More on energetic communication

I've been thinking a LOT lately about how I'm going to introduce and teach the concept of energetic communication. I believe that by the time I'm ready to do so, there will be more literature and research so that will help. It's funny, I've found myself thinking about different exercises I'd like to try out in class, different ways to teach the concepts and how to make the differentiation between energetic communication and spirituality.

I just finished listening to Christine MacMahon's CD on relationships and energy exchanges and realized two things: I have a LOT more to learn about the subject before I can even think about teaching it and secondly, it's SO much more beneficial if you're doing it conjunction with spiritual and emotional work. Although my intent is to teach people how to determine WHAT'S going on energetically and to also determine HOW they want to respond, I strongly feel the most important piece of that equation is WHY you choose the response you choose. That's the most powerful piece - understanding where you're responding from and why.

It's going to be interesting, learning how to teach the one without emphasizing the other. It's not that I wouldn't want to help people find their path, it's that ANYONE can learn about energetic communication without having to be on a spiritual path. That's what I think is one of the strong points for this type of program - although you don't have to be actively searching, it will be blindingly obvious that doing your spiritual work will greatly enhance your energetic communicative abilities. It's like diet and exercise. Either one done separately will help you feel better and make you healthier, but done together their power increased exponentially.

So teaching energetic communication without the *necessity* of spiritual work is actually a nice way to ease people into thinking more about themselves, their choices, and their experience. A neat way to get them thinking about spiritual and emotional stuff without forcing them into it.

The highest choice?

So I was thinking today about nonviolence and how (or if) it could be effective against something like Hitler's regime. Although my thoughts didn't lead me to any substantial conclusion, here's what I got: In the vast majority of cases (99.9%) nonviolence is probably the highest choice. However, given this reality, this world, and the people that inhabit this world, there is a chance that a situation gets to the point that there is no nonviolent solution.

Of course, this depends on the people and events surrounding the situation but if the people aren't willing to listen and if the events have picked up a momentum of their own, then the choice seems to be either continue an ineffective nonviolent protest and watch millions more people get killed, or do what is necessary to stop the killing. I suppose you could call it 'feeling the moment'. We all set boundaries but those boundaries need to be flexible and able to change with each situation. When you set the boundary of nonviolence and commit yourself to a nonviolent lifestyle, it seems almost inconceivable that you would ever again consider violence as an acceptable solution. Maybe you can't and that's okay also.

But the question still remains - what do you do about a Hitler? I'm not a history buff but even I know that there were *many* missed opportunities to stop him and prehaps prevent WWII. However, those opportunities were missed and we found ourselves in a horrendous situation. If you are committed to nonviolence, can you change that boundary to condone violence in such an extreme situation? Does that negate all your other nonviolent efforts? When do you draw the line again? If you cross that line once, isn't the tempation always there to cross it again? Can you condone violence done for even such an extreme purpose?

Obviously. this line of thought led only to more questions. I'm sure this subject will come up during my studies and I look forward to hearing others' opinions and insights.

DVDs I want

Here's my current list of wants. Must (eventually) haves have a *

*Finding Nemo
*High Fidelity
*X2
*Monsoon Wedding
Bend It Like Beckham
*Nat'l Lampoon - Christmas Vacation
*School of Rock (when available)
Buffy - all seasons
*Angel - all seasons
*Death to Smoochy
*I'm Gonna Get You Sucka
Undercover Brother
The Sweetest Thing
Bowling for Columbine
Catch Me If You Can
Legally Blonde
*The Full Monty
The Shawshank Redemption
Fight Club

Freedom of speech?

Free Press - a free media organization

Speaking of freedom - what have we been thinking with all the subversive labeling that's going on???

Thanksgiving

On a happier note, I just had Thanksgiving dinner with my chosen family - just made a quick phone call to the other family. I had a wonderful time and am constantly grateful that I can choose whom to spend my time with and that I have such an abundance of wonderful and loving people in my life.

Spirit is good and I'm thankful for her also :)

Chilling

11/29/03 - NOTE - I finished reading the article after I posted this comment and have a bit of trouble relating to some of the stuff he said. Can't really tell which side this guy is rooting for...

Just read this scary article that discusses General Franks' doubts about whether our Constitution would survive a wmd attack on the US. Before completely disregarding that idea, let's think about all the alternatives. I'm no political scholar in any way but it seems there's got to be a better way than going directly to military rule. Anyone have any ideas?

As a second thought what, if anything, are we doing now to prevent such an attack? I don't mean beefing up airport security or ballistic missle defense systems, I mean on an international relationship scale? Are we doing anything to address and find solutions to the problems that create terrorist-friendly environments? Are we doing anything to address the problems of countries who hate us b/c we're arrogant and greedy? It's funny - I know there are hundreds of thousands of individual Americans who are working internationally and nationally to try and help but all that positive and loving energy doesn't seem to be doing much to hold off the hostility Bush's imperialistic attitude is generating.

Some resources on Gandhian thinking

Gandhi was influenced by Leo Tolstoy's "The Kingdom of God is Within You". I'm interested in looking at this because I've known that Christianity had elements of truth, this looks like an opportunity to check out a potential. Here is another good piece of writing that lists Gandhian principles in a nice, clear, and easily understandable format.

As a side note, this site looks interesting. I just read a bit on their synergic containment. At the very least, they seem to be offering an alternative to our current law enforcement mentality.

This blog entry sparked this question: What's the difference in pacifism and nonviolence? It's a good posting that led to a long thread with some interesting debate.

Just glanced over an interesting article that talks about Gandhi's response to the Jews' plea for help during WWII. Since I'm just beginning to learn about Gandhi this is new to me. It does seem, however, that the news source might be taking some of his writing out of context or deliberately twisting them. However, if they didn't, it raises questions along the lines of when is it okay to champion force? Is it ever okay? Is it okay only in extreme instances (like the Holocaust) and, if so, who determines when the instance is extreme enough?

Maybe doing away with violence altogether is too much to ask for from the world in its current state.

Political satire

I just finished Al Franken's Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them and it was funny.

Some musings on weight

I was thinking about my physical being and all the issues I've had around weight my entire life and had a nifty realization around the way we lose and gain weight. It's all about the energy we attract. If what we're really made up of is just molecule vibrating at really slow rates, then thinking we have more and more of them will attract them and we'll have lots more really slow moving molecules (i.e. saddlebags) attached to us.

If you think about it, what's a calorie anyway? Just a unit measure of heat. What's heat? A byproduct give off when something moves. Okay, so that may not make a lot of sense to you but it's okay for me. Regardless of my inept descriptions, it seems that the faster you can get your molecules moving, the less slow moving ones you'll have. Thus the theory that raising your body temperature helps you lose weight. Surely, some of those slow moving mols. will speed up and just go away, thus lowering your body weight.

Another point, body weight is simply a measure of the force that the earth's gravitational field exerts on your mass. There's no meaning to it other than that. It's made up, just like the 'average' weight for your height was made up. Just like so many other measures that we take as god's truth are just made up. If something changed about the composition of the earth (and we all survived), it's possible that your weight would change because the strength of the earth's pull on your mass would have changed - who knows?

Do I have a point? Probably not. In trying to write this, I've discovered that I'm not able to write about it in a comprehensive, logical fashion. Probably need to let it stew around a bit more. I guess the point for now is - don't worry too much about the whole weight thing unless you're feeling bad or having health problems. All those measurements are so much hogwash anyway...

Cruising through the day

Okay, it's the day before Thanksgiving and I'm here at work. This is *obviously* going to be a day of total non-work and freebie paid time for me - yippeee! I've already got the personal business at work going in high gear - I'm busily surfing, updating my website and handling other personal matters such as applying for financial aid and looking for a couple of cool new links for my website.

Here's some stuff I happened across by searching on the word 'random' in Google:

The Gylawang Drukpa's Humanitarian website
Random Links.com
Classic cars? I'm not sure what AMC means
Webring on angling
Lots of random pictures
COOL - A random name generator!
Totally neat - random quotes from mathematicians

And here is something mindblowingly cool - sent to me by a co-worker

Bubbles
Big Rings
Bars
Eggs
Little Rings

Here are some sites on Amitahba:
Amitabha web
The Amitabha Foundation
Amitabha Hospice Service

I cannot believe I'm doing this!

