New Civilization News: An honest reply to The Rise and Fall of the New Age    
 An honest reply to The Rise and Fall of the New Age9 comments
16 Feb 2003 @ 12:50, by spells

This reply is from a member of another forum regarding the article "Rise and Fall of the New Age". Please notice how it sticks to the points presented and does not take anything personally.....actually opening dialogue that is relevant and progressive....


From: "r”
Date: Sun Feb 16, 2003 1:57 pm
Subject: Re: Rise and Fall of the New Age

"So many are sucked in by the subtle and not so subtle sort of egostrokings conveyed through these messages. And few are aware that these messages serve to dupe their readers into following a way of being that leads to a very compromised and distorted version of the True Spiritual Path. Those who are taken in by them are being scammed. They are being lured into a sort of sham spirituality, and being led down a path that is strewn with glamour and insidious deception…..a path that is skewed by a myopic focus on, by and for the personal ego self.

Unfortunately, for those who continue to be
deluded by these sorts of gloppy, gooey missives that are tailor made to appeal to the selfish graspings of those millions in the New Age scene, and
who are continuing to seek for the self, the path they are treading will not lead them to Liberation at the end of this cycle."

There is a kind of haze over the whole New Age arena. It's like a fog that keeps people distracted. People caught up in this hazy fog have all sorts of seemingly interesting and fascinating stuff that they attend to like practices, workshops, seminars, divination tools, techniques, methods and all sorts of other things that draw their attention and keep the focus of their awareness occupied. It's a real `I just wanna feel good' kinda vibe that permeates this scene.
It's like this whole luv&lite&laughter&peace&harmony-I'm-gonna-ascend-to-another-dimension-cuz-I-heard-from-a-channeled-source-that-I'm-a-cocreator-and-I-will-become-ascended-if-I-just-feel-really-fluffy-and-good-enough-about-me kind of a mindset.

This vibe is very evident on so very many of these sorts of New Age `ascension' related forums. And many seem to truly believe that
this feeling-this soppy, sort of glammed up I'm-all-powerful kind of focus on and about the self-is the way to Liberation. Unfortunately for those who have been deluded thus, it is not.

All of these new age distractions and all of this feeling impelled to just `feel good', keep one's focus directed quite pointedly only upon
what can be gained for the self. Not only that, but such focus also serves to gloss over the stark reality of what is actually happening on this planet, preventing people from ever actually seeing the truth of what is unfolding here or feeling the feelings that might arise if they actually took a brutally honest look at what is indeed going on around them here. For if they were to look up and away from their self possessed distractions long enough to shift their vision to attune to the true plight of humanity and the Earth, they might be compelled to feel the innermost feelings that lie at the core of their hazed and fogged over hearts. They might have to confront the demons that lie within them and face head on their own deepest, darkest fears.

This is why there is such a thick, gunky miasmic shroud of new age glam surrounding lists like these. Because most people are not ready to step onto the True Path of Liberation which begins with being
honest enough to look directly and without distraction to see through all delusion and look within so as to "Know Thyself".

And when someone comes along with a beacon-like laser, cutting through this fog of delusion, distraction and miasma, most of those who are still very invested in their selfish, myopic perspective will protest and shield their hazed over eyes from such radiance and say `Begone! Stop making me look there! "

Maybe if they stopped a moment to see just exactly what was being shown to them, they might realize that they have been lost in the mists of this 3D illusion called life on Earth. And maybe they would look up from their new age distractions long enough to begin to see a shard of Truth.

And maybe, just maybe, they might begin to see that the Way has never been based upon a selfish focus, but rather on a selfless one.

[< Back] [New Civilization News]



17 Feb 2003 @ 00:56 by jazzolog : Strong Stuff
I congratulate you, Sandi---or should I call you the "New Age" name? ;-)---on putting this up. The writer makes some very good points, and I certainly endorse a view that encourages political activity and heavy involvement---whether grassroots or national (Kucinich is in! Let's get busy!)---along with constant spiritual practice and growth. Mixing the two can get evangelical and produces the kind of dangerous regime now running the US, but a careful delineation and alertness should keep an individual healthy and responsible.  

17 Feb 2003 @ 03:11 by istvan : Yes (Jazzlog),Let's Get Busy

February 17, 2003

Published on Sunday, February 16, 2003 by the Cleveland Plain Dealer
Kucinich Says He Wants To Be President
by Mark Naymik and Tom Diemer

Dennis Kucinich, Cleveland's youngest and most controversial mayor, wants to be president.

