Change Can be Difficult

There are so many things to learn these days, and blogging is just one of them - as is the art of sharing information, or building new relationships or accepting change and learning the new skills that must come with the change, for successful change.

So here we are on Blogging Right - a forum for info searching and sharing (which takes in a lot of areas!), opinion-seeking and stating, story telling, and personal growth.

The first thing I would like to do is invite some friends and unknown acquaintances to read and roast at whim in response to this posting.

Blogging Right's topic, today, springs from the perspective that individual religious beliefs and political philosophies are individual choices that serve as links, or as comparatives by way of free choices that may be made earlier and later in life, i.e. changing your support of a particular political party, or considering the significance of different religious beliefs at different points in your life.

These links and choices provide membership into a number of communities. The metaphorical fabric of these communities is strengthened by actions taken within each of these membership circles, unlike actions taken against other communities; the latter may be used to assimilate through force, or harm, different membership communities merely on the basis of differences.

And so if everything were in Divine Order, as the saying goes, we would learn to accept others, as we have learned to do with other big or little changes in our lives. This choice would result in every person learning new skills and strengths, throughout a lifetime. It doesn't mean "liking" all the differences. Acceptance would mean respecting the differences. We would be discovering and acknowledging personal growth opportunities. A difference doesn't have to be celebrated to be accepted. By accepting a different community, however, it would mean that community memberships do not take action against it.

At the same time, it is simple to condemn "certain" communities as 'unacceptable'. Those that create fear, or act aggressively and dangerously towards other communities, or those communities that have more power or resources and act coercively towards smaller or less fortunate communities - these memberships too would have to expect "change" - but it takes the individuals who comprise the memberships to act in favour of change.

On the other hand, from a group perspective, for instance, if there were regional governments based on global and population-based criterion (not countries' boundaries), then 'party' politics and religion as community-structured memberships would also have to change. The people's representatives, financial bases, etc would also be changed. New skills and strengths would be discovered and implemented. It would be a new world membership. Instead of countries assigning monies to 'third world' countries, or resources being fought over in the struggle to survive, or to amass fortune, new philosophies would be introduced and new structures created to deal with the changes needed in a global community.

Again, there are so many issues or changes to constructively address in that idea as well. So, not to simplify, but to provoke thought and change, these ideas have been presented here. Hope you enjoyed them and found some of your own passion, which identifies your beliefs, and something else to think about...a new angle, a new possibility, new directions. George Orwell would have been fascinated with the changes since 1984. Was there change? Blogging Right!

Charissma