PDA

View Full Version : Can We Withdraw Consent from the Control Paradigm?



Pages : [1] 2

Ahkenaten
21st December 2010, 17:02
The first requirement for stepping outside the dialectic or stepping outside the Panopticon (the intoxicating illusory world created by media, etc) is to realize the fundamental nature of this particular illusion, i.e. that it is a deliberate creation, an exemplar of social engineering par excellence. The reach and scope of the illusion is vast and truly astonishing when you begin to be aware of it. And the particular illusory bubble that people exist in within what is known as the USA has very distinctive features. Let me remark here that all social constructs could be considered to be, to varying extents, similar bubbles, but few in history have such a remarkable self-reinforcing, integrated structure. This particular bubble has all the hallmarks of the Hegelian dialectic, and being deliberately created for a particular purpose. I will not spend too much time with the interconnections between the Founding Fathers and this Philosophical System other than to say that Adam Weishopf who is considered to be the modern founder-of Masonism - it would be more correct to say one who again surfaced the tenants of Masonism - and his theories were very well known to the Founding Fathers, in fact George Washington was a Mason. There are compelling historic and intellectual connections between Masonic thought and the Hegelian Dialectic. Anyway, I digress - with respect to stepping outside the box, the first step is to become aware that you are in a box or special environment. It is very difficult for fish to know that they are in the water because their being is so utterly integrated into their environment, for example - but anyone who has pulled a fish out of the water knows that even fish have expressions because one can see that they certainly look shocked when removed from their environment. I warn you that stepping outside even an unpleasant environment is a shock, but in this case it must be done!

Stepping outside the Panopticon and the dialectic involves simply, once one recognizes the key features, removing one's consent from a system that depends upon our full participation and consent in order to exist! Without our consent and full participation it ceases to exist for us personally - if the collective WE withdrew consent, it would utterly fall and a new human reality would come into being.

Simple examples of removal of consent - do not participate in any systems that support the Illusion, or reduce such participation to a minimum always maintaining awareness of what it is that you are doing: 1.) reduce to an absolute minimum mindless "consumerism" - human beings are not, contrary to propaganda - "Consumers." Someone would like us to believe we are and reinforcement of that illusion is essential to the control paradigm. 2.) turn off the TV. TV is the main conduit of propaganda and social control/thought and impulse entrainment. 3.) begin to understand that the entire world around you actually reflects what you think, do, and say; rearrange thoughts, actions and words accordingly. 4.) begin to think deeply about the fact that personal ethos is the foundation of a meaningful human life - analyze and assess and make adjustments accordingly 5.) when impulses and feelings arise that serve only to cause dissension, conflict, alienation and hatred amongst human beings STOP and reassess. Do NOT engage in destructive patterns unless one's very life is in danger, and then - take action with deliberate, conscious, razor-like precision. Conscious and deliberate action NOT mere visceral reaction, is the high road to human development. Mere reaction entraps once more in the Control Paradigm. 6.) Withdraw support of any kind from the existing paradigm once its features and players are clearly recognized, and this includes money, time, energy, and participation........................the existing paradigm is a parasite and relies totally for its existence upon the participation, wittingly or not, of the majority of humans. Once the participation ceases, the current destructive paradigm FALLS. This essentially describes what I am doing differently, how I am thinking differently and I believe more people are acting and thinking in this way.

As for voting - sadly, and I do not mean to rub this in - you can see with your own eyes that you may have voted and your "candidate" may have "won" - but is anything any different? What does common sense tell you? The problem is not within you - the problem lies in the false reality which only continues to exist to the extent that you give it your lifeblood and energy. Not voting IS an option - and may be a moral and intellectual obligation when the false alternatives presented are harmful to you, me - and everyone.

With best wishes for an AWAKE AND AWARE New Year, take heart loved ones, together we can make a difference!

Ahkenaten
21st December 2010, 19:10
I would be VERY INTERESTED in anyone's views on this important subject!!!:cool:

Banshee
21st December 2010, 19:37
:whoo::whoo::whoo::whoo::clap2:My first thought, is that I wish that I could click the "thanks" button more than once.

Sage advice. Let's see if I have the essentials of your post: Stop buying all but bare necessities (check). Stop taking part in situations that contract your paradigm (check), stop playing the game (check). Go to the sidelines and sit down and start rearranging your reality as you would have it (working on it).???

I have been one who wants to take action, but I am realizing that by "opting out" we are taking action. I am also starting to see glimpses of the other layers of the game. Its a bit daunting.

Wise words about voting. I didn't vote for the first time this past November. The results would have been the same, so validating a corrupt process allows that process to thrive.

Well said Ahkenaten!

Ahkenaten
21st December 2010, 19:46
:whoo::whoo::whoo::whoo::clap2:My first thought, is that I wish that I could click the "thanks" button more than once.

Sage advice. Let's see if I have the essentials of your post: Stop buying all but bare necessities (check). Stop taking part in situations that contract your paradigm (check), stop playing the game (check). Go to the sidelines and sit down and start rearranging your reality as you would have it (working on it).???

I have been one who wants to take action, but I am realizing that by "opting out" we are taking action. I am also starting to see glimpses of the other layers of the game. Its a bit daunting.

Wise words about voting. I didn't vote for the first time this past November. The results would have been the same, so validating a corrupt process allows that process to thrive.

Well said Ahkenaten!

Thank you Banshee! Some of us really see the need at this time to move the ball forward on the court, so to speak. My personal belief is that the profound subject of withdrawal of consent is at the root of our present dilemma.....................and withdrawal of consent is a dynamic form of action. Non-participation IS a viable option, and moreover, serves the exalted purpose of taking us OUT of the control paradigm, placing us in a position of NON PARTICIPANT....................................... ..we can observe from this position and create OTHER options outside the bubble. Again, I am with you in body and spirit.

I continue to believe there are VERY positive developments going on, not the least of which is the utter panic and disarray the people engaged in the Control Paradigm are exhibiting. That shows they AND their social model IS VULNERABLE and that they FEEL THREATENED. Take heart, therefor, we are powerful as individuals and collectively.

WE MUST WAKE UP to who and what we are if there is to be any hope for us, our children, our grandchildren and all of our Descendents.

Let us do this one thing in remembrance of all the hardships and sacrifices made by all of our ancestors from the caves forward. Let their experiences, our collective wisdom, and all their lives MEAN SOMETHING.

jeannacav
21st December 2010, 19:56
I like what you have said very much Ahkenaten,

I voted because I did not want them to think they had made us apathetic. It was a funny choice for me to vote, and when I reviewed my votes, I saw that I had voted for almost half of each party based on what the candidates said. I have not, nor will I bother to see what they actually did with this.

I am inclined to agree with Jefferson that we should live our lives in peace our own way and only have a very little bit of organization.
I have called this "organized anarchy" since I thought up the term in the 70's.
I still like the term and concept, but I also (still) do not think americans are ready.
But, this is what you are talking about, and maybe no americans or hardly anyone else for that matter, will be ready because it is so difficult to get out of the box.

I read a book called "Abduction to the 9th planet" where the aliens wanted to suggest to us through this man that the best way to "win" this tyranny is to stop going to work.
Everything will stop and eventually the entire system will crash.
It means doctors and police and everybody must not go to work.
Then we could all live on a permanent vacation being self sufficient.

It would take a lot of courage for most people to stop working, but I think this is a good idea in that it would probably be successful.

Good thread.
Thank you,

jeanna

I think I will return to fred's webpage and download all those early american papers (thanks fred!)

Ahkenaten
21st December 2010, 20:12
Hi Jeannacav - thanks for your thoughtful comments. Concerning the issue of non-participation, actually though it is not well known, NON-PARTICIPATION has historically occupied a very important position in the USA, going back to the New England Town Meetings. So it really isn't a new or radical concept, ONLY insofar as a majority takes this up as a common theme and practice - which would truly be radical. As for people not going to work - well, that decision might well be taken away from us by events on the ground, so to speak, if the economic system crashes..............and it may well do that. I personally would not urge people to stop going to work...................we all need to live, but a radical shift in perspective on the part of the majority of human beings that reflects itself in genuinely new and often subtle ways of thinking, speaking and behaving in the world would have as revolutionary an effect as stopping going to work without the extreme turbulence.

Kind of like unplugging the TV instead of kicking in the screen and throwing the danged thing out the window!!!

READ THE FEDERALIST PAPERS!!!!

jeannacav
21st December 2010, 20:59
It seems that non-participation needs to be covered.
Otherwise it appears to be apathy.

Do you have suggestions?
I like the 'flash mob' concept, for instance, you know, something like an artistic statement along with the message "we are NOT participating".

------
BTW, the reason I do NOT believe the economy will ever crash is that it is a necessary tool for those who are controlling.
The threat of economic collapse is a great way to create fear which then can be used, but to actually destroy the tool?
I do not think it will actually happen.

[yes, federalist papers! ]

thanks,

jeanna

Ahkenaten
22nd December 2010, 00:07
The Flash Mob concept has incredible power thanks to the internet...................check it out..............apparently 5,000 people showed up at the Galleria in Roseville CA last night for one of those Hallelujah Chorus scenes and the balcony around the food court started cracking and popping and the floors started swaying leading the Mall to dispatch security guards to escort people out of the Mall because the structure might be compromised!! So, that is one unintended consequence of mass action (also called 'BLOW BACK') that we must be concerned about...........................even so, point well taken......Flash Mobs can be very powerful! Let me ponder this further!!

see this article on what happened last night in Roseville

http://www.kcra.com/news/26200981/detail.html?source=SAC

I think that non-participation being characterized as apathy is similar to the way western society characterizes eastern spirituality as "passive" - that is WaY WAY too simplistic and doesn't adequately capture the differences.

I agree with you that TPTB cannot pull down all the pillars of the temple, in particular the economic pillar OR the communications grid/network because they depend upon those two hollow pillars (Jochin and Boaz) for continuing their control paradigm as well as for their very survival. Any false flag operation could probably be identified by the fact that those two key pillars or significant parts of them, would be intact.

jcocks
22nd December 2010, 00:20
I agree with most of what is said..except I believe you SHOULD play the game. BUT.... The problem with the game so far is that all the moves are pretty much made for you nowadays. You've got to start PLAYING the game - making your own moves - and be strong. Because if you PLAY the game, you'll get yourself "in trouble", you'll be ostracised, you'll be ridiculed...you name it. Be strong. Don't stop playing. Be a shining beacon of light for those around you, because eventually they'll start to wake up too - and then you'll be setting an example for them. But most of all - BE STRONG! You are doing the right thing! You are a wayshower, the first wave of a growing movement.

BE STRONG.

Banshee
22nd December 2010, 00:27
II read a book called "Abduction to the 9th planet" where the aliens wanted to suggest to us through this man that the best way to "win" this tyranny is to stop going to work.
Everything will stop and eventually the entire system will crash.
It means doctors and police and everybody must not go to work.
Then we could all live on a permanent vacation being self sufficient.!)

The book was renamed " The Thiaoouba Prophecy " in case anyone is looking for it. Fantastic read. Written by a jewel of a human being.

Teakai
22nd December 2010, 00:39
It seems that non-participation needs to be covered.
Otherwise it appears to be apathy.

Do you have suggestions?
I like the 'flash mob' concept, for instance, you know, something like an artistic statement along with the message "we are NOT participating".

------
BTW, the reason I do NOT believe the economy will ever crash is that it is a necessary tool for those who are controlling.
The threat of economic collapse is a great way to create fear which then can be used, but to actually destroy the tool?
I do not think it will actually happen.
[yes, federalist papers! ]

thanks,

jeanna

Jeanna, I do like all the points you make, but I would point out that the euro is in the process of literal collapse right now. The results which can be seen across European states (only not in the mainstream news - surprise surprise :) )

It is predicted that the US currency will collapse not long after that.

This is what a lot of people are warning about - to get prepared for when this happens, with food, water and basic needs because when it happens, it's not at all pretty.
The US wasn't always the reserve world curency - it would be a costly mistake to consider it will always remain so - especially when we aware that definite and determined measures are being taken in order to ensure its collapse, and that' it's collapse is essential for the forwarding of the 'nwo' agenda.

I'm not at all pointing this out to promote fear, but it is an issue that does need to be taken seriously. Listen to independent forecasters - I really like Gerald Celente, but there are others saying the same thing.

Ahkenaten
22nd December 2010, 00:40
I agree with most of what is said..except I believe you SHOULD play the game. BUT.... The problem with the game so far is that all the moves are pretty much made for you nowadays. You've got to start PLAYING the game - making your own moves - and be strong. Because if you PLAY the game, you'll get yourself "in trouble", you'll be ostracised, you'll be ridiculed...you name it. Be strong. Don't stop playing. Be a shining beacon of light for those around you, because eventually they'll start to wake up too - and then you'll be setting an example for them. But most of all - BE STRONG! You are doing the right thing! You are a wayshower, the first wave of a growing movement.

BE STRONG.

Check it out - if one steps outside the paradigm, "withdraws consent" that does not necessarily mean retreating to a cave on a mountainside (appealing as that seems sometimes!) Most of us continue to live our lives everyday, interacting with others, going about our daily business, getting the basic food we need to prepare meals, struggling to make ends meet and fulfull our obligations, etc. We are playing OUR Game, that is, we are now making moves that we chose to make for our own reasons and perhaps even adding some new options to the mix. It is for the most part a "quiet revolution" if you will, and does not necessarily involve kicking the TV around and screaming at Whomever and then throwing the thing through the plate glass window!! (Much as I have been tempted to do that!) The GAME becomes very, very interesting and rich as it becomes OUR GAME, OUR STAND in reality. I think, jcocks you know what I mean. I would be the last one to recommend retreating from reality, we must engage......................but in order for our engagement to be meaningful, we must think, speak and act on our terms outside the current control paradigm.

And Tekai - I most heartily agree that practical steps need to be taken sooner rather than later (making sure one has adequate food, supplies and cash on hand to last for some time) because we all know in our hearts our survival is at issue here. Even so, we must remain hopeful, understanding that our attitudes are the only things we exercise immediate control over, and that we are receivers as well as transmitters, be mindful therefor what you transmit!!

I still say that in order to wake up we must withdraw consent from the Control Paradigm and proceed about the important business of building something new.

Ahkenaten
22nd December 2010, 00:52
Jeanna, I do like all the points you make, but I would point out that the euro is in the process of literal collapse right now. The results which can be seen across European states (only not in the mainstream news - surprise surprise :) )

It is predicted that the US currency will collapse not long after that.

This is what a lot of people are warning about - to get prepared for when this happens, with food, water and basic needs because when it happens, it's not at all pretty.
The US wasn't always the reserve world currency - it would be a costly mistake to consider it will always remain so - especially when we aware that definite and determined measures are being taken in order to ensure its collapse, and that' it's collapse is essential for the forwarding of the 'nwo' agenda.

I'm not at all pointing this out to promote fear, but it is an issue that does need to be taken seriously. Listen to independent forecasters - I really like Gerald Celente, but there are others saying the same thing.

Tekai they might appear to be blowing up the oil rig to use a metaphor about the economic system, but I can guarantee that is not what would actually happen. TPTB REQUIRE the existing economic infrastructure in order to maintain their control paradigm. This is not to say that currencies might not go under, and that us peasants at the bottom are not being set up for more major pain....................but the system, the hollow economic pillar, will continue because it is essential to the infrastructure of their power and control just as the electronic communications media hollow pillar is.

Teakai
22nd December 2010, 01:00
Ahkenaton - I do agree with what you're saying in regard to not consenting to the system.

This is only effective as a society, though, if pretty much everyone participates. The way I see it, and I don't want to p*ss on anyone's parade is that this current system must fall in order that a more genuine one can arise from it, because our entire society is built upon the foundations of economy and profit. This is a sad fact.

It is this collapsing process that is going to be the challenge and there will be those who will succumb to pretty much anything, even a fascist one world order run by paedophile, merciless control freaks who are incapable of empathy, so long as they feel safe enough.

Teakai
22nd December 2010, 01:16
Tekai they might appear to be blowing up the oil rig to use a metaphor about the economic system, but I can guarantee that is not what would actually happen. TPTB REQUIRE the existing economic infrastructure in order to maintain their control paradigm. This is not to say that currencies might not go under, and that us peasants at the bottom are not being set up for more major pain....................but the system, the hollow economic pillar, will continue because it is essential to the infrastructure of their power and control just as the electronic communications media hollow pillar is.

The 'ptb' will introduce a new monetary system - one which they of course will have the power to print.
But first the old one must go.

That's where it gets really ugly, much moreso if people haven't made preparations - people disregard information of the impending crash at their peril. OK, admittedly that likely sounds very scary, nevertheless that's the plan.

Ahkenaten
22nd December 2010, 01:25
I agree with much of what you have said and was emphasizing the continued existence of the "two pillars" by way of pointing out one way to (this is in another thread, too) distinguish between fake and real attacks on us. The fake attacks will leave elements of the control paradigm in place, real attacks will not. Even though things may get pretty interesting, I still have hope that the phoenix - i.e. something sparkling and new - will rise from the ashes. And that is where it gets very, very important about our frame of mind, what we do, say and think - because we have the real opportunity to create something very new out of what is now, clearly dying.

