Aaron

Depends on what you classify as the ills of humanity. Once you tell me what those are, then I can honestly answer this question. Aaron

Hello people, I was wondering if other people feel it might be a good idea to have a subforum devoted to the Tao Teh Ching or even the philisophical aspect of Taoism? I feel it might make it easier to locate those threads that have to do with Taoism on a philisophical level. Aaron

Hello Serene, My two cents in regards to this... first Taoism teaches us to not value anything, to understand that everything we need is here with us, and that the way of man is to help mankind (see Chapter 81). As far as I can tell from my own experiences in meditating this is right on the money. If I value my computer and it is taken from me then I have lost something, but if I don't value it and it is taken from me, I wont even notice. It's as simple as that. Now these days I'm not a Taoist (or anything else for that matter), but what I can tell you is that when one can put others before themselves, then they find true happiness in their life. This can be seen in groups such as AA and also in charities where people help the needy. There is something very primal that is touched when one acts selflessly. It brings one out of one's self and allows them insight into the nature of mankind. Anyways, I just thought I'd throw that out there. Also, if I was a ruler the last religion in the world I'd want my followers to practice is Buddhism, that's one of the reasons it was so heavily repressed by communist regimes. Buddhism is much more dangerous to a ruler than Taoism is. Aaron

I'll agree that change for a little while is good, but my point has been what we can do to help invoke lasting change. I'm not saying that the protesters are wrong, simply that many are misguided and unaware of what the real problems are. Good luck, I really am rooting for you, despite what you might think. Aaron edit- Actually my main worry these days is that the protesters may be harmed eventually, so keep yourself safe out there and keep your kids home.

Well Marblehead's right there's no need for a moderator for the subforum really. In reality I had to depend on Apech to help me figure out how to moderate in the first place and I can count the number of things I actually had to moderate on one hand in nearly 11 months. I really don't need a title or power to moderate properly, sometimes a reminder of what the right action is or simply doing what's right is enough. Aaron Edit- Also the actions that led up to my decision is also part of the reason why I don't think I should continue to be a moderator. I let my own personal feelings about someone else effect how I interacted with them and in the end I directly insulted that person. Whether or not I believed they had it coming doesn't matter in the end, but rather whether or not I was practicing the policies I was supposed to uphold as a moderator. Since I wasn't I couldn't in good conscience continue to be a moderator.

I posted Chapter 81 in the Tao Teh Ching Subforum and I couldn't help but think that maybe it applied to some of the things that are being discussed here, so if you get a chance take a look at it and tell me what you think. You can also view a few translations over here. Aaron

I'm bumping this post because I wanted to let everyone know that the last chapter of the Tao Teh Ching chapter study, chapter 81, has been posted in the Tao Teh Ching subforum. I had the great pleasure of being one of the founding members of that forum and today it's hard for me to imagine the Tao Bums website without it. I hope everyone has a chance to stop in and take a look at some of the amazing discussions that have taken place there. I also want to thank all those people that helped out with the forum, in particular Marblehead and Apech, whom without, I doubt it would've run as smoothly as it has. I also want to thank Sean who created it almost as quickly as we asked for it. Thanks again Sean you really came through for us. There are a lot of great people on this website and I know many of them visit the Tao Teh Ching subforum. It's because of you people that the subforum was such a wonderful place to visit (and I know will be in the future). With a happy heart, Aaron

