I have written about the necessity and difficulty of Change in all of my books and also in my Jan, 2009 blog, “The How of Change” in which I quoted from “Eco Harmony Dawn Cooking: Balancing your Internal & External Environments”, which I co-wrote with my wife, Nicola Lawrence:

“The urgent question for Humanity is not so much if we need a much higher level of compassion and cooperation, but how can we get to that level? Over his twenty-five years of teaching and even before that, Andy has pointed out that while it is a great impetus to have inspiring global leaders with integrity, compassion and vision - like Mahatma Gandhi, the Dalai Lama, Mother Theresa, Nelson Mandela and now perhaps, Barack Obama – it is also necessary for the average person to radically change. Each of us needs to transform her or his consciousness in order to recognize appropriate leadership and support it on an on-going basis, through seeming highs and lows. Without this continuing support, the end result of any Great Leader‘s work will be more of the same - one step forward and one step back; one step to the left and one step to the right. Meanwhile, our global, human crises will continue to escalate.
There are many specific reasons for the gap between our ideals and actions, but perhaps the deepest and most universal is that we feel ourselves to be separate from each other, from our natural environment, and from our Divine Oneness… or “God” to many. We struggle to bridge the gap. Such feelings of alienation have not been as prominent in all cultures and eras as they are in ours, wherein our current embrace of Science and Capitalism accentuates separation, fragmentation and competition, rather than integration and cooperation. In short, modern society tends to exaggerate the processes which break us into competitive parts, rather than uniting us into a Whole.

We are at an unique point in human history, wherein our practical, global challenges as well as our most profound, spiritual teachings, are calling us to the same place – to unite on a common, higher human ground.

To be able to step unto that higher ground, we must expand the dimensions and parameters of what it means to be “I” and our particular collective identity, “We”, whether that is defined by political ideology, nationality, race or religion. This expansion of the sense of self is essentially a matter of spiritual transformation and consciousness. It can only come about by something radically different taking place within ourselves, not just substituting one belief of the day for another”.

In blunt, crude terms we have to look into ourselves before we shoot off our mouths. 2500 years ago, The Buddha said, “We are the result of what we have thought” and that we ought to be “a refuge unto ourselves”. Jesus (in reference to a stoning of a prostitute) said, “Let he who is without sin throw the first stone”. The crazy thing is that conventional society does not ask us to look into ourselves and take responsibility... we have no parameters or measures for that... yet you would think that the most essential ingredient of a successful Democracy would be aware, discerning voters!
Be aware that many (not all) of our leaders want us to be uninformed and to unthinkingly react to temporary, deceiving “talking points” or “photo ops”! In that way, we become more manipulable even as we see ourselves as “tech savvy”. Many people want change but there is no specific target against which we can direct our frustrations and energies.. unless in a destructive way as in the recent G20 riots or as terrorists do. We have built a technologically evolved and complex society and we need a more evolved consciousness to deal with it.

As has been the case the past decade, American media and popular poll interpretations of all issues – in this case, the Gulf Oil Spill – are simplistically polarized, with few nuanced or deeper discussions.  President Obama’s desire to link this catastrophe to a long-term environmental policy aimed at weaning the USA from oil, especially ‘foreign’, is simply dismissed by many ‘knowing’ voters as typical Liberal/ Leftie agenda.  The Republicans want to get back to “business as usual” asap... citing the fact that many Lousiana and Gulf states jobs are linked with continuing oil drilling.  One senior (Texas) Republican congressman, Joe Barton, even apologized to BP, about the deal struck earlier this week by the White House and BP executives to establish a $20 billion escrow fund to pay claims of economic loss by Gulf coast residents.  Barton referred to the account as a "slush fund”, lacking legal standing and setting a bad precedent for the treatment of companies regarding future disasters.  Under current U.S. law (following the Exxon Valdez spill), oil companies were cut a deal by Congress wherein their maximum liability was capped at $75 million, which the BP spill has already exceeded by $ billions.  "I think it is a tragedy of the first proportion that a private corporation can be subjected to what I would characterize as a shakedown, in this case, a $20-billion shakedown," Barton told BP CEO Hayward at the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing.  Although Barton was subsequently condemned by some of his Republican colleagues, his sentiments are echoed by many grass roots Republicans - that this is just an unfortunate glitch which we should clean up and then continue as before. The polls presently seem to favour Republicans.
This unprecedented catastrophe and its partisan interpretations bring into sharp focus for me, at least two underlying and recurring issues and questions, which are rarely if ever discussed in popular American media.  In this case, the enormity of the situation begs extra attention:

