No, You are NOT Powerless!

There are always lots of "voices" in my head.

Whether I'm a certified nut or not is not the issue, here-- I'll just explain this by saying I have lots of "inner conversations" with myself about things: Life, Love, People, The State of the World, and so forth. Some of my friends merely characterize it as "you just think too much!"

Maybe I do.

The past couple of weeks have been very busy, inside my head (well, outside, too... but that's not what this is about). As I've wandered through life, and through the weirdness of the WWW, I've become more and more aware of a pervasive sense of ("perceived") helplessness in the world.

As I look closer at that, I have grown increasingly aware of the fact that those who are "in power" want YOU to believe that you are powerless. And through clever marketing and strategically placed "societal messages," there is this deep (and alarming) subtext in our lives... it sounds something like "Yeah, I know this is BAD, but *I* can't make a difference; *I* don't have enough power."

The truth is that (most of the time) you DO HAVE the power... but "the man behind the curtain" has hypnotized us into believing we are powerless. I can't pinpoint the exact "how" of this trance, but I know some of it has to do with the misperception that in order to change the status quo of the world, you must be a multi-national corporation with a team of Ivy League attorneys at your side.

In other articles, I have written about how people often give up hope and lapse into apathy because they believe that "to make a difference in the world," they must (figuratively speaking) "invent a cure for cancer," or perhaps "end world hunger." I'm not blaming anyone here... it's easy to look at the sheer scale of the problems facing out world, and feel insignificant and powerless.

But there's empowerment in knowing that every positive action you take does change the world. It may not feel that way... but truth be known, most major changes in the world are the result of millions of "tiny adjustments" at a grassroots level... not the result of someone "inventing a cure for cancer." Our misperceptions about change are perhaps born out of the fact that the media will create a huge circus when the "cure for cancer" is announced, and some researcher gets his/her 15 minutes in the limelight... and we go "Wow! This person changed the world!" There is no news report that goes "A million consumers decided to buy organic lettuce today, providing a boost to local organic farmers."

See what I'm saying?

"Yeah, but I still feel powerless.... what can I actually DO?"

Gandhi once said "BE the change you wish to see in the world."

My suggestion for a "starting point," is that every time you reach a choice point where you feel in some sense "wronged," you take power over your rights... as a human, as a consumer, as a parent, or whatever... instead of "letting it slide."

This does NOT mean "being a rabidly militant asshole," either. And it can be something as little as NOT "letting it slide" when the box of cereal marked at $2.79 on the shelf scans at $2.99 at the checkout counter. Or it can be bigger things...

Last year, I had a "fight" with the company who services and fills my propane tank. Now, I get their quarterly newsletter, and they are all on about "conserving energy," economy, being green, reducing emissions and stuff. Minimizing fuel use. Great.

So then I get a statement in the mail, with a random $299 charge. WTF?

Of course, I get on the phone, wander through 47 levels of voice mail jail, get instructions in Swahili and Urdu... and eventually talk to a human being.

"I'd like to know what this $299 charge on my account is about" I say.

"Please hold."

Jeopardy music plays. Crickets chirp.

"Sir, that's an inactivity fee. You didn't order two fill-ups last year, so the company charges a low usage fee."

You... WHAT????

"Let me get this straight... there's an energy crisis, you're actively advising people to conserve energy and use less gas, we're worried about global warming... and you're charging me $299 for NOT using propane?"

"Well, it costs us money to keep the account active..."

At this point, some people would probably feel resigned to being powerless in the face of "Big Business." Others would perhaps rant and rave and get nasty with the person at the other end... who'd feel abused and respond by doing nothing. Some might demand to talk to a "manager" or a "supervisor," and probably not get very far, either.

