Worthiness Fatigue or Aversion to Excess Worthiness
I woke this morning with a feeling of "worthiness fatigue" (really more of an aversion to the worthiness excesses other people). There's alot of worthiness about just now, let's face it !
My feelings of worthiness fatigue are partly prompted by an item on yesterday's MSM News about "green fatigue". As a lifelong environmentalist, with occasional lapses, this type of fatigue isn't something from which I suffer. Quite the opposite in fact. Journeying by foot or bike generally energises me, as does not overheating my home or workplace (I often combine the two, which also saves on space/travel). Similarly, not buying loads of unnecessary stuff saves on rubbish...and, yes, I also re-use/cycle wherever possible. Doing a recent MSM survey of my household carbon emissions, I calculated these at 25% of the UK average (mainly due to my not using a car, or travelling by air in the past 6 years). However, none of this makes me feel particularly worthy, nor do I proselytise about my "greeness" to other people.
So it really annoys me, as happens all the time, when "worthies" from government sponsored agencies - which by and large I consider to be a waste of public money ! - suggest I take a greater interest in the domestic problems of other people. My own view is that the exponential growth in publicly funded "helping professions" since the middle part of the last century, and particulary under New Labour, has greatly contributed to the kind of social problems which are now recounted everyday in the media, by as the saying goes "feeding the fire". The kind of worthiness which comes with these "professional helpers" is something I particularly detest. This is not to say that I don't think real social problems exist. They do, but their causes - often economic - usually receive inadequate attention, particularly from the present government.
Therefore, excess worthiness, of the kind embodied by people like Tony Blair and Gordon, and of which politicians from other parties also have more than their fair share, should be taxed at the higher rate as far as I'm concerned, and the sooner the better !
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Monday, November 27, 2006
The Bank of Beirut - My Curious Dream
I am quite interested in dream interpretation, although, frankly, the meaning of most of my dreams remain impenetrable to me. Nevertheless, I can remember at least one occasion when the content of the dream was prophetic, if that's the right expression.
At the time of this prophetic dream, I was helping a charitable enterprise acquire some open land which the owner wanted to sell for housing. In the middle of this landholding, was a separate property owned by the local authority who were in the process of selling it to a private individual. Control of this council land was likely to be important to the wider aquisition. However, it seemed that the sale was "a done deal". However, one day I had a troubling dream which, upon interpretation, indicated that the deal was not yet done. The council later returned the potential buyer's cheque to him, and their site was integrated into the charitable enterprise : sort of, but that's another story...
Last night, I dreamt of the Bank of Beirut. I cannot consciously remember seeing a bank with this name before, but that's not to say I haven't done so. A bank of this name does exist, but why would I dream about it ?
In my dream, the Bank of Beirut occupies newly refurbished ground floor premises in an urban area which I associtate with a city quarter. The location is nondescript in being neither particularly modern, nor particularly historic. My reaction to seeing the bank is positive - I am possibly experiencing a lucid dream in which my conscious mind also comes into play - as it suggests some enterprise, albeit of a possibly risky nature. Nevertheless, I sense the possibility of some new and maybe exciting venture.
What could this be about ? At the time of writing, I'm not at all sure. The name of "Beirut" conjures up all sorts of conflicts and undertainties to my waking state. Yet I know that before the outbreak of the most recent "war", the city was regaining its status as the playground of the Middle East. However, notwithstanding the problems of the region, I still associate it with financial opportunity, all be this perhaps not risk free. It also has an exotic quality which, given my current base in Worcester, has some attraction just now.
Yet I'm no nearer to understanding my dream, or am I ? I bank with Halifax Bank of Scotland (or HBS) and on my other blog today (janetmackinnon.blogspot.com) I wrote about the prospect of Scottish independence. Worcester is strongly associated with the last battle of the English Civil War and for being a Royalist stronghold. Do I have underlying issues about the breakup of the UK perhaps, and both the opportunities and dangers this might hold ?
I am quite interested in dream interpretation, although, frankly, the meaning of most of my dreams remain impenetrable to me. Nevertheless, I can remember at least one occasion when the content of the dream was prophetic, if that's the right expression.
