumptionism, we are speaking about destroying artificial identity from majority of societies in a western world, we are speaking about blocking a possibility of reaching, in pervasive way, for fulfillment performed by scared ego in ritual activity of buying and consuming. First consumer question would be: why should I? And this question is built on his ego life experience, built in contrary to his traumatic and denied body life experience. 2nd reaction would be strong NO, as for a person who is just for a curiosity and without any consciousness of possible mechanism, doing his first in his life bioenergetics stool exercise. And what about loosing a control over situation that money virtually brings to wealthy people, will they expose themselves to that traumatic in effect lack of control that they survived in their childhood, etc etc. That is why I am very doubtful in democracy which is nowadays the same market good as any other thing that can be bought and sold, and mostly doesn?t express people love to justice, freedom, peace and world, but it express what owners(sellers) makes people believe it express.

I support your point of view from my deepest thoughts and heart but I agree with statement that I saw in some of the Roger Waters interviews: "Historically, there have always been people within the artistic community who have spoken out about things they believe in and they should continue to do so. I shall certainly continue to do so, whether it has any effect or not, because I feel I have a responsibility to myself to do that." That is good comment for what I think about the idea of making majority more conscious, about spreading bioenergetics all over the world more intensively (as one of the foundation aims). It is great, fantastic, very important and noble aim, however it is going to be long and difficult work. Right now, I don?t expect people in western world, as majority, will make a wise choices when expressing their points of view, when voting, they will just choose exactly what they are.

With a kindest regards,

[Flowen]

As the year winds to a close, I am more ashamed of our governing leaders ?!?!? than ever before. How low can they go?

It is unbelievable to what degree our government and corporate leaders will go to maintain the status quo. It is equally unbelievable how much like sheep the American people are to continue to accept such ?protection? (President Bush?s word). At least in Vermont, over two dozen towns voted unanimously that President Bush should be impeached...not that it means anything. On the federal level Democrats and Republicans alike argued against impeachment. "It's only one more year," "What can he do as a lame duck?," "The country can't afford the distraction," yada yada yada.

For crying out loud, they impeached Clinton for lying about having sex! Not that Clinton was materially better for the country than Bush. While there is evil in the Republican party, the Democrats are characterized by unbounded incompetence, and both bend over to maintain the Status Quo. Different effect, same result. Do you want your BullSh*t with vanilla or chocolate?

Let's see, in the three days before Christmas?

1) They passed an "energy bill" in which they mandated that $16 billion of tax credits should continue to be granted to who?...the poor Oil and Gas Industry! The media cheerleaders don?t specify, so it is probably $16 billion annually. It is no coincidence that vice-President FrankenCheney, who wouldn't even be alive if they don't re-boot his heart every once in a while, was CEO of Halliburton; a garden variety oil company until the Iraq War, Halliburton is now a multi-faceted conglomerate supplying everything from food service to oil service with mercenaries, arm supplies, and construction in between, at tax payer expense. Billion dollar blocks (literally) of cash, 100,000s of small arms, and millions of rounds of ammo delivered to Iraq, go missing, totally unaccounted for. Exxon-Mobil alone has been ?earning? (that?s what Wall Street calls it) over $10 Billion net income every three months for the last 2-3 years. The poor, needy oil & gas industry certainly needs this taxpayer subsidy? Yeah, right! And this is only a small part of the whole.

Also in the energy bill they removed existing subsidy for wind and solar development! Wind, solar, conservation, alternative transportation would need no subsidy if energy were priced in a true free market; but in the face of the politicians doing everything they can to keep the price of gas, diesel, electricity, and coal down by every means they can think of (and all of it with our taxpayer money), not charging the costs of environmental degradation, related health care expense, and infra-structure deterioration (remember the Minneapolis bridge collapse?...not one nickle of gas tax said Bush!), they maintain the Status Quo. The average American calls it Freedom, and the Wisdom of the Free Market. How deluded can we be?

Also in the energy bill, in their wisdom they have mandated upping the use of ethanol from 6 Billion gallons to 36 Billion gallons; never mind the market distortion, the near doubling in corn prices we have already seen, with it's effects on food prices worldwide. It's a give-away to the US auto industry (the twin brother of the oil & gas industry) as "flex-fuel" conversions are by far the easiest and most effective way to keep the Status Quo: lots of cheap cars that use lots of cheap fuel. It's no coincidence that Archer-Daniels-Midland ("supermarket to the world"), the world's largest food and grain processor is now headed by an executive from the oil industry.

2) For the first time in 30 years they mandated that cars and light trucks will have to get minimum mileages of 35 miles/gallon....by 2020. That's something, that is, something the Chinese (remember the chinese, wallowing in their rice fields, now eating our lunch?) and others have already been doing for years. Democrats, and even some environmentalists are calling it real progress; to a starving man even rotten meat seems like something. Worse yet, and here is the real strategy, the next day the EPA (Environmental Pollution Agency) disallowed higher mileage standards set by California, Vermont, and 12 other States that were set to go into effect in 2009. This decision taken by the head of the EPA was apparently contrary to the advice of the EPA's own lawyers and technical experts. It will certainly be overturned, but it will take years. This is the typical bait, switch, and obstruct (aka distract, dis-arm, dis-able and destroy) tactic the Republicans have honed to a fine art. Lame duck president?....I don't think so!

3) A new federal budget that includes $75 Billion of new spending for the wars in Iraq and Afganistan, with no strings attached. Bush, Cheney, and crew continue to have a free hand in their profiteering adventure while they solidify their personal and business connections with the Bin Ladens, and most everyone else that fronts for the big oil reserves around the world. Meanwhile, the Democrats, the congressional majority elected with a mandate for change (what BS!) in 2006, didn't want a re-play of the government shut-down in '95, were scared by Bush's threats to veto, and the Republicans threats to filibuster; besides, they wanted to get home for Christmas, leaving Americans and peace-loving people around the world a lump of radioactive coal for Christmas. Meanwhile my step-son, a National Guardsman, is scheduled for deployment to Afganistan next year.

The only change we get is more of the same, and apparently that's what we Americans want; it is certainly how we behave. As Alexander Lowen and others point out: a people will get the best government they deserve, and the worst they will tolerate. It is a case where the lowest common denominator prevails.

America the Beautiful has been hijacked by government and corporate criminals; if you don?t think that?s so, just think about the support Hitler had from the German people. It doesn?t take monsters to do monstrous things. It can happen here, too.

If I sound angry it is because I am! ...as much at our population of sheep as at our so-called leaders. It is nightmarish that Americans don?t have the sense, ability, or willingness to discern reality from illusion, to set aside their need for self-gratification, and behave in a manner that enhances life, rather than degrade and destroy it.