EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
A Primer on Class Struggle
When we study Marx in my graduate social theory course, it never fails that at least one student will say (approximately), “Class struggle didn’t escalate in the way Marx expected. In modern capitalist societies class struggle has disappeared. So isn’t it clear that Marx was wrong and his ideas are of little value today?”
I respond by challenging the premise that class struggle has disappeared. On the contrary, I say that class struggle is going on all the time in every major institution of society. One just has to learn how to recognize it. 
One needn’t embrace the labor theory of value to understand that employers try to increase profits by keeping wages down and getting as much work as possible out of their employees. As the saying goes, every successful capitalist knows what a Marxist knows; they just apply the knowledge differently.
Workers’ desire for better pay and benefits, safe working conditions, and control over their own time puts them at odds with employers. Class struggle in this sense hasn’t gone away. In fact, it’s inherent in the relationship between capitalist employer and employee. What varies is how aggressively and overtly each side fights for its interests.
Where else does class struggle occur? We can find class struggle wherever three things are at stake: the balance of power between capitalists and workers, the legitimacy of capitalism, and profits.
The most important arena outside the workplace is government, because it’s here that the rules of the game are made, interpreted, and enforced. When we look at how capitalists try to use government to protect and advance their interests -- and at how other groups resist -- we are looking at class struggle.
Capitalists want laws that weaken and cheapen labor. This means laws that make it harder for workers to organize unions; laws that make it easier to export production to other countries; laws that make it easier to import workers from other countries; laws and fiscal policies that keep unemployment high, so that workers will feel lucky just to have jobs, even with low pay and poor benefits.
Capitalists want tax codes that allow them to pay as little tax as possible; laws that allow them to externalize the costs of production (e.g., the health damage caused by pollution); laws that allow them to swallow competitors and grow huge and more powerful; and laws that allow them to use their wealth to dominate the political process. Workers, when guided by their economic interests, generally want the opposite.
I should note that by “workers,” I mean everyone who earns a wage or a salary and does not derive wealth from controlling the labor of others. By this definition, most of us are workers, though some are more privileged than others. This definition also implies that whenever we resist the creation and enforcement of laws that give capitalists more power to exploit people and the environment, we are engaged in class struggle, whether we call it that or not.
There are many other things capitalists want from government. They want public subsidy of the infrastructure on which profitability depends; they want wealth transferred to them via military spending; they want militarily-enforced access to foreign markets, raw materials, and labor; and they want suppression of dissent when it becomes economically disruptive. So we can include popular resistance to corporate welfare, military spending, imperialist wars, and government authoritarianism as further instances of class struggle.
Class struggle goes on in other realms. In goes on in K-12 education, for example, when business tries to influence what students are taught about everything from nutrition to the virtues of free enterprise; when U.S. labor history is excluded from the required curriculum; and when teachers’ unions are blamed for problems of student achievement that are in fact consequences of the maldistribution of income and wealth in U.S. society.
It goes on in higher education when corporations lavish funds on commercially viable research; when capitalist-backed pundits attack professors for teaching students to think critically about capitalism; and when they give money in exchange for putting their names on buildings and schools. Class struggle also goes on in higher education when pro-capitalist business schools are exempted from criticism for being ideological and free-market economists are lauded as objective scientists.
In media discourse, class struggle goes on when we’re told that the criminal behavior of capitalist firms is a bad-apple problem rather than a rotten-barrel problem. It goes on when we’re told that the economy is improving when wages are stagnant, unemployment is high, and jobs continue to be moved overseas. It goes on when we’re told that U.S. wars and occupations are motivated by humanitarian rather than economic and geopolitical concerns.
Class struggle goes on in the cultural realm when books, films, and songs vaunt the myth that economic inequality is a result of natural differences in talent and motivation. It goes on when books, films, and songs celebrate militarism and violence. It also goes on when writers, filmmakers, songwriters, and other artists challenge these myths and celebrations.
It goes on, too, in the realm of religion. When economic exploitation is justified as divinely ordained, when the oppressed are appeased by promises of justice in an afterlife, and when human capacities for rational thought are stunted by superstition, capitalism is reinforced. Class struggle is also evident when religious teachings are used, antithetically to capitalism, to affirm values of equality, compassion, and cooperation.