Hello Seth, I understand that you might not see things the same way that I do and that's fine, but let me ask you this, when you say lower class who are you talking about? Are you talking about the mother who works two jobs to support her children, so she doesn't have time to go to a movement? Are you talking about the homeless man who has no place to live and no money and depends on the handouts of strangers and charities to exist? Are you talking about the family that can't afford to take their child to the doctor when they are sick? I'm not sure what you are considering lower class. When I talk about the lower class I'm talking about the people that suffer the most from the economic yoke of capitalism as we know it today. In that light none of the reforms that you're talking about are really going to change life for them. When I say that no lasting change will come from these demonstrations it's because I understand the root of desire and the root of capitalism and that you cannot have real economic change so long as you have a capitalist economy that allows others to take advantage of the lower (and middle) class. The only real change that will occur that will end poverty and suffering for the majority of the people of this world is when we cease to use the same economic and socioeconomic values as a means for determining our future wellbeing. The Zeitgest Movement is on the right page, but even they have some room for improvement. We are all talking about "the world as it is" and how we need to "look at realistic changes in our modern economy" without seeing that the modern economy is the cause of all the problems in the first place. So when I say stop valuing what the rich value and stop valuing what you have been taught to value what I am also saying is that we need to change our value system, both internally and externally. We look at technology as the salvation of mankind, thinking that these modern conveniences have eased our suffering, but in reality we are living in a world that is suffering from overpopulation, ecological devastation, and moral bankruptcy, in large part because of the technological advancements that were meant to make life easier. In fact technology is the noose around our children's necks. They've been ingrained and taught to depend on facebook, Ipads, and laptops to survive, when many don't even know how to use a mechanical can opener. So long as we continue to allow corporations to shape the social values of our youth through media and goods, then we will never have a lasting change. Lasting change will only come when we realize the differences between needs and wants and adjust our lifestyles accordingly. You see those evils you talked about earlier in this thread, obesity being among them, are all a result of our slow decline into corporate capitalism. It's been going on for over 50 years now, perhaps longer. The corporations don't care about our children or their wellbeing, they care about the money they can earn off of them. Lasting change will not come from demonstrations but from ceasing to be a part of a morally bankrupt system that exploits the world and it's people. It starts by simply not buying things you don't need. It starts by sharing the wealth you do have. It starts by not shouting at the corporations to stop, but talking to your friends and neighbors about the need for change and telling them what you're doing to help with that change. This Christmas, don't buy your kids an x-box, laptop, i-pod, or any of the other fancy gizmos they've been taught they need, but rather take them out and show them the poor and destitute, ensure that they understand the differences between needs and wants and encourage them to be compassionate to those who suffer. And while you're at it, turn off the television, take away their cellphones, and teach them that they don't need to be in constant contact with everyone instantly, that silence is golden, that absence does make the heart grow fonder. Teach them the difference between a facebook friend and a real friend, that a status online has no bearing on the reality of their situation. Anyways I can rant about this all day, but it doesn't change a thing. I have taken much of this to heart. I stopped playing video games, stopped buying vanity products and I've begun to appreciate the value of human companionship and simply eating a meal and appreciating the world around me. With that said, I wish you and the OWS people success, but I also hope that somewhere along the line people wake up and realize that what they're asking for isn't just not enough, but in the end meaningless. You can't fix a system that's already fixed. Aaron

Humans adapt and change constantly, that's one of the great things about us. If you only take into account the history that we have on record, then it's easy to believe that the last 12,000 years of recorded history are the summation of our existence, but the fact of the matter is that we have been on this earth for much much longer than that. Now even taking into consideration what we know regarding recorded history, what I do know is that human's have the capacity for change and that those groups that live peacefully are normally the groups that share the same ideals and beliefs. With that in mind it seems only logical that having a society where those people who share the same ideals and beliefs can congregate and live together seems to be the best solution. I understand your doubts regarding people changing of their own free will, but if I've learned anything from my years of living on this world it's that suffering brings change. In this time of suffering, if people begin to share their own beliefs, change the way they behave to others, and resist those aspects of government that they know are wrong, then change will happen. This requires no violence, only a devotion to something greater than one's self. It seems idealistic, and to the pessimist even more so, but what I can assure you is that there will be change, one way or the other, it's those people who rise above and enact change in a peaceful manner, those who bring others to change, not by force of arms, but by the force of their spirit and hearts, that will bring about a lasting change. We need to change the way we believe and behave. We need to rise above the indifference and intolerance and devote ourselves to changing the world for the better. If you don't think we need change, then that's fine, but I would urge you not to give up on mankind simply because it doesn't seem probable. Aaron

