The dark side of the dogma to contribute to society

Spiritual inspiration Sunday 9

Anyone who does good is a good person. Obviously, so it seems. Ways to do it are:

  1. Usually by hard, honest work
  2. By contributing to the national gross income
  3. By doing philanthropic work
  4. Efficiency is a good mean to those ends, because it saves time, money and resources.


So why should there be anything wrong with above presumptions at all?

I am not even getting into the inhumanity, that a cold logic of being measured by ones contributions would render disabled and elderly as a burden to society (who then should be put in euthanasia),
but address this issue by debunking above suppositions.

1 ) Hard work in a frenzy can lead to disaster

I once knew a woman who worked really hard to save for a house for a family – so frantically that she failed to hold on once in a while to reassess her path of life. And because she also was under the self-imposed pressure to start a family as soon as possible, as soon as she had the money, she did end up marrying a guy she herself acknowledged not to love.
I doubt whether her rush made her happy.

2 ) The national income is a pig in a poke

For ancient isolated tribes it was obvious that everyone needs the support of others, especially since many tasks can not be accomplished alone. As tribes did connect to other ones, alliances were born, which then turned into nationalism. So to support the national income seems as supporting ones community. The only problem being that due to the hierarchical structure of large communities, i.e. nations, it is not guaranteed anymore where ones support does end up. You can see this in the many absurd spendings of governments, which often even are detrimental to mankind.

In the past the highest dedication to ones community was to sacrifice ones life, but in this day and age, soldiers not rarely are used as expendable throw-away gadgets for behind-the-scenes-agendas, destroying their entire life by having turned their natural inborn capacity for unconditional love into hate for arbitrary concepts of enemies – leaving them with post traumatic stress disorders due to shock and the guilt of having killed for all the wrong reasons.

In our current democratic structure, political power is also shifted every 4 years, resulting in the nations agenda to possibly turn around; so ones entire energy for the own tribe may be directed even into the opposite agenda at any time. It is said not to put all ones eggs into one basket, so why putting them into the national basket?

Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries
~ George Bernard Shaw

The love of one’s country is a splendid thing. But why should love stop at the border?
~ Pablo Casals

I am not an Athenian or a Greek, I am a citizen of the world.

~ Socrates

Carolyn Myss explained in her book “sacred contracts” that the tribal consciousness does everything in its power to keep an individual in line with the tribe in order for it to survive, but it does that at the expense of a person to fulfil its own life quest. This is why it is so difficult to hear the silent inner voice against the majority of the noisemakers who aggressively demand from everyone to support the system.

3 ) Philantropy is a changing fashion

To pick just two of the current political correct agendas:
After ages of male domination feminism was necessary to alert men to the fact that women are equally intelligent and capable to lead companies or nations, but since being a warrior is a male virtue, to fight a gender-war for decades did lead Women to neglect their female virtues of grace, sensuality and serenity for too long so that the terminology in the West is now overstretched into the absurdity that “equal rights” “domestic violence” usually neglect the male half of the population.

Another one is the fight against climate change. Whilst it is totally necessary to push back against ruthless exploiters of our natural resources, as with most philanthropic projects, a huge aspect is the blame-shifting away from ones own responsibilities towards shaming politicians or others who aren’t in line with ones own ethical standards. This is why there is so much hate out there for Greta Thunberg who merely does her best saving the planet (ironically also for those haters). Whilst everyone likes to dish out blame, no one likes to take the blame, so a demand for sacrifices triggers a hateful resistance from those who fear their loss of comfort.
Since the law of attraction states that everything which is brought to awareness will come into ones life, it is questionable whether mere demonstrations against fossil-fuel-mining won’t even manifest it even further.
An example of the negative effects on climate-change-agendas is that once the awareness finally also did reach the USA, the first panic-reaction was not to question own consumption habits, but instead to scream for more nuclear power in order to combat CO2 – jumping right from the fire of fossil fuels into the frying pan of thousands of years of toxic waste.
Edit: I want to make sure that this was not a criticism against Americans, but only meant to show that Demonstrations can cause nervousness which then leads into the next frenzy.

4 ) Pragmatism and efficiency can kill the soul

Logistics is a great means to direct and distribute efforts in the most efficient way by reducing as many unnecessary steps as possible. Thereby it idealistically is beneficial to the environment and saves time.

However, there are ever so subtle side-effects which in the long run can take away the entire purpose of ones life.
Let’s make a simple example: You make your life easier by taking your empty plate back to the kitchen when going to pick up a desert there. But this can become obsessive if you want to take each time something with you whenever you walk around your apartment, because it kills the spontaneity which allows for fun and serenity. Think about yourself wanting to a moment of peace first in the day – if you then have to think about what you still have to tidy in order to take it with you to the bathroom, kitchen and all places, by the time you sit down quiet you are already agitated. Even more absurd would be to ask all your party-guests to always tidy up after themselves wherever they go.
Think about it: Whenever you felt most alive (whether as a rebellious adventurer or a serene sharp meditator, efficiency usually played the least role.

Another issue with pragmatism is that it always seems to be right by allowing to do things faster, better or with more rewards. But the question is whether the reason behind it is justified.
The most common reason for pragmatism is to make money, but look where that did lead us to: To productions of tons of useless environmental damaging goods which are pusposely designed not to be sustainable in order to force people into further consumptions.
The reason why politics does not further sustainability is on one hand the strength of lobby of such producers, but on the other hand also the fact that consumption does accelerate taxes, which does bring us right back to the questionability of the value of the national gross income.

The results of efficiency so far were detrimental to our social needs:

  • Small shops with individual customer care and an opportunity for people to meet neighbours are replaced by cold storage halls with assembly-line-checkouts. What wasn’t destroyed then is killed now by the online- giants.
  • Customer care is stripped of any of its humanity by the means of outsourcing and the redirection of enquiries to artificial intelligence. The continuous decrease in human interaction does force people into social networks which ironically also are manipulated by automatic robots.
  • Because Formulars are the only way to guarantee a standard information; the ever increasing need to comply with them does violate free spirits through a sieve of rules and laws.
    Each time this is done; a piece of ones individuality and spontaneity is imperceptibly ground away, which is the reason why we nowadays see so many spineless fence-sitters who don’t stand up for their values, but stay anonymously in the dark, applauding celebrities and taking pleasure in idiosyncratic people failing.
    If you doubt that statement, think about an ancient hero. Do you really think a brave warrior who had to make quick and clear decisions would have bothered to fill in forms?

In the worst case it can happen that someone who has been sieved through bureaucracy too much, can find themselves in the gutter of neuroses, and end up like a homeless who is sleeping at the bottom of a skyscraper. Ironically, such a person would never be acknowledged by the manager at the top of the very same building, who may have contributed to such a collateral damage. Such tragedies in the end render all efficiency inefficient.

So what do all criticisms have in common?

The fact that the road to hell is paved with good intentions,
because if they are not aligned with ones deeper inner voice or higher spiritual mind, they can lead to disaster.
Hence it is not the frenzy of the world, which should dictate our ethics, but our contact with our higher mind.
The tragedy is that most people derive their drive for action from unreflected responses to past experiences, not realising that it is exactly their actionism which does serve them as a means not to have to face their own inner issues.

And this, my dear readers, was my long intro for down-to-earth-minds
who otherwise would have dismissed the following video as “yet another airy-fairy spiritual talk”.