I began with the claim that Marx’s contemporary relevance becomes clear once one learns to see the pervasiveness of class struggle. But apart from courses in social theory, reading Marx is optional. In the real world, the important thing is learning to see the myriad ways that capitalists try to advance their interests at the expense of everyone else. This doesn’t mean that everything in social life can be reduced to class struggle, but that everything in social life should be examined to see if and how it involves a playing-out of class interests.
There is fierce resistance to thinking along these lines, precisely because class analysis threatens to unite the great majority of working people who are otherwise divided in a fight over crumbs. Class analysis also threatens to break down the nationalism upon which capitalists depend to raise armies to help exploit the people and resources of other countries. Even unions, supposed agents of workers, often resist class analysis because it exposes the limits of accommodationism.
Resistance to thinking about class struggle is powerful, but the power of class analysis is hard to resist, once one grasps it. Suddenly, seemingly odd or unrelated capitalist stratagems begin to make sense. To take a current example, why would capitalists bankroll candidates and politicians to destroy public sector unions? Why do capitalists care so much about the public sector?
It’s not because they want to balance budgets, create jobs, improve government efficiency, or achieve any of the goals publicly touted by governors like Scott Walker, Chris Christie, Rick Snyder, or John Kasich. It’s because of the profit and power they can gain by destroying the last remaining organizations that fight for the interests of working people in the political sphere, and by making sure that private-sector workers can’t look to the public sector for examples of how to win better pay and benefits.
Other parts of the agenda being pursued by corporate-backed governors and other elected officials also make sense as elements of class struggle.
Selling off utilities, forests, and roads is not about saving taxpayers money. It’s about giving capitalists control of these assets so they can be used to generate profits. Cutting social services is about ensuring that workers depend on low-wage jobs for survival. Capitalists’ goal, as always, is a greater share of wealth for them and a smaller share for the rest of us. Clear away the befogging rhetoric, the rhetoric that masks class struggle, and it becomes clear that the bottom line is the bottom line.
If class struggle is hard to see, it’s not only because of mystifying ideology. It’s because the struggle has been a rout for the last thirty years. But a more visible class struggle could be at hand. The side that’s been losing has begun to fight back more aggressively, as we’ve seen most notably in Wisconsin. To see what’s at stake in this fight and what a real victory might look like, it will help to call the fight by its proper name.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


354 Comments so far
Show AllCarlos Slim of Mexico increased his wealth by 20 billion in a single year. This while millions of More Mexicans suffer poverty and see wages decline.
This is that grand system of Capitalism hard at work creating wealth.
Carlos Slim grew wealthy by buying up all those Government assets that were Privatized by the Government of Mexico. These assets were once owned by the peoples of Mexico.
The Koch bothers know a good thing when they see one and want much the same in the USA.
Capitalism=Theft. It rewards the biggest crook and the persons with the lowest morals. The means of a livelihood (production) MUST be removed from the Investor Class.
Link to Cornell West talking with Al Jazeera about Obama policies and the prison industrial complex
http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes/rizkhan/2011/03/201132863311584728.html
The Koch cartel, via their puppet dictator and agents in state government targeted Wisconsin not because Wisconsin's finances were in the bad condition they allege, but because Wisconsin had relatively low debt, thereby providing more assets for Governor Walker to steal and hand over to the Koch cartel.
Naaa! this part of a long standing Republican plan currently being administered bu Karl Rove. this was orginally worked out during the Rooosevelt administration, how to reverse the lose in privilages by the robber barons and banksters to do as they will with the resources and people of this nation. It's just the last 20-30yrs things have really started working out for the shadow leaders and they could bring their plans more into the open.
>^^<
Link to an article about DEM Gov. Cuomo taking 2x (twice) the amount Gov. Walker took from the Koch brothers: (http://bayridgejournal.blogspot.com/2011/03/andrew-cuomos-koch-problem.html.)
