Originally published at: https://integrallife.com/putting-the-pieces-back-together/
Corey and Keith discuss the psychological and cultural aftermath of the 2020 Presidential Election, and the integral work ahead of us to help put the fragmented pieces of our society back together in the post-Trump era.
Well, gentlemen, I lasted 15 minutes into your conversation, but that was about it. As an integralite Trump voter, I am astounded by the casual assumptions thrown around, particularly by Dr. Witt, regarding a supposed integral perspective on the elections. Just to mention one that utterly bewilders me is his casual assertion that orange “wants to go where the profit is.” As a 25-year student of and commenter on Ken Wilber’s work, I find this shockingly facile and wrongheaded. Orange is an evolutionary transcendence of amber, an advance on the long reach for divine consciousness. Amber, by the way, also goes where the profit is, as does Boomeritis green. Humans cannot exist without profit in its purest sense. Only Marxists and other romantics think profit is bad.
Such carelessness does not serve integral analysis.
Equally unfathomable was the assertion that advances in consciousness will come from “progressive positions.” Apparently Dr. Witt hasn’t read Ken Wilber’s devastating critique of the nihilism and narcissism of Boomeritis “progressivism” in his “Trump and a Post-Truth World.” I assert that most “progressive politics” today are in service of a nasty retribalization of the world, a counterrevolution against modernity, a transcend-and-exclude perspective that, as Wilber shows, is already a failure evolutionarily.
Dr. Witt asserts that “conservative media [whatever that is; he doesn’t specify] and conservative politicians do not serve their base.” Those politicians just received over 74 million votes in the recent election. Wonder how many they’d have received if they had been serving their base. “They had,” he asserts, “the best interest of the donor class.” And this is not true of the “progressive media and politicians”?
Conservativism doesn’t mean, in my life experience as an official in Republican administrations, what you seem to think it does. It’s not amber traditionalism, although of course folks with their center of gravity there are more likely to vote Republican than Democrat. It’s actually where the orange values of the American Revolution and founding are defended and embodied.
I found it amusing to hear Dr. Witt without evidence assert that the Democrat officeholders are somehow superior to those greedy Republicans. (Sen. Grassley is from Iowa.)
“Amber has very little capacity for cognitive dissonance.” What first tier wave does? Why is amber (aka, in the Witt universe, conservative and Republican) singled out for this thoroughly first tier psychodynamic? Where is Boomeritis green’s capacity for cognitive dissonance? And what does Democratic control of the US Senate have to do with this? Is Chuck Shumer somehow more at home with cognitive dissonance than Mitch McConnell?
“There are more egocentric politicians in the Republican Party; if you’re egocentric, personal power first, you’re not as welcome in the Democratic Party–you know, in the Democratic Party you have to do things for people.” Oh, bless your heart for retailing this fabulism. Then the mask slips, as it eventually does with “progressives,” when Dr. Witt kindly asserts that people in amber or in “corporations” “need external constraint.” Which, presumably our “progressive” betters are ready to impose.
Well, I had to stop there, recognizing that I wasn’t listening to an integral analysis but something less interesting. I’ve never listened to Dr. Witt before, although I know he posts a lot here. I doubt I will again. I’d rather listen to Rachel Maddow; she seems to know who she is. I’ve listened to Corey a lot more, particularly in his dialogues with Ken; he seems more authentically willing to work on an integral perspective, and I honor that even when I disagree or don’t get his points.
But I honor this attempt at integral analysis in spite of my own inability to listen long. It’s all in service of deepening and embracing Spirit manifesting in and as all of us. Thanks, guys.
(If you’re interested, here’s my in-depth analysis of Ken’s “Post-Truth World” essay at my AQALBlog on Blogspot, Feb 2017. Your system wouldn’t let me post the link. Cheers!)
Marty K.
1 Like
Thanks for this insightful discussion! There was an interesting thing I couldn’t really understand. Why does have amber or red only little capacity for cognitive dissonance? Could you explain this a bit more please?
I see that MKeller4033 above has already mentioned that. Also too me it seems to be something what needs further explanation.
Tank you guys for your wonderful work!
Respectfully I’m having difficulty understanding how someone that is coming from an Integral understanding could vote for Trump? I’ve clearly seen for decades that he has been a disturbing malignant Narcissist and Con-man and have knowledge of his scams and swindling for decades? There’s a reason why so few New Yorkers voted for him. Sir, please help me understand how you could overlook his downright criminal activity and believe that he could be the right choice for president? That’s not a defense of the corruption on the left or anything. For me my education in Psychological matters wouldn’t allow me to vote for such a mind.
1 Like