Teakai
22nd December 2010, 01:30
Check it out - if one steps outside the paradigm, "withdraws consent" that does not necessarily mean retreating to a cave on a mountainside (appealing as that seems sometimes!) Most of us continue to live our lives everyday, interacting with others, going about our daily business, getting the basic food we need to prepare meals, struggling to make ends meet and fulfull our obligations, etc. We are playing OUR Game, that is, we are now making moves that we chose to make for our own reasons and perhaps even adding some new options to the mix. It is for the most part a "quiet revolution" if you will, and does not necessarily involve kicking the TV around and screaming at Whomever and then throwing the thing through the plate glass window!! (Much as I have been tempted to do that!) The GAME becomes very, very interesting and rich as it becomes OUR GAME, OUR STAND in reality. I think, jcocks you know what I mean. I would be the last one to recommend retreating from reality, we must engage......................but in order for our engagement to be meaningful, we must think, speak and act on our terms outside the current control paradigm.

And Tekai - I most heartily agree that practical steps need to be taken sooner rather than later (making sure one has adequate food, supplies and cash on hand to last for some time) because we all know in our hearts our survival is at issue here. Even so, we must remain hopeful, understanding that our attitudes are the only things we exercise immediate control over, and that we are receivers as well as transmitters, be mindful therefor what you transmit!!

I still say that in order to wake up we must withdraw consent from the Control Paradigm and proceed about the important business of building something new.

The thing is though, that until people do wake up - they won’t withdraw from the system. One only happens on realisation of the other.

Yes, of course we should be optimistic and hopeful, I’m not in the least saying that we shouldn’t be.
Being prepared doesn’t mean not being hopeful. In fact it means being hopeful, and practical.
Denying that it’s going to happen is simply sticking one’s head in the sand along with adding to the mess.

These ‘ptb’s haven’t spent the last god knows how many centuries planning this out – they’re not going to give it up without a fight. Just like that guy with cerebral palsy was pulled from his wheel chair during the London riots.
Just like Ghandi’s peaceful protest eventuated in bloodshed.

I have nothing at all against your idea of withdrawing consent – I’m fully in agreement with it. – I didn’t think you meant it as retreating to a cave either. I rather thought you meant it as not buying mentally or physically into the falsity of the illusion of the system.
Which is the only thing we can do – but until practically everyone is doing it, the system will continue because it is being supported.

Also, cash will be useless.

Teakai
22nd December 2010, 01:35
I agree with much of what you have said and was emphasizing the continued existence of the "two pillars" by way of pointing out one way to (this is in another thread, too) distinguish between fake and real attacks on us. The fake attacks will leave elements of the control paradigm in place, real attacks will not. Even though things may get pretty interesting, I still have hope that the phoenix - i.e. something sparkling and new - will rise from the ashes. And that is where it gets very, very important about our frame of mind, what we do, say and think - because we have the real opportunity to create something very new out of what is now, clearly dying.

I do agree, Ahkenaton - but there's no point in just saying things that are wishful thinking and denying stuff that might be considered scary.
We have to be truthful - with ourselves first and foremost, with each other and in regard to what is happening in the world around us.

Something sparkling and new will arise from the ashes - so long as most of us don't settle - because we're scared.

Ahkenaten
22nd December 2010, 01:42
Tekai I agree heartily what what you have said and thank your for your wisdom, grit and spirit! I also believe that we should not take violent action unless we are defending ourselves or our loved ones and that is why I stop short on those issues and emphasize withdrawing from the paradigm. This is because we must practice what we preach......if we wish to create something new we must NOT adopt the tactics of those who seek to destroy us. There has to be another way than act/react! Once we - that is many of us - WAKE UP - we can act together to create something new. It is for this I pray and why I earnestly exhort others to WAKE UP!! Ahk

Teakai
22nd December 2010, 01:50
Tekai I agree heartily what what you have said and thank your for your wisdom, grit and spirit! I also believe that we should not take violent action unless we are defending ourselves or our loved ones and that is why I stop short on those issues and emphasize withdrawing from the paradigm. This is because we must practice what we preach......if we wish to create something new we must NOT adopt the tactics of those who seek to destroy us. There has to be another way than act/react! Once we - that is many of us - WAKE UP - we can act together to create something new. It is for this I pray and why I earnestly exhort others to WAKE UP!! Ahk

Absolutely, Ahk – the waking of humanity is the only way out of this illusion. And it’s a ruddy big illusion. :)

This makes for a fascinating study into the human psyche and the power of ego identity.

DawgBone
22nd December 2010, 02:11
Tekai I agree heartily what what you have said and thank your for your wisdom, grit and spirit! I also believe that we should not take violent action unless we are defending ourselves or our loved ones and that is why I stop short on those issues and emphasize withdrawing from the paradigm. This is because we must practice what we preach......if we wish to create something new we must NOT adopt the tactics of those who seek to destroy us. There has to be another way than act/react! Once we - that is many of us - WAKE UP - we can act together to create something new. It is for this I pray and why I earnestly exhort others to WAKE UP!! Ahk

Bingo!

The solution can't be business as usual. We have to create a new reality, an new model. But first we must imagine it.

What should life on Gaia be like? What should humans be?

The old paradigms, the old models are worthless. It is time for us to create a new world.

Ahkenaten
22nd December 2010, 02:17
Yes Dawgbone - anything is possible. IF we wake up from our collective nightmare.

Lost Soul
22nd December 2010, 02:57
Concur about stepping back and trying to see it as an outsider. John Peniel mentions some of it in his book, The Lost Teachings of Atlantis. He also mentions the programming people receive from parents, school, television, the media. I find myself not doing a lot of mainstream things (I don't have a stereo or cable vision, don't listen to modern music), don't believe in any particular political party as both major ones are owned by the multinational corporations or the bankers. Don't trust the media or watch television either.


I read a book called "Abduction to the 9th planet" where the aliens wanted to suggest to us through this man that the best way to "win" this tyranny is to stop going to work.
Everything will stop and eventually the entire system will crash. It means doctors and police and everybody must not go to work. Then we could all live on a permanent vacation being self sufficient.I read a book called "Abduction to the 9th planet" where the aliens wanted to suggest to us through this man that the best way to "win" this tyranny is to stop going to work. Everything will stop and eventually the entire system will crash. It means doctors and police and everybody must not go to work. Then we could all live on a permanent vacation being self sufficient.

The above won't work. Man hasn't ascended to the point where (s)he will do things out of pure love or compassion for their fellow man. Second, if the cops didn't show up to work, we'd be no better off than war torn Somalia. The biggest and most aggressive gangs would run our streets, monopolize resources and terrorize others into submission. If everyone were to adopt the Christ consciousness of being good to one another, then it would. But what are the chances of that? Selfishness rules in most people and will continue to do so for a long time.

Ahkenaten
22nd December 2010, 03:25
The fact is that it is up to us, ALL of us, to change. And it can be done! For inexplicable reasons in the past living beings on earth SUDDENLY changed drastically physically, almost overnight, to accommodate to new living situations here on earth. We have within us enormous potential for change, all that we need is packed right inside us, way way down in our DNA - and in our consciousness!! All that is needed is for us to RISE UP, WAKE UP, whatever you want to call it. Positive change is possible, and in fact is REQUIRED NOW for our very survival.

jcocks
22nd December 2010, 03:58
I still say that in order to wake up we must withdraw consent from the Control Paradigm and proceed about the important business of building something new.

I agree wholeheartedly... But it's a case of participating in a way that helps building the new paradigm, rather than the non-participation that some seem to espouse...

IMHO, now that we have undergone the lunar eclipse, the energies are going to start to settle in. The awakening will speed up and more people will awaken faster. Up until now this has not been a real threat to the PTW, but now it's going to start becoming one - which will invoke a "fight-or-flight" response from the animal that is the PTW...and can you guess which they'll choose?

That's right - fight. Our jub is going to start becoming harder and the controls are going to start really stepping up. Be strong, the change is at hand.... It's not long now. It's going to be an adventure! Just don't buy into the PTW's crap - because it's going to start flying thick and fast...

Just my 2c worth....

Ahkenaten
22nd December 2010, 04:01
Yes we must be strong and resolute. And we must stand together. Strength is in our numbers.

sjkted
22nd December 2010, 06:24
A great post... I'm still in the process of withdrawing. I just get a little better at it every year.

--sjkted

Banshee
22nd December 2010, 16:50
Tekai they might appear to be blowing up the oil rig to use a metaphor about the economic system, but I can guarantee that is not what would actually happen. TPTB REQUIRE the existing economic infrastructure in order to maintain their control paradigm. This is not to say that currencies might not go under, and that us peasants at the bottom are not being set up for more major pain....................but the system, the hollow economic pillar, will continue because it is essential to the infrastructure of their power and control just as the electronic communications media hollow pillar is.

Agreed - enough damage to currency/economic systems to induce fear, but not to cause rebellion.....

"Beware of one who has nothing to lose" And, the Controllers know this. They're not going to upset the applecart to the extent that it jeopardizes their control, they just want to strengthen it.

Banshee
22nd December 2010, 16:57
The fact is that it is up to us, ALL of us, to change. And it can be done! For inexplicable reasons in the past living beings on earth SUDDENLY changed drastically physically, almost overnight, to accommodate to new living situations here on earth. We have within us enormous potential for change, all that we need is packed right inside us, way way down in our DNA - and in our consciousness!! All that is needed is for us to RISE UP, WAKE UP, whatever you want to call it. Positive change is possible, and in fact is REQUIRED NOW for our very survival.

This could very well interrupt "their" plans to manipulate our DNA. So don't buy their GM food, take their vaccines, watch their crappy television, listen to their mindless music, join their clubs, go to their churches, read their books, play their games (soccer moms come to mind here). In other words, opt out of anything that reeks of joining. I would even go as far to say use their electronics and electronic systems, but that seems highly impossible to maintain any form of communication with other members of the resistance. There does need to be an alternate internet, free of the control systems.

xbusymom
22nd December 2010, 17:04
this might help

http://www.oocities.com/CapitolHill/2917/status.html

Ahkenaten
22nd December 2010, 17:36
this might help

http://www.oocities.com/CapitolHill/2917/status.html


xbusymom - for what it's worth I don't put much creedence in any of this "sovereign citizen" stuff. It was just last Spring when so much attention was given to a Sovereign Citizen movement that supposedly served papers on all the Governors of all the States concerning this issue, and - kaput! The leader of the movement disappeared from sight and dropped out. I personally have always suspected this entire phenomenon to be just another government-designed "honey pot" operation to entrap people interested in anti-tax issues, and general non-compliance with official laws, etc. Why go that way? Why does anyone need to play inside their game to withdraw consent from the paradigm? We are talking about something much more powerful and much more subtle here than being pulled over by the state police and handing them an affadavit instead of a driver's license, to inform them of your "soverign" status, or a "diplomatic license plate' for your car!!

Sorry, but I know all about this particular movement and all it did was make a little money for one little poseur from Columbia County, N.Y. and provide the government with a big list of rebellious anti-tax/ant-iIRS adherents! That is NOT what we are about in this thread!! In fact I am so opposed to everything having to do with the "sovereign citizen" movement that I actually want the link to their information removed from this thread.

Why would I want to ensnare any members of Avalon in a government sting/information gathering operation??!!

Ba-ba-Ra
22nd December 2010, 18:41
Great post Ahkenaten!

Yesterday I watched the Video AlkaMyst posted where James Corbett discusses "austerity". I was interested when he talked about the citizens in Iceland "not fighting the government, but becoming the government." I need to research and see how that experiment is going. Hopefully well, and could be an example for another way.

Of course, Iceland having such a small population, compared to a country with the population of the U.S. could be a whole other matter, but... often once a prototype is in the consciousness of humans, it is at least a beginning.

The other problem I see is if we are not awake enough to completely understand the problem - then unawake citizens taking over could be more of the same, only with different foxes guarding the chicken coop.

Uniting is important, but so far, I'm not seeing anyone coming up with ways and/or common goals to reach this purpose.

Ahkenaten
22nd December 2010, 18:47
Ba ba ra thanks for your thoughtful comments. The way I see it is that all the old ways, i.e. traditional grass-roots organization and movements, etc. run a very high risk, based on experience, of just being more of the same-old same-old reaction-formation activities thereby keeping us firmly ensnared in the current control paradigm. What is needed is a new way - speaking in terms of "Memes" and "meme-spreading" I think is helpful. What is needed is a rising up similar to what one observes in nature - a cluster of earthquakes, clouds forming from moisture condensing from the earth below becoming a moving storm system, a great flock of birds in flight suddenly changing direction acting as one organism, etc. THIS is the kind of change mechanism I envision. The traditional methods for social change have not worked and only have been reactions to existing formulae......................in order to get to something truly new another means must be employed. Just a thought.

xbusymom
22nd December 2010, 18:50
ok, I will adjust my post and you can remove the link from yours and we can all do things YOUR way... (sorry this is sounding like a rant – I was interrupted by activities here at the house, so I will continue..)

my point is that – (yes many of the big agencies that spring up for the purpose of taking on the fed govt head-on are traps, and I would not want that for anyone) BUT telling people to do things a certain way smacks of what even you say we should try to get away from doing, so-

first-we need to kickstart people thinking independently and creatively again... that means that maybe we need to plant a few sovereignty seeds in their minds. maybe enough of us can start small and fly under the radar until we do actually make a difference in local communities...

case in point... when I moved and closed out my bank account, they REQUIRED my new address. since it was only a local credit union, I did not see the need and I refused to just comply with procedures. the clerk fussed the whole time (10 minutes) about me breaking the rules, needing to forward dividend checks next quarter, etc. . I asked him how much it cost to mail a check, informed him that IF I was due anything it wouldn’t even be close to covering the cost of the stamp—he still fussed. I left praying I had at least planted a seed for logical reasoning.
*and besides- they have my ssn#, my phone #, my name, DL and BC info, and other peices of identifyers on record - if they really NEED it that bad they can just dig for it themselves.

second – we need to allow people to utilize their own talent and skills to accomplish non-compliance in the way they feel most comfortable with... people need to build their self-worth/self-power with victories that small successful non-participations can bring.

grow your own food-
http://www.squarefootgardening.com/

start filtering out the toxins in your water (including flouride)
http://directive21.com/

refuse to use THEIR money-
http://www.ithacahours.com/

jumpstart a caring community-
http://www.timebanks.org/

------------
Babara- that is a great idea and I would be very interested to hear what you find out about that new type of governing body,

but I think we also need to look at how we eat the elephant. if we keep the changes on a holographic /grass roots level- where small ‘fires’ are starting everywhere, TPTB wont have enough fire departments to fix things according to their plans...

Ahkenaten
22nd December 2010, 18:55
ok, I will adjust my post and you can remove the link from yours and we can all do things YOUR way... (sorry this is sounding like a rant – I was interrupted by activities here at the house, so I will continue..)

my point is that – (yes many of the big agencies that spring up for the purpose of taking on the fed govt head-on are traps, and I would not want that for anyone) BUT telling people to do things a certain way smacks of what even you say we should try to get away from doing, so-

first-we need to kickstart people thinking independently and creatively again... that means that maybe we need to plant a few sovereignty seeds in their minds. maybe enough of us can start small and fly under the radar until we do actually make a difference in local communities...

case in point... when I moved and closed out my bank account, they REQUIRED my new address. since it was only a local credit union, I did not see the need and I refused to just comply with procedures. the clerk fussed the whole time (10 minutes) about me breaking the rules, needing to forward dividend checks next quarter, etc. . I asked him how much it cost to mail a check, informed him that IF I was due anything it wouldn’t even be close to covering the cost of the stamp—he still fussed. I left praying I had at least planted a seed for logical reasoning.


second – we need to allow people to utilize their own talent and skills to accomplish non-compliance in the way they feel most comfortable with... people need to build their self-worth/self-power with victories that small successful non-participations can bring.

grow your own food-
http://www.squarefootgardening.com/

refuse to use THEIR money-
http://www.ithacahours.com/

jumpstart a caring community-
http://www.timebanks.org/

------------
Babara- that is a great idea and I would be very interested to hear what you find out about that new type of governing body,

but I think we also need to look at how we eat the elephant. if we keep the changes on a holographic /grass roots level- where small ‘fires’ are starting everywhere, TPTB wont have enough fire departments to fix things according to their plans...

It's OK xbusy mom you are allowed to rant if you want!! ;) I just do not want this discussion to be diverted to a "sovereign citizen" thread.........as for the rest of what you say, I agree. While the IDEAS you are exploring are of course germane to this topic, the use of the language "sovereign citizen" etc. is in my opinion, a trap.................and a flag. That is NOT what this topic is about at all. I hope you understand what I am saying here.

xbusymom
22nd December 2010, 19:02
yes I do, but I am finding that the current LABELS of an issue are all we have to work with right now- so that people will know (mostly) what we are talking about.
if people know what a couch is but have never heard the term 'sofa', we run the risk of spending all our time and efforts just getting people up to speed on the new lingo... without ever having delved into the meat of the matter...