And guess what Cuomo does next: ""This time, it’s a Democratic governor, Andrew Cuomo, in the driver’s seat ... the budget pushed through at 1 AM contains steep cuts to primary education spending, the State University of New York, and job creation. It also allows the millionaires’ tax to expire – that’s a surtax on incomes over $1 million." (http://www.thenation.com/blog/159619/bringing-budget-protests-new-york)
Now, how much do you think DEM Gov. Brown (CA) got from the Koch brothers (insert "Koch brothers" equivalents here?) (Hint: draconian budget cuts to Democratic line items with no tax increases for the rich, but sure enough tax increases for the middle class.)
You can play this game too. What's your governor (Dem or Rep) taking from the Koch brothers (and equivalents;) and what are the subsequent budget cuts to Dem line-items whilst either adding Rep line-item tax cuts or tax increases for the middle class?
Still think this isn't about class warfare?
2 adults with 2 kids working full time at walmart are still eligible for welfare - that's how little they pay their employees
they dump off their responsibilities for their employees on the taxpayers - not unlike the bank bailouts - and we let them do it because we are weak and uneducated. the fact that most people need a primer on class struggle speaks for itself don't it
it also speaks to the absolute control of the education system by the rockefellers to the point where we have college students who can't read or write
the faintest glimmer of awareness is bad news for the controllers so they ensure there is none
they put fluoride in the drinking water, they vaccinate us with all kinds of lethal cancers and retro viruses, and they add hiv and hep c to processed foods
http://www.blacklistednews.com/The_BioPirates_of_Science%3A_Genetic_Engineering_%E2%80%93_Science_or_Hoax%3F/13306/0/38/38/Y/M.html
and here we are the allegedly free citizens in the enlightened west trying to absorb a primer on class struggle
not good enough............
carlos slim just bought up mexico and the hedge funder smith just bought the state of maine
we are peasants, or as the author points out we are renters in our own country
i think its safe to say that our parents and grandparents who fought so hard to create this country would be ashamed of us - and rightly so
one wonders how low we are prepared to sink before we stand up
rats in a maze we are - hey who moved my cheese
Good comment. And when the CA government wanted walmart and other companies to quit doing this, they put it on the ballet. And people voted it down.
What did Forest say? Stupid is......
That was John C. Malone that bought almost a million acres of Maine recently. You have the right Idea(s) memedude, but you should check your facts first. :)
Sorry, there never was any cheese for you, it was part of that American Dream nonsense.
That's why they call it a dream "you have to be asleep to belive it"
>^^<
Hey you! medmedude!
Nobody moved your stinking cheese!
Dummy, the boss left it there for you, but it’s so moldy and smelly you didn’t even recognize it.
So, what are you going to do about?
:<(
:>P
:>)
* * * * *
medmedude wrote:
"we are peasants, or as the author points out we are renters in our own country
i think its safe to say that our parents and grandparents who fought so hard to create this country would be ashamed of us - and rightly so
one wonders how low we are prepared to sink before we stand up
rats in a maze we are - hey who moved my cheese"
* * * *
My Comments About The Book:
The website for Dr. Spencer Johnson's book “Who Moved My Cheese?” describes the book as the “The World’s # 1 Best Selling Book on Change.” The sad thing is that this claim might actually be true.
Anyone who has read this book may have noticed that the basic premise of the book was not simply that change is inevitable.
The basic premise of the book implies the following:
1. Change is only brought about by impersonal forces, not by people (e.g. bosses) acting in their own best interests to the detriment of your (e.g. workers) best interests.
2. Not only is change inevitable, but change should not be resisted or re-directed, because change is both inevitable and basically good or at least the best that can happen in a bad situation because the system (i.e. the market and / or social systems like “democratic” government and the workplace) are good.
3. Workers should adjust to change by looking for more cheese wherever cheese may have spontaneously and miraculously appeared or been left by somewhere in the maze (this difference is not even acknowledged much less its importance discussed); not be chewing a whole in the maze walls and escaping or seeking out those who leave cheese in the maze and figuring out have to take over control of the whole system.
4. Workers who stop looking for cheese because their cheese has been moved by someone e.g. bosses, are to be pitied and perhaps even reviled as pathetic.
