July/August 2000
Articles on the theme "Exploring and Adventure"
The Way of the Adventurer
by Bob Gonzalez
The inspiration of the classical Greek
adventurer, Odysseus -- whom the Romans called Ulysses -- as portrayed in
Tennyson's poem "Ulysses."
Exploring with Wonder
by Kathy Houston
The adventure of life. Exploring it
with the wonder and imaginings of a child.
A Spiritual Adventure
by Rev. Pat Cross
Making a new start at any age -- an
exploration and adventure in consciousness... the ultimate eternal adventure.
Exploring the Adventure Within
by Ron Graham
The adventure of becoming One with
the universal mind of God.
Life's Adventures
by Linda Bothwell
From birth to falling in love, to Self-realization
Exploring Body/Mind Healing
by Ernesto J. Fernandez
An approach to healing that helps define
the best 'road map' and the best forms of treatment.
Exploring God as Process
by Rev. Pat Palmer
God as not only the source of everything
that is but also as the unfolding of every event that occurs.
Why Explore?
by Patrick Plaskett
How exploration helps us see the world
and ourselves differently -- and get more out of life.
Exploring the Self
by Edwina H. Holloway
The greatest adventure of all, the
excavation of our true Self.
A Learning Adventure
by Rev. Cydné Battreall
The story of a mother and daughter
in the adventure of a lifetime.
The Lure of Adventure
by Charles Larsen
What exploration and adventure consist
of. Achieving a state of mind to experience them.
Other Feature Articles
Natural Health Q & A
by Kim Gillespie
Concerning cocaine and drug abuse.
2000 & Beyond!
by David Findlay
What is... Sustainable/Organic Agriculture?
by Robert Roman
What sustainable/organic agriculture
is and why it is superior to commercial agriculture.
Minerals from Mother Earth
by Judy Power
Features stones for July and August:
jade and charoite.
2000 & Beyond!
by David Findlay
Should I vote? Should I not vote? If I vote, how should I vote? Why bother? Isn't politics a corrupt game anyway, so surely I can't do anything that will have any effect. It's all controlled by those who have the money. Do I have any real choices?
What on earth am I doing here raising political questions? The basic policy of this magazine is to stay out of politics. We're concerned with Body, Mind and Spirit - not politics! Let the politicians play their game and we'll get on with real life.
Unfortunately life is not that simple - or maybe it's fortunate makes things more interesting!
Politics does affect the Body, Mind and Spirit all the time!
Asking "Should I vote?" is a bit like asking "Should I breathe?" We breathe whether we like it or not, whether we are conscious of breathing or not. And it's the same with voting. We are voting all the time whether we like it or not, whether we are conscious of it or not.
Now, you may say that I am cheating. Surely I meant vote in the political sense?
A vote is simply a decision to choose one thing rather than another. I am voting when I buy a particular brand of toothpaste. I am voting when I choose the foods I eat. I am voting when I watch TV or read a book. I am voting when I choose my work. I am voting when I choose where I live.
A vote in the political sense is, however, something of a special vote. The right to vote is something that people have fought and died for. Even today people risk their lives to come to America the Land of Freedom, where their voice counts.
And yet only about thirty percent of the population exercise their right to vote!
Why? The answers are probably contained in the questions at the beginning of this article.
Too many people have become disillusioned with 'politics as usual' with all the manipulation and corruption.
What we need is a reason to vote, and this is in fact the title of a book that I strongly suggest you read: A Reason To Vote by Robert Roth (published by St. Martin's Griffin, ISBN 0-312-24316).
The book is about the Natural Law Party. However, whatever your political leanings, the book raises some very interesting issues.
One thing the book stresses is the importance of third parties. Issues such as the abolition of slavery and the right of women to vote, for example, were introduced by what at the time were third parties.
The problem with the two party system we currently have is that on many issues it doesn't give us any real choice. In a system dominated by PACs (Political Action Committees, in other words the big, powerful lobbies), true democracy has very little chance.
The current choice we have between Republican and Democrat gives the illusion of choice. The media foster this illusion by 'debates' in which Republicans and Democrats 'oppose' each other. In fact this is very much like professional wrestling which, as everyone knows, is rigged. The purpose of professional wrestling is entertainment. And the same is true of the political debates we get on TV.
Even the terms Republican and Democrat are confusing. What's a republic? Per the American Heritage dictionary it's "any political order that is not a monarchy." Very helpful! By this definition all our politicians should be called republican. Another definition is, "a constitutional form of government, especially a democratic one." Again, very helpful! If the Republicans are supporters of a constitution and a democratic government, then what about the Democrats?! It would probably be helpful if we could get rid of the terms Republican and Democrat but to replace them with what?
