by Gary Z McGee
June 17,
2021
from
Self-InflictedPhilosophy Website
Gary
Z McGee, a former Navy Intelligence Specialist turned
philosopher, is the author of
'Birthday Suit of God' and 'The Looking Glass Man'.
His
works are inspired by the great philosophers of the ages
and his wide-awake view of the modern world. |
"Tradition becomes our security,
and when the
mind is secure
it is in decay."
Jiddu
Krishnamurti
We do not need rulers because we can rule ourselves.
We do not need
masters because we can master ourselves.
We do not need A
God
because everything is already God.
Problems arise when we allow others to rule us or other people.
Problems arise when we allow others to master us or other people.
Problems arise when we allow others to dictate
God to us or to other
people.
What problems tend to arise?
Many:
Violence, rape, coercion,
slavery, and forced compliance despite consent are the most typical
and egregious...
When your society's solution to a problem is violence, rape,
coercion, slavery, or forced compliance, then you know that your
society is profoundly sick.
As David Graeber said,
"People don't
need to be threatened with force or fines or jail time (or divine
commandments) to get them to do the right thing. We can organize
ourselves and police ourselves.
In fact, that's the only way it can
happen with respect and dignity maintained."
So as to maintain our respect and dignity, and to avoid these
problems, we must learn self-rule, self-mastery, and how God is
implied in the cosmos itself.
Let's break it down…
No rulers
except self-rule
"Since few men
are wise enough
to rule
themselves,
even fewer are
wise enough
to rule others."
Edward Abbey
Rebel. Nonconformist. Maverick. Self-rulers embrace rules that are
in healthy alignment with universal laws (valid), but they
courageously break rules that are not (invalid).
Governing the precept that humans are fallible, imperfect, and prone
to make mistakes, especially when it comes to power, it stands to
reason that confiding in a system made up of humans wielding power
over others is absurd.
It's circular reasoning at its worst...
There must be checks and balances.
Once we've accepted our own
fallibility, we are more likely to be compassionate toward other
fallible beings. But we are also more likely to recognize
fallibility and to help correct it.
Fallible individuals checking the power of systems made up of other
fallible individuals is the only way to prevent the power within
those fallible systems from becoming corrupt.
Let alone from
corrupting absolutely...
So, it stands to reason that attempting to rule ourselves (despite
our personal fallibility) is superior to allowing others to rule us
(since power tends to corrupt). Leadership then becomes a thing we
teach each other how to do, rather than a thing we force upon each
other.
Keep in mind:
'no rulers' does
not mean 'no rules'...
Rules will
always arise organically and socially through the natural
checks-and-balancing mechanisms of self-rulers.
As Peter Kropotkin
said,
"Anarchism is mutual support, mutual aid, and mutual defense."
Through mutual support, mutual aid, and mutual defense, we teach
each other how to rule ourselves.
True leadership is teaching others
how to lead themselves.
In the crashing plane that is our sick society, the self-ruler puts
the oxygen mask on him/herself first so that he/she can help others
who may be less capable.
In this way, they lead by healthy example.
No masters
except self-mastery
"She wasn't
afraid to be herself.
When everyone
said, 'be a lamb,'
She showed her
fangs
and became a
wolf."
Unknown
Self-taught. Autodidact. Divergent. Self-mastery keeps the
individual focused on what he/she can control rather than on
attempting to control others.
As it stands, fear-based programming and mass-orientated narratives
dominate the status quo.
The solution is for individuals to be
willing to diverge from the herd and become self-masters through
courage-based re-programming and self-empowered narratives that
transcend the status quo.
Self-mastery makes mastery of others obsolete. When everybody learns
how to directly self-correct, the system is more likely to
indirectly self-correct. A system of self-masters eventually
balances out a corrupt system of masters and slaves.
Simply by focusing on
building the healthy new despite the unhealthy old, we get ahead of
the societal curve.