For these reasons "likeitornot" might or might not point out that "Who Moved My Cheese?" is biased and manipulative propaganda.
This # 1 selling book on change never really answers the questioned so brazenly asked in its title!
For this reason ““Who Moved My Cheese?””is an excellent book on change, if your goal in life is to shape your motivation in ways that enable you to better survive as a wage slave.
According to Michael Schwalbe who wrote the article titled "A Primer on Class Struggle", writing the book "Who Move My Cheese?", selling the book, giving the book away for free, any of these activities done with or without an appropriate disclaimer, as well as praising the book, or criticizing the book are if fact all examples of class struggle, because the book promotes acceptance by workers of all change even when that change is damaging to their interests and promotes industrious behavior by workers that can easily be exploited by bosses.
While Michael Schwalbe doesn't say this directly in his article the implication is clear.
Although I am not religious I do think that the very well-known first four lines of the “Serenity Prayer” by Rheinhold Niebuhr gives far better advice regarding adapting to change than the book “Who Moved My Cheese?.
"God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference."
Reinhold Niebuhr
URL: www.thevoiceforlove.com/serenity-prayer.html
Schwalbe lost me at "graduate social theory course." The organized responses to Gilded Age inequality, which we are now re-living, didn't require graduate degrees. To the contrary, the level of formal education was quite modest (another modern replay).
I'm not willing to discard professors entirely but, as a pale reflection of the class structure that has most of America in a corner, academia should be taken with a grain of salt.
The reason most of America is in a corner, is because of people like you.
Anti-intellectual combined with the refusal to engage in debate about thoughts and ideas, instead preferring to engage in debate about personalities.
Where in the comment are personalities debated?
Academia is becoming increasingly corporatized and a refuge for guys like Yoo.
Academia needs a serious shakeup, and will not enjoy the luxury of sitting on the sidelines for very much longer.
dreamjoehill also wrote:
“Income and tax base inequality is the major source of education failure in the US.
It might not be responsible for every problem, but it is responsible for a great deal.
I'm glad the author pointed this out. The attacks on teachers unions are a shameful right wing tactic. The Right hates teacher's unions because those unions are solid Democratic party supporters.”
My Comment:
Would you agree then that the author, Michael Schwalbe, is at least one academic who is not sitting on the sidelines?
Please don't mention John Yoo!
That any university could hire him as a professor of anything much less law is a real scandel!
Yes I would agree that there are a minority of left wing professors that are actively opposing empire and corporatism, but they are few and far between.
The institutional political economic dynamics push the academy ever rightward.
Is Schwalbe the author of the recent report on the effects of inequality?
dreamjoehill wrote:
"The institutional political economic dynamics push the academy ever rightward.
My Reply:
I agree.
dreamjoehill asked:
"Is Schwalbe the author of the recent report on the effects of inequality?"
My Reply:
I don't know. This is the first I have heard of this recent report.
dreamjoehill, maybe you're referring to the book "The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better" by Wilkinson and Pickett? They are British researchers.
www.equalitytrust.org.uk/why
Yes, that's the one! Here's a good review:
http://counterpunch.org/dobbin03162011.html
Thanks Alcyon and dreamjoehill!
It is about personality, because he is obsessing over the identity of the writer.
He does not even bother to address the ideas. He dismisses the article out of hand, because of what the writer is. Personality.
Same with you.
No, I didn't dismiss the article out of hand. And I presented some ideas regarding why academia is generally out of touch. I actually liked the article.
There is a difference between "personality" and "class identity" The poster was addressing class identity, although in a somewhat hamfisted way.
Still the common worker's distrust of academia is well justified in general, and that is my point. I am not speaking categorically as I have had some excellent lefty mentors from academia throughout the years.
Really couldn't we just be a race/class, like everybody else?
>^^<
*buzzer sound effect*
rfloh, you're mistaking intellectual content for academic content. There's a huge difference. Schwalbe seems an OK sort, but what about the vast majority of people who never get near a "graduate social theory course"? Would his students learn more from working 30 days at Wal-Mart? (if they haven't already, that is)
This is a huge problem with the American Left, one we're not going to solve on this thread.
