Politicians

edited August 2011 in Politics
Q. Goal of flow--why do politicians and lawyers frequently have this goal?

A: Because they are not acting on behalf of their own goals; they are taking on the goals of their constituents or clients.

Q. How does soul age relate to the Republican/Democratic divide?

A. Both the major political parties include a wide range of soul ages. Party affiliation has more to do with imprinting than with any factor on the Michael chart--both family and cultural imprinting.

There is a slight tendency for those who are politically conservative to be, or have strong influence from, the solid roles of warrior, king and scholar. There is a slight tendency for the more liberal, progressive people to be the fluid roles--server, priest, artisan, and sage.

There is a slight tendency, though we don't want to make too much of this, for the Republican Party to be a bit younger in soul age, but again, there is a wide range. There are some extremes there; there are both some very old and very young souls who like the idea of minimal government. So probably the mean soul age is younger with the Republicans, but there is a wider range. The philosophy of the Democratic Party has more of a mature soul flavor to it, yet people's party affiliation has a lot more to do with their cultural and familial imprinting than what they really believe. There are a lot of Democrats who are, in fact, quite conservative, although it might not be immediately evident.

The proclaimed divide between Republicans and Democrats is really calculated to build brand loyalty. It's like the difference between Pepsi and Coke; they are far more similar than they are different. However, it's hard to get people excited about brands if they don't differentiate themselves. There is a lot of Maya that reinforces the cultural and familial imprinting, when the parties are not really so different from each other in a mundane way.

Of course, the politicians of one party tend to vote differently than the politicians of the other because of how they perceive their brand and what they think the voters want from them. However, it's different on the level of individuals who habitually vote for one party or the other. When they talk theory, as people mostly do during election cycles, they sound like the politicians. However, what they really think and would like to see--when you get down to the sort of world that people want to have--many times there is more ambiguity between the parties.

It is good work to release the charged energy around political parties and to instead get down to cases, meaning discussing issues in a more specific, grounded way, looking for common ground. There is more of it than the brand loyalties of the two major political American parties would suggest. We are not saying that there are no differences between them--there are different emphases, but a lot of it is more in the philosophy than in the day-to-day workings. Also, over history there has been flip-flopping between them on certain issues despite their current identification with particular stances.

Q. What roles are the most popular politicians?

A. Clearly Barack Obama is a priest; John McCain is sage with a lot of warrior secondary influence. Sarah Palin is also a priest, and here you see the importance of cultural imprinting, which she has absorbed without much examination. In soul age, she is actually a little older than Barack Obama, yet in consciousness, she is much more on automatic pilot. This points out some Maya (illusion) among Michael students about soul age: age is age, but it is not consciousness. We would say that she is using her overleaves in a much more knee-jerk manner, whereas Barack Obama has put forth a lot more effort towards knowing himself.

Q. Are there more folks in the Democratic leadership living from a deeper place at this time than in the Republican leadership?

A. There's a little more depth in the higher levels of the Democratic Party than in the higher levels of the Republican Party, but there is a little more depth among the lower ranks, the more local levels, in the Republican Party than in the Democratic. However, the difference is slight and we would recommend that people not make too much of that. The lower ranks of the Democratic Party tend to consist more of people who are active because of what they personally want to get out of it. The lower ranks of the Republican Party tend to be more people who are more philosophically motivated. A problem there is that they often don¹t recognize the difference between the philosophy or, as we¹ve been saying tonight, the branding, and the reality. However, the lower ranks of the Democratic Party are not so concerned with that, one way or another; they are generally more narrowly focused in what their desires are.

Neither party is very elevated in consciousness. A great deal of what goes on universally in politics is at the knee-jerk surface level. There is not much vision or self-awareness anywhere in the political world. Having said this, we would add that Barack Obama is perhaps the most self-aware presidential candidate since Abraham Lincoln. This is not meant as an endorsement, to say that he¹s "better"--it is the choice of those who are voting that counts.

We might add that John Kennedy was quite self-aware, and he was a young soul, illustrating that soul age is not the issue here.

