Friday, June 14, 2024

Pema Chödrön: The Love That Will Not Die

Photo by Molly

 The Love That Will Not Die

Spiritual awakening is frequently described
as a journey to the top of a mountain.
We leave our attachments and our worldliness
behind and slowly make our way to the top.
At the peak we have transcended all pain.
The only problem with this metaphor is
that we leave all the others behind --
our drunken brother, our schizophrenic sister,
our tormented animals and friends.
Their suffering continues, unrelieved
by our personal escape.
                  
In the process of discovering our true nature,
the journey goes down, not up.
It’s as if the mountain pointed toward the      
center of the earth instead of reaching into the sky.
Instead of transcending the suffering of all creatures,
we move toward the turbulence and doubt.
We jump into it. We slide into it. We tiptoe into it.
We move toward it however we can.
We explore the reality and unpredictability
of insecurity and pain, and we try not to push it away.
If it takes years, if it takes lifetimes,
we will let it be as it is. At our own pace,
without speed or aggression,
we move down and down and down.
         
With us move millions of others,
our companions in awakening from fear.
At the bottom we discover water,
the healing water of compassion.
Right down there in the thick of things,
we discover the love that will not die.

 Pema Chödrön
From When Things Fall Apart: Heart Advice 
for Difficult Times

Tuesday, June 11, 2024

Deeply Important — Gaza Besieged, Jews Divided, & a World in Pain: Gabor, Aaron, & Daniel Maté in Conversation

This conversation from February of this year between Gabor Maté — who is himself Jewish and a Holocaust survivor and his sons Aaron and Daniel is deeply important and a gift to us all. In the midst of so much that is rooted in propaganda, polarization, dehumanization, and disinformation, here we have an opportunity to go deep into a much larger picture of understanding and truth, compassion and caring, and a greater experience and potential for healing and transformation. Such a needed breath of fresh air and hope! Please consider watching and sharing. Thank you. Bless us all, no exceptions. 🙏 Molly


Gabor Mate and his sons Aaron and Daniel
got together in Vancouver BC to discuss
what's happening in Gaza, Israel, and
the worldwide Jewish Community.


Sunday, June 9, 2024

Starhawk: To Honor the Sacred

Photo by Molly
To Honor the Sacred

The Earth is a living, conscious being. In company with cultures of many different times and places, we name these things as sacred: air, fire, water, Earth.

Whether we see them as the breath, energy, blood, and body of the Mother, or as blessed gifts of a Creator, or as symbols of the interconnected systems that sustain life, we know that nothing can live without them.

To call these things sacred is to say that they have a value beyond their usefulness for human ends, that they themselves become the standards by which our acts, our economics, our laws, and our purposes must be judged. No one has the right to appropriate them or profit from them at the expense of others. Any government that fails to protect them forfeits its legitimacy.

All people, all living things, are part of the Earth's life, and thus are sacred. No one of us stands higher or lower than any other. Only justice can assure balance; only ecological balance can sustain freedom. Only in freedom can the fifth sacred thing we call spirit flourish in its full diversity.

To honor the sacred is to create conditions in which nourishment, sustenance, habitat, knowledge, freedom, and beauty can thrive. To honor the sacred is to make love possible.

To this we dedicate our curiosity, our will, our courage, our silences, and our voices. To this we dedicate our lives.

— Starhawk
From Prayers for a Thousand Years:
Inspiration From Leaders & Visionaries
Around the World

Monday, June 3, 2024

Richard Schwartz: Love Is the Answer In the Inner World Just As It Is In the Outer World

This post and others are inspired in part by the recent tragic death of the adult child of close friends. I also know countless others who struggle with addictions, depression and anxiety, and the many other faces of unhealed trauma of whom I was once one. Held right alongside my grief is profound gratitude for all the ways that treatment for trauma in all its many forms is evolving and expanding and effective. 

It is my perspective and experience that Internal Family Systems (IFS) is one significant step forward in saving lives and empowering even severely abused and addicted human beings to significantly transform their suffering, know deep peace and joy, and come to thrive through the gift of leading lives that are increasingly integrated and Self-led, compassionate and connected, loving and whole. This is my experience, wisdom, and hope for us all. Molly

The Wisdom of Richard Schwartz, IFS, and a 
Pathway to Healing and Transformation, 
Wholeness and Authenticity, 
Connectedness and Compassion, 
Peace and Love

We need a new paradigm that convincingly shows that humanity is inherently good and thoroughly interconnected. With that understanding, we can finally move from being ego-, family-, and ethno-centric to species-, bio-, and planet-centric.

