The debates, the town halls, and the pundits hashing out e-v-e-r-y word spoken (and tweet tweeted) by the candidates. It can be exhausting, and for some, an entertaining distraction from an otherwise mundane work day. Not to say the 2016 election isn’t important. It should be. But amidst the 24/7 news coverage of the elections, are we paying attention to other issues like the Panama Papers?
Eryn and I talked about the current state of affairs, the never ending political rhetoric and chatter, making it difficult to distinguish truth and deception clearly.
We questioned if we can expect a genuine expose of the Panama Papers by Western media and why big corporate names have been largely missing from the reporting.
I, for one, am not surprised by the Panama Papers. Perhaps there’s a bit of cynicism in me as I have seen firsthand corruption at the highest level in business and politics when living in Mexico as a young woman. And no, I don’t believe the U.S. or any other country is exempt of corruption.
Setting aside this cynicism, I am saddened. I’m saddened by the anger, the hatred, and the divide within our country; how fear continues to feed our hearts and obscure our decisions.
We found ourselves asking the fundamental question: what is the true state of affairs in our politics and how does it play into humanity’s overall progression?
We decided this would be a good topic today and asked our board members to share their perspective. World affairs being one of his favorite topics, Khaled immediately takes the floor to share his thoughts.
Khaled: We invite you to see, consider, the commonalities in the events which are playing on the stage of global politics. What is occurring?
Elena: Well, we were talking about the elections and the Panama Papers. So what are the commonalities? The Panama Papers is exposing—bringing to light—those of power and wealth who have been involved in deceitful practices for their own benefit…so it’s about exposing the truth?
Khaled: And the elections?
Elena: I don’t see how American politics is necessarily showing that. It’s more about covering up the truth!
Khaled: Consider this disparity between reality and fantasy or pragmatism and idealism or truth and perception, see how these seemingly dual and opposing view points are playing a part in the creation of conflict in their confusion?
[We talk about the meaning of this disparity and how people are confusing reality vs fantasy, pragmatism vs idealism and truth vs perception. We talked about how the pundits are saying that Bernie Sanders doesn’t stand a chance to win and how many, who don’t necessarily trust Hillary Clinton, may resort to voting for her since they believe Sanders can’t win (pragmatism vs idealism). We also considered our perception of idealism as being the truth. Is it?]
Khaled: In this conversation is missing a much needed and impartial meditator: discernment.
Elena: So, who could facilitate this conversation about discernment? Is there one such person?
Khaled: Never one. But all. Humanity searches, must look to a single entity to be the hero. Why? One can never solely carve the path for all humanity. All individuals, contradictorily posses the innate power to carve humanity’s path forward.
In this contradiction, see how disempowerment would render the individual impotent in his belief that he, or she, must look to another in reverence to accomplish that which is already innately apart of his own beingness to create. God, gods, goddesses, demi-gods, heroes of myth and legend, emperors, kaisers, kings, tyrants and presidents—why must man himself imbue someone outside the self with power and belief? In so doing, with humanity’s eyes held upward on bended knee, does he await another to step into creatorship, and the collective humanity waits for change while watching the same world come into being over and over again.
In so doing, with humanity’s eyes held upward on bended knee, does he [man] await another to step into creatorship, and the collective humanity waits for change while watching the same world come into being over and over again.
[We talked about this contradiction and what it means…how we have the power to carve humanity’s path forward but we always look to one outside ourselves. In doing so—holding on to this belief —we relinquish our power and there becomes “no collective voice.” We wait for change, but nothing changes.]
Elena: Are you saying that a world filled with people of different cultures doesn’t need some sort of structure and leadership?
Khaled: The hero you speak of, the one who can facilitate this conversation of discernment, is that within the self. It is the ‘who’ of the individual and that of the collective. All. Consider your own perceptions of ‘presidential’ and what that may imply for you. Are you looking for a hero?