Large part of not being powerless is not only "knowing your adversary," but knowing what motivates your adversary. On the surface, you might say "that's MONEY!" but that's only a half-truth. Bottom line is, they are typically motivated by shareholders. And shareholders "leave the building," if an investment becomes... "risky." Companies that get bad publicity are seen as risky... and "bad publicity" doesn't just mean that someone makes air filters with asbestos in them, it can also mean a company engages in business practices that run contrary to current trends in societal values.

Getting back to my conversation with the gas company, I said that I was sorry about their policy and sorry that they couldn't remove the fee, and I realized that the person I was talking to didn't make the policy. I was completely pleasant and cordial.

Then I added that the policy of an inactivity fee seemed to me to be out of touch with current market trends of efficiency and economizing fuel use... and "I think this might make an interesting story for the local Seattle TV news crew who does that 'Troubleshooters' program on the five o'clock news."

The fee was "miraculously" waived, within minutes.

I'll tell you one more, and then leave this.

A friend bought a fairly expensive laptop computer from a major computer manufacturer. Spent about $1200. Within a couple of days, a problem developed... the computer would spontaneously reboot, every twenty minutes to couple of hours. Clearly not acceptable.

On the OEM web site (OEM = Original Equipment Manufacturer), it clearly stated that a FULL REFUND was available if the machine was returned within three weeks from the invoice date.

However, all calls to customer service were fielded with the statement that they would REPAIR the defective computer. And that there would be a "restocking fee" of 15% if the computer was returned.

I took on this challenge, because clearly the company had a policy of trying to buffalo consumers out of seeking a refund.

Now, many people would argue (a) that individuals have no power in the face of a giant corporation and (b) that their time is "worth more" than being on the phone for hours with some recalcitrant customer service rep whose "script" revolves around making it all but impossible for the consumer to get a REFUND.

But... again, it pays to examine the "chain of logic" and the motivation of the OEM, or any other large company. And it will show you that *I* actually have the upper hand in the equation, NOT the giant corporation.

My "investment" in the situation is $1200 I want back, as a refund. If I spend six hours engaged in jumping through hoops, getting the return to happen, I'm saying that my time is "worth" $200/hr.

The OEM? They have my $1200, sure... but on a "net" basis, the sale of that computer is probably worth $100 to them in profits, IF that. I worked with the computer industry, and it is VERY competitive, and margins are razor thin. I also worked with some of the people who "took calls" (this was before they were outsourced), and I know that these CSRs were trained to "resist," but they also had internal "timers" that would alert them when their time spent with a customer was getting to the point of "costing too much for the company." At some point, they start losing more money through me tying up their phone line than it's "worth" to them to balk at the return.

Diligence pays off. So does "paying attention." In the above case, I also ended up catching the company trying to "get around" the problem by creating "duplicate tickets" (work orders) for my problem... and then insisting that certain things had NOT been discussed. There was always an "uncomfortable silence" when I'd say (perfectly patiently and pleasantly) "well, try looking at ticket number 4562354X instead."

Eventually, the "timer" ran out, and the return authorization for a FULL refund was issued.

Still... had the compnay continued to hold out, my next step would have been a screen shot of the web page stating the return policy, send to the Attorney General of that state, with a transcript of the phone conversations contradicting it.

Now, there are still those who'd state that they "couldn't be bothered." I'm not going to argue for or against... but I WILL ask... "Why are you agreeing to let yourself be fleeced?"

Cultural Commentary: Growing up in the Shadow of the Jante Law

I am a Danish national.

I was born in Denmark, and I lived there (on and off) till I came to the US in late 1980, to go to college. Whereas my formative years were spent in many different locales in different countries, my family background is very definitely Danish, and it seems that my strongest social and cultural influences are Danish-- especially if we take the assertions that we "learn" most of our core values before age 14 seriously.

My first experiences with the US (notwithstanding previous short visits to New York, Boston and Virginia) were in the great state of Texas. To say that Denmark and Texas are cultural polar opposites would be an understatement... that's simply a fact, not a judgment. I have since lived in other parts of the US-- Arizona, Oregon, and now Washington-- and have a greater appreciation for the regional variation in core values within the US. That said, I do think all nations have "socio-cultural identities," and if you were raised with those identities they will likely shape some part of your value system and choices for the rest of your life.

