Trump, Trudeau & The House Of Saud: Business As Usual

In what has become a very public and highly covered social media spat between Canada and Saudi Arabia, the two countries have jousted over twitter exchanges that implicate human rights violations.  The social media feud was ignited when the Canadian foreign affairs department called out Saudi Arabia’s regime for imprisoning human rights activists in a pointed tweet from Canada’s Foreign Minister.

“Very alarmed to learn that Samar Badawi, Raif Badawi’s sister, has been imprisoned in Saudi Arabia. Canada stands together with the Badawi family in this difficult time, and we continue to strongly call for the release of both Raif and Samar Badawi.” ~Chyrstia Freeland, Canadian Foreign Minister.

Image: Samar Badawi during a visit to Sweden’s Parliament in 2013.

The Canadian foreign affairs department bolstered this stance with a tweet of its own, calling for the immediate release of the women and human rights activists.

Canada is gravely concerned about additional arrests of civil society and women’s rights activists in #SaudiArabia, including Samar Badawi. We urge the Saudi authorities to immediately release them and all other peaceful #humanrights activists. ~@CanadaFP, (Canada Foreign Policy)

Saudi Arabia responded with scathing criticism of Canada, including a caustic tweet from a pro-Saudi Government Organization which featured a doctored image of an Air Canada plane aimed at Toronto’s skyline.  This veiled thread was eerily reminiscent to the 9/11 attacks on the US, in which 2,996 people were killed after 19 hijackers flew airliners into the World Trade Center’s twin towers and the Pentagon. Fifteen of the hijackers were Saudi nationals.

Riyadh responded to a call from Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland to release civil society activists with an abrupt severing of diplomatic and trade ties, sending home Canadian ambassadors and boycotting Canadian products including grain and maple syrup. Ironically, Saudi Arabia launched a laughable and impotent critique of Canada’s human rights record as the monarchy was publicly crucifying a man in Mecca in a scene reminiscent of the dark ages.

A Deeper Look Into Saudi-Canadian Relations

Lost in the media buzz of this public Twitter spat is the fact that Canada has continually and consistently supported the Saudi Autocracy as a major Arms Sales trading partner.  Indeed – Canada has funded, supported and aided the worst of Saudi Arabia’s abuses, rendering it complicit in its war crimes and international humans rights violations in Yemen and across the region.

On August 9th, the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen bombed a school bus killing dozens of civilians including 29 children.  Despite this atrocity, there hasn’t been a word of criticism from Canadian officials.

Image: Yemenis gather next to the destroyed bus at the site of a Saudi-led coalition air strike, that targeted the Dahyan market the previous day in the Houthi rebels’ stronghold province of Saada on August 10, 2018.  Courtesy of Stringer, AFP; France 24

Business As Usual

Trudeau has been regarded as a stalwart of liberal internationalism – an antithesis to the Trump, Le Pen, Orban nationalism.  However, as it pertains to challenging the military-industrial complex world order, Trudeau has preserved the status quo.  Canada appropriately criticized the human rights violations in Saudi Arabian society, but has remained muted on the war crimes and international human rights violations that Saudi Arabia has committed in Yemen.

In 2014, the Conservative Canadian government made a deal to sell $15 billion worth of military vehicles to Saudi Arabia. The deal was criticized as Saudi Arabia had previously used similar vehicles to attack protesters and activists both in Bahrain and in the Eastern Province in Saudi Arabia. Despite this, there was no shift in policy when the Liberals came into office, as Trudeau’s government decided to preserve the Saudi arms deal that was brokered from the previous government.

As of today, Saudi forces and its proxies have killed more than 10,000 people in Yemen, two-thirds of whom are civilians. According to the BBC, “The fighting and a partial blockade by the coalition has also left 22 million people in need of humanitarian aid, created the world’s largest food security emergency, and led to a cholera outbreak that is thought to have affected a million people.”

Hélène Laverdière of the New Democratic party pointed to reports of the Saudi kingdom’s attacks on its own civilians as well as the Saudi-led campaign in Yemen, where more than 3 million people have been displaced.

“So I am asking the prime minister, what does he think about Canada potentially being complicit in international human rights violations?” Laverdière asked. “How can we say Canada’s foreign policy is progressive and feminist when we continue to sell arms to Saudi Arabia?”