Q. Would my being a liberal today mean that I was a conservative in an earlier life?

A. Not necessarily. What it is to be a liberal today is different from what it meant in other generations, and is different in different locations. However, some souls tend to be more attracted to whatever is the more progressive brand of the day, and some tend to be more attracted to the more conservative brand of the day. We spoke about the more solid roles tending to be more conservative in a certain respect; with one input, they are slower to change.

One could be a warrior or king and be a firebrand of progressive politics, so the generalizations are a little weak here. Most souls are agnostic in this regard, so the familial and cultural imprinting can have a large impact, at least at first. Later, a lot of people are strongly influenced, starting in their teenage years, by their peers. The people whom they admire who are their own age or a little older can become very significant here. Therefore, even if your family and culture are very conservative, if you go to school with someone who makes a big impact on you who is more progressive, then you might move towards that (or vice-versa). Friendship is more influential in politics than advertising. Today, there¹s more segregation, so those who are more progressive tend to stick with their own, and those who are more conservative stick with theirs. However, in the schools, there is still a fairly good mix, and there is more of a chance to get people to question their imprinting at that age than there will be later.

Q. What does Michael think of the fact that at the same time, both the United States and Canada are in a political process of elections--is there any national karma present here?

A. There's no karma. However, these two countries look to one another, and have for quite some time, to try to learn from each other. There is much to be gained from greater communication between the peoples of these two countries.

Q. How would Michael characterize the masses of young people who have galvanized behind Obama in terms of soul age and consciousness--are they a new and different class of souls?

A. There is no such thing as a new and different class of souls; there does not need to be--the garden variety of human souls is quite adequate. What you have here is a lot of youthful idealism. This is a generation that grew up knowing about things many of their elders either learned about later, or still don't know about, such as the dangers to the environment. Therefore, at least the better educated of this generation are more aware of what is at stake. Also, they recognize the cynicism of most politics, so to have a candidate who is not cynical is hopeful to them. Although this generation is idealistic, we do not think it is naïve. It knows that there is a lot of hard work ahead. We would say also that Obama's opposition to the war in Iraq is a large factor in his popularity with this generation.

Q. Can Michael say what they feel are the real issues in this election: for example, the war, health care, education, jobs, and so forth?

A. The unspoken, overriding issue is self-centeredness vs. altruism. That is what the election is about, fundamentally.

Q. I understand that soul age and consciousness are not synonymous, but how do you measure consciousness--what are the signs, for instance, of an advanced consciousness?

A. We do not claim that consciousness can be objectively measured. As one particular individual grows in consciousness, the emanation of light from that individual grows both in quality and quantity. However, two individuals can be conscious in different ways, and their illumination may be of different qualities. You can obviously tell the difference in the aura of one person who is highly unconscious and one who is highly conscious. However, with two people in the middle range, who are both struggling to awaken, we could not say that person A is at 67 on a scale and person B is at 68. It's a little like comparing apples and oranges. Some people are very conscious in some areas and still asleep in others.

However, if someone is on the spiritual path, in the process of awakening, you can see that the energy is not stuck or badly blocked. There are changes happening, and the person is responsive to higher input; those who are firmly asleep are not--they do not take in light that shines from more conscious people or from spiritual guidance, at least not very much.

We would underline here what might be thought of as our mantra: that all is choice. We are not encouraging you to think of unconscious and conscious as another form of "better" and "worse." In fact, the more conscious you are, the more unity you see in all things and the less you tend to judge others, even if they are at the moment stuck in unconsciousness. You recognize that they are sparks of the Tao just as you are, and that they are following their own path. So this is not a competition. It¹s just that most of you are interested in being more consciously on your path, so we speak to that. Others who are not choosing that at this time are on their path, and it is their right to choose that. All you can do is choose for yourself--choose the path that you want to be on right now. Obviously, there are many people still choosing to live from the surface. That is neither good nor bad, but choosing to live from your quietude will ultimately bring you much more real joy. It is not easy at first, but it pays off in that regard.

CHANNELED BY: Shepherd Hoodwin
Sign In or Register to comment.