I have to go get my final letter of recommendation so I left work a bit early. Unfortunately, I couldn't get out of this stupid-ass 5-6 conference call. I don't know why the hell I even have to be here - I'm so unnecessary at this point! But I'm home and I'm called in. Another point o' suckage - I can't mute the phone so they'll hear me typing if I'm typing - grrrrrrrr!

On an up note - my entire application is done except getting a couple of nice binders, assembling everything, writing the check and then putting all the stuff in an overnight packet. They'll have everything by next Monday at the latest :) I just can't believe it. I can't believe it's really starting...

Second attempt

Okay - the second attempt at my personal statement is successful. I can't even read it again because I'll start crying - it truly reflects my heart and how I feel about my choice to go into this field. I've often heard that if you want to do something but you can't explain either exactly what it is or exactly why you want to do it but you want to do it anyway, then it's probably the right thing.

That's what is going on here. I can't give good logical reasons for why I chose CR and I can't explain exactly what I want to do after I'm done with the graduate work but I know it's something great and I know I can do it. Is that vague and airy fairy enough? LOL

I'm so grateful that I'm being given this opportunity - thank you universe and thank you spirit.

Nearing completion...

Okay, my application for graduate school is nearing completion! I'm picking up my final letter of recommendation today and have only to finish my personal statement and write the check for dropping everything in an overnight package and sending it on it's way YAYAYAY!!!

I made a first attempt at my personal statement last night and, although it would probably have been good enough, it just wasn't me. At least, that's what jneal told me and, upon further reflection, I realized jneal was correct. She made a couple of suggestions, one of which I immediately glommed onto and I'm now working on a completely new and different piece of writing. I feel that it's much better - gives a much better idea of who I am and why CR is important to me.

Communications (as a field) didn't seem applicable enough. Even though I'm a communications major and enjoyed learning about the field it still seems fairly general - there was no one aspect or area that spoke strongly to me. Conflict resolution seems to be a specific application of the communications field. One of the things I like about CR is that it involves not only communication techniques but it brings in elements of psychology, activism, nonviolence, and other social issues that I'm interested in.

Even as I read this, I know that people in the communications field could come up with a counter argument for everything I've said. I agree - my reasons aren't terribly well stated or reasoned out. Although there is a tremendous amount of value in the field of communications, I feel my skills are best suited for the work I've chosen. Conflict resolution allows me to give back, to offer my gifts in service to not only myself but to others and that truly appeals to me.

Gotta follow the heart on this one and the heart is pretty clear...

Some random tidbits

Wondering how important blogs & blog etiquette are becoming? There's been some uproar around Michael Hanson's recent blogging faux pas

Also, I've been reading Al Franken's latest book and here's a great quote from the late Senator Paul Wellstone: "Politics is about the improvement of people's lives. It's about advancing the cause of peace and justice in our country and in our world. Politics is about doing well for the people." Here's a link to an archive of speeches he gave.

On a side note about my current workplace - I'm constantly amazed at how isolated this environment is from *the real world*. Recently, some of the folks in my group went on a trip and did a number of user interviews. They've brought back the feedback and it's blowing me away that so much of this feedback seems new to them. A majority of the people here have been here for a LONG time and they're so used to the environment/products that they produce that their reaction to the users' lack of knowledge seems almost humorous. As a bit of a gripe - I've said some of this stuff to them before and it didn't have much impact.

To be honest, I don't know that they'll be able to do that much about it, but it is nice that they're at least interested. I find it absolutely amazing how many assumptions they make about what 'ordinary' people do and don't understand. Oh well, I feel justified that what I've been saying has now been confirmed. Even though I'm not staying here, at least my analysis of the situation was fairly accurate.

Giving them the credit they're due - they are taking the feedback they've gotten and are working on applying it to the specific work process they're involved in and that's really good. Even though I think it's funny that they didn't really seem to 'get' how frustrated users get, it's nice to know that they're concerned and are trying to find solutions. go team!

Some additional thoughts on martyrs and suffering

I wrote quite a bit about this in another post but just couldn't stop beating a dead horse. It occured to me that the 'martyr syndrome' has nothing to do with actually becoming a martyr. People who have been martyred have been so after they died. One of the most important things to remember about them is that they did NOT suffer. They were living their lives from loving and joyous places, truly experiencing and loving every moment they were alive. They didn't get involved in struggle because they wanted to suffer, they got involved because they wanted to - because they couldn't NOT do anything in their power to help. They didn't WANT people to suffer, themselves included.

I think what happens is that people look and say "so and so sacrificed his/her life for x cause" and it is automatically assumed that they 'suffered' for the cause. Although I supposed it's true that most powerful leaders and martyrs did suffer to a certain degree, their focus wasn't on the suffering. The suffering was a unintended side effect of their real work - similar to the adoration and praise some of them engendered. From what I've read of Christ, at no point did he make a conscious decision that personal suffering would cause lots of positive change for other people or help other people 'see the light.' He knew that suffering was likely but he didn't see it as an action that, of itself, would have a major impact.

I think the reason martyrs are dubbed as such is that people want to remember them because they gave their lives for something they loved and believed in. That willingness to accept any price because you are doing what you *know* is the highest choice not only for yourself but for humanity - that is what we want to remember. Not that they endured suffering for the cause, but that they loved enough to keep going even through the fear that they would have to suffer. I believe the intent, the purpose is what makes a Christ or a Dr. King such a legendary figure - they knew that the love they felt and the light they followed was more important than one human's suffering.

I felt the need to explore my ideas on this a bit more because I think sometimes people equate activist with martyr and I don't believe that's an accurate connection. Rereading this, I realize I didn't do a terribly good job expressing my ideas but they boil down to this: It all comes down to the intent. Where is the person's energy coming from? Does the energy come from a loving place - are they walking in their light and being their authentic selves or are they doing something because they think they have to or that it's expected?

Bottom line - If you're not doing it because you love it, maybe you should re-examine your reasons.

Ugh - I'm *really* moving...

Okay - I've known I was moving but now all the little details are beginning to set in. I know I'm going to have plenty of time to deal with them but still! I've got to pack all my photography equipment, all my tack & riding gear, go through all those stupid floppy diskettes I've still got laying around & see if there's anything I need to keep, go through all the boxes I never unpacked when I moved here and decide whether I want to even keep that stuff, get everything moved over to my brother's and a myriad of other things.

This is when focusing on the NOW is extremely important. If I start *thinking* about all the stuff I still have to do, I'll be paralyzed. I should have my grad application ready to overnight on Dec 1st so it should be at the school on Dec 2/3. Hopefully I'll have my letter (of acceptance) by the first week or so in January. Regardless, I'm plowing ahead - assuming I'll be accepted.

I've also got to go either Friday (after Thanksgiving) or the next Monday and apply for unemployment. It would be kind of cool to find a short term assignment for the next few weeks but I don't know that I'm going to - given the time of year and all. Oh well, there are worse fates than to have a couple of months off and get paid. I will be looking for work, it'll just be in Portland...

Gifts from the universe!

I just read a fabulous article about the energy field, or grid, that connects all of us. I've wondered where to start academically integrating the idea of energetic communication with conflict resolution. This article is a good jumping off point - at least for references and some ideas about where I can start.

I'm a superheroine!

I read comic books from the time I was about 12 until I was around 30. I still take a look occasionally but I don't like the art as much as I used to. I especially don't like the way so many of the characters look like children. My favorite comic book of all time was the X-Men (Marvel), followed by (probably) Legion of Superheroes (DC). I realize that I'm crossing universes but that's just the way it is :)

I've always wanted to be Phoenix or Storm or Rogue or the Scarlet Witch any of the chicks in the Legion (Dream Girl, Dawnstar, White Witch, etc) - I've always known that those kinds of powers existed but I never knew how to tap into them. Now, with the ideas I'm forming around energetic communication, I feel that I am a superheroine after all! I feel like I have a tremendous amount of power directly related to how I understand others and how I can communicate back to them. For me, that's one of the greatest gifts of all...