Ahkenaten
22nd December 2010, 19:07
You raise an excellent point, the language is presently breaking - we must develop new language - or new way of communicating - to describe what it is we envision. That is a huge part of the problem we face.....................our very language is now strained to its limits. I guess what I am trying to say is that our language itself is part of the control paradigm and that is the paradox....................how can we envision and create something new operating within the control paradigm??!!!!

That is why I started this thread - I wanted to see what other people thought about this. You have arrived at the CRUX of the matter ..... the heart of darkness, so to speak.

xbusymom
22nd December 2010, 20:08
I have been toying with this premise for a few months now. I found (and will have to re-find it now) something alluding to the designing and the deliberate use of (or lack of) harmonics and energy-vibrations in the creation of the english language.

it’s all a jumble in my head but I am pretty sure that a lot of things are connected to this issue...

+ solfegio notes and light/energy frequencies , and sacred geometry frequencies
+ chalkra vibrations (of both body and earth)
+ the massacres of the native American and other indigenous tribes (who had an understanding and working knowledge of how to use energy and vibrational harmonics to help/heal physical matter)
+ how the legal language and definitions were designed (reversed meanings to regular language)
+ the spiritual meditation chants
+ the religious songs

• every other foreign language is more complete (harmonically speaking) than the English language... its no wonder all the other countries scorn our arrogance that we have toward making everyone speak English to us

(sorry if I am way off topic but my forte is putting odd connections together that most people don’t see...)

ok, so maybe we do need to construct a new language... how do we do this and get it over to everybody worldwide in time to really make a difference?

Banshee
22nd December 2010, 23:19
Iok, so maybe we do need to construct a new language... how do we do this and get it over to everybody worldwide in time to really make a difference?

Eeeeeeeeeeeek. stop. All was sounding great until...... can you say "wordspeak"?
That's one of the tactics the controllers are using against us. Great Uncle Eric would have a conniption fit over that one. Let's revert to the beautiful language of our forebearers, eliminate acronyms, abbreviations and all attempts to divide us through the abuse of language.

Sorry, this is a hot button of mine :)

Ahkenaten
22nd December 2010, 23:27
I have been toying with this premise for a few months now. I found (and will have to re-find it now) something alluding to the designing and the deliberate use of (or lack of) harmonics and energy-vibrations in the creation of the english language.

it’s all a jumble in my head but I am pretty sure that a lot of things are connected to this issue...

+ solfegio notes and light/energy frequencies , and sacred geometry frequencies
+ chalkra vibrations (of both body and earth)
+ the massacres of the native American and other indigenous tribes (who had an understanding and working knowledge of how to use energy and vibrational harmonics to help/heal physical matter)
+ how the legal language and definitions were designed (reversed meanings to regular language)
+ the spiritual meditation chants
+ the religious songs

• every other foreign language is more complete (harmonically speaking) than the English language... its no wonder all the other countries scorn our arrogance that we have toward making everyone speak English to us

(sorry if I am way off topic but my forte is putting odd connections together that most people don’t see...)

ok, so maybe we do need to construct a new language... how do we do this and get it over to everybody worldwide in time to really make a difference?

This is exactly what I have been thinking about when it comes to language -- have you read The Hermetic Code in DNA by Michael Hayes? That book ties together a number of threads on the subject!

Ahkenaten
22nd December 2010, 23:30
Eeeeeeeeeeeek. stop. All was sounding great until...... can you say "wordspeak"?
That's one of the tactics the controllers are using against us. Great Uncle Eric would have a conniption fit over that one. Let's revert to the beautiful language of our forebearers, eliminate acronyms, abbreviations and all attempts to divide us through the abuse of language.

Sorry, this is a hot button of mine :)

Banshee how about sacred sounds and syllables? I mean we don't necessarily have to create a new language - do you have any ideas, if you think this is an issue, about how we could overcome the built-in problems with our spoken languages today?

astrid
23rd December 2010, 02:15
Loving this thread peoples, and a BIG yes on our current language not cutting anymore , these days i think more in terms of energy signatures and whole concepts, and i mostly i don't even bother trying to translate them into words it's far too arduous. You get better with time at reading the essence and energy of things, and u don't need to bother with the detail, especially if u have a basic understand the big picture.

As far as withdrawing , i honestly don't think i even joined, its been VERY VERY tough here, there was plenty of times when i was seriously thinking of going home, lol.
But when i found others like me, it got easier. I think Dolores Cannons work helped me alot, and also Michael Newton.

Its easier now that people are waking up, and it makes more sense why we even agreed to incarnate here , but seriously it does feel like we have been waiting around for this time to finally arrive.

My next step, after i sell my house is to find enough land so i can set up an self sufficient community, so 2011 will see me totally off grid. That thread i posted on this man's work.. shows people already doing this.. including one group that is printing their own currency to use in their community only....

Im not sure he understands the big picture, like we do, BUT u could easily add what we know to his concepts ... and u have a powerful beginning...

http://www.ted.com/talks/rob_hopkins_transition_to_a_world_without_oil.html

http://www.ted.com/speakers/rob_hopkins.html

http://transitionculture.org/

i dont much like following anyone's ideas in totality, but rather picking out what i resonates with me, and building onto it...

I have a girfriend that has hooked into a group in Melbourne formed out of this site.
She was telling me that she was having trouble with her garden as her lawnmower was sick and she was low in funds to fix it... She went to a meeting near her to link up and that very next day they were at her place helping her with her lawns.

I thought , wow.. this is what we need to see more of.
Im not really a "groups" person, but i also know i have to get over that, and i have alot of skills, so i know i can contribute my part to the benefit of the whole..

Banshee
23rd December 2010, 02:56
Banshee how about sacred sounds and syllables? I mean we don't necessarily have to create a new language - do you have any ideas, if you think this is an issue, about how we could overcome the built-in problems with our spoken languages today?

Well, my first knee jerk thought was " stop talking". Meaning, we need to be more intuitive and use our telepathic abilities and nonverbal cues, but... how many emoticons exist to truly convey meaning since the majority of our interractions take place in cyberspace?

Maybe... the secret to winning this war does not require unanimity. Would that not be serving the Controllers' agenda? Would diversity in culture, language and society in spite of all of its challenges be the more liberating option? In other words, if we adopt "hive" mentality on any level, including unifying our language, are we not eating out of their......hands.... um.. claws, oh that's right........feet?

xbusymom
23rd December 2010, 03:38
no, no, no, I meant that the language has already been damaged and we need to get back to the whole and complete language- sort of reverse the effects of the tower of babel... go back to clear communication and intent... empathic,

it might be nice to read each others' minds but then you start trampling on the privacy issue (or maybe we should be transparent with that too???)

Ahkenaten
23rd December 2010, 04:03
Well, my first knee jerk thought was " stop talking". Meaning, we need to be more intuitive and use our telepathic abilities and nonverbal cues, but... how many emoticons exist to truly convey meaning since the majority of our interractions take place in cyberspace?

Maybe... the secret to winning this war does not require unanimity. Would that not be serving the Controllers' agenda? Would diversity in culture, language and society in spite of all of its challenges be the more liberating option? In other words, if we adopt "hive" mentality on any level, including unifying our language, are we not eating out of their......hands.... um.. claws, oh that's right........feet?

I think I know what you mean when you say 'stop talking'! And on the other hand I also value traditions and obviously natal languages - especially since language groups are disappearing and going extinct - are a very important part of our personal and collective heritage and traditions. Even so - how can we better communicate? I don't think it is giving up our native languages for something else...........intuitively I feel the path lies somewhere in the middle - taking our present languages AND our intuitive abilities to relate to others that transcends language barriers to another level....................all heading to that plane or dimension we share where intuition and elemental sounds/standing waves that reflect the truth that exists......

xbusymom
23rd December 2010, 04:07
I think I know what you mean when you say 'stop talking'! And on the other hand I also value traditions and obviously natal languages - especially since language groups are disappearing and going extinct - are a very important part of our personal and collective heritage and traditions. Even so - how can we better communicate? I don't think it is giving up our native languages for something else...........intuitively I feel the path lies somewhere in the middle - taking our present languages AND our intuitive abilities to relate to others that transcends language barriers to another level....................all heading to that plane or dimension we share where intuition and elemental sounds/standing waves that reflect the truth exists......

which convinces me even more than ever that we need to recapture our lost vibrational speech patterns... heck i don't know what the answer is- if I did I would have already been fixing the problem...

Ahkenaten
23rd December 2010, 04:09
no, no, no, I meant that the language has already been damaged and we need to get back to the whole and complete language- sort of reverse the effects of the tower of babel... go back to clear communication and intent... empathic,

it might be nice to read each others' minds but then you start trampling on the privacy issue (or maybe we should be transparent with that too???)

Have you seen Peter Breughel's painting the Tower of Babel? It is really very powerful ........... and that story captures an important aspect of our dilemma at present!! I agree about the concept of restoring original or primal language, if you will!!

And I have been giving the whole idea of "privacy" a lot of thought. Right now in our present state I feel personally protective of privacy, i.e. I am not happy with government snooping, the endless cataloguing of information on all of us, the government "turn in a suspicious neighbor" and "report a suspicious shopper at Wal Mart" programs..........................however it is not so much others having information about me that I am concerned about, it is THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH THAT INFORMATION MAY BE USED.

IF we evolved to a higher level like other things in nature such as trees or animals, or minerals, for examples - what would the need for privacy or any secrecy be? Of course we aren't there yet - but the truthfulness that exists in nature that does NOT exist in humans at this time is a reflection on our present debased state...................there are no secrets before God, to use a metaphor.

Ba-ba-Ra
23rd December 2010, 18:23
Some thoughts:

A) I've been told language is sound-coded. Unfortunately, we've made words too concrete. So, if you listen to conversation without analyzing it, you can get messages. Rather like going to a foreign country where you don't speak the language, and listen to the sounds of people talking without knowing what they're saying. This is why singing is so great - even in your own language - as you're not so much focusing on the words.

B.) When you are exchanging conversation in a language you understand: listen at a deeper level. Be aware that when the other person is talking that often you are already planning what you're going to say next in your mind, so you're not giving what that person's saying complete attention. Also, don't get stuck on words (we all have our buzz words: i.e. liberal, conservative, etc) instead, try to listen to the overall message of what the other person is saying.

C.) Many words and symbols have been tampered with thru the ages. i.e. The Swastika, which in Sanskrit means lucky or auspicious - is now associated with Hitler and Nazi Germany. I am told by those who peform kinesiology that even a small baby will test negative is you put a picture of a swastika on their solar plexus. Why should that be? The baby knows nothing of Hitler. I feel it's because the collective WE is holding that symbol in the negative. Perhaps we need to focus on how to break that hold & return the "Lucky" symbol to our consciousness. ALSO, the word LUCIFER, which originally meant Lightbearer and was associated with the planet Venus - has now become the devil or the prince of darkness. Whether these things have been done purposely doesn't matter as much as we realize they've happened. Can we focus on reversing them?

Ty
23rd December 2010, 20:23
Hi Ahkenaten,

Thanks for creating a new thread to specifically address what you're doing. I pretty much agree with the 6 things in your opening post except #6, which concludes...


Once the participation ceases, the current destructive paradigm FALLS.

Boycotting is effective when delivery of the product or service in question is subject to demand. If 30% of the population stopped eating it would create massive changes in the food production and distribution systems (as well as the mortuary biz).

But 30% or so of the eligible population already doesn't vote and the system chugs along just fine. I suspect it would continue chugging if 90% or 95% of the people didn't vote.


As for voting... your "candidate" may have "won" - but is anything any different?

Yes.

Without enumerating, and whether you're for or against, do you think any of the major legislation passed in the last two years would have been passed if the Republicans controlled all 3 branches? Do you think a Republican President would have appointed the same two Supreme Court judges? Would have named the same people to head agencies that now have regulatory control over just about every aspect of our lives?

This may not be the scale of change you're alluding to, but these differences impact (or will soon enough) our day to day lives, for better or worse. Organizing and voting are the only way most of us can influence this. Not organizing and voting just removes what may be an effective, decisive voice for no gain. From what I can see, it's giving up what influence we have, which, though slight, is better than nothing, in exchange for ... nothing.


Without our consent and full participation it ceases to exist for us personally - if the collective WE withdrew consent, it would utterly fall and a new human reality would come into being.

I agree with the above on a personal level. If you aren't familiar with The Quakers, look them up. There is a community of them not far from me in Pennsylvania Dutch Country. They live off-the-grid, pretty much like life in colonial times - self-sufficient as families with each helping the other as needed and the community pitching in for barn-raisings and such. They still dress as people did in colonial days and they still use horse and buggy, no automobiles. No electricity. This may be changing somewhat but by and large it is an accurate portrayal.

As for the collective WE withdrawing consent and resulting in the fall, I don't see it. Our current political system doesn't need our participation to continue. I need those dots connected unless I'm on a completely different plane of thought than you are.

Would also like a little more clarity on what this new human reality might look like.

Thanks,
Ty

NancyV
23rd December 2010, 21:23
I think non participation is a very good step along the way, especially for those who don't have a lifelong penchant for rejecting authority figures, peer pressures and the "normal" way of doing things. Although I always rejected anything I didn't like or find logical from as far back as I can remember (about 2 years old), I still benefited from opting out of almost all normal things for many years.

For several years my husband (to whom I was married for 16 years) and I lived an idyllic life in Hawaii, built our own house, had a baby, didn't have to work, were total vegetarians, had no TV or radio, just music tapes, did not go to doctors and basically had a lot of fun. We also meditated a lot and I did extensive research in 'spirituality', among other things. But we DID spend money, shop in stores and eat in restaurants upon occasion. It's pretty hard to not participate in society if you don't have money and you have to work. I suppose you could say we worked when we built our house and a couple of subsequent houses, plus I made money buying and selling some properties, but it was a minimal involvement in normal society.

Now in my 60's I do not need to stay away from the influences of TV, news, politics, technology, etc. I find that the matrix gets more and more clear the more I am able to naturally not be influenced by these things instead of avoiding them. Avoiding them seemed to be rather fear based and somewhat disempowering, although as I said, it was a good stage in my life.

I now see the various games going on and I can participate (at least on the surface) without being caught up in believing any of it, and I do mean ANY of it. Many things are interesting to me but I don't have to believe them to enjoy them. I was just listening to Kerry's interview with Bob Dean and the way I feel is similar to what he said. He is old enough now to not give a damn what anyone thinks about him, his experiences and what he says or does. I have felt that way for as long as I can remember. It's wonderfully freeing to feel no self imposed pressures to be a certain way or to do certain things, and all these pressures we feel from society, advertising, doctors, peers, family, the PTB, etc. are voluntarily accepted by us if we choose to accept them. I accept none of them and I don't have to be concerned about their influence or retreat from anything to do that.

Nancy :)

Teakai
23rd December 2010, 22:30
Tekai I agree heartily what what you have said and thank your for your wisdom, grit and spirit! I also believe that we should not take violent action unless we are defending ourselves or our loved ones and that is why I stop short on those issues and emphasize withdrawing from the paradigm. This is because we must practice what we preach......if we wish to create something new we must NOT adopt the tactics of those who seek to destroy us. There has to be another way than act/react! Once we - that is many of us - WAKE UP - we can act together to create something new. It is for this I pray and why I earnestly exhort others to WAKE UP!! Ahk

Hi Ahk, I've been giving this a think over - and I was wondering how you feel about violence in defence of others?

And then I got to thinking that if these 'ptw' - are really reptillians posing as humans as David Icke says they are - and we kill cows and sheep etc for far less - then why not them?

And I was thinking that if they were gotten rid of, wouldn't that likely save a lot of violence all round?

I have no set answer to this, but do think it seems sensible to remove the problem, rather than allow it to continue doing the damage it's doing - and I was interested in how you saw that sort of thing.

Ahkenaten
23rd December 2010, 22:32
Hi Ahk, I've been giving this a think over - and I was wondering how you feel about violence in defence of others?

And then I got to thinking that if these 'ptw' - are really reptillians posing as humans as David Icke says they are - and we kill cows and sheep etc for far less - then why not them?

And I was thinking that if they were gotten rid of, wouldn't that likely save a lot of violence all round?

I have no set answer to this, but do think it seems sensible to remove the problem, rather than allow it to continue doing the damage it's doing - and I was interested in how you saw that sort of thing.

I am opposed to violence as a general rule

Ahkenaten
23rd December 2010, 22:37
Hi Ahkenaten,

Thanks for creating a new thread to specifically address what you're doing. I pretty much agree with the 6 things in your opening post except #6, which concludes...



Boycotting is effective when delivery of the product or service in question is subject to demand. If 30% of the population stopped eating it would create massive changes in the food production and distribution systems (as well as the mortuary biz).

But 30% or so of the eligible population already doesn't vote and the system chugs along just fine. I suspect it would continue chugging if 90% or 95% of the people didn't vote.



Yes.