• Firstly, why is every issue treated by the Media as Either-Or, Left-Right, Democrat-Republican?  The obvious answer is that for the Media, such an approach is a win-win situation. 1) It provokes controversy- “Which of these 2 alternatives do you vote for?” which increases coverage, viewership, readership... and advertising revenue. 2) It provides a convenient excuse for not having an opinion, vision or basic intelligence... “If we just treat each conflicting view as equal, we will come across as professional, knowing, intelligent, sophisticated and just!”  To me, such conclusions of equivalence are illogical since they neither address the specifics/particulars of the situation (How likely is it that all probabilities in the Universe fall into a Democratic/ Republican dichotomy?) nor seek to rank them in terms of Qualitative importance i.e. the possibility that something is inherently more important than something else.  For example, the Republicans seek to equate Nixon’s Watergate, Reagan’s Contragate and George W. Bush’s fake Iraq War with Bill Clinton’s cover-up of his dalliance with Monica Lewinsky on the grounds that they were all Presidents merely covering up their pecadillos/ missteps.  Hello!!?? Sexual misconduct is being equated with spying on political (American) rivals, international, drug-related subversion and outright, avoidable wars!!??  Think of the cost in Lives and Treasury! In the case of the present Gulf Oil Spill, Obama is being accused of using a crisis to advance an agenda – more Sustainability - which we actually all need, whether Democrat or Republican! I don’t hear the Media comparing Obama’s Gulf oil environmental linkage with George W Bush using 9/11 to establish military bases in Iraq, trying to control Iraqi oil and giving Bush- Cheney friendly companies like Haliburton $ billions contracts. Why not???  Incidentally, Haliburton was involved in the supposed ‘safe’ capping of the well that is now spewing into the Gulf!!... again no significant media coverage of this fact, which would seem to be to be historically relevant.  However, in these Internet times, we seem to have short memories!
• Is the present American (and other ‘developed’ Democratic countries’) economic/ political system capable of introducing and implementing policies aimed at long-term goals? Very probably, Not!!!  Corporate stock values go up and down daily on half-baked ideas, whims, emotional reaction or simple panic and corporations are now widely regarded as part of the fabric of government – check out the G8, G20 summits and others like Davos!.  Corporate decisions are definitely short term... make a ‘profit’ in this quarter, share prices will go up and the executives will earn their bonuses! Similarly, politicians, in bed with their corporate buddies, look towards re-election every 4 years or so, often focused on how much “pork”  (“profit”) spending they can direct to their local electorate.  Neither the Media nor the Electorate will give ‘brownie points’ for long-term policies... which means our children’s and grand-children’s quality of life... Destroy the Environment as long as the consequences don’t come to roost on our watch!  Polls and surveys show that we are self-centered with very strong tendencies to immediate gratification.  That is perfectly Democratic but it does have consequences which conflict with our supposed Ideals! There is a significant gap between our Talk and our Walk!  Selfishness is Democratic but that does have consequences, which we are seeing now, not as an aberration, but recurring facts. We get the leaders and policies that we select and deserve... for better or worse.

In the end, Democracy depends on you and me and what we want.  At present, we are getting what we really want and it conflicts with our avowed Ideals and Hopes.  To truly Change entails “spiritual transformation” which may entail delaying or even giving up gratification.

