Moving Forward – Empowerment and Engagement

Empowerment

As we look to reduce the negative impact of stress on us, as well as to make our efforts at inner and outer change more effective, we need to address at least three factors.

First, we must learn to resist the intrusion of adverse forces and ideas; that is, to resist stress waves, emotional viruses, misleading information and geomagnetic anomalies that flow through our collective consciousness, along with the provocations on which many people, organizations and other entities feed.

Second, it behooves us to anchor ourselves in the power of our heart-centered sovereignty (our core values), and to work from that foundation, rather than from fear or anger. Our fear and anger may certainly motivate us and provide information to us, but we want to operate more effectively by centering first on our core values.

And third, we need to maintain forward development and expression of our own identity as a unique, soul-filled individual – and craft our responses to things based on this identity. Beware of allowing external agents to capture our attention and, thereby, hold in abeyance our own interests.

Each of these three factors helps to keep us from becoming the mirror image of those we do not like, and gives access to our own moral compass. This means, in part, making time for that which nurtures us.

A Review

At this point in my meanderings, we’ve looked at a list of cultural stressors, their impact on us, our connectivity with nature and people, the adverse impact of stress, the inestimable worth of our core values for guidance and health, and how to use our emotional system for perception and problem-solving. Our next topic will be moving forward to make change in the world and in our lives – on a foundation of our core values rather than provoked reactions. But first, let’s look at some of the not-so-obvious factors that make change difficult.

Hidden Pitfalls on the Path toward Empowerment and Sovereignty

Many of us resist change – and there are reasons why we might choose to resist even that which would ultimately benefit us.

Some people have an ingrained authoritarian orientation. They find security in looking up to a strong leader and clear rules. Loyalty becomes a high value. For such individuals, independent thought, too much self-examination or ambiguity are uncomfortable. They like things clear and direct; and an autocratic leader saves them from responsibility and uncertainty. (This authoritarian orientation was early noted to be a common denominator of the president’s followers. This allowed candidate Trump to brag that he could shoot someone in broad daylight and not lose any followers – as if that were laudable.)

Also, something in us wants our leaders to god-like – to believe some divine force put them there. On the other hand, to be automatically cynical (“They’re all corrupt.”) is an equal abdication of responsibility since one is once more freed from the obligation to think, evaluate and act. Such individuals are still authority oriented – just negatively so.

Others may be attached to their stresses or may be getting something out of their current situation – even if it has unpleasant features. They may enjoy a benefit, special consideration or the moral high ground. And having someone to blame for their troubles (even if true) can take the onus of off them to move on.

Still others may be attached to their anger (reflecting deeper personal issues) or even addicted to the anger chemicals in their body (certainly a more powerful feeling than vulnerability). If one is angry, one is focused on the infraction and perpetrator and not on one’s pain.

Finally, it’s often the case that change is just plain hard work, requiring attention to our goals, honesty about our efforts, and evolving the relationships around us, many of which may be invested in things staying as they are.

This is not to blame the victims who live in pain and struggle to keep going, but only to recognize the full ramifications of introducing change into a structure.

So, before undertaking efforts at change, it may behoove us to explore these questions:

• What does the current situation cost you, or deny you?
• Has it given you any special considerations or privileges or a moral high ground?
• Are you gratified by having someone to blame?
• If things truly changed, is there something you might have to give up?
• If things truly changed, are there responsibilities you might have to assume?
• Are there people who depend on things being the way they are – on you being the way you are?
• If things changed, how might your relationships change?

Another broad question might be to ask what your investment is in things as they are, as well as the need for change? With that awareness, you may be able to approach efforts at change in a more wholistic and effective manner.

Next, we’ll get more specific in the final section – part 3b.