I thought it would be polite to inform everyone that I have asked to be removed as the subforum moderator. I also wanted to take the time to thank those people that have helped make the subforum such a great place to visit. I appreciate everyone's insight and comments and I hope that it can continue to grow. About a year ago, a small group of us started up this forum with doubts as to whether or not it would ever get anywhere, obviously it did. I think this would be a great time to thank those people especially, you know who you are. Aaron

Would you feel better if I said the republican's tanked the economy? Just kidding. I think the government's lack of response to a growing problem tanked the economy. Really I don't want to debate that so much, what I feel the important topic is, isn't what's happened in the past, but what are we going to do to make a brighter future. I for one think the only way we will ever have a lasting future is to change ourselves and the way we behave. We need to stop doing what we think is wrong, stop supporting what we think is wrong, including financially supporting those things and begin to stand up for what we believe in, regardless of the consequences. I know that sounds dramatic, but in reality it will be the only way for change to actually occur. Aaron

Hello Blasto, Paragraph deleted per Moderator's "request". First, nothing you've said even remotely infers that I was judging these people's spirituality. Taoism on many levels has nothing to do with spirituality, but rather making practical decisions. If you are going to rebuke me for mentioning Lao Tzu, at least have the decency to mention something that actually proves I'm wrong rather than wag your finger at me like some old woman in an upstairs window upset because the children were making to much noise while they were playing (see if you had used that analogy to describe me, that would've been humorous and actually been adequate, but alas you can't diminish yourself enough to talk in plain language, because of that massive graduate school education you've received). To be honest I have a great deal of contempt for the spirit that moves the Wall Street gang, if only because it is motivated by selfishness. I know you say, "no it isn't, they want to get these people in line so everyone can have a better life", but the fact of the matter is that gaming the market doesn't effect the poor, only those with money to lose. So what we have here, really, is just what I've said, a bunch of middle class people who're finally really feeling what it is like to go without finally rising up to rebel in the only way they know how, to sit in front of the people they think have robbed them and yell at them to give them back their ball. Now that is meant to be condescending (towards the protesters), because this act does not deserve a compassionate response, no more than someone smacking a child. The fact of the matter is that there were a large number of american's suffering long before Bush tanked the economy, but no one cared because they were in the minority. If there is any change, that change will be simply that the middle class will be expunged or they will return to their former status. Sadly I believe it will be the former. The United States of American and the rest of the Western world are looking at becoming third world nations within the next 20-30 years. When that happens there will be no social programs and democracy will essentially be decided by who has the most money. Now the fact of the matter is that this model of society is not going to change by force, the only way true lasting change will occur is if there is a change in the way people think, that requires that people share their experience, live lives worth emulating and become devoted to enacting a change. When that occurs I am certain that in a relatively short period of time those people will have a tremendous impact on the world. Edited- The moderation team wanted me to remove this insult. Ironically I've seen Blasto/Encephalon/whatever name he's going under these days say much worse, but it was an insult,<Bleeped per moderator request>. I'm putting Blasto back on ignore. Buddy you just aren't worth my time, literally. Aaron

Hello Blasto, I could've said they were gurus and I think you would've still had a problem. To clarify your misleading statement, I never once called them spiritual infants, nor did I insinuate there is such a thing, rather I said that what they were doing would not result in any long term lasting change. I also stated that many weren't even aware of what they were protesting. My main point was (and is) that the only lasting change comes from someone willingly changing, that any other change is only short term, because the person or people involved will only remain "changed" for so long as they are forced to change. The protesters have every right to protest and I am quite happy they've chosen to have a peaceful protest, but what they are doing is not actually defined as civil disobedience, because they will go home and pay their taxes and continue to invest and do all the things they seem to have a problem with. Just wanted to clarify that point. In closing, I can see that you are making an effort to change your ways in regards to conversing with other. There is still room for improvement, but I do see you are trying, so thanks. I hope life is treating you well. Aaron edit- Keep in mind that the comment I made that led to this conversation actually had very little to do with the protest on Wall St and more to do with my own views on what it would take for change to actually occur.