They say knowledge is power and I believe that's true. Of course, you have to realize that knowledge is also relative, therefore, power is relative. HOWEVER - within the framework of what we can know and what we can have power with, I believe the knowledge of how to use our own energy is extremely empowering.

NOW is the time

I was listening to The Crystal Method and jamming out to their song "Now is the Time" when the realization hit me - NOW really IS the time. All times are now, we just don't get it. We break time up into all kinds of pieces and chunks. When someone asks me what time it is, I tell them it's 3:30 or 9:15 or whatever. What I should be telling them is "now". The time is now - nothing else exists but this moment, this instant.

I know - most people don't really think about time but I do. I think about the fact that it's just made up. A bunch of guys in a room somewhere said "hey - how can we track how far something moves through space" and that started it. Because that's all it is really, a measure of how far something moves through a certain area of space. Time tells us how long it takes to get from point A to point B. So when they talk aobut Planet Nebula being 40 million light years away, keep in mind that those light year measurements are only relevant to us, here on this planet while it circles the sun at exactly the distance it is now. Change any of those factors and a light year is diddly squat as a measure.

As an overachiever, I may never truly recover...

I showed jneal the cover sheets for my application package yesterday and she promptly mocked me. Yes, she mocked me. She laughed because only a teacher's pet, overachiever type such as myself would go to the trouble to actually design cover sheets for an application package. Personally, I prefer to think of it as professional experience coming into play. Anytime you want to present something important, you make it look as attractive and professional as possible.

There! That sounded really good and I almost convinced myself that jneal was wrong. So pfffftttttt!! :P

Functional Communication

NOTE - I was going to use another blog for this type of discussion but I decided to put everything here instead. I've moved the entries I made over there over here.

I've been thinking a great deal lately about the field of Technical Writing and I've come to the realization that it's not *technical* writing/communication that this field addresses, it's Functional Writing/Communication. Looking at both the connotation and denotation of each word, I found that they mean vastly different things. I don't know that I would say they are separate - my feeling is that technical writing is possibly a subcategory of functional writing.

Musings on war

A friend of mine told me that one of his major influences was Kent Shifferd. I admire my friend and so decided to read some of Shifferd's work (if available) and see what I thought. Here's an essay on Replacing War with a General Peace System. By the way - I tried to find some information on Dr. Shifferd but only found several very short references to him with regard to a number of different organizations and other fairly general information. Honestly, I didn't spend *that* much time on it.

Another tidbit on the draft...

I put up a bunch of stuff about the draft a few days ago but I missed this juicy morsel...

On another note, be extra special glad if you don't have a home or family in Iraq.

Something to do?

The lack of real job duties here is starting to put a strain on me. I have WAY too much time on my hands and even though I've managed to find some good stuff to do, feelings of guilt are starting to stare me in the face. I mean, I've managed to almost complete my application, contact moving & auto transport companies, write intensively in my blog, create and maintain my website, research apartments & stuff and contact all those people - all this while sitting here getting paid.

Yes, this is good but I'm not terribly sad that the assignment is over. I'm *really* excited about moving and am just a bit impatient that it looks like I'm going to wait until Feb after all. I mean, I don't really want to pay double rent for a month! I have discovered that there is a lot more rental property than I thought so I'm going to have no trouble finding what I want. In fact, it'll probably turn out to be a good bit cheaper than what I have now. The only drawback is that places with w/d hookups aren't as common. Guess Portlandites like to share their laundry time...

Some observations on activism

I've been thinking quite a bit about activism lately, whether I have the guts to get involved, effect change, make a difference, etc. A couple of things that have worried me are whether or not I can make the sacrifices required and whether or not other people will think I'm a 'good' activist.

Now where did those two thoughts come from? I'm not entirely how they managed to creep in but they're there. So, instead of just blithely ignoring them, let's look at them a bit closer:

1. Can I make the necessary sacrifices? My answer to that is - why should activism have to be about sacrifice? I don't see that being a martyr has made anyone truly happy or brought about significant social change. Jesus and Joan of Arc would probably agree that they never intended that their suffering should spawn thousands of years worth of self-flagellators. I'm not saying that sacrifice and suffering are unwarrented if you feel you need to do those things to get the point across. All I'm saying is that it shouldn't be expected. Ask anyone and you'll soon discover that no one enjoys being around a self annointed martyr. If that's the case, then why is the unspoken understanding around activism that activists have to be prepared to suffer and sacrifice?
   
   Probably because our entire mindset is geared towards this thought: "Nothing good is worth having or doing unless you have to suffer for it" What a load of bullshit. If I still bought into the Christian religion, that alone would be enough to make me want to leap up from in front of the altar and run far away. Why on earth should we suffer in order to better our lives? I can't imagine that a benficient and loving God would require suffering in order to gain. Oh yeah - I'm talking about Christianity - home of the angry and ass-kicking God, not a generous and loving God - my bad.
   
   Okay - back from the digression - I simply don't understand how my choosing to live out of a cardboard box would benefit someone else. From my perspective, if I really want to help, I should look at the reasons why people are forced to live in cardboard boxes to start with! That doesn't mean I wouldn't be willing to demonstrate to prove a point, just that I don't see why being an activist should be synonymous with 'be prepared to suffer'. I strongly believe that adding additional suffering (mine) and negativity to the already large pool of negative energy in this world just ain't gonna do the trick. Obviously, it could be that I just have a misconceived notion about how American society (in general) views activism - I don't know.



2. Will they think I'm a 'good' activist? This one is a bit more tricky as it involves societal thoughts around what constitutes activism and my personal ideas around activism and I feel certain they're not entirely the same. It occurs to me that society has certain expectations around people who are 'good' activists - they're outspoken, they get out there and participate in lots of demonstrations, they're angry, loud, political, passionate, opinionated, and often unwilling to listen to reason. They pick weirdo causes to support and they're all about crusading constantly! They eat, breath, sleep, and live their cause - they have no life but their cause(s).
   
   Again I say - bullshit. All these things are probably true of many people but that's not the way I want to live my life. I believe in balance and this description, to me, doesn't indicate any kind of balance. Again, we're looking at the martyr syndrome. I sacrifice my entire life to 'x' cause because I'm such a sacrificing kind of person. No wonder many people get burnt out - you give, give, give and (usually) don't get quite that much back. Problem is, no one asked you to give that much to begin with.
   
   I believe activism is all in the desire to help effect positive change. Whether that positive change comes because one soccer mom decides to buy a small Honda Civic instead of a grotesque Ford Escalade or because I choose to uproot my life, move across the country and learn about conflict resolution, or because someone decides that they're going to sit in a redwood in California to stop the logging - those are all instances of effecting some positive change. I truly believe that what can often get lost is the realization that activism can only happen one person at a time and not everyone acts the same way.
   
   Some people aren't brave enough to act publicly but they'll act privately - in the voting booth. Some people won't talk to their peers about their ideas but they'll talk to their children or their family. Some people don't know what activism is but they're kind to strangers and will give a hitchiker a ride. To me, those are all instances of activism whether they're labelled as such or not. Not everyone wants to be associated with social issues or agendas because the words 'activist' and 'activism' carry some negative connotations. If we can shift the prevailing attitudes around activism in a more positive direction, perhaps more people would be willing to participate
   
   And that's what we need to remember - everyone has opportunities to become more active and to try and change things for the better. Just because they don't stand on the roadside with a sign or picket in front of a clinic doesn't mean they don't make an effort. What I find distressing is that so many people either don't consider themselves activists or are hesitant to act on something they feel strongly about because they don't want to be labelled as 'outside the mainstream' - they want to be liked and they want to fit in. There are all kinds of activism and not all of them involve protest, resistance, and public displays of one's beliefs.
   
   So will I be a 'good' activist in the commonly understood defintion of the word - I don't know. But I do know that I'll do the best I can to turn my skills, talents, time, and energy towards finding ways to move us all towards a better place.
   

