Screen Shot 2017-10-05 at 12.07.09 PM

America is somewhat divided down the middle in political ideologies. On one side is conservatism. On the other is progressivism. Straddling both is libertarianism.

At my best, my science informs my beliefs. My science is BioFeedback. My beliefs are many.

Included in my beliefs is my politics. I identify as a scientist. I also identify as a Libertarian.

Whenever we talk about government and the political spectrum, we have to view it through the lens of authority. Where does authority reside? Is it with the individual or the government?

Conservatives believe that economic authority should be with the individual and social authority should be with the government. Progressives believe that economic authority should be with the government and social authority should be with the individual.Libertarians believe that all authority (save the authority of the Courts, Police, and Military) should lay with the individual.

What about my science leads me to believe the best form of governance is the smallest form of government? Why would I champion the individual? What does BioFeedback have to teach us in this arena?

In 2009, THE MOVEMENT was formed to share the discovery of perpetual progress. Perpetual Progress is based upon the use of BioFeedback. BioFeedback refers to how sensation and action affect other.

Whenever we match our actions to our sensations, we progress. Whenever we do that in perpetuity, we progress perpetually. Let me explain…in the realm of movement.

Let’s say I get a positive sensation from flexing my shoulder. If I train that with THE MOVEMENT protocol, I’ll achieve some personal record. Whether it be flexibility, strength, speed, endurance, or recovery, in some way, I’ll do more than before.

So what BioFeedback, even working out have to do with Politics? Everything! It has to do with how individuals react to leadership.

When an individual tunes in to their own biological based leadership, amazing things can happen. Pain can be relieved. Abilities can be gained.

And when one ignores their internal leadership in lieu of external leadership, or governance, they invite disaster. While following one’s own guidance is tricky (especially in the beginning), following others’ guidance is a guarantee…of eventual failure. If you follow anything other than yourself, you will eventually break yourself.

When we have a strong state, or central governance, all people will be broken at one time or another…especially those with the least power. And group is only as strong as its individual members. This points to a simple principle and practice.

Maximize individual liberty. Make a group where the individual is the focus…when the individual can be the focus. And when is the individual not the focus?

The individual is not the focus when that particular individual is impinging on other individuals. The other case is when another group (of individuals) is aggressing upon another group of individuals. It’s in those cases where the (weak) state institutions come into play, those being the police, the courts, and if a threat is international, the military.

That allowance of freedom allows for conservatism and progressivism to coexist…if they’ll allow each other coexist. And I think their coexistence is crucial to their individual existence. Both conservatives and progressives can advance the cause of individual liberty, as well.

There is a time for progress. There is a time for conservation. Each respective group must sound the clarion call when it is time. Sebastian Junger’s argument is much the same in his book, TRIBE.

But here’s where BioFeedback comes back into the picture. Just because something needs progressed beyond or something needs to be conserved doesn’t mean progress or conservation can happen now…and that’s where individual and collective BioFeedback plays a role.

The feedback we get from ourself tells us how much we can and cannot change. The feedback we get from others tells us how much they can and cannot change. This informs the roles we all play.

Conservatives tells everyone, this is important…this part shouldn’t be changed. Progressives say, this part isn’t good enough…we need to makes progress here. And Libertarians remind both that as a group, we can stay the same or change…but not at too high a cost to any individual.

And when we all collectively decide to remain or change directions, our roles change a bit. But we have to understand the nature of change before we more clearly understand our roles. Change isn’t as effective as we’d prefer…but we can make it more effective.

I’ve heard change referred to in many ways. Change is incremental. Change is a pendulum. I believe it’s both of those things…but I believe it’s more than those things.

When I’m talking about individual physiology (including psychology), I describe it in terms of elasticity. Your body is made up of elastic tissues…with some being more elastic than others. But what we fail to comprehend is that our physiology is elastic, too.

Whenever we think of cultural change, we can look at it as incremental…everything looks incremental in the short term. When we look at it through the broader prism, we see the pendulum. And we see it go too far in a direction…and then swing back.

The pendulum swings back because change is an elastic process. And if the only way to change is to go too far, then by all means, the party of change (or changing back) has to push us too far. And what we’re all fighting is staying too long or going too far.

To fight change is to delay the inevitable. And to fight change is to build change up so much that too much change occurs. And when that change occurs, a commensurate correction is needed.

But then the change of correction is fought, so that an overcorrection occurs. And each side is emboldened to fight change until change is once again, inevitable. It’s a truly vicious cycle…but going too far isn’t the only way to change.

Cooperation between the three minds of the American Politic can help keep change going. But that cooperation must start with understanding our collective roles. And we need to play those roles better.

Optimally, conservatives would keep us from changing too much, too fast. Progressives would keep us from staying the same too long. And Libertarians would remind both sides that staying the same or changing cannot impinge upon the individual too much.

What has happened is that no group values the other groups. And when we collectively don’t see the necessity for each other, polarity occurs. Conservatives fight change at all costs. Progressives push change at all costs. Both want Libertarians to pick a side and Libertarians don’t want to be a part of either side.

What if Conservatives remembered their own bias against change and tried to find ways in which they could change? What if Progressives didn’t throw the baby out with the bathwater? What if Libertarians remembered that the most power and safety an Individual can have from other individuals and groups…is a group?

The group that needs to change needs to communicate what change they can accept…and accept it. The group that is pushing the change (literally) needs to learn to not push too much. And the group that has pushed the change must be open to change…when it’s their turn.

Energy is lost putting on the brakes, in going too far, or pushing too hard. There are things that deserve, even demand to remain the same. There are things that require us progressing past. And both conservatism and progressivism should protect and progress the individual’s liberty. And when the Libertarian joins in, all individuals maximize the ability to conserve what works, progress past what doesn’t, and maximize individual power through cooperation of the three minds of the Body Politic.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *