Let's change the game. (or: That win could be for all of us.)

An attempt at messaging that could widen the tent and also build on the momentum of this election.

This is written, in the context a post-Dem win, to particularly be amenable/capture the interest of those who voted Democrat for the first time this last cycle, and/or identify as Centrist, Libertarian and even Republican. 

Perhaps I'm wrong in thinking that we'd need Republicans to do this, and I don't want to alienate our own base with any of this language, but... I'm trying to circumvent completely the "sore loser" feelings and disillusionment with political action of any kind - and actually capitalize on shared grievances. 

This would probably be best from an organization that has a large grassroots base right now and that has led other cross-party initiatives or "widen the tent" emphasis at least... I don't know about No Kings or not... as they are of course associated with the left. But their platform is pretty inclusive - i.e. up with democracy, down with authoritarians... so maybe No Kings???

You'll see below that I am imagining that "corruption" is the word that might cross party lines most easily... as opposed to "authoritarianism"...???

-----

Let's change the game.

However you voted this week, this last election cycle is showing us an area of common grievance, and common cause. This is an opportunity for all of us - Centrists, Independents, Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, and Socialists. 

Government corruption has us being treated like pawns in a game. 

None of us should have to wonder if a president or other politician will fee beholden to a corporation rather than to their constituents.

None of us should have to wonder if a president or other politician is making a talking point or supporting a certain course of action for personal gain.

None of us should have to fear that one party will amass so much money that they can rig the system so that our votes no longer matter.

And to change this game, it's going to take a cross-party effort like we haven't seen before.

In times that have been divisive, "working together" can feel impossible. But its essential when we have common cause. We've been divided and conquered way too many times, and it's a threat to all of us. 

Whatever you call this kind of collaboration - "widening the tent," "building strategic coalitions," or "keeping power in check" - I call it an essential part of democracy.

So, while different parties are not going to agree on many things, I hope we can agree that we need to get Big Money out of politics how we can - and that this might be the moment that we can do it.

In fact, polling shows that there is mass cross-party support to get Big Money out of politics. 

That's because Big Money in politics comes at the direct cost of the power of the people - you, me, everyone. 

I don't think it's to our benefit to focus on what happened November 3rd as a "win" for a party. I see it as a possibility for all of us - if we lean in together.

Whether you tend to vote Republican, Independent, or Democratic, I hope we can come together and pressure our new (and old) lawmakers to actually protect our freedoms and the political power of the people.

Elections should be one-person, one-vote. No company or private interest should be able to steal elections away from the people.  When Citizens United was enacted, it allowed corporations to _______________. 

Read about a cross-party solutions here:

https://americanpromise.net/for-our-freedom-amendment/what-will-this-amendment-do/

______

______

There are many ways to push forward together.  Some are here:

_____

______

_____

White people mantram

White people (me): other people's gains are not your losses. Repeat.

Hmmm

I know what it’s like to be the one recommending nuance in the face of dogma. And I know what’s it’s like to be totally frustrated at the person doing that when it seems like they are making a situation I find unjust more vague. I’m just feeling this tension.

the woman in jerusalem

A woman in Jerusalem asked me did I think it was possible for a single human to create the principles and ideals to discipline (in the spirit of right livelihood) themselves? She asked this after learning that, not having been a part of a formal religion at any point in my life (which is perhaps the strangest identity marker a person can have in that land), I had developed a set of working principles to live by from my parents, my work places, the education I have sought out, my peers, and my experiences. On the one hand, I wanted to yell at her, "YES!" (I was feeling a bit vulnerable during that trip). Shouldn't we let other people and our earthly and spiritual experiences be what informs us, what we learn about life from, what tells us what matters? Listening to our intuition, having a discipline that evolves from the self, is subject to change, and isn't simply dictated by an outside force? I'm very inspired by the work and way of life of many peers who follow this openness to be changed.

But I also understood what she meant. It is hard to create self-discipline without an accountability group, for sure, and especially when you are always questioning the mantras. And then today I was thinking again about how our beliefs are so conditioned by our experiences (which are limited, of course) and by those of the folks who are around us. And then too, how often we create beliefs to match what we WANT to be true- or maybe better said, we interpret experiences, even filter our experiences, to match beliefs we are comfortable with. Kind of amazing, and scary. Sometimes I think we do this temporarily for healthy reasons- to cope with and titrate past trauma, for instance. But ultimately we need to open our hearts to a clearer seeing. All this to say that darn lady pushed ME out of my comfort zone and engaging duality may be the only tenant I'm sure of again. I actually find this really funny at present. And if anything it confirms that multiple truths can stand together. I'm writing as an invitation for your open thoughts and perspectives! (Anyone who'd like to reply, and as long as it's speech that is about you and your experience personally, and comes from a place of cultural and religious humility.)

telephone monkeys

I seem to need to write this story, despite its assumptions and perhaps unpleasant manifestations of bias (including mine). I'm invested in writing what is happening, so we can look at it. Comments welcome, especially if you think I'm contributing to bias.