I have never thought of myself as "particularly Danish." At the same time, even though I have lived in the US for almost 30 years, I don't think of myself as "particularly American." I guess I think of myself more as a "citizen of the world," than anything. As such, I feel neither particularly insulted or hurt when a US citizen points out to me (for whatever reason) that I seem "very foreign" or "very UN-American." Similarly, I also want to make clear that I don't regard such feedback as "negative" comments, merely "factual" ones.

However, whenever such a comment does come up, I am always curious. To some degree, I am curious about "what" seemed foreign... but mostly I'm curious to track whatever "it" was back to its cultural roots.

Yesterday and today I have been taking somewhat "light days," as I am trying not to completely give into some flu/virus that has been poking at my body for the past 5-6 days. Mostly I've managed to keep it at bay... however, the downtime has given me a little time to contemplate. This afternoon, I was thinking about the movie "Avatar" and how my sense of "rightness" about the Universe was bolstered and given hope by the subplot ("nature defeats machinery" rather than "man conquers nature") of the movie. This made me drill deeper into my general feelings of "disregard" for people who believe they are "something" because they have money, power, equipment or whatever.

Then I thought about the places, over the years, where I'd been "called on" my foreign-ness, while trying to fit into US culture. A series of words/concepts started to line up (non-competitive, non-combative, egalitarian, soft, invisible, unmotivated, unassuming, self-effacing, passive, cold, dispassionate) and suddenly a penny dropped.

The sound of said coin hitting the floor made me go do a little research on an old piece of Danish (and Scandinavian) socio-cultural heritage; something I never really considered to be much more than a piece of "cultural mythology:" The Jante Law.

I won't go into great details about what it is. It has its basis in a 1930s literary work that somehow became deeply infused into the subtext of the Scandinavian value system. The odd thing about it is that even though its influence is often dismissed and disregarded by cultural anthropologists and the populace at large, it nonetheless casts a very long "shadow" across the Danish social and cultural landscape. As Danes, we may not like it, and we may laugh at it, and ridicule it, and we may claim it doesn't affect us... but in very subtle ways, it has a significant impact on the way we form our values and how we "present ourselves" in the world.

The core principle of the "law" goes something like this: "Don't think you're anyone special or that you're better than us."

In the original book, the "law" was laid out as a sort of "Ten Commandments" by which people were supposed to live. HOW it got from being "a book" to being a central part (however subtle) of several national identities, I do not know. I'm sure I could research and find out, but I don't have the inclination. The truth, however, is that it did become infused in the culture-- to such a degree that cultural anthropologists around the world study and write about its effects, even while they disagree that it has much influence. Few guides to Denmark (and Scandinavia) fail to mention the Jante Law somewhere. It's NOT "imaginary," in other words.

Here's a rough translation of the ten "commandments:"

• Don't think you are somebody
• Don’t believe that you are as good as us
• Don't believe that you are smarter than us
• Don't believe that you are better than us
• Don't believe that you know more than us
• Don't believe that you are more than us
• Don't believe that you are good at anything
• Don't laugh at us
• Don't think that anybody cares for you
• Don't believe that you can teach us anything

From where I sit today, it sounds pretty dismal. I can also see why the cultural impact of such a thought pattern would lead to the sort of "brain drain" (a substantial exodus of independent thinkers and innovators to pastures greener and more welcoming) the Scandinavian countries experienced in the 1970's and early 80's.

Oh!
Wait...
I left that part of the world during that period.
Things that make you go "hmmmm...."

In the interest of brevity, I'll only paraphrase and summarize a few salient comments from cultural anthropologist Åke Daun's writings on the topic:

"There is a strong tendency among Nordic people to strive for socio-cultural homogeneity. Another typical Nordic feature contributes to this tendency: the wish for conflict free encounters in the private life.