Harper’s likely master plan for hosting both the G8 and G20 summits was crude, cunning, but likely effective, given the lethargy of the Canadian electorate.  I imagine him smirking, “Hmm... under the pretext of promoting Canadian tourism and nationalism, I can use federal funds to promote myself on the international stage as a big-time player, which will show the World how clever I am, and simultaneously boost me in the Canadian polls... maybe to a majority government!  Canadians will see me as important, decisive and ‘president-like’ like my pal George W., especially since I can control the summit agenda as Host.  As a bonus, under the cover of Summit Spending, I can slip mega pork- barrel funds to all my guys, including dear Tony Clement and his Muskoka riding, which will result in even more Ontario votes the next election.  A no-brainer win-win-win situation!!  No one will notice! Who says Accountants aren’t sexy!?   I can count votes!!”
Perhaps, Harper’s (minority government) egoism and arrogance may have finally pushed the people too far, triggering widespread indignation over the ballooning $1-2 billion summit costs, which include the tasteless and pointless $1.9 million ‘fake lake’ in the Toronto media centre.  I wish I was given the opportunity to tender for the fake lake!! Here are a few points to ponder:

• Harper, a righteous opponent of “big government spending”, has historically been consistently reckless with the Public Purse when it suits his purposes. In 2006, he inherited a $13 billion budget surplus from the despised/ disgraced Liberals and turned it into a deficit even before the current recession.  Way to go for a social and fiscal conservative!!The deficit for this year is currently estimated at a whopping $49 billion!  In spite of this unprecedented Canadian deficit and the continuing global recession, Harper has authorized an obscene $1-2 billion expenditure on a 3-day summit.  In comparison, the 2009 G20 summits in London and Pittsburgh cost a relative paltry $30 million and $18 million respectively. This represents terrible judgement and/ or massive incompetence!  Either way, there is no excuse! Think of Harper's selective funding cuts; think of the alternative use of $2 billion - healthcare, education, infrastructure etc.
• Harper having mortgaged Canada’s  future to host this global party, what can Canadians expect in return? Canada’s stature in the world rising?  More tourists coming to Canada?  Probably neither.
• Even as Harper has thrown (your and my) money at these summits in order to globally impress, he has ideologically distanced himself from most of the participants.  What are you thinking, Stevo?...probably the same as George W....that North American opinion somehow represents global opinion? Harper’s original agenda for the summits was probably three-fold: 1) Hold Canada’s banking system up as an example to the world; 2) Push for rich nations to help women in poor countries dying in pregnancy and childbirth... which can be held up as an example of his soft, even “Liberal” side;  3) Avoid talks of Global Warming lest it impacts the beloved (and vote-rich) Alberta Oil Sands.
• Harper probably banked on the world economy being in better shape when he offered to host the G8 and G20 and then he could say that Canada’s bank regulations saved us (relatively) and that the world should follow us.  However, the World wants to fix the present recession/ depression rather than worrying about the future and they want to punish the banks with a “bank tax” because of their reckless behaviour.  Harper is in a small minority opposing the “bank tax”.
• Harper has also isolated himself (following the dictates of his Hero, George W) by stipulating that Canada would withhold aid funds from any groups that support abortion as part of family planning (as well as groups promoting Feminism, the Environment, and supposedly anti-Israel sentiments etc). His closest allies, the UK and USA, have opposed him.  Hilary Clinton bluntly rebuffed Harper, the G8  Host:  “You cannot have maternal health without reproductive health...(which) includes contraception, family planning and the access to legal, safe abortions”.
• Paul Nesbitt-Larking of the University of Western Ontario comments, “When it comes to ideological positioning, Mr. Harper is off-base with the rest of the world”.   A recent report by a wide spectrum of Canadian entrepreneurs, philanthropists, environmentalists and journalists states, “We need to be better friends with our best friend. And we need to make more friends in a word in which power, wealth and knowledge are accessible to all”.
• In terms of the Environment and Global Warming, Harper promotes the Alberta Oil Sands because it is his political base .. money coming into Canada, specifically Alberta.  What happens when the oil runs out?  Who pays for the environmental damage, which presently includes  vast, toxic ‘tailing lakes’, with a potential to rival the present Gulf of Mexico oil spill?  If Harper and the Tories under-write any potential damage, that would be great!  Any takers? If not, why not?

