Is love the answer?

Is love the answer?

Here is an example of why I get so frustrated with TED, here is Anneloes Smitsman’s talk. She provides love as a solution, and to be fair to her her school project in which she tries to educate her students to be stewards of the earth – of sustainability – sounds great.

I came across her before with her experience with the Aboriginal Elder who talked of his own love and how their culture fosters that love through the feminine. Again love as a solution – excellent.

Then she offers Bhutan - a sustainable mountain Buddhist country of 77,000 people, love as a solution. Terrific. Of course you have to pay to get in to Bhutan!!!

All the time I am listening to this I get more frustrated. What about the love of indigenous people? Why hasn’t that changed the world? What about the hippy generation of love that I grew up with? Has that changed the world?

And then I think about all the brick walls I have met, all the consumers, all the MAWPs, all the conditioned. In my short lifetime I look at how much worse it has got, yet throughout my life I have heard people talking of love, of people using their love for change, of people growing up and finding some love on the path only for some to turn to drink or whatever.

And then I think of how she started her talk in which she spoke of 1% owning more than 99%, and yet apart from mentioning this she left it alone. Was this a TED prerequisite?

Since the time of Buddha and before, love has been known as the answer. Why is it that when I discuss with the MAWPs that love and compassion is the answer, and that is what people should do they become alienated. They then agree and do nothing – saying they can’t, Chomsky’s apathy.

I wish Anneloes all the luck in the world with her love but then I ask “will she be promoting this love all her life?” I hope so. The 1% have no problem with her small project in Mauritius. The 1% have no problems with love communes, go for it. Then there will be a 66-year-old Anneloes listening to another young thing propounding love because they have found a small-scale project that works. Will she then be frustrated when some young thing spouts love as if it’s the first time?

Will she look at Greta Thunberg with admiration, and then watch as young people complain about plastic bags when all her life the green movement have been warning about global catastrophe; all of this while the greed of the Chomsky-indescribable 1% continues to manipulate, control and cause devastation. Will Anneloes then be happy just talking about love without talking about these evil people who are destroying Gaia so they can have more zeroes in a bank account? Will she be happy not to be angry about ostentatious exploiters being allowed to pay for homes like this sicko? Will she be content to talk only of love when the world thinks of this sicko with envy rather than seeing that his distance from love is the source of the problems?

Love and compassion are of course the answers, they are the only answers. Knowing that love and compassion come from Gaia is the answer, and that we must connect with Gaia is the same answer. But the fault does not lie in us for not loving, it lies in the 1%-satrapy which conditions us not to love. When you ask people to love, don’t place the onus on their failure to love – their lack of vision in seeing themselves as crunched-up paper instead of an opened blank slate. Tell them that the 1% are frightened of their love, that their love is being suppressed by conditioning, that the 1% know love can solve humanity’s problems but that they are using their power and influence by preventing people from loving. The 1% have trained us to be crunched-up paper – it is their conditioning that we are like that. They cannot love so we cannot love as well

But despite that conditioning some people escape being scrunched. They love. They share their love. They say love is the answer, and instruments of the 1% knock them down, yet they get up and say love is the answer. Anneloes, that is when your message of love can be understood. Because people have rage (Pankaj Mishra), their love has turned to rage. The 1% has done that to them, has turned love to rage.

People have to know that their love will be knocked down, yet their love can get back up and keep going. People have to know that this is their duty – and their joy. And when your love meets the frustration of the endless complacent and apathetic brick walls who have accepted the conditioning the 1% dish out, your love can still stand up and shut out that love and compassion are the answers. When people hear what the full picture is, maybe they will understand why love, which has been the answer for millennia, has not been able to overcome the egos of the 1%, their power and influence, their instruments.

But then there is the final rub. These sickos are not happy, they have all the trappings, the world is envious but they are not happy. The people who are happy are following the path of love and compassion, get knocked down, get back up, and are happy. Because that is what love does. It is bliss and joy. Love is the answer but without this context people will not see it.

Let me say again. Love is the answer but love will get knocked down. Love gets back up, and we are happy – only to be knocked down again. Only for love to get back up …. and so on. This is the reality of love and why love is the answer.

Sadly the complacent and apathetic brick walls will never know this.

"Path of the Dispossessed" <-- Previous Post

"Lokuttara" Next Post -->