6 June 2007

I was just reading about how putting energy into the universe by being for something is a much more positive step than expending energy by being against something. (Me, I've always liked being against things myself. Back in college I was all about the rallies, the protest marches, and against dozens of evil things--stick a sign in my hand and I had a cause, a nice hefty dose of self-righteous anger, and was all a-bristle with fierce and persuasive arguments. Tons of fun!)

But back to my point. What I read said that it's more difficult to be for something, because then you have to come up with creative solutions for problems and work toward those, rather than just rail against all the wrongs--which is easy because problems tend to be so self-evident and, well, anyone can rant and rave and wave a sign in the air. (I get angry and wave my arms around a lot.)

The gist was that sending positive energy out is much healthier (not just for me, but in general) because it gathers creative and positive energy with it: "We can direct our energy and intentions into activities that promote peace rather than using our resources to speak out in opposition of war. On the surface, these appear to be two interchangeable methods of expressing one virtue, yet being for something is a vastly more potent means of inspiring change because it carries with it the power of constructive intent." (Daily OM, Putting Power In Perspective: Always Be For Something; May 18, 2007)

Then I saw this in the blogiverse tonight. It is a cool and very simple thing. I'm just sayin'. You could make a globe for your blog. Write a post on June 6. Whatever. I mean, if you feel like it.

But that thing about the positive--I never thought about it that way before.

So now I'm not quite as busy hating the war, despising Bush, being disgusted with the whole situation--it all really was wearing me out. I'm just trying to focus on peace. Dona nobis pacem. You go, Mimi.

Peace, my friends. And blessed be.