A reminder of Harper’s control fetish (of which I have repeatedly written) - The June 7th edition of The Toronto Star, using Canadian Press material, has revealed that the Harper minority government routinely uses “MEPs” (Message Event Proposals) to control and direct all bureaucratic activity, meshing it with political activity, controlled by the (minority) Tories.  In short, any spending initiative is given a Harper slant... even though he opposes “public spending”.  He is using Public Servants and funds to advance his own political agenda!  Any time a road is built or money goes to  a local, community centre, you are reminded that is because of  Harper’s Tories (who are opposed to Public Spending).
I am amazed that Stephen Harper is still our Prime Minister with current public blessing.  Iggy and Layton may not be fantastic, but perhaps they may at least try to respect our wishes and refrain from attacking Canada's battered (by Harper)democracy. Maybe a Liberal-NDP coalition?

The above is a chapter title in my 2003 book, Ageless Wisdom Spirituality: Investing in Human Evolution.  7 years later, there is still no significant discussion of technology’s pervasive and profound impact on our individual and collective lives, unless there is something specific or dramatic (a media ‘”hook”) like the current Gulf of Mexico oil spill.  Even in these cases, the incident/ event is treated as an unfortunate, unforeseen “single issue”, which soon becomes “old news”,  even if the consequences continue and worsen outside of the brief news-cycle.   Who is interested in mortality spikes a few years later or interconnections with non-oil issues?  Not very “sexy”.

The general  impact and control (or lack thereof) of Technology  does not lend itself to media coverage or legislation, because it is gradual, complex, subtle and generally un-dramatic, which doesn’t translate well into  sound or video “bites”, media ratings or opinion polls.  To my mind, the unexamined implementation of new technology is far more dangerous and destructive than the threat of “terrorists” over which we currently obsess.  “Terrorists” will eventually succeed in killing anywhere they want if they are willing to sacrifice their own lives.  You or I, if sufficiently desperate, deranged or “motivated”, can strap a bomb to our bodies and detonate it in a crowded shopping mall, restaurant, market, subway station etc... and make the headlines, stampeding millions of people!  But what does that really mean or require for prevention?  More surveillance and Big Brother/ Police State policies (costing billions $ out of the Public Purse) which will eventually fail in the face of individual Human Will?
Here are few of the “hidden effects of technology”:

There is much more but space dictates the end of this blog. We need more discussion. Technology is not just a glorified hammer or shovel, but highly interactive and interconnected with us.

Harper continues to spin and ride out his what should be his embarrassments – Guergis/Jaffer, Afghan torture cover up etc - while aggressively carrying out his American neo-con copycat agenda. As usual he bypasses Parliament, packing ‘independent” government agencies with his nominees, working on the bureaucratic level with other countries so as to bypass any big national debates, cutting funding to any group with whose policies he may not agree: anyone not always pro-Israeli, feminists, day care, gays, pro-choice, environmentalists especially those critical of the tar sands and more. It’s interesting that like all Conservatives, Harper is critical of ‘big government’ spending, but is happy to throw funding (your and my tax dollars)to his own favourite groups and spend on the military.
For some time, I have pointed out that Harper has been pulling Canada far to the Right even without the support of the majority. It’s getting pretty blatant now. The National Rifle Association (NRA, the all powerful gun lobby in the USA, is now funding campaigns in Canada designed to get rid of gun registration.
A new book called The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada details Harper’s links with the Religious Right. Author Mari McDonald comments, “All my worries about having to prove my case that this government is intent on cultivating the social conservative constituency in this country were nothing to worry about. They were doing it so openly that you could hardly keep up with the headlines...I think we should be vigilant. We have to decide what kind of country we want to live in. We have to stay on top of these issues because this is a government wedded to secrecy...This government has chosen a strategy that risks changing the Canada that most of us have agreed we want to live in and the tolerance we have built”.
I and others have issued similar warnings for some time but Canadians seem asleep or are cocooned in their own lives, hoping that will be enough to protect them. It won’t . The reality is that we have created a Global Village. We are all interconnected; we have become a corporate-run society that is reinforced by technological innovation. Power and wealth have shifted upwards to a very small percentage of the population. Democracy is being rapidly undermined... as several authors, journalists and academics are beginning to point out.