At the time of this prophetic dream, I was helping a charitable enterprise acquire some open land which the owner wanted to sell for housing. In the middle of this landholding, was a separate property owned by the local authority who were in the process of selling it to a private individual. Control of this council land was likely to be important to the wider aquisition. However, it seemed that the sale was "a done deal". However, one day I had a troubling dream which, upon interpretation, indicated that the deal was not yet done. The council later returned the potential buyer's cheque to him, and their site was integrated into the charitable enterprise : sort of, but that's another story...
Last night, I dreamt of the Bank of Beirut. I cannot consciously remember seeing a bank with this name before, but that's not to say I haven't done so. A bank of this name does exist, but why would I dream about it ?
In my dream, the Bank of Beirut occupies newly refurbished ground floor premises in an urban area which I associtate with a city quarter. The location is nondescript in being neither particularly modern, nor particularly historic. My reaction to seeing the bank is positive - I am possibly experiencing a lucid dream in which my conscious mind also comes into play - as it suggests some enterprise, albeit of a possibly risky nature. Nevertheless, I sense the possibility of some new and maybe exciting venture.
What could this be about ? At the time of writing, I'm not at all sure. The name of "Beirut" conjures up all sorts of conflicts and undertainties to my waking state. Yet I know that before the outbreak of the most recent "war", the city was regaining its status as the playground of the Middle East. However, notwithstanding the problems of the region, I still associate it with financial opportunity, all be this perhaps not risk free. It also has an exotic quality which, given my current base in Worcester, has some attraction just now.
Yet I'm no nearer to understanding my dream, or am I ? I bank with Halifax Bank of Scotland (or HBS) and on my other blog today (janetmackinnon.blogspot.com) I wrote about the prospect of Scottish independence. Worcester is strongly associated with the last battle of the English Civil War and for being a Royalist stronghold. Do I have underlying issues about the breakup of the UK perhaps, and both the opportunities and dangers this might hold ?
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
"Living In Truth" by Vaclav Havel
The English writer Tom Stoppard recently described former President of the Czech Republic, Vaclav Havel, as one of the greatest political philosophers of our time. Stoppard's comments reminded me of the strong impression that Havel's collection of essays, "Living in Truth", had made on my thinking when I read this work during a visit to Berlin in December 1989. For me, Central or Middle Europe has a particularly rich intellectual tradition of which Vaclav Havel is a contemporary manifestation. Unfortunately, I can think of no one in present day British politics who brings his depth of reflection to political thinking - although if there is someone out there, do let me know ! - and for this reason, I have chosen to use below an extensive quotation from one of the essays in Havel's "Living in Truth" :
"I am convinced that what is called 'dissent' in the Soviet bloc is a specific modern experience, the experience of life at the very ramparts of dehumanized power. As such, that 'dissent' has the opportunity and even the duty to reflect on this experience, to testify to it and to pass it on to those fortunate enough not to have to undergo it. Thus we too have a certain opportunity to help in some ways those who help us, to help them in our deeply shared interest, in the interest of mankind.
One such fundamental experience, that which I called 'anti-political politics', is possible and can be effective, even though by its very nature it cannot calculate its effect beforehand. That effect, to be sure, is of a wholly different nature from what the West considers political success. It is hidden, indirect, long term and hard to measure; often it exists only in the invisible realm of social consciousness, conscience and subconsciousness and it can be almost impossible to determine what value it assumed therein and to what extent, if any, it contributes to shaping social development. It is, however, becoming evident—and I think that is an experience of an essential and universal importance—that a single, seemingly powerless person who dares to cry out the word of truth and to stand behind it with all his person and all his life, ready to pay a high price, has, surprisingly, greater power, though formally disfranchised, than do thousands of anonymous voters. It is becoming evident that even in today's world, and especially on this exposed rampart where the wind blows most sharply, it is possible to oppose personal experience and the natural world to the 'innocent' power and to unmask its guilt, as the author of The Gulag Archipelago has done. It is becoming evident that truth and morality can provide a new starting point for politics and can, even today, have an undeniable political power. The warning voice of a single brave scientist, besieged somewhere in the provinces and terrorized by a goaded community, can be heard over continents and addresses the conscience of the mighty of this world more clearly than entire brigades of hired propagandists can, though speaking to themselves. It is becoming evident that wholly personal categories like good and evil still have their unambiguous content and, under certain circumstances, are capable of shaking the seemingly unshakeable power with all its army of soldiers, policemen and bureaucrats. It is becoming evident that politics by no means need remain the affair of professionals and that one simple electrician with his heart in the right place, honouring something that transcends him and free of fear, can influence the history of his nation.