None of these changes are possible if we subscribe to the current paradigm of the mind and human nature. It’s not enough to simply address specific problems—green energy initiatives, for example—because as long as we continue to view human beings as selfish, separate, and disconnected, we will continue relating to our parts in ways that make them increasingly extreme, and the host of problems we now face will find other ways to manifest.

Jimmy Carter echoes that sentiment: “What is needed now, more than ever, is leadership that steers us away from fear and fosters greater confidence in the inherent goodness and ingenuity of humanity.” Our leaders can’t do that, however, with the way we currently understand the mind because it highlights the darkness in humanity.

The mono-mind perspective, in combination with scientific and religious theories about how primitive human impulses are, created this backdrop of inner polarizations. One telling example comes from the influential Christian theologian John Calvin: “For our nature is not only utterly devoid of goodness, but so prolific in all kinds of evil, that it can never be idle … The whole man, from the crown of the head to the sole of the foot, is so deluged, as it were, that no part remains exempt from sin, and, therefore, everything which proceeds from him is imputed as sin.” This is known as the doctrine of total depravity, which insists that only through the grace of God can we escape our fate of eternal damnation. Mainstream Protestantism and Evangelicalism have carried some version of this doctrine for several hundred years, and the cultural impact has been widespread. With “Original Sin,” Catholicism has its own version.

What I propose in this book is a hard sell in Western culture. We are primarily oriented toward getting from our partners what we need to feel good and don’t believe we can get much from ourselves. We want to transform the source of pain in the outside world rather than the source within us. That external focus—and the therapies of accommodation that subscribe to it—will only provide temporary relief at best from the inner and outer storms that gradually erode the fertile topsoil of our relationships. There is another way, and we will explore it in this book. Before we do, however, let’s further examine the problems with this accommodation premise.

* * * * *

Imbalanced systems, whether internal or external, will tend to polarize.

Another is psychotherapist Matt Licata, who writes, ‘The ego’ is often spoken about as if it is some sort of self-existing thing that at times takes us over—some nasty, super unspiritual, ignorant little person living inside—and causes us to act in really unevolved ways creating unending messes in our lives and getting in the way of our progress on the path. It is something to be horribly ashamed of and the more spiritual we are the more we will strive to ‘get rid of it,’ transcend it, or enter into imaginary spiritual wars with it. If we look carefully, we may see that if the ego is anything, it is likely those very voices that are yelling at us to get rid of it.

The collection of parts that these traditions call the ego are protectors who are simply trying to keep us safe and are reacting to and containing other parts that carry emotions and memories from past traumas that we have locked away inside.

Jeff Brown explores the phenomenon in depth in his film Karmageddon: “After my childhood, I needed the kinds of spirituality that would keep me from allowing the pain to surface…. I was confusing self-avoidance with enlightenment.”

From the IFS point of view, the quieting of the mind associated with mindfulness happens when the parts of us usually running our lives (our egos) relax, which then allows parts we have tried to bury (exiles) to ascend, bringing with them the emotions, beliefs, and memories they carry (burdens) that got them locked away in the first place.

* * * * *

A part is not just a temporary emotional state or habitual thought pattern. Instead, it is a discrete and autonomous mental system that has an idiosyncratic range of emotion, style of expression, set of abilities, desires, and view of the world. In other words, it is as if we each contain a society of people, each of whom is at a different age and has different interests, talents, and temperaments.

Some of the most powerful personal burdens are similar to what attachment theory pioneer John Bowlby called internal working models. He saw them as maps you developed as a child of what to expect from your caretaker and the world in general, and then from subsequent close relationships. They also tell you things about your own level of goodness and how much you deserve love and support.

When you were young and experienced traumas or attachment injuries, you didn’t have enough body or mind to protect yourself. Your Self couldn’t protect your parts, so your parts lost trust in your Self as the inner leader. They may even have pushed your Self out of your body and took the hit themselves—they believed they had to take over and protect you and your other parts. But in trying to handle the emergency, they got stuck in that parentified place and carry intense burdens of responsibility and fear, like a parentified child in a family.

* * * * *

Parts often become extreme in their protective efforts and take over your system by blending. Some make you hypervigilant, others get you to overreact angrily to perceived slights, others make you somewhat dissociative all the time or cause you to fully dissociate in the face of perceived threats. Some become the inner critics as they try to motivate you to look or perform better or try to shame you into not taking risks. Others make you take care of everyone around you and neglect yourself.

