In Part 1 of this post I wrote that the reality of life today includes much confusion, uncertainty, and confused emotions about pursuing success and wellbeing. In fact, our tumultuous, changing world spurs actions that often undermine rather than support psychological health. That’s visible in the dysfunction and unhappiness emerging from the choices, decisions and overall way of life of many people, today.

Based on current research and new thinking about resiliency and psychological health, I suggested three practices for “rebooting” your life in today’s environment: Self-awareness (“Wake Up”); envisioning your life circumstances with out-of-the-box perspectives (“Lose Your Mind”); and actions that support positive growth rather than stagnation (“Push The Envelope”).

In Part 2 I propose that you combine “rebooting” your life in those ways with a life “remix.” That is, create an intent to activate six important dimensions of your life, each with a new, clear purpose. The “remix” reflects the holistic reality that everything you do in each “part” of your life affects and is affected by every other “part.” A life “remix” in the dimensions I describe below helps you evolve in healthy, proactive ways. And the latter is a necessity for positive, resilient living within this fluid and uncertain world that we now inhabit.

The Six Dimensions:

Here’s what you do:

• Formulate specific new goals for each of the following six interconnected dimensions of life. Each should be modest; that is, realistic and able to be achieved within a reasonable time-frame that you specify and commit to.

• Then, describe some specific actions you can begin taking right now that support each of the goals.

The six dimensions are:

• Intellectual – Identify a subject area for new learning of any kind. It should have some intellectual or knowledge component, but could consist of something involving motor skills or a non-cognitive subject as long as it has some mental component.

• Emotional — Choose an emotional experience or capacity that you want to strengthen. For example, greater empathy; more attention to inner emotional life; diminished anger or frustration; more self-exposure in your daily interactions.

• Relational – Define some feature or quality of an existing or potential relationship that you want to strengthen. Perhaps with a family member, a friend, or even strangers you may deal with. Examples might include becoming a better friend; being a better listener to someone you care about; being a more loving parent.

• Creative — Pick one area in which you want to develop or enhance your creative expression. The “product” that emerges is unimportant; no one is going to judge it. Just work at doing it, as an expression of something that you find creative. Preferably, it should be something that’s not directly work-related.

• Spiritual — Choose some activity through which you build a stronger sense of purpose and meaning in your life; something that transcends your day-to-day, “outer life” material existence. The goal is strengthening your sense of connection with God, if you are a believer; or unity with the Cosmos, the “One;” or whatever frame of reference you prefer.

• Physical — Select an objective for improving your physical health. It may be a new goal, or one that helps you move towards optimal health. Be mindful of the mind-body-spirit connection.

How Your “Remix” Integrates Your Life

Most people discover two things as they work on this. First, each new goal affects and is affected by what you’re doing in each of the others dimensions. They are synergistic. Therefore, your goals and your action-steps towards them steadily build greater integration and connectionwithin yourself; and they build greater integration between your mind-body-spirit and the other “parts” of your life. Here are some examples of what that can look like:

Bob chose a relational goal: he wanted feel more engaged, more connected with the needs and life dilemmas of family members and friends. This, in turn, impacted his spiritual goal — building a greater sense of purpose and meaning, beyond his career achievements, by service to a religious institution. And that, in turn, strengthened his actions that supported his physical goal – which was to lose some weight and respect his body more. That is, these connections helped him see that he was striving to feel at his best, overall, through self-directing and integrating his life in new ways.

Another example: Richard crated an emotional goal: strengthening his empathy towards colleagues and subordinates at work. He saw that he couldn’t do that while maintaining the same old patterns in his relationship with his wife — he had become less sensitive to her emotional needs. This gap became more visible and uncomfortable to him. His emotional goal impacted his relational goal. That is, he began to step “outside” of himself, and saw things more from his wife’s perspective and experiences, not just through the lens of his ego-self.

By opening himself more to his wife, intimacy grew. And she responded with greater openness, herself. But more than that, they began to feel more closely attuned, spiritually; on the same wavelength. So for Richard, his emotional goal also strengthened his spiritual goal, as well.

Tina established a creative goal: to take a painting class. This opened up new sources of pleasure and beauty in her life. It also introduced her to some new people and generated more vitality, overall. Consequently, she began feeling happier interacting with her partner. The products of her creative goal spilled over into the relational dimension of her life. She experienced a “remix” of pleasure and fulfillment from different sources.

Similarly, Jeff decided to learn flower-arranging as his creative goal. It became such fun for him that he became more emotionally expressive and lively in his relationship with his wife — which was his emotional goal. It also increased his desire for more knowledge about botany – which was an intellectual goal. And it strengthened intimacy with his wife, hisrelational goal.

Robin’s intellectual goal was to read one book per month in a particular subject area she had long-standing interest in. With more ideas now circulating in her head, she had more to talk about with her husband. In fact, she realized that she had ideas and thoughts in a lot of areas that she had not been sharing with him. So her intellectual goal cross-fertilized her relational goal.

From learning to “reboot” and “remix” your life, you strengthen your capacity to build greater psychological health and resiliency in this post-9-11 world. Growing and integrating these six dimensions of your life forms a kind of latticework of new growth.  It activates your natural drive towards wholeness and positive adaptation to change. It helps you retrieve your capacity for resiliency from immobilization and uncertainty…and the latter are so easy to sink into when dealing with the pressures, material values and fears that are part of life today.

Many people today don’t like what they see when they look into that mirror. Especially when so much feels out of control: Economic decline with no end in sight; social and political changes that can feel frightening, even threatening; career uncertainty; relationships unraveling under stress; climate disasters, both man-made and natural. All of these events impact your mental health and overall well being, as research and survey data show: Emotional, physical and social symptoms are rising, such depression and anxiety, obesity, demagoguery from media personalities like Glen Beck, emotional disturbance in the workplace…the list goes on.

All of that can make you feel frozen in today’s world. How can you find a psychologically healthy path into the future, in the midst of such confusion and turmoil? And, within a cultural and political environment that feeds self-serving, shortsighted behavior?

I’ve been addressing the impact of living in our new world upon people’s emotional health on my posts for this blog, Progressive Impact.  In this post, I suggest three ways to “reboot” you life in positive ways, within today’s unpredictable, interdependent and often scary world.

Wake Up!

Common lore is that it’s harmful to wake up a person who’s sleepwalking, but that’s not true. And when you’re sleepwalking in your life, it’s especially crucial to wake up to some important truths. They include what really drives your life, your values, your beliefs and your conflicts. That is, what lies behind the denials, rationalizations, and social fictions you’ve created or bought into along the way. Keep in mind that we all have hidden drivers; it’s part of growing up as a human.

So, it’s important to wake up. That means facing and working at rectifying what’s unexamined or unresolved in your life that’s caused difficulties for you. These are mostly unconscious and usually products of old childhood and family-based conflicts. People tend to repeat and reenact them through adulthood. As Faulkner put it, “The past is never dead – in fact, it’s not even past.”

In addition to old traumas are the consequences of having taken a wrong path in life; a decision that you may now regret, perhaps one that was based on fear. That can also keep you locked in place and less flexible today.

No question, waking up to painful truths can feel frightening or humiliating. But it’s the road to “rebooting” your life. It might mean confronting feelings of deep self-loathing. Or recognizing shame about expressing your needs, perhaps because your parents affirmed only the desires they approved of. It might mean facing up to a character trait you’ve been blind to, like arrogance or contempt. Therapy can help with these issues, when they are particularly troublesome. But you can also practice honest self-examination on your own.

A marketing executive I worked with awakened to the fact that she was chronically drawn to relationships in which she felt invalidated and unaffirmed – both with lovers and bosses – just as she felt as a child, when she was treated indifferently by her mother and rejected by her father. Awakening like that can activate feelings of rage, loss, and disappointment. They might come from realizing what was done to you, and from what you did to yourself. But if you don’t awaken, you could seal your fate. Like this woman had been doing, you might keep reenacting old themes over and over, telling yourself new versions of the same old lies (“This time, with him/her, it’s going to be different!”).

Another part of waking up is learning about your inborn temperament and how that impacts your sensitivities and needs. For example, how much or how little social interaction you enjoy; your reactions to light and sound. Learning how to penetrate through the cultural and gender attitudes you acquired as you grew into adulthood is also important. For example, our culture has taught that “success” in relationships and work is equivalent to possession and control – getting it or submitting to it. This has created all sorts of emotional problems, individually and socially, especially when “failure” results. Take a look at how devastated people can feel when they suffer a career setback. And that experience has become even more intensified since the economic downturn began in the fall of 2008.

Lose Your Mind

Henry Miller once wrote, “Don’t try to change the world….change worlds!” He was referring to the liberating experience of looking at your life situation from a very different perspective than your usual one. I’ve described this shift in previous posts as a way to create new solutions to relationship conflicts. But more broadly, “losing your mind” can be helpful for creating new ways of seeing and thinking about your life in many ways, especially when you feel frozen or stagnant.

For example, envision what it would look like to behave differently in a situation that’s confusing or causing conflict. Picture yourself in a movie, where you’re creating different scenarios, alternative “takes” for the same scenes. Or, imagine yourself as the character in a novel….and you’re writing the story as it proceeds. Just picturing in your mind alternative ways of seeing yourself can free up the new energy you need for making changes.

One example: Jane, a media executive, sought help for dealing with a new, faltering relationship. Her emotional mindset was such that she viewed herself “the problem” because of what she assumed was her “chronic insecurity.” With help to visualize a different “take” of her story, she looked at her insecurity not as a deformity but as her response to her partner when he withdrew from conflict. That is, her insecurity was the product of something she brought to her relationships, as well as the kind of man she was drawn to, to begin with. She also saw parallels in chronic conflicts with some co-workers on her team. Waking up to the roots of her own issues, combined with shifting her view of those chronic situations, opened up new possibilities for growth and change in her relationships.

