Daggie Oh: On "The Gift of Going Without"

Is the freedom to "go without" a human freedom that we tend to overlook?

I've been mulling over this thought for the better part of a year, and I have some examples to share what precisely I mean.

The first that came to mind is the Delhi Lama. Is it his choice to lead a life of not seeking riches, materialism, and physical gratification that creates the foundation in our minds on which we may build with his teachings?

If a government, a foundation, or any other organization was to publicly guarantee him with a house like ours, stuff like our own, and a moderate savings account, all from the day of his birth and available until the day of his death, would that not undermine that foundation of respect that we have for his way of life and teachings?

The strangeness of the question lies in our (at least occasional) human need to step into un-safety; to step out into the unknown, which some might even see as actively seeking "rock bottom". True uncertainly can only be really felt, explored, and understood to a level of acceptance and joy if there is no safety net to cling to.

An alcoholic or drug addict could be done a great deal more harm if every time they came close to "rock bottom" they were forced through re-hab and then tossed right back into the same alluring scene to continue destroying their bodies. The healing that they really need is simply to lose so much and to be filled with such pain, that they CHOOSE to leave that life entirely, and not just to be flushed of the substances.

It seems to me that the freedom we have to strike out from what is comfortable and to go without the comforts of life, or even the assurance of safety, is a freedom to progress as beings at a much more primal level from which comes a level of "human" growth and self assurance. Alongside this primal growth we also may better understand what does and does not matter (concerning possessions, obsessions, and illusions), and what is real to our core vs. what is excess baggage and only bogging us down.

Daggie Oh: On Marriage

Sometimes you are in love with someone, and they love you, and it is perfect. As you both grow (or one does and the other doesn’t) you may grow together, you may grow in the same direction, you may do neither and thus part ways. That is still perfect. It doesn’t make your relationship a lie, or wrong, or a waste of time… you were perfect for each other, and that’s wonderful, and now you’re not, and that is also wonderful and natural. It shows your growth down your personal path, and your recognition of a meaningful change in the dynamic of your relationship. Two roads may lie parallel for a time but at some point veer into different directions, it doesn’t undermine the period that two travelers spent at each other’s side nor their shared intended destination, but merely the twists and turns that might lie ahead of one traveler while the other continues their own personal route.

Beyond tax benefits and an excuse to have a great party, marriage only serves the purpose of creating, not a bond, but a barrier behind both people to fence them in. There is a bond between them or there is not, and a ceremony will have no lasting effect but to force a greater effort from either one or both IF they decide that they have come to a point where their bond has transformed and the legal contract of marriage is now unfitting and unnecessary. 

I do not mean to disregard the beauty of successful long term relationships and marriages, quite the opposite. I mean only to free some from the illusion that there is only one perfect way to reach one’s destination, and to inspire an appreciation for the experience in those who have taken, or have it before them to take, “the scenic route”. 

Daggie Oh: On Anti-Morals

What do we stand for? We being a generation raised on two phrases “its nothing personal, its business” and “meaningless sex”. These are greats among the go-to anti-morals that I believe lie near the core of our current impersonal social trends, likely budding from the wholly ignorant perception that corporations are people and thus their actions have become conceivably acceptable by society. These two cliché phrases do nothing but provide us with an excuse and maybe a clear conscience when we decimate someone’s feelings, intentionally or otherwise. They not only relieve us of responsibility, but each also makes the losing party feel worse for the experience and foolish for having become emotionally invested.

Neither phrase removes the humanity from either situation.

Just deeming intercourse “meaningless sex” does nothing for the party that opens their heart to experience what they may… you know, all that “passé human nonsense”. In the same strain of self deception, saying “its nothing personal, its business”, does not merit the forgiveness of the devoted employee that gets laid-off to better line the pockets of the shareholders. Its a phrase that does nothing to excuse sweatshop conditions, again exploited for the sake of greater profit margins. For those who might contend that in this age of automation each of us should, on a personal level, get our asses in “gear” and grow out of our outdated emotional constraints, I must contend that such is not in the human design.

