Lewis Howes Be sure to subscribe for more – https://www.youtube.com/user/lewishow… Check Out The School Of Greatness – https://lewishowes.com/start-here/ Reverend Michael Beckwith is a sought after meditation teacher, conference speaker, and seminar leader on the Life Visioning Process. He’s also the founder and spiritual director of the Agape International Spiritual Center, and one of LA’s foremost black leaders. Micahel is the author of several books, including Life Visioning, Spiritual Liberation, and The Answer Is You. Michael has also appeared on several TV shows, including Oprah Winfrey’s SuperSoul Sunday, Dr. Oz, CNN, and Larry King Live. Every Friday at 1 pm Pacific Time, thousands of people tune into his radio show, The Sound of Transformation, which is all about recognizing the deep potential in all of us to create positive change. Michael is an old friend of mine, and I was honored that he had this conversation with me. I had him on The School of Greatness back on Episode 748, and you should definitely check that out to learn more about the power of pain and his struggle with racism. Martin Luther King said, “The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.” I have chosen not to be silent. I have much to learn, but even in my ignorance, I can stand in solidarity with the black community. I sincerely hope you will stand with me and make positive change happen. We’re not here to make people comfortable. We’re here to make people great. In addition to listening Episode 962 with Michael, please join me educating ourselves about allyship and how we can be actively anti-racist.

AS IF TO DEMONSTRATE AN ECLIPSE
by Billy Collins

I pick an orange from a wicker basket
and place it on the table
to represent the sun.
Then down at the other end
a blue and white marble
becomes the earth
and nearby I lay the little moon of an aspirin.

I get a glass from a cabinet,
open a bottle of wine,
then I sit in a ladder-back chair,
a benevolent god presiding
over a miniature creation myth,

and I begin to sing
a homemade canticle of thanks
for this perfect little arrangement,
for not making the earth too hot or cold
not making it spin too fast or slow

so that the grove of orange trees
and the owl become possible,
not to mention the rolling wave,
the play of clouds, geese in flight,
and the Z of lightning on a dark lake.

Then I fill my glass again
and give thanks for the trout,
the oak, and the yellow feather,

singing the room full of shadows,
as sun and earth and moon
circle one another in their impeccable orbits
and I get more and more cockeyed with gratitude.

(brainpickings.org)

Opinion

One-term presidents generally don’t leave big footprints. And the last four years may be seen as a reaction to the game-changing presidency of Barack Obama.

By Steve Inskeep

Mr. Inskeep, co-host of NPR’s Morning Edition, is the author of “Imperfect Union: How Jessie and John Fremont Mapped the West, Invented Celebrity, and Helped Cause the Civil War.”

• Nov. 29, 2020 (NYTimes.com)

President Trump’s critics warn that history will look unkindly on his effort to overturn a democratic election. This forecast, while understandable, may be wrong. History rarely looks on one-term presidents at all.

For the last four years I’ve covered his administration as a journalist while also researching and writing books about 19th-century American history. This made it natural to try assessing him from a distance, as future historians might peer at him. Someday the clamor of his tenure will fade, leaving behind a few essential facts, the first of which is his single term.

Few presidents who served four years or less find an enduring place in the popular imagination. One term is not long to influence a country so large and dynamic — and a president’s failure to win a second term can be a sign that he didn’t. If you are not from Indiana, you may not know my state produced Benjamin Harrison, a one-term president who was different from President William Henry Harrison, who died after one month in office. Few people visit the statue of James Buchanan in a lonely corner of a Washington park, and in my life I have met just one enthusiast for Chester A. Arthur.

One-term presidents who escape obscurity often did something beyond the presidency — like John Adams, one of the nation’s founders, or Jimmy Carter, whose much-admired post-presidency has lasted 10 times as long as his term. John F. Kennedy’s legacy rests, in part, on legislative achievements that passed after his assassination. Others are known for their failures while in office: Warren G. Harding for a corruption scandal, Herbert Hoover for economic calamity, Andrew Johnson for being impeached.

We can’t be sure what history will make of Mr. Trump, whose term featured scandal, impeachment and calamity, as well as a pandemic. His story may not be over; he remains at the head of a powerful movement, and reportedly talks of running in 2024. But to judge by information available today, he has a relatively narrow role in the American story: as the reaction to a game-changing president — Barack Obama.

Something like this is true of many presidents. A relative handful enact lasting change, while others respond to them. The ones who left a mark include Andrew Jackson, Mr. Trump’s favorite, who served two terms, from 1829 to 1837. Jackson founded the Democratic Party, reinforced slavery, pursued populist economic policies, and faced down a near-rebellion over states’ rights. When he exceeded his power to achieve his goals, critics called him King Andrew.

