In pondering my purpose in life, I often imagine the following: what if I had been born a slave in Egypt, building the pyramids? I would have spend my entire life in hard labor at a task I probably did not care about, and probably would have never seen the final product before I died. The vision could equally well be of many other conditions of slavery that have existed throughout humankind's sad history.
I imagine there are two kinds of slaves - those who accepted their lot in life, and those who rebelled, either internally through resentment and depression, or externally through attempts to escape or change the system. Given the chances of actually succeeding in rebellion, I imagine that accepting one's lot in life is the more healthy answer - that there, one can find at least some internal peace.
This is a difficult conclusion for me who values his freedom so highly - to think that it might be better to acquiesce than to fight. We hold those who have fought for freedom so highly in our society as the examples of who we all should be. Yet, no one is ever totally free. We all pay taxes, we all sit on hold waiting for a customer representative to come on the line, we all constantly suffer the small indignities our society has in store for us. Without the skill of finding peace in the middle of restriction, we would all be miserable indeed.
When does acquiescing become an escape, and when does it become a legitimate path to serenity?
I'm about to re-enter the workforce, and am trying to prepare myself to lose 40+ hours of free time each week in return for money. My freedom has a price, apparently - I can be bought. Is this an indignity or a privilege? It feels like a return to slavery. Can I find serenity working for the corporate empire? Should I?