Hello Serene Blue, Thank you for coming to my defense. I think many people have this idea that anarchism means that there are no rules or morality or any kind of policing of people at all, but anyone that lives in the real world obviously understands that there will always be certain people who don't fit into a select society, whether it be a rapist, pedophile, or sociopaths. In fact when people think of anarchists, more often than not, what springs to mind is a sociopath who wants a world where he can be free to exact his sociopathology on others, but that's not true at all. Most Anarchists that I've met over the years abhor violence and if they advocate the use of violence, more often than not, it's because they see no other way to bring about freedom. I don't see it that way, nor have I ever seen it this way. From my experience in meditation and also listening to what other wise men have said, I have come to believe that the only lasting change that evolves is a change of the heart that occurs willingly and gladly. People do not change by force, it merely pacifies them for a time and when they feel they can act again, they do just that. So in my mind a true revolution does not come from changing others, but changing the way we behave and interact with others in a way that encourages them to change. I am not a complete pacifist mind you, I do not advocate sitting still while an army mows down your family, but I do advocate behaving as peacefully as one can. Treat each other with kindness and compassion. You need not love someone to be kind to them, you merely have to behave in a way that benefits them and you. That is the point of compassion that confused me for some time but is now becoming very clear to me. In regards to government, society is so large now that there seems to be little chance that we can survive without some form of government to manage things, but in my view, if there is any kind of government at all it's purpose is not to enforce and create laws or oppress people for personal gain, but rather to ensure that people are free to live their life the way they choose to live it. Democracy is fine and dandy if it works, but the problem is that it easily corruptible by those who gain influence within it. A true government should have no held positions, no paid positions, it should be a voluntary position that one does while still earning their own income. One should have no special benefits for a government position, no pay, parking spot, or private office. There should be no taxes or social programs, because these are used as ways to control the people that use them, rather people should help others as they see fit. Private groups would provide support for the hungry and housing for the homeless. I have no doubt that this help would arise and that there would be no need for any kind of intervention to provide these services in a true Anarchist community. A community should be able to choose its own governance, even if that community chooses specific laws that might be oppressive in another's view. The key here is that these laws only pertain to that community and not all communities. Government's purpose would be to ensure that each community is free to behave as they choose and no one is forced to stay within a community if they choose not to. My only reason for advocating a governing body at all is because I understand that with the varied religions that exist there would inevitably be groups that would desire to exert influence on others and something needs to be put in place to check that influence. There would be no requirement to share one's wealth with others, rather the basis would be that people would be allowed to live as they choose. There would still be wealthy and poor, the difference is that no one would be required to be wealthy or poor, that if one society was oppressive then people from that society could freely leave and join another. How is this different from the world we live in one might ask? Well simply put, there is no free society on the face of the earth right now. Every society that we live in places their own moral and economic agenda before the welfare of its people. In society today the wealthy do have absolute control over the poor and in an Anarchist society this wouldn't happen, because it could not happen unless the majority agreed. There would be no required laws that said people would work the fields without having enough to eat or that people could not marry because they were of different sexes or that a man could not refuse the religion of their father without fear of death. There would be no military or police that's purpose was to oppress people and define how they behave. There would be options for all of this. The only thing the government would do is ensure that people retained their freedoms. In my own perfect society there would be no laws at all except simply that one could not harm another person, other than that, each person should be able to do whatever they want. If you choose to smoke crack, then smoke crack. If you choose to walk around in your underwear, then walk around in your underwear. So long as you aren't harming anyone else, then so be it. Everyone should be able to be who they want to be without someone dictating what that should be. Children would not be taught to be faithful to their government, because there would be no government, but rather faithful to themselves. They would be taught to respect themselves and each other and the value of freedom. They would be taught the past and the reasons why we needed to change the way lived. I know it sounds strange, but I know that it is the basis for which mankind is meant to exist. Man was never meant to be yoked and bowed, rather it was meant to express itself and live as it chooses to live. Anyways, I hope everyone is having a good night. I have an chalezium on my right eyelid right now, so I'm trying to deal with that and I probably wont be on much over the course of the next few days. Aaron