Jackson was followed by eight presidents who served in his shadow, two of whom died in office and none of whom went on to a second term. History does not linger long on most of them; they were subordinate characters, mostly shaped by Jackson’s agenda — either advancing or resisting it.

In the same way, Mr. Trump’s place in history may be overshadowed by Mr. Obama’s. Elected in 2008, Mr. Obama seemed to personify America’s growing diversity as a multiracial republic. His campaign motivated new voters, and he talked at first of transcending old political divisions. He said he wanted Americans to regain trust in institutions battered by 9/11, the war in Iraq and the financial crisis. He raised taxes on the wealthiest Americans, signed the Affordable Care Act, tried to break an impasse over immigration and approved a nuclear agreement to ease a long-running conflict with Iran.

He also did not manage to transcend the old divisions. Facing unrelenting opposition from Republicans in Congress, he enraged them by using executive authority to govern around them. Numerous Republicans claimed Mr. Obama had acted like a king.

The Obama presidency paved the way for Mr. Trump. He rose by relentlessly attacking Mr. Obama, promoting the racist conspiracy theory about his birthplace and falsely claiming that he favored open borders. Mr. Trump told voters in 2016 that he was their “last chance” to win before they were overwhelmed by immigration and globalism.

It is astonishing to recall how much Mr. Trump devoted his term to re-fighting the battles of the Obama years. Using executive authority as Mr. Obama had, he rolled back housing and environmental regulations, reversed transgender rights in the military, and branded antiracism programs as racist.

But on many issues he only partly succeeded. He withdrew the United States from the Iran nuclear agreement, but other nations did their best to maintain it. He abandoned Mr. Obama’s strategy toward China, but he struggled to make his own strategy work. He damaged the Affordable Care Act but never managed to repeal it, even when his party controlled Congress.

It was revealing that he publicly supported the most popular benefits of the health insurance law that he said he despised, such as protections for pre-existing conditions. His predecessor defined what health insurance should cover, and Mr. Trump accepted the definition.

Mr. Trump withdrew from the Paris climate accord, but his successor plans to rejoin it. Mr. Trump ended Mr. Obama’s program giving legal status to some undocumented immigrants who arrived in the United States as children, but the Supreme Court restored it, finding Mr. Trump’s action “arbitrary and capricious.” Though Mr. Trump took other actions to limit immigration, the most permanent symbol of his policy may be an unfinished wall in the desert. He neither erased all of President Obama’s accomplishments nor completed his own.

President Trump still has a legacy. He attracted a vast and loyal following. The tax cuts he approved could last for years, while the three conservative justices he appointed are likely to remain on the Supreme Court for decades. His obsessive use of social media made him unlike any president before him, as did his open disregard of barriers between his public duties and personal business. He spoke well of authoritarian rulers, and accelerated the use of disinformation.

The epic conflicts he generated seem like perfect material for future history classes. It is easy to imagine a high school history book recounting the monthslong court fight over his effort to ban Muslims from entering the United States, followed by discussion on religious freedom and the Constitution.

But in those same textbooks, President Trump may be a minor player in the larger story of a democracy grappling with demands for a more equal society — an era marked by the election of Mr. Obama, the first Black president.

And Mr. Trump’s tenure already has a fitting bookend: On Jan. 20, he will be replaced by Mr. Obama’s vice president.

Steve Inskeep is a co-host of NPR’s Morning Edition and Up First, and the author of “Jacksonland” and “Imperfect Union: How Jessie and John Fremont Mapped the West, Invented Celebrity, and Helped Cause the Civil War.”

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.

• © 2020 The New York Times Company

(Courtesy of Michael Kelly, H.W.)

Gemini Full Moon Lunar Eclipse

The Gemini Full Moon involves a partial eclipse — penumbral, to be precise — so it won’t be an especially obvious one. The Sun will illuminate most of the Moon, but a tiny section will be blotted out by the Earth’s shadow. We will experience this as just a small blot on the landscape. It won’t be enough to fully upset our situation or thwart our hopes and dreams, though there may be a sense that something is missing, or a plan hasn’t quite come together as originally expected.

This is the last of four such minor eclipses this year, with the previous on January 10th, June 5th, and July 4th. I can certainly vouch for plans not coming together fully around two of these penumbral eclipses. This didn’t really matter, in the grand scheme of things, as I would see the people concerned again for other events. But there was a sense of slight disappointment with the mismatched arrangements. What struck me most clearly in both instances was that I was not fully committed to the plans in the first place and perhaps overlooked my early discomfort. So, yet again — as so often with lunar occurrences — obscured feelings became clearer under a penumbral eclipse.