Now in his fourth term in the U.S. House, the 56-year-old Kucinich will announce tomorrow - Presidents Day - that he is forming an exploratory presidential committee.

By doing so, he places him self in a crowd of much-better-known Democratic candidates seeking their party's 2004 nomination.

U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, talks to reporters about his 'Baseball Fan Protection Act' outside Jacobs Field in Cleveland July 8, 2002. Kuninich plans to file papers to launch a presidential campaign Monday, said a source familiar with his plan and his entry into the 2004 presidential race bumps the Democratic field of candidates to eight.(AP Photo/Mark Duncan)

Kucinich said voters need to hear alternative points of view on Iraq, trade and the nation's economic policies, all issues that will be at the center of his campaign. Yesterday, he spoke at an anti-war rally in New York near the United Nations.

"My experience in public life is that one person can make a difference," he said.

Kucinich said he is "testing the waters" and will commit to running for the nomination in June if his candidacy wins wide support in the next several months.

Kucinich is scheduled to be in Iowa today, where he is to meet with Democratic Party activists in advance of an appearance tomorrow with other presidential hopefuls at an AFL-CIO forum.

The Iowa caucuses next January are the first major contest of the 2004 primary season.

Kucinich's announcement ends months of speculation fueled by his high-profile stance against a possible war in Iraq and a vigorous effort to position himself as a leading liberal voice in Congress.

In Washington, Kucinich co-chairs the Progressive Caucus, a group of the most liberal lawmakers on Capitol Hill. He crisscrossed the country last year, traveling to 40 cities, to speak against President Bush's Iraq policy.

Kucinich could easily be labeled the peace candidate because his stand against war-making preceded the Iraq debate. Among the first bills he introduced after getting to Congress in 1997 was a plan to create a Cabinet-level Department of Peace, dedicated to finding nonmilitary conflict resolution. Another early bill barred deployment of weapons in space, a counter to Republican plans for a missile shield. Neither of his proposals gained much support.

Kucinich is the ranking Democrat on the Government Reform National Security subcommittee, which gives him a forum for his anti-war views.

On Wednesday, he filed a resolution in the House demanding that the White House turn over "any evidence it has about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."

On domestic issues, Kucinich - a tireless advocate for labor - lobbied Bush personally to impose tariffs on steel importers.

He also claims credit for helping develop a Democratic policy that resulted in a law providing a $300 tax rebate to individuals in 2001. The National Journal, a Washington periodical, said Kucinich voted the liberal line 95 percent of the time in 2002 on economic issues and 90 percent of the time on foreign affairs.

He voted against the Patriot Act, which gave the Justice Department vast powers to track terrorist suspects in this country.

But Kucinich, a Catholic, deviates from his liberal pedigree on abortion, voting against Medicaid funding for the procedure and opposing the procedure known as partial-birth abortion.

While he said he stands by his votes on abortion-related issues, he acknowledged he has been meeting with abortion-rights advocates. "I have reached out to both sides," he said.

Abortion notwithstanding, Kucinich's positions overall place him to the left of most of the announced presidential candidates on the political spectrum. And he is likely to draw support from the same base of voters that backed Ralph Nader, the Green Party presidential candidate, in 2000.

Others who have announced their interest in the 2004 Democratic nomination are U.S. Sens. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, John Kerry of Massachusetts and John Edwards of North Carolina; former House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt of Missouri; former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean; and New York activist Al Sharpton. Former Illinois Sen. Carol Moseley-Braun has said she plans to file papers for a presidential exploratory committee this week.

Kucinich, who was elected mayor in 1977 at the age of 31, left a mixed legacy in Cleveland. As mayor, he is best remembered for his battles with businesses and for his refusal to sell the city-owned electric utility.

He barely prevailed in a 1978 recall election, and he lost his bid for a second two-year term the following year to George Voinovich, now a U.S. senator.

But Kucinich maintained a strong political base and was elected to the state Senate in 1994 and then to Congress.

Though he is a deft campaigner, capable of rousing a crowd, he is not widely known outside Ohio. And he has never faced the challenge of raising large sums of campaign money - an imperative in a serious presidential race.

He starts from scratch on national fund raising. He began the year with a mere $7,032 in his congressional campaign account - money that could be transferred to a presidential campaign.

Among Kucinich's recent donors were actors Elliott Gould and Ed Begley Jr. Both gave $250. Kucinich, who has not named a fund-raiser for his presidential bid, said he soon will have a Web site through which his supporters can contribute money.

