Wealth

We can think about wealth from different perspectives.

1. Physical.
This is the material world — physical money, gold, things that allow us to exchange goods. But from this also emerges the accumulation of wealth: first as prevention against hard times, then, taken further, as greed — a tendency that leads to wars and inequality. And inequality is harmful not in itself, but when it damages others. This is not about prohibiting differences between people: everyone has different skills and excels in certain areas. In that sense, everyone is equal — good at something and less good at something else.

2. Mental.
Wealth in the mental area would be having received a good education that gives us the skills and knowledge to sustain ourselves and contribute value to the world. But that knowledge must also lead us to wisdom — and wisdom gives us mental peace. That is a form of wealth money cannot buy.

3. Spiritual.
Wealth in the spiritual realm is finding God. Because true spirituality cannot be found as a group — the connection, the awakening, the growth, the experience, is individual. Personality is individual. Therefore, we can only find the ultimate connection as individuals. And as individuals we must discover that the outside is as the inside, that we are the same light — and that at the same time we form a whole conscious being made of unique personalities. That is the highest wealth.

Sudor

Ganarse el pan con el sudor de la frente. Es una frase que hace referencia a ganarse la vida con el trabajo propio. Esto debe hacernos reflexionar sobre los mecanismos de prestar dinero y exigir que, además de lo prestado, se devuelva un extra. En la antigüedad esto se veía mal por ciertos grupos, que llegaron incluso a prohibirlo en sus sagradas escrituras. Pero como la codicia y el interés material priman sobre todo lo demás, si hace falta se crea una nueva religión, unas nuevas sagradas escrituras que admitan los nuevos intereses. Así actúa el poder de la codicia: el querer ganar más, ya no solo con el sudor de la frente sino, si es posible, con las vidas y el trabajo de otros. Y se renombra como trabajo el hecho de prestar riqueza, de usar contactos, de esclavizar, de matar, de oprimir, de seguir órdenes malvadas.

El sudor de la frente deja de ser algo moralmente admirable, algo deseable, algo digno de imitar. Pero es precisamente ahí —en el acto de servir al otro con el propio esfuerzo— donde se expresa el verdadero amor. Y es ahí donde encontraremos la belleza, donde la verdad y el amor se unen.

El sudor de la frente no es una condena: es una dignidad. Y lavar los pies del otro es el sudor más noble de todos. Seamos capaces de lavar los pies de los demás. Seamos capaces de entender que no hay jerarquías, razas ni religiones cuando se trata de servir, de amar, de seguir el camino de la verdad.

Lento

Moverse no es lo mismo que avanzar. Y quedarse quieto no es lo mismo que estar a salvo. Qué lento parece que avanzamos a veces. Incluso hay momentos en que parece que damos dos pasos adelante y uno atrás —en el mejor de los casos—. Y en tiempos de gran turbulencia, parece que retrocedemos mucho más de lo que se había avanzado.

Se suele decir que cada uno tiene su tiempo —una forma de decir que cada uno avanza a su ritmo—. Puede que haya verdad en eso, pero también puede llevar a la inactividad y a la indiferencia: no tomamos acción. Y sí, tal vez tomamos acción solo cuando la gota derrama el vaso, cuando la necesidad o el agobio se vuelven tan insoportables que al fin te mueves —pero desde la desesperación y una posición débil, no desde una más fuerte—.

Hay que ir despacio para no estrellarse. Y aún así podemos estrellarnos. La idea no es no estrellarse: es disminuir la probabilidad, y si ocurre, que sea leve. Incluso sin moverte, algo puede estrellarse contra ti. No estamos solos, ni estamos del todo quietos.

El punto es tomar responsabilidad y movernos con propósito, no por inercia. Puede que a veces lo hagamos por inercia —porque estamos aprendiendo, porque estamos pasando de ser guiados a tomar el control, o porque nos tomamos una especie de pausa—. Pero eso sería mejor si fuese por decisión propia: en ese caso, la inercia misma se convierte en propósito. Somos experiencia, y eso en sí es movimiento en el tiempo.

Cluster

I have heard a cluster of ideas that serve as a mental model. There are four, and if I remember correctly they are:

1. Reality over idea, or reality over theory. This is about staying close to the real — touching it, being present, putting things into practice. You can hear about something, but experiencing it directly is something else entirely.