On this occasion, the Moon in Gemini especially accentuates being of two minds or having to deal with two possible scenarios. Do we go down the first track or the second? This kind of Gemini vacillation makes life more complex than it needs to be! If we can’t make up our minds, then maybe we’re simply not ready — in which case, fate will take its course and make a decision for us (or highlight where we have failed to be resolute).

Similar to the Harvest Moon on October 1, neither the Sun nor Moon makes aspects to other planets. The closest are a trine between Sun and Mars and a t-square from the Sun and Moon to Neptune. But these are outside of the typical orbs (6° for a trine, 8° for a square), suggesting that the opposition itself is the major energetic exchange, and support from other sources is not easily at hand.

When the Sun opposes the Moon, we can experience it as facing off in a power struggle with an authority figure. The Sun’s logic or rationale (the person represented by the Sun) feels overbearing, despite that we have strong feelings (the Moon) percolating under the surface. We have an instinctive sense of what’s right in the situation, while having little choice but to go along with the other version. It is worth remembering that the face-off is temporary and that feelings and situations will change, given time. This is not to suggest that we just ignore significant emotions, but that there may come a time when they don’t bother us quite so much; or conversely, when they come out more powerfully at another point or even in a sideways fashion. We can now recognize when a response is out of proportion, and that it’s merely a pent-up emotion making its presence known!

One name for November’s Full Moon is the Beaver Moon, reflecting how we may be beavering away; getting ready for winter and preparing for major festivals like Christmas. Another name is the Mourning Moon, encouraging us to let go of outmoded habits, behaviors, or attitudes that no longer help. Mercury is in Scorpio, a sign associated with the need to detoxify and move away from dead energy. Mercury’s close sextiles to Jupiter, and Saturn give the nod to make changes. With Mercury applying to Saturn, especially, the instruction seems clear to trim down in some way.

This article is from the Mountain Astrologer, written by Diana Collis.

Uberboyo I breakdown how; God, Your Father, and The Divine Masculine, all relate Basically; if you don’t get right with you’re Dad you’ll never get Passive Income and will thus remain a Wagie for life Possibly even have to do some wagie job in Heaven as well – like documenting how much Eve spends on celestial shopping at the Tree of Fashion If you want to get in touch with me and do DEEP work on; APPLYING Jung and Nietzsche Exploring Art Therapy Tackling your Anxiety. Follow this magic link and we can set up a call: https://boyoalert.typeform.com/to/c45Rd1 ~ Want to LISTEN as you Work or Drive? The Boyocast is on Spotify, Overcast, Anchor and WAY more Check it out: https://fanlink.to/boyoalert ~ Like my Music? Check out more on Spotify, Soundcloud, Deezer, and Tidal: https://podlink.to/uberboyomusic ~ Uberboyo Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/uberboyo/

BUY BOOK ▾

By Francis Fukuyama

• Published Nov. 10, 2020 Updated Nov. 17, 2020 (NYTimes.com)

STRONGMEN
Mussolini to the Present
By Ruth Ben-Ghiat

Ever since the 2016 election, observers like Timothy Snyder, Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt speculated that Donald Trump could undermine American democracy and move the country in an overtly authoritarian direction. That possibility grew more plausible over the years of the Trump administration, as he sought to undermine a growing list of American institutions that stood in his way, including the intelligence community, the F.B.I. and Justice Department, the courts, the mainstream media (which he branded “enemies of the American people”) and of course the integrity of elections themselves. Trump made his authoritarian instincts clear by refusing to commit to a peaceful transfer of power should he lose the 2020 election.

Ruth Ben-Ghiat contributes to this literature in a book that compares Trump to a wide variety of earlier strongmen, including Mussolini, Hitler, Augusto Pinochet, Francisco Franco, Muammar Qaddafi, Silvio Berlusconi and Mobutu Sese Seko, as well as contemporaries like Viktor Orban, Rodrigo Duterte, Vladimir Putin, Narendra Modi and others. The author, a historian who has written previously on Italian Fascism, is at her best when describing the history of Mussolini’s rise, and the way that insouciant Italians and foreign powers facilitated it.