Scandinavians are particularly prone to achieve consensus in attitudes and opinions, and generally avoid socializing with others than like-minded people. Confrontations are regarded as particularly unpleasant. Nordic people generally do not believe themselves to be interesting enough to awaken the curiousness of others, and to compensate for this there must be food and beverages, and maybe certain activities, when meeting others.

Another feature worth noting is a "cultural shyness;" people feel inhibited around others they don't know well, and tend to be very (overly) observant of their own behavior since it is regarded as very important to control what kind of impression others are left with.

There tends to be very strict borders between private life and work life, which manifests as a general resistance to small talk about private matters with strangers (a characteristic which has periodically been reported to be a great hindrance to forming in business contacts in foreign countries).

The lack of passion a stranger might perceive in Nordic people is likely a reflection of both a genuine trait and the fact that rational reasoning has a strong precedent (preference) over for emotional reasoning. Not to be misunderstood, emotions are NOT at all disapproved of in most contexts, but they are regarded as "pure" emotions of no further value than to signal one's general sentiment with life or fate.

Quietness is regarded as the commonly accepted norm, and "noisy fellows" are strongly disapproved of. Vociferous stubbornness is deemed as very ill-mannered, as is interrupting and talking over the voices of others.

The Nordic ideal is to think twice before one speaks, and to utter only one's most firm beliefs, and then only when there is a considered and deliberate intention. The assumption is that what one says is going to be remembered for ages, and if one says something stupid or "wrong" it will be proof of one's stupidness and general incompetence... and can be used against one in encounters for ages afterward...

To be kind and good-natured is important. It is generally seen as preferable to be quiet or agreeable rather than uttering a strongly opposing opinion, unless one really aims at hurting."

Well.

I have been sitting here for some time, contemplating this... and what it means.

Like the truth of most situations, there are two sides to this coin. In some ways, I feel a little more enlightened about myself, from a cultural history perspective. I'm still glad to be Danish, and I'm still glad I live in the US, not Denmark. Although I didn't start writing this because I was looking for an outlet to "pass the buck" to as explanation for being who I am-- I was just curious-- I find myself looking at me through slightly different eyes.

Ultimately, life is about balance. I look at the above and realize that American culture could "learn a thing or two" from Danes, and Danish culture could "learn a thing or two" from Americans. Both approaches to living have their merits. Neither is perfect.

So, I think I will leave this little anecdote and cultural history lesson with an old memory that just popped into my head.

I was five years old, and my Godfather (a powerful insurance executive from New York) was visiting us in Denmark. "Uncle Victor" spent quite a lot of time with me and was (as family lore would have it) "quite worried" about my seeming timidity. And he tried (although I don't remember it ALL that well) to teach me how to "Stand tall, look 'em in the eye, and tell 'em what you know!" Having been taught that the proper way to greet someone (per Danish culture) was "quick eye contact, followed by a slight bow of the head in deference and a handshake" made Uncle Victor's way seem strange to me. Or, as my mother once said I told her "He's nice, but quite rude."

At the Turning of the Year

For many blogger-type people, it is de-rigeur to end the old year with reflections on what was, and to begin the new year with some sort of statement about what might lie ahead.

I am not actually writing this post, as it posts. Call it an "absentee post," if you will.

You see, I'm not actually home, at the moment.

Well, I am. Because I am sitting here, writing this... and it's the 27th of December. But I am not at home, as this actually posts and makes its way out into the www blogosphere.

What makes that particularly important (to me) and worthy of a old year/new year "comment," is that I have something more important to do, somewhere more important to be, someone more important to be with... more important than sitting around, writing bloggy reflections about what a year had/has to offer.

Yeah?
So what?

As I write these words, I am about to leave town and head to Ohio to spend the New Year with the Love of my life. And that's what's comment worthy, in this context. Whereas she is always "comment worthy," what I'm specifically looking at as comment worthy is that for the first time in my 49 years on this planet... I am going to be doing something that does not feel like a "duty call" for some major holiday.