That's it for now - I feel *much* better :)

Gore Vidal's interview with the LA Times

Here's a link to the interview (from commondreams.org). I became a fan of Vidal earlier this year after reading two of his books - Blood for Oil and Dreaming War. I picked up The Last Empire but haven't gotten into it yet. Here are a couple of other blogger comments on the interview: Halley's Comment and Rowboat

Whiling away the time...

If I weren't getting in some good personal working time, I'd be out of my mind! My current job wasn't challenging anyway and now that a) I'm out of here next week and b) the work is really slow - it's gotten even worse LOL Seriously, I can see how the long term planning piece of this job could be kind of neat but the day to day maintenance stuff is just tedious and time consuming.

I'm going to rant a bit here about some stuff I should probably put on my technical communication blog but oh well... Biggie rule - a tool should NEVER break a process! Tools (either software, hardware, or whatever) should be designed to facilitate a process and should at least attempt to integrate with how things are done. Admitted, there are times when the process has to change to work with a tool but those changes are normally along the lines of enforcing policies that have been let go. People whine a bit but it's usually not a huge deal.

However, my experience here has shown me how big an impact a poorly designed and implemented tool can have on an already unwieldy process. The tool (I'll call it Kick Me Now) took a process that was reasonably good although not problem free and split it into two or three pieces that DON'T INTEGRATE WITH EACH OTHER! How's that for good software development planning? KMN is also missing key (dare I say vital/necessary) features that you practically can get nothing done without. For example - email notification when you're assigned a task. Not everyone uses KMN on a daily basis so they aren't always running in to see if something's been assigned to them. The old tool had the nifty little email that showed up and told you what was going on. This tool - has nothing.

What's even worse is that there's all this concern over backlog of work and a big part of it was due to lack of notification. People didn't know stuff was assigned to them so it just sat there. I think the group has found some type of tedious manual way to get around the non-notification problem but still...

As it turns out, KMN was developed from specs that were around four (count 'em four) years old BEFORE the tool was completed. Now, they're probably about 6 years old. What a disaster...

Oh the upside - I managed to get all my edits done to my academic writing samples, got the applications filled out, designed & printed the app cover sheets and sent my writing samples to jneal for some additional editing. As of today, all that's left is to get drwick's letter of rec and transcripts from two more schools. I'll then write my letter to the director, write my check & stuff both apps into an overnight package to PSU! Yay - only another week or so before the app is in...

Coercion and other words of power

After my long discussion on coercion yesterday I sent mail to a friend in the CR field and asked him for his thoughts. What he said opened up a whole new area of exploration! Quite interesting actually because his connotation of the word coercion is a bit different than mine - he views it as a neutral word that describes such events as the solidarity movement in Poland, Gandhi's protests against British rule, and so on.

What this started me thinking about is this: Ultimately, the word you use to describe what's happening isn't the most important point. Words are important because they are a large part of how we communicate but they're not the most important. For example: Words and phrases such as coercion, persuasion, convince, "change your mind", and "see it my way" are all designed to do one thing - get the other person to think the way you do or at least understand your perspective. I realize that these words aren't precisely synonyms of each other but they connote similarly.

This idea led to a whole other area - the area of ethics and morality around conflict resolution. Gandhi did not believe that coercion has a place in conflict resolution strategies. However, he used a form of coercion to make his point. So when is it morally acceptable to use coercion? To most of us the results of the coercion he used are good. But does the end justify the means? Even if the means are nonviolent, who makes the decision that 'x' behavior is wrong and needs to be changed/fixed?

Does the idea of nonviolent coercion automatically mean that you have the moral high ground as long as your methods meet certain standards of nonviolence? How do we arrive at the decision to try and change someone else's mindset or behavior? Do we ever have the right to even attempt such a feat? We do it all the time and think nothing of it but that doesn't make it right.

Digression (but not really)

I'm going to make a bit of a digression for a moment and talk about the difference between power over and power with. I'm no philosophy scholar by *any* stretch of the definition but I do know that the vast majority of Western communication is based on Aristotole's ideas of speech and how it should be conducted. I once heard someone call this type of rehtoric verbal warfare and I believe it's an apt description. It's the idea of power over someone. Having your own agenda that you consider truth and finding ways to convince them that it's their truth also. To me, that type of communication is ALL about convincing the other person that you're right and they're wrong.

However, I've spent a fair amount of time talking to friends about this concept and we've come up with a different type of rhetoric - the rhetoric of discovery/experience/relation (can't decide on a name yet). In this type of discourse, there is no agenda, there is no point to prove, there is no one absolute truth. This type of interaction's sole purpose is to discover your own experience and find ways to communicate that experience to others. This type of interaction I would call power with. The goal is not to gain anything other than knowledge of the other person's experience, help them validate that experience and make some determination around whether or not their experience is useful to you. In this type of communication, power is shared and expanded by that sharing.

An interesting point I think needs to be made here is that men often use the verbal warfare type of comm. and women often use the experiential/relational type of comm. and it's impossible to come to agreement if you're coming from two such vastly different communicative experiences.

One of the reason I think feminism and women's studies have had such a difficult time being taken seriously is that the have to communicate concepts that only exist in the experiental/relational type of communication using the verbal warfare style. The ideas, language, and concepts that form the experiential/relational type of dialectic simply aren't available using verbal warfare language and mindset. Until we can shift the mindset (the rhetorical position that forms the basis of the majority of our communication) to better accommodate the experiential/relational style, the challenge is going to continue.

Returning to the subject

So how does all this tie into the idea of coercion and the ethical dilemma around when it's morally acceptable to find ways to change someone else's mind? I'm not entirely sure yet but I feel strongly it has to do with the the mindset that informs our communication. It's true that sometimes you have to resort to extreme measures when the other party simply isn't willing to participate. But how do we determine when it's appropriate to use those measures? How can you know that what you're trying to do is the *right* thing? How can you ever be sure that you're not damaging those others in your own quest for truth?

I believe the answer is - you just know. Sometimes, there is a greater truth that we tune in to and know is there but that we can't explain. It's like trying to explain why slavery is wrong. Yes - to those enslaved and to those who suffered because of the system of slavery, it's wrong. But to the people who willingly participated in the system of slavery, it was right - it was the system and it was the way things were. We can go back and find arguments to support each side but in the end - slavery and oppression of other living beings is wrong. It just is and I can find no other argument that's as compelling.

I suppose that's the fine line we walk when we're looking at any issue - when are we so attached to the way we think things ought to be versus when is something just wrong. When we allow ourselves to form an attachment to an idea that outlines how something ought to look or be, then that's when we need to consider carefully whether or not we are truly interested in resolving the conflict (no matter what the outcome might be) or whether we're carrying our own agenda and trying to persuade others to see things our way. This is a delicate discernment and it will be interesting to see how well I succeed in knowing my own motivations.

One last thought - why are we so interested in gaining power over others? Why has this been a driving force behind our communication? I realize that most people would not consider themselves as seeking power while they're interacting with others but I believe we all do it all the time, we just aren't aware of it. Could it be that we see ourselves as power deficient or power deprived and this is the only way we know to gain some of our power back? Another question - what type of power are we discussing?

When discussing conflict resolution, I believe these questions are vital. If you can address the area in which each group sees itself as deficient, perhaps you can reach a true resolution where each group feels all its needs are being met.

Random note on my car

I love Honda - let me say that right up front - I love Honda! I have a Honda car and a Honda motorcycle. I drove another Honda car for 12 yrs before I got this one. However, there is one little thing that's making me feel like I'm nuts - the air conditioning switch just flips on at random if I have the fan on! I think the default for the fan is that the air conditioning is on. That's okay, I promptly turn it off if it's cold. The issue is this - if I have the fan on with the heater, sometimes I'll look down and the AC button is on!

How silly is that? Why would the AC button just flip itself on? Do I have a ghostie in my car? Am I doing this without realizing it? Not likely - I hate AC in the car...

oh well - that's enough of that...

Feeling naive and sophmoric...

You know, as much as I'd like to think my ideas and my writing are impressive, I look at them and think "In a year, I'm not even going to want to admit to writing that stuff!" I guess that's the way everyone starts out - exploring the subject, turning it over, testing its weight and heft, the texture, smell, shape, and taste. Trying all kinds of ideas on, discarding them and combining weird stuff to make new ideas.