Like I said, refusal to engage with the ideas.
You're continuing to do so.
The true heroes do BOTH rfloh, for example Emma Goldman wrote profound theory AND marched with working people and imperialists against capitalism and statism. I have to agree with Joe Hill overall while words are important to understand WHY we oppose the oligigarchs words alone are nor sufficient in the current soft fascist state we currently live in. Yes to reading and education, no to ivory elitism that thinks and acts not, post Marxist lit crit theorists that hammer on about identity politics while never actually engaging with working people for example are worse than useless IMO.
Well, if what Michael Schwalbe says is true, that at least one student enrolled in each of his graduate social theory courses claims to believe that “in modern capitalist societies class struggle has disappeared”, then we might conclude from this that there is always at least one student who has managed to enroll in the graduate social theory course without taking the recommended prerequisite Wal-Mart classes at the School of Hard Knocks. Apparently, North Carolina State University doesn’t require it.
Michael Schwalbe doesn’t tell us what else is on the graduate social theory class syllabus. So, it is hard to say whether any of us here would benefit from taking the course.
I would like to know whether Schwalbe covers the tendency of the left to self-destruct, because of the persistence of dogmatic leftist sectarian doctrinal contempt for working class people who may have different perspectives on the problem of power in society in part because they work in different sectors of the economy.
Although the immunity in many people is rapidly wearing off due to recent events, much of the working class has been inoculated over the years by the powerful and by those serving the powerful against the idea that class struggle exists in the United States. Personally, I don’t have a problem with Michael Schwalbe attempting to weaken that immunity wherever he finds it.
In todays university engageing in debate over thoughts or ideas would be a violation of the diversity codes which state everyones culture opinions and thoughts are equally valid, and must never be challenged! at least thats the way it was in 2002 when i tried to return to finish my degree. It's probably gotten worse.
>^^<
This has not been my experience and doesn't seem to be the experience that Michael Schwalbe has just desribed in his graduate social theory course.
I agree. All these IVORY Tower profs. that post in here are to say the least mildly hypocritical, as they soak up our taxes and benefits while working 6 mos. of the yr. when not on sabbatical. Ivory Tower Marxists with safe life tenure and a big fat retirement pension like Prof. whats his name here and the rest are the last people you'll ever see at the local peace rally. Believe me they'll do nothing that threatens their solid gold jobs.
SEAGLASS, You have a frame of reference which trivializes academics with the code word IVORY - capitalized for us to more easily recognize your bias.
Thank you for explaining that your IVORY tower bias refers to an imaginary stereotype. I'm a non-academic who does attend peace rallies, and I can assure you that I see academics there, as well as many other places, working tirelessly to preserve the freedoms we enjoy, including your freedom to express your bias.
If you would like to meet some academics who work for peace, for example, you might try attending a peace rally.
Paul Wellstone, R. I. P.
Before his election as a Democratic U.S. Senator from Minnesota Paul Wellstone was a professor of political science. Wellstone was a progressive and a leading spokesman for the progressive wing of the national Democratic Party.
Upon earning his Ph.D., Wellstone accepted a job as a Professor of Political Science at Carleton College in Northfield, Minnesota, where he taught until his election to the Senate in 1990.
During the 1970s, he became involved in community organizing, working with the working poor and other politically disenfranchised communities. The first organization he founded was the Organization for a Better Rice County, a group consisting mainly of single parents on welfare, which he organized to advocate for public housing, affordable health care, improved public education, free school lunches, and a publicly-funded day care center[citation needed]. During this same period, he also began organizing with union members, farmers, and liberal activists. Later, he would use these connections in his bid for the Senate.
In the early 1970s, the trustees of Carleton College considered firing him, and actually did fire him for a short time, but his students held a sit-in that resulted in him getting his job back and becoming the youngest professor at Carleton to ever get tenure.
Wellstone was known for his work for peace, the environment, labor, and health care; he also joined his wife Sheila to support the rights of victims of domestic violence. He made the issue of mental illness a central focus in his career.[10] He was a supporter of immigration to the U.S.[11] He opposed the first Gulf War in 1991 and, in the months before his death, spoke out against the government's threats to go to war with Iraq again.