Creating a different mindset can also help when you have a setback or loss in your career. For example, a senior executive who had enjoyed a stellar career was suddenly faced with “failure,” when he was let go in the current economic downturn. He felt depressed and rudderless. One thing that helped him was to create a different picture of what had make him successful in the past; different from the career roles that he had defined himself by, previously. Using the analogy of the children’s toy, Lego Blocks, he visualized himself as a set of strengths and capacities. Those were the keys to his previous career success. They could be reconfigured and redeployed in different ways – just as you can use Lego Blocks to make different objects – and therefore create success in other kinds of roles than his previous one.

To use a very non-psychological term, “wisdom” begins to accrue as you practice “Waking Up” and “Losing Your Mind.” That’s because the more you see, the more you can understand and create more effective actions in response to what you understand. Wisdom reflects a broader set of perspectives, sort of like the expanded vision you have, looking from the top of a tall building vs. when you’re standing on the street. That helps you with the next practice for rebooting your life – making deliberate shifts in your behavior.

Push The Envelope

Becoming more self-aware and shifting your mindset about your life are the foundation for positive change. But then you have to apply them to how you behave in daily life.

One way to trigger positive change is to put yourself in new environments, situations or relationships that require you to stretch; to create new behavior consistent with how you want to change or grow.  For example, a man who had become aware of arrogant and superior attitudes that he’d been demonstrating towards others, wanted to change. He committed to growing his capacity for empathy towards others, and knew it would take some work. One avenue for building greater empathy was undertaking volunteer work that, in effect, “required” him to practice compassion and giving. That behavior was like strengthening a muscle. The more he “exercised” it, the more it grew.

Keep in mind that “rebooting” your life comes at a price: All of your actions from the past remain a part of you. But that doesn’t have to be a negative.  In fact, they can inform you about what you need to rectify or build on in order to redirect your life today. When you awaken, shift your mindset, and undertake new actions, you’re also incorporating all the consequences of your past. That’s part of creating greater wisdom in the present.

For example, some people were damaged by ignorant, abusive, or narcissistic parents. Some voluntarily hurt themselves, as well, by foolish actions or decisions. Positive change in your life is fueled by integrating and accepting responsibility for all of that. Forgiveness and compassion towards yourself and others is key. Without it, you don’t grow. You’ll remain like a computer program that’s become frozen.

Learning from the consequences of your past helps you restart and grow, whether in your relationships or any other part of your life. In fact, every moment is a new opportunity to “reboot.” And as you do that you create the foundation for a “remix” – which I’ll describe in Part 2.

The current version of the GOP is doing a good job at trying to fool all of the people, all of the time.  And, with the help of many Democrats, who give new meaning to the term, “fellow travelers.”

Case in point: The issue of the soon-to-expire tax cuts for the rich.  The Bush tax cut legislation of 2001 included a provision that they would expire at the end of 2010, and tax rates would then revert to 2000 levels.  The Obama administration wants to keep the tax cuts in place for the middle class, who would benefit from them during this continued economic near-depression; but let them revert back to previous levels for those with very high incomes, when they expire at the end of this year.

But guess what?  The Republicans, together with a number of Democrats, are fighting vigorously to preserve the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.  Republicans and their Democratic allies argue that it’s more beneficial to the economy to preserve the tax cuts for the wealthy – those making over $2 million a year —  because that would help “small business.”

Tell me, how many small business owners make that kind of income? And how would we make up for the loss of revenue?  By taking away benefits for the middle and lower classes, in the form of food stamps and other benefits or services.

This is where trying to “fool all of the people all of the time” comes in:  The entire argument is disguised in Orwellian terms, as necessary and good way to benefit everyone.  Writing in the New York Times, Paul Krugman exposes this with a good analysis of the deception and corruption behind it all.

For example, he points out that continuing the tax cuts for the rich would cost the federal government $680 billion in revenue over the next 10 years.

And where would this $680 billion go? Nearly all of it would go to the richest 1 percent of Americans, people with incomes of more than $500,000 a year. But that’s the least of it:  …estimates are the majority of the tax cuts would go to the richest one-tenth of 1 percent.  (and) the average tax break for those lucky few — the poorest members of the group have annual incomes of more than $2 million, and the average member makes more than $7 million a year — would be $3 million over the course of the next decade.

Krugman is right on target when he points out that

…it’s hard to think of a less cost-effective way to help the economy than giving money to people who already have plenty, and aren’t likely to spend a windfall.  No, this has nothing to do with sound economic policy.

He also points out that this reflects our corrupt political culture,

… in which Congress won’t take action to revive the economy, pleads poverty when it comes to protecting the jobs of schoolteachers and firefighters, but declares cost no object when it comes to sparing the already wealthy even the slightest financial inconvenience.

So, what will prevail:  The corruption, deception increasingly rampant in our culture – disguised in Orwellian terms, as “helping” you, the average American?  Or Lincoln’s observation?

Stay tuned….

As I read and hear about the reasons offered by those opposing the Center, they usually conclude with such descriptions as  ”insensitive,” “inappropriate,” or “insulting” to the memory of those whose lives were lost in the 9-11 attacks.  And yet, I haven’t heard any real explanation of what, exactly, would be  ”insensitive,” and so forth, about the proposed presence of an Islamic Center in the vicinity of Ground Zero?  The most they say or imply is that its presence would be wrong, by definition, because of its location.  But those opposed don’t really say what that connection is, in their minds, that makes its location wrong or “unwise.”

To put this in a broader context, look at the recent speech by New York Mayor Bloomberg.  He presented both a passionate and reasoned, principled explanation why it should be allowed; and why doing so is fully consistent with American values and history.  Following that, President Obama affirmed much of the same set of principles in support of the Center — until he backtracked the next day, under the not-unexpected Republican and right-wing opposition.

Here’s what I believe is the unspoken source of the opposition: Equating fanatical, extremist Muslims with Muslims, per se.  That’s why some have used the analogy of erecting a Nazi center next to a concentration camp.  Or a monument to the KKK next to a civil rights memorial.  The analogies are bizarre, and reveal the bigotry and ignorance behind them.  That is, the heart of the argument against the presence of the Islamic Center is that it would be “insensitive” because  the perpetrators of the 9-11 attacks were Muslims.  Now take that link to it’s conclusion.  Aside from the fact that Muslims were among those killed in the attack, the opponents seem reluctant to state that they are arguing that Islam, as a faith, is embodied in the terrorist attacks.  This would be like saying that because some Christians are fanatics, and some of those support killing of doctors who perform abortions, that therefore Christianity, per se, is a fanatical religion.

The triumph of emotional reactiveness and sentiment over our professed American values is very troubling.  If the opponents to the Center acknowledged outright that they’re equating fanatical Muslims and the Muslim faith in general, at least they would demonstrate logical integrity — along, of course, with outright bigotry.  But we would see what their true position is, rather than hearing them evade explaining just why they believe the presence of the Center would be “insensitive.”  This closet prejudice reminds me of Colin Powell’s retort to those claiming that Obama was  a secret Muslim, during the 2008 campaign. Powell asked what if  Obama was, in fact, a Muslim? So what?  What’s the point?   The same questions should be asked today of those who couch their opposition in words that don’t make explicit their implied conclusion.

Mayor Bloomberg was right on target when he explained the higher principles and context of this issue.  It’s worth reading.  Click here for the full speech.  Here’s a small portion of what he said.

Let us not forget that Muslims were among those murdered on 9/11, and that our Muslim neighbors grieved with us as New Yorkers and as Americans. We would betray our values and play into our enemies’ hands if we were to treat Muslims differently than anyone else. In fact, to cave to popular sentiment would be to hand a victory to the terrorists, and we should not stand for that.

For that reason, I believe that this is an important test of the separation of church and state as we may see in our lifetimes, as important a test. And it is critically important that we get it right.

On Sept. 11, 2001, thousands of first responders heroically rushed to the scene and saved tens of thousands of lives. More than 400 of those first responders did not make it out alive. In rushing into those burning buildings, not one of them asked, ‘What God do you pray to?’  ’What beliefs do you hold?’

The attack was an act of war, and our first responders defended not only our city, but our country and our constitution. We do not honor their lives by denying the very constitutional rights they died protecting. We honor their lives by defending those rights and the freedoms that the terrorists attacked.

Well said, Mayor Bloomberg.

A woman in her late 30s was telling me about her work-life conflicts. She has a busy career, three children, and a husband who travels a great deal for his own job. She suddenly paused, recalling a recent, terrifying dream: She’s on one of those moving sidewalks, and can’t get off. Passing by on either side are scenes of herself, but living different lives with different people. Suddenly she recognizes the Grim Reaper standing at the end of the sidewalk, arms outstretched, awaiting her.

She wakes up, screaming.

You might think her dream sounds more typical of someone in the throes of “midlife.” In fact, I think it reveals the need for new thinking about what we’ve called “midlife.” That is, changes in our culture and in how people live require tossing out old notions of “midlife” and the “midlife crisis.” With people living longer, healthier, productive lives, what used to be a narrower “middle” period of adulthood has greatly expanded.

Instead, think of a broad period of true adulthood that starts somewhere in the 30s. From that period onward men and women face a range of truly adult challenges of living and working in today’s world. This new, longer adulthood extends for several decades — recent surveys find that about 80% think “old age” begins at around 85 — so the term “midlife” is no longer accurate.

No surprise, then, that 30-somethings are reporting symptoms associated with a “midlife crisis” – marriage boredom, careers flatlining, work-life juggling, trying to keep it all together, trying to maintain sanity…and, wondering what the point of it all is, like in that Talking Heads song.

To better explain all this and how to reverse that “death spiral,” let’s look at recent contradictory data about the so-called middle years from a broader perspective. Then, I’ll suggest ways to deal with those challenges that enhance psychological health and well-being.  First, the recent research and surveys that present contradictory data about the so-called middle years: Some comes from a MacArthur Foundation study that indicates there’s no such thing as a “midlife crisis” at all; that most people sail through it smoothly. But try telling that to the many men and women who struggle with a “non-existent” crisis that can lead to despair and turmoil.