Like anyone, I'd like to think I have a contribution to make. That something I've said or some idea I came up with really made a difference. It's kind of hard when I've always felt top of my game - head of the class - until now. I guess this is similar to the transition from high school to college. Being successful in high school turns out to be vastly different than being successful in college. Being a successful undergraduate is probably vastly different than being a successful graduate student. For one thing, it means more. The ideas and subject matter are closer to my heart.

I feel like a six year who wants to learn to write, practices by herself all the time but is shy about showing her efforts to her teachers and parents. Fearful of being told her efforts are clumsy and foolish. Well, I guess this is where the courage shows up - to go ahead and do it anyway because it's worth the risk...

Something I saw

I saw something lovely and unusual on the way to work: The wind is pretty strong today and it's blowing the cloud cover really fast. The clouds were kind of swirling and dancing around with a big chunk of sky peeking through. It was just beautiful to see that when all the rest of the sky was gray and rainy - those wispy swirly clouds letting the sun and blue sky be seen for a moment.

Thoughts on coercion...

I've been thinking a great deal about coercion lately - specially since I started reading the Juergensmeyer book Gandhi's Way. What I've been thinking is that coercion comes into play whenever we allow ourselves to become attached to a specific outcome. If we have an idea about what we think an outcome should be, it's highly likely that we'll resort to coercion to make that outcome happen.

Here are some defs of coercion from Merriam-Webster online:
1 : to restrain or dominate by force
2 : to compel to an act or choice
3 : to bring about by force or threat

Example

It's difficult to describe but I'll give it a whack. One example I can think of is lawyers within our judicial system. By nature of the profession, a lawyer is automatically attached to a specific outcome - either the client is proven innocent or the defendant is proven guilty. One of those two things has to happen and lawyers spend their lives ensuring one or the other. However, this form of conflict resolution leaves no room for another outcome and thus something has to happen to force the outcome onto one of the two prescribed paths.

I believe that's why there seems to be so much unease and discontent within a process that's supposed to help us find justice and resolve conflict. At its core, the system is already working against true resolution - resolution in which both parties agree on the principles. Obviously, my thinking on conflict resolution has already been influenced by Gandhian theory so feel free to disagree. However, I believe that Gandhi's ideas about turning the fight from people to principles is the highest idea.

It is true that this can seem idealistic, unrealistic, and unworkable but I don't believe it is. I do believe it is difficult and can require immense amounts of committment from all parties involved. One of the keys to facilitating this type of CR is encouraging the warring factions to truly listen to each other. It is also important that they realize that listening to someone and acknowledging their point of view do NOT indicate agreement with that point of view. Unfortunately, it seems that many are not even willing to listen.

I can sympathize with that because I've been in those kinds of situations - situations where you are so angry and feel so justified that you don't want to even admit there CAN be another point of view. That's a difficult hole to pull yourself out of and it's easy to see why many people either can't or won't.

Guilt them into listening?

So back to the idea of coercion: As the intermediary, it would be tempting to put into play something that might influence a particularly stubborn party to relax their viewpoint a bit and look at things differently. I wouldn't say it was coercion unless it's something designed to move the party a certain way or influence them to think in a specific direction. For example: If two countries are having a disagreement over their national boundaries and one refuses to listen to the other's reasoning, it would be coercive to say something like "Why aren't you being reasonable? Country A has listened to you, why won't you listen to them?" I would label that as coercive because you're relying on guilt to bring Country B to the table - not a true willingness and desire to resolve the issue.

No - I don't have a good solution because it would depend on each situation. I would tune in to the energectic exchanges that were taking place and gather whatever information I could from those in addition to what the parties were verbalizing. Oftentimes, what people say and what they are attempting to do energetically are two vastly different things. Knowing the difference and being able to call someone on that difference could potentially make a big difference in the situation. I also believe we then need to introduce the language of emotions into the dialog and that could prove tricky.

Emotional language

The Western world in particular has gone to great lengths to remove emotional discourse from our 'serious' use of language and bringing in the words "It feels like x is happening" could be difficult. Not impossible but challenging. However, it has been my experience that people want their feelings heard and acknowledged. Even at a national level, this could be true.

Remember that nations are comprised of and led by individuals. When those individuals get their feelings hurt, why shouldn't it affect us nationally? If another nation is willing to listen to emotional talk, why not put it on the table? On this note - one more observation about coercion: It seems that coercion is also an attempt to force another person/party to either disallow, refuse to acknowledge, or stifle their true emotional responses. It may be that their emotional response makes us uncomfortable or that it's inconvenient - whatever the reason, we're not interested.

Intrapersonal communication and CR

Intrapersonal communication is, in my mind, critical to determining how people arrive at decisions. I did some of my undergraduate research on this topic and found that there isn't much about it in the communications field. The majority of what's there falls under the heading of self persuasion or self talk.


There's probably a great deal more information in the psychology circles but I'm interested in what we say to ourselves - how we talk ourselves into and out of making certain decisions. Here is what seems to be a reasonable definition of psychology.

I'll have to take some time later to think about how psychological definitions of intrapersonal would differ from communications defintions but here's a quick thought: Communications theory would be more interested in the actual messages than in how those messages were sent and received. I would also *assume* that comm theory would look at the meaning of those messages and (perhaps) the content. To me, it looks like a high probability that the two fields would overlap in this area - since the sender and receiver are the same and the message content is internal.

This is where some of the spiritual work would come in - learning to determine why we respond the way we do and what is motivating those responses from a spiritual/emotional perspective instead of a ego/mental perspective. In my personal experience, we often don't know or understand our motivations for certain actions, we just know that our knee jerk reaction in 'x' situation is to do 'y'. For many people, that seems a good enough answer. For me, it's not. I want to understand why certain people seem to push buttons or elicit specific responses. If it's a response I'm not happy with, what are my choices? Avoid the person, force a different response or keep responding the same way? None of those are good choices for me.

In any case, the areas of interest that are emerging for me are these: How we interact energectically, how this energetic communication affects us during conflict and how can we take a more spiritual and loving approach to conflict?

Additional references:

Self persuasion and conformity
Communicating Social Change (workshop)
Balance theory
Cognitive response theory
Indiana State - info on self talk
Interesting tidbit on stepfamily formation and self talk
SelfGrowth.com
Some class lecture notes in powerpoint format - click the Personal Communication link.

News and action

Here's another depressing bit o' news about the complete lack of anything resembling ethics in our current administration...

On the other hand, you can participate in the ActionForum and try to facilitate change...

Even more prevarication...

How much more lying, dishonesty, and duplicity will we put up with? If the White House is allowed to edit whatever the investigatory organizations see, why bother investigating? Why spend the taxpayer dollars? We're not going to get any sort of substantial truth, so why even bother? Why not just accept everything the Bushites say at face value and stop fucking pretending that we can get to the truth.

Even more depressing that not getting to the truth is this: If we get to the truth, what will happen? Nothing. Exactly what's happened so far. The list of illegal, immoral, and downright bullyish acts committed by the current gov't is extensive and isn't getting any shorter. The American people have been at least given a sentence or two on most of them. Many of them have been talked about and exclaimed over. People have acted shocked and worried. So what has happened? Nothing.

Yes - this is a cynical and bitter post and I haven't even been involved as long as many others. How do they do it? How do activists keep on moving when it just seems hopeless? Is this cynicism simply because the results of current activism don't look like I think they should look? Perhaps it's just taking longer than I think it should take. I'm certain there are good things happening somewhere - that there are bright spots - but I'm just not seeing them.

It seems as if this administration can truly do whatever it wants and not have to own up to anything. In my heart of hearts, I know that's not true but it sure feels true today...

Class warfare in America {gasp}

For those of you who haven't read Barbara Ehrenreich's novel Nickel and Dimed, get your ass to a store, buy it and read it! She's just written a great article for The Progressive magazine and they've graciously made it available online - get your ass over there and read it!