Without enumerating, and whether you're for or against, do you think any of the major legislation passed in the last two years would have been passed if the Republicans controlled all 3 branches? Do you think a Republican President would have appointed the same two Supreme Court judges? Would have named the same people to head agencies that now have regulatory control over just about every aspect of our lives?

This may not be the scale of change you're alluding to, but these differences impact (or will soon enough) our day to day lives, for better or worse. Organizing and voting are the only way most of us can influence this. Not organizing and voting just removes what may be an effective, decisive voice for no gain. From what I can see, it's giving up what influence we have, which, though slight, is better than nothing, in exchange for ... nothing.



I agree with the above on a personal level. If you aren't familiar with The Quakers, look them up. There is a community of them not far from me in Pennsylvania Dutch Country. They live off-the-grid, pretty much like life in colonial times - self-sufficient as families with each helping the other as needed and the community pitching in for barn-raisings and such. They still dress as people did in colonial days and they still use horse and buggy, no automobiles. No electricity. This may be changing somewhat but by and large it is an accurate portrayal.

As for the collective WE withdrawing consent and resulting in the fall, I don't see it. Our current political system doesn't need our participation to continue. I need those dots connected unless I'm on a completely different plane of thought than you are.

Would also like a little more clarity on what this new human reality might look like.

Thanks,
Ty

Thanks! I admire the Quakers very much. It is not true that the present system does not require our participation........it MUST have our participation and consent to continue. Without buy-in, the oxygen goes out of the balloon. As for a more concrete vision of the collective we I can't provide that because I am not the collective we............but maybe something useful will come out of this exercise!!

Teakai
23rd December 2010, 22:38
I am opposed to violence as a general rule

So am I - but this doesn't seem like a general sort of situation.
:)

Can one commit what looks to be acts of violence with the intent of love?

For instance - if I went and shot dead somone who was about to release a biological hazard on the world that would kill millions - would you be against that?

Would you do it yourself?

xbusymom
23rd December 2010, 22:42
Hi Ahk, I've been giving this a think over - and I was wondering how you feel about violence in defence of others?

And then I got to thinking that if these 'ptw' - are really reptillians posing as humans as David Icke says they are - and we kill cows and sheep etc for far less - then why not them?

And I was thinking that if they were gotten rid of, wouldn't that likely save a lot of violence all round?

I have no set answer to this, but do think it seems sensible to remove the problem, rather than allow it to continue doing the damage it's doing - and I was interested in how you saw that sort of thing.

besides, no one knows who they are and where they are, and how to get past the multiple layers of bodyguards and security devices... etc.

and I don't really want that on MY karma list... it might be better to just pray (not prey) them out of existence- you really don't know what everyone in the world is working on as a life-lesson (ever watched the movie 'Bruce Almighty'?).

Ahkenaten
23rd December 2010, 22:43
So am I - but this doesn't seem like a general sort of situation.
:)

Can one commit what looks to be acts of violence with the intent of love?

For instance - if I went and shot dead somone who was about to release a biological hazard on the world that would kill millions - would you be against that?

Would you do it yourself?

This is a difficult question ---- I think Mahatma Ghandi addressed the issue when he said something to the effect that no one would have any respect for a person who failed to do their duty and protect their family and loved ones when attacked. I am paraphrasing here not quoting. It is a very difficult thing to have to chose between two (or more) abysmal alternatives but sometimes we are put into that situation. I would NEVER advocate that others commit violence - especially as a planned course of action, however - and though not a saint or guru, expect that people must rely on their own morals and common sense when life places us in difficult situations. If I were a general or political leader perhaps I would have another perspective!

Also I do believe that the Dalai Lama addressed this issue with respect to the moral concept of lesser evil - what should one do when confronted with a mass-murderer, etc.

However I do not have the moral standing nor do I pretend to be so spiritually evolved to make pronouncements on such weighty matters that might influence others in any way.

The most profound and weighty information I have encountered on these questions is in the Bhagavad Gita. I would urge you to read the discourse between Krishna and Arjuna....and I recommend the translation from Sanskrit by Juan Mascaro, Penguin Books.

greybeard
23rd December 2010, 22:55
This is a difficult question ---- I think Mahatma Ghandi addressed the issue when he said something to the effect that no one would have any respect for a person who failed to do their duty and protect their family and loved ones when attacked. I am paraphrasing here not quoting. It is a very difficult thing to have to chose between two (or more) abysmal alternatives but sometimes we are put into that situation. I would NEVER advocate that others commit violence - especially as a planned course of action, however - and though not a saint or guru, expect that people must rely on their own morals and common sense when life places us in difficult situations. If I were a general or political leader perhaps I would have another perspective!

Also I do believe that the Dalai Lama addressed this issue with respect to the moral concept of lesser evil - what should one do when confronted with a mass-murderer, etc.

However I do not have the moral standing nor do I pretend to be so spiritually evolved to make pronouncements on such weighty matters that might influence others in any way.

I go with Ahkenaten on this.
The essential ingredient is intention.
If the genuine intention is for the benefit of others then the minimum action, taken but enough to prevent another from creating havoc, is not just justified but necessary for karmic merit. Hope fully one could prevent without killing but if it is essential so be it.
Chris

Teakai
23rd December 2010, 23:00
besides, no one knows who they are and where they are, and how to get past the multiple layers of bodyguards and security devices... etc.
and I don't really want that on MY karma list... it might be better to just pray (not prey) them out of existence- you really don't know what everyone in the world is working on as a life-lesson (ever watched the movie 'Bruce Almighty'?).

Hi Busymom - aren't they the one's who attend the Bildeberg meetings to arrange the fate of the world?
The one's who own the banks and plan the collapse of economies?
The one's who rule countries by royal decree?
And the one's who talk about depopulating using vaccinations?

I personally don't think they can be prayed away - if God wanted them gone I guess he wouldn't wait for us to put in a request.

¤=[Post Update]=¤


This is a difficult question ---- I think Mahatma Ghandi addressed the issue when he said something to the effect that no one would have any respect for a person who failed to do their duty and protect their family and loved ones when attacked. I am paraphrasing here not quoting. It is a very difficult thing to have to chose between two (or more) abysmal alternatives but sometimes we are put into that situation. I would NEVER advocate that others commit violence - especially as a planned course of action, however - and though not a saint or guru, expect that people must rely on their own morals and common sense when life places us in difficult situations. If I were a general or political leader perhaps I would have another perspective!

Also I do believe that the Dalai Lama addressed this issue with respect to the moral concept of lesser evil - what should one do when confronted with a mass-murderer, etc.

However I do not have the moral standing nor do I pretend to be so spiritually evolved to make pronouncements on such weighty matters that might influence others in any way.The most profound and weighty information I have encountered on these questions is in the Bhagavad Gita. I would urge you to read the discourse between Krishna and Arjuna....and I recommend the translation from Sanskrit by Juan Mascaro, Penguin Books.

Can I ask, Ahk - do you eat abbatoir killed meat?



¤=[Post Update]=¤


I go with Ahkenaten on this.
The essential ingredient is intention.
If the genuine intention is for the benefit of others then the minimum action, taken but enough to prevent another from creating havoc, is not just justified but necessary for karmic merit. Hope fully one could prevent without killing but if it is essential so be it.
Chris

That's what I'm saying, Greybeard.

But, I didn't get that Ahk was seeing it the same way.

Ahkenaten
23rd December 2010, 23:03
Hi Busymom - aren't they the one's who attend the Bildeberg meetings to arrange the fate of the world?
The one's who own the banks and plan the collapse of economies?
The one's who rule countries by royal decree?
And the one's who talk about depopulating using vaccinations?

I personally don't think they can be prayed away - if God wanted them gone I guess he wouldn't wait for us to put in a request.

Points well taken Tekai but the action/reaction spin mechanism is part of the control paradigm........................that is why people say that HiStory is just S**T that happens................

Of course I am as stuck in this vortex as anyone, which is why I posted this thread - but my intuition tells me that reacting - especially violently - is more than likely, even with the best intentions, to perpetuate this matrix situation we find ourselves in! Even with the BEST intentions WITHOUT TOTAL DETACHMENT one is inevitably tied to the various events that then spring from one's actions. I don't know, nor have I ever encountered, any human being so detached that they could act in any way, especially violently towards others, without reaping the whirlwind. And so I would never advocate that. NOR would I want to be in the places of those who have urged others to such (need I list our political leaders individually?) I would not want the futures that surely wait for them as justice is part of nature and will have its way with them.

p.s. Tekai on the meat thing I am not a gigantic fan of it, nor am I a card-carrying vegan. I find that I have trouble digesting meat frankly..........and always have and so usually avoid it without making a big deal of it in social situations where meat is part of the ingredients of a dish.

p.p.s. I am pretty fed up with TPTB myself - I have referred to them many times as satanic demons from hell on this Forum! But even so I will not advocate killing them.

Teakai
23rd December 2010, 23:37
Points well taken Tekai but the action/reaction spin mechanism is part of the control paradigm........................that is why people say that HiStory is just S**T that happens................

Of course I am as stuck in this vortex as anyone, which is why I posted this thread - but my intuition tells me that reacting - especially violently - is more than likely, even with the best intentions, to perpetuate this horrible matrix situation we find ourselves in! Even with the BEST intentions WITHOUT TOTAL DETACHMENT one is inevitably tied to the various events that then spring from one's actions. I don't know, nor have I ever encountered, any human being so detached that they could act in any way, especially violently towards others, without reaping the whirlwind. And so I would never advocate that. NOR would I want to be in the places of those who have urged others to such (need I list our political leaders individually?) I would not want the futures that surely wait for them as justice is part of nature and will have its way with them.[/COLOR]

p.s. Tekai on the meat thing I am not a gigantic fan of it, nor am I a card-carrying vegan. I find that I have trouble digesting meat frankly..........and always have and so usually avoid it without making a big deal of it in social situations where meat is part of the ingredients of a dish.
p.p.s. I am pretty fed up with TPTB myself - I have referred to them many times as satanic demons from hell on this Forum! But even so I will not advocate killing them.

That's beside the point, Ahk.

Is it not a little hypocritical to be adamantly speaking out against violence in regard to something which greatly harms humanity while contributing to a market which incurs violence to beings that not only do not harm humanity, but have much to offer it?

It doesn't seem to make sense at all.

greybeard
23rd December 2010, 23:45
Sometimes Higher Self takes action.
An example is the "reflex" action going for the brake to avoid hitting a rabbit.
Afterwards on close examination it is realise that the braking was occuring before there was the thought I will brake.
Spiritually called the action of non action.
People have performed great acts of heroism that occurred without thought for their own safety.
So going back to if your loved ones were threatened with violence appropriate action could well happen without thought happening first.
There is no easy answer but I come back to intention, highest intention is not the same as "The end justifies the means"
Chris

jeannacav
23rd December 2010, 23:46
I think this (latest turn of this subject) is the reason that (as I understand it) Alex Collier tells us that the aliens' first order of business when "mentoring" us will be to teach us our FULL history.
If we knew how many violent actions of humans against other humans came as the result of being pestered and "driven" (frequency driven) to this violent result, we might find that we are a very peaceful race.
If given the chance, we would most likely NOT react with violence.

I have a lot of faith in this because when you think about it, we kind of all know that what we really want is to go home and tend the garden and laugh with friends etc...

So, this means the talk of killing to defend ourselves (etc) is entirely moot.

I hope.

jeanna

NancyV
23rd December 2010, 23:52
It seems to me that it's just as much buying into propaganda and mental conditioning when you believe that violence is essentially bad. Many religions and philosophies preach against violence which may be part of their attempts to control people or just their unique interpretation of right and wrong. If your intention is to prevent someone (maybe yourself) from being killed or to protect someone, I do not see violence or killing as an unacceptable action. All you are doing is removing an imminent danger and moving that person on into another dimension. Remember there is no death.

If your intention is to do something evil as the aggressor and not the defender, then it may be argued that you are evil, although that is a value judgment. But here on this earth plane we may sometimes fight violence with greater violence. It's about playing the game they are playing IF you find yourself in that type of situation, only doing it better than they do. Remaining detached and not accepting some kind of programmed guilt is essential in being more effective. It's all about intentions and detachment, at least for me. Preferably one would be able to control the energies they draw into their lives.

You also have the choice to be non violent and accept aggression or death without a fight, if you find yourself having to make a choice. It's entirely your business and I wouldn't presume to tell someone they need to be like me or that we all SHOULD do the same. Should is not a word I've ever paid much attention to.

I don't see this matrix as horrible. Most likely we have all chosen to be here for a reason. Certainly I will never admit to being a victim. I will bet that no matter how much you think you detest this earth dimension when the time comes you may very well choose to come back here, as you did this time.

Nancy :)

Ahkenaten
24th December 2010, 00:00
Tekai - I am not especially against violence, per se, as I am against the particular paradigm en toto, the way the whole thing is playing out. I have fished and raised animals and plants for food, by the way so I have a very pragmatic view of nature and survival. Unfortunately, in this reality, there is not a way to 100% avoid violence, albeit it accidents of nature (earthquakes, landslides, storms, tsunamis, etc), or worse - the deliberate violent acts of others. This is an imperfect, transient world filled with pain and suffering. With respect to the whole discussion about not eating meat as a moral principle, I leave it to others to make up their own minds about that. I PERSONALLY do not go out of my way to eat meat, nor do I go out of my way to admonish others about that. I think that is people's own personal business. I know that some people use the whole meat thing as a way to measure others - but that is not my way. The Jains in India, for example, feel so strongly about avoiding doing ANY harm to ANY living beings that they wear masks to avoid unintentionally inhaling organisms and thus, mistakenly killing them. While I think that is admirable and worthy of respect, that is not my way, personally, nor would I dictate my way to the Jains. Sometimes I do smack flies with the fly-swatter! ;) What I do PERSONALLY when encountering a challenging situation in my life (a burglar entering my home, someone trying to assault me on the street, etc.) is my personal business and that is not what this thread is for - this thread was begun to elicit ideas from others about how to make a better world without my having a lot of ideas where that should go.........the thread is not for challenging each other to moral and ethical perfection, rather it is a call for practical information and ideas - in the hope that something unexpected and even miraculous could occur!

If what you seek is a perfect philosophy that is absolutely coherent intellectually and spiritually, that is admirable. However, because life itself is so full of paradoxes and grey areas, so filled with suffering - and therefor so are human beings, I fear you run the risk of becoming an embittered absolutist...........my personal opinion is that you will not find, nor can you create a world that conforms to that vision. I am not attempting to preach to you or others here in this Forum Tekai - I do not have a message. I am looking for ideas and input and above all I do not expect that others are perfect and therefor exhort them to perfection to satisfy my desire for consistency in all things. That absolute consistency is not to be found in this paradox and contradiction-filled world!

And yet - the compelling image of the Lion Laying Down with the Lamb summons us to envision another way of being - is that way of being possible IN THIS DIMENSION?

Anchor
24th December 2010, 00:01
The first requirement for stepping outside the dialectic or stepping outside the Panopticon (the intoxicating illusory world created by media, etc) is to realize the fundamental nature of this particular illusion, i.e. that it is a deliberate creation, an exemplar of social engineering par excellence.

It certainly helps, but I think for the sake of completeness it is important to realise that this illusion is a CONSENSUS illusion. For this reason, those of dark intent that have discovered the means to influence the illusion, by proxy (because we ALL create it) have figured out that their modes of control is to delude us (the ones with creative powers) into creating according to their script as opposed to our own.

That is why the awakening is akin to extricating yourself from a fast flowing river. (The “stepping outside” you refer to). Otherwise we are swept along the path of the river – one that has been dammed and manipulated into flowing in an unnatural direction. It is OUR energy however that makes the river flow. It is our intent that directs the flow of the river, but the aim of the dark intent is to “program” situations, through any means appropriate to the social matrix at the time, that encourage us to direct our intent according to their objectives rather than those of our hearts. Our egos are their control levers.


With best wishes for an AWAKE AND AWARE New Year, take heart loved ones, together we can make a difference!

I concur. Yes we can.

Teakai
24th December 2010, 00:08
Sometimes Higher Self takes action.
An example is the "reflex" action going for the brake to avoid hitting a rabbit.
Afterwards on close examination it is realise that the braking was occuring before there was the thought I will brake.
Spiritually called the action of non action.
People have performed great acts of heroism that occurred without thought for their own safety.
So going back to if your loved ones were threatened with violence appropriate action could well happen without thought happening first.
There is no easy answer but I come back to intention, highest intention is not the same as "The end justifies the means"
Chris

Hi Greyeard – that reflex action takes place beyond conscious action. It comes from the survival brain rather than the higher brain and is an unconscious act.

Heroic action, where people run into a building to save another is not that mechanism at work – it is the opposite because it is putting the self at risk. - that would be using the higher brain and is a conscious action.

In regard to the action/reaction – our society has developed laws to handle those who break the laws. Do the crime – do the time.

Those laws have been majorly broken – and yet why are we not putting those laws into effect?

Are there people here who think it was OK to put Saddam Hussein to death, or it will be OK to put Osama Bin Laden to death (should they ever manage to find the man). People who think it was the done thing to invade Afghanistan and Iraq – and maybe iven Iran, because they feel there’s justice in that – but it’s only OK if someone else does it, because they don’t want the blood on their hands.