The mono-mind paradigm has caused us to fear our parts and view them as pathological. In our attempts to control what we consider to be disturbing thoughts and emotions, we just end up fighting, ignoring, disciplining, hiding, or feeling ashamed of those impulses that keep us from doing what we want to do in our lives. And then we shame ourselves for not being able to control them. In other words, we hate what gets in our way.

Any approach that increases your inner drill sergeant’s impulse to shame you into behaving (and make you feel like a failure if you can’t) will do no better in internal families than it does in external ones in which parents adopt shaming tactics to control their children.

Your protectors’ goals for your life revolve around keeping you away from all that pain, shame, loneliness, and fear, and they use a wide array of tools to meet those goals—achievements, substances, food, entertainment, shopping, sex, obsession with your appearance, caretaking, meditation, money, and so on.

The critical voice that harangued Debbie Ford with so much self-loathing is an example of one common type of part called a protector, which tried to keep her from taking risks by running down her confidence. The more vulnerable inner childlike part that believed her critic and, as a consequence, felt worthless and empty is an example of a type of part I call an exile.

When I asked these protective parts what they’d rather do if they trusted they didn’t have to protect, they often wanted to do something opposite of the role they were in. Inner critics wanted to become cheerleaders or sage advisors, extreme caretakers wanted to help set boundaries, rageful parts wanted to help with discerning who was safe. It seemed that not only were parts not what they seemed, but also they each had qualities and resources to bring to the client’s life that were not available while they were tied up in the protective roles.

* * * * *

We often find that the harder we try to get rid of emotions and thoughts, the stronger they become. This is because parts, like people, fight back against being shamed or exiled.

The difference here is that the Self says no to impulsive parts firmly but from a place of love and patience, in just the same way an ideal parent would. Additionally, in IFS, when parts do take over, we don’t shame them. Instead, we get curious and use the part’s impulse as a trailhead to find what is driving it that needs to be healed.

Revisit each of these parts, inviting them to relax inside in open space just for a few minutes, and ask them to trust that it’s safe to let you more into your body. Their energy tends to make it harder for you to be embodied when they’re triggered. And if they’re willing to let you in more, you’ll notice a shift each time they relax—you’ll feel more space inside your mind and body. Remind them that it’s just for a few minutes, that it’s just an experiment to see what happens if they let you be there more. They don’t have to if they don’t want to, in which case you can just continue to get to know them. But if they are willing, notice the qualities of this increase in spaciousness and embodiment. Notice what it feels like to be more in your body with a lot of space.

* * * * *

Our exiles are a buried treasure that, because they are in a state of tremendous pain and need, we experience as toxic waste and remain convinced that if we get near them, we will be contaminated. Everyone around us agrees that we shouldn’t go there and instead should just get over it and not look back. This is because no one understands that what is toxic are the emotions and beliefs the exiles carry—their burdens—not the exiled parts themselves. On the contrary, those parts are the vulnerability, sensitivity, playfulness, creativity, and spontaneity that are the heart of intimacy. How can we expect to enjoy our partner when we’ve buried our joy?

It is also important to consider the sociological development of what the historian Philip Cushman calls the “empty self” that arose in this country after World War II. For Cushman, American individualism lost its soul at that point to the huge pressures of industrial capitalism. Whereas before the war our individualism was tempered by a strong ethic of community service, afterward that changed. The American Dream of ever-upward mobility, fueled by memories of the Great Depression and by increasingly pervasive national advertising, infused that war generation with a more selfish individualism. Their baby-boomer children inherited that perspective and, in addition, experienced less of the extended family and community-focused upbringing that their parents enjoyed. Many of us have lost our connection to connection.

As the urges of these protectors consume most of your attention, they drown out and keep exiled the more sensitive and loving parts of you. As you unburden your exiles, it allows your protectors to transform, and you begin hearing more from those parts of you that aren’t so obsessed and driven—the ones who love being truly intimate with others, the ones who want to create art and move your body, the ones who want to play with family and friends, and the ones who just love being in nature. When you’re more Self-led, you become a more complete, integrated, and whole person.

Self-led individuals have the great pleasure of recapturing all the energy their protectors used to expend on inhibition, containment, distraction, and rebellion.

* * * * *

Parts are little inner beings who are trying their best to keep you safe.

Some discoveries I made about parts: •​Even the most destructive parts have protective intentions. •​Parts are often frozen in past traumas when their extreme roles were needed. •​When they trust it’s safe to step out of their roles, they are highly valuable to the system.