My brother posted while I was at work... sorry about that. Disregard what was here. Aaron

I think the same could be said for most Western countries, including Australia, England, Germany, and the list goes on. Obesity in children is prevalent throughout the western world as well. I think it's important that we take notice of these things, but we shouldn't allow it to cloud our judgement in regards to our own countries. I personally like America, but I'm not ignorant of its dark side. The three strikes your out law is crazy, as is the minimum sentencing. My neighbors boy went to prison for 10 years when he was eighteen because he was with some kids who broke into a house, one of them possessed a handgun. The judge stated his hands were tied, that the boy didn't deserve this sentence, but there was nothing he could do. His mother visited him the other day and he's got tattoos and crap all over his body. He's in a gang in jail and pretty much institutionalized, so this kid who had a bright future before that night, is now pretty much looking at a life behind bars. The sad thing is that, aside from a governor's pardon, which wont happen, there's nothing that can be done. And for this story there are literally thousands more. So in regards to the propaganda machine, I'm right there with you guys, just the propaganda seems to be worldwide these days. Aaron

Hello Serene Blue, You last post was quite lengthy, so I'm not going to address everything you talked about, but rather the parts I felt might have been off the mark. The first thing I wanted to clarify is what Anarchism actually is... Now Anarchism does not say that there is no administration, but rather that it is as minimal as possible. Obviously some things need to managed, people need to be protected, etc. So Anarchism isn't about letting criminals wander the street and behave indiscriminately, it's about people being able to live as they want to live, so long as it follows the rules of that specific society. Now many people think of Anarchism and they immediately get this idea of people running around with guns trying to start chaos, but that's not what it's about, it's not even about democracy, rather it's about freedom, unadulterated freedom. Now that I've got that out of the way, let me address the Taoist view. Now I haven't read the Tao Teh Ching in awhile, but from memory I believe that there are several passages that would lend themselves to my argument, in particular the passages that talk about the Sage leading people without them even knowing, how a person can interact with others in a way that is unobtrusive or invasive. In fact (and feel free to point out the passages from the Tao Teh Ching that say differently,) I don't remember one passage encouraging people to riot, rather it says, this is what happens when the people are unhappy and a wise ruler should take notice. Finally, I don't know if I want to keep this up, so this is probably my last post regarding this matter. I've said my peace, nothing else really needs to be said. All I'm doing is beating a dead horse right now. I'm going to let the horse be and just head off to bed. I hope that you are doing well. Aaron