And then there are the recent surveys that find midlife to be a period of both increased potential for suicide and increased happiness. One American-British study of two million people indicates that midlife is a time of universal depression, especially through the decade of one’s 40s.
 Moreover, that depression can be severe, leading to suicide. For example, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports a 20 percent rise in midlife suicide in recent years; a rise that exceeds all other age groups in the U.S.

Some have tried to explain this in various ways: The decrease of hormone replacement therapy among women; more divorces; the tenfold increase in the use of prescription painkillers. But they’re groping in the dark. Such factors can lead to many outcomes, depending on how the person handles them; not necessarily suicide.

On the flip side, data also indicates that happiness actually increases after this “bottoming out” of depression. Again, speculations abound as to why: Some argue that people may feel happier after their 40s because they’ve learned to count their blessings, or learn to accept that they’ll never achieve certain life goals.

I find these all of the above explanations unconvincing. I think they only underscore the need for a new understanding of adulthood, proper; a new framework through which people can learn to deal positively with that adult life challenges of today’s world.

Redefining “Midlife” Much of the contradictory data about depression and happiness reflects a failure to understand that people face a mixture of new challenges once they’re past the young adult years, pre-about 35. During the several decades between young adulthood and old age you grapple with the challenge to “evolve” into a fully adult human – emotionally, creatively, relationally, and spiritually. You have to face such core questions as “What am I living for?” “What’s the purpose of my life?”

That period now kicks in somewhere during one’s 30s. That’s when most people start emerging from younger adulthood, which is really an extension of adolescence in our culture. Until then, you’re dealing with the often-long period of education and training, and getting established in the adult career world. You’re shifting your emotional connection with your family towards becoming more of your own person. You’re learning about intimate relationships, and (hopefully) why they fail. Overall, you’re having to take more responsibility for your actions, decisions and direction in life.

These challenges are the source of most adult emotional conflicts, because facing them can arouse tremendous fear, denial or escapism. After all, we’re highly conditioned to define ourselves by what we have rather than who we are. We learn to turn away from looking down the road, where we see Death patiently awaiting us all, as that 30-something woman did in her nightmare. And the economic downturn that began in September 2008 has only added to the anxieties about what may lie ahead.

When you begin to deal with the fully adult challenges you open a Pandora’s Box of new questions and conflicting desires. For example, you feel pulled towards integrating the different “parts” of your life. You want to answer that inner voice asking, “Why am I choosing to live the life I’m living?” That is, the work you’re engaged in, your friendships and love relationships, your life-style and other commitments. Your inner voice begins to ask, “Are they what I truly want?”

Facing all that can be difficult, even painful, because we’re so easily trapped within our past choices and/or materialistic lifestyles, and there we may not be able to see any viable alternatives. Then, we may just resign to “what is.” It can lead to what one man said to his wife during a couples therapy session in my office, “Maintaining a certain life-style and juggling all the balls of busy lives and careers – that’s just part of normal life, isn’t it? Can’t do anything about that. Let’s just figure out how to smooth out the bumps.”

A Perfect Storm

I think depression does rise among some people when the new conflicts and needs converge with a second psychological shift: Old emotional defenses, rationalizations and self-deceptions from your childhood and adolescence, as well as from your adult decisions, begin to erode and crumble under their own weight. They no longer work so well as you age.

One reason that happens is because we always know the truth inside, and truth always keeps trying to rise to the surface. We may have remained unconscious about old conflicts – and puzzle over repetitive patterns or underlying unhappiness – but the pull towards resolving them is a strong developmental need. It tends to blossom more fully as you become older. In fact, the current economic meltdown has intensified that pull, out of necessity. In that sense it may prove to be a blessing in disguise for many people; an aid to redirecting their life choices in more fulfilling ways.

Sadly, though, some do descend into that “death spiral” of despair and resignation. That can segue into depression, from mild to severe. Suicide attempts may occur, as the research found. An example of downward drift is a man who realized that he never really liked his career, felt underutilized and unfulfilled; and then was let go by his company. At the same time, he was going through a divorce. He asked me a tearful question in our first meeting that sounded like a Zen koan: “How do you start over when you can’t start over?”

Some people are better able to move through this period with greater clarity and hopefulness. This may account for some of the other data, about an upswing of happiness during one’s 50s. In fact, research shows that older people show greater brainpower, increased judgment, perspective and wisdom when solving problems. In addition, those with a sense of humor tend to live longer. These qualities can enable one to feel gratitude and appreciation for what one has in life. That can enhance overall well-being and positive energy, as distinguished from day-to-day fluctuations in “happiness.”

But I think there’s also a darker reason for the reported rise of happiness among some: masked resignation and accommodation. Some people more or less give up trying to grow or change. They decide, consciously or unconsciously, to lope along in the life they’ve been living…and then define that as “happiness.”

It’s an illusion, though. Over time they tend to become “comfortably numb,” emotionally and spiritually. And they become increasingly vulnerable to physical ailments, an upsurge of later-life depression, alcoholism or drug usage.

I’ve worked with many such “happy” people: A woman who feared what changes she might have to make in her life to feel more alive, more vital – until one day she discovered her husband had been conducting an affair for several years, and her world crumbled. Or the man who had become more withdrawn at home, burying himself in work, alcohol and Internet chat rooms – with the silent agreement of his wife. Meanwhile, he gained weight and developed high blood pressure. When he consulted me, he said that whenever he had tried to “break free,” he reverted back to his “old ways,” so he had decided to just stop trying.

But more positively, I’m seeing a rising number of people who grapple with their “midlife” challenges right from the start. They do some self-examination and work towards creating clearer purpose and more integration within their lives. That can open up a sense of renewal and positive resiliency.

Seen in this light, midlife is better understood as a positive transition zone into full adulthood. A period for creative solutions and better trade-offs regarding your current commitments – mortgages, tuitions, salaries, expenditures, work and relationships. And then restructuring your choices, values and goals. Making them support an integrated, healthy and authentic life, through which you can continue to grow and develop in all realms of your life. That’s positive aging.

How Can You Do That?

Deal With Your Problems – Today No one enters the thick of adulthood unscathed by childhood. Have you ever met anyone who had perfect parents? But when your emotional conflicts impact your relationships and behavior, it’s time to find a good psychotherapist. Do it now. Remember what’s waiting for you down the road. If you feel depressed, don’t be so quick to pop pills. Recent studies find that antidepressant medications work no better than placebos, except for people with incapacitating depression or major mood disorder. Most people’s emotional state is a physiological-emotional byproduct of how you’re “practicing” your whole life.

Design Your Own “Evolution” A large-scale study of baby boomers by MetLife/Civic Ventures found that over half now want their work to contribute to the common good; to provide a greater sense of service. Does that resonate with you? Take an honest look at what you’re really working and living for. With your partner, assess how your career – its rewards and tradeoffs – relates to the rest of your life, including where you find meaning, your longer-term goals, and how you’re using your mental and emotional powers to contribute something to the world, beyond just own self-interest. What changes would create better alignment? That’s especially relevant today, when financial rewards may not be as promising as in years past.

Rethink Your Intimate Relationship If you and your partner have been together a long time take the radical step of confronting whether you want to continue your marriage or relationship. Is this the person you want to stay with the rest of your life? Face the possibility that the relationship you entered years ago and within which you raised children worked for that earlier purpose, but may no longer do so, today. If so, how could you reconstitute it? Do you want to?

Maybe a time will come when people choose a marriage partner on the basis of raising healthy children in a stable environment, and then later seek a different partner with whom one feels a greater romantic, soul mate connection. But for now, you can face whether the two of you can rebuild the kind of relationship that you both want. Get the help of a good couples therapist if necessary. But if you decide it’s better to end it, do it now, with mutual respect.

The upshot, here, is that most people are capable of self-directing their lives during the adult years. What you experience isn’t some inexorable process that simply happens to you. It’s the product of how you manage the changes within your mind/body/spirit; how you deal with the new possibilities that lie ahead.

As the novelist George Eliot wrote, “It is never too late to be what you might have become.”

Moreover, look at today’s context: The election of our first African-American President has spawned a not-unexpected backlash of fear, racism and hostility.  That backlash is clearly an element in the Tea Party movement, and is stoked for political gain by frightened Republicans. Few Republicans will admit that; and few Democrats have the courage to expose it.

Given the larger, world-wide context of change, danger and uncertainty, it’s no surprise that President Obama has become the receptacle for fear and hostility.  For example, the right-wing and its Republican allies are intent on portraying Obama as a commie-leaning, anti-American, dangerous alien — despite that evidence that he’s a pretty centrist, business-supporting, moderate via his actions and policies.  I think the outrage and vitriol expressed about and towards him is fueled by a mounting sense of hopelessness and danger, with no discernible way out.

The fact is, we’re living with a continuing, frightening economic tailspin; unchanging unemployment levels; endless wars with no clear purpose or exist strategy; an obvious need to let the tax breaks for wealthy people expire (and opposition to such from the Republicans); fears among both parties about tackling the mounting dangers of climate change; and a host of other continuing uncertainties and dangers.

In this context, few political leaders offer solutions that can be supported or enacted, given that the Senate now seems to require a filibuster-proof majority for any legislation.  Columnists like Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post, Charles Blow and David Brooks of the New York Times are among the few public figures exposing the core dynamics underlying this odd mixture of free-fall and stalemate.  Many feel as Maureen Dowd described recently in the Times, that “…we are in a monstrous maze without the ball of string to find our way out.”

Our times need “out-of-the-box,”  courageous, outlier-type thinking and actions.  Having begun this piece about recent racial issues, I’m reminded of a quote from Martin Luther King, Jr., that fits: “Human salvation lies in the hands of the creatively maladjusted.”