Blended parts give us the projections, transferences, and other twisted views that are the bread and butter of psychotherapy. The Self’s view is unfiltered by those distortions. When we’re in Self, we see the pain that drives our enemies rather than only seeing their protective parts. Your protectors only see the protectors of others. The clarity of Self gives you a kind of X-ray vision, so you see behind the other person’s protectors to their vulnerability, and in turn your heart opens to them.

Well-known neuropsychiatrist Dan Siegel has emphasized the importance of such integration in healing and has described IFS as a good way to achieve that. He writes, “Health comes from integration. It’s that simple, and that important. A system that is integrated is in a flow of harmony. Just as in a choir, with each singer’s voice both differentiated from the other singers’ voices but also linked, harmony emerges with integration. What is important to note is that this linkage does not remove the differences, as in the notion of blending: instead it maintains these unique contributions as it links them together. Integration is more like a fruit salad than a smoothie.” This, again, is one of the basic goals of IFS. Each part is honored for its unique qualities while also working in harmony with all the others.

* * * * *

IFS can be seen as attachment theory taken inside, in the sense that the client’s Self becomes the good attachment figure to their insecure or avoidant parts. I was initially amazed to discover that when I was able to help clients access their Self, they would spontaneously begin to relate to their parts in the loving way that the textbooks on attachment theory prescribed. This was true even for people who had never had good parenting in the first place. Not only would they listen to their young exiles with loving attention and hold them patiently while they cried, they would firmly but lovingly discipline the parts in the roles of inner critics or distractors. Self just knows how to be a good inner leader.

Think of how your work environment would be altered if the leaders in your organization related to themselves differently. If they hate the parts of themselves that want to slow down and enjoy life, they will be impatient with workers who aren’t as driven as they are. If they want to get rid of their own insecurity and anxiety, they’ll create an atmosphere in which people fear for their jobs if they show vulnerability. If they attack themselves for making mistakes, everyone will pretend to be perfect. If they fear their own inner critics, they’ll fear the judgment of others and let people become exploitive. On the other hand, if they can relate to those parts of themselves in caring ways, that compassion and acceptance will permeate the company, making it much easier for all the employees to relate compassionately to their own parts and to one another. The same process applies to your inner family. This new way of relating to yourself can’t be forced. It doesn’t work to command yourself to be curious about these parts of you or pretend to feel compassion for them. It has to be genuine. So how do you get to that point? This raises the question of who the “you” is who relates to your parts. Who are you at your core?

* * * * *

Usually, they’ve been operating by themselves in there without any adult supervision, and most of them are pretty young. When you finally turn around and give them some attention, it’s like you’re a parent who’s been somewhat neglectful, but who’s finally becoming more nurturing and interested in your children.

All of these are exiling projects. In the first, we try to get our partner to exile the parts of them that threaten us. In the second, we work to exile the parts of us that we think they don’t like. In the third, we exile the parts of us that are attached to them. As I will discuss later, whenever a relationship creates exiles, it will pay a price.

The inner battles between women’s caretakers and their assertive parts often built over time until, seemingly out of the blue, their assertive protectors would explode with an intensity that left their husbands stunned.

In addition, because of the collusion between women’s caretaker parts and men’s entitled ones, real imbalances often exist in the lifestyles of each spouse—the wife has more responsibility and fewer resources—that fuel her rage and his reluctance to talk.

In terms of the three projects, mentioned earlier, that protective parts take on in relationships once exiles have been hurt, it seems that women are more likely to keep plugging away with the first two, while men more quickly retreat to the third. That is, because women want a relational solution to their pain, their inner critics take aim at their husband and, when that doesn’t work, at themselves, in an effort to open his heart. Men, partly in response to what feels like intolerable criticism, will give up sooner on the intimacy-generating projects and will focus instead on distractions that make them feel good, such as work, sports, and drinking alcohol.

Despite being extremely isolated inside, these childlike parts of the husbands were addicted to the little affection from their wives that was allowed to trickle down to these exiles through the walls of protection. The exiles knew that this trickle was all that kept them from a return to utter love-starvation and worthlessness. This phenomenon also explains why some men who seem so detached from their spouses are simultaneously so possessive and jealous, to the point of stalking and threatening them when they try to leave.

Terrence Real, the author of a valuable book on the wounding of men titled I Don’t Want to Talk About It, describes his life in a way that applies to my own experience and that of many of the men I work with.