Trump and the NeoCon Artists

As unsavory as Canada’s relationship with Saudi Arabia is, it pales in comparison to the corruption and deceit inherent in the Saudi-U.S. long-standing alliance. Under the Trump regime, Riyadh and Washington are closer than ever and have been enjoying an exceptionally close relationship – tense during the administration of former U.S. President Barack Obama – who distanced his administration from both Saudi Arabia and Israel while seeking to thaw relations with Iran.  Both Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and President Trump (along with Israel) have now teamed up to bully a common rival: Iran.

Image: President Trump, Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz, and Egyptian President Abdel Fatah al-Sisi in 2017 in Riyadh | AP

In 2016, candidate Trump promised to build infrastructure and jobs at home – and to stay out of foreign entanglements.  In fact, Trump repeatedly criticized Obama for intervening in Libya and Syria – and campaigned on getting the U.S. out of endless wars. That was all bluster and empty rhetoric, of course, as President Trump has been a NeoCon’s dream come true, bent to set the world on fire in a rapid devolution cycle via a foreign policy that is furthering the criminal objectives of the George W. Bush Administration.  John Bolton – the NeoCon of NeoCons – was a prominent architect of the illegal Iraq war invasion who to this day praises the decision to invade Iraq which led to the murder of millions of innocent civilians.  Instead of standing trial for war crimes, Bolton has been rewarded with legitimacy as Trump appointed him to be his National Security Adviser.  Since being appointed, Bolton has actively called for regime change in Iran and is shamelessly lobbying for all-out war.

Soon after assuming the presidency, Trump cowardly walked away from the landmark Iran Nuclear Deal, which was an immense, multinational diplomatic achievement that took several years to manifest. Simultaneously, Trump and Saudi Arabia’s King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud signed a gargantuan Arms deal from the United States totaling US$110 billion.

New Hat Alert: “Make Oligarchy Great Again.”

Trump’s supporters often characterize him as being an outsider and somebody who challenges the Establishment Order in favor of the common interest.  Nothing could be further from the truth – particularly as it pertains to foreign policy.  Just like Hillary Clinton, Trump’s business ties with Saudi Arabia are well-documented.  Trump – a self purported “billionaire” – reported a 13 percent increase in hotel business revenue for the first three months of 2018 thanks to a visit from the Saudi Arabian crown prince.  During his first year in office, dozens of foreign governments spent hundreds of thousands of dollars at Trump-owned properties, including a Saudi Arabian public relations company that spent $270,000 at his D.C. hotel. The ethics watchdog group Public Citizen said the Saudis were trying to “seduce Trump” by staying there.

This is just one example of the ethical and financial improprieties that this president has brought to Washington.  Trump is profiting personally from foreign dignitaries seeking favoritism by patronizing his many businesses – and favors are given in return.  American foreign policy favoritism is effectively being used to kill Yemeni civilians and children, thanks to the Trump-Saudi arms deal which has delivered the world’s deadliest bombs (courtesy of Raytheon, Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics) to the Saudi kingdom for whatever use they see fit, even if it violates all standards of international human rights protections.

Image: A US-made MK-82 guided bomb, which has been used in previous attacks on Yemeni civilians. The cage code on the bomb identifies Lockheed Martin as the manufacturer.

Trump’s foreign policy is neither nuanced nor knowledgeable, and has been expertly exploited by special interest groups seeking to finalize the mission set forth by the Project for a New American Century NeoCons:  to take out seven countries in the Middle East, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.  In just months after President Trump was elected, he had already been usurped by a veiled, shadow government that sees an opportunity to exploit Trump’s lack of principled vision for their own destructive purposes, with Trump as a willing accomplice.

You simply cannot be fighting for “liberal democracy”, “human rights” and “peace” when you are funding (directly and indirectly via Saudi arms deals) the expansion of organizations like the Islamic State and Al-Qaeda (who never even existed until the West intervened in the Mideast) and supporting the occupation of the Palestinian people by an extremist Netanyahu apartheid regime in Israel. Yet, all we hear about are the “evils of Iran” – despite the fact that it was not Iran – but Saudi Arabia – which had its hands in 9/11 and continues to export extremist ideology and propaganda through its madrasas and support of arms and money to organizations like ISIS & Al-Nusra.  It is Saudi Arabia – not Iran – which is the world’s #1 exporter of terrorism.