Ahkenaten
24th December 2010, 00:17
I can see that you are suffering greatly from all the injustice and cruelty in the world and that you are in despair. And there is a place for a righteousness, but do not bring that battle HERE, Tekai! You cannot fight with me because I am not fighting. I surrender.

Now - can we get back to the thread?!:dizzy:

¤=[Post Update]=¤


It certainly helps, but I think for the sake of completeness it is important to realise that this illusion is a CONSENSUS illusion. For this reason, those of dark intent that have discovered the means to influence the illusion, by proxy (because we ALL create it) have figured out that their modes of control is to delude us (the ones with creative powers) into creating according to their script as opposed to our own.

That is why the awakening is akin to extricating yourself from a fast flowing river. (The “stepping outside” you refer to). Otherwise we are swept along the path of the river – one that has been dammed and manipulated into flowing in an unnatural direction. It is OUR energy however that makes the river flow. It is our intent that directs the flow of the river, but the aim of the dark intent is to “program” situations, through any means appropriate to the social matrix at the time, that encourage us to direct our intent according to their objectives rather than those of our hearts. Our egos are their control levers.



I concur. Yes we can.

John what a relief! I think you understand what I am trying to get at but you say it so much better than I do! Thanks for that!!

Teakai
24th December 2010, 00:21
Tekai - I am not especially against violence, per se, as I am against the particular paradigm en toto, the waythe whole thing is playing out. I have fished and raised animals and plants for food, by the way so I have a very pragmatic view of nature and survival. Unfortunately, in this reality, there is not a way to 100% avoid violence, albeit it accidents of nature (earthquakes, landslides, storms, tsunamis, etc), or worse - the deliberate violent acts of others. This is an imperfect, transient world filled with pain and suffering. With respect to the whole discussion about not eating meat as a moral principle, I leave it to others to make up their own minds about that. I PERSONALLY do not go out of my way to eat meat, nor do I go out of my way to admonish others about that. I think that is people's own personal business. I know that some people use the whole meat thing as a way to measure others - but that is not my way. The Jains in India, for example, feel so strongly about avoiding doing ANY harm to ANY living beings that they wear masks to avoid unintentionally inhaling organisms and thus, mistakenly killing them. While I think that is admirable and worthy of respect, that is not my way, personally, nor would I dictate my way to the Jains. Sometimes I do smack flies with the fly-swatter! ;) What I do PERSONALLY when encountering a challenging situation in my life (a burglar entering my home, someone trying to assault me on the street, etc.) is my personal business and that is not what this thread is for - this thread was begun to elicit ideas from others about how to make a better world without my having a lot of ideas where that should go.........the thread is not for challenging each other to moral and ethical perfection, rather it is a call for practical information and ideas - in the hope that something unexpected and even miraculous could occur!

If what you seek is a perfect philosophy that is absolutely coherent intellectually and spiritually, that is admirable. However, because life itself is so full of paradoxes and grey areas, so filled with suffering - and therefor so are human beings, I fear you run the risk of becoming an embittered absolutist...........my personal opinion is that you will not find, nor can you create a world that conforms to that vision. I am not attempting to preach to you or others here in this Forum Tekai - I do not have a message. I am looking for ideas and input and do not expect that others are perfect. That is not to be found in this world.

Hi Ahk, I didn't think you were preaching at all :)

And I'm not telling anyone they should or shouldn't eat meat - not even close - I'm just wondering at the philosophy of one who would go along with one lot of violence and then passionately denounce another - especially in view of the nature of the beast.

To be honest, it does seem to me hypocritical to say yes to one lot of violence and no to another. It is not at all up to me to judge that - and I don't, at all, but I do wonder how you reconcile yourself to it.

I'm also not looking for a perfect philosophy - I was just interested in your take on it as another human being.

Teakai
24th December 2010, 00:26
I can see that you are suffering greatly from all the injustice and cruelty in the world and that you are in despair. And there is a place for a righteousness, but do not bring that battle HERE, Tekai! You cannot fight with me because I am not fighting. I surrender.


??????????

What on earth caused that reaction, Ahk?

I had no idea we were fighting - I thought we were having a conversation.

(Probably a good thing you're not into violence - talk about an itchy trigger finger :lol: )

Ahkenaten
24th December 2010, 00:34
Tekai as one human being to another I am, as I said before NOT PARTICULARLY AGAINST VIOLENCE PER SE - the reasons I am against the current control paradigm are many, the sheer mindless avariciousness, manipulativeness, gross materialism, using violence to achieve materialistic objectives of it, I could go on and on. Having said that I am a pragmatist and feel that violence and unpleasantries - along with gentleness and good things - are hallmarks of this odd situation we find ourselves in here. We are in a PARADOXICAL situation filled with contradictions inside and out! As long as we live on this planet in this dimension, there will be violence, suffering of all kinds and death! I do not seek to extricate myself from what I call the control paradigm (and when I say control paradigm I am speaking of THIS world, NOT THE NEXT!) primarily because of the violence that is here - it is because in this particular paradigm script the roles of humans are extremely limited (mostly self-limited whether people are aware of that or not) ....... I am NOT looking at the world through the prism of violence. Are you? Is that the metrics you use? If so, fine. Those metrics are not mine. And so concerning the food thing, I am taking a deliberate middle path. I frankly avoid extremes of all kinds being rather conservative by nature. I feel no particular need to defend - or explain myself to you any further than that, after all I don't even know you!

As for my reaction above - it seems that you are suffering here, and trying to call me out in some way as though you sense something - I don't know what! You are being VERY insistent. It FEELS like you want to do righteous battle with someone or something.....

I just do not want to do battle with you. I have other battles to fight right now!

Teakai
24th December 2010, 01:12
Tekai as one human being to another I am, as I said before NOT PARTICULARLY AGAINST VIOLENCE PER SE - the reasons I am against the current control paradigm are many, the sheer mindless avariciousness, manipulativeness, gross materialism, using violence to achieve materialistic objectives of it, I could go on and on. Having said that I am a pragmatist and feel that violence and unpleasantries - along with gentleness and good things - are hallmarks of this odd situation we find ourselves in here. We are in a PARADOXICAL situation filled with contradictions inside and out! As long as we live on this planet in this dimension, there will be violence, suffering of all kinds and death! I do not seek to extricate myself from what I call the control paradigm (and when I say control paradigm I am speaking of THIS world, NOT THE NEXT!) primarily because of the violence that is here - it is because in this particular paradigm script the roles of humans are extremely limited (mostly self-limited whether people are aware of that or not) ....... I am NOT looking at the world through the prism of violence. Are you? Is that the metrics you use? If so, fine. Those metrics are not mine. And so concerning the food thing, I am taking a deliberate middle path. I frankly avoid extremes of all kinds being rather conservative by nature. I feel no particular need to defend - or explain myself to you any further than that, after all I don't even know you!

As for my reaction above - it seems that you are suffering here, and trying to call me out in some way as though you sense something - I don't know what! You are being VERY insistent. It FEELS like you want to do righteous battle with someone or something.....

I just do not want to do battle with you. I have other battles to fight right now!

Well, Ahk, I have to say that what I find paradoxical are the words you write.
You also said :

I also believe that we should not take violent action unless we are defending ourselves or our loved ones and that is why I stop short on those issues and emphasize withdrawing from the paradigm. This is because we must practice what we preach......if we wish to create something new we must NOT adopt the tactics of those who seek to destroy us. There has to be another way than act/react!

Only not with animals, then. Only practise what we preach on a level that suits your particular view?

Note – this is not about animals per se – it is about double standards. It is about paradoxical thinking.


this thread was begun to elicit ideas from others about how to make a better world without my having a lot of ideas where that should go.........the thread is not for challenging each other to moral and ethical perfection, rather it is a call for practical information and ideas - in the hope that something unexpected and even miraculous could occur!


Step 1 – that on which all else rests.
Wake up to yourself.


WAKE UP!! Ahk



As for my reaction above - it seems that you are suffering here, and trying to call me out in some way as though you sense something - I don't know what! You are being VERY insistent. It FEELS like you want to do righteous battle with someone or something.....

I just do not want to do battle with you. I have other battles to fight right now!

That is an obvious case of projection, Ahk. You’re the one getting prissy. You’re the one taking it personally, you’re the one seeing this as some kind of a battle.

When you know you - then you will know me. :)

Ahkenaten
24th December 2010, 01:41
If you insist on taking such an extreme view than you must stop eating altogether ... plants have feelings too.......it is all a matter of degree. There are beings in India who survive, they say, on energy from the Sun. Most people are not at that stage - yet! Eating is not an inherently violent act. Decisions concerning eating habits are personal ones and not the subject of debate here on this thread.

I am not playing gotcha with you Tekai.

Let's get back on topic here - this thread is not about you, it is not about me. I refuse to personalize it any further.

Beth
24th December 2010, 02:04
Hey all, let's try to get this thread :focus: Any side issues can be PMed about or a new thread created.

So, Can We Withdraw Consent from the Control Paradigm?

Thoughts? Ideas?

Teakai
24th December 2010, 02:07
If you insist on taking such an extreme view than you must stop eating altogether ... plants have feelings too.......it is all a matter of degree. There are beings in India who survive, they say, on energy from the Sun. Most people are not at that stage - yet! Eating is not an inherently violent act. Decisions concerning eating habits are personal ones and not the subject of debate here on this thread.

I am not playing gotcha with you Tekai.

Let's get back on topic here - this thread is not about you, it is not about me. I refuse to personalize it any further.

Ahk, this is on topic - only you are missing the point. It is ego thinking that has you thinking that this is in any way personal, or a battle - and why you're getting defensive - and why you're thinking the point I'm making is about food - it isn't.

The point I'm making is that if we can't be honest with ourselves, if we can't give reasonable and rational explanation for our thoughts, if our thinking does not stand up under scrutiny, then they are without foundation. They are the provence of ego.

And ego thinking is how they control us.
(actually, I think maybe you said that in one of the posts on this thread)

Ahkenaten
24th December 2010, 02:14
Of course Tekai I agree with much of what you are saying. I would just prefer that we keep within the general outlines of the thread and keep intensive discussions about dietary/animal issues off this thread and deal with those issues privately, if at all -- do you understand?

Anchor
24th December 2010, 02:18
We are all related - we are a soul grouping, and one of the common aspects to that is this very forum. With that in mind I think we are seeing some of that metaphysical sibling rivalry flaring up on this thread :)

One of the tricks is to understand that all of us are imperfect - we all face challenges - we all can use help, love and compassion in regards to those aspects of us that need work.

Even engaging in a bone crunching debate has value, but it can be quite wearing if you are not following all of it along.

Finding out you have been trapped in an extremely deep and multi-layered rabbit hole of a trap is quite annoying - and then when you think you got done with it and found a way out, you see more layers. How even more intensely annoying to discover that these layers are of our OWN freaking design !!!

The stepwise nature of seeking the truth is beset by these layers - and like peeling an onion, sometimes it will make you cry.

Teakai
24th December 2010, 02:26
Of course Tekai I agree with much of what you are saying. I would just prefer that we keep within the general outlines of the thread and keep intensive discussions about dietary/animal issues off this thread and deal with those issues privately, if at all -- do you understand?

Again, Ahk - it's nothing whatsoever to do with dietary choices - though it's interesting that you persist in seeing it so.

What it's about is ego justifying our actions and our thoughts.

How can we possibly wake up to the reality of anything if we insist on lying to ourselves? Falling under the illusion of ego?

But, it's your thread and I don't have any bandaid solutions to offer up, so, over and out, Roger.

Ahkenaten
24th December 2010, 03:05
First Tekai you were the one who introduced the whole idea of violence to this thread - i.e. should you (hypothetically) kill someone who is about to release a weapon of mass destruction - and asked me what I would do about that personally. I do not think this is the place to discuss those kinds of issues. Then after I made a general statement about not being into violence - in an attempt to dampen that tack you were taking... (what do you think I am going to advocate violent revolution here?!) you respond, I presume to that statement, with a question as to whether I personally would eat meat from a slaughter house! WHAT?! Isn't that a clasical "GOTCHA" chessmove? Is that the kind of game you want to play? I don't. Then you accuse me of being a hypocrite for on the one hand espousing non-violence and on the other, not being a strict vegetarian. ???? You see a major conflict between those two things. You think that being non-violent cannot co-exist with eating meat apparently, though you did not say so. I DO NOT. And that is not anything other than a personal opinion. YOU made the discussion about diet and brought that up, not me! I wouldn't because I presume there are all kinds of people on this thread with many personal views and opinions about the subject, and I consider dietary issues to be personal ones. There are many people - including strict practicing Buddhists - who espouse non-violence and at the same time eat meat, including some of the major practitioners and teachers in the world today. I am not a Buddhist, by the way. Then you went on the attack against me for what you perceive as moral inconsistencies, contradictions and hypocrisy....as though you are on some kind of a crusade! I don't feel comfortable with crusades of any kind. If you don't think calling someone a hypocrite isn't a personal attack, then I don't know what is! I did not counter-attack. Again - this all came up in the context of dietary issues and what you feel are my inconsistencies. I kept trying to say that I do not want to fight about this issue. I think eating habits are a personal issue - people can get very alienated reading this thread when it is deliberately polarized narrowly around eating habits, and what you consider to be my moral failings and our personal exchange about these things. That was not the REASON I POSTED THIS THREAD. I think you are acting very hostile, making personal attacks on me and YOU will not admit it. As I said before if you want to fight fight with someone else. As for my moral failures I have my share and I am here, with others, to work them out. It is not helpful for you to take such a strident tone under the guise of getting at the truth, honesty, etc. The whole tack is hostile. That makes me wonder about intent. But your motives, etc. are your business. Why you would try to hijack this thread to make it about ME and my character is a mystery to me. If your intention was to help me with what you see are my failings, why attack? Why make it personal? Since when are you my judge and why is it your business to point out what you think are my moral and intellectual inconsistencies in this manner in this forum?

THAT seems to me to be pretty inconsistent with your professed interest in getting to the bottom of things. It also seems pretty violent. And all in the guise of a free exchange of ideas........

I don't buy it.

As for me I want to get this thread back on track----

Ty
24th December 2010, 14:51
741
OK. So the question is can we withrdaw consent from the "Control Paradigm"?

By control paradigm are you're referring to our economic and political system? I'm not sure since other references in this thread indicate, to paraphrase, that we are collectively manifesting this illusion.

So is it our economic and political system, our physical form as spiritual/energy beings or something else you refer to as the control paradigm?

Just want to get a better feel for what paradigm your question refers to.

PHARAOH
24th December 2010, 14:56
Ahkenaten, if you have to ask then the answer is no. However you can choose to civily disobey. Your post was nice but mostly blah, blah, blah. Sort of like preaching to the choir. However if you really mean what you suggest then try
1. Stop going to work.
2. Stop paying taxes.
3. Stop applying for any and all licenses.
4. Stop accepting any and all forms of government handouts.
5. Stop registering children at birth.
6. Stop sending your children to school.
7. Close all your bank accounts.
8. Close all credit card accounts.
9. Stop driving.
As you can all see I can go on and on but noone really wants to hear that its really this simple because it will force us to look in the mirror and see that we are all really full of it because as simple as this is and can be we will all make our own excuses not to do so. Just wait to see what people have to say about my post and you will see for yourself. Appreciate you post anyway.

Intraphase
24th December 2010, 15:27
I enjoyed the thread. Some dynamic tension is necessary to expand the sphere of ideas discussed, and then the pull effect occurs, as the outer boundary establishes itself as a point of abstraction where the lines of argument and counter-argument lose their innate relationship to the core ideas (Accept Vs. Refuse), making a turn inward to the key ideas necessary. The withdrawal or granting of consent, and the areas of existence where that lens is used as a focus for a person to define their own intentions toward an area of pre-existing cause and effect histories and world lines.

The issue is peculiarly relevant these days because of the decay of old orders and the attempted rising of new patterns of behavior.
In this world, as stated by a previous poster, you can watch with greater clarity and detachment and appreciate the flowing complexity of the big stage.
Rhetoric and action are often separated by great distances.

I use a cyclic tool to analyze social structure.
Versions of self: Pure Full True Whole Natural.
Each stage gathers and sorts information differently which affects the use or not use application of what is gathered.
We come in as a clean slate and gradually absorb to much until we are forced to judge our self and the world we have entered and
then our possible reasons (low bias meta search as whole self) for being here. Eventually finding a natural balance in some form or another.

xbusymom
24th December 2010, 17:34
and getting back to the language component of this issue...

it has been shown that the subconscious does not acknowledge the negative words in any statement... so the ten commandments being written in the negative do affect (not effect- although it ends up as "cause and effect") the way the commandments are played out in our lives...

* thou shalt not kill - is read by the subconscious (our silent auto-pilot) as * THOU SHALT KILL*

so we see how screwed up our language is... it is totally backward... no wonder we are going in the opposite direction than we want to go... we think one thing - then speak into manifestation the exact opposite of what it is that we truly desire.

