Details

Published: 03 June 2007

Created: 03 June 2007

Last Updated: 03 June 2007

The “pursuit of happiness” is a uniquely American phenomenon. Few people know that is was originally formulated as “the pursuit of property,” then changed because it was seemingly too cynical and immoral in the face of the destruction of Indian nations and of the stealing of their lands.

Happiness is nevertheless still frantically chased by most as if it was a criminal on the run, and New Agers are the latest to have espoused the idea that to be happy is a natural, normal, God-given state, and to be unhappy or not completely satisfied and fulfilled is a symptom of some form of mental pathology, failure, or spiritual ignorance.

It is very strange indeed ... How this quest for happiness focuses solely on the individual, severing him from his environment to attempt to make him, or her, the complete master of his or her own life. Wealth here is perceived to be a sign of alignment with divine purposes, another peculiar American belief that parallels the conservative view that the rich has God’s approval and the poor is rightly punished by God for some purported sins, which validates the greed and lack of compassion typically defining conservative ideology, and total personal fulfillment is said to be desirable and achievable regardless of local or worldly circumstances.

From here it is only a small step to view others' misery and misfortunes as opportunities for personal enrichment, and to state that to take advantage of the weakness or failures of others is part of God’s plan and of nature’s laws, that predatory behavior is at once natural and divine.

The individual then is conceived to be totally self-contained, a separate unit unaffected, untouched by his environment, a view that leads to the ideas that to be emotionally and psychologically affected by such world events as the genocide in Darfur, for example, would be a sign of mental illness … that to look at the world and actually see the suffering, the misery that are prevalent would be to indulge in “pessimism” and “negativity”… to have compassion for those who struggle would be to “look for a cause to avoid facing one’s personal issues,” to “go out and attempt to save the world to not have to live one’s own life,” etc. … in other words to be a phony, completely misguided and in need of psychological readjustment.

It is amazing how the ideology of profound selfishness that constitutes the foundation of our Western civilization permeates even the most progressive thoughts, such as can be found in the New Age movement, whose ideal of achieving personal bliss in the midst of an intensively suffering world is as grotesque and obscene as are the power and wealth gained by a ruthless elite.

It is indeed the product of the same culture that still refuses to connect the dots between the rich and the poor, the exploited and the exploiter, the winner and the loser, the victim and the victimizer, those whose main preoccupations are to stop gorging themselves on food or refine methods to look sublime, and those whose sole problem is to find some food, any food, for their children and themselves, or to dodge bullets or machetes.

Massive cultural denial notwithstanding, this pursuit of an ever-elusive happiness is obviously not working, as more and more people desperately need more potent medicines to fight their depressions or psychological difficulties and barely function … Could it be that it is not the individual that needs “fixing,” but the culture itself? Could it be that our cultural values do not fulfill the individual?

Personal alienation and a “survival of the fittest” social structure disregard and actually oppose the human heart, soul and our conscience. They transform society into a battlefield, cold, unforgiving of any mistake, ruled by mistrust and promoting unfeeling, immoral behavior. They makes winners out of criminals who do not end up in jail because their actions are legal and condoned by principles of predatory competition.

How could anyone build an ivory tower of wealth and personal comfort in a world torn and screaming for relief from thirst and hunger, from diseases, from oppression, torture, rape and mass murder? How could anyone find perfect fulfillment in the midst of a sinking world? How could anyone find happiness without giving, without doing something, no matter how small, to make the world a better place, without some form of selfless effort to relieve the suffering of others?

Rather than looking for a self-centered, immature, bratty form of “happiness,” a neurotic activity that keeps the machine that is destroying the world running at full speed, why not give happiness to others, and end the individual alienation and the inequities and injustices that feed this engine of mindless consumerism, of exploitation of people and exhaustion of natural resources? Why not restore the dimensions of conscience, of unity, of balance and sharing to the idea of happiness, as was prevalent in many indigenous tribal cultures (such as among Indians before they were made into “American Indians”), which were more human precisely because they were more attuned to universal spiritual laws?

Raphael Montoliu

Lakeport

{mos_sb_discuss:4}

Details

Published: 20 May 2007

Created: 20 May 2007

Last Updated: 20 May 2007

It is often said that many died in wars to defend American freedom and democracy.

Martin Luther King was not a soldier, but he died while fighting to implement actual freedom in a nation that was at least in part opposed to it, not defending a status quo that was anything but freedom.

Not so long ago, African Americans were segregated, lynched, mutilated in the South. Native Americans were not granted citizenship, while given the "right" to enlist and die in disproportionate numbers in wars waged by this nation. Their religions were suppressed, made illegal.

