Purser acknowledges, more than once, that mindfulness, in and of itself, is not a bad thing, but claims that its teachers, for one, and the corporate community, for two, are promoting it in ways that "do not permit critique or debate of what might be unjust, culturally toxic or environmentally destructive." And if that is actually the case, then shame on them, but no surprise there. All good ideas will be corrupted by those seeking to maximize their own power.

I say "if that is actually the case" because I couldn't help noticing that the author managed to present lots of direct quotes from the various naysayers against the "neoliberal" mindfulness movement, but very few actual quotes from those mindfulness promoters themselves, leaving me to wonder if his claims that they want people to “accept things as they are” might be sourced more from his own fears and misunderstandings than from the real intentions of the mindfulness gurus.

The idea that mental discipline can lead to a permanent state of "blissful acceptance" regardless of one's material circumstances is a central tenet of the perennial philosophy, as ancient as the earliest wisdom traditions of Homo sapiens. But those teachings, to my knowledge, do not claim that the practitioner should not also work to make society better. If the new iterations of those traditions actually do claim that, then they are heinously corrupt indeed.

Another theme throughout this unnecessarily repetitious rant is the worry over individual solutions as opposed to collective action. But some jobs can only be done by individuals. Replace every appearance of the word "mindfulness" in the article with "toothbrushing" to see how much sense that makes. You can brush your teeth, or meditate, before, during, or after a protest march, without any inherent conflict that I can see, but the idea of collective toothbrushing falls kinda flat. The only way a group can meditate is if all the individuals in it are meditating.

From the perspective of history, there has always been a source (or many) of turmoil and suffering in the sphere of human affairs, and there are likely to always be. Neoliberalism may be our particular dukkha du jour, but when we conquer that one, another will replace it. There will never be a utopian world, free of pain, for us to inhabit... other than that one the ancients discovered, hiding in our own mental potentialities.

Purser seems particularly haunted by his fear of capitalist excesses, but he might find himself more effective at fighting them if he could learn to shift his attention from his feelings to his actions.

Provocative article ... the urgent point of it seems to be: "By failing to address collective suffering, and systemic change that might remove it, they [mindfulness proponents] rob mindfulness of its real revolutionary potential, reducing it to something banal that keeps people focused on themselves."

Asking a stress-reduction technique to guide people in their political ethics is, I think, looking for something that isn't in the box. I don't go to a therapist seeking guidance on how to overturn the current imbalances of capitalism, but rather on how to cope with their effects on me. It's up to me to go out and vote, read the news, get involved. Whether I practice "mindfulness" or not, I don't believe has any influence on the overall thrust of my political awareness.

I think the author is reading something into it that isn't there.

Yup new form of don't do anything be cool don't rock the boat exactly the opposite of what needs to be done