Between Yin and Yang

Over the past few days, we've had a bit of a discussion sprinkled within my posts and your comments in regards to engaging the world via political concerns. Many of you have aptly pointed to the Taoist concept that all we really have a modicum of control over is ourselves, that if we change the way we approach the world, we can model a different way to live. (If I have misstated this line of reasoning, I'm more than confident you will correct me in the comments section of this post!) :-)

I certainly don't dispute this point of view as it is something I've written about frequently on this blog. In many ways, the best way to change the world is to change ourselves. Since we will never know the lengths that the ripples born of our thoughts and actions will travel, leading a more balanced and virtuous life can impact the world in ways we could never fathom.

However, with all things Taoist, there is a yin and a yang. While I would agree that there is no question that we must each begin from the personal inner, this should not preclude working in the area of the social outer. If a person has great compassion for his/her fellow beings, then that person will carry a weight in a world awash with war, poverty, oppression and injustice.

For my part, I cannot comprehend how a compassionate person could not want to work to end war, poverty, oppression and injustice. Yes, each has been part of the human experience for as long as anyone can remember. Yes, in some degree, each most likely will be part of the human experience in the future. But just because something disharmonious has been with us in the past and will be with us in the future does not, in my mind, mean we should take it as a fixed given.

As long as disharmony exists, then humankind will not be able to approach the supreme harmony of the Way. It would seem, then, that those of us who care about the concept of harmony should avail ourselves to work to eradicate those elements of society that cause the greatest imbalances.

At this juncture, I think it is of critical importance to note the difference between conservative and progressive activism (for lack of better terms). In general, those of a conservative bent advocate one-size-fits-all solutions with, ironically enough, big loopholes for favored classes of people. It's a "my way or the highway" mentality. It's a "controlling" system of living.

Progressives (my preferred term is Leftists), on the other hand, are far more open to the idea of many paths to the same or congruent destinations. More often than not, it's about loosening the controls and allowing different innovative ideas the chance to flower. It's about allowing each individual more freedom to discover who they are.

While progressives favor a more open society, we do want safeguards to protect the individual from the majority and the have nots from the haves. We feel these limited controls, unfortunately, are necessary to curb the strong from victimizing the weak. It is our fervent hope, however, that within time, such safeguards can be pared to the bone as society moves into a new epoch in which victimizing others becomes passe.

The reason I have been lamenting (Baroness Radon's term) the current state of the world is that progressives like me are stumped as to how to proceed toward our nebulous goals for the social outer. We've employed countless strategies over the past two decades and few, if any, of them have stemmed the march toward greater disharmony and imbalance.

As compassionate individuals who are aggrieved at the level of suffering that stretches to all corners of the globe, the misery of so many life forms weighs heavily upon us (e.g., a great disturbance in the force). We want to work -- individually and together -- in ways to achieve greater balance, but we are lost right now as how to move forward.

So, we lament...in the hopes that it will spur us toward new ideas.