Don't get me wrong. I have been to many New Year's parties (and other holiday celebrations)... but this marks the first time that some small part of me will not be wishing that I were somewhere else. I will be exactly where I want to be.

I suppose it "should" make me feel sad that I have not previously been where I felt like being, when I think about it... but hey, I'm not big into "shoulding" on myself.

Some journeys are very long. Life is, perhaps, the longest journey we have. Within the journey of life, there are stations along the way. And I feel like I am about to pull into a really BIG station, after a decades-long journey, ready to pause and then change trains and board on a completely new journey... many, many years in the planning.

This time, however, I will not be traveling alone.

May your journeys take you where you wish to go, during 2010!

[Edited to add: Rats! The future posting thingie didn't work. Ain't technology grand?]

Reflections on Silence and Not Having a Clue

I was a quiet child.

It should be stated for the record that I am introverted and soft spoken, by nature.

Family lore holds that I would quietly entertain myself in my crib, and that "having a good cry" was generally something I engaged in about once every few months, as a baby and toddler. Apparently I didn't "fuss" and I didn't "demand." I'm also told I had a total of maybe 2-3 "tantrums" before age 16. Whereas I definitely was "there," I don't remember those days, so I can't verify whether all of this is true.

I do remember that a substantial part of my early decision to "just shut up" was fostered by my environment. Initially, I stayed quiet because the mantra of my extended family was that "Children MIGHT be seen, but they should definitely NOT be heard." Subsequently, said silence was reinforced by my repeatedly being told "Just be quiet. You have no idea what you're talking about, and nobody cares what little boys have to say, anyway."

It should also be said for the record that I don't possess much natural inclination to "fight" with people, over points of view. I tend to go "Meh. Whatever. That's interesting. You can keep your point of view, and I'll keep mine." And then go about my business. I sucked at debate because other people's opinions generally seemed as valid as my own. It's not for me to tell others what to think-- I'll happily share alternate points of view, but I'm not going to pound them into anyone's head. Sometimes I smile at the irony that I was in my 30s before I (psychologically) learned about "tools" to disinvest myself from other people's closely held opinions... "gaining" the additional insight that I had already been letting things be, pretty much since I started speaking.

Last week, I did a lot of cleaning up and organizing, of the "stuff of life" we accumulate over time. I came across some journals from the early to (mostly) mid-1990s, when my former marriage was failing, and had failed. Journals, talking about life, and questions raised in therapy. I didn't have much time to really look at them, but I picked up a few threads belonging to that period of my life, just from a quick glance. And paused to insert them into the greater context of life.... my overall existence... age zero to the present day.

"Just because MOST people believe and do something, doesn't make it True."

Whereas self-study often leads us to the conclusion that we should finish the above statement with the words ".... True for ME," there are actually a surprising number of situations where the greater world adopts and adheres to some idea, or action, or tradition that is really not inherently in most people's best interest. A state of near "mass psychosis" arises because folks end up doing/saying/believing something based on little more than "Well, everybody ELSE does that, so it must be right," and there's no pause to question whether or not "the accepted norm" makes any sense, whatsoever, or is healthy, nor whether any "sense" it does make is Global vs. Individual.

For example, scientists have repeatedly shown that we-- as human beings-- attach more strongly to a person who makes us earn "insecure" and "unpredictable" love, in relationships, than to someone who openly and freely gives us love. In fact, we "work harder" to gain approval and "earn" love, when we're being treated badly, than when we're being treated respectfully and kindly. It is almost as if we deem "secure" love to be "boring" and "not challenging enough," and many people actively reject it and dismiss it, as "lacking in passion and intensity." This may hold true for as much as 90% of the population, and if the relationship doesn't actually "end badly," we certainly end up feeling bad about it, much of the time. Yet, most people stay on, and on, and on, in less than desirable and painful situations...