The New Old World Order

The New York-based group Human Rights Watch warned that the worsening spat between Ottawa and Riyadh “should alarm Saudi Arabia’s allies and all rights respecting countries.”  However, the official response from the European Union and the U.S. has been muted, indicative of the deep financial ties and corrupted, oligarchical influence that permeates the U.S.-Saudi relationship.

While Canada’s foreign minister may criticize Saudi Arabia’s treatment of women’s rights activists — and the U.S. may publicly call for a “war on terrorism” – both nations are engaging in business as usual with the Saudi kingdom, which has enabled the proliferation of terrorism across the region and the continued suppression of gross human rights violation.

Information Warfare & Alex Jones: Journalistic Responsibility In A Post-Truth Era

In our quest for truth, we all have intuitions, hunches, and personal insights that we may not be able to prove.  Whether it’s spiritual premonitions, conspiracy theories, or superstitious synchronicity, our conscious thought is an explorer in a universe of ideas, possibilities, and theories.  However, if there is no filter in place to bring form and meaning to these free-flowing ideas, the truth quickly becomes whatever we want it to be; feelings and opinions become just as “true” as verifiable, well-researched facts.

The revolutionary ideas that produced the American experiment enshrining the Enlightenment principle of freedom of expression has produced an unchained intellect.  With that conscious liberty comes a responsibility to quest for truth with journalistic integrity.  In our current media free-fall of anything goes think-pieces and political punditry, we have reached a post-truth stage in our history where “fake news” is simply whatever we want it to be, usually characterized by a viewpoint we disagree with.

As explorers of consciousness, we have a deep responsibility to substantiate our thoughts & theories in order to foster legitimate discussion of the important matters of our time.

“We risk being the first people in history to have been
able to make their illusions so vivid, so persuasive,
so ‘realistic’ that they can live in them.” — Daniel J. Boorstin, The Image: A Guide to
Pseudo-Events in America (1961)

Alex Jones & The “Mainstream” Media

By now, everyone has chimed in on the concerted effort among major companies (YouTube, Facebook, Apple) to ban Alex Jones & Infowars from its platforms.  Many in the conscious community remember when Alex first came on the scene in Austin, Texas where he developed his signature gravelly voice that shouted conspiracy from the mountaintop. Since his early underground days on community radio, Jones has ascended in popularity and has become a prominent voice in media buoyed by audiences fascinated with his conspiratorial takes and fervent support of President Trump (who granted Infowars White House press passes after his election in 2016).

Jones and his supporters continually lambast the “mainstream media” when framing commentary on global events.  However, Alex Jones has become mainstream media, boasting view stats in the billions with subscribers in the millions that rival and eclipse traditional media giants like CNN and NBC.

Since Jones was banned, his Infowars app has surged on the Google Play and iTunes charts, ranking third among trending apps behind only Twitter and News Break.  It’s important to acknowledge just how vast the Alex Jones audience has become, and the bulk of his viewers solely rely on Infowars for information gathering on political and global events.

Ironically, the ascent of Alex Jones into the mainstream has been buoyed by Facebook & YouTube, who actively promoted and pushed out Alex Jones content in their respective feeds as his popularity sky-rocketed and his content raked in considerable advertisement profits for the Silicon Valley behemoths.  But unlike newspapers and traditional media sources who are liable for what they publish, Facebook & YouTube have been shielded from liability in the U.S. for what their users publish – which largely has resulted in the quest for truth taking a back-seat to the quest to go virile.

Freedom Of Speech & Responsibility

The aptly named “Infowars” is emblematic of the information war that is currently taking place in America.  From traditional media giants like Fox, CNN & MSNBC to emerging internet media forces like The Young Turks, Mark Dice & Secular Talk, there is a jockeying for power and news authority that is shaking up the global political landscape – and this is significantly changing how (and what) people think.

Indeed, freedom of speech and a free press is something that truth-seekers should hold sacred, but Jones being banned is not about freedom of speech.  Jones is free to broadcast his message as he sees fit – but that doesn’t guarantee that private companies like YouTube and Facebook will feature his content.

An important question that must be answered in response to the ban is this: What responsibility should Alex Jones, YouTube & Facebook assume in presenting “truth” to audiences?  While many say that they should bear no responsibility as it pertains to journalistic integrity, what effect is that having on our aggregate consciousness?  America is in a mental health crisis.  Suicides are increasing at alarming rates, iPhones, social media and technology have dominated the lives of young children with distraction and fantasy. Reality is becoming so abstract that more and more are losing grip on their day-to-day lives, opting to live in a world where truth is malleable and whatever you want it to be.

