Tolerance is Not Love

Capitalism has driven a wedge between us. The manner in which the competitive economic system appeals to us for tolerance towards one another has stolen our sincere connection to compassion.

Love is not something to be negotiated as part of some economic transaction. Tolerance towards one another results from conflict within our own minds leading to wars as nations and conflict within our own circle of friends or family. Tolerance can only lead to more conflict since it is not genuine love or compassion.

Tolerance is behaviour more akin to a settlement, an agreement to not do harm, to just statically exist and leave one another alone.
This is not love.

Love is an action towards something, an expression of the underlying truth we ignore and replace with the fatally flawed notion of tolerance.


“Tolerance is not compassion, it’s a thing put together by the cunning mind. Tolerance is the reaction from intolerance; but neither the tolerant nor the intolerant will ever be compassionate. Without love, all so-called good action can only lead to further mischief and misery. A mind that’s ambitious, seeking power, does not know love, and it will never be compassionate. Love is not reform, but total action.”

Krishnamurti

Introduction: Prismatic Journalism

A sincerely objective journalist reports on ‘facts.’, objectively. However, in my experience, all journalists report with a distinct leaning away from those facts and their journalistic training and towards a preexisting agenda. 

It is as though these agendas have possessed both the journalist and the reader in equal measure. It won’t be possible for either to breathe until those facts have been twisted through a finely crafted lens.

Most of these journalists have a political leaning, to either Left or Right Wing, which are ‘part of the same bird’ as the photo-quote of native wisdom goes. I usually add that ‘..the US has two Right wings, and that’s why it is currently flying in circles‘.

This suggests that I would believe in democracy and the success of the Left vs Right system – if only both sides were represented honestly. However, Left vs Right is a system that causes greater chaotic cyclical thinking than a bird attempting to fly with one wing. A more appropriate image is two birds locked in the grip of one another’s claws while speeding exponentially to the ground. 

The reason; anything that uses static terminology and beliefs will always conflict with reality, which is always in motion. Take a moment to sense the gravity of change in the earth’s natural processes since the Industrial Revolution. Things are moving fast, and the system isn’t just embarrassingly outdated in its ability to address it. It is directly causing it.

Left vs Right is a disastrously hypocritical way to address the realities of ‘climate change’ and our overuse of finite resources. Perversely, both Left and Right treat those resources as though they are infinite

By now, we may have all noticed this. The opposing party takes power and makes an abrupt u-turn on those already ineffectual policies. Every four or five years, the hard-fought gestures towards progress made through anemic negotiations are undone by that same democratic vote.

They are literally fighting over how best to ruin the planet – or at most, how to make the earth uninhabitable the least quickly. This is not your fault. You were born into this system. Our challenge is to unlock ourselves from this exponential death spiral. 

So, my blog takes the feeling that you are to blame out of the equation – by reminding us that we have not been presented with a viable alternative system. 

We need to sit with the question: ‘IS the alternative going to come from limited Left vs Right thinking, a polarized and conflict breading perception?’ 

We simply have to be willing to look for a new way ourselves and respond proactively, as some people already are

I think the answer can come from a prismatic way of perceiving and thinking. 

By questioning what the world would be like without dogma – without stubborn belief systems that have us defending them as though our lives depended on them, we will instead see how our life itself depends on us, shifting rapidly away from them. 

This is where the word ‘prismatic‘ in my blog title – lifts our heads and hopefully our attention for a moment:

When a beam of light enters a prism – such as a pyramid-shaped crystal (yes, similar to the cover of Pink Floyd’s album Dark Side of the Moon), the true nature of that light is revealed in all its glory by bursting into the range of vibratn colours it actually consists of. Reality is revealed not as one-dimensional at all. Still, it is something we feel makes instinctive sense to us – since these are the colours we see life lit up with each day.

Can we use the prism as more than just a metaphor for gaining new perception, enough to save us from static, polarized and conflict-ridden thinking?

It is time for us to take a similar approach with our thinking; we need to free our consciousness from the lock of two-dimensional interpretations. We need to become aware of what lays under the boards of our current reality. 

Our minds need to go through this prism to reveal the structures/walls of perception that we have mistakenly identified as the boundaries of our abilities. These ultimately prevent us from acting in new, all-encompassing and compassionate ways. 

Having perceivable (political) wings is the polarizing white light – it makes people jump towards a certain sense of familiarity and loyalty. A motionless and hypnotic commitment. This makes people leave their journalistic training, away from reporting facts objectively. Up to now, we have all been the victims of this scam on consciousness.

My blog is not focussed on exposing the follies of polarized thinking – which could quickly become another conflict within itself. What we resist – persists. What we fight, we give validity to and energize).

Instead, my blog proactively takes the light of awareness that hits the prism of our minds to expose the beast’s true nature. With this altered state of full range perception, we will naturally want to reexamine almost all our assumptions. 

Asking questions should be our way of life. Acceptance of rigid beliefs will always conflict with reality, which is always in motion. We have to adapt to a rapidly changing reality. 

Maybe we can find out how – together. ‘What other world is possible? What can and should be done at this critical point in human history with such a new perception?’