Or, take the state of being an Introvert, as I am. It is a genetically based root character trait, not "shyness" or "social anxiety." But our culture is based in outgoing, aggressive go-get-it-ness, and 70-75% of the population IS extraverted. It is the majority paradigm. Nothing wrong with that. However... it doesn't make introverts "defective," and in need of "fixing," so they can be more like extraverts. And yet, introverts often labor through endless "assertiveness training" courses and Toastmasters classes, pressured not only by the predominant social paradigm around them, but by their own sense of not being like "the majority."

The above are just a couple of examples.

As a species, it seems, we often find some measure of "safety" in NOT thinking for ourselves.

Looking at the journals, I realized that my ex didn't think I knew what I was talking about. I was vilified for wanting to look at how things actually were, rather than how things were "supposed to be." Or how she "wanted them to be," I suppose. When I was a kid, I was told repeatedly that I didn't know what I was talking about. Yet, I could watch the adults "make plans," and "agree" on something... and I could readily see that it would "end badly," through the non-expert eyes of an eight-year old. And it would "end badly," and the adults (whom I thought "knew better," since they asserted that I didn't know) would sit around and be all hurt and surprised that things did, indeed, "end badly." 40-some years later, I watch adults-- sometimes even very evolved adults-- get stuck in the very complexes they insist they have long since worked through, and when I (gently) draw their attention to them, I relive my childhood through being told that I have "no idea what I am talking about." I shrug, and watch their circuses unfold.

"Just because MOST people believe and do something, doesn't make it True."

I am sometimes stunned-- and a little saddened-- by the number of times I have said "no, this will end badly, I don't want to be part of this" only to be met with the assertions that not only do I "not know what I am talking about," but moreover, *I* am the one with the psychosis. Which makes me feel a bit like the lemming who pauses at the top of the cliff and goes "You know what? This is stupid. We'll DIE if we jump off, so I'm not going to jump."

And then I get "institutionalized" for not jumping, because jumping is simply "what people do."

I am, I suppose, an observer of people and patterns, and a "connector of dots."

"Popular opinion" holds that I am "apathetic" because I have become unwilling to engage other people in the "drama and chaos" of their lives. Allegedly I have "issues" because of that. I have "issues" because I say "that fire is hot, and I don't want to sit in it," rather than just willingly sit there and burn myself to a crisp, with everyone else.

Look in the mirror.
What you see in that reflection is also called "projection."

But don't take it from me.
I don't know what I'm talking about.
But I do observe a lot...

Sometimes you just have to THROW AWAY the box!

Many people understand what it means to "go for a walk on the beach." Not so many people grok the idea of spending six or maybe eight hours, walking on a beach.

This, however, is what I do. And fairly often.

Whereas I am generally loath to make any "claims" as regards the state of my mental health, I can with considerable confidence say that it has improved, since I started taking these long walks on the beach.

The beach IS my place of peace. Part of my mental health regime. And since I walk on the order of 50 miles (80km) some weeks, it's also part of my physical health routine.

Some might say "Yeah, well, nice work if you can get it, but who can afford to do that?"

It's certainly a valid question, and one I had to answer for myself. Which brings us to the power of intention, and creating our own reality. Whereas I have beach combed since I was a tiny child, my walks used to be considerably shorter-- well, because I had work, and things.

One of the greatest paradigm shifts I have experienced in my life came during my college years. In the course of a junior-year marketing class, we had a number of guest lecturers. One of them was the late Stanley Marcus, one-time principal of the Neiman-Marcus chain of luxury department stores, as well as the man generally credited with originally building that company's stellar reputation for quality and service.

Mr. Marcus spoke to 300-odd students about life and retailing and marketing, followed by the inevitable Q&A session. Many "relevant" questions were asked-- about balance sheets, merchandising, product mix. Finally, someone asked "Yeah, but how do you figure out WHAT it is you're supposed to be doing?"