Hello Serene Blue, I see you feel very strongly about this topic, in that respect I really don't want to argue with you about it, because you have every right to feel the way you do. First, I'm not discouraging people from protesting, what I'm doing is expressing my own experience and knowledge regarding this protests. Much of it has to do with Thoreau, but it also has to do with a general understanding of Taoism (not Buddhism mind you). First thing to ask yourself, would Lao Tzu recommend that people form large groups and disturb the peace of those around them, in order to satisfy their own desires? If not, what would he recommend? Did Lao Tzu believe that we had the ability to change people or only our own actions? Did he encourage us to actively try to influence people, or did he recommend we use our actions (rather than words) to influence others? I find it quite funny that I am using Taoist philosophy as the basis for many of these ideas, yet you seem to want to relate them to Buddhism and Anarchism, because they contradict your own philosophies. First Anarchism is most simply defined as allowing people to behave as they want to behave without government interference (in fact there should be no government or at best the minimum government required to maintain these freedoms). In other words a society chooses how they wish to conduct themselves and those people within that society decide whether they wish to be a part of it or not. If not then they move on. Majority decides right, the minority moves on til they find a place where they can survive as a majority. It seems cruel, but in reality it allows people to live life as they choose to live it, rather than have it dictated to them by others. I would also say that it's not Marblehead that has a problem with the "Buddhists" but you, you're just trying to shift your own negative comments onto someone else. That's alright too, but I would recommend that it's always best to accept responsibility for your own opinions. Now in regards to worrying about things you have no control over... that is not exclusively a Buddhist concept, in fact it's a Christian concept, a Taoist concept, a Hindu Concept... do I need to go on? The idea that we worry about something that we cannot change will only cause us to suffer. I am not saying don't worry about something you can change, I am saying if a wall is tumbling and you cannot stop it from tumbling, then get out of the way and let it tumble. Don't fret over the wall coming down, wasting days worrying about when it will happen, clear crap out and let it tumble. Simple as that, no fess, no muss. Now in this light, if you find a way to change people, then please let me know, there are a few I'd love to change now. If you find a way to have a revolution and lay down your arms afterwards (literally and metaphorically) without having those people you rose up against taking back the power after you've done this, (assuming you didn't just kill all of them), then let me know that too. The problem is that there are realities in the world that you are not addressing. Churchill said something to the effect that anyone under 27 that isn't a socialist has no heart, anyone over 27 that is, has no brain. When I was young I was a socialist, but now I'm not. It's not because I read that quote and decided I didn't want to be stupid, it was simply that I woke up to the reality of the world. Can we have real change in these modern times? YES! Can we do it through rhetoric and demonstration? NO! Real change comes through changing the way we behave and react to others. It starts with us and if that change is good and right, then others will see it as such and decide to change as well. It's really this simple. Lao Tzu said it was that simple. Buddha Said it was that simple and Jesus said it was that simple. Now Stalin, Mao, Bush, and numerous other politicians and Wall Street groupies camped out on sidewalks will tell you differently, but the simple thing that none of these people understand is that you can't change people, only terrorize people into doing what you want them to do. So choose which path you want to use to institute change, terror or compassion, and see which one leads to lasting change. Aaron

Hello Ralis, I can't remember any particular instance, historically, when a compassionate revolution took place. As far as the trickle down economics BS, do I need to refer you to the picture and all the corporate products people are using? Regardless of where they come from, they are being used. What most people fail to understand is that these days the economy is a global economy, rather than a national economy. Of course I'm not a capitalist or socialist at heart, but an anarchist. This may not make much sense to many out there, but if you know what anarchism is really about, then peaceful change will not be so strange to you. Aaron

Thank you Zanshin. I originally posted "We can only hope", but then I remembered that hope has nothing to do with this. Things change of their own accord. We can choose to take part of that change, to influence it through our own actions or we can allow things to happen without our interference. Many think that inaction is the natural way, but what I have begun to understand more clearly is that our actions are every bit as natural as the actions of the world, when they are done within the context of compassion. So what I "hope for" is that I will continue to be able to act in a compassionate way, to understand compassion with clarity, and help those who suffer in every way possible. If I do these things I believe that regardless of what happens, my life will be satisfactory. Aaron