In a previous age of industry we built everything from reliable products to families, and while I do not propose a backslide, I would like to point out that in this age of information, we have more opportunities to learn then we have minutes in the day and days in our lives, but what hits home is what touches our emotions; what reminds us that we are human.

All of the great minds of the past did not strive for the betterment of mankind so that we could forget what it is to be compassionate about our world, our friends and lovers, and our one human race.

Daggie Oh: On Democratic Liability

If it takes a mercenary army to fight a war, and the people feel they cannot unite against a common “foe”, than it is no foe and the war is merely a redefining of the old capitalist favorite “hostile takeover”.

If someone does a job in your name, you retain the liability of their actions. If a gun wielding workforce (the current US Army) fights a war on behalf of the United States, then we Americans will be held responsible, for better or for worse.

Always keep in mind that we, the democratic populace, are accountable for our country’s actions, like it or not and no matter how unfair it sounds. It is in our best interest to show interest, and to take part in our government so it will remain “our” government, and not be misused as a corporate tool.

Daggie Oh: On Making Decisions

I have picked up a quote, of late, as a favorite reminder of what I see as the better half of good decision-making: "Many a false step were made by standing still" - Fortune Cookie. While I have yet to glean such great value from my own interactions with fortune cookies, and although the impact of this statement is lost when punctuated by "...in bed", lets explore it's usefulness.

I have found that while "good decisions" tend to be quantified in a variety of ways, most of which involve a weighing of the decision's overall impact through hindsight and generally through the lens of each person's hierarchy of values (for example: a person might value "the greatest good/least harm to the greatest amount of people impacted" higher or lower then "the greatest good/least harm to those few people dearest to themselves"), thus leaving most of society at a constant dispute in areas such as politics, military, and social services. Though this issue of hindsight is of no use to us in the instant that a decision is to be made, be it a decision effecting many, or your own decision to slap the snooze button and rest for eight more minutes.

The two parts of making "good decisions", as I have experienced, are:
1. The application of knowledge, values, and the consideration of impact
2. Swift action

The fortune cookie reminds me that a decision made an instant too late was a decision to allow the circumstance to hold all of my own power. For if the train has already left the station, you can't decide to get on now.

Daggie Oh: On Peace of Mind

I have been ignited once again, and I would like to share what came to mind:

If you ever feel that there is to little time for all that you want to do, then you don't really know what you want

Until you live here and now, in this moment alone, you will not know the extent of your power

Ask the right questions...
Make the right choices...
Wake up

In silence, you will hear your mind, a war zone of insufferable noise...
You will be inclined to drown it with outside sound...
music, television, conversation...
you will dicide, at the right time, to stick it out...
to listen, to release, and to answer...
and in the silence you will be "here"...
you will "be" now...
and the peace you feel will be an anchor...
A home within, you will always return to...
when you mean to, and at times when you have forgotten the way...
You're no less than a silence away from what is and what isn't..
You're never more than a breath away from coming home.

Daggie Oh: On Dancing

Gentlemen,
(or however you would like to be referred to)
It is not a threat to your masculinity to dance.
To be good at it and to enjoy it.
If you can dance,
(and the shuffle most people do barely qualifies)
it is not your responsibility to challenge any other guy that approaches the dancer floor with your "mad moves".
If you want to be confident in your moves then Bravo; that's fine.
On the other hand, if you feel inclined to get out of your seat just to treat a night out clubbing like some kind of pissing match then just settle down and grow some balls.
Particularly if you find yourself back in your seat waiting to pounce again, after a mere couple minutes dancing, seriously get over yourself.

Those of you guys that fight the social norms that insinuate that every physical act a guy does must be a competition, thank you, and keep it up.
You may be the future of social evolution.

End