Media sources like Infowars that purposely and knowingly perpetuate false information and sensationalized conspiracy under the guise of “the truth that the mainstream media won’t tell you” have significantly contributed to the growing American population that is misinformed and increasingly mentally unstable.

“Every single school/public shooting is a hoax staged with crisis actors.” “Queen Elizabeth is converting to Islam and is a Jihadi.”  “Democrats (and only Democrats) are running a global prostitution ring.” “Obama is having sex with 10 men a day on taxpayer dime.”

The aforementioned are actual quotes and takes from recent Alex Jones broadcasts, and they are seeding millions of minds with precisely what they are purportedly railing against: Fake News.  In effect, Jones has produced the same kind of disinformation that he accuses “The Liberal Left” of producing – and that has a very real effect on public consciousness.  In order to educate, enlighten, and challenge the conventionally programmed mind, you must credibly appeal to truth.  You cannot do that when you are peddling junk theories.  There are real instances of false flag events and manipulated events for geopolitical gain without us pressing to find conspiracy where there is none.

There are real global cabals and child prostitution rings to expose and bring to justice without us having to go down a rabbit hole of gutter dialogue, obsessing over “Pizzagate” and other poorly evidenced theories while actual instances of human trafficking are taking place right in front of our eyes. There is a real war on our planet, environment and bodily integrity without entertaining lunatic claims that “they are putting chemicals in the water that make frogs gay!”

This is not to say that there aren’t legitimate grievances and critiques of traditional media.  The American public’s faith in the media is at a historic law – and there is good reason for that.  The level of discourse, global news coverage, and critical thinking displayed on CNN, NBC, & Fox are numbingly restrictive, biased, and dishonest.  Major newspapers were complicit in presenting false and poorly sourced information to readers that precipitated the criminal and illegal Iraq War.  The New York Times (and others) peddled conspiracy theories from the NeoCon Bush Administration which knowingly lied and deceived Americans with lies and false information – and this greatly influenced public opinion in the lead-up to the war.

Both things can be true: Our media institutions have often failed to enlighten and inform us – *and* Alex Jones is contributing to the post-truth movement that is further skewing truth in favor of journalistic anarchy and chaos.  There are kernels of truth that can be found on Infowars, just as there are kernels of truth to be found within traditional, “mainstream” media.  But what separates the real from the fake are journalists and media that take deep personal responsibility in presenting information, news & intelligence that is in service to truth, and not just in service to shares, likes, views & trending statistics regardless of the actual integrity of the content.

While many rail against the New York Times or the Washington Post, there is a level of journalistic standard (citation, sourced information, liability for slander/libel) that is too often absent from alternative news.  As writers within conscious media, we should take that responsibility to heart as we are already exploring thought forms, theories, and ideas that are often outside of the parameters of what the restrictive corporate media sources will broadcast and publish.  It is imperative that we report and explore ideas with integrity, and that means thoroughly investigating, researching, and filtering our ideas and claims before blindly adopting popularized conspiracy theory that has no firm grounding to stand on.

Unintended Consequences of “Chilling” Alex Jones Content

Regardless of whether you resonate with Alex Jones and his content, the larger question to explore is the implication of banning his content on YouTube, Facebook and other mainstream platforms.  As reported above, Infowars has gained massive popularity and its app has soared since the ban.  Banning Jones only increases his allure and – in effect – martyrs Jones and Infowars, giving credence to supporters who feel that his message is being chilled and suppressed by the Deep State.

This type of censorship often produces unintended consequences.  For example, Europe has criminalized the denial of the holocaust.  The result of that has seen more people in Europe actually denying the holocaust, as their viewpoint gets pushed to the fringes and foments rebellion amongst those who declare that the State is suppressing their voice.  America leans more heavily on free speech than any country in the world, creating an environment where there’s a competition of opposing views and a marketplace of ideas.

This traditional American defense of freedom of speech posits the notion that the way to challenge the false claims of someone like Alex Jones is to challenge that viewpoint, expose it, and present an argument so that readers/viewers can make up their own mind.  The censorship of Jones is a relative divorce from this principle, and there is legitimate concern as to whether a precedent will be set to ban other commentators and media sources simply because they report, write, and opine on controversial topics and conspiracy.