* * * * *

The other aspect of Mona’s account I want to underscore is that she used the fight with Monk to find and heal a key exile in herself. When partners can do this, they come to trust that such disconnecting episodes, as uncomfortable as they are, can be tremendously valuable opportunities to heal in ways that will serve the relationship in the future.

Thus this ability to care for yourself emotionally permits the intimacy you seek because you have the courage to allow your partner to come close or get distant without overreacting. With less fear of losing or being hurt by your partner, you can embrace them fully and delight in their love for you.

When each partner has courageous love for the other, many of the chronic struggles most couples face melt away because each partner is released from being primarily responsible for making the other feel good. Instead, each knows how to care for their own vulnerability, so neither has to force the other into a preconceived mold or control the other’s journey. Courageous love involves accepting all parts of the other because there is no longer a need to keep the other in the confining roles of parent/redeemer/ego booster/protector. The other senses that acceptance and freedom, which feel wonderful and unusual to them. They come to trust that they don’t have to protect themselves from you and can keep their heart open.

When your partner is freed from the extreme pressures to both caretake your parts and deal with your rage or pouting when they don’t, your partner can be the lover, companion, and co-adventurer that you want.

In the same vein, if you don’t fear your own anger, you’ll be able to stay Self-led when someone’s angry at you. The person’s judgment of you won’t trigger your own inner critics, because you know who you are, and because those critical parts of you have retired or taken on new roles. So many of the obstacles in our relationships are because we fear the mayhem that someone else’s behavior will create in our inner systems. When Self leads, the mayhem is gone. 

You can become your own healer—the special person your vulnerable parts have been waiting for. When that happens, your partner will be released from the redeemer trap and its accompanying projects, and true intimacy will be possible.

When this process of vulnerability and acceptance is mutual, couples form such a secure connection that their protectors relax, and their young parts know it’s safe to pop out at any time. You may know a couple whose relationship seems full of lively spontaneity and creative playfulness. They literally bring out the best in each other because they each know that all their parts are welcome to step into the warm, safe space between them. Their interactions have the feel of an improv ensemble, with a wide variety of characters jumping excitedly onto the stage and playing off each other.

* * * * *

Compassion as a spontaneous aspect of Self blew my mind, because I’d always assumed and learned that compassion was something you had to develop. There’s this idea—especially in some spiritual circles—that you have to build up the muscle of compassion over time, because it’s not inherent. Again, that’s the negative view on human nature at play. To be clear, what I mean by compassion is the ability to be in Self with somebody when they’re really hurting and feel for them, but not be overwhelmed by their pain. You can only do that if you’ve done it within yourself. That is, if you can be with your own exiles without blending and being overwhelmed by them and instead show them compassion and help them, then you can do the same for someone in pain who’s sitting across from you.

When you have that kind of love swirling around inside you, it spills out to people around you, and those people become part of your circle of love and support. You don’t need intimate others to keep you out of the inner dark sea because that sea has been drained of its pain, shame, and fear. In your inner world, your parts are on dry, solid land and are well housed and nourished. They trust you to be their primary caretaker, which allows your partner the freedom and delight that come with being their secondary caretaker.

If we were all fully Self-led, all parts and people would be welcome. One quality of Self is connectedness not only the desire to connect, but the in-our-bones knowledge that we are all connected, so when one of us suffers, we all suffer.

IFS is a loving way of relating internally (to your parts) and externally (to the people in your life), so in that sense, IFS is a life practice, as well. It’s something you can do on a daily, moment-to-moment basis—at any time, by yourself or with others.

Another kind of happiness exists that you can feel steadily whether you are in a relationship or not. It comes from the sense of connectedness that happens when all your parts love one another and trust and feel accepted by your Self.

― Richard C. Schwartz
Most quotes are from No Bad Parts: Healing 
Trauma and Restoring Wholeness with 
the Internal Family Systems Model

*****

Please go here for additional links, books, and resources:

Invited by Congress, Outraged Critics Say Netanyahu 'Should Be Arrested on the Spot'

Infuriating, horrifying, criminal, and just 
plain pure madness. Molly

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses a joint meeting of the United States Congress in the House chamber at the U.S. Capitol March 3, 2015 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)
"Perhaps," said one progressive critic, the Israeli prime minister "can be arrested for his war crimes on the Senate floor."

By JON QUEALLY

"This is shameful, Sen. Schumer."