Disturbing rumors

I've recently seen more articles (one in Yes! and one in Utne) about the administration's attempts to start rebuilding the infrastructure for the draft. The article showcased in Utne is actually from the Guardian Unlimited. There is another article at Salon and here's another one in the Sierra Times. Fritz Hollings has sponsored a bill to officially reinstate the draft. What I find interesting is that it appears that the administration is trying to sneak this rebuilding in disguised as (initially) voluntary draft boards.

Here's something written by Rep Charles Rangel saying he introduced legislation to reinstate the draft also. Maybe he and Hollings are buddies in this. Here's a response from Robert Stewart that addresses some other issues around the draft - esp issues surrounding the poor and minorities. Another good point - poor people can't afford for one of the breadwinners in the family to be shipped off or get killed. It's proving tough enough for middle classers to provide on the National Guard stipend, let alone a family that's already struggling.

Here's an article that I *totally* disagreed with, as it argues for the draft, but it does present several arguments for the Reinstate the Draft faction. An argument from the Christian Science monitor that also supports reinstituting the draft. Surprising because the article opens with a brief discussion of Americorps - a voluntary, national program that directs youth efforts to provide service to the less fortunate. Looking at the argument presented in this piece, it seems to me that the writer's ideas about promoting youth service and a sense of responsibility are good but why should those qualities be directed toward a military perspective?

From a different perspective, here's an essay from a senior at the Ayn Rand Institute. I'm a big fan of much of her work and I like the way this particular essay addresses only one theme - who should be the one to decide how a person's life is lived? Of course, her philosophy is based on the idea that our only moral obligation is to our own happiness and our own productivity so this is not a surprising theme. This doesn't specifically address the military draft but I don't think conscripted service in general is anybody's idea of a happy destiny. If you're interested in the idea of individual rights, you may also want to read a bit about political philosopher John Rawls. In a nutshell, he believed that individual rights were of paramount importance in any society...

I'm sure people from the Vietnam era began thinking about this stuff when Bush first sent in the troops but it just never occured to me that this could happen. I vaguely remember hoping my brother wouldn't be drafted but I later found out the draft was long abolished before he was 18. The upshot is, I don't have nearly the emotional attachment to the draft that others do so I have no particularly good feedback.

I guess there are two sides to the story, especially considering that some countries make it a requirement for all of their citizens to serve a certain amount of military time. However, I don't believe in the military and war in general so I would oppose the idea on general principle. Something I do consider interesting is what so many others have commented on - the fact that the young adults of our country are the ones who suffer the heaviest casualties under draft conditions.

On its face, the argument for the draft may seem solid but not if you take into consideration the long term good of the nation. Maybe drafting in a bunch of young kids seems like the answer to plug the bleeding hole of Iraq right now, but who's going to carry forward the life of our nation if all the young people are dead? I feel there are many flaws in the argument for the draft and I'm sure they've been covered thoroughly elsewhere.

If recruiting and retention are proving problematic for the military, shouldn't our gov't be interested in finding out why? I don't think it's because young people feel less patriotic, I think it's because our younger generation is becoming less and less interested in pursuing war as a primary course of action. I wonder if the Peace Corps membership has been growing? How about other humanitarian aid groups and programs? What about NGO's - are they attracting more of America's young?

Here's an interesting quote from Rumsfeld - it will be fascinating to see how he makes his inevitable about-face on this one:

At a regular press briefing, Rumsfeld said the administration had no plan to re-implement a draft, saying "there is no need for it at all."

"The disadvantages of using compulsion to bring into the armed forces the men and women needed are notable. The disadvantages to the individuals so brought in are notable," Rumsfeld said, noting that a draft would add no value to the armed services.

"And it seems to me that the way we're currently organized and operating is vastly preferable," he said, referring to the all-volunteer system.

This quote came from enorth.com

Spearhead

I 'discovered' Spearhead last year sometime and just love his music! I was listening to the album Home (1994) this morning and was amazed at the talent for putting socially conscious lyrics/poetry to great music. Michael Franti (Spearhead's front man) was part of a one-album group called the Disposable Heroes of Hiphoprisy - cool name!

I like that word: Hiphoprisy


On to other thoughts - here are two things I need to begin researching about Portland: riding (dressage preferably) and the local STC. I just checked out the Portland area STC (Williamette Valley) and it looks great! I'm pretty psyched about getting involved with them - maybe I'll actually be motivated to begin updating my other blog. It looks like there are some dressage oriented barns and trainers in the area so I'll have some stuff to check out.

I've also begun apartment shopping and looking at car/motorcycle transportation companies. I'm going to take as little with me as possible so perhaps I'll just end up shipping via UPS.

More meetings that emphasize my uselessness :)

Yeah - I'm gonna be gone in a couple of weeks but I'm still having to attend these meetings. I kind of understand but it's still a big ole' drag. The fact that I've just been a stand in all this time hasn't helped. I haven't really been given the opportunity to get into the nitty gritty of the job, just holding down the topical detail stuff. oh well - it's been great because i haven't had to work too hard and i've been able to do ALL kinds of great stuff with my website and my blog.

Musings on cause and effect

I've thought a bit about how we all work on a couple of different levels when we're problem solving. We can either work on the causal level or the effect level. That may seem obvious but I don't think it is all that obvious. For example: When we talk about issues around the military such as how it should be structured, what kind of power military leaders should have, how our military should interact with other nations, etc...all that discussion is premised on the fact that we need a military.

What if the argument changed? If we shifted the discussion to whether or not we need a military at all, that would be a big change of direction. I find that somewhat intriguing but here's something I find even more interesting - what is leading us to the belief that we need a military at all? So instead of asking about how to implement a military state or whether or not we need a standing military, what if we were to begin asking ourselves why we feel we need a military? Why do we feel the need to be a military superpower?

That's what I'm talking about when I say cause and effect. The cause is America feeling a need to protect itself from aggressive nations - the effect is America becoming a military state/superpower. So if you feel drawn to work on the effect level, you might be interested in things like how to best integrate the military mindset with the general populace, how to train military personnel to interact diplomatically, etc. This is what is happening on many levels throughout our country. This line of reasoning leads to hosts of other questions around how the military should interact with the general public, exactly what their duties as diplomats should be, their role as peacekeepers, etc.

Working on the causal level means addressing a much broader and higher level set of issues. Issues around national interactions and relationships, the use of force as a method of gaining compliance and the constant threat of force as a result of noncompliance, national intolerance, and the general 'my way is the only/right way' attitude exhibited by so many of the nations in the world today. It would be easy to assume that the causal level is 'more important' than the effect level but I disagree completely.

Take the example of illness: Researchers work on finding the cure and eliminating the disease altogether, but doctors work daily to treat the symptoms and aid people who are suffering from the disease. Which is more important? Neither - both are necessary for humanity to grow and move forward. People can't function if they are incapacitated by sickness and disease and cures aren't found overnight. Thus, the need for work on both levels.

My thought on the basic cause for all conflict (this is *very* broad and extremely generic) - people don't feel safe in their world. That sounds terribly simplistic and naive but I believe it to be true in the most basic sense. If we think of conflict in the context of change and the unknown, it becomes easier to see how people could feel unsafe and resist change. Resistance to change is what leads to conflict.

Boring ass meeting call...

My god - could this get any more excrutiating? holy shit - i've never heard so much corporatespeak in one place before. The scary thing is - these people actually talk that way! It's funny, I guess they have to because it's the language of business and that's how they understand the business functions and processes. God knows - I don't understand what they're talking about. Of course, there are a lot of references that you just have to *know* about before half the stuff makes sense.

With all my fascination with language you'd think I would find this interesting but I just don't. It's gotten so cliche and boring - the way that people communicate in the business world that I almost hate to even hear businessspeak...

Disagreement and energy exchanges

I read a bit of Ghandi's Way (Mark Jurgensmyer) today and I have to disagree on a point he made about why one should fast. I don't believe someone should choose to fast strictly out of a sense of duty or obligation. I believe any kind of 'extreme' action like that should be undertaken as a result of a sense of knowing your own truth. If the point Ghandi is making is this: If I truly believe in 'x' so much that I am willing to fast in order to draw attention to a specific problem surrounding 'x' then I agree with him.

