April 6, 2011
As long as I can remember, I have always loved cheering for the underdog. When I was a child, the cartoon series “Underdog” was one of my favorites. Anytime his love interest, Sweet Polly Purebread, was in peril, unassuming, mild mannered “Shoeshine Boy” would step into a nearby phone booth and transform into super hero “Underdog,” inexplicably exploding the phone booth in the process. Speaking mostly in rhymes, and strengthened by his “Underdog Energy Vitamin Pill,” which he stored in the secret compartment of his “ring,” the super hero Underdog would then rush to save the day.
History is full of “underdog” stories. David and Goliath. The ’69 Mets. Even, “Revenge of the Nerds,” among many others! There is something epic and inspiring about the one that no one gives a chance to overcoming all odds to emerge the victor. I believe it is an archetype “story” that we come equipped with in our spiritual DNA.
I know in my own experience, I have felt like the “underdog” on countless occasions, especially when it comes to righting or correcting what I perceive to be the “injustices” of the world. Left to my own devices, I often feel utterly powerless to effect any meaningful influence upon the world.
The crux of this challenge comes from trying to figure out what I can do to right the world, rather than what I can be in order to see a right world. Each of us can probably list, without even really thinking about it very long, what we see as “not right” with the world. However, even in the act of making the list, we can inadvertently give power to the very thing that we perceive needs to be righted in the world.
In general, it is apparently easier for us to decide what we are “against” in the world and give energy to that, rather than decide what we are “for” and then go about the business of bringing that in to the world. This is especially so for most people when it seems there are insurmountable odds against them.
Deciding what we are for involves understanding who we are first, which necessarily implies a certain sense of personal self awareness. Conversely, it is often easier to decide what we are against because it only involves investing in what we believe about the world.
For me, the most extreme example of what needs to be righted with the world is our apparent instinct and tendency to go to war. I am not just speaking of wars between nations, but also of our interpersonal turf wars when we feel our boundaries have been threatened, especially by those closest to us in life.
If I perceive “attack” in any form and decide the attack is real, I have first decided that I am vulnerable to attack, which is a form of self attack. In doing so, I have already mortgaged away my peace and sense of safety. Boundaries now become absolutely essential to my survival and I must now be prepared to fight for peace, rather than simply “being peace.”
When we fight for peace, there is always collateral damage. We do not need to look very far to understand the damage done by war to all involved. Some believe the price is worth the cost. Personally, I believe such efforts just keep escalating the price tag, and history proves this premise time and again.
In the Underdog cartoon, there was always collateral damage from Underdog’s efforts to save the day. When confronted with this fact, Underdog would simply reply in rhyme to the effect of:
I am a hero that never fails.
I cannot be bothered with such details.
In a sense, it appears we may have inadvertently internalized Underdog’s apathy. Looking at the way we are going about things in the world, it appears no cost is too great to stomp out what is deemed “evil” by the powers that be. In this mindset, we are forced to reduce our reasoning to a “lesser of two evils” mentality.
Someone else’s willingness to go to war always seems to be greater than our own, so me must take preemptive action, a first strike. This is the way we justify our own instincts for war.
We might know it is evil to go to war, but the perceived enemy is a greater evil, so then we rationalize that we must “temporarily” become evil like them in order to vanquish evil once and for all. Truly and earnestly I ask, “Who among us is a perfect enough judge to accurately and unfailingly draw the distinction as to which of the two is the lesser evil?”
In order for us to move through these “beliefs” and evolve our collective consciousness, each one of us must begin individually to withdraw our agreement to go to war in any form. Make no mistake about it, the consciousness for war is present within our individual and collective consciousness. If it weren’t, we would already be at peace as a normal condition of our lives.
We cannot be “against” something without feeding the thing we are against. The rationale is that we must make it real first, so that we can then vanquish it. However, in the process we come perilously close to becoming the thing we are against. As long as the condition exists, we believe we must continue to fight against it.
In terms of sheer numbers, it would appear there are more of us vested in the mindset of war, than peace. In this respect, those of us who are for peace are apparently underdogs. However, as Dr. David Hawkins points out in his influential book, Power vs. Force, the energetic vibration of peace is exponentially greater than that of war.
In other words, it doesn’t require a majority of us to be peace to overcome and vanquish the mindset of war. One is a mindset of thriving, the other is based on surviving. It simply depends on whether we desire to thrive, or merely survive. Which would you rather experience? Me, I’ve already made up my mind.
There’s no need to fear, Underdog is here!
Stay Tuned In…