Unlike authoritarian regimes in China and Russia, American jurisprudence has long held that the State is not permitted to infringe upon free speech unless speech directly incites violence.  Given the immense power and influence of giant companies like Facebook and YouTube, the question that is now being presented is whether they are the proper arbiters of truth and permissible dialogue.  Facebook & YouTube have never been neutral in presenting information.  They control timelines and push certain content that is trending in order to increase their advertisement sales, viewership, and profitability – which is one reason why Alex Jones became so popular in the first place.  Just as our very own Joe Martino reported earlier this week, Facebook deliberately governs the content that you see and thus can greatly influence (or diminish) any organization’s reach and view-power.

Relying on Facebook & YouTube – en masse – for information and access to news is problematic in itself – and this challenges consumer behavior to be proactive in its quest for information.  Taking control of the narrative by not being simply a receiver of a manipulated timeline will become paramount.  Visiting websites directly will become an important way to sift through the emerging regulation and censorship that will change the way companies like YouTube and Facebook operate.  While they’ve been immune from liability for slander and defamation (unlike traditional newspapers and media), the U.S. Congress is intent on taking away the absolute shield of protection for these corporations.  Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) actually wrote the law himself (circa 1996) which prevented internet companies from being sued over user-generated content.

Earlier this week he stated,

“I just want to be clear, as the author of Section 230, the days when these pipelines are considered neutral are over.”

This signals a new era of social media regulation that will have significant impact on how news and opinion are presented on platforms like YouTube and Facebook.   This presents a challenge to you: the truth-seeker; the information gatherer; the critical thinker. How active will you be in seeking out truth?  Will you rely on the State for your information? Will you rely on YouTube and Facebook for your information?  Will you actively search for and frequent the journalism and viewpoints that resonate with you, regardless of censorship?

As journalists, will we take more responsibility in our own viewpoints, ensuring that standards of empirical truth and grounded arguments are upheld? We are at a dangerous point in our history as it pertains to steering the collective consciousness of the planet.  Now more than ever, discernment and active participation in creating the narrative of now is a task that cannot be left to the control of someone or something else.  As with everything else, it starts from within to where we are self-reliant in our quest for truth. Once we take that responsibility within ourselves, we will see that moral imperative extended to institutions (like Big Media) which have too often twisted reality via half-truths and mis-truths to service veiled agendas.

Red Team vs. Blue Team | Toxic Tribalism We Must Transcend

We’ve all experienced it.  You log on to Facebook and scroll through your timeline – and there it is: a fiery argument where insults are flying freely on a subject that charges you.  Though you may aim to steer clear of the sludge and toxicity of social media comment sections – perhaps you decided to lunge into a particular topic that you care deeply about.

Almost inevitably – an argument takes place where emotions reach a crescendo and the “debate” devolves into sophomoric insults where both sides are trying to tear each other’s character down instead of engaging in discourse on the merits of respective viewpoints.

Often, we find ourselves scrambling to score points by reflexively reacting to current events based on agenda and cultural identifiers, (nationality, orientation, race, creed, religion etc..) arguing over semantics, using trigger terms, stereotypes, and gross generalizations to stir the pot of frantic frenzy.  There is a primordial root to this way of interacting with each other.  From the very beginning of our history on this planet, we were thrust into a world where “the others” were viewed as an imminent danger that must be defeated, lest we be invaded and taken over.  In modern times, this tribal notion of “the others” often manifests as an idea, viewpoint, or perspective outside of our own, and it is often perceived as a threat that must be beaten down.

This has come to typify our state of discourse – whether it’s in corporate media, in Congress, on social media, or elsewhere – it has become abundantly clear that we are feeding into endless argumentation that features polarized “sides” of an argument – and there are often only two viewpoints presented as acceptable to latch onto. We anger quickly, posit ourselves in a reflexive defensive posture, and prepare to debate with one another in a way that perpetuates conflict instead of fostering education and cooperation.