[ This book was one of our most anticipated titles of November. See the full list. ]

Unfortunately, Ben-Ghiat provides no conceptual framework for distinguishing between different types of strongmen, and gives us very little insight into Donald Trump beyond what is already widely known. What we get instead is an endless series of historical anecdotes about a heterogeneous collection of bad leaders ranging from democratically elected nationalists like Modi to genocidal fanatics like Hitler. What sense does it make to put Silvio Berlusconi in the same category as Muammar Qaddafi or Saddam Hussein? Berlusconi may have been sleazy, manipulative and corrupt, but he didn’t murder political opponents or support terrorism abroad, and he stepped down after losing an election. Ben-Ghiat notes that many strongmen came to power in the 1960s and ’70s through military coups, but that today they are much more likely to be elected. Wouldn’t it be nice to know why coups have largely vanished?

Ben-Ghiat’s case selection seems quite arbitrary: For example, strongmen of the left like Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez or Ecuador’s Rafael Correa are not included, nor are women like Indira Gandhi. If we are focusing on populists in democratic countries, why include autocrats who never faced an election? An analytical framework would allow us to understand how strongmen differ from one another, rather than lumping them into a single amorphous category.

This is too bad, because Trump really does deserve more careful comparison with other leaders. There are indeed certain parallels between him and contemporary populists like Hungary’s Orban, Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Poland’s Jaroslaw Kaczynski, insofar as they all rely on a similar rural social base for their support. On the other hand, there are unexplained differences: Orban, Duterte and El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele, for example, used the Covid pandemic to vastly expand executive authority, while Trump did the opposite, abdicating responsibility and shifting authority to the governors. Most strongmen are ruthlessly efficient and Machiavellian; Trump demonstrated incredible incompetence in failing to build his border wall, repeal Obamacare or expand his voter base. And, of course, he failed to win re-election to a second term. Revelations in The New York Times of Trump’s tax returns suggest he ran for president not out of a mad desire for power, but simply to avoid bankruptcy in his failed hotel business. And yet, despite myriad revelations, he exerted a magnetic pull on his core followers. Why? Perhaps it might be more useful to understand the ways that Trump is sui generis, and how he could set a pattern for strongmen of the future, rather than reprising familiar precedents from the past.

• © 2020 The New York Times Company

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJ

Michael Beckwith founded the Agape International Spiritual Center

Michael Bernard Beckwith is a New Thought minister, author, and founder of the Agape International Spiritual Center in Beverly Hills, California, a New Thought church with a congregation estimated in excess of 8,000 members.^[1][2][3] Beckwith was ordained in Religious Science in 1985 .

Career

Beckwith is founder of the Agape International Spiritual Center, co-founder of the Association for Global New Thought, and co-chair of the Season for Nonviolence along with Arun Gandhi.^[4][5]

In 1986, he founded the Agape International Spiritual Center, a transdenominational community which today counts a membership of 9,000 individuals who study and practice New Thought–Ancient Wisdom. Agape’s outreach programs feed the homeless, serve incarcerated individuals and their families, advocate the preservation of the planet’s environmental resources, and globally build and support orphanages whose children have survived the ravages of war and AIDS.^[4]

Beckwith was one of the featured teachers in The Secret (2006) movie and the bestselling book by the same name that followed the film.

Beckwith teaches meditation, affirmative prayer, and speaks at conferences and seminars. He is the originator of the Life Visioning Process, a technique purporting to offer its practitioners a method for putting a stop to being a passive tourist in one’s life.^{[citation needed]} He is author of Spiritual Liberation, which won the Gold Medal Nautilus Book Award,^[6] Inspirations of the Heart, which was a Nautilus Book Award finalist; Forty Day Mind Fast Soul Feast; A Manifesto of Peace; and Living from the Overflow.^[4] In 2011, Beckwith released TranscenDance, a collection of remixed lectures set to electronic dance music by Stephen Bray and John Potoker. Beckwith was named to Oprah’s SuperSoul100 list of visionaries and influential leaders in 2016.^[7]

Beckwith briefly appears in episode 4 of the UK Channel 4 television series ‘How to Rob a Bank‘ with a segment of his stage show and interview, describing how his inspirational talk led former US Marine Cain Dyer to hand himself in after committing 100 bank robberies.

See also

• History of New Thought
• New Thought

More at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Beckwith

Phoenix Bear – Gravy Boat Thomas Woods

(Contributed by Bob of Occupy aka Political Bob)

Chen Chen

Last Updated November 23, 2020 (onbeing.org)

Has a guest ever been a soothing influence on a complicated family gathering?

In this poem, a son writes to his parents and invites them to a meal, letting them know that his boyfriend will also be there. He gives instruction to his parents on how they should behave, parenting his parents. In all this family tension, the boyfriend’s question “What’s in that recipe again?” offers calm, and builds lines of connection that had otherwise seemed unlikely.

Chen Chen — I Invite My Parents to a Dinner Party