Hello Serene, It's quite simple really, the dichotomy that is. I know that real change involves allowing people to change on their own accord. As I said before if you force someone to change, once you stop forcing them, they will revert back to their original state. For me the options are simple, act in a way that spreads compassion and understanding to others in a peaceful and compassionate way or allow our base desires to overwhelm us and take out our frustrations on others, either passively or aggressively. In the end the lasting peace will come from a willingness to do what's right, regardless of the risk, but in doing what's right cause no harm. When I say they have absolutely no idea what they're fighting, that stems from an understanding of capitalism ingrained in me by my professor in college. Simply stated, the majority of the wealth is owned by 1-3% of the population, but that wealth helps to support the 97-99% and provide them with the goods and services they desire. With that said, to return to the protests, the reason these protests will fail is simply because there are not enough people supporting them. In the case of India and Gandhi, nearly everyone in the country supported Gandhi's movement. Millions upon millions of people were involved. A revolution of any kind rarely succeeds unless the popular support of the people are behind it and unfortunately the majority of the people are absolutely ignorant regarding what's happening here. As an aside I've been getting a very, "this is the end of the world" type of vibe from the forum as of late and I have a hard time understanding where it's coming from. I really hope it passes, because people are allowing themselves to worry about something that they have absolutely no control over. Live your lives to the best of your ability. Worry about those things you can change, which in most cases revolves around those things you can change about yourself. When you change the way you think about the world, then you have experienced a real revolution. IMO of course. Aaron

First comparing what these predominately middle class disfranchised kids are doing with what Gandhi did, is ludicrous. They are complaining about being poor, when tonight they'll go home to their apartments or parent's home, open up the gallon of milk they or their parents got from the supermarket, sit on the couch with their bag of potato chips and lament over their suffering, all the while their air conditioners will be keeping them nice and cool. They are not suffering, that is the irony. What they are complaining about is trite. They don't even realize that the 99% of the wealth they complain about not having is providing for their comfortable lifestyle. What do they want? A yacht in every driveway? A new blender for smoothies in every kitchen? This is my problem with the wall street gang, it's not that they're not trying to do something good, it's just they have absolutely no real idea of what they're arguing against. It's like the socialists who fought to free russia only to realize that they were better off without Stalin. When they do get rid of the rich 1% who will get all their wealth and who decides this? The problem is not the 1%, that is my point. The problem is that people want what they do not need, are not happy when they have what they need, and have absolutely no idea what poverty really is (the middle class kids on wall street I mean). They will go home eventually or be forced to go home. No change will occur and in a year we might have a memorial march, but believe me, nothing will come of this, because the people protesting don't even know what they're protesting against. Again you can try and skew my words and say I have no idea what Gandhi was about, but I studied Gandhi in school in an academic capacity and I have watched the movie and I know that Gandhi himself would never consider himself to be an activist in the sense that the middle class hippie kids today think of it, but rather a pacifist. He believed completely in the notion of passive resistance, understanding that violence in actions and words can only cause harm. I can't remember him speaking ill of anyone, instead he actively promoted peaceful action, not resistance. The kids on wall street are out for blood, not change. If they did succeed the only thing that would happen is the old guard would be replaced with a new guard. There will be no change until we change our value system and stop valuing things that have no value. We do not need cars. We do not need televisions. We do not need computers (believe me I'm aware of the irony). We do not need $100 sneakers. We need enough food to nourish us. We need clothes to keep us warm. We need a safe place to sleep. If we can be happy with what we need and stop placing value on those things we don't, then there will be nothing on the face of this earth that can stop us from living peacefully together. Now with that said, there's nothing wrong with having a car, television, computer, etc. rather it is understanding that they are not needed and being willing to give those things up if it means other will have a better life because of it. That is what I'm talking about, not valuing things that we were raised to value, and being willing to spend the 1% of the wealth we do have to help those who need it, rather than grab at the 99% we don't have. If we want change, it wont come from shouting about something everyone already knows (corporations rule the world, oh my what a shocker) rather it comes from taking PEACEFUL action to help those around us. Change begins within each of us, not a handful of kids camping out on the sidewalk. If you hope those kids are going to change the world, let me be the first to tell you, that aint happening, but we do have the opportunity to enact change, but only if we're willing to start with ourselves. My question is this, if they do end up getting the 1%ers wealth, are they going to share it with the world or just their fellow Americans? Aaron