* * * 

I was getting on the bus downtown around 10pm. A man nearby had been yelling forcefully for reasons I did not know. He got on the bus I was getting on, and as he came down the aisle towards where I had sat down, I felt more sure that his behaviors were symptoms of a mental health crisis. 

Having had a different stranger exhibiting similar behaviors publicly choose me as a target for his feelings not long ago, my stomach clenched and I impulsively left my seat (which had an empty one next to it), and slid into the first seat across the aisle, next to a man in a suit, who looked at me surprised. (In Seattle, the social protocol is to sit alone if you have the option. Yeah, it's silly, and a real bummer.) Not sure if I was apologizing to him or the man coming down the aisle, I explained to my new seat-mate that I would feel safer right now sitting next to him, if he didn't mind. He quickly said he understood, and as I registered his clean cut look and suit and tie, I realized I was likely about to have a different kind of cross-cultural moment. 

Just then, the man who was yelling returned past us, back up the aisle, and he turned to everyone, and yelled: "You telephone monkeys! You telephone monkeys! You're all just telephone monkeys!" He kept yelling it, and despite my earlier alarm, and the deep concern that had replaced it... I repeated in my head what he was saying, and began to smile. 

Everyone with their phone in their palm was looking up at him, but soon returned to looking at their phone. My seat-mate then said to me conspiratorially, "The things you see on buses." I was put off by that. I tried to stay open, to connect - I thought about it, and without the same intonation, said, "Yes." Then I started to laugh. At my seat-mate’s surprise, I explained, "I think he's got a great point.” He looked confused, but I just kept laughing. Putting my own phone away, I said, "We ARE all kind of telephone monkeys!" I continued on laughing. I couldn't help myself. 

My seat-mate looked a little bemused, but then nodded and smiled a little. He was holding his phone. He didn’t look at it for some moments, then he started to look at it, then he put it down. I felt guilty all of a sudden - and blurted: “I’m not judging you!” and rambled quickly on, “I use mine all the time!... I mean, I’m addicted!… I just thought it was good social commentary…” He half nodded. “Yes, of course,” he said. Awkward pause. Then he felt compelled to explain, “You know, sometimes it’s just that you don’t feel like talking to anyone…” Pause. As I now started to smile again, he backpedalled fiercely: “Oh, I didn’t mean you!!!” I started laughing again, and assured him I understood. 

He changed the topic back. “It’s gotten a lot worse downtown these past few years, you know. 3rd and Pike… it’s very bad down there now.” I was back to feeling put off, suspicious of his analysis, tired of how shallowly we can see (and not see) other people. “Right,” I said, “it has gotten a lot worse. With all the development, all of the gentrification, and no legal recourse for people, has come a lot more poverty. People have literally been put out on the street.” Awkward silence. 

“What do you do?” he asked. I explained I was a kind of social worker. “What do you do?” I asked. He is a lawyer for a few wine companies in the area. I brought up my hometown of Woodinville, we discussed the development there, and we laughed about the “Tour de Franzia” my friends used to do by bike through Woodinville a few years back. He explained that he was dressed up because he was at a dinner for a law association for Vietnamese lawyers (I’m not sure of the name), to which he had been invited by a friend. As we spoke, I dropped some of my pre-conceived biases against him, and noticed his openness to new ideas, and his kindness. 

We spent the rest of the ride talking about whatever. And every once and awhile, I’d sort of shake my head in gratitude, at the same time as I felt grief, thinking how it was the man who called us “telephone monkeys” who had forced me to sit with someone and look up from my phone, and had enhanced my late night bus ride because of it. And I’m not surprised. I'm really not at all. Someone who’s been so affected must be seeing clearly. And I feel sad. I feel really sad. I’m wishing him and all of us the kind of community that looks at one another, bothers to connect, to take care of each other and believe in each other, the kind he is ringing the alarm for.

opening

History shows how often when we say we know (but we really don't) we are simply choosing a belief that appeases our discomfort or justifies unjust actions. Goal for me: to try to stay with the not knowing instead (listening, receiving, until knowledge actually exists)

real trickle-down

employers: real trickle-down in Capitalism looks like offering thriving, not just livable, wages. also, capping the top incomes. some would say giving equal wages to all. and yes, finding excellent, qualified people who are willing to let go of excessive wages for simply a thriving wage. it's a choice.

i get that part of the limitations on that choice are the need to stay "competitive," or to "get big or get out." so the employer says the wage inequality in their company is all about "keeping the doors open" and thereby keeping employees employed. and they're right - to an extent. the system in which the corporation operates does put these pressures on. this is where coalition-building and changing the game by playing it differently together is needed.