Ba-ba-Ra
24th December 2010, 21:26
CAN WE WITHDRAW OUR CONSENT?

i have personally grappled with this for years. On the one hand I believe that the more attention you give something, the stronger it gets. On the other hand I see what happens when a society plays ostrich. So, my personal way to deal with what's happening is to be aware of what's going on (completely) without buying into the fear of it - which isn't always easy for most of us, but like anything else, the more you intend it, the easier it gets.

I have to agree with Pharoh, there is a limit to how much you can withdraw your consent without ending up in Prison or jepoardizing your personal safety or just creating some real problems for yourself. ( Did you see what happened to the 57yr old woman in Austin TX who refused to let them pat down her breasts at airport or the ceribal palsey young man in a wheelchair in UK who was protesting?)

Eventually I came to the conclusion that what I have to focus on is waking up. BUT.....we all throw that phrase around, but what the h*ll does it REALLY mean, and how do we do it when we already think we're awake. Some will tell you it means recognizing the Truth of what's happening. I have to dispute that to some extend, only because THE TRUTH is often just agreed upon facts. We could argue about THE Truth of anything all day. Take 911 for example. And/or the Kennedy Assassination.

Most of us on this site believe ( I think) that we're much greater than we appear and within lies the Christ Self. Perhaps more daily focus on developing this higher self - and perhaps what we really need to withdraw is "our attention" by focusing it on what we'd really like to create.

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 03:44
741
OK. So the question is can we withrdaw consent from the "Control Paradigm"?

By control paradigm are you're referring to our economic and political system? I'm not sure since other references in this thread indicate, to paraphrase, that we are collectively manifesting this illusion.

So is it our economic and political system, our physical form as spiritual/energy beings or something else you refer to as the control paradigm?

Just want to get a better feel for what paradigm your question refers to.

Hi Ty - By "control paradigm" I mean all of what you mentioned. The political and economic are part of the bigger picture that I believe WE collectively are creating.

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 03:55
Ahkenaten, if you have to ask then the answer is no. Not necessarily - a hypothetical question is just a way to initiate a discussion However you can choose to civily disobey. civil disobedience is always an option, as is uncivil disobedienceYour post was nice but mostly blah, blah, blah. i agree - nothing new under the sun, so to speak.......most things discussed by humans have already been discussed, and much better, a long time ago - but this IS a fundamental issue many are grappling with.......how can we change something we are inside of and actually creating, let alone transcend it or step outside of itSort of like preaching to the choir.Yeah I presume many in Avalon are interested in the subject but what about the nitty gritty ways to actually do/be something new??? However if you really mean what you suggest then try
1. Stop going to work.
2. Stop paying taxes.
3. Stop applying for any and all licenses.
4. Stop accepting any and all forms of government handouts.
5. Stop registering children at birth.
6. Stop sending your children to school.
7. Close all your bank accounts.
8. Close all credit card accounts.
9. Stop driving.


OK, Pharoah - all nine things you list doing if someone REALLY is sincere about this whole subject are virtually impossible for most people to actually do today, especially regular working people with family responsibilities. And to me, this is where the whole subject of meaningful change gets REALLY interesting because many people in that situation do sincerely want to make changes. Are they to totally give up on it because they are, as a practical matter, unable to do all the 9 items on your list? I THINK NOT. The hard part is that we must make the change WHILE AT THE SAME TIME DISCHARGING OUR RESPONSIBILITIES IN THE WORLD. This is why I wanted to hear what other people think, what ideas they might have.


As you can all see I can go on and on but noone really wants to hear that its really this simple because it will force us to look in the mirror and see that we are all really full of it because as simple as this is and can be we will all make our own excuses not to do so. Just wait to see what people have to say about my post and you will see for yourself. Appreciate you post anyway.

Pharoah - Do you really think we are all "just full of it" because each and every one of us is just not able or willing to do all 9 things on your list? I don't think so. In fact, I think not being able to do all nine or some of the nine might be an excuse also not to even try.....and what good does that do??

It is a puzzling and paradoxical predicament we find ourselves in and when you really stop to think about it it ain't simple at all!!

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 03:59
I enjoyed the thread. Some dynamic tension is necessary to expand the sphere of ideas discussed, and then the pull effect occurs, as the outer boundary establishes itself as a point of abstraction where the lines of argument and counter-argument lose their innate relationship to the core ideas (Accept Vs. Refuse), making a turn inward to the key ideas necessary. The withdrawal or granting of consent, and the areas of existence where that lens is used as a focus for a person to define their own intentions toward an area of pre-existing cause and effect histories and world lines.


The issue is peculiarly relevant these days because of the decay of old orders and the attempted rising of new patterns of behavior.
In this world, as stated by a previous poster, you can watch with greater clarity and detachment and appreciate the flowing complexity of the big stage.
Rhetoric and action are often separated by great distances.

I use a cyclic tool to analyze social structure.
Versions of self: Pure Full True Whole Natural.
Each stage gathers and sorts information differently which affects the use or not use application of what is gathered.
We come in as a clean slate and gradually absorb to much until we are forced to judge our self and the world we have entered and
then our possible reasons (low bias meta search as whole self) for being here. Eventually finding a natural balance in some form or another.


THANK YOU THANK YOU for your comments that bring some clarity and focus to the discussion. Clearly some detachment is needed to arrive at a broader and more lucid view..............................

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 04:05
and getting back to the language component of this issue...

it has been shown that the subconscious does not acknowledge the negative words in any statement... so the ten commandments being written in the negative do affect (not effect- although it ends up as "cause and effect") the way the commandments are played out in our lives...

* thou shalt not kill - is read by the subconscious (our silent auto-pilot) as * THOU SHALT KILL*

so we see how screwed up our language is... it is totally backward... no wonder we are going in the opposite direction than we want to go... we think one thing - then speak into manifestation the exact opposite of what it is that we truly desire.

Xbusy mom are you talking about neuro-linguistic programming here? It really is bizarro isn't it that language could be so distorted and so harmful? Sure puts a whole other spin on the old tower of babel story, even more apocalyptic than people speaking hundreds of different languages unable to communicate with one another......................I understand many are proud of their cultural heritage and languages but somehow I still believe, as you seem to indicate, that our language is at the root of the problem....................which leads me to our brains and wiring - I am not sure if that means that our minds are the problem - they say that our brains are pre-programmed towards language..................this is really getting over my head because I am not a linguist or anything like that, but something is definitely messed up here! It's almost like something/someone messed up our brains somehow at some point in our development, scrambled the circuitry, so that we are self-limited without even being consciously aware of it! Or, in psychological terms, that we have suffered some primal trauma at some point in our development that caused us to "split off" our psyche on some fundamental level, becoming divided unto ourselves mentally, psychologically, spiritually and ENERGETICALLY! Oh dear......... maybe I have gone too far with this particular slant on our theme! Sorry.......

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 04:13
CAN WE WITHDRAW OUR CONSENT?

i have personally grappled with this for years. On the one hand I believe that the more attention you give something, the stronger it gets. On the other hand I see what happens when a society plays ostrich. So, my personal way to deal with what's happening is to be aware of what's going on (completely) without buying into the fear of it - which isn't always easy for most of us, but like anything else, the more you intend it, the easier it gets.

I have to agree with Pharoh, there is a limit to how much you can withdraw your consent without ending up in Prison or jepoardizing your personal safety or just creating some real problems for yourself. ( Did you see what happened to the 57yr old woman in Austin TX who refused to let them pat down her breasts at airport or the ceribal palsey young man in a wheelchair in UK who was protesting?)

Eventually I came to the conclusion that what I have to focus on is waking up. BUT.....we all throw that phrase around, but what the h*ll does it REALLY mean, and how do we do it when we already think we're awake. Some will tell you it means recognizing the Truth of what's happening. I have to dispute that to some extend, only because THE TRUTH is often just agreed upon facts. We could argue about THE Truth of anything all day. Take 911 for example. And/or the Kennedy Assassination.

Most of us on this site believe ( I think) that we're much greater than we appear and within lies the Christ Self. Perhaps more daily focus on developing this higher self - and perhaps what we really need to withdraw is "our attention" by focusing it on what we'd really like to create.

I have to say that what you are saying reinforces my feeling..................how does one completely withdraw without actually putting oneself and ones' family in jeopardy, and yet - if one does NOT completely withdraw does that mean that one cannot, or simply will not and because we all cannot or will not, does that in turn mean that we all are stuck BECAUSE WE DECIDED TOGETHER TO REMAIN STUCK??!!!

It is a puzzling situation......................and that, too is why I emphasize waking up. Waking up (I know, I know another overused cliche!!) is first of all observing...............but then, what if we are observing ourselves awake while we are asleep? I do not think the conventional consensus reality helps us at all......................especially now as it gets more and more warped and distorted. And this is where I think that our language itself is breaking open because it has reached a point where it no longer contains the reality.

Perhaps a key lies as you suggest in the idea of daily focus on the higher self................

and I AM VERY INTRIGUED BY YOUR STATEMENT

"perhaps what we really need to withdraw is "our attention" by focusing it on what we'd really like to create"..............

I am really going to think about this more......the whole issue of directing and focusing attention as a third way,(or fourth, or OTHER - rough concepts only!!) if you will, a way through the dilemma.....and what I am tentatively coming to may be radical and revolutionary in its own way, but is hardly NEW - and that is self-realization and development using the ancient and refined science of meditation as the Royal Road to change

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 04:24
At some point soon I am going to attempt to summarize the various thoughts/ideas on this thread to see what we have gathered together so far. There are lots of excellent points here..................including some that have caused me to reexamine some of my assumptions and comfort zone (thanks Tekai for that!) ...... the main ideas discussed so far include, but are not limited to: the importance of personal ethics. the role of language in creating/reinforcing the control paradigm, the importance of intellectual clarity and honesty, cultivation of detachment as an active perspective for change and the proper use of human will. These posts are a treasure-trove of ideas and perspectives and thanks to all who have so generously contributed!!

Teakai
26th December 2010, 05:36
First Tekai you were the one who introduced the whole idea of violence to this thread - i.e. should you (hypothetically) kill someone who is about to release a weapon of mass destruction - and asked me what I would do about that personally. I do not think this is the place to discuss those kinds of issues. Then after I made a general statement about not being into violence - in an attempt to dampen that tack you were taking... (what do you think I am going to advocate violent revolution here?!) you respond, I presume to that statement, with a question as to whether I personally would eat meat from a slaughter house! WHAT?! Isn't that a clasical "GOTCHA" chessmove? Is that the kind of game you want to play? I don't. Then you accuse me of being a hypocrite for on the one hand espousing non-violence and on the other, not being a strict vegetarian. ???? You see a major conflict between those two things. You think that being non-violent cannot co-exist with eating meat apparently, though you did not say so. I DO NOT. And that is not anything other than a personal opinion. YOU made the discussion about diet and brought that up, not me! I wouldn't because I presume there are all kinds of people on this thread with many personal views and opinions about the subject, and I consider dietary issues to be personal ones. There are many people - including strict practicing Buddhists - who espouse non-violence and at the same time eat meat, including some of the major practitioners and teachers in the world today. I am not a Buddhist, by the way. Then you went on the attack against me for what you perceive as moral inconsistencies, contradictions and hypocrisy....as though you are on some kind of a crusade! I don't feel comfortable with crusades of any kind. If you don't think calling someone a hypocrite isn't a personal attack, then I don't know what is! I did not counter-attack. Again - this all came up in the context of dietary issues and what you feel are my inconsistencies. I kept trying to say that I do not want to fight about this issue. I think eating habits are a personal issue - people can get very alienated reading this thread when it is deliberately polarized narrowly around eating habits, and what you consider to be my moral failings and our personal exchange about these things. That was not the REASON I POSTED THIS THREAD. I think you are acting very hostile, making personal attacks on me and YOU will not admit it. As I said before if you want to fight fight with someone else. As for my moral failures I have my share and I am here, with others, to work them out. It is not helpful for you to take such a strident tone under the guise of getting at the truth, honesty, etc. The whole tack is hostile. That makes me wonder about intent. But your motives, etc. are your business. Why you would try to hijack this thread to make it about ME and my character is a mystery to me. If your intention was to help me with what you see are my failings, why attack? Why make it personal? Since when are you my judge and why is it your business to point out what you think are my moral and intellectual inconsistencies in this manner in this forum?

THAT seems to me to be pretty inconsistent with your professed interest in getting to the bottom of things. It also seems pretty violent. And all in the guise of a free exchange of ideas........

I don't buy it.

As for me I want to get this thread back on track----

Hey, Ahk, I didn't call you a hypocrite at all. I said (paraphrased because I'm too lazy to get it word for word) that it seems hypocritical to be OK with violence only as it suits - and not just you - but anyone.

And isn't it?

If one is OK with the idea of killing to feed humanity (or just because meat tastes good), then how does one reject the idea of killing for the survival of humanity?
I just don't see how it's reasonable - but was interested in how you justified it to yourself. (And I'm not calling you unreasonable - I'm saying that, to me, the idea is unreasonable.)
Kill the cow because it tastes good, but don't kill the retillian who wants you dead and has been killing you and yours slowly for years. (replace reptillian with sociopathic, murderous human if you don't think reptillians exist)

And my point wasn't about personal ethics - just in case you thought it was.
It was about understanding our thought processess and where they come from - and whether or not they are sensible and reasonable and whether they stand up under scrutiny or whether we are just kidding ourselves by designing what we believe to be right and moral as suited to our ego thinking.

How can we think straight if our thinking is screwy?
If our thinking is screwy, then how can we trust we are thinking straight?
Surely correct thinking is the foundation every choice/decision we make rests upon?

I know - I probably should have kept away, but I'm one of those curious sticky beak types :)
But, I don't think I can explain the point I'm trying to make any clearer.

And, whether you believe it or not - none of it was an attack - that is ego thinking and ego thinking is false thinking.

Love, blessings and pizza to you.
:)

Ty
26th December 2010, 17:32
Language...

xbusymom is right that the subconscious doesn't "see" negative words. Effective marketing avoids them, always looking for a positive way to express an idea. But most of our reading and comprehension takes place in the conscious, not the subconscious. For instance, I doubt that anyone reading this mis-interpreted the first sentence of this paragraph, which contains a negative word. So while the subconscious may have interpreted it as "the subconscious sees negative words" the conscious read and interpreted it accurately as written.

Language guides thought. Without a way to express something with words we can't think about it. We can have thoughts in English that the Japanese can never have and they can have thoughts we can't. Eskimos have something like 47 different words for snow. They can think about snow in ways we can't.

But I don't see language as a probem here. English is a very dynamic language. I forget the numbers exactly but we have something like 2 to 3 times more words in English than any other western language. While it does restrict possible thought, English also expands continuously to incorporate new words and findings and allow new thought. For the most part, English today provides a rich vocabulary for clearly and precisely discussing and thinking about pretty much anything.

Compared to the English of the middle ages, which was sometimes very symbolic, we've come a long way. From the diary of the "Burgher of Paris", describing the Burgundian murders...


Then arose the goddess of Discord, who lived in the tower of Evil Counsel, and awoke Wrath, the mad woman, and Covetousness and Rage and Vengeance, and they took up arms of all sorts and cast out Reason, Justice, Remembrance of God, and Moderation most shamefully. Then Madness them enraged, and Murder and Slaughter killed, cut down, put to death, massacred all they found in the prisons.... and Covetousness tucked up her skirts into her belt with Rapine, her daughter, and Larceny, her son.... Afterward, the aforesaid people went by guidance of their goddesses, that is to say, Wrath, Covetousness and Vengeance, who led them through all the public prisons of Paris.

Huh?

Language is a tool that can be applied (or misapplied) in many ways.

PHARAOH
26th December 2010, 17:48
Ahkenaten, it really is that simple. Not only to do all, but more. Seems like your already making excuses in your mind why you won't. Those were just a few examples of the many. Explain what is so hard about it? Is it because you (we) are afraid to lose our jobs, marriges, what people will think or say, the inconviniece??? You see the suggestions I made are all simple non violent ways to alter and create the world we wish to live in. If we did, the world would literally change overnight. The people who believe they have all the power know its only because of thier "FEAR" tactics that we comply. Your compliance is all based on "FEAR" and nothing more. Please explain to us why it's not this simple??? What make these suggestions so complicated? Millions of americans did what they were told to do by thier bosses even when they knew it was wrong, only to find themselves unemployed and homeless after following orders or else. Well they are now learning that they should have taken a stand because they are still were they "FEARED" they would be if they didn't. Small example. Be honest, your just "AFRAID" of what will happen if I do??? Will I be alone??? Will anyone else join me??? What will become of me and my family??? I suggest we all choose to do one of the hundreds of suggestions first as we must crawl before we run or we can just go gang busters and enjoy the ride as we see the world around us become exactly what we all dream it should be. By the way, what good would this do you asked, how about change our reality and way of life for the betterment of humanity and our children forever. As you already know I can go on and on but I will leave it here and wait for you response.