In previous posts I’ve written about the roots of that seemingly inevitable decline and what helps. But there’s another part of relationship failure or loss that can be a basis of new growth. Let me explain. Over the decades I’ve witnessed countless examples of people drawn into new relationships that are simply new versions of previous, failed relationships — old wine in new flasks. And inevitably, disaster is lying in wait, right down the road. I think that often happens when an important part of the foundation for a positive, sustainable romantic and sexual relationship is neglected or overlooked.

That is, mental health practitioners focus a great deal on building better mechanics of listening, mirroring to each other, techniques of communication and compromise, and so on. All good stuff. But what can go missing is a deeper learning, emotionally and spiritually: Learning not only what went wrong in your past, failed relationships; but also learning from the residue of the loss and using that awareness in your future relationships. That means incorporating the meaning of the loss or failure into the fabric of your life, and identifying what you need to learn from it as you go forward.

That missing ingredient came to mind recently while reading an essay by a woman who encountered the son of an early, lost love. Reading it stirred up an old memory, as I described in a previous post, in a different context.

As a young boy growing up in upstate New York, I sometimes roamed through some nearby woods and fields. As I did that one bright summer afternoon I came upon a large tree – perhaps an elm or poplar. I noticed that its trunk had a deep scar, and looked like it had been struck by lightning some years before.

That came to mind, for reasons I’ll explain later, reading Lee Montgomery’s essay, “First Love, Once Removed.” She describes a drop-in visit by the son of her first lover, with whom she had many romantic and adventurous experiences in her early youth, during the 1970s.

She writes, “When I think of Ian, I think of endless days hanging out in the woods and fields around our New England prep schools, sucking dope out of a metal chamber pipe. Ian showed me the world and taught me to live in it. New York City. The Great West. And Europe, where we lived for several months during his first college year abroad. He was socially connected and wealthy, two things I was not. For a long time, it didn’t matter.”

Eventually, their relationship ended. No surprise, for two 18 year-olds. She went on with her life: “I went to college, fell in love again (and again), married, went to graduate school and made a career. For his part, Ian….inherited a lot of money, moved out West, married, had no career that I knew of and shot himself when he was in his 30s.”

His son, who was quite young at the time his father committed suicide, was now about the age Montgomery was when she and his father were lovers. She describes his dropping by her office one day, hoping to hear some stories of what his father was like. The memories felt and alive as she drew into them and spoke with her young lover’s son about his father: “Sitting across a booth studying this young man, I was overwhelmed. So many years later, I was stunned to find the feeling of first love still there….We were really happy once. My word, imagine to be that age, in love and alive.”

Montgomery’s poignant essay brought to mind the importance of facing the enduring loss of love and connection. It affects us permanently, and that can be a good thing. No matter whether it was because the two of you grew in different directions as you enter adulthood life, or from failure to build on what you once shared together. Nor does it matter if the relationship ended because of something you did that harmed or damaged the relationship. None of those experiences can be undone. Nor should they.

Their legacy becomes woven into the larger tapestry of your life, even as that tapestry enlarges over time. The challenge is to incorporate all of it; learn about yourself from all of your experiences, especially what didn’t work or what was negative…or else keep repeating new versions of it.

That’s what brought to mind the old tree trunk I saw as a young boy. Damaged where the lightning had struck, I noticed that the trunk had continued to grow around it and gradually encompassed the damaged part within it. It was like oneself: Even if you continue to grow and change, learn from your experiences and continue on with your life, your losses nevertheless remain part of you…. always there, a visible, enduring part of you. But by embracing that reality, loss of failure in love can be a good thing for your future relationships; if you can learn to integrate it and meld it into your ongoing life journey, your personal “evolution.”

Here’s a way you can begin learning from your failed or lost love relationships. I call it doing a Relationship Inventory.

Start by making a list of your major romantic relationships. Then:

• For each one, reflect on and write down what attracted you to that person, at that particular time of your life. What were the qualities of that person that aroused your interest? Why those qualities? What were your life circumstances at the time? What role did those play? Include family influences, as well as the impact of what you thought love was, at that time. How would you assess your own level of development or awareness at that time?

• Describe in one or two paragraphs what you think happened during the relationship that led to its end, from today’s perspective. That is, from the vantage point of what you know about yourself today.

• Write down what you think you learned – or were unable to learn at that time – about yourself from that relationship.

• How did that help – or could have helped, had you been more aware at the time — evolve your capacity for a positive, sustaining relationship?

• How can you use that knowledge and awareness now, with your current – or next-relationship?

In a previous post I wrote that a key pathway to psychological health and resiliency in today’s world is learning to “forget yourself.” This post describes ways to do that in three important realms of your life – your work, your personal relationships, and your life “footprint.”

In the earlier post I explained that “forgetting yourself” doesn’t mean neglecting your own legitimate needs or concerns. Rather, it means letting go of our human tendency to overly dwell on ourselves – our own concerns, needs, desires, slights, complaints about others, and so on. Psychological health and resiliency in today’s world grows when you can do that and put your energies in the service of something larger than yourself: problems, needs and challenges that lie beyond your own personal, narrow self-interest.

That may sound like a paradox, but it’s based on a new reality: Today’s world is changing more rapidly than you can imagine and is becoming immensely interdependent, interconnected, unpredictable and unstable. In this new environment you can’t create or sustain a positive, healthy life through the old ways of reactive resiliency, of coping and hoping to rebound.

That is, chronic unhappiness, dysfunction and overt emotional disturbance lie in store for those who remain too locked into thinking about themselves and who use old solutions to achieve success in relationships and at work. For example, trying to achieve power and domination over others, and thinking you can hold on to that. Fearing collaboration and avoiding mutuality with people who are different from yourself, or with whom you have differences. Looking for ways to cope with stress and restore equilibrium or “balance” in your life. And overall, being absorbed by your own conflicts, disappointments and the like. The latter are inevitable, and dwelling on them is a breeding ground for resentment, jealousy, and blame. That’s a dead-end. The consequences are visible in people who are unable to handle career downturn, who experience mounting relationship conflicts and who suffer from a range of psychological problems like depression, boredom, stress, anxiety and self-undermining behavior.

In contrast, positive resiliency in today’s environment is the byproduct when you aim towards common goals, purposes or missions larger than just your own narrow self-interests. That keeps you nimble, flexible, and adaptive to change and unpredictable events that are part of our new era. Then, you’re creating true balance, between your “outer” and “inner” life.

Here are three ways you can move through self-interest. Each describes a shift, or evolution from the older, reactive form of resilience to the new, proactive form:

Upgrade your career to the 4.0 version; Practice “Harnicissism;” and Become a Good Ancestor

Yeah, I know — those descriptions sound odd. In future posts I’ll elaborate on each of them. But this overview will help stimulate your thinking about what they look like in everyday life.

Upgrade To Career 4.0 The most savvy men and women already know that today’s workplace requires a high level of collaboration with very diverse people. You need to align your talents and skills with common objectives, whether a product or service. That means diminishing your ego in the service of teamwork towards that larger purpose, while constantly looking for opportunities for learning, growth and impact. In essence, that’s the 4.0 career upgrade.

To oversimplify for the sake of contrast, the 1.0 career is doing whatever kind of work is necessary to survive. The 2.0 orientation is what most people think of as “careerism” – aiming for increasing personal power, authority and position within an organization. The rise of Career 3.0 during the last 20 years reflected a desire for more personal meaning and sense of purpose through work.

The more recent emergence of the 4.0 orientation goes beyond the self-focus of 3.0. It’s a shift away from self-promotion and purely personal ambitions – whether for increasing authority or personal “happiness” – and towards effective, creative contribution to goals larger than the purely personal. It means looking for ways to have impact on something that matters, as you continue to learn and grow your capacities and talents.

From the 4.0 perspective, you move through self-interest, not into it. You’re tuned in to the larger picture, in which you’re one player, while finding ways to make a positive contribution to the service or product. It includes being aware of how you’re perceived by others, and looking for ways to be collaborative rather than self-promoting at others’ expense. As a CEO recently commented, “the definition of success is the company, not an individual.”

Practice “Harnicissism”

Don’t go looking it up, because there’s no such word. I made it up to describe the second pillar. “Harnicissism” is shorthand for learning to harness your narcissism. I don’t mean that everyone is narcissistic in the pathological sense. Most people have tendencies towards self-interest and self-absorption, and those are often reinforced and promoted by cultural norms and values. They impact and distort our romantic and sexual relationships, as I’ve written in another post here. Those same tendencies cripple effective interactions and relationships in general, and will undermine positive resiliency.

But in fact, research shows that we’re not innately narcissistic. So, a second pillar of resiliency in today’s world is leading yourself towards mutuality and equality – “power with” rather than “power over” – people in your sphere of relationships. From the perspective of “Harnicissism” you’re aware that you’re serving a larger purpose than just your own agenda: the “third entity,” the relationship itself. It’s that third entity that supports and strengthens your intimate relationship, that with your children, co-workers, or groups that you’re a member of.

The shift, here, is from primarily self-interest, towards openness and mutuality in service of a shared goal. For example, it’s a shift away from maneuvering, dominating or subtly manipulating to get your own way; to get your own needs and desires met at the expense of the other person — or even, as is often the case — at the expense of the relationship itself.

You can practice “Harnicissism” through transparent exposure and two-way openness, as opposed to being in relationships that are transactional and commercial, operating with a “return of investment” philosophy. In fact, research shows that more effective, productive relationships are forged through cooperation and mutual support rather than by power struggles. Those actions are fueled by both empathy and “indifference,” as I described in previous posts.

Become A Good Ancestor

This third pillar of resilience refers to everyday actions that help support a healthy, sustainable planet – for your own life, your children, your community, and all humans, around the globe. Others who come after you will live with the “footprint” you leave behind. That’s why I call this pillar becoming a “good ancestor.”

That is, growing recognition of climate change, along with climate disasters like the Gulf oil eruption and political upheaval around the world has raised awareness that everyone’s well-being, security and future way of life are highly interconnected. We’ve all become global citizens. Your individual actions and “footprint” will impact the health of the planet and the lives people who come after you.