Yes, 'anti-political politics' is possible. Politics 'from below'. Politics of man, not of the apparatus. Politics growing from the heart, not from a thesis. It is not an accident that this hopeful experience has to be lived just here, on this grim battlement. Under the 'rule of everydayness' we have to descend to the very bottom of a well before we can see the stars.
When Jan Patocka wrote about Charter 77, he used the term 'solidarity of the shaken'. He was thinking of those who dared resist impersonal power and to confront it with the only thing at their disposal, their own humanity. Does not the perspective of a better future depend on something like an international community of the shaken which, ignoring state boundaries, political systems, and power blocs, standing outside the high game of traditional politics, aspiring to no titles and appointments, will seek to make a real political force out of a phenomenon so ridiculed by the technicians of power—the phenomenon of human conscience? "
From the essay "Politics and Conscience" (1984)
The English writer Tom Stoppard recently described former President of the Czech Republic, Vaclav Havel, as one of the greatest political philosophers of our time. Stoppard's comments reminded me of the strong impression that Havel's collection of essays, "Living in Truth", had made on my thinking when I read this work during a visit to Berlin in December 1989. For me, Central or Middle Europe has a particularly rich intellectual tradition of which Vaclav Havel is a contemporary manifestation. Unfortunately, I can think of no one in present day British politics who brings his depth of reflection to political thinking - although if there is someone out there, do let me know ! - and for this reason, I have chosen to use below an extensive quotation from one of the essays in Havel's "Living in Truth" :
"I am convinced that what is called 'dissent' in the Soviet bloc is a specific modern experience, the experience of life at the very ramparts of dehumanized power. As such, that 'dissent' has the opportunity and even the duty to reflect on this experience, to testify to it and to pass it on to those fortunate enough not to have to undergo it. Thus we too have a certain opportunity to help in some ways those who help us, to help them in our deeply shared interest, in the interest of mankind.
One such fundamental experience, that which I called 'anti-political politics', is possible and can be effective, even though by its very nature it cannot calculate its effect beforehand. That effect, to be sure, is of a wholly different nature from what the West considers political success. It is hidden, indirect, long term and hard to measure; often it exists only in the invisible realm of social consciousness, conscience and subconsciousness and it can be almost impossible to determine what value it assumed therein and to what extent, if any, it contributes to shaping social development. It is, however, becoming evident—and I think that is an experience of an essential and universal importance—that a single, seemingly powerless person who dares to cry out the word of truth and to stand behind it with all his person and all his life, ready to pay a high price, has, surprisingly, greater power, though formally disfranchised, than do thousands of anonymous voters. It is becoming evident that even in today's world, and especially on this exposed rampart where the wind blows most sharply, it is possible to oppose personal experience and the natural world to the 'innocent' power and to unmask its guilt, as the author of The Gulag Archipelago has done. It is becoming evident that truth and morality can provide a new starting point for politics and can, even today, have an undeniable political power. The warning voice of a single brave scientist, besieged somewhere in the provinces and terrorized by a goaded community, can be heard over continents and addresses the conscience of the mighty of this world more clearly than entire brigades of hired propagandists can, though speaking to themselves. It is becoming evident that wholly personal categories like good and evil still have their unambiguous content and, under certain circumstances, are capable of shaking the seemingly unshakeable power with all its army of soldiers, policemen and bureaucrats. It is becoming evident that politics by no means need remain the affair of professionals and that one simple electrician with his heart in the right place, honouring something that transcends him and free of fear, can influence the history of his nation.
Yes, 'anti-political politics' is possible. Politics 'from below'. Politics of man, not of the apparatus. Politics growing from the heart, not from a thesis. It is not an accident that this hopeful experience has to be lived just here, on this grim battlement. Under the 'rule of everydayness' we have to descend to the very bottom of a well before we can see the stars.
When Jan Patocka wrote about Charter 77, he used the term 'solidarity of the shaken'. He was thinking of those who dared resist impersonal power and to confront it with the only thing at their disposal, their own humanity. Does not the perspective of a better future depend on something like an international community of the shaken which, ignoring state boundaries, political systems, and power blocs, standing outside the high game of traditional politics, aspiring to no titles and appointments, will seek to make a real political force out of a phenomenon so ridiculed by the technicians of power—the phenomenon of human conscience? "
From the essay "Politics and Conscience" (1984)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)