Toltec Way and the 1%

I am reading the book “The Toltec Way” by Susan Gregg – no free link I bought it (ISBN 1-58063-214-9), it is a nice readable book. It’s a manual but in truth I am not reading it as a manual – I’m not doing what she says. On p73 I got a bit stuck, here is the quote “Once you remember you’re looking through your filter system you realise what you’re seeing is not real and that you can change your response to it. Once you’re able to do that you’ll be able to experience whatever you want whenever you want. You will realise that you and you alone are the creative force in your life”. In my mind comes the 1%, how does the 1% affect these freedoms? And on it goes. Is my view of the 1% a filter system? To be quite honest I could imagine the Susan Greggs saying the 1% does not affect her freedom – apologies to her if this doesn’t apply to her. It is not particularly Susan Gregg but all the people on the Path who offer their Path as a cure-all “you and you alone are the creative force in your life”. Because of the 1% no Path is a cure-all. My compassion takes me to wanting to end all wars, world hunger and poverty, can I do that? Can any system that comes from someone’s Path do that? OK Zandtao could do it if everyone followed Zandtao, but then so could Susan Gregg’s if everyone …., so could Eckhart Tolle’s if everyone …., but then so could Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism if everyone …. and so on. So no war, hunger or poverty is not particularly addressed by any Path, it is addressed by all, and yet none of them have an effect – “you and you alone are the creative force in your life”? So my comment is “get real”, where is the proviso “you and you alone are the creative force in your life given that the 1% dominates the world and is so destructive”? But that doesn’t sound so good, does it? What Path is so wonderful when it doesn’t affect the global system? It doesn’t sound so attractive, does it? But am I decrying Paths? Of course not, one’s relationship with one’s Path is THE most important relationship in the world, it is more important than the love of your partner although obviously the two are connected. This relationship with one’s Path, love, is liberating. It does make you free, it does allow you to travel through 1%-world and do what you want …. mostly. Your Path can contribute to improving the situation with regards to war, poverty and hunger, so long as you don’t think you can make effective systemic changes. You can be free in 1%-world, that is so important, as those who are not liberated by their Paths remain trapped in all the horror of wage-slavery and the rest that are the features of 1%-world. I had a friend who was trapped in 1%-world. He said he avoided politics, to me that is like saying he avoided reality. Because he was avoiding the truth he was unable to see that it was affecting his responses. I made a throw-away comment that was political, and he claimed that I was being political. Despite my saying it was unimportant, his failure to view reality as it is – 1%-world – ended our relationship which had previously been one of respect for me on his part. We must face reality. We cannot say “you and you alone are the creative force in your life” without also recognising the proviso that “the 1% dominates the world and is so destructive”. Freedom only comes when we face reality. We are our only creative forces but the destructive forces can be limiting. They definitely limit our compassion as we cannot get rid of war, hunger and poverty, pivotal strategies of the 1%. But liberating our creative force means that we are not attached to the sadness that can follow from an understanding of 1%-world. Suffering is. 1%-world is. War, hunger and poverty are. That’s it. On our Paths we do what we can, but the truth is we cannot do enough about this suffering; but we can free ourselves from the sadness associated with the suffering – through compassion and detachment. So the question of Susan Gregg then becomes “If she doesn’t add the 1%-proviso, does she see it?” She is the only person who can answer that. But 1%-world can allow such people on their Path delusion. When people on the Path promote the notion of freedom, they can also give the illusion that there is freedom in 1%-world. For those on their Path there is freedom, but for most people there isn’t. From the outside those free on their Paths might still be wage-slaves but their minds are free. From the outside there is however no apparent difference in this slavery. Susan Gregg is free to write her book. By publishing her book she contributes to the profits of the 1% when her work could equally have been disseminated on the internet for free. Or she could sell it through self-publishing. But then she chose to publish through St Martin’s Griffin, thus enabling profit for her publisher. Michael Moore’s movies and books make profits for the 1% even when they are decrying the 1%. We are free to make compromises, but the question for free people is “have they understood their compromise?” Is it necessary? It is also important to note that once we follow our Paths Nature gives us financial independence, it just happens that way. Susan Gregg’s Path enables her to write a book, run counselling and generally help – whilst at the same time providing herself with sufficient money – more than sufficient money? Eckhart Tolle is not broke, neither is Gary Zukav etc. Nature provides those on their Path with what is needed. How much they accumulate this wealth is their own decision. Has Susan genuinely asked the above questions of herself? So far (p73) she has not asked them in her book. And we have no solution to war, hunger and poverty until the world understands the 1% and what they do.