Hello Seth, I didn't miss your point, I just didn't agree with it. Gandhi would have no problem with peaceful protest, he was all for that, but the key thing was peace, not shouting "be gone white devil" or "the 1% are evil" but rather "we deserve to be treated fairly". Also before you cut and paste a list of quotes, try to be aware of what the quotes pertain to. The quote "a man who was completely innocent, offered himself as a sacrifice for the good of others, including his enemies, and became the ransom of the world. It was a perfect act..." was referring to Jesus. Anyways... I'm not going to argue, so you can believe what you want, but I think that if I do what I know is right, teach my children to do the same, then I will do more good than I ever could by telling other people how they're wrong. Lets see how much peace, prosperity, and lasting change comes from this sit in. I say it again, if you want lasting change, change yourself and help your fellow man, asking for nothing in return, when you can do that, then you have begun a true revolution. Or you can shake your fist at the sky and shout "shame on you" and see where that gets you. And for the brutal truth, what we have on Wall Street is the product of the middle class, finally being forced to the underclass, making a stand to become the middle class again. You offer all those people a million dollars to go home, 99% will leave and 1% will stay. The only difference between the 1%ers and the protesters is that the 1% have what the protesters want. True change will not come about from socialism, but rather from a complete change in our way of thinking... How do you stop the thieves? By not valuing the things they steal. Aaron edit- I am educated regarding Gandhi, that's why I know he'd never call himself an activist, but rather a pacifist... there is a distinction that apparently your are missing.

Fighting begets fighting. Go to the castle and drag out the king and burn him at the stake, then ask yourself how you are better than the king? Change does not come through fighting but rather understanding the capacity for compassion within each of us and acting compassionately. Rather than spend hundreds of dollars so you can go to New York to demonstrate on wall street, spend that money helping someone eat. No it isn't flashy, but who has helped more people, the man holding a sign screaming "injustice" or the man who handed a sandwich out to the homeless? In a month if there is no one left protesting on wall street, there will still be hungry people. No matter what happens there will always be hungry people. We can't change that, but what we can change is our attitude about that. When we stop valuing what others value, then nothing can be stolen from us. When we teach our children that they don't need an X-Box 360, but rather food, clothes, and a safe place to sleep, then there will be a lot less X-Boxes being bought. Change, true change, does not occur through revolution, rather it occurs through one's treatment of another person. Look at Egypt and look at Libya in a few months and what you'll see is that those who rise to power through conflict do not give up the power they gain, but those who do not rise at all, those are the people that will truly have lasting change. Who is more respected in the world Gandhi or Che Guevara? Both were martyrs, both had the same intentions, but took different paths to achieve those intentions, one through peace and one through revolution. As soon as one picks up arms to change the world, then one should be aware that they can never lay those arms down without fear that their enemies will rise up against them, but if one enacts change through peace, then that will be a lasting change. Stop shouting "change your ways" and instead change your ways, that seems to be the simple truth that is escaping everyone these days. Of course if you have the opportunity to buy a 52" flat screen television or feed a hundred hungry children, which will you do with your money? If you honestly answer this question, then you will begin to see where you need to change yourself. Aaron edit- And just to set the record straight, Gandhi wasn't an activist at all, he was a pacifist.

Here's synchronicity for you. I got a few days of work and on the first day came down with the flu. I still worked, but I was very sick. Something I noticed is that sickness doesn't seem to hit me as hard these days, I got a fever and chills, which used to keep me in bed for days, but I worked, came home, fed my cats, swept my kitchen floor and lived my life. What I have learned is that suffering, even physical suffering, is as bad as it is, but we are the ones that choose how we behave while we suffer. Can I stop getting sick or hungry or tired, no, but I can choose how I react to those things. I suffer much less these days and it's not because I am physically stronger, but rather because I understand the nature of suffering. It is transient, even if it is terminal. I can choose to focus on suffering or living and I choose the latter. Aaron