Becoming a good ancestor represents a shift from selfish consumption of resources, from fear of others who are different, towards actions that help sustain the health and well-being of both the human community and the planet. For example, it’s harder to enjoy and consume pleasures for yourself when you’re highly aware of the suffering of others, whether from famine, natural disasters, polluted water, torture. All such events circle back to impact each of us. Actions that help you become a good ancestor strengthen your own capacity to deal with the disruptions and upheavals that are in store for all of us; with being able to handle a “non-equilibrium world with flexibility and positive actions.

All three of these pillars of resiliency rest upon being able to “forget yourself” in the ways I’ve described. They are the vehicle for acting with empathy, a broadened perspective, and sense of responsibility for not only yourself and immediate relationships, but for the human community and the planet. When you “forget yourself” through flexible, focused actions, you’re better able to experience stability, success and well-being through tumultuous times, like a gyroscope that keeps a ship stable through choppy waters.

Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank, describing the recent meeting between President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, provides a good example.  With a tinge of ironic humor, Milbank writes that

A blue-and-white Israeli flag hung from Blair House. Across Pennsylvania Avenue, the Stars and Stripes was in its usual place atop the White House. But to capture the real significance of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s visit with President Obama, White House officials might have instead flown the white flag of surrender.

Milbank was referring to the Obama administration’s decision four months ago to condemn Israel over a new settlement.

The Israel lobby reared up, Netanyahu denounced the administration’s actions, Republican leaders sided with Netanyahu, and Democrats ran for cover.  So on Tuesday, Obama, routed and humiliated by his Israeli counterpart, invited Netanyahu back to the White House for what might be called the Oil of Olay Summit: It was all about saving face.

He continues:

The president, beaming in the Oval Office with a dour Netanyahu at his side, gushed about the “extraordinary friendship between our two countries.” He performed the Full Monty of pro-Israel pandering: “The bond between the United States and Israel is unbreakable” . . . “I commended Prime Minister Netanyahu” . . . “Our two countries are working cooperatively” . . . “unwavering in our commitment” . . . “our relationship has broadened” . . . “continuing to improve” . . . “We are committed to that special bond, and we are going to do what’s required to back that up.”

Milbank then targets the core problem, writing that

Obama came to office with an admirable hope of reviving Middle East peace efforts by appealing to the Arab world and positioning himself as more of an honest broker. But he has now learned the painful lesson that domestic politics won’t allow such a stand.

And that feeds the continuing tragedy – for the Israelis, the Palestinians, and for all of us.  Our political leadership engages in one-sided political pandering, based largely on shoring up political support.  In so doing, it fails to promote peace and reconciliation, which should be the aim.  But doing the latter requires acknowledging that BOTH sides have engaged in destructive actions and atrocities, and that BOTH sides have legitimate, valid interests.

When one attempts to do so, however, one risks being labeled anti-Israeli, or even anti-semitic.  Such was the fate of noted historian Tony Judt, author of Postwar, the seminal analysis of post-World War II Europe.  A few years ago, two major Jewish organizations blocked Judt, who is Jewish and directs an institute at New York University that focuses on European issues, from speaking at an event at which he planned to argue that the Israeli lobby has often stifled debate.

As though to confirm his subject matter, the Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Committee objected, saying Judt was too critical of Israel and American Jewry. The groups persuaded the organization sponsoring the talk to cancel it.

Judt, who lost his family in the Holocaust, described this as “chilling,” and part of a larger pattern he and others have experienced.

Stifling debate – especially by those who seek solutions that promote a two-state solution – only furthers the endless killing, retaliation and horror for both sides. But some continue to argue strongly that one can be both pro-Israeli and pro-peace.  Notable, here, is a new organization, J Street.  It describes itself as “the political home for pro-Israel, pro-peace Americans to advocate for vigorous U.S. leadership to achieve a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and to broaden debate around Israel and the Middle East in national politics and the American Jewish community.”   It argues that “ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is in the best interests of Israel, the United States, the Palestinians, and the region as a whole.”

And, it emphasizes support for “Israel and its desire for security as the Jewish homeland, as well as the right of the Palestinians to a sovereign state of their own – two states living side-by-side in peace and security….diplomatic solutions over military ones, including in Iran; multilateral over unilateral approaches to conflict resolution; and dialogue over confrontation with a wide range of countries and actors when conflicts do arise.”

Such advocacy is both realistic and hopeful; an alternative to endless decades of more mutual destruction. It’s also helpful to experience the world of the less familiar from within the perspective of its members.  A good example is the movie Paradise Now, that portrayed the psychological evolution of Palestinian suicide bombers, from within their point of view and life experiences.

The problem is that even President Obama, who came into office presenting himself as an even-handed broker for Middle East peace, found it necessary to backtrack quickly from that position.  As Milbank wrote about the recent press conference, its conclusion found Obama

…feverishly rebuilding the U.S.-Israel relationship. The president’s opening statement in front of the cameras contained not a word of criticism of the Jewish state.  “Well, I just completed an excellent one-on-one discussion with Prime Minister Netanyahu,” he began. For those tuning in late, he added at the end: “So I just want to say, once again, that I thought the discussion that we had was excellent.” Netanyahu was pleased with the pandering.

Facing what that means can be painful. It may even feel relationship-threatening. But doing so can open the door to strengthening the true foundation of your relationship: Your vision of life. That refers to what you’re really living and working for, both individually and as a couple.

That’s the fundamental core of a relationship, and it’s often overlooked or seldom discussed. When you do face it you may discover that you and your partner were never in synch about your vision of life. Or, that you may have gone off on different tracks over time. When either is the case, you end up seeing different things altogether.

That’s a crucial problem because your core vision of life will increasingly impact your long-term health and well-being in today’s world, whether you’re in a relationship or not. We’re now living in a totally interconnected, unpredictable, “non-equilibrium” world. My 35 years as a psychotherapist and business psychologist convinces me that our new era requires a new and revised picture of psychological health and positive resiliency — what it looks like and what helps build it – to support your outward success and internal well-being in the years ahead.

My previous posts about the impact of the New Resiliency on intimate relationships have focused on sustaining or rebuilding building positive connection, emotional intimacy and sexuality in our new era. These are important, but the underlying foundation for long-term vitality and connection is a couple’s shared vision of life. But typically, a couple doesn’t talk about it much, or may gloss over it and assume they’re on the same page. Then, when they get into trouble in their daily relationship, they start looking for answers that don’t help.

That is, many couples spend a great deal of time, effort and money trying to improve their communication skills, listening skills, negotiation skills, their problem solving techniques and, in general, trying to learn how to make a marriage “work” for the long run. And yet, despite best intentions, the divorce rate continues to be about 50%. Increasing numbers choose to live together without marriage. And affairs appear to have entered the mainstream (Ashley Madison, the on-line site for people seeking affairs, now advertises on TV and has made a $25 million bid for naming rightsto the new Meadowlands stadium).

But the yearning for a relationship that sustains and deepens over time – even the desire for the elusive “soul mate” – remains strong. The continuing market for articles, books, blog posts and videos about how to make relationships work better is, in itself, evidence that none of these programs, strategies and techniques help very much. But it’s also confirmed by actual research. For example, social psychology researcher Bella DePaulo has documented the lack of evidence for the effectiveness of marriage skills programs in two recent Psychology Today blogs.

What’s Your Vision of Life?

I think the reason these programs don’t contribute much to building or sustaining intimacy and relationship “success” is that most of them focus on tweaking or modifying what I’ve described as a Functional Relationship. It’s what most couples descend into as they grapple with “balancing” work and life issues, raising children, paying bills, and so on. Their interaction becomes increasingly transactional, less energized and less interesting. Conflicts and power struggles begin to become part of daily life. As one spouse said to me, “I can’t remember why we got together in the first place.”

Couples will begin thinking that they’re seeing things differently, and if they can only learn how to adjust those differences – perhaps some creative compromises or better give-and-take – then they will have a successful future.

Not so. Not when the real problem is that you’re operating with different visions of life to begin with. Your vision includes:

• Your overall sense of purpose, of meaning.
• What you’re actually living and working for, or towards, in “real time.”
• What you’re strengthening or diminishing in your personality and values — knowingly or unknowingly — individually and as a couple, as you travel through life.

Here are some guides for you and your partner to help identify your life vision. Compare your answers to the questions and discuss what you discover

Seeing Your Current Life Path
First, set aside a block of time to talk with each other about your deepest desires and aspirations for your lives, individually and together. Listen to each other. Ask questions, but hold off commenting on or judging what you hear. Just learn from each other. Be as honest as you can.

Begin the dialogue with these questions:

• Why do you think you’re here, on this planet, at this moment in time?
• How did you come to do the kind of work you now do?
• Why do you continue to do it?
• What are your material goals vs. your spiritual, creative or relationship goals for your lifetime, as an individual and as a couple?
• What do the answers reveal about your desires, values, aspirations or fears?

Then, look at what you and your partner are aiming towards at this moment in your lives, in the context of your careers; your financial situation; your family, if you have growing children or ones already “launched;” or elderly parents who may need care and decision-making. For example:

• Children – Are you on the same page about what you want for your children, regarding education, summer enrichment programs, how you see their personalities, temperaments, interests, cognitive strengths, talents, etc.

• Financial – Describe each of your views of financial “needs” vs. “wants,” with respect to your desires for lifestyle, long-term security, use of assets over time, and the role of giving to others in your value system. Discuss where you and your partner mesh, where you don’t, and how to bridge the differences. Focus on the long-term, the decades ahead, and not just immediate circumstances.

• Geographic – To what extent are you both compatible with, and have a sense of connection with your geographic location? How important is this dimension to you? Where there are differences, how can you deal with them through compromise or adjustment over time?

Your Life Plan

• Do you serve anything larger than your own personal needs and wants? If not, where do you think that road will take you over time? If you do, what is it? Does what you serve or contribute to feel in synch with your true self, your talents, your values?