Self-mastery is precisely a focus on the healthy new despite the
unhealthy old. It's the full acceptance that we cannot (and should
not) attempt to control others, especially when we can barely even
control ourselves.
Instead, the focus is on
self-mastery, self-correction, self-improvement, and
self-overcoming, despite the master-slave paradigm that surrounds
us.
A bottom-up strategy of leadership is where individuals learn
self-mastery. The self-master's teachers are Nature, Pain, Validity,
and other individuals who have mastered the self. Self-mastery is
grounded mastery.
It works from the bottom
(roots) up (crown). It's a health-based, body-based, earth-based
philosophy.
Bottom-up self-mastery follows the golden rule and the
non-aggression principle, while instilling the courage to disobey
any laws/rules/commands that go against them. Bottom-up leadership
is about self-mastery despite those claiming to be masters.
In the grand scheme of things, we are indistinguishable from Cosmos.
The concept of interdependence emerges from this
indistinguishability.
To the extent that we
have mastered our own mind-body-soul, the mastery of interdependence
and interconnectedness is the next reasonable step on the path
toward self-mastery.
Lest we give into the insanity that arises from entrenched power, we
must remain self-empowered individuals seeking self-mastery, rather
than self-inured individuals blindly following a chain of obedience
that keeps corrupt power entrenched.
As Albert Camus suggested,
"It is the job of
thinking people (self-masters) not to be on the side of the
executioners."
And then we must go
beyond this and teach each other how not to be executioners.
No Gods except
oneness with all things
"Let me keep my
distance, always,
from those who
think they have the answers.
Let me keep
company always
with those who
say 'Look!'
and laugh in
astonishment
and bow their
heads."
Mary Oliver
Skeptic. Heretic. Nonbeliever. Those who allow God to be
'everything' (infinite) tend to question any particular God claiming
to be 'something' (finite).
Everything is already God. Almost every religious person, spiritual
person, and secular person would probably agree with this.
The problem is that we have too many people attempting to browbeat
and force feed each other into accepting a particular God through
blind faith and allegiance. When you have enough people with
differing ideals of what God is, it creates conflict, violence, and
even war.
The solution is to simply allow everything to be God. Any attempt to
force "Everything" into being "Something" should be mocked,
ridiculed, and laughed at, but also tolerated. Cultural leveling
mechanism are vital toward maintaining a healthy balance in society.
Especially when it comes to God.
'No Gods except oneness with all things' simplifies existential
angst.
Rather than balk, we laugh.
Rather than finitely pigeonhole
God, we allow God to be infinite.
Rather than claim God is a 'he' or
a 'she' or even an 'it,' we simply allow God to be all things...
From
quarks to quasars, from gluons to galaxies, from microcosm to
macrocosm, from Big Bang to Big Crunch and everything in between.
When we allow God to simply be the interconnectedness
of all things,
we are less likely to get defensive about what God should be and
more likely to be tolerant of what God could be.
When someone says
God is the sun, we're more likely to say,
"Sure, why not?"
When
someone says God is a Flying Spaghetti Monster, or a Jewish Zombie,
or an alien from a planet of super intelligent beings, we're more
likely to shrug and say,
"Yeah, sure. If
God is all things, then God
is also those things. Why not?"
Ironically, we're more likely to be tolerant of others by not
believing in a particular God and by simply allowing God to be all
things than by believing in a particular God and attempting to jam
it down everyone's throat. Easy...
We're more likely to act with
loving kindness and open-mindedness when we are thinking through God
as a medium than when we are believing in a particular God as a
means to an end.
Allowing God to be all things gets us out of our own way.
It
crucifies the ego.
It ushers in the soul.
We go from being an
insecure codependent cog in the clockwork to becoming a confident
independent force in an interdependent cosmos.
In short:
we become
an interdependent force of nature...
As it stands, there are too many typical "leaders" (whether
religious or secular) telling people what to think.
We desperately
need more radical leaders (self-rulers, self-masters, interdependent
forces of nature) who teach people how to think... for themselves...
|