The quest to be “right” or to “win” the argument takes precedence over actually listening with an open mind to an alternative viewpoint, robbing us of the opportunity to learn something new, expand our perspective, and integrate new data into our thought process to assist in evolving our consciousness.  Scientists call this motivative reasoning: a phenomenon where our unconscious motivations (beliefs/desires/fears) shape the way we interpret information.  Some ideas resonate with what we identify with – and we want them to win.  Other ideas sound like the “other” side – and we want to denigrate, defeat and banish those ideas out of the discourse.  When we apply this to our world we see how the polarizing power of partisanship and deeply held belief-systems influences our perceptions of the world around us.

“Motivated reasoning theory suggests that reasoning processes (information selection and evaluation, memory encoding, attitude formation, judgment, and decision-making) are influenced by motivations or goals. Motivations are desired end-states that individuals want to achieve. The number of these goals that have been theorized is numerous, but political scientists have focused principally on two broad categories of motivations: accuracy motivations (the desire to be “right” or “correct”) and directional or defensive motivations (the desire to protect or bolster a predetermined attitude or identity).” ~Thomas J. Leeper

Even when we think we’re being objective/fair-minded – we still can wind up unconsciously arguing for something with mechanical repetition – even when the empirical evidence shows that there is no sound basis for our argument.  We’ve become more adept at crafting and presenting an argument than conducting an actual investigation and critical thinking into the truth of the matter at hand.

But shouldn’t our motivation to find truth be more prominent than our motivation to be “right” or to cherry-pick arguments and articles that reinforce our own views? How can we cut through our prejudices/biases and motivation – and look at data and information as objectively as possible?

Making A Change

Perhaps it begins with shedding overly rigid identities and boxes that have been created for us in order to herd us into predictable boxes.  How often do you find yourself parroting a viewpoint or argument that you feel is aligned with your primary identity?  Perhaps you identify primarily as a Democrat.  If so – should your entire viewpoint be defined by this identifier to where you only agree with policies and/or ideas presented by those on your team (Team Democrat)?  If you identify as a woman – is that all you are?  If you consider yourself a Christian – must your perspective only be aligned with a narrow prescription of popularized Christian “values”?  If you consider yourself part of the “conscious community” – must everything be understood and reasoned through that filter?

This isn’t to say that identity isn’t important.  Expressing a sense of who we are is paramount – but that expression is unnecessarily limited when we aren’t open-minded and don’t allow for a full-spectrum experience. Identity politics is always an ever-evolving realm, and many of us attach more value to certain identifiers than others, be it race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, etc.. It’s respectful to be supportive of an individual’s universal right to self-identify (or even their right not to identify at all), but it is also helpful to exercise a level of suspicion about the ability of rigid identifiers and social constructs (like race and gender) to accurately portray the multi-dimensional beings that we are.

“There’s a dangerous corrosive side to identity politics, ie: making one’s gender/skin color/religion/sect/sexuality one’s *defining* trait. Between groups this can divide people rather than unite them, promoting rather than reducing group stereotypes, and therefore increasing discrimination.

Within groups this can lend itself to reinforcing a hegemony for those individual members who refuse to conform to what being a member of that group is *meant* to mean, as defined by that community’s internal power structures. This is like the old trope “You can’t be a true Muslim/black man, and be gay”.  ~Maajid Nawaz

Breaking down these constructs and constrictive identifiers will usher in a new framework for discourse.  Currently, major media and news outlets rarely put forth effort in facilitating an open-range discourse, and are capitalizing (and in many instances feeding) the toxic tribalism where only two-view points are presented without any real effort to find intersectionality or genuine exchange. We see the phenomena of “both sides of the same coin” playing itself out again and again as it pertains to a polarized duality of public opinion.   Thus, the vast percentage of the populace are unconsciously bombarded with polarized view-points that unseat their own ability to find the neutral and to explore new thought-forms outside of the limits of dual categorization.

An unknown ‘something’ has taken possession of a smaller or greater portion of the psyche and asserts its hateful and harmful existence undeterred by all our insight, reason, and energy, thereby proclaiming the power of the unconscious over the conscious mind, the sovereign power of possession.”  ~Carl Jung

It would be prudent for all of us to examine whether our own psyches and intellects have been unseated by an unknown, unconscious force. We are now tasked to get back in the driver’s seat of our own consciousness, turn off cruise-control, and navigate our own vehicles.  Just as the fleshly body must be cleansed of parasites and toxins such that they don’t become hosts for worms that weaken the body’s vitality, the mind must go through its own filtration process to clear out intrusions and predictive programming that wane our original core vibrational thought patterns.  Otherwise, we are often just passive receivers of whatever the TV is downloading into our minds.