The reply to which was: "Do what you're really good at, and what moves you."

I suppose there's a smart-aleck in every crowd. In this particular class, there was.

"Yeah, but what if the only thing you're good at is SLEEPING?"

There was the expected ripple of laughter, but Mr. Marcus never missed a beat.

"You become a mattress tester for Serta. You work in sleep and dream research."

*****

"Thinking outside the box" is perhaps the most overused buzz phrase of our time, closely followed by "You create your own reality."

To my way of thinking, there's really nothing wrong with these two concepts, beside the fact that few people truly grok what they mean. And-- upon reflection-- thinking outside the box isn't really that useful because you're still basically trapped in "box-like" thinking. Sometimes you just have to throw away the box... and in a Matrix-like way declare "There IS no box."

"Creating your reality" is not exactly a new idea-- it has just been given some fancy new packaging by ideas such as "The Secret," "Abraham-Hicks," "What the Bleep" and others. Now, before any of you get a bug up your butt, don't get me wrong, I'm all for self-awareness and self-development. I say that often, because I mean it. But here's the thing... these "programs" and concepts are-- ultimately-- just another kind of "box." I believe their greatest value lies not in some nifty "connect A to B" methodology, but in the fact that they teach people to wake up, and be aware, and to become "active agents" in their own lives, as opposed to sleepwalking through existence blindly accepting whatever comes their way as if it were some kind of inevitability.

Personally, I am a bit annoyed by Oprah's (and a number of other "talking heads") overemphasis on money/wealth as the focal point of Creating Reality, but I also recognize that marketing spiritual esoterica to the masses may require a focus on a point of common interest-- in this case, money. 'Nuff said.

But how does this all relate to taking long walks on the beach?

For me, it started with figuring out what was important to me. And the deeper inquiry became one of examining "who am I," absent the cacophony of voices that surround us-- society, media, family, friends, lovers, even teachers and gurus I may have valued. The thing is, if you don't really know who you are, it's hard to figure out what you want.

As part of that inquiry, I ended up in childhood. What really moved me, before the world encroached on my reality and started telling me what I "could" and "could not" do? It's a good exercise. So many people I have met who are truly "in their bliss" can also track a close correlation between a childhood interest/obsession, and what they do now, and love.

Perhaps you endlessly built things, of sticks, mud, sand whatever you could get your hands on... leading to a life building beautiful custom homes. Perhaps you were a consummate observer of your family and its parties; understanding and drawing connections behaviors and outcomes... leading to a life as a brilliant therapist or coach. For me, I was never happier than when I walked on the beach, "finding things."

Fast forward 40+ years. It finally occurred to me that it would be the shit if I could get paid for walking on the beach... enough to justify being "out there," many hours. And so, that happened. I walk on the beach and "find things," and sell them to artists, jewelers and sculptors all over the world.

Now, this is not a story "about me." It's a story about throwing away that proverbial box, and embracing the infinite possibilities out there. Just like the guy in college who was only good at sleeping, what I do in no way "looks like a JOB." In fact, one of the most common comments I get goes something like "You can't DO that!"

Yes.
Yes you can.

But you have to be willing to throw away the box, and embrace whatever "reality" your imagination creates.

Because I Like To Write

Occasionally I get asked why I "waste my time" writing blogs on the web, and being part of forums, and facebook and the like.

Usually, these questions come from people who can barely tell the difference between a boat anchor and a computer. Yes, folks, there are still people who don't own computers and don't have Internet access-- and have no interest in changing that. They will never read these words, so I feel fairly safe talking about them here...

"Why don't you get off the computer and get a LIFE?" they ask.

Then they seem to back away slightly, as if someone who uses a computer has a contagious disease.

It's a mystery to them that I actually make a living (as it may be), using my computer, buying and selling things from vendors and customers I have never met-- and probably never will meet. When I explain that I actually do meet some of the people I know from "inside the box" they seem to feel horrified.