That was the reaction of progressive activist Cynthia Nixon on Friday after the Democratic Majority Leader in the U.S. Senate co-signed a formal letter—alongside Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.), Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), and House Minority Leader Jakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.)—inviting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address a joint session of Congress.

With global outrage over Israel's ongoing assault on Gaza at new heights and the International Criminal Court considering an arrest warrant application for the Israeli prime minister over the military campaign that many experts and humanitarians have deemed "genocidal," Nixon suggested that "[p]erhaps Netanyahu can be arrested for his war crimes on the Senate floor."

Nixon was far from alone in reacting with disgust to the decision by Schumer, who faced considerable pressure not to go through with the invitation that has been under consideration for many weeks.

Schumer, Johnson, Jeffries, and McConnell, said the Jewish-led human rights group IfNotNow, "will forever be remembered as the leaders who invited the war criminal Netanyahu to give a speech to Congress in the middle of Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza, days after he crossed President Biden's 'red line' on an invasion of Rafah."

Asked about the possibility of Netanyahu addressing Congress under the current circumstances, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said last month he would boycott the event if the invite was issued. "It's a terrible idea. No I won’t go," Sanders said. "You have a Prime Minister who has created the worst humanitarian disaster in modern history."

"Five percent of the population is now dead or wounded," Sanders said, "and 60 percent of them are women and children. Some 200,000 housing units have been completely destroyed. Every university in Gaza has been bombed. There is now imminent starvation taking place. So why you would invite somebody who has done such horrific things to the Palestinian people is something that I think is a very bad idea."

In March, Schumer vocally criticized the Netanyahu government over its treatment of Gaza in the wake of the October 7 attacks by Hamas militants.

https://forward.com/news/616078/netanyahu-address-congress-johnson-schumer-israel/

Last month, the Forward's Jacob Kornbluh explained how the potential invite of Netanyahu "divided Democrats even when it was just a rumor." He wrote:

On the left flank of the party, critics of Israel don’t want Congress to give a platform to the prime minister, who is widely reviled for embracing right-wing extremists within his government and prosecuting a war in Gaza that has resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands.

But mainstream pro-Israel Democrats don’t necessarily want to welcome him either. Many of them are also frustrated by Netanyahu, but prefer to avoid the inevitable calls to boycott the democratically elected leader of a country they otherwise support.

"I understand why Mike Johnson, Mitch McConnell and Benjman Netanyahu badly want this to happen," commentedMSNBC's Chris Hayes on Friday after the invitation was made official. "I cannot for the life of me understand why Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer think it's a good idea."

Please go here for the original article: https://www.commondreams.org/news/arrest-netanyahu-for-war-crimes

Leftist Climate Scientist Claudia Sheinbaum Wins Mexican Presidency in Landslide

Claudia Sheinbaum waves to supporters as she celebrates after winning Mexico's presidential election in Mexico City on June 3, 2024. (Photo: Daniel Cardenas/Anadolu via Getty Images)

 The close ally of outgoing President Andrés Manuel López Obrador is the first woman to win Mexico's presidency.

By JAKE JOHNSON

Leftist Claudia Sheinbaum, a close ally of popular outgoing President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, won Mexico's presidential election in a landslide on Sunday, with an official tally showing her leading right-wing opposition candidate Xóchitl Gálvez by nearly 30 percentage points.

Gálvez called Sheinbaum early Monday to acknowledge the results and concede defeat in what was the largest race in Mexico's history—a contest marred by deadly violence.

Sheinbaum, a climate scientist and the former mayor of Mexico City, is set to become the first woman and the first person of Jewish descent to lead Mexico after Sunday's overwhelming victory, which was a boon to her leftist Morena party. According to official vote tallies, The Washington Postreported, Morena and its allies "appeared close to winning a supermajority in Congress, which would allow them to change the constitution."

"We imagine a plural, diverse, and democratic Mexico," Sheinbaum told cheering supporters on Sunday. "Our duty is and will always be to look after each and every Mexican, without distinction."

David Adler, co-general coordinator of Progressive International, called Sheinbaum and Morena's win "epic, whopping, [and] historic."

While Sunday's contest—which involved more than 20,000 government positions—and outcome were unprecedented, some questioned whether the results would be truly transformative for Mexico, where poverty and inequality remain high despite minimum wage hikes and other progress made in recent years under the government of López Obrador, commonly known as AMLO.