However, if the point is that we should draw from our sense of duty and obligation (to whatever) in order to make this type of decision, I don't agree with that. I recognize that the difference is subtle but I believe it is profound. There is nothing wrong with wanting to serve your fellow beings but that feeling of service (for me) is better served from a higher place - a place of seeing the oneness and realizing that what I do helps us move closer to each other. I don't feel that service is best performed because I feel like I should or that I owe something back to society (or whoever).

To me, that feels like a type of coercion - that the collective conscious is subtly coercing me into performing this type of service. That others feel, on some level, that I owe them. This is a difficult concept for me to communicate without bringing up chakras, the differences in the level of energy and vibration associated with each and how motivation changes depending on where most of our energy 'lives'. This is part of what I want to bring to conflict resolution. Even though others may thing it's a weirdo new age thing, my experience has given me innumerable examples that awareness of our energetic interaction is vitally important.

Tangenting off...

A couple of books that talk about this kind of thing are The Celestine Prophecy and Conversations with God, Book 1. I think The Celestine Prophecy breaks it out into very simple and understandable terms. Conversations with God Book 1 introduces the concept and then the other books expand on it a bit.

For me, this concept has proven not only true but valuable. I find it interesting that the 'energetic' language is becoming more and more prevalent in our communication, as are the concepts of energetic exchange and energetic beings. However, if you talk to people about details they get a little uncomfortable. For example - everyone knows what an 'energy vampire' or a 'psychic leach' are but if you talk about exactly how that happens (those people literally suck away our personal energy and we allow that by either not shielding or by buying into their drama), many people kind of drift off. In fact, I'm re-reading this now and thinking that I sound like a total kook.

I would think I was a total kook if I hadn't had the concepts around the energetic body proven to me again and again. It feels right so I'm sticking with it. It's not mumbo jumbo, it's just new ideas that many people aren't ready for yet. I'm guessing the same thing happened every time other new concepts and ideas were introduced to mainstream society. Yoga, for example, and therapy. In the 50s, no one had heard of yoga (save a few kooks :) and going to a therapist was a humongous shameful secret. Now, yoga is almost as common as running and going to a therapist about as commonly accepted as visiting your regular doc for checkups.

Another tangent

Encouraging stuff :) I firmly believe that whether or not people accept ideas you present depends on two *big* conditions: 1). The way it's communicated and 2). Where your energy is when you communicate the information. If you don't use language (terms and concepts) that people understand, they either think you're making fun of them or they completely disregard what you're saying. Secondly, if your energy is not in a good place (i.e. you don't truly believe what you're saying, you're afraid they won't believe or that they'll laugh at you, etc.), your chances of gaining their trust (i.e. establishing your credibility) and them comprehending your message is significantly reduced.

This is what I want to bring to CR - an understanding of how we interact energetically and practical, concrete ways to teach people an awareness of this type of interaction. We've all become more and more aware of unspoken language - nonverbal cues including body language, physical location cues, culture/society attitudes, gender, etc. All the unspoken understandings and knowledge that we bring to every interaction. What I propose is that there is another level at work here - a level that we can tap into and gain more control over - the energetic level. I believe this level is always at work, we just don't know it. Our lack of knowledge in this area is the missing piece in understanding many conflicts.

How many times have we said "I don't understand why X is completely set on that idea - it's completely absurd!" Usually this comes after a big nasty fight with X that utimately ended with no resolution and lots of bad feelings. If we're more aware of the energetic interaction, perhaps we would realize that X is holding energy in a very low place. At that point, we can either choose to go to that low place with him/her or we can choose to hold our energy in a higher place, perhaps helping X move his/her energy up a bit and increasing our chance of resolving the issue.

It just occured to me that I forgot to mention that the higher we hold our energy, the bigger our perspective grows. We are able to move away from the annoying and aggravating details a bit and get an idea of the larger perspective. Instead of focusing on the niggly details of how X wishes to implement his/her suggestion, we can begin to appreciate that his/her idea may be very good for our organization overall but that it's the implementation that's causing the problem. When we realize this, we can give X credit for a good idea (making him/her feel better) but we can also introduce ideas around different types of implementation. This could prove to be a turning point in your relationship to so and so, in addition to bringing a valuable idea into your organization.

Thus ends my initial attempt at clarifying my ideas around conflict resolution and energetic exchanges!

Here's an interesting site:http://capwiz.com/congressorg/megavote/editconfirm/

School of Rock

I saw this movie a couple of weeks ago (went by myself) and it was a blast! Jack Black has been one of my faves ever since I saw him on Mr. Show (with Bob and Dave) and then on the show Tenacious D (produced by David Crosby from Mr. Show) - short lived but cool. Of course, who could forget his fab performance in High Fidelity either? And, lest I forget, his incredible duo - Tenacious D! More info on Tenacious D - I couldn't find anything on their short HBO show...

At any rate - here are my comments on the movie: Wonderful, funny, fabulous and amazingly entertaining! Jack Black does something I have rarely seen when there are kids involved in a movie - he doesn't just use the kids as a foil for his own performance, he manages to make them part of the movie. I love that and it worked incredibly well. Probably the fact that he spoke to them like people and listened to them with respect helped. Also, he didn't do what a lot of adults do with kids - didn't blow off their suggestions.

Anyway - enough of singing the praises of Jack Black...he's just the best :)

Reflections and a beginning

So I guess today 'officially' started my move process. I started packing stuff - real stuff and not just random stuff I wanted out of my sight. I packed up part of a bookcase and started packing my darkroom. Packing my darkroom is hard - I've had it with me for the last seven years and even though there's no way it can go with me, it's sad to think of it in storage. I am going to take my other equipment (lights, cameras and stuff) and my paper and other accessories. I'm doing this because I figure I'll probably have some access to a darkroom and that way I'll have paper and some other stuff.

However, I don't know what to do with all my pictures and negatives. The color stuff - the b&w is going with me. I need to make sure it's stored somewhere cool and dry and I don't know if storage facilities are that climate controlled. This is strange - leaving all this stuff behind. If I can leave it behind for two (or more) years, do I really need it at all? Probably not. Sad, that I carry so much unnecessary stuff around with me. Perhaps this is a chance for me to separate the wheat from the chaff and see what's really important.

I know most of my fiction books are going into storage while my acquisitions from the past two years (mainly spiritual and social awareness literature) is going with me. Also, *all* my technical books are going - the tech writing, english, undergraduate textbooks, and computer stuff is all going. Of course - that's the heaviest stuff also LOL

I'm having a hard time with this. Part of me wants to pack furiously and move as soon as possible, another part urges caution - "Wait until you get notice that you've been accepted" and yet a third part is saying "There's no rush - you have three months and you can't move until Feb anyway." But it's hard. Once a decision like this is made, any waiting or hesitation makes it harder. My heart isn't really here anymore.

My feeling on this is that I need to relax and enjoy the time I have left here - not rush through it madly. I went to the barn the other night and got really weepy thinking about the fact that I won't have this wonderful fellowship much longer. I won't be riding with these dear friends and my Sadie. I'll still ride but it'll be with new people and a new horse. But I can't stay - the pull to go is that strong. There's nothing for me here for now...

Get informed about the upcoming election - check out Yes! magazine's online 2004 Survival Guide.

hee hee hee - here's some funny stuff!

Some more info on the whole Halliburton contract scam...

I've realized that my love of my own voice has translated nicely into loving the sound of my own typing. Man - I write a LOT! Oh well - guess it's better than chewing somebody else's ear off :) Besides, I have all this stuff I want to say and, since I'm not back in school yet, I don't have anywhere to direct it! Once I get back into school you probably won't be hearing as much from me...

Just saw this article about volunteers for draft boards (x-posted on Guerilla News)

Here's another interesting tidbit (also from Guerilla News) about a (I guess) recent event where Paul Wolfowitz spoke. I'm so late come to the political scene that I can't claim first hand rememberance or knowledge about his role in the late 80s Iraq stuff...

Okay - I'm obviously NOT working and busily blog surfing - here's a hysterical bit from shorxrore.

Something kind of cool - not sure if you're supposed to answer on this site or just ponder the questions...