On October 25, 2002, Wellstone, along with seven others, died in a plane crash in northern Minnesota. The plane was en route to Eveleth, where Wellstone was to attend the funeral of Martin Rukavina, a steelworker whose son Tom Rukavina serves in the Minnesota House of Representatives. Wellstone decided to go to the funeral instead of a rally and fundraiser in Minneapolis attended by Mondale and fellow Senator Ted Kennedy. He was to debate Norm Coleman in Duluth, Minnesota that same night.
The above excerpts taken from Wikipedia.
URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Wellstone
RIP
I shouted out,
Who killed the kennedys?
When after all
It was you and me
Let me please introduce myself
I'm a man of wealth and taste
I'm always forgetting how to spell assasination.
Yes, Mick Jagger and The Rolling Stones.
But I have no sympathy for the devil!
Well, maybe a little.
But not for any devil responsible for the crash that killed Wellstone and seven others, if in fact devils caused that crash.
And which devils caused the plane crash of JFK Jr.
Another great liberal hope killed in a wierd plan crash.
http://www.angelfire.com/wy/1000/WasJFKJR.Murdered.html
-speculative but a place to start looking foe those interested.
Sometime in the 1980s I saw Carl Oglesby, former president of the SDS (1965-1966), speak before the Libertarian Party of Massachusetts. He was interested in running for the U.S. Senate against Ted Kennedy, primarily as a means of exposing evidence about what he believed was a cover up of a conspiracy to assassinate John F. Kennedy. Oglesby considered the conspiracy proof that the United States had a fascist government. Most of the Libertarians there were not interested.
I don't doubt that such things could happen in the United States, but I have never felt I would gain that much from trying to prove to myself just who has been assassinated as a result of a conspiracy and by whom they were assassinated.
I suppose that is because so much of the available information does seem speculative; and I don't know what I personally would be able to do differently anyway if I came to the conclusion that an assassination by conspiracy had taken place, contradicting the official version of the cause of death.
Unfortunately, the federal government has engaged in numerous horrible activities over the years, the details of which are pretty much well established facts as far as I am concerned.
So, I don't feel a great need to try to figure out whether or not Paul Wellstone was assassinated, for instance, although I considered his death a great loss.
Nevertheless, thanks for posting the link regarding the JFK Jr. plan crash. I took a glance at it just moments ago.
URL: www.angelfire.com/wy/1000/WasJFKJR.Murdered.html
The first lesson I had in ponerology was when I was ten, listening to the lyrics further on in the song, "But what's confusin you is just the nature of my game".
I heard it with two meanings and the 2nd way was the insight that if I've given a good faith effort to understand motives and I'm still confused, then I am most likely dealing with evil. It has served me well for the last 40 years. One of the few musical differences my husband and I have had is that I appreciate the Rolling Stones for this song while he considers them the Anti-Beatles ;- P
if I've given a good faith effort to understand motives and I'm still confused, then I am most likely dealing with evil
----------------------------
A truly powerful insight. If someone persists in being confusing, they're either crooked or psychotic.
Hughnanimous,
I do agree that Two Americas and readbetweenthe_lines can be difficult at times.
I haven't had the chance or the inclination or the need to closely evaluate your behavior, although I have gotten some sense of it.
So, I hope you will forgive me when I say that I haven't followed very closely the kerfuffle that readbetweenthe_lines, Two Americas and you have been involved in on this thread; and I don't intend on following or reviewing it now.
But my sympathy goes out to all three of you, even though I suspect that you are not all equally responsible for the conflict and misunderstanding.
Oh, well.
And Good Luck!
Hughnanimous wrote:
“There is a relevant saying for those seeking enlightenment :
‘When the student is ready the teacher appears.’
I like this saying.
I had a cousin who joined The Farm commune (www.thefarmcommunity.com) in Summertown, Tennessee sometime in the seventies. He’s no longer there. But I remember a saying attributed to Lao Tzu that was included in their “This is The Farm” booklet (it was called something like that).