"AMLO has done a little better for people than prior governments, and Sheinbaum has pledged to continue his political approach, though with a greater emphasis on sustainability," Tamara Pearson, a Mexican Australian author, journalist, and activist, wrote for The Nation ahead of Sunday's race. "The pension for informal workers has increased to 6,000 pesos ($359) every two months. The health system for informal workers, which includes most Mexicans, is still extremely lacking but has improved."

The outgoing president has also faced backlash for pursuing fossil fuel infrastructure projects that risk damaging Indigenous communities and the planet.

Mongabay's Maxwell Radwin noted last week that Sheinbaum—who contributed to a major Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report—"continues to support one of AMLO's most polarizing projects, the Tren Maya, a 1,554-kilometer (966-mile) railroad crossing the Yucatán Peninsula."

"Despite dozens of legal complaints about deforestation, the destruction of cave ecosystems, and the relocation of Indigenous communities," Radwin observed, "she's defended the project and even suggested expanding it to a major port in the town of Progreso, in northwest Yucatán."

With Mexico facing a devastating heatwave and other climate impacts, Sheinbaum has pledged to prioritize clean energy development, vowing to "lead a $13.6 billion program to jumpstart Mexico's renewable energy sector," Politicoreported.

Sheinbaum is set to take office in October.

Please go here for the original post: https://www.commondreams.org/news/claudia-sheinbaum-mexican-presidency

Saturday, June 1, 2024

Pema Chödrön: The True Practice of Peace

Photo by Molly
The True Practice of Peace

To the degree that each of us is dedicated to wanting there to be peace in the world, then we have to take responsibility when our own hearts and minds harden and close. We have to be brave enough to soften what is rigid, to find the soft spot and stay with it. We have to have that kind of courage and take that kind of responsibility. That's true spiritual warriorship. That's the true practice of peace.

— Pema Chödrön
From Practicing Peace In Times of War 

Frances Moore Lappé: America—Democracy or Plutocracy?

(Photo Credit: Giorgio Trovato/Unsplash)

 What happened to the middle class in
the United States? The rich ate it.

By Frances Moore Lappé

Almost 90 percent of us think of ourselves as being “middle class,” but we’re way off. In 1970, 62 percent of Americans did qualify; but by 2021, our shrinking middle class was down to 42 percent. By 2022, the value of our minimum wage has fallen by 40 percent since the late 60s.

And our poverty rate? Today, at 12.4 percent, it’s the highest among almost all 38 OECD nations. Only the newest member, Costa Rica, suffers a higher poverty rate.

So, how did our view of ourselves become so distorted?

We were once indeed primarily middle class because we had stepped up to tackle poverty. In the late 1950s, our official poverty rate was about 22 percent, but Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty cut that rate in half, hitting a low of 11 percent in 1973. Then Reaganism struck, and by 1983 poverty had spread to nearly 15 percent.

And now?

While our official rate is indeed lower, it is still high and misses millions struggling to meet essential needs.

Our path to this sad outcome began in the 1980s. Reversing the War on Poverty, Reagan began dismantling welfare protections while slashing taxes on the ultrarich. Capturing the tenor of the time, in the 1987 film “Wall Street”, Gordon Gekko declared “greed is good.”

Reaganomics paved the way for today’s shocking inequality.

In 1978, the top 0.1 percent held roughly 7 percent of wealth. By 2018, this tiny group enjoyed about 18 percent. Most shocking: By 2019, America’s three richest families held more wealth than the bottom half of us.

Hardly a middle-class nation, today’s concentration of wealth ought to make a Russian oligarch blush. Out of 178 countries the CIA ranks by income inequality, the U.S. lands between Micronesia and Morocco—at 56th. No industrial democracy is near us. The closest—New Zealand—is 31 places less extreme, at 86th.

An additional injustice?

While workers’ share of national wealth has been shrinking, their productivity has soared. Between 1979 and 2017, worker productivity grew by 70 percent, while hourly compensation rose by a meager 11 percent.

And who benefited?

As earnings for the bottom 90 percent of Americans rose by just over a fifth, the wealth of the top 0.1 percent grew by 343 percent. That's 17 times more!

Thus, we shouldn’t be surprised that in 2019 the bottom half of us held only 2 percent of the nation’s wealth.

Moreover, while American workers had to take on more hours to boost their relatively stagnant earnings and as healthcare and housing costs climbed, the wealthy increased their gains and used it to further warp our nation’s democratic institutions: By funding candidates and hiring lobbyists to ensure their interests were heard at the expense of ours. From 1998 to 2023 alone, dollars spent paying Washington lobbyists grew almost three-fold, from $1.5 billion to $4.1 billion.