• Did you turn away from any passions or interests that pulled you when you were younger, and that you regret not having pursued? If so, how could you try to reclaim them?

• Make a list of any talents, experiences, unfulfilled creative needs, and challenges that you would like to incorporate into the next several years of your life.

• For each item on your list, write down what changes you would need to make in your career, personal life commitments or relationship, to make that occur.

• What are the resources you currently have; and what ones would you need to acquire to make those changes (education, financial, location, life-style, etc.)?

• How do these mesh with those of your partner? What do you do if they don’t?

Should Your Relationship Continue?

Now, the big one: Describe why you want to stay together, including the possibility that you don’t.

• Be open with each other about whether you want to continue your marriage or relationship as it currently exists. Is this the person you want to stay with the rest of your life? If so, explain why.

• If you have doubts, express them. Consider the possibility that the relationship you entered years ago, and within which you may have raised children, worked for that earlier purpose; but that it may no longer work for you today.

• If it doesn’t, how could the two of you reconstitute it to fit who each of you are at this point in your lives? Do you want to try? If not, can you end it respectfully?

Share with your partner what you come up with from all of the above exercises. Discuss where you’re in synch, and how to deal with where you’re not. Just asking these questions about your life vision will reveal important information about each other and about yourselves as a couple. That will tell you if you have a good foundation for a self-sustaining relationship — one that will be resilient in the face of the unknowns and changes that are waiting for you down the road….and you know there are going to be plenty of them!

That event triggered a memory of an event that occurred more than two decades earlier.  It made me reflect on what we do as parents that affect how our children will deal with uncertainties and unknowns that lie ahead in their lives.  But it also reminded me that children have some innate “adult” powers that we haven’t fully recognized.

It happened one morning in early spring.  We were sitting at the airport, waiting for the plane to begin boarding.  My daughter was going fly alone.  It wasn’t the first time she had flown, but on this trip she would be unaccompanied, and would meet her mother in another city.  She was excited about it, but was also scared about going alone.

We sat side-by-side in the airport lounge, where we could look through the large windows at the baggage loading and refueling activity outside.  She began peppering me with unnerving questions — like why planes crashed, how frequently, and whether I knew that this one would be safe.  Oddly, though, each time she asked I thought I detected a faint, sly grin, followed by a quick sideways glance with her twinkling blue eyes.  I sensed that she was feeling something she couldn’t quite express, beyond her fears.  Maybe was looking to me to affirm whatever that was, if  only I could tune into it.

Then suddenly, it was boarding time.  We rose together, and she hugged me tightly.  “I’m still scared, Daddy,” she murmured quietly.  Quickly reviewing my parental options, I thought of something: I reached into my pocket and found a quarter.  I told her that this was a Magic Quarter that I kept for situations like these.  As long as she held it in her hand, she would be completely safe.  Then, then she would feel free to have fun on the trip.

She gripped it tightly in her little fist, and with a solemn look, but still with that odd glint in her eye, marched down the boarding ramp. She continued looking back at me, waving until she was out of sight.

Driving along the Potomac River back into Washington, I kept thinking about what had happened.  I felt there was something meaningful in her sly grin.  Perhaps she sensed that the trip could be fun, a new adventure, and not just a bundle of fears.  At the time, I wasn’t sure, but if so, maybe the Magic Quarter provided the bridge.  Maybe she knew the real “magic” was the nascent power within her.

Today, I think that moment illuminated something that’s often unrecognized in our understanding of both children and adults:  That there are innate “adult” powers within the child that are the foundation for a psychologically healthy adulthood.  But the parenting the child receives, as well as the norms and rewards the culture provides, can deform those powers.

Let me explain.  Mental health practitioners and the general public alike often speak of a “wounded child” within the adult; that a healthy adulthood requires healing that “inner child” and building good coping skills and competencies. That’s certainly true, for many people.  But I think psychological health includes more than healing early damage and successfully adjusting to the conditions you’re in. Those enable you to be functional in society, but can also fuel one’s “default mode” of self-centeredness and self-absorption to an extreme degree. Just check out the daily news.

Missing from that picture are the capacities for embracing new possibilities and challenges in life.  A spirit of adventure, fun and confidence in the face of the unknowns that lie ahead in your life path. Going against the grain in decisions and values.  Creating positive, mutual connections with diverse people. And, knowing who you are inside — independent of the pressures to adapt to a “self” that may bring external reward but also feels alien and inauthentic.

In short, reverse the notion that there’s a child within the adult.  Consider that there is also an adult within the child.

Think of how the seeds of a flower contain everything that’s needed to sprout, grow and bloom into its full form.  Similarly, the infant isn’t a blank slate.  Here are three adult powers within the child:

You’re innately empathic

This is the rudimentary form of the adult capacity for mutuality and compassion.  Empathy is the basis for experiencing others’ feelings, desires and conflicts, and moving beyond your tendency to view the world only through your own lens.  Research shows you can observe empathy within the emotional experiences and behavior of infants and small children. In fact, we now know that empathy is hard-wired, in the mirror-neurons.

You can rebound from adversity

The child has the capacity to bounce back from loss, trauma, or abuse.  Research confirms this, even for abused and emotionally damaged children.  What helps is when a child has or seeks out a role model who provides inspiration to carry him or her through the damaging experience.  The child who heals was able to construct a vision of hope and change, beyond the damaging experience.  That’s the basis for the adult capacity for creative flexibility and proactive behavior in the face of change, whether positive or negative.  That’s what I’ve described in previous posts as the proactive “new resiliency” needed in our current world.

You know your ‘true’ self

This is the child’s capacity to recognize the differences or boundaries between his or her emotional states, needs, and desires, and those of others.  That’s the foundation for the adult capacity for self-definition, for being the “author” who’s writing the “story” of your life.  That self-definition helps you let go of the social conditioning that tends to shape your values and beliefs, and that also underlies the choices at work and in relationships that often result in pain and conflict.  It’s the basis for defining your own goals and values, independent of the pull from social pressures or rewards.

Of course, these adult capacities can and do become deformed, arrested or squashed, depending on parenting, inherited temperamental and other circumstances.  For example, empathy can be short-circuited by abusive experiences or extreme reward. (see some celebrities or sports stars).  Resilience can turn into hopelessness and despair if the child is unable to visualize a hopeful possibility for the future.  And your true self can be deformed by an increasing gap between your socially-adapted false self and your more authentic “secret self,” especially if the child is pressured or rewarded to comply too much or too easily with life situations that are stifling or disappointing.

In fact, the latter underlies many of the feelings of meaningless and lifelessness that often erupt in the form of the “midlife crisis.” It also underlies the recent, seemingly contradictory findings that the mature adult years show an increase in reported happiness, on the one hand, and depression – including suicide – on the other.

The parents’ behavior is crucial to whether the adult-within-the-child flourishes, deforms or becomes arrested.  Some parents are more able than others to support growth. Some are indifferent, or affirm the wrong things because of their own unconscious, unresolved conflicts. As Jung once wrote, “Nothing has a greater impact on children than the unlived lives of their parents.”  Research confirms this.  Children report that being subjected to humiliation and disrespect, not listened to, and put in embarrassing situations have the most significant impact on them.

Looking back to that event at the airport, I think my daughter was trying to let me know – perhaps with only dim awareness — that she wanted to experience this new adventure as fun; not just cope with her anxiety about it.  As her father, my challenge was to recognize and affirm that.  The worst affirmation would have been to give her the message that her fears should be her main focus, or imply that life is just one long series of anxieties. Or, that her task was to endure the fears and sadness, but without any spirit of fun or adventure to trump them.

Unfortunately, I wasn’t so aware of any of that at the time.  But maybe the Magic Quarter help ease her anxieties, and  — if she was “on” to it, as I suspected — opened the door to her drawing on her own budding “adult” capacities.

Alfred North Whitehead once wrote that youth is “life as yet untouched by tragedy.”  Well, youth seems to end awfully early these days, in our world.  Like many, my daughter has traversed her own ups and downs as she moved into her adult years.  But her medical crisis did resolve…without any “magic.”

She did keep that Magic Quarter for several years, in a little box along with other coins and items accumulated through childhood and adolescence.  As in Chris Van Allstein’s classic children’s book, The Polar Express, when the child eventually became unable to hear the Christmas bell that only children could hear, eventually she could no longer tell – or cared — which quarter had once been the “magic” one.

Just as it should be.

That memory came to mind recently, while reading two recent New York Times articles about loss and love.  They appeared on the same day, and reflected two very different kinds of life events. Yet I think they go together, in a way.

One was the “Modern Love” column in Sunday Styles, titled “Affirmation, Etched in Vinyl,” by Connie May Fowler.  It was about the loss of her father from a heart attack, when she was six years old. Both parents appear flawed, apparently alcoholic.  But Fowler describes her mother as having been intent on portraying her father as malignant.  She writes that

“…most of what I knew of him came from my mother, who considered him the embodiment of evil.”

And most significantly,

“…My father’s death stole many things from me, including the sound of his voice.”

Ever since, she had longed to be able to know and hear what his voice sounded like.  Well, it turns out that her father had somewhat of a career as a country and western singer.

“The lack of any memory of my father’s true living voice was all the more perplexing to me because before my birth, my father, Henry May, had enjoyed a reasonably successful run as a country-western musician. He had a television show in Jacksonville, Fla. He and his band, Henry May and his Rhythm Ramblers, were a major draw all along Florida’s northeast coast.”

In her essay, Fowler describes her search for a record that he had made along the way, as she looked in old record bins and on e-bay, over the years.  Then, one day, she received a message from a stranger who had learned of her search and, in fact, had a copy of her father’s record in his possession. At last, she might be able to hear his voice.  Here’s Fowler’s full story.

The other essay is “First Love, Once Removed,” by Lee Montgomery.  It describes a drop-in visit by the son of her first lover, with whom she had many romantic and adventurous experiences in her early youth, during the 1970s.