The Need for Innovative Narrative

So who are the new story-tellers who can create a more progressive narrative of universality?  A narrative where we seek to understand each other by coalescing in multi-sensory empathy and cosmic commonality?  A narrative which rejects that humanity is a simple, basic species that can easily be divided into boxes of artificially devised social constructs.  A narrative which recognizes that we are coming out of an age of spiritual amnesia – and many of our societal problems are related to our universal yearning for meaning, truth, and a desire to be connected, balanced, and whole in our relationship with each other and our selves. The need for a new narrative is upon us – and we each bring a unique gift that is required to comprise the tapestry of our immediate position in this time/space.

The Electric Electorate: Can We Consciously Navigate The Political Process?

There is a growing sense and concern that our institutions are failing us – and that concern is well-founded.  From government and religion to media and education – we are seeing institutional failures destabilize our society, breed division amongst us, and deprive so many of their basic human rights and dignity.

Many have resorted to rebellion and protest while others have abandoned the system entirely, seeking a life outside of normative society’s parameters.  Many within the conscious community have withdrawn from the political process altogether, opting to focus on self-exploration, experience and conscious expansion.

The Trump presidency has caused us to look at our ugly face in the mirror – and has served as a shock to the system, exposing some of the unsightly truths that exist beyond the veil, including a shadow government and global oligarchical cabal that has largely evaded public consciousness.  This has produced a system that has been successful at controlling narratives and producing both an anti-intellectualism and group-think herd mentality that suspends critical thought.

Now more than ever – the ability to think for ourselves is paramount.

“The ultimate tyranny in a society is not control by martial law. It is control by the psychological manipulation of consciousness” ~ Barbara Marciniak

While there is indeed an entire universe out there for us to experience and explore, there is also a very real world manifesting right here in 3rd dimension – in the now – that we can access, influence, and enhance – and this world desperately needs our contributions.  On the turbulent path to questing for higher consciousness, most are greatly assisted by access to independent media, fast internet access, free thought exercise, clean water/food supply, and healthy lifestyle habits (diet, exercise, rest).  All of that requires resources that so many in this world do not have access to – and the notion that one could just hit the seat-eject button to parachute up, up and away from this reality is an option that so few can even make without the privilege and resources to do so.

While there are many avenues to explore to effectuate change in this world – should we reconsider the potential to bring forth change in the political and civic arenas?

Restore Politics?

Staying out of politics is a luxury that many have when their liberties aren’t impeded and their very identity isn’t politicized.  The child from Guatemala who is separated from her parents at the border and is subject to traumatic incarceration, displacement, and in some instances human trafficking is proximately affected by the political climate of the time.  We may be able to see how broken the political system is, but that realization in itself doesn’t stop bombs from flying over the homes of millions of innocent civilians who fall victim to proxy wars waged by corrupted elites bent on destroying humanity.

The banking cabal still rigs economies and foments cycles of debt and scarcity.  Civil liberties and human rights violations continue. The military-industrial complex grows stronger, richer, and more corrupt.  Our food and water supplies become more toxic and polluted – and the list goes on.

This is not to say that there isn’t a compelling argument for staying out politics (the word politics signifies polarity – pole – polls and has a tendency to polarize the mind engaged in the red versus blue dichotomy) – but is that argument going to produce solutions that address the political decay within government? Let’s consider for a second what would result from the conscious community engaging the political process and contributing to an awakening within their respective communities.

Let’s take a look at the polling data from the 2018 U.S. Presidential election:  As a percentage of eligible voters, Clinton received 28.43% (65,845,063) of all votes compared to Trump’s 27.20% (62,980,160).  Total voter turnout was estimated at 59% of the voting eligible population.  Many within the conscious community were repelled by both Clinton and Trump – and again – there were compelling reasons for that rebuke of the polarized system.  Some voted third or fourth party, opting to cast a vote for Jill Stein or Gary Johnson.  Others opted out after revelations that the Democratic National Committee (DNC) actively tipped the scales and unfairly adjudicated the democratic primary process, refusing to referee an equal playing field at the expense of the Bernie Sanders campaign.