2. Union over conflict. This is about joining things, people, humanity, cultures — including, sharing, becoming stronger together. At its core, this is about love.

3. The whole over the part. This is about understanding that we are part of a whole, and that the whole matters more than any single part. We see this principle repeatedly in cases where one person or a few sacrifice themselves for the many — and we admire that bravery and recognise it as an act of love.

4. Time over space. This is about processes that take time — about evolution, improvement, and cycles that do not become toxic but instead become cycles of growth. And it stands against the impulse to take and hold spaces, to conquer land. That impulse leads to patriotism taken too far, nationalism, racism, fascism, war, genocide.

These principles I heard from Pope Francis. He said they help him understand countries, cultures, and religions. He defends integration. And I think they align with the Golden Rule — they align with the purpose of loving, serving, and seeking truth.

Stage

Parliament is a stage — and like all stages, what matters is not the truth but the performance. Parliament seems like a stage where the aim is either to defend everything the government does or to oppose everything it does. I think this is a problem that thinkers noticed as far back as ancient Greece. Leaders are not necessarily the smartest or the most suited to govern — whether by their morals or their skills. The skill that matters most is the ability to convince people. You can lie or simply complain; if you convince people, that is enough.

And those who are powerful in resources but lack that ability themselves can simply buy it. They can be the very company that oppresses workers whilst maintaining good public relations — and also funding the NGO that fights them. This sounds ironic, but they manage everything they can. And greed has no end.

Because sooner or later, those in power fight amongst themselves — when there is an overproduction of elites, or when their interests come into conflict. And the pawns are the rest of us. Seen this way, everything can be read as a stage where everyone is playing their character in a play called life.

Fama

La fama es un amplificador. No cambia lo que eres: solo lo hace más grande. La fama puede tener sus beneficios y sus desventajas. En ambos casos se debe tener en cuenta la responsabilidad: en los beneficios, para no llegar a herir a otros; en las desventajas, para no herirte principalmente a ti mismo.

La fama trae la responsabilidad de ser un ejemplo. Cada persona ya lo es para otras, quiéranlo o no. Con la fama esto se incrementa y puede desbordarte —más aún si eres una persona inmadura, si careces de principios y valores que te sirvan de guía, o si no tienes un propósito claro—.

La fama conlleva también la responsabilidad de ser una voz que defienda las causas justas, porque tu luz influye mucho más en los demás.

Puedes tratar de alejarte de la fama, y está bien. Así como está bien abrazarla y sobrellevarla mientras creces. Que esté bien equivocarse no debe convertirse en justificación para no esforzarse en evitarlo.

La fama es una herramienta, un amplificador. Qué vas a amplificar es cosa tuya. Si será algo bueno o malo es tu decisión —como en cada acción de la vida—. No es algo con lo que creerse superior a los demás, ni con lo que empequeñecerse por verlo como algo grandioso. Es algo pasajero, como la vida misma en este gran universo.

Face

People try to change their faces, but the results can be perceived very differently. Some changes come across as comic or unnatural — and some people look for exactly that, whilst others perhaps do not intend it. I prefer the natural look: improvements that leave the face appearing as though nothing artificial was done. Whether it is make-up, surgery, injectables, or other techniques I am not familiar with, the ideal for everyday style is to wear it and not appear to be wearing anything at all. Seeing a face that is obviously made up is one thing; wearing make-up that seems invisible — that is something else entirely.

I am not sure whether make-up is strictly necessary on television due to lighting or other factors. Perhaps not, and it has simply become the norm even when it is not strictly needed.

We should also bear in mind that faces differ due to age, ethnicity, diet, and environment. In recent decades we see faces that look younger compared with photographs of people of the same age from fifty or more years ago. Beyond genetics, we see someone of sixty who looks forty, or someone of fifty who looks thirty or forty.

I think we can improve our appearance through knowledge of nutrition, exercise, and certain products — but the goal should be to maintain a natural look rather than a comic one. The best improvement, in a face or anywhere else, is the one that leaves no trace of itself — only the result. And the best things a face can have are a genuine smile and shining eyes.