“When I think of Ian, I think of endless days hanging out in the woods and fields around our New England prep schools, sucking dope out of a metal chamber pipe. Ian showed me the world and taught me to live in it. New York City. The Great West. And Europe, where we lived for several months during his first college year abroad. He was socially connected and wealthy, two things I was not. For a long time, it didn’t matter.”

Eventually, their relationship ended.  No surprise, for two 18 year-olds.  She went on with her life, married, began a career.  He inherited money, married

“… had no career that I knew of and shot himself when he was in his 30s.”

The son, quite young at the time his father committed suicide, was now about the age Montgomery when she and his father were lovers.  He had dropped by her office hoping to hear some stories of what his father was like.  Montgomery’s essay describes how fresh and alive the memories felt to her, as she drew into them and spoke with her young lover’s son about his father:

“Sitting across a booth studying this young man, I was overwhelmed. So many years later, I was stunned to find the feeling of first love still there.”

The full article is here.

To me, these two essays read like bookends.  Both portray the enduring loss of love and connection and how it affects us, permanently.  No matter whether it comes from a child’s loss of a parent, from the ending of an adult love relationship at any age; or from an unexpected death.  Or, for that matter, if the loss results from something you did that harmed or damaged a relationship that was important to you. None of those experiences can be undone.  Their legacy becomes woven into the larger tapestry of your life, where it remains, even as that tapestry expands over time.

And that’s what brought to mind the old tree trunk.  Damaged where the lightning had struck, I noticed that the trunk had continued to grow around it and gradually encompassed the damaged part within it.  It was like ourselves: Even if we continue to grow and change, learn from our experiences and continue on with our lives, our losses nevertheless remains part of us…. always there, a visible, enduring part of our lives.

A great deal of the criticism is justified, and it’s coming from both right and left. It includes not only his personal leadership but more broadly, the role and response of the federal government.

But I think there’s another, additional basis for the criticism:  The psychology of people’s fears when they’re confronted with such disasters, and how that shapes what they look for in a leader.

That is, the psychology of the criticism directed at Obama reflects something deeper than questions about BP’s performance and/or untrustworthiness, given the cozy relationship big oil has had with the federal government.  It’s also deeper than debate over what government’s proper role should be in dealing with this or other man-made disasters.

To explain, let’s take a look at some criticisms coming from both the left and the right:  On May 17, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews erupted in anger at the oil disaster. He railed about the profits BP reaps as it fails to fix it, but also criticized the Obama administration for letting BP control the disaster response.  Calling this “disaster capitalism,” (from Naomi Klein’s The Shock Doctrine) he questioned why the President doesn’t just “nationalize that industry and get the job done,” adding that in China, “they execute people for this.”

That’s typical of Matthews’ sometimes over-the-top passion, but he’s been making solid criticism of the President for, in essence, looking like an observer, standing on the sidelines, instead of getting in there and doing something.

Similarly, other critics have openly wondered why Obama hasn’t shown more passion, like pounding the table, showing outrage; perhaps shouting.

Some conservative critics have implied the same, but link their criticism with an attack on Obama’s entire presidency, as you might expct.  For example, the title of Peggy Noonan’s May 29^th op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal, stakes out her position: “He Was Supposed to Be Competent: The spill is a disaster for the president and his political philosophy.”

Noonan makes the connection crystal clear, in case you didn’t get the message from the title.  She calls this “…his third political disaster in his first 18 months in office. And they were all, as they say, unforced errors, meaning they were shaped by the president’s political judgment and instincts.”

She adds that Obama has been “…chronically detached from the central and immediate concerns of his countrymen.  How could there not have been a plan? How could it all be so ad hoc, so inadequate, so embarrassing?”

Getting to the emotions of the issue, Noonan says that Obama “…attempted to act out passionate engagement through the use of heightened language—”catastrophe,” etc.—but repeatedly took refuge in factual minutiae. His staff probably thought this demonstrated his command of even the most obscure facts. Instead it made him seem like someone who won’t see the big picture.”

Then, there are the remarks of conservative columnist George Will.  Appearing on ABC’s This Week, he placed himself somewhere in the middle…sort of, saying that President Obama “is being unfairly blamed” for oil spill response, “and it sort of serves him right,” he added.  He’s apparently defending the President’s leadership and “lack” of passion, while arguing that it just goes to show that big government can’t do the job, so, one assumes, it’s better to leave it in the hands of private enterprise – which created the problem to begin with.

I think that one strong thread weaving together these critiques is not just that President Obama and the government have not responded quickly enough, but that Obama himself has not shown the emotional outrage and arm-waving that are so important for doing….well, what, exactly?  That’s the question they don’t address.  What’s the outcome they’re looking for? Or do they just want to be reassured by what looks and sounds “passonate?”

I think many of the complaints about Obama’s coolness, his being too cerebral, too measured and reasoned in his responses are fueled by this: A wish for a strong “Big Daddy.”  A commanding, strong-sounding, protective figure who will somehow “take command” and “do something” to fix things and make us safe again.

That kind of wish is largely unconscious.  It’s likely driven by unacknowledged, terrifying  feelings of helplessness, similar to what lies behind much of the denial about climate change.  Then, the emotions of fear and longing for safety trump your ability to stop and ask what, exactly, do you want a display of more “passion” and pounding the table to result in, with respect to solving the problem?

When you realize that the best minds and technologies are working on this – even with the criticism that corporate greed and government collusion with the oil companies have created this disaster – that realization should point you towards supporting all efforts to create the best solutions asap.

That is, it would steer you towards crying out for fact-based, results-oriented leadership, which is what Pres. Obama is now, apparently, trying to deliver.  That requires being focused on the reality of the situation, mobilizing the means we have to achieve the results, and creating a strategy that works.

That’s where reasoned criticism is important.  Unlike the flailing of those who psychologically long for a Commanding Father to make you feel secure, some are actually proposing constructive critiques.

For example, David Gergen, a truly bi-partisan figure who’s served both Republican and Democratic administrations, has posted both a strong critique of Obama’s leadership as well as specific, strategic actions by the Feds to take over the strategy and structure of the whole operation.

He writes:

It’s time for the White House to get in the driver’s seat and get us to safety – fast ….Even if BP were reliable, the problem has clearly become too big for it to handle… (and)…this catastrophe is increasingly threatening the nation’s welfare.

Gergen proposes 10 actions.  For example:

• Set up a daily command center in Washington where a presidentially-appointed leader runs the show, calls the shots, coordinates the overall effort, briefs the president and briefs the country.
• Have two deputies, one to direct the leak-stoppage and the other to direct the clean-up. Ex-CEOs and generals would be excellent candidates.
• Provide the country with the kind of daily briefings that the military has mastered for wartime – bring in people who are smart, straight and tough.

Gergen’s 10-point list is well worth reading.  His critique and proposals are the kind that are sorely needed in our polarized, self-serving political culture.  If the President embraced them it would be consistent with the strong, rational leadership that many people believed him capable of to begin with.  And that’s a psychologically positive wish for a leader!

First, some clarification about what I mean by each term. “Hook-Up Sex” refers to just plain f***ing; that is, a purely physical encounter. “Marital Sex” is the kind of sex life that most committed couples tend to have — married or not, straight or gay. And “Making Love” is a different kind of experience that transcends both of the other two kinds.

That is, the three kinds of sexual relationships occur on different planes, different levels of integration between your physical, animal being, and your relational and spiritual beings. The kind of sexual life you have – and its conflicts – are embedded in the overall relationship you learn and how you “practice” it with your partner. I’ve described some of these connections in my previous posts, here and on my Psychology Today blog, on our adolescent model of love, the soul mate, and the positive power of “indifference.” Most relationships limit the capacity for “Making Love.”

Hook-Up Sex

“You know how there’s good sex, great sex, and then really great sex? That’s what it was like with her!” With gleaming eyes, Ken was telling me about his latest sexual encounter. He was a 44 year-old trust fund guy who lived with his mother and had never married. He entered therapy because he wanted to learn why he hadn’t been able to form a lasting relationship.

In Hook-Up Sex you and your partner use each other’s bodies for your own pleasure. It can be extremely intense and arousing, especially when you feel lust towards a new partner. There’s a place for this kind of sex, but it’s also the most primitive, least evolved form of sex. It reflects the purely animal part of being human — our physiological needs and impulses. We share those with other animal species. From a human standpoint, though, it’s mostly void of relationship beyond the physical connection; a form of playing through using each other’s bodies.

Aside from Ken’s deeper emotional issues that he’d never faced or dealt with, another barrier to his forming a relationship was that he had turned sex into a technique-dominated sport. He saw himself as a great lover and, in fact, had become very proficient in Tantric sexual practices. Handsome and charming, he was able to find women eager to participate. Tantric and related practices are, in fact, part of “Making Love,” but they can also be misused. Ken’s mastery of them had become an end in itself, and they were entirely divorced from human connection, beyond pure sex.

He was like a character in Nobel laureate Doris Lessing’s novel, The Four-Gated City, a man who had become a master of Tantric sex, but had devolved as a human being. He had no soul-to-soul connection with any of the women he drew into his serial sexual relationships.

Marital Sex

“Dr. LaBier,” she said, “I read that women require an average of 14 minutes of sexual stimulation to reach orgasm. Maybe that’s the problem – that Tom’s just not a good lover.”

Julie and her husband had descended into what I call a “functional relationship.” They didn’t have sex much anymore, and when they did it was pretty uninspired. They remained committed to each other, though, and wanted to improve their sex life. Their sex life was an example of what most long-term couples experience, as research and surveys have documented.

“Marital Sex” reflects a higher plane than “Hook-Up” sex because it includes some degree of emotional connection and intimacy. At least it does at the beginning of the relationship. But what tends to happen is what this couple experienced: Their sex life became entangled with the conflicts and disagreements that had accumulated over the years. They brought all of that into the bedroom with them.

