A conscious entity has chosen to direct its existence to a sofa. This is the kind of world I perceive myself to live in when I return to the United States. The material world. The world where we pay money to have someone else paint our toenails and we are a little less than shunned if we wear clothing indicative of any years preceding the current one. A world where the central figure of worship (allowing myself to be a little loose with the term, and drawing from the following elements of its definition "to show profound
In Hindu philosophy (among others), it is understood that whatever you lend your consciousness to is what your existence will be associated with. If you're thinking about your house and your cars then when the opportunity for physical life comes around again that's what your lot will be - houses and cars. This seems pretty commonplace for us, since we need material goods to survive our physical existence.
The problem, as it appears in my life, is when the material is the central driving force in existence, as opposed to non-material values and lifeways such as Love.
It doesn't surprise me that my great-grandmother would still be sitting on her sofa. She grew up in a world where all that mattered was material (based on the actual amount of joules the people of her time directed towards the acquisition of wealth and goods). Her Spanish ancestors had bravely subjugated and enslaved the native populations of Mexico and now owned all of the resource offered by the bounteous landscape. Her family became the owner of various haciendas (or maybe just one, I'm no historian - yet) and thus began their history as wealthy landowners. The native populations, as well as the mestizo children born from the rape of their mothers by Spanish conquerors, were generously allowed to work the land to harvest its precious resources, all of which were given to the landowners. My mom assured me they were not slaves. I wouldn't believe such heretics myself either. I don't need to read a history book to know the European landowners were both honest and compassionate and would want their new neighbors to excel and thrive just as much as they desired for themselves. It seems certain that they paid their "workers" ("brothers" and "loved ones" are probably more appropriate terms) fair wages and most likely also gave them opportunities to own and direct haciendas themselves in order to promote equal wealth distribution and egalitarian social advancement. Note: I do have a goal of reducing the amount of sarcasm I utilize in communication, but when it comes to topics of extreme oppression and violence, I still find it hard to avoid. For anyone to even attempt to assert miniscule traces of equality during such times is both historically inaccurate and frankly vain.
I suppose the purpose of all of this is to provide an outlet for my mourning, a practice I frequently lose myself in, especially after returning from trips abroad. There is no doubt that all places are full of love, though at times it may be hard to see or understand. There is great beauty in the western world, both natural and immaterial. What I struggle with is moving on from my addiction to verbal reparations for our gruesome past. I suppose what I really want is that everyone have a time of mourning. I feel highly disturbed when I confront what to me is a constant celebratory orgy for the triumphs and admirable achievements of the western world, particularly the United States. I perceive this as a profoundly offensive denial of what our achievements are built on. The United Nations University's World Institute for Development Economics Research* reported that "the richest 10 percent of adults in the world own 85 percent of global household wealth." How did this come to be? Our economic and political systems are not very old. It does not take much to trace the path of resource and wealth ownership and distribution. I would consider not knowing this history to be a main contributor to current global violence.
The problem is perpetuated because people do not place themselves within the historical and contemporary context of what all of this means. According to data from Credit Suisse, and reported by the blog Zero Hedge** "to be among the wealthiest half of the world, an adult needs only USD 4,000 in assets, once debts have been subtracted. However, each adult requires more than USD 72,000 to belong to the top 10% of global wealth holders and more than USD 588,000 to be a member of the top 1%. The bottom half of the global population together possess less than 2% of global wealth, although wealth is growing fast for some members of this segment. In sharp contrast, the richest 10% own 83% of the world’s wealth, with the top 1% alone accounting for 43% of global assets." Read that quote again, slowly.
How much are your assets worth?
I am a dominating force in the world today because a majority of the world was dominated yesterday. This doesn't mean one has to inherit extreme privileges to eventually excel in today's world, but it absolutely makes it easier. All of this is to say: contextualize yourself. If you really want to live in a world that we often pride ourselves on, one of freedom, equality and respect, then base this in reality. You will likely find extreme disjointedness between what we value and what we live. This is due in part to the ignorance (disjointedness) between our present and our past. And also to our failure to recognize our unity, but that is another topic.
With love and in mourning,
Kayleigh
*http://www.wider.unu.edu/publications/newsletter/articles/en_GB/10-03-2008-feature-article/
** For the full article: http://www.zerohedge.com/article/detailed-look-global-wealth-distribution