I'm going to recommend another book that's entertaining and easy to read yet highly thought-provoking: Are You Liberal? Conservative? or Confused? by Richard Maybury (Bluestocking Press, 800-959-8586, ISBN 0-942617-23-1).
Richard Maybury points out that both Republicans and Democrats are pretty much in the middle of the political spectrum and that we are in reality a one-party country. You may or may not agree but his arguments are worth reading.
Even a broad division into Left and Right is in my view a gross oversimplification. It may make good TV - 'good' in the sense of entertaining - but it has the danger of leading us to believe that we are saying something intelligent and useful, when in fact we are not.
For the sake of a more real debate, I'd like to suggest the following:
Instead of Left and Right, I'd use the terms More Government (MG) and Less Government (LG).
One might argue that Left and Right are more or less the same as MG and LG. But as Richard Maybury argues both Democrats are Republicans are pretty much in the middle. Maybe the Democrats are a little more MG than Republicans, but the difference may not be all that significant. One has to take into account not only what the parties say but what they do. Both parties based on actual record can be regarded as MG rather than LG.
One also has to look at specific issues. It might be a useful exercise to make a list of all the issues you feel are particularly important and place the Republican and Democrat positions on an LG/MG scale (say 1 being extreme LG and 10 being extreme MG). Take, for example, something like Education. I might give the Republicans a 6 and the Democrats a 7. In other words, from what I understand of their positions, Republicans want a little less government and the Democrats a little more. But what if I want a 2 or 3, or a 9 or 10? Do I have anyone to vote for?
The LG/MG scale on particular issues will tell us a lot and may be helpful in making up one's mind as to which party or who to vote for.
However, it's not enough. It's clearly not just a matter of how much government but also of what the government proposes to do (I'll abbreviate this to DO).
A good example of this is the military. I might decide that it's important to beef up the military and that we should, therefore, give it more money. That, however, does not answer the question, "What should the role of the military be in today's international environment?" One might, for example, be in favor of a stronger military (a higher rating on the LG/MG scale) but, as for the DO, not be in favor of it being used as a kind of international police force.
Looking at an issue in these two ways - LG/MG and DO - can help to clarify one's position, or that of a particular politician or party, on really difficult 'grey' areas. For example, abortion. To try to fit all the possible views into a simple Republican or Democratic viewpoint is impossible. I am sure there are Republicans and Democrats on both sides of the issue. Let's try, however, to use our LG/MG and DO approach. As far as I see it the Republicans are more MG than the Democrats on this issue. Let's give the Republicans a 7 and the Democrats a 5. So, if I were in favor of less government control I would vote for the Democrats, right? Not necessarily because I might not agree with what the Democrats want to DO with their power - liberalize abortion. If asked where I stood on abortion, I would say that I am philosophically and practically against abortion in most cases but that on the LG/MG scale I'd give it a 1 or 2. I don't think government is good at deciding moral issues - it should be a private matter.
Let's come back to Third Parties for a moment. We need third parties to bring to public consciousness and debate issues that the two main parties are, for one political reason or another, going to avoid.
Until I read the book A Reason to Vote, I did not realize how hard it is for a third party to get on the ballot. In fact it is so difficult that I'm adding a copy of a page from the book of "Signature Requirements for a New Party to Get on the Ballot". I was shocked. Here we are in this 'Land of the Free', yet in fact we have less freedom to express our views politically - in the sense of casting a political vote - than Canada, Australia and most of Europe!
Read the book! And if you believe in such things as health care rather than disease care, crime prevention rather than longer jail terms, putting a stop to genetically modified foods, encouraging organic/sustainable agriculture (see the article in the What is section), encouraging clean sources of power, a foreign policy that is more supportive of real peace, you might find the Natural Law Party worthy of your vote.
[As a footnote: John Hagelin, the presidential candidate of the Natural Law Party, is also running against Buchanan for the Reform Party nomination. The Reform Party is conducting a 'popular' mail-in vote in July. You can request a ballot via the internet, www.reasontovote.com. All registered American voters can vote. And, this is important, even if you are planning to vote for someone else in November, you can vote for John Hagelin now so that he gets the Reform Party nomination. If you want more info about the Natural Law Party read the book or check on the internet, www.hagelin.org and www.dnet.org. See also the ad on page 27. Locally you can contact Kerri Biancalana who is the Tampa Bay Natural Law Party Co-Chairperson (727-392-1180 or email TBNLP@aol.com). If all else fails, call or email me.]
Copyright (c) 2000 Altnewtimes,
Inc. All rights reserved.
No part of this web site my be reproduced without written permission of Altnewtimes, Inc.
E-mail info@altnewtimes.com