Native American children were kidnapped by the Bureau of Indian Affairs to be sent to far away boarding schools, not to see their parents and families again for as much as a decade, and parents who resisted were sent to Alcatraz and other prisons. I doubt any of these people felt free.

If the original foundation of this nation is freedom, why did the FBI monitor and attempt to crush the civil rights movement, which was nonviolent, and led by a Christian reverend? If the Pope himself had insisted on a need for peace, equality and justice, would he have become an "enemy" of America, targeted for surveillance and censorship, as were some progressive priests and nuns in Central America, who took a stand for the oppressed and against dictators according to their own conscience, and were subsequently chastised by the Pope for having a conscience?

Why have grass root humanitarian movements meant to improve social conditions, expend freedoms and raise moral standards been mostly brutally opposed by the elite and by government (child labor, women's right to vote, unions, labor laws, etc.)? Could it be that freedom and morality are the ideals of ordinary Americans and of people all over the world, but not the desires of a mostly unethical elite that would rather have power and control, including the control of information?

Could it be that the "communist threat" that was used by government to keep everyone – including, absurdly, Native American activists – in check for decades has been replaced by an equally paralyzing and convenient "terrorist threat," that landed on the lap of the neo-cons at a very auspicious time to

begin implementing the foundation of their neo-imperialist "Project for a New American Century"?

Could it be, speaking of the neo-cons, that the extremely lame campaigns by Gore and Kerry against Bush were nothing but charades and meant to fail, because the agenda of global US domination mostly transcends Democrat and Republican ideologies? Are not these ideologies used, in a "good cop-bad cop" manner, to merely give the people the illusion that they are free, have choice, and are represented, which would explain why both parties are equally fiercely opposed to the formation of a viable, independent, grass roots, as-yet uncorrupted third party?

Can it be that government will always find, manufacture, manipulate or support the creation of vast and all encompassing threats to justify curtailing or suppressing freedoms and expend its bureaucracy, so that the oligarchy (international banks, corporations, monopolies), that essentially owns government, retains and expends its control, the multitudes, especially the poor and minorities who are viewed as threats, remain mostly powerless, and domestic and third-world resources continue to be exploitable at very little financial cost and ever greater profits?

Raphael Montoliu

Lakeport

{mos_sb_discuss:4}

Details

Written by: Hal Bennett

Published: 18 May 2007

Created: 18 May 2007

Last Updated: 19 May 2007

I was shocked to read an article recently concerning Marta Williams' charges against the board of directors of Clear Lake Animal Welfare Society (CLAWS), including her initiation of the petition to remove board members Laurelee Roark and others named in [the Clear Lake Observer American 05/16/07] article.

I have known Laurelee Roark professionally for over 15 years and rarely have met anyone more civic-minded, selfless, professional and compassionate in her work with other people. The charges being brought by Ms. Williams are highly uncharacteristic of Ms. Roark. I have seen Roark handle extremely difficult conflicts with impeccable skill, maintaining the highest purposes and goals of the organization or cause she served. Roark is an extraordinary woman who has contributed much to help improve our community.

Before we all go off half-cocked, Marta Williams' charges against the CLAWS board need to be carefully examined. Ms. Williams is a relative newcomer to Lake County, who has been involved with CLAWS for only a short period of time. I suggest that she, as well as any community member concerned about this issue, carefully examine why she has taken the action she has. Too often, in matters like this, the person with the most shrill and aggressive voice gets the most attention, regardless of the facts. The results can be both destructive and heartbreakingly unjust.

As for the petition Williams has circulated, I ask that this document be published and the signatures be verified, both for county of residence and for knowledge of CLAWS beyond hearsay of the petitioner. Readers should know that there are online services available for anyone wanting to circulate a petition. Petitions circulated in this way can be signed by anyone from any area of the United States, and anyone can collect signatures for virtually anything they wish.

As a resident of Lake County and supporter of CLAWS, I respectfully request that the reporter who originally broke this story investigate how Ms. Williams' petition was generated and whether or not the signatures represent people familiar with our community. While the petition may be legitimate, we should not take it seriously until we are able to examine the facts for ourselves.

Until we get the whole story here, I urge that we all keep cool heads. We owe this much to Laurelee Roark, a citizen who has contributed so selflessly and so much to making our community a better place to live. While I do not know the other CLAWS board members who have been charged, I extend my support to them in the same way.

Perhaps Ms. Williams has a legitimate cause but until we know more we should all reserve judgment.

Hal Zina Bennett

Upper Lake, California

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.