Elena: What I mean by “presidential” is an appropriate representation of our country on the world stage. I’m not referring to the fact that the president can …
Khaled: But are you basing your judgments on the substance of character or your perception of his or her outward persona driven for concern for your own self perception in the global context? Parents who can not see their children as anything but projections of self, their own ego, identity, social perception, persona, will never allow their children to become all that they are.
Eryn: So perhaps we should change our perspective on how we look at our global leadership. If we choose to see someone for themselves, rather than looking solely at their image, then we would focus more on their character.
Elena: Yes, I think you are responding to what I said earlier about Sanders? How I like what he represents but that he doesn’t seem very ‘presidential’ with his poor posture and gruff voice.
Elena: So why didn’t you just say so?!
Khaled: Socratic method, Elena, take note!
Elena: I got it! It takes me a while, doesn’t it?
Khaled: So on the one hand we have an electoral system playing out in the U.S. which is exemplifying this sense of confusion of idealism with fantasy with truth.
Elena: Ok. Let’s talk about that…
The voices say ‘stay in chains because at least here you are fed’ … allowed a piece of bread. And so a nation devours crumbs in silence, having a story of mutual hunger repeated over again but seeing their ‘betters’ dine and drink of full plates and cups. Ask of yourself, am I choosing to see with true discernment?
Khaled: Americans now are grappling with the decision to confront the status quo, as if it needed to be debated! Why indeed? Do you not continually question how you may grow and expand yours to continue to evolve and take into your sphere of existence more abundance, more security, more fulfillment? And therefore what can be concluded here is that a great deal of fear is working behind the scenes. He [fear] emerges from the collective consciousness to say that you are powerless in the face of peril, that any supposition or proposition of change or bravery is a fantastical bed time story. That humanity is divisive and unequal by nature. The voices say ‘stay in chains because at least here you are fed’ … allowed a piece of bread. And so a nation devours crumbs in silence, having a story of mutual hunger repeated over again but seeing their ‘betters’ dine and drink of full plates and cups. Ask of yourself, am I choosing to see with true discernment?
Eryn: What’s really at play is fear. We’re being told that there is never enough, our lives are in peril. It’s like the slave who chooses to accept his chains because at least he’s being fed. His master says ‘hey I’m hungry too, but at least I’m feeding you.’ And so the slave eats the crumbs all the while he sees his master dines with full plates. Regarding the electoral system, we’ve been debating if Sanders is realistic, but we’re not asking if we really have the power to make a difference. We’re made to believe that our vote can make the difference. The fantasy is if we really have the decision. Are choosing to participate in a system that doesn’t serve us? Do we not challenge a system that maintains our own servitude?
Khaled: And see how this is being considerably acknowledged in the exposure of this rampant corruption in the Panama Papers. You are correct to question this omission in your media. In fact, we pose that there is much censorship at work, and more illuminating revelations for your elected officials and political system. The degree to which your peers engage with the pony show will reflect the degree to which the Panama Papers have something considerably convincing about the need here and now to question the status quo not only at home but globally. We offer the age old convention of the charlatan who woos the crowd while a passerby fleeces the crowd. This language we employ may seem radical or otherwise limited in scope.
But we say this without judgment, for those who perpetuate this fear and inequality are not so dissimilar from either of you. They are equally enslaved to the narrative that they are powerless, they dine from exquisite plates and are never full. Their perception of their own fullness is characterized by how much more than others they can have. Tastelessness and loneliness of the soul reigns here.
[We talk about the ramifications if all the information in the Panama Papers was truly exposed in this election year. Is information being withheld? Are we being distracted by the pony show of our elections? We discuss Khaled’s meaning of ‘tastelessness,’ the fact that they are not enjoying their wealth, they are ‘joyless.’ We note how Khaled stresses the importance of not judging the people who are wooing the crowd. Challenging the status quo is us not perpetuating that perspective, that fantasy.]
Khaled: To stand, finally. As one, in union with your peers and embracing all the heroic merits and differences of all.
Elena: Thank you. I think we have much to digest with all of this.
Khaled: We invite you both to step into your own power and discernment with compassion. When you do this, you become the hero, the advocate, the carpenter, the engineer of evolution for humanity.