What if all of that disenfranchised energy was funnelled into infusing the political system with a conscious awakening?  We just saw a micro-experiment of this in New York’s 14th Congressional District which represents large swaths of the Bronx & Queens.  This past week, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez defeated a powerful, bought & paid for Corporate Democrat Joseph Crowley in an election all of the cynics thought was impossible to manifest.  Alexandria is a post-partisan activist who walked the walk on campaign finance reform and bravely posited her authentic self against Crowley – who was the overwhelming favorite and establishment branded Democrat funded by corporate interests. Crowley outspent Ocasio-Cortez 18-1 – but it didn’t matter as the wave of energy at Alexandria’s sails was a force of nature.

The future doesn’t belong to old-world models of polarity and left/right duality. Alexandria is representative of her district (+70% people of color), challenged the deeply embedded status-quo candidate who was never elected (Crowley was appointed) – and proved that when you give voters a reason to engage in the political process – they will respond.

She described her ascent into politics as “an awakening” and actively engaged historical non-voters who felt alienated and unserved by the political system.  Crowley had all the big money; Ocasio-Cortez had the people – and they weren’t all that interested in party-politics flag-waving. They wanted authenticity and bold leadership from a candidate who speaks truth to power and works to correct the planet’s wobble – and they got it with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

We need an energized, active, and joyous populace in order to take on the larger/macro issues – but it often starts w/ the microcosmic work on the ground that galvanizes from the ground-up, via organic community growth and development that addresses the localized problems that we can actively influence – just as Ocasio-Cortez has done.

While there is limitless experience to be embarked upon within the spiritual dimension, there is also a very urgent call for us to contribute our uniqueness and individuality to the collective hue of humanity.  That doesn’t always require us to crack through the ceiling of the universe via astral projection or to spiral through other dimensions in an ayahuasca circle.  Sometimes it can be as simple as ensuring that your community has access to clean drinking water – or safeguarding the basic civil and human rights of our neighbor so that we may build the framework for a prescription of universal rights that enlarge the aura of the body politic.

Many within party politics quibble about the fracturing of the vote that takes place intra-party via contentious primaries, the more efficient strategy would be to facilitate an awakening within the entire electorate, and not just summarily dismissing the non-voting 40% who have (understandably) felt alienated and unserved by institutionalized politics.

Political commentators within Big Media rarely inform, enlighten, or alert the public to civil and human rights abuses. Instead, politics has become a checkerboard of two choices, both of them usually unpalatable.  Just as baseball fans relish the rivalry between the Red Sox and Yankees, fervently pledging allegiance to their “team”, American politics has been framed as a dual rivalry fueled by identity politics: us versus them, red versus blue, which generates a hyper polarization within the electorate.

We are in the midst of a chaotic tornado and are challenged to steer that tornado with sturdy balance, and that tornado cannot be steered with an endless loop of left-right cyclical argumentation.  But what would happen if we put our system in neutral to address the immense imbalance and dysfunction in our world?

“The body’s ability to be alive depends on its ability to acquire charge.  If a seed isn’t centripetal – it can’t suck in first nourishment.  The reason structures like the Stonehenge cause seeds to germinate is electrical.  That is, it’s a centripetal conjugate field.  Your brain — like every centripetal structure — is like two pine cones learning to kiss noses. In physics that’s called phase conjugation and governs self-organization. ~Dan Winter, Golden Mean Ratio

Electrify The Electorate

Looking at the esoteric and exoteric significance and impact of the body politic – we see that it is an extension of the human body and the state/health of the body politic corresponds with the state and health of the human body.  When we step into our power, we can see a correspondence, as-above, so-below resonator between the dimensions – and that resonance can take hold within our immediate reality where it is so desperately needed.

Politics literally means (etymologically) the ability to a make a body polis – which is to say – a coherent plasma field, which is generated from bliss and measurable electro-magnetically. So when the body is engaged in bliss and conscious awakening illuminates the body politic – people are full of bliss with the expansion of universal rights.  Such bliss makes us feel connected and is a critical part of our health as a humanity. We mustn’t be so beat down by the state of our political system such that a conditioned cynicism leads us to snicker anytime a bright-eyed activist like Ocasio-Cortez builds the courage to challenge the status-quo – no matter how small they may seem when measured by a cosmic spectrometer.  Enhance the universal aura; the electro-magnetic output of the Universal Organism – then topple the oligarchy effortlessly.

Related CE Podcast