If he can't raise millions to open campaign offices and hire an army of workers, his presidential campaign could turn into little more than a series of speeches that raise his profile but garner few delegates.

But Kucinich has little to lose. He can run in the Democratic primaries next year while also seeking re-election to his House seat, according to the office of Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell.

17 Feb 2003 @ 06:10 by shawa : I agree with Richard
Could not say it better! :-)  

17 Feb 2003 @ 15:27 by tdeane : One thing I find confusing...
is whether it is possible to have such a thing as a selfless motive. I'll use my own suggestion for everyone lighting a candle together all over the world as an example. On the one hand, it was for the purpose of uniting us all, but on the other was the sheer delight of knowing I have had just one good idea that made a difference in the world. It was not until I realized that I could light my candle for everyone that I really got my cookies and felt at peace with my idea, but it still is selfish because I still do it because it feels so good and offers such promise. Until then my pursuit of it bordered on fanaticism, as everyone well knows. The reality is, if we do have peace, can anyone really prove that my individual candle for everyone didn't have an effect? I think not. Every good deed I have ever done in my life has felt wonderful to me -- is that not selfishness? I continue doing it because it feels really good! And I'm referring here not to those good deeds that felt good while I was going through them, but my numerous legal battles for employee rights with the Labor Department. Was my desire to not have anyone go through the same indignities not fundamentally selfish?

So I have to question that any one person or persons have the right to define spirituality for anyone else -- we all have, as I have said in another log, our own "golden keys" to share. I somehow draw back when I hear anyone speak of the True Spiritual Path. Is that not the greatest selfishness and ego of all?

By the way, I also find confusing that you would look at this response as not taking things personally. The only essential difference I see here is that they did not take what was written in the article personally. He/she certainly has a lot of "personal" stuff about those viewed as "New Age." New Age has been bashed so much, and I am not New Ager, by the way, by so many that it is becoming the "standard" for attack. Is that not selfish in that it is something which the writer obviously doesn't feel comfortable with? And why are all these attacks necessary anyway. If we'd just work together and allow ourselves TO BE in our own beliefs, we'd probably get a whole hell of a lot more done than arguing amongst each other in our logs. Love ~ Tricia  

17 Feb 2003 @ 18:49 by spells : Working for the Sake of Cause....
Hi Tricia, Thanks for asking these questions. Let me just say this....There is a difference when one does something for "Cause", and truly the greater good without concern for personal outcome. This is all a matter of intent. Let me ask you this...if you were about to do something that you knew was for the greater good of all, would you do it, even if you may come out of it disliked? The answer to this question, answers all of your questions.


17 Feb 2003 @ 21:30 by tdeane : Thanks, Sandi....
(chuckle) Need I answer that? Love ~ Tricia  

17 Feb 2003 @ 22:27 by sevenlamb : I am thankful
For the conscise and pragmatic statement of a deadly probelm. With 137,000 'ways' of knowing, we're dead. It means we -won't make rings- the right way.

We need the roots. Now, together.
Their alive in the shape and nature of our hands.
And the eyes in our children.
Which are the eyes in of the stars....

We need to be -empowered- to -seek these base roots together-, without dogma, or categories. In games,
that save worlds.  

18 Feb 2003 @ 05:18 by tdeane : Sevenlamb...
I guess I'm not sure what you are saying here. Are you saying that we should all be following the same leader and be playing the same games instead of sharing our games with each other? Is that not mimicry? Love ~ Tricia  

20 Apr 2003 @ 13:51 by CLEVELAND (OH) @ : WWW.KUCINICH.COM

Your Name:
Your URL: (or email)
For verification, please type the word you see on the left:

Other entries in
17 Jun 2010 @ 06:07: Stereotypes are circular and non-scientific
29 May 2010 @ 18:00: StereoTypes are debased Concepts
31 Mar 2010 @ 15:08: What's the line between "immersing in beauty" and exaltation?
26 Mar 2010 @ 14:47: Dialectical Analysis of Consciousness and Information
6 Mar 2010 @ 07:49: The word for World is Forest
17 Feb 2010 @ 15:55: Dialectical analysis of the Post-modern Epoch
10 Feb 2010 @ 18:50: Mindmap for Ifa for the 21st Century
19 Dec 2008 @ 09:42: Cosmic Egg, Cosmic Onion
4 Dec 2008 @ 03:58: Profound Metaphysical Questions to Ask Yourself
30 Nov 2008 @ 10:59: The Hard Problem of Conscious Experience

[< Back] [New Civilization News] [PermaLink]?