I'm adding this for my own persual - Oregon weblogs

I like this word...

Word of the day (from Merriam-Webster online)

egalitarianism
1 : a belief in human equality especially with respect to social, political, and economic rights and privileges
2 : a social philosophy advocating the removal of inequalities among people

However, I don't like this word:

proselytize
1 : to induce someone to convert to one's faith
2 : to recruit someone to join one's party, institution, or cause

transitive senses : to recruit or convert especially to a new faith, institution, or cause

They say misery loves company.... However I LOVE PINK!!! I choose not to be miserable, so keeping my life in the pink in Portland seems like a great idea to me :)

And here is a wonderful article - especially check out the quotes from Granny D. Here's my favorite: “We cannot have world peace without peace in our own lives. We cannot attack our planet by the way we live, and then go off to a peace rally and hope to set right all the imbalance we have caused. Peace is first a private matter. It cannot grow except from there.”

It's uplifting to know that there are others who feel the same way I do - that peace begins at home. Not just in the home but in the way we choose to live our lives.

Check out the Bill of Rights. Also, here's a link to part of Granny D's site that has archives of speeches from some of our greatest leaders.

well, it's something even if it's not everything! But honestly (laughable word considering this administration), how much more f*cking evidence is necessary before the American peepuls will wake the hell up? For god's sake - the bastards have done everything but write a book about cronyism!! Has the American government always been this bad and we just never noticed? Or were we willing to look the other way because things were good?

Even though I despise what's going on, I have to say that we can't blame it all on them. Regardless of the farce in 2000, we elected the president(s) who put those Supreme Court Justices on the bench so we can't weasel out of taking responsibility for the fact that Bush is (nominally) the president. He, not unlike Marilyn Manson, is a product of our society. Perhaps the ultimate symbol of many of the negative things about our country - greed, partisanship, favoritism, hypocrisy, bullying, and downright untrustworthiness.

I wonder if the rest of the world has seen us this way all along? What a sad and depressing thought. There's lots of good in this country too.

Quick thought - I didn't realize there was a *difference* in Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution but there is. It's not huge (like Biology and English) but there's a definite demarcation. So now the question is - which route? I'm still leaning heavily towards CR - just seems more focused on the person to person relationship whereas PS seems (note the word 'seems') to be a bit more focused on looking at the problems caused (at the root) by poor relationships.

Remember - these relationships can be person to person, person to many people, region to region, country to country, race to race, etc. but the BOTTOM LINE is the singular person and their response to the world around them. It is my strong belief that the outer wars that are raging are mirrors to the inner conflict we all struggle with daily. If we cannot accept ourselves at the most basic and fundamental levels, if we cannot accept that we are all (at the core) loving and light filled beings, how could we possibly truly accept that about others?

This has been an integral part of my struggle - learning to accept and love myself. Even though I did feel a great amount of compassion and love for others, there was always a part of me that secretly yearned for appreciation and gratitude. In time, I realize this yearning would have turned into resentment when I didn't get the appreciation/gratitude. In the process of learning to love myself, I rid myself of this yearning - the need for others to love me. I love myself more now so it's not as vital that others love or appreciate me.

That doesn't mean I don't want loving relationships, it only means I don't need appreciation and gratitude in order to feel loved. I think that's a big difference - it has been for me. So pulling this to the idea of conflict resolution - is it possible that our outward conflicts all mirror this inner conflict? But what if people emphatically deny that they have any inner conflict? Of course, it's possible (although not likely) that they don't. In which case they should be leading this country, not just talking about their lack of inner conflict! LOL

I think this is a most difficult conflict to resolve because we hide it from ourselves. It hurts to much to admit that (at some level) we don't love ourselves, we don't think we're worthy of love, etc. So what's so terrible about admitting that? Because once we admit it, we recognize that it's possible that all those ugly, fearful thoughts are true. That maybe we are fundamentally unlovable, black, evil, and unworthy. Why is it so hard for us to recognize the untruth of those statements? Because we're taught by much of our experience that bad things happen to us for no reason other than we must deserve them.

Believing that those statements are false and generated by a fear filled ego, requires a huge leap of faith - an amazing testament of trust. It is by no means an easy thing. But it can be done. Just like working to better our country and our world can be done. It won't be easy but it's not impossible. It requires a constant, huge leap of faith. It requires ongoing loving kindness and compassion. It requires that we look to our own personal issues for resolution before looking to resolve the issues of others. It requires the courage and compassion and fearlessness of a bodhisattva. I believe we can only acquire these traits through learning to love ourselves.

Pema Chodran wrote a book called The Places That Scare You. In it, she talks about looking at these scary places and learning to appreciate what we can learn from that study. I know I've learned much from mine and I appreciate where those fearful places have brought me. If I hadn't had those negative experiences overcome and scary places to look at, I wouldn't be where I am now and I LOVE where I am now.

Just found out that I won't have to transfer my lease - it's up at the end of February! Talk about perfect timing :) Obviously, there are LOTS of details I have to work out for moving and obviously I'm taking a major leap of faith in moving without being accepted to the school yet. However, I feel so strongly that this is the place for me I don't think I could *not* move - whether or not I get into the program. I'm sure I'll find work and I can live cheaply if I have to LOL

Wow. This decision just seems so right and it feels like things are going to kick into high gear pretty soon. I'm not sure what's going to happen with my current contract but I'll probably be outta here sometime in December. It would be *really* cool if they'd let me stay through the end of January - that way I'd be getting paid until I am ready to move. However, it's possible I can get temporary unemployment so I may go that route.

Here's some of the stuff I need to take care of:

Portland

• Place to live (very close to campus)


• Employment (could be full/part time/contract)


• Utilities (including high speed internet access)

Here

• Moving company


• Arrangements to have car & bike shipped (maybe via a train that I can take also?)


• Move my cat to his new home


• Packing (decide what goes and what stays. Get LOTS of boxes)


• Storage facility (need something decent as my darkroom equipment will stay here for now. Also - need to label boxes carefully & map out the storage area in case I need to have something shipped to me)


• Tell my family

School

• 4 Transcripts from all previous schools


• Letters of recommendation (three for my program application and three for the mentorship application)


• Write two personal letters: One for the program director and one for the mentorship director


• Decide which piece of academic writing to include (should I also include my self published book?)


• Contact the foreign language dept & find out where my two semesters of japanese puts me towards the language requirements for an MA

Just got home from my trip and am planning my move to Portland. My heart's already there - I can feel it :) I'm pretty thrilled about the whole thing - can't wait to get started in the program. I may move out even earlier than I expected - depending on what happens at work and whether or not I have the option to transfer my lease to a property out there. Who knows? Moving earlier has its advantages though - I could get settled, get all the training for the mentoring program and find some part time and/or contracting work while waiting for the summer session to begin.

Did get to meet with the director of the Peace & NonViolence Studies program - he was great also and I totally enjoyed the conversation. It's just so incredible that there's this whole world of people out there who like to think about and discuss the same things I'm interested in. Admitted, I'm quite afraid of sounding like an idiot or a blowhard but I think I managed a credible round of discussions on Monday LOL BTW - I get the feeling that although they're technically separate programs they're fairly closely linked. I'm all for that - just gives me more stuff I can learn about!

One thing I really feel I need to mention - getting the master's degree is secondary here. The pull for me is the learning. The learning and meeting the people. One of the reasons I've been feeling restless in Charlotte is that there is no sangha here - no community of practicioners. I have never felt I would find the people I really need to push myself to the next level. Now I've found them. What an amazing feeling.

I do have TONS more stuff to put up here - I just finished reading my first issue of Ode and Yes! and got some GREAT stuff from them. However, that'll have to wait until I get my clothes washed...pew!

just a quickie - the trip to denver & portland is going great! denver weather was just icky but portland is totally gorgeous :) It's going to be Portland - depending on whether I'm accepted or not. If I'm not accepted, I'll have to start over but I don't think it's going to be too much of a problem.

I spent some time with the CR director got a *great* feeling while talking to him (complete contrast to the experience at the other school). We talked for quite a while and the conversation was wonderful. I'm *so* excited and happy I almost can't wait. gotta run - more later