Seven: For Heaven

My dad is a pastor/preacher/spiritual leader.  A few years ago he became a “General Presbyter” which basically means that he is a pastor to pastors.  When I told my dad about the revolution, I’m happy to report that he didn’t understand it.  He told me that I was describing “the kingdom of heaven.”  Well, maybe he understood it in his own way…

I actually took offense at his suggestion, because let me tell you something about the “kingdom of heaven:” it’s a cruel joke if you can’t actualize it in our known reality.  It is hell on earth if you can’t live heaven.

Lets say, for the sake of argument, that heaven exists and it will be some sort of beautiful plane of existence where there is no pain and suffering.  That’s all fine and well for an afterlife.  And if you believe in it then you most likely believe that one can only have the experience of heaven by first dying.  But in all likelihood, our body will just rot after we die. What happens to our consciousness in the afterlife is up for anyone’s best guess.

I don’t think that an “afterlife heaven” needs to be the case.  I think we are perfectly capable of establishing our own understanding of heaven on earth today if we so chose.  My only personal request would be that this “heaven” includes the equality of all human life.

In a sense, I’m not advocating heaven on earth.  I’m advocating the treatment of all human beings with the basic common human dignity that we all possess.  I’m advocating a fundamental respect for life in all forms.  The consequences of this are world peace and equality.

So a revolt against the rich is a revolt for the possibility of heaven on earth.  I think it’s something that many of us have always wanted in the first place.

*   *   *

A note about Natural Law.  Nature was a “heaven” long before humans began intervening and thus altering.  I think that if we allow nature (but not the bad behavior of historic human nature) to take over the reigns of humanity then we will find ourselves in a place of peace that we’ve never known before.  What’s more, is that since we are social creatures, we can begin cooperatively competing with one another to find solid solutions to our sustainability and climate change problems.  We cannot overcome this obstacle if we remain divided with one another.  It is a common conundrum to all of humanity.  With a peaceful revolution, I’m simply suggesting a perfectly plausible solution to the main problem of inequality; and the tertiary problem of “too costly resources.”

*  *  *

A note about March 15th logistics:  I talked with Sgt. Phil Pera of the SFPD again today.  We reached an agreement on the parade route and he agreed that the revolt will not include any arrests, and will not be deemed “civil disobedience.”  I’m going to be meeting with him in person tomorrow to make sure we have all the details and obligations considered.  I’ll be sure to report on that tomorrow.

Also – if you are planning on attending the March 15th non-violent revolt in the financial district – PLEASE WEAR GREEN!  We need to be able to identify one another and a bunch of greenies will stick out nicely in the hyper-trendy and professional fi-di.

2 comments on “Seven: For Heaven

  1. KTK says:

    I would just like to point out that today I saw an ad in the SF Weekly, promoting the “Revolution” March against the Rich on the 15th.

    SF Weekly is the only alternative news weekly in the Bay Area that is owned by a coporation. Furthermore, there were no ads in the Sf Guardian promoting the event.

    So I ask you, how are you to revolt against the rich if you’re paying coporate salaries with your marketing budget? Isn’t this a contradiction?

    In my opinion, if you took this seriously, you should have used one of the Independently Owned Alternative news weekilies rather than the one that’s own by a coporation in Phoenix, Arizona. It wouldn’t have taken much research, and would have saved you the burden of looking like a hypocrit.

    • Thanks for the comment and thoughts.

      The decision to run an ad in any sort of publication was weighed heavily. We ultimately decided on SF Weekly because it appears to have the broadest circulation and many of peers indicate that they pick up an SF Weekly regularly over the Guardian.
      Further – SF Weekly gave us a significant discount for the ad.

      I can certainly appreciate your concerns about hypocrisy and contradictions. But we are constrained within a corporate system and will need to continue playing by their financial rules until some meaningful change starts to happen. As you are aware, this is a “catch 22.” Filling the coffers of corporate media is a necessary evil until the power structures change.

      I can assure that you that I’m taking this revolution very seriously (as are many people that I’ve been working with). But I also want to acknowledge that it can have a lot of fun built into it too. I think it will be a healthy process for us to look back on our consumer lifestyles and laugh about it. And of course, we are planning on the March 15th revolt will be a joyous and peaceful time.

      What’s more, I would suggest that now is not the time to be quarrelling over procedure. Now is the time to organize and unite. We won’t be able to change anything if we’re busy quibbling about details. I’m happy to have your help in organizing future events if you believe that a peaceful revolt against the rich is the way to go. Email me at to schedule a meeting.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s