This might qualify as a personal journal entry.
I feel pretty alone as I write it. There was a little piece of news which came by last week that had great significance to me, but which slipped under the radar of most political punditis.
Bernie Sanders, the “favorite” in the horse race for the open U.S. Senate seat in Vermont, filed as a candidate in the primary election … as a DEMOCRAT. What does this mean?
Well, Bernie might be the best person to tell us all the ramifications but one ramification is very clear to me as an independent challenger for the seat:
WE ARE LOSING OUR INDEPENDENTS IN CONGRESS!
Bernie can no longer claim to be an Independent.
He has taken a side. I think it was the the correct action for him. It was something I challenged him to do in my ‘Open Letter to Bernie Sanders’ where I said:
4. Why do you vote with the Democrats and accept the endorsement of prominent Democrats but refuse to run as a Democrat?
Reference: http://metamind.us/m…
Bernie Sanders is currently the only independent in the House of Representatives. James Jeffords is the only independent in the U.S. Senate. Jeffords has already announced his retirement.
Sanders has announced his partisanship and the end of his independent status.
The way I see it BOTH of our independent politicians are “giving up” on independence.
They have joined the party game.
As an independent it is for me to do … to support independence from parties. What does it mean to be an “independent” politician?
It means I am “outside the box” of the gang warfare. Parties are like gangs, each gange “certainly correct” that its ideology is the correct one. But it is all foolishness. Both gangs believe in control, in dominance, in the idea that “politics is about who’s in charge?”
To me, this is all rubbish. Nobody is in control. Everyone has influence on the course of events and the destiny of humankind. But nobody controls it.
The Republicans may espouse “free market idology” but they are as much the victims of money and its machinations as they are the controllers of it.
It seems to me that we want “something to believe in” because we are too insecure and cowardly to “stand alone in the winds of change.”
But courage is a virtue and parties diminish our courage. It takes more courage to stand alone than to join a gang which is “certainly correct” in its ideological views.
What is correct? It is “doing the right thing.”
It is virtue. But virtue should be looked at as a toolbox of creative spirituality rather than a set of rules to be followed with religious conviction. Virtue is not religion; it is philosophy. It evolves as we evolve. Virtues can be combined in many creative ways. Virtue liberates us from ideology rather than confining us to it. Virtue is the antithesis of ideology.
Once someone is “certainly correct” they can do great evil. Look at what is happening today between Israel and Hezbollah. Israel is certainly correct, right? So is Hezbollah. How can this be? Because neither side is practicing virtue any more. None of them are correct. They are all wrong.
One literal translation of “Israel” is “Upright with God” according to Wikipedia
( http://en.wikipedia…. )
The word “Hezbollah” means “Party of God.”
So who is correct? It is difficult for me to call Israel “Upright with God” when their actions seem so out of balance with fairness, compassion, mercy and justice. If Hezbollah is a party, I fail to see what’s fun about it. Dying for one’s beliefs is one of the most insane actions possible in my humble opinion. They are only beliefs. Change them. Then change them back. Then change them again. Good grief! I think many of us are taking ourselves far too seriously.
What was your belief in God when you were a child?
Did you believe God was an old man with a big grey beard who lived in the sky? What was your belief in God last year, five years ago, ten years ago and so forth? Has your belief changed over the years? Tell the truth. Tell the HONEST truth.
Are you making it up as you go along? Were you
correct when you believed these things before? Are you now correct? Are you sure?
This is the “nut” of the issue.
Surely, we are certainly correct.
It’s too insecure for us to think otherwise. What kind of politics can an “independent politician” have nowadays? Uncertain politics, right? Wrong. I can have convictions as an independent politician and I do have convictions.
One of my convictions is: “I MAY be wrong.” That’s acknowledging my own ignorance, my own capacity for an incorrect, inferior, incomplete understanding of the issue. That’s humility. That’s wisdom. That is a virtue. Ironically, it’s also a “more correct” position on political convictions.
I’m convinced that virtue is a good thing, but I’m uncertain about which virtue is most important at any given point in time. Is it more important to pursue PEACE or JUSTICE? Is it more important to be TRUTHFUL or REVERENT? Is it more important to be PATIENT or ASSERTIVE?
Someone recently asked me “So what’s the best solution?” I told him “Always ask the question: What would be better?”
That’s life in the “independent lane.” I don’t have a firm position on embryonic stem cell research. My position on the violence in the Middle East is “It’s all wrong.” Focus on virtue and you will find better answers. I am certainly correct.
Steve Moyer
Warren, VT
http://stevemoyer.us