Ba-ba-Ra
26th December 2010, 18:11
If one is OK with the idea of killing to feed humanity (or just because meat tastes good), then how does one reject the idea of killing for the survival of humanity?
I just don't see how it's reasonable - but was interested in how you justified it to yourself. (And I'm not calling you unreasonable - I'm saying that, to me, the idea is unreasonable.)
Kill the cow because it tastes good, but don't kill the retillian who wants you dead and has been killing you and yours slowly for years. (replace reptillian with sociopathic, murderous human if you don't think reptillians exist)

And my point wasn't about personal ethics - just in case you thought it was.
It was about understanding our thought processess and where they come from - and whether or not they are sensible and reasonable and whether they stand up under scrutiny or whether we are just kidding ourselves by designing what we believe to be right and moral as suited to our ego thinking.

How can we think straight if our thinking is screwy?
If our thinking is screwy, then how can we trust we are thinking straight?
Surely correct thinking is the foundation every choice/decision we make rests upon?



:)

Hi Teakai, I get what you're saying and I'm with you. And these very thoughts were brought to my attention back in 2000 when visiting Iceland. A group from the U.S. were with a group of Icelanders at a restaurant. We were thoroughly enjoying our dinner, when someone from the U.S. asked what this wonderful meat was. The reply: Puffin. Many of the Americans literally stopped mid-fork and pushed their plates away. "How can you eat you're beautiful Puffin?" The Icelanders reply: "You eat your beautiful chickens and pheasants, etc."

Neither could understand the others position. I just watched. Hmm, why is it okay "in my culture" to eat sheep & cows, but not horses or dogs , etc. For many it's okay to kill a criminal or a soldier in the opposing army. Hmm - and who decides "what" a criminal is. Is the man who steals food or robs a bank to feed his family a criminal, when he's stuck in a society where he can't find work? In U.S. we've been fighting over abortion forever. Killing a fetus terrible - but isn't brining a fetus into a situation where mom can't support it or wants it - equally terrible. All judgments calls. And I believe Teakai, you are trying to push us to look at where these judgments come from.

What thoughts are actually ours and which are programming so deep that we actually believe they are ours.

Akh this is a great thread because it's encouraging us all to look at our own thoughts and beliefs - and maybe do some reevaluating.

Ty
26th December 2010, 18:18
You ask if we can withdraw consent from the control paradigm. I ask, in exchange for what? What will it be replaced with? Until there is a fairly clear vision of this, shared or individual, why even consider withdrawing your consent? You may well end up in an even less desirable place.

I can think of 4 examples of withdrawing consent at different scales:

1) Personally - the homeless, by choice or necessity, are not playing the game, they are not giving their consent to participate on the supportive side of the paradigm (ie they are not contributing). However they are still dependent on it for their subsistence.

2) Personally - my brother-in-law got tired of the rat race, bought 75 acres in the middle of nowhere WV, built a log house and lives there with no electricity (except what he gets from his solar panels) or plumbing. He does still shop for groceries and has autos that need occasional service so he isn't completely independent of the paradigm. He benefits from it without being controlled by it.

3) Community - the Quakers have done this. They have a self-sufficient community within the paradigm, yet isolated from it and from what I can tell, operate entirely outside of it. They created their own oasis by never modernizing.

4) Tibet - much like the Quakers but on a national scale, which lacks any form of defense and so China claims it.

I am sure there are other examples. So two of these, not so bad, two not at all desirable to most.

My point is that just withdrawing consent in essence creates a vacuum. You move from known to unknown. That's not just tough, but could have dire consequences. Seems like it would be beneficial to define what the replacement paradigm would be at whatever scale desired. Then energies could be focused on creating that.

It's really hard to get somewhere if you don't know where it is you want to go. And as imperfect as our current paradigm is, it is arguably the best mankind has come up with yet for supporting the drives and desires (or lack of same) in a massive and varied population of different cultures.

So perhaps instead of thinking in terms of withdrawing consent (moving away from) it would be better to define what you want, think in terms of moving towards it then defining the steps needed to get there.

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 18:51
Tekai - thank you again for provoking me to profound thinking on an important subject: I agree that our thinking must be straight and not screwy! We must be strong enough and intellectually honest enough to take criticism from others and reexamine our selves at every point. I repeat - I do not advocate killing reptilians or human beings by the way nor would I advocate that others do so. Not advocating the killing of others is very different than defending oneself against an attack in which some killing might occur. On the other hand I do not advocate the killing of animals either. Not advocating the killing of animals does not to me equate necessarily to being a vegan or a vegetarian - correct me if I am wrong in my logic. To me those two views are not in conflict with one another. I DO think what we are talking about here is the very important personal ethics piece of the bigger puzzle (i.e. the Control Paradigm) - and the equally important piece of accuracy and clarity in the use of language. My language is not very refined or acutely philosophical, but is intended to provide a rough sketch of the concepts.

The way I see it - and this is only one of any number of ethical frames one could use - there is an ethical continuum, if you will with on the extreme left what I call relative situational ethics. That pole includes those decisions made on the fly based on personal whims, impulses, or what is expedient in the moment. A number of personality types we call "criminal" or "sociopaths" often operate from that ethical pole. There is no underlying core or central principles other than doing what the SELF dictates is to the advantage of the SELF to inform action. On the extreme right is the other pole, which I call absolute fundamentalist ethics. What I mean by that is that those operating from that ethical pole believe there is some underlying set of rules, albeit the "10 Commandments" or something else that should be used when making any decisions or taking any action. Neither of these ethical poles necessarily cover all situations where people make decisions or do things on impulse. So I have laid out the poles, the extremes on either end - and then on the horizontal line connecting the poles lies an ethical continuum that flows between those extremes, upon which people may place themselves, or be placed, based on their actions/philosophies reflected in actions.

When it comes to the issue of eating meat for food and I am using that subject only to illustrate a point (or not taking a concrete stand on that issue, as the case may be) anyone will fall on a place on the line representing the ethical continuum consistent with their views on the issue of killing. I suspect that most people fall not on either extreme pole but somewhere along the line between the two. Some people (like me) feel more comfortable with the ambiguity of NOT taking a firm I WILL NOT EAT (kill or allow others to kill) ANIMALS (or fish, or other creatures) than they would feel about dialing themselves across the ethical line towards the extreme right hand side of the continuum, closer to that pole I call the fundamentalist position - OR dialing themselves to the extreme left where one grants oneself permission to do as one pleases in the moment, including killing other living beings! Some people call the extreme left pole NIHILISM. Similarly, I also would not categorically say I will not EVER kill a person either because I cannot guarantee what I would do given a life-threatening situation for me or my family and loved ones. Granted it is not ethically clear-cut, and it is a VERY ambiguous moral position to be in but it IS internally coherent and logical. I suspect there are many that occupy a position somewhere on the line connecting the poles either by conscious choice, or by default. When it comes to the issue of clear-thinking, and attempts to resolve all conflicts ethical, intellectual or otherwise in one's thinking so that one is coherently whole, of course this is an important issue for thinking human beings. Where I and others fall along the line on that particular issue is based on a personal choice one makes - or it is a moral/ethical position occupied by default, purely based on actions one takes without being aware of it.

Having laid out the ethical framework, I DO agree an important part of the Control Paradigm is the values associated with food and eating choices. Making a better world together involves addressing the important issue of food. Clearly fish farming and massive corporate agriculture with genetically modified and systematically contaminated food is NOT the answer and it is not healthy or sustainable - though sometimes I do not know what the word sustainable even means!! I personally think the small grass-roots local, community based sustainable organic farms and gardens is the answer, if there is one, and within that, people coming to an awareness (and clearly this awareness is now growing) that THE CHOICES WE MAKE THE WORLD WE CREATE. I do not believe, however, in dictating values, morals, or principles to others. That is a CORE value to me!! Painful as it is - and critical as our situation may be - I still feel more comfortable with everyone coming to their own conclusions about these matters on their own, not under coercion. So to raise people up, this is what I think the Middle Path is all about and why it is important - NOT dictating to others, instead showing by example. Respecting the differences that exist between people, and recognizing and honoring that people come to their own comfort zone in their own time and in their own way. IDENTIFYING COMMONALITIES and de-emphasizing differences is important. I do think such an awareness is rapidly growing though I do also feel that we may not have enough time to deliberately make the changes nature will require of us if we are to survive and continue to maximize our human potential without completely destroying the earth!

Again, using the dietary subject as an example only for the purposes of discussion, I discussed this issue with a life-long friend of mine that I respect very much yesterday who has been a vegetarian for almost as long as I have known her. She said that she feels these choices are a personal decision. She does not feel that the time to have the discussion about it is when people are "sitting down to eat a steak"! - and she feels that IF THERE ARE OTHER FOOD CHOICES in general, it is in our best interests and in the best interests of other living things and the planet, that we do not eat meat. She does, however eat seafood. That happens to be the point on the ethical line I drew that SHE places herself and it is where she feels comfortable and where she is acting in harmony with the rest of her values, which are not surprisingly, humanitarian, environmentalistic, etc. She would NOT place herself over on the extreme right pole of the ethical continuum because she would NOT use a rigid set of rules and then apply them to the actions of others or use them as a screen through which to view others decisions and actions!

She DOES NOT feel that it is helpful or appropriate to dictate her values to others - and that in fact when one goes to any extreme it often has the effect of eliciting a reactionary response - NOT bringing the other person along. I respect this person VERY much and I am only sharing what she had to say to add to this discussion.

So - in concluding my points about this particular facet of what I consider to be a very important discussion about personal and collective ethics within the whole "Control Paradigm" issue - where I come out thinking this through is that as a practical matter we each fall at some point on the continuum I sketched out. Some other visual model than a line with a pole at either end might help move this discussion along but this is the best I can come up with right now. As we develop together, we can best move forward by envisioning where, ideally, we would like to be as Ba Ba Ra said, and put our focus there and each move towards being the best person we can envision being at the same time maintaining respect for others. In that way, perhaps, with conscious tolerance towards others, we can raise ourselves up, and the inconsistencies and wrinkles in our collective thinking and behavior thereby will become less extreme and hopefully, eventually be ironed out.

Anyway I am still thinking about all of this. As I said, I PERSONALLY (though I do NOT want this discussion to be limited to personalities and personal eccentricities or differences!!) am not especially anti-violence so not taking a firm anti-animal consumption stand is not at all inconsistent within my own value system. I NEVER would engage in any crusade to convert others to my point of view, even if I were to decide to dial myself over further to the right on the model I drew!!

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 18:59
Ahkenaten, it really is that simple. Not only to do all, but more. Seems like your already making excuses in your mind why you won't. Those were just a few examples of the many. Explain what is so hard about it? Is it because you (we) are afraid to lose our jobs, marriges, what people will think or say, the inconviniece??? You see the suggestions I made are all simple non violent ways to alter and create the world we wish to live in. If we did, the world would literally change overnight. The people who believe they have all the power know its only because of thier "FEAR" tactics that we comply. Your compliance is all based on "FEAR" and nothing more. Please explain to us why it's not this simple??? What make these suggestions so complicated? Millions of americans did what they were told to do by thier bosses even when they knew it was wrong, only to find themselves unemployed and homeless after following orders or else. Well they are now learning that they should have taken a stand because they are still were they "FEARED" they would be if they didn't. Small example. Be honest, your just "AFRAID" of what will happen if I do??? Will I be alone??? Will anyone else join me??? What will become of me and my family??? I suggest we all choose to do one of the hundreds of suggestions first as we must crawl before we run or we can just go gang busters and enjoy the ride as we see the world around us become exactly what we all dream it should be. By the way, what good would this do you asked, how about change our reality and way of life for the betterment of humanity and our children forever. As you already know I can go on and on but I will leave it here and wait for you response.



I am not saying what I would do personally, Pharoah - I only said I would not advocate that others check off each of the nine items on your list because somehow what is needed is to devise a way to move forward and bring everyone along regardless of where they fall with respect to any metrics at this time. Because there are so many people, each in different positions now, I don't think removing consent is simple for everyone. I personally like your list very much and think it is very useful. I have a list that closely resembles yours.....I don't see that you have left anything out. I think that we should each personally do the very best we can to move towards the kind of better world implied by the nine very significant features on your list, as an example of a way through this dilemma - using Ba Ba Ra's idea of focusing individually on being the very best human being we can possibly be as a means of "withdrawing consent" as an example of a practical method, and there may be other working examples -...........................but I would not be critical of others if for some reason or other they felt they could not quit their job, or all of the nine things on your list right not now...because then they would be left out!!

Maybe there is a way we could tractor-beam the collective WE up!

Sorry but the language is breaking under the strain.

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 19:08
Hi Teakai, I get what you're saying and I'm with you. And these very thoughts were brought to my attention back in 2000 when visiting Iceland. A group from the U.S. were with a group of Icelanders at a restaurant. We were thoroughly enjoying our dinner, when someone from the U.S. asked what this wonderful meat was. The reply: Puffin. Many of the Americans literally stopped mid-fork and pushed their plates away. "How can you eat you're beautiful Puffin?" The Icelanders reply: "You eat your beautiful chickens and pheasants, etc."

Neither could understand the others position. I just watched. Hmm, why is it okay "in my culture" to eat sheep & cows, but not horses or dogs , etc. For many it's okay to kill a criminal or a soldier in the opposing army. Hmm - and who decides "what" a criminal is. Is the man who steals food or robs a bank to feed his family a criminal, when he's stuck in a society where he can't find work? In U.S. we've been fighting over abortion forever. Killing a fetus terrible - but isn't brining a fetus into a situation where mom can't support it or wants it - equally terrible. All judgments calls. And I believe Teakai, you are trying to push us to look at where these judgments come from.

What thoughts are actually ours and which are programming so deep that we actually believe they are ours.

Akh this is a great thread because it's encouraging us all to look at our own thoughts and beliefs - and maybe do some reevaluating.

Yes the particular facet of the ethical discussion has provoked some very deep thinking on my part.....and questioning and revisiting my thoughts and beliefs in this area. During the Vietnam War era a very bright friend of mine had his brief Andy Warhol 60 seconds of fame in the national news when he advocated a "Baby Vietnamese in Every Mailbox" sort of a play on Roosevelt's old slogan during the depression, "A chicken in every pot." His point was that if Americans were cannibalistic perhaps there would be no moral conflict with all the killing and maiming of the Vietnamese and as you may recall the major casualties, as usual were women and children. This created quite a flap and earned him a brief moment of fame................and it was, though very smart and cynical, certainly a commentary on the many moral inconsistencies that riddle our culture and ourselves individually!!

NancyV
26th December 2010, 19:16
Ahkenaten, it really is that simple. Not only to do all, but more. Seems like your already making excuses in your mind why you won't. Those were just a few examples of the many. Explain what is so hard about it? Is it because you (we) are afraid to lose our jobs, marriges, what people will think or say, the inconviniece??? You see the suggestions I made are all simple non violent ways to alter and create the world we wish to live in. If we did, the world would literally change overnight. The people who believe they have all the power know its only because of thier "FEAR" tactics that we comply. Your compliance is all based on "FEAR" and nothing more. Please explain to us why it's not this simple??? What make these suggestions so complicated? Millions of americans did what they were told to do by thier bosses even when they knew it was wrong, only to find themselves unemployed and homeless after following orders or else. Well they are now learning that they should have taken a stand because they are still were they "FEARED" they would be if they didn't. Small example. Be honest, your just "AFRAID" of what will happen if I do??? Will I be alone??? Will anyone else join me??? What will become of me and my family??? I suggest we all choose to do one of the hundreds of suggestions first as we must crawl before we run or we can just go gang busters and enjoy the ride as we see the world around us become exactly what we all dream it should be. By the way, what good would this do you asked, how about change our reality and way of life for the betterment of humanity and our children forever. As you already know I can go on and on but I will leave it here and wait for you response.
I would be interested to hear how simple it was for you to do the things you listed and more. If you owned a home was it repossessed when you did not pay the property tax? When you were driving a car were you ever stopped by the police because you did not have a license on the car, did you have a drivers license or insurance? How do you pay for food if you do not have a job or are not self employed, and if you are self employed how do you accept checks from people if you have no bank account.

We are living in a society and culture where doing almost anything on your list makes life extremely difficult. We do not accede to the rules of society primarily because of fear, much of it is conditioning and habit and the preference to get along in the world we live in. I'm not sure why it would be wise to reject the way of life we find ourselves participating in and then spend an inordinate amount of time trying to evade any attempts the enforcers of our societies rules and laws might make to force us to comply.

I speak from a bit of experience in attempting to participate as little as possible in normal society. For several years we lived in Hawaii, did not have to work, were total vegetarians, did not go to doctors, did not have a TV or read newspapers, etc. We also did a lot of meditation in order to explore spiritual growth and freedom. However, we had plenty of money from real estate investments. We were building a house on land we owned. If we had NOT had money we would not have had the freedom to be as far out of normal society as we were. We made the money by working and dumb luck from my real estate ventures.

After those years in Hawaii we lived on 50 acres we bought in Oregon, built another house and still stayed out of most of normal social interactions. My second child was born at home. We got low on money so I started a business which supported us very well for the next 10 years, so we also could stay at home and my husband did not have to work at a job for someone else. BUT, I would not have felt that it would be at all wise to not pay taxes, not have a drivers license, not get birth certificates for my children and opt out to the extent you are suggesting. I've heard all the arguments for civil disobedience and I absolutely will not spend my life in protest.