For example, Julie didn’t talk very openly with Tom about what she wanted, sexually. She carried the residue of shame about revealing her sexual desires, shame that originated in her relationship with her mother. She was dealing with that in therapy, but that shame had joined with a still-existing view in our culture that a woman who expresses herself sexually must be a slut/whore. Moreover, Julie and Tom had descended into the low-level, adversarial power-struggle so typical of the functional relationship. So, learning new sex techniques or acquiring new sexual knowledge wasn’t going to elevate their sexual relationship beyond Marital Sex.

Sometimes Marital Sex includes a Hook-Up sexual experience – perhaps when on a vacation, or aided by ingesting substances, legal or illegal. And it shares with Hook-Up sex what sex therapist Joseph Kramer calls “balloon sex:” Building up tension, followed by release, mostly focused on the genitals. Nevertheless, Marital Sex is further along the continuum because it includes some degree of emotional, relational connection, in addition to sex. Couples who have Marital Sex like something about each other as people. Or at least they did at one time, when they first got together.

That relational connection is both good and bad. The good part is that your relationship is more humanly evolved, and contains the possibility of evolving towards Making Love. The bad part is that all the feelings, conflicts, non-mutual behavior, hiding out and manipulation characteristic of the adolescent model of love can seep into your sex life like a growing virus. For example, withholding sex as punishment, or using it as leverage for manipulating your partner in some way. Or projecting and reenacting all sorts of unresolved family, parental, and sibling issues in your relationship. Michael Vincent Miller described much of this in Intimate Terrorism, about the sex lives of modern couples bound by struggles for possession and power over the other. All of that usually leads to diminished sexual connection over time.

In short, couples that have Marital Sex play out in the bedroom everything unspoken and unresolved from outside the bedroom. Julie may have learned how long it takes to reach an orgasm, but she didn’t know much about what she and Tom need to do along the way to build a heightened, fulfilling and energized sexual relationship.

Making Love

For most people, their “normal” development into adult relationships cripples their capacity for moving beyond Marital Sex. But integrating what I call Radical Transparency and Words-Into-Actions with specific sexual practices can heighten energy, connection and excitement between partners on all levels of their relationship. Doing that is the path to the most evolved, integrated mind-body-spirit relationship: Making Love.

You might think of this as “spiritual sex,” but I think that term is too easily equated – mistakenly — with only ecstatic physical experience. And some recent research indicates that seeking just the experience of transcendent, physical sex can also increase the likelihood of unprotected sex. Instead, envision two partners whose sex life is interwoven with heightened mind, body, and spiritual connection.

That is, Tantric and similar Eastern practices like Qi gong will enhance conscious energy flow between partners and that “ego-less” state that people often long for. But your sexual relationship elevates to that higher plane only when you join that energy to the energy that comes from open communication and equality in your daily behavior with your partner. This integration focuses you and your partner on your shared journey through life on this planet, including larger issues about your sense of meaning and purpose in the world. As Tolstoy wrote in Anna Karenina, “Without knowing what I am and why I am here, life is meaningless.”

The physical practices that are part of Making Love are aimed at building, increasing, and exchanging the sexual energy of your and your partner’s body. They are important pathways to elevating and steadily expanding pleasure throughout your entire body. In contrast to “balloon sex,” this form of sex broadens, deepens, expands and sustains arousal and positive tension between you and your partner. Orgasm is no longer the end-state to hurry towards. In fact, Making Love doesn’t even have to include genital intercourse. Couples who are unable to or who don’t have genital sex are still able to evolve towards the heightened mind-body-spiritual state of Making Love.

Most of the sexual techniques share a common core of meditative, breathing, and physical movement exercises with your partner, combined with extended foreplay. They help you let go of your ego-needs — for example, simply wanting to be given pleasure, or wanting to make your partner experience pleasure.

While sexual techniques build and increase energy exchange and flow, the quality and level of arousal and pleasure your and your partner experience sexually depends on the extent to which you’re doing building connection and arousal in the other parts of your relationship.

That is, when you treat each other as equal human beings within your daily relationship, and you’re transparent about your inner life and emotions, you automatically feel more stimulation and excitement with each other. When you feel connected as equals and yet engage each other as separate, distinct individuals as well, that generates new energy and it enhances the sexual energy between the two of you.

There are many good sources of information and guidance for building heightened sexual engagement, equality and openness in your relationship – through books, videos and workshops. Some of the most substantial and useful include Margo Anand’s guides to Tantric practices; Kenneth Cohen’s detailed description of Qi gong sexuality; and Pepper Schwartz’s works, including building equality in relationships.

I think one of the best descriptions of Making Love is a passage in another of Doris Lessing’s works, the allegorical novel The Marriages Between Zones Three, Four, and Five. There, she describes the power of heightened sexual connection when it’s equal and reciprocal between two partners. In the story, the man was required to be apart from his new wife, during which time he became “ready” to learn equality and sensuality. Now, they meet again:

“He had remembered something entirely blotted from his mind during that enervating month. The light, glancing, inflaming kisses that he had not known how to answer, had gone from his mind. The invitation, the answer and question, the mutual response and counter-response — none of this had been within the provision of the courtesan Elys, since she had never in her life enjoyed an equal relation with anyone, man or woman.

(His wife) came to him, and began to teach him how to be equal and ready in love. It was quite shocking for him, because it laid him open to pleasures he had certainly not imagined with Elys. There was no possible comparison between the heavily sensualities of that, and the changes and answerings of these rhythms. He was laid open not only to physical responses he had not imagined, but worse, to emotions he had no desire at all to feel. He was engulfed in tenderness, in passion, in the wildest intensities that he did not know whether to call pain or delight…and this on and on, while she, completely at ease, at home in her country, took him further and further every moment, a determined, but quiet companion.

He could not of course sustain it for long. Equality is not learned in a lesson or two…But even as far as he could stand it, he had been introduced to his potentialities beyond anything he had believed possible. And when they desisted, and he was half relieved and half sorry that the intensitites were over, she did not allow him to sink back again away from the plane of sensitivity they had both achieved. They made love all that night, and all the following day, and they did not stop at all for food, though they did ask for a little wine, and when they had been entirely and thoroughly wedded, so that they could no longer tell through touch where one began and the other ended, and had to look, with their eyes, to find it, they fell into a deep sleep….

Striving for the Making Love type of sexual partnership keeps your relationship alive and growing. Couples who build such a relationship feel enduring connection and sustained passion. Their relationship becomes resilient through all of the changes and challenges that people face along the path of life. And it becomes a portal into continues spiritual evolution, individually and as a couple.

Well, OK, but take it back from what? And to what?

Well first, I think that many of those drawn to the Tea Party are genuinely concerned about the rising scope and size of government and want lower taxes.  Some have become fired up with rage about that (while also, of course, wanting to keep all the benefits and support that Big Government provides, as Louisiana Gov.Jindel recently discovered).

And some are so fired up that they just want to get rid of everybody on the Hill and the inhabitant of the White House – all those who are taking our country in the “wrong” direction.

But let’s take a look at what the Tea Party’s dominant ideology includes, with respect to what it thinks is the wrong course; what they advocate it it’s place; and, especially, what the Republican party is embracing as it bends over backwards to drink from the Tea Party’s cup (sorry for the mixed metaphors.)

Take Utah Republicans.  There’s a movement afoot to repeal the 17^th Amendment.  Having trouble remembering which one that is?  Well, it’s the one that gives people the right to vote for and select their Senators.  That’s right – elect their Senators.  Taking away that right is a favorite of Tea Party supporters, and they’re getting Republicans to join with them.

It gets better.  On the other side of the country, the Republican Party of Maine has adopted some Tea Party proposals of its own. It’s official platform calls for the elimination of the Department of Education and the Federal Reserve; demands an investigation of “collusion between government and industry in the global warming myth;” insists that “healthcare is not a right;” calls for the abrogation of the “UN Treaty on Rights of the Child” and the “Law Of The Sea Treaty;” and says we must resist “efforts to create a one world government.”  There’s more.  If you’re interested, here’s the whole thing.

The Maine Politics blog calls the official platform for the Republican Party of Maine “a mix of right-wing fringe policies, libertarian buzzwords and outright conspiracy theories.” It quotes Dan Billings, who’s served as an attorney for the Maine GOP, describing the new platform as “wack job pablum” and “nutcase stuff.”

In contrast to the claims of Tea Partiers around the country, Washington Post columnist E.J.Dionne has pointed out some actual facts.  He writes:

“…there was evidence on Tuesday that there are limits to the anti-government mood that is supposedly sweeping the country.  In Arizona — nobody’s idea of a liberal state — voters supported a temporary increase in the sales tax from 5.6 to 6.6 cents on the dollar, to raise $1 billion annually. This, coupled with a large tax increase on businesses and high-income earners endorsed by voters in Oregon earlier this year, suggests a pragmatic electorate that is far less reflexively opposed to taxes or government than Tea Party cheerleaders would have us believe.

He also points out that:

The most significant result for the fall was the Democrats’ success in holding the western Pennsylvania House seat left vacant by the death of John Murtha. Democrat Mark Critz won an impressive nine-point victory over Republican Tim Burns by distancing himself from Obama and liberal positions on guns and abortion, but also by running a relentlessly economic populist message on jobs and outsourcing.

Circling back to the rising star Rand Paul, the new candidate has also made it clear that he opposes the Civil Rights Act.  That’s the Act that most of the then-Republicans voted for, back in the days when Republicans were strong supporters of civil rights, back before the party morphed into a bastion of right-wing mostly southern white men.  Paul emphasizes that opposing the Civil Rights Act is not racist.  Go figure.

If you look at some hard data about what is, in fact, transforming our society, in contrast with what the Tea Party sees, it’s hard not to conclude that their appeal is to a small number of people and will remain a fringe movement.

Sometimes we become so convinced of our own convictions, when they are shared by others, that we seduce ourselves into seeing a movement that will transform the world.  There’s a long history to such delusions.

The sad consequence for our two-party system is that the Republican Party is allowing itself to upend it’s own principles and ideals as it tries to capture this “movement,” and thus risks marching into oblivion.