(Lao Tzu paraphrased)
“I do not seek enlightenment, but I do not stay where enlightenment isn’t.”
My original interpretation of this saying was that seeking enlightenment and trying to identify what enlightenment is gets in the way of attaining enlightenment. But the absence of enlightenment is easier to reliably identify and leaving places where enlightenment isn’t gradually directs you to where enlightenment is. Dwelling where enlightenment is makes the attainment of enlightenment easier and life better.
Maybe there is a lesson somewhere there for the time we spend here on Common Dreams.
But after reading the saying you offered I can’t help but wonder whether Lao Tzu knew that by following this practice he was more likely to appear when and where students were ready.
:>)
Afterall, a certain amount of enlightenment makes the next lesson easier.
On the other hand the teacher in the saying you cited isn't necessarily another person at all, but could simply be the awakening appearance of a new understanding brought about an ready openness to present circumstances.
And that is how I most like to interpret the saying you cited.
Yeah. Thanks for mentioning this story. I do think I have read it somewhere before. It's a good one.
Gurus are bullshit.
Yeah, but friends and teachers are not.
I alway liked the title of the book, "If You Meet the Buddha on the Road Kill Him!" by Sheldon Kopp. But I never bought or read the book and don't intend to.
Turns out Kopp wrote another book with the title, "Even a Stone Can Be a Teacher: Learning and Growing from the Experiences of Everyday Life".
I like this title too, but I have no intention of buying or reading the book.
The saying that Hughnanimous cited I think is relevent here.
‘When the student is ready the teacher appears.’
As Sheldon Kopp says in the title of the second book "even a stone can be a teacher."
I agree. I'm fine with teachers and was officially one years ago.
It's guru worship that I detest. I'm much to free-spirited for that game.
Hughnanimous wrote:
However, this " kerfuffle " spans many screen names, articles, threads, and years.
My reply:
Wow, if this “kerfuffle” has been going on that long then it seems to me you need to change your approach somehow; and accept the fact that back and forth argument at least with certain folks here isn’t going to go anywhere you really want to go.
Hughnanimous,
Yeah, "trust but verify" is my favorite Ronald Reagan quote.
However, I personally would not trust Ronald Reagan if he were still alive and well.
No, I would definitely want to verify what Reagan was actually doing, at least if he were still in a position of power like the presidency.
My second favorite Ronald Reagan quote is “Trees kill.”
I remember reading in the news many years ago that Reagan had said that trees kill. Presumably Reagan said this upon learning that trees breathe in oxygen and breathe out carbon dioxide during the night and that emissions of carbon dioxide were the primary cause of global warming.
Of course, this fact misses the fact that like other plants trees produce more oxygen during the day than they consumed at night when during the day they breathe in carbon dioxide and breathe out oxygen. Plants, afterall, are responsible for maintaining the levels of oxygen in the atmosphere upon which animals depend for survival. Similarly, trees like other plants consume more carbon dioxide during the day than they produce at night.
My favorite part, however, is that climate activists began showing up wherever Reagan was speaking dressed as trees and holding signs that read, “Chop me down before I kill again.”
That's quite true, and funny too. . :>)
Hughnanimous wrote:
"I can only battle the evil that I know of, and I have a zero tolerance policy."
* * * * *
My Reply:
Yes, there are rare and unusual times when a zero tolerance policy may be appropriate, but I don't think posting comments here on Common Dreams is one of those times.
Sometimes the evil that we know of isn't the evil we should be worried about.
Sometimes it helps to simply let some things go.
Seems like figuring out the bigger picture and helping others and ourselves even though we don't always completely agree with others is more important.
Hughnanimous wrote:
"I have taken a non-violent and impersonal approach and will not be drawn to their despicable level, as that was my failure last time around.
Thanks for being present to what I have to say."
* * * * *
My Reply:
This seems like a sensible approach.
And, you are welcome.
Stop with the character assassination and personal attacks.
Two Americas,
I don't think Hughnanimous can assassinate your character.
You have control of your character here on Common Dreams; and you are best I can tell, for the most part, well respected here.