Groking Politics: A Tale of Two Telescopes

By Douglas Bonar

I began writing this reflection weeks before the November midterm election, fully aware of the social consequences of what many might consider the "wrong" outcome. Yes, I am political, increasingly partisan, vocal, and deeply concerned. At the same time, I believe deeply in our interconnectedness and essential oneness. I am passionate about both convictions and unapologetic about them.

As a self-described sacred activist and Bodhisattva, I believe that understanding and advocating for justice in areas such as environmental stewardship, healthcare, equality, and nonviolence are vital expressions of a truly spiritual life.

Am I being divisive or dualistic by taking sides? Perhaps. Yet, in the groking sense, (editor's note: please click here for a definition of groking) I can enfold this apparent dualism into a larger holistic worldview. To be genuinely holistic, we must acknowledge duality as an existential and experiential reality, much like suffering itself.

I believe Kamala Harris won the last election. There is substantial evidence that supports this position. I mention this belief for two reasons. First, it is intentionally provocative. I welcome controversy and healthy dialogue. Second, and more importantly, I have noticed a growing tendency among many spiritually awakening people to avoid anything that carries political controversy. Politics has become taboo.

I believe we can no longer afford that avoidance.

We cannot ignore global economic instability, political upheaval, or escalating threats to our environment. Groking invites us into greater sensitivity, deeper understanding, and compassionate action. In my view, spiritually awakened individuals are especially needed right now, not only to embody wisdom but also to give voice to it.

I am not going to present the evidence that has shaped my belief regarding the election. For those interested, I recommend the Substack This Will Hold, which has documented its perspective on these events for more than a year. I am persuaded by its arguments, though I acknowledge I could be wrong. If you are curious, I encourage you to investigate the information for yourself. In any case, that is not the primary focus of this essay.

Groking politics provides a lens for understanding our integral nature, our True Self, our potential, and what some call the New Human. There are many names for this evolutionary emergence. I often place them under the broader umbrella of conscious evolution.

This evolution represents a shift from ego to essence. It is the ongoing process of reimagining and embodying the dynamic balance required to become whole, holy, and healthy. Ego has dominated for long enough. The invitation before us is to step more fully into our deeper nature.

To clarify this perspective, I want to share two stories about telescopes.

The first concerns Galileo.

In 1609, Galileo developed one of the first astronomical telescopes. His 1610 publication Sidereus Nuncius (The Starry Messenger) made him internationally famous and helped shift scientific understanding toward Copernicus's heliocentric model of the universe.

Yet this emerging worldview threatened established religious authority. Historical accounts document that some Church officials refused even to look through Galileo's telescope. To do so would have meant confronting observations that challenged the geocentric cosmology they believed Scripture required. In 1616, heliocentrism was declared both scientifically indefensible and heretical. Resistance to Galileo's discoveries persisted despite the evidence he presented.

Now fast-forward several centuries.

Albert Einstein is rightly celebrated for his brilliance and innovation, yet his original 1917 cosmological model described a static universe. His equations naturally suggested a universe that would either expand or contract, but Einstein disliked that implication. To preserve a fixed cosmos, he introduced the cosmological constant (Λ), effectively modifying the equations so they would align with his assumptions about reality.

In other words, even Einstein struggled to accept evidence that challenged his worldview.

By the late 1920s, Edwin Hubble's observations of galactic redshifts demonstrated that distant galaxies were moving away from one another. The universe was expanding.

National Geographic recounts a pivotal moment. On January 29, 1931, Einstein visited Hubble at Mount Wilson Observatory, home of the 100-inch Hooker Telescope, then the largest telescope in the world. Einstein accepted Hubble's invitation to look through the instrument and examine the evidence. Confronted with these observations, he abandoned his static-universe model and publicly accepted the reality of cosmic expansion.

Groking politics is much like looking through a telescope. It means examining reality as honestly as possible and then adjusting our worldview accordingly.

Differences are natural and healthy. There is room for vigorous debate, collaboration, and disagreement. Yet our shared aim should be fairness, stability, and the well-being of all people, not merely the privileged or the majority.

I remember a bumper sticker from the 1970s that captured this sentiment:

Know justice, know peace.

No justice, no peace.

Groking politics is ultimately about rising above polarization in order to make decisions grounded in a moral commitment to serving the Earth and all of her inhabitants.

Einstein's transformation illustrates a broader pattern of worldview change:

• A deeply held model (the static universe)

• Conflicting evidence (galactic redshifts)

• Emotional and philosophical resistance

• Eventual integration of a larger truth (an expanding cosmos)

  
  

This willingness to see beyond our assumptions mirrors the psychological and cultural implications of oneness, wholeness, and interbeing. Old stories eventually give way to new stories when reality becomes too painful, harmful, or outdated to ignore. Such is the case in our politics of today.

Though it may be difficult to accept, I believe our existing political systems are showing signs of profound dysfunction. The contested election narratives, the events surrounding January 6, and the deepening polarization of society reveal a system under stress.

The deeper problem is not merely political. It is human. It is a problem of consciousness. Restated, it is the opportunity to look through the telescope and integrate a larger truth – of our interconnectedness. 

None of the great "isms" function as intended unless people themselves develop sufficient consciousness, compassion, and integrity to live the ideals. Capitalism, socialism, communism, and democracy all depend on human beings acting responsibly and ethically within their structures.

Looking through the telescopic lens of holotropism, we see our interconnectedness more clearly. Just as a plant turns toward the sun through heliotropism, humanity can, and inherently must, turn toward greater wholeness. We can orient ourselves toward what author Charles Eisenstein calls "the more beautiful world our hearts know is possible."

There is another lesson offered by the cosmic telescope.

Heliocentrism taught us that the universe does not revolve around Earth. Earth revolves around the sun. Yet cosmologist Brian Thomas Swimme introduces another fascinating concept: omnicentrism.

In Cosmogenesis, Swimme explains that the expansion of the universe appears centered from every point of observation. From Earth, it appears centered on Earth. From another galaxy, it appears centered there as well. There is no single privileged location from which the universe unfolds.

Viewed through this lens, each of us can be understood as occupying a uniquely central perspective within the cosmos.

The implications are profound.

We are each, in a sense, the center of the universe, while simultaneously being inseparable from the whole. This paradox resonates deeply with the emerging story of oneness, wholeness, and interbeing.

Can we dare to look through this lens and recognize ourselves as expressions of the Divine, manifestations of Creation itself?

Returning, then, to politics.

Through the emerging worldview of oneness, wholeness, and interbeing, we recognize that partisan politics can indeed be divisive. Yet I also vote with directionality in mind.

I look for candidates who embody adaptability, compassion, and evolutionary potential. Evolution advances through increasing complexity, cooperation, creativity, and coherence. I pay attention to which leaders support diversity, care for the Earth, the arts, and the well-being of all living beings.

Ironically, the current political landscape has made such choices easier for me than they once were. As a result, I have become more partisan than I was in the past.

Yet I do not see this as a contradiction.

In voting according to directionality, though partisan it may be, while embracing a holistic worldview, I embrace both unity and division, both idealism and practical reality. Groking wholeness allows us to live comfortably within that paradox.