But I digress.

I write bloggy things and get into other online activities because I like to write. Moreover, I find the interactiveness of writing in this medium "differently rewarding" than I find writing in a journal with pen and ink. Which I also do.

The other day, I was watching some video clips of different "internet people" and social anthropologists, talking about the development and evolution of how we interact, as human beings.

In the "early days," the predominant speculation (or was it fear?) was that the Internet would end up homogenizing the world into a colorless, borderless "soup" where everyone is the same. That we would lose all sense of unique identity and language would slowly evolve into Sino-English mush. And that we would become "de-humanized," and just a number.

25 years later, the song seems to have changed. The social anthropologist types are now more of the belief that the Internet is helping us all return to a more "tribal" system of communication and interaction. Moreover, they are arguing that this is actually what "comes natural" to us, and it was how the world worked until the Industrial Revolution came along and automated, standardized, mass-produced and averaged how we approach things. Now we have a technological system that allows us to connect and gather in "special interest tribes," ranging from "folk dancers who speak Polish" to "collectors of blue feathers."

Or, as the case may be, "people who like to write."

I like to write, but I also like interacting with my Tribe. The Tribe of People Who Like To Write.

Actually, I like to interact with my Tribes.

From students of metaphysics, to beach combers, to enneagram enthusiasts, to stamp collectors, to nature photographers, to eBay entrepreneurs, highly sensitive people and many others.

Never before, in the course of Human History, has it been so easy to reach out and connect with others who share an interest, a belief, a hobby, a pathology(!) or a lifestyle. Perhaps what puzzles (and worries) my non-technological friends is that the "language" used to describe what "having a life" means has changed, and is continuing to change. Most significant of these is the subtle shift of getting to know people "from the inside out," as opposed to "from the outside in."

Meanwhile, I simply like to write.

Getting off the Train of Chaos

Some years ago, I decided to get off the train.

The "train," in this case, was the train of a chaotic life; the train of constant running around in no particular direction, but mainly in pursuit of something other people called "success." And maybe it was something I'd managed to persuade myself was "success."

Of course, this is a very simplistic way of stating what really happened.

I should also add that I didn't just "get off," all of a sudden... it was a long and rather deliberate process. And I'm onlt just now starting to clean up the final "bits."

I got to thinking about this, today, as I wandered on the beach for about three hours. It was a rather brisk late autumn day, and it suddenly occurred to me that it would have been unthinkable-- just five years ago-- that I would take three hours to do anything such as walk on a beach.

I was "warned" about getting off the chaos train. Most of the warnings took the form of assurances that I would soon "grow bored," and "regret" my decision. I actually lost some friends, over that. That, in turn, got me to contemplating how often our ostensible friends are drawn to what we DO or HAVE, rather than to who we ARE.

Going a bit further down the rabbit hole, I came to realize that change-- "real" change-- of our paradigms often means more than what immediately meets the eye. Taking the left fork in the road, rather than the right (which we have always taken in the past) doesn't just mean that we get to see new scenery... it also means that a whole series of things that normally transpire as a result of our going right... no longer happen.

Everything in life is interconnected. I got off the chaos train (slowly, gradually, almost completely off, now), and EVERYthing in my life changed... not just my stress level. My life, my friends, my work, my lifestyle, my living quarters... even my primary relationship. I no longer "go" to work, I walk on the beach and play around with my hobbies. I can DO that, because my life costs less to live. And I feel supported in that, because the people in my life are connected to ME, not to my "doings" and "havings." And I am no longer connected to a sense of needing to "prove myself" to others.

All in all, it is change for the better. In fact... there's very little of the "old me" that I actually miss. And only one more puzzle piece to put in place, before I completely wave goodbye to the train.

REAL change is not easy... and it often takes a long time, and involves the discovery that "one thing leads to another," and the original intent to do ONE thing ("reduce stress," for example) differently may well lead to a wholesale personal reinvention.