Thus, when our rules are set to bring the highest return to those with the most, a market economy not only selectively rewards the already wealthy; it undercuts democracy.

The pain of Reaganomics should have taught us one clear lesson. A market economy can only work for the common good within rules set democratically—free from private control—to ensure opportunity for all. The beginning of these rules would be basics such as an enforced, livable minimum wage, as well as strong and enforced anti-trust laws.

Such steps could move us toward a market serving the most basic freedom of all—the freedom to thrive.

Please go here for the original article: https://www.smallplanet.org/single-post/america-democracy-or-plutocracy

Originally Published on Common Dreams, May 09, 2024

Frances Moore Lappé: Woke Is the New Red

First Lady of Florida Casey DeSantis wears a leather jacket that reads, “Where Woke Goes To Die." (Photo: Twitter)
In the 1950s “communist” was the slur of choice to attack those focused on equity, particularly for people of color.

By FRANCES MOORE LAPPÉ

Over half of Republicans agree that “fighting woke ideology in our schools and businesses” is more important than protecting Social Security and Medicare, finds a recent Wall Street Journalsurvey.

“Florida is where woke comes to die,” brags the state’s governor Ron DeSantis, “woke” is “basically a war on the truth.” Under the banner of anti-woke, he enacted sweeping limitations on what can be taught in public schools, a six-week abortion ban, and America’s cruelest anti-trans policies.

For DeSantis, the “woke” are “cultural Marxists” who are to blame for what’s broken in America.

We’ve endured a long history of labels that mislead, divide, and hinder us. So, let’s stop the name calling, listen to the actual agenda of those with whom we think we differ, and engage in real conversation.

 Merriam-Webster defines “woke” first as being “aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice).” The term took off in 2014 after Michael Brown was shot in Ferguson, Missouri, and then came to be used in the Black Lives Matter movement.

Today, “woke” is a sweeping, ill-defined insult making it harder to find common ground essential to reforms benefiting most Americans, such as lifting the minimum wage.

For those who lived through the 1950s it rings painful bells. Back then, “communist” was the slur of choice to attack those focused on equity, particularly for people of color. The McCarthy-era witch hunt caused as many as 12,000 people to lose their jobs.

Growing up in Fort Worth, Texas, in the early ’50s my parents helped found the first Unitarian church and to integrate it. The FBI took notice. I’ll never forget an agent knocking on our door as part of the agency’s investigation of our church. The inquiry was scary enough to shrink our membership. It didn’t shut us down but did lead to several members being fired from their jobs.

As a kid, I thought that we were suspect in the eyes of the FBI because Unitarians were seen as atheists, and atheism was associated with communism. Only recently did I learn my storyline was wrong.

With access to church archives, I discovered a letter from someone in our congregation to J. Edgar Hoover complaining that a member of our church had been questioned by two FBI agents at his home. The letter stated that “Among other questions, this man was asked what he thought of racial equality for Negroes, would he marry a Negro, and whether or not he attended the Unitarian Church.” He added: “I think you will agree these questions are completely out of line.”

Hoover’s response? “No questions were asked by representatives of this Bureau such as are alleged in your letter.”

At about the same time I uncovered these documents, someone in my extended family shared with me his related experience with the FBI. During the Korean War, the army had called him to serve. But when the recruiter learned he was a member of the NAACP, my relative was told that he was no longer qualified because that affiliation meant he was likely a communist.

Today, “woke” as a put down is similarly worrying. The term is derived from African American Vernacular English, meaning to be “alert to racial prejudice and discrimination.” It could have become a rallying cry for a better America. Especially now, as the Supreme Court has rejected affirmative action, facing racism’s deep and painful harm becomes even more urgent.

We’ve endured a long history of labels that mislead, divide, and hinder us. So, let’s stop the name calling, listen to the actual agenda of those with whom we think we differ, and engage in real conversation. We might discover common ground on which we can all advance.

We would then be able to tackle the long-standing, anti-democratic economic and political rules that generate income inequality more extreme than in 109 countries—including all of the Western, industrial world—and wealth so tightly held that the top 1% control almost as much as the bottom 90%. Such unequal economic power harms us all, as it is linked to poorer health and education, greater violence, and other social ills. Its effects also infuse our political lives, twisting policies to further favor the few and undermining democracy itself.

Together we could in fact wake up to what truly harms us and thus become eager to join hands for the benefit of all.

Please go here for the original article: https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/woke-is-the-new-red