So now the talking point is that Obama destroyed chained CPI with his masterful brinksmanship.

[napoleon_in_rags]

27. Okay dude, here's the horrible truth:

How to even start this reply. Okay, how about this thought experiment: To give more life to a much used metaphor around here, let's imagine Obama is actually playing chess. Eventually he comes to a place in the game where he moves a pawn into jeopardy from an opposing knight. Informed people watching the game scratch their chins for a moment, then say:

"Ah, I see what he's up to. But the opposition is a good player, he sees as well. So that pawn won't get taken."

And they wait to see what happens next. But DU? Well, a post saying "I'm sorry I'm just a useless pawn" shoots the top of the greatest page, with 375 recs. The post, by a pawn, describes how they have always stood in front protecting the king, taking the risk, and how disgraced they are to see themselves sacrificed. It would be moving, if Obama were sacrificing a pawn. But in this case he's not even doing that.

Now, lets snap out of that cold chess metaphor, back to reality. People aren't pawns. This is human lives we're talking about. People are scared, upset. We can see that, we can feel that. Yet the realities of the game persist. You can talk about how each human life is precious and anything should be done to save it, but when you put that in to action as policy, you will become a slave to the first group of terrorists who takes a hostage and makes demands of you. So the game must be played to make the world better, despite it all.

How? That's a good question. I mean, what does it take psychologically, to be a great leader? To make the world a better place? The hard truth is that in a way, you have to be a bit of a psycho. FDR sent so many good innocent men to die on V-Day while sipping whiskey. Gandhi saw children mowed down with machine guns at the Jallianwala Bagh massacre as a result of his actions, and kept doing what he was doing. MLK knew the bomb threats for him went for all his loved ones, and they would be safe if he just backed down, but kept walking forward.

I don't know if there's a word for this state of being, but I think of it as a spiritual thing. Regardless, the key undeniable fact is that NO ONE in this political scene can save us from suffering and death, its the human lot in life. So meaning must come from a deeper place. I think of the Indian story of the Gita: Arjuna is a peaceful hippy, who doesn't want to fight. But God has come to him in the form of Krishna, and told him its his destiny, his duty, his dharma to be a killer on the battlefield, a knight in the great game of chess. Arjuna protests, but Krishna reveals how all the things in life have no substance, and the eternal nature of the human spirit. Arjuna finds timeless greatness in embracing his dharma, disposing of his foes with great presence of mind and love for them. Krishna elevates Arjuna to be a king, who is greater than the temporal states of life and death. He was able to kill his enemies in the end, not because he hates them, but because he realised that underneath it all, they were exactly the same as him - kings and queens in disguise, greater than life or death. This is the mental state of a great leader: He risks our lives because he knows that ultimately, he risks nothing at all. What is undying cannot be killed.

And this should be the mental state of anyone who would support a great leader: acceptance of Dharma. Maybe we had big plans about avoiding suffering and death, being hailed as worldly kings and queens, fame fortune and the rest. But when it becomes clear to us that our dharma, the hand we've been dealt is to be pawns, our greatness lies in fearlessly accepting that. Our greatness lies in offering up ourselves for sacrifice, while understanding that underneath, nothing being offered up at all.


Peace!
Nir.