As long as man is a hierarchical species there will be a pecking order and tribute will be exacted under one guise or another. If you choose to not pay that tribute you must go into hiding or move somewhere where there are no people. All throughout history on this planet every tribe, every civilization, every town and city has always exacted tribute from it's inhabitants in one form or another. There really is no where to go to escape it. So perhaps it might be wiser to leave this life if one is unwilling to participate in it.

I came to that realization when I found myself not being able to relate easily to normal life, when I was a total fruitarian for several months and was leaving my body every night and traveling on other planes. I finally realized that I was rejecting this world and the way it was operating and I had to make a choice. I chose to stay here and participate in whatever this incarnation brings to me. I chose to participate without bitterness, blame, hate, rejection or FEAR. My life is what I make of it and is not defined by the rules of a society that I choose to follow in order to make my life easier.

As far as your comments making people look like they are all victims if they followed orders, you are dead wrong. Three of my husbands were soldiers, a job where you must constantly follow orders, ALL of them volunteered and NEVER considered themselves to be victims. You seem to be giving the impression that most people are victims of a very few bosses. I do not accept that. If anyone else wishes to look at life in that limited and dis-empowered way, that is their business. I have a different view of life and will not be a victim. Those who think they are doing good by telling others how they SHOULD be are not much different than those they think they are rebelling against.

I will not attempt to force anyone to see reality the way I see it. Those who choose to dwell on fear will feel fear and will see almost everyone else as operating from fear. I prefer to see people as powerful souls who chose to come into this incarnation to learn certain lessons and hopefully to enjoy playing the game.

Nancy :)

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 19:33
You ask if we can withdraw consent from the control paradigm. I ask, in exchange for what? What will it be replaced with? Until there is a fairly clear vision of this, shared or individual, why even consider withdrawing your consent? You may well end up in an even less desirable place.


To clarify by "withdrawing consent" I was trying to focus with my word choice on the fact that the reality actually is supported by our 'consent' whether we realize that or not, and for things to change in a massive, meaningful way our 'consent' must be withdrawn.

As for the alternative reality that would fill the vacuum, so to speak - it seems to me that literally anything is possible so I am unable to define it.

And I agree - letting go of what we have in exchange for the unknown, is a scary prospect! As a practical matter, people often chose to stay in a bad situation because it is emotionally preferable to jumping off the cliff into the unknown!!





I can think of 4 examples of withdrawing consent at different scales:

1) Personally - the homeless, by choice or necessity, are not playing the game, they are not giving their consent to participate on the supportive side of the paradigm (ie they are not contributing). However they are still dependent on it for their subsistence.

Yes, in this example they chose not to participate/contribute - yet are dependent on it, not an optimal situation but at least they jumped off the cliff!!

2) Personally - my brother-in-law got tired of the rat race, bought 75 acres in the middle of nowhere WV, built a log house and lives there with no electricity (except what he gets from his solar panels) or plumbing. He does still shop for groceries and has autos that need occasional service so he isn't completely independent of the paradigm. He benefits from it without being controlled by it.

OK lots of people have done this but not everyone has the money to buy the 75 acres and build the off-the-grid house or move out of the US or whatever...................and although he has set himself out at the perimeter of the Control Paradigm, he is STILL hooked in on a practical level. And you didn't mention the important social dimension - I presume he is not a hermit and he has friends, etc. who live closer into towards the center of the Control Paradigm!


3) Community - the Quakers have done this. They have a self-sufficient community within the paradigm, yet isolated from it and from what I can tell, operate entirely outside of it. They created their own oasis by never modernizing.

I am a great admirer of the Quakers, Pennsylvania Dutch and groups like that. Even so, they sell their goods to people in the outside world and so, to that extent are hooked in - and they live in the midst of a landscape populated thickly with others living more conventional lives so it is only a matter of a degree of removal!

4) Tibet - much like the Quakers but on a national scale, which lacks any form of defense and so China claims it.

The Tibetans are within a Control Paradigm - in this case a Chinese Control Paradigm. NOT an optimal situation.

I am sure there are other examples. So two of these, not so bad, two not at all desirable to most.

Rather than emphasizing lifestyles - should we perhaps consider what Ba Ba Ra said about focusing on the individual who in turn focuses their energies on becoming the very best person they can be, and in that way, bootstrapping all of us upward without getting bogged down in a need for consensus on lifestyles, etc. at this point?

I hate to intrude this thought because I am not an adept or an exemplar - I am sure there are others better able to fill these shoes here on Avalon - but perhaps a Middle Way through this is the individual use of meditation practice as a means of getting focused on what it important, as a path to self-integration?

All the stories are beginning to sound to me like the epic story of the life of Siddartha who left behind the "real world" and through self-realization, discovered his higher self and a means of knowing the reality within which we all live.

But again, I do not want to prosletyze any philosophy or religion, or practice here - I am only bringing this up as a possible solution to our problems creating a better world - and this particular 'solution' has been tried, tested and proven to work - though not, to my knowledge anyway, on a collective level!

And - then we perhaps get into yet another old dilemma/problem, and that is the whole idea of Utopia and the pitfalls associated with that!!


My point is that just withdrawing consent in essence creates a vacuum. You move from known to unknown. That's not just tough, but could have dire consequences. Seems like it would be beneficial to define what the replacement paradigm would be at whatever scale desired. Then energies could be focused on creating that.

Agreed - but again how does the collective We ascend? What practical means should be employed? How does the collective We envision or define, on any massive scale, a replacement paradigm, at least now, with the way our minds presently work?

It's really hard to get somewhere if you don't know where it is you want to go. And as imperfect as our current paradigm is, it is arguably the best mankind has come up with yet for supporting the drives and desires (or lack of same) in a massive and varied population of different cultures.

I don't know if this is 'the best mankind has come up with. There is lots we do not know about our own history - especially the distant past.

So perhaps instead of thinking in terms of withdrawing consent (moving away from) it would be better to define what you want, think in terms of moving towards it then defining the steps needed to get there.

Yes, perhaps it would bring more clarity to redefine what we are trying to do here more in terms of defining what we want, who we want to be as individuals - then individually and collectively begin to think in terms of HOW we move towards being the people we want to be..................maybe even laying out a yellow brick road, so to speak.............I tried to respond to your points individually in the box, above. Sorry if it is not clear.....................

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 19:42
I would be interested to hear how simple it was for you to do the things you listed and more. If you owned a home was it repossessed when you did not pay the property tax? When you were driving a car were you ever stopped by the police because you did not have a license on the car, did you have a drivers license or insurance? How do you pay for food if you do not have a job or are not self employed, and if you are self employed how do you accept checks from people if you have no bank account.

We are living in a society and culture where doing almost anything on your list makes life extremely difficult. We do not accede to the rules of society primarily because of fear, much of it is conditioning and habit and the preference to get along in the world we live in. I'm not sure why it would be wise to reject the way of life we find ourselves participating in and then spend an inordinate amount of time trying to evade any attempts the enforcers of our societies rules and laws might make to force us to comply.

I speak from a bit of experience in attempting to participate as little as possible in normal society. For several years we lived in Hawaii, did not have to work, were total vegetarians, did not go to doctors, did not have a TV or read newspapers, etc. We also did a lot of meditation in order to explore spiritual growth and freedom. However, we had plenty of money from real estate investments. We were building a house on land we owned. If we had NOT had money we would not have had the freedom to be as far out of normal society as we were. We made the money by working and dumb luck from my real estate ventures.

After those years in Hawaii we lived on 50 acres we bought in Oregon, built another house and still stayed out of most of normal social interactions. My second child was born at home. We got low on money so I started a business which supported us very well for the next 10 years, so we also could stay at home and my husband did not have to work at a job for someone else. BUT, I would not have felt that it would be at all wise to not pay taxes, not have a drivers license, not get birth certificates for my children and opt out to the extent you are suggesting. I've heard all the arguments for civil disobedience and I absolutely will not spend my life in protest.

As long as man is a hierarchical species there will be a pecking order and tribute will be exacted under one guise or another. If you choose to not pay that tribute you must go into hiding or move somewhere where there are no people. All throughout history on this planet every tribe, every civilization, every town and city has always exacted tribute from it's inhabitants in one form or another. There really is no where to go to escape it. So perhaps it might be wiser to leave this life if one is unwilling to participate in it.

I came to that realization when I found myself not being able to relate easily to normal life, when I was a total fruitarian for several months and was leaving my body every night and traveling on other planes. I finally realized that I was rejecting this world and the way it was operating and I had to make a choice. I chose to stay here and participate in whatever this incarnation brings to me. I chose to participate without bitterness, blame, hate, rejection or FEAR. My life is what I make of it and is not defined by the rules of a society that I choose to follow in order to make my life easier.

As far as your comments making people look like they are all victims if they followed orders, you are dead wrong. Three of my husbands were soldiers, a job where you must constantly follow orders, ALL of them volunteered and NEVER considered themselves to be victims. You seem to be giving the impression that most people are victims of a very few bosses. I do not accept that. If anyone else wishes to look at life in that limited and dis-empowered way, that is their business. I have a different view of life and will not be a victim. Those who think they are doing good by telling others how they SHOULD be are not much different than those they think they are rebelling against.

I will not attempt to force anyone to see reality the way I see it. Those who choose to dwell on fear will feel fear and will see almost everyone else as operating from fear. I prefer to see people as powerful souls who chose to come into this incarnation to learn certain lessons and hopefully to enjoy playing the game.

Nancy :)

Hi Nancy - I am in synch with your thinking to a great degree.................I do not espouse the victim mindset and I also believe that respect for one another is a basic core value. I do not think we will make any progress if we continue insisting that others go along with whatever strategy we have devised, somehow if anything meaningful is done it must be - though this seems impossible - radically inclusive. One example from history is the story of the Buddha and how he left his home and everything he knew behind and went out into the world to face the unknown and himself, arriving ultimately at some sense of the Truths of our existence. But I do not feel comfortable prosletyzing any path. This is just a known examplar. And shows a way or path that can be taken whereby one can move from the individual or through the individual if you will, to the universal.

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 19:53
Language...

xbusymom is right that the subconscious doesn't "see" negative words. Effective marketing avoids them, always looking for a positive way to express an idea. But most of our reading and comprehension takes place in the conscious, not the subconscious. For instance, I doubt that anyone reading this mis-interpreted the first sentence of this paragraph, which contains a negative word. So while the subconscious may have interpreted it as "the subconscious sees negative words" the conscious read and interpreted it accurately as written.

Language guides thought. Without a way to express something with words we can't think about it. We can have thoughts in English that the Japanese can never have and they can have thoughts we can't. Eskimos have something like 47 different words for snow. They can think about snow in ways we can't.

But I don't see language as a probem here. English is a very dynamic language. I forget the numbers exactly but we have something like 2 to 3 times more words in English than any other western language. While it does restrict possible thought, English also expands continuously to incorporate new words and findings and allow new thought. For the most part, English today provides a rich vocabulary for clearly and precisely discussing and thinking about pretty much anything.

Compared to the English of the middle ages, which was sometimes very symbolic, we've come a long way. From the diary of the "Burgher of Paris", describing the Burgundian murders...



Huh?

Language is a tool that can be applied (or misapplied) in many ways.

I suspect but am not an expert and have no way of proving this beyond any reasonable doubt - that our language such as it is is, as Schwaller de Lubicz would say, a LEGACY - that is, it is a sad remnant and monument to something in our past history - a remnant or vestige, if you will, of a more exalted purer language that existed at some other time. I have heard that the study of Sanskrit resulted in the development of the Science of Linguistics and that it appears that all human languages, with a few notable exceptions where there does NOT seem to be any historic precedent or connection (Sumerian being one notable example!!) - ARE CONNECTED AND SEEM TO HAVE ARISEN FROM SOME ANCIENT proto-language. It would appear that, due to the interconnections and similarities between harmonics (relating the the basic principles of sound) and Numbers, that the proto-language took as its underlying principles "universal" that is cosmic truths expressed in NUMBERS and HARMONICS. In that sense, our languages as they presently stand are but a "legacy" of that past, forgotten language, just as our systems of mathematics and music are "legacies" of a means of human expression based on elemental truths once employed in the past with only the basic underlying structure remaining in existence today.

As such, the language tools presently in use are at best, rudimentary.

Ty
26th December 2010, 20:30
Hi Ahkenaten,

I'll address some specific comments you made...


To clarify by "withdrawing consent" I was trying to focus with my word choice on the fact that the reality actually is supported by our 'consent' whether we realize that or not, and for things to change in a massive, meaningful way our 'consent' must be withdrawn.

I don't think things will ever change in a massive meaningful way by withdrawing our consent. That would require too many people opting out of the system. And while many are dissatisfied with the current sytem, they are not thinking in terms of replacing it with another, just tweaking it to make it better - pulling it further right or left, depending on their political persuasion.


The Tibetans are within a Control Paradigm - in this case a Chinese Control Paradigm. NOT an optimal situation.

For that matter, so are the Quakers, only theirs is of their own choice. Their actions are controlled by the needs of their livestock, fields, families and shelters. They have chosen to live a life of piety and hard labor and maintaining that life imposes certain controls on them. Far different than the ones imposed on most of the population, but no less real. I suspect they have far less personal freedom as a result.

This is one reason I think it would be good to give serious thought to what your utopian paradigm would be on an individual basis. If it happens to coincide with others then perhaps you can work together to get there.

It's easy to take for granted the benefits of modern society. It's hard to imagine modern society without the paradigm that helped created it. Abandoning that paradigm may very well mean trading a reasonably comfortable life for one not nearly so.


Rather than emphasizing lifestyles - should we perhaps consider what Ba Ba Ra said about focusing on the individual who in turn focuses their energies on becoming the very best person they can be, and in that way, bootstrapping all of us upward without getting bogged down in a need for consensus on lifestyles, etc. at this point?

Yes - I think individuals should focus on what they want out of life and move towards that.


And - then we perhaps get into yet another old dilemma/problem, and that is the whole idea of Utopia and the pitfalls associated with that!!

One of the main pitfalls being - your Utopia is probably not my Utopia, thus I think the only reasonable way to proceed is as individuals.


Agreed - but again how does the collective We ascend? What practical means should be employed? How does the collective We envision or define, on any massive scale, a replacement paradigm, at least now, with the way our minds presently work?

We don't. The collective we are too few for any meaningful impact. I think the best we can do is individually carve out our own Utopias within the current paradigm. And perhaps a small community of like-minded people. Ending the paradigm via collective individual efforts? I don't see that happening.

But take heart. It will soon collapse from it's own weight. It's own unsustainable financial obligations will soon impose more change than anything we could collectively manifest. The forces that created the Nation State paradigm a couple hundred years ago have changed. New forces are at work ending it. I believe it will happen with or without our participation or consent. Those younger members of the forum may live to see it.

xbusymom
26th December 2010, 20:43
I am not saying what I would do personally, Pharoah - I only said I would not advocate that others check off each of the nine items on your list because somehow what is needed is to devise a way to move forward and bring everyone along regardless of where they fall with respect to any metrics at this time. Because there are so many people, each in different positions now, I don't think removing consent is simple for everyone. I personally like your list very much and think it is very useful. I have a list that closely resembles yours.....I don't see that you have left anything out. I think that we should each personally do the very best we can to move towards the kind of better world implied by the nine very significant features on your list, as an example of a way through this dilemma - using Ba Ba Ra's idea of focusing individually on being the very best human being we can possibly be as a means of "withdrawing consent" as an example of a practical method, and there may be other working examples -...........................but I would not be critical of others if for some reason or other they felt they could not quit their job, or all of the nine things on your list right not now...because then they would be left out!!

Maybe there is a way we could tractor-beam the collective WE up!

Sorry but the language is breaking under the strain.

I don't think he was advocating that everyone do exactly what he said to do... I think that he was simply providing a few examples of things we COULD do- in case you had no clue where to start or what the major issues of the current paradigm are...

case-in-point: I tried to escape and join a farmstead project; didnot work out because of a family emergency- then when the emergency was over I was still in hoc to my son for $4,000 in car repairs/registrations/ fines, etc. and racking up more debt expenses because I did not have a job anymore, had no money for getting my own place, etc.

there are many things you can do for small non-compliance acts, but if you are just waking up you don't really know where the illusion ends and the controlled paradigm begins... right?

Ty
26th December 2010, 20:51
there are many things you can do for small non-compliance acts, but if you are just waking up you don't really know where the illusion ends and the controlled paradigm begins... right?

Why does it matter? What would you do differently?

xbusymom
26th December 2010, 21:03
thats just it... If I could have done better with the info and the circumstances at the time of any decision I had made - I would have done better, but since I did the best I could with the situation as it was ... et.al. the only thing about hindsight is what one can learn what NOT to do for future scenarios... no one can go back and fix the past...

so to answer your question- I don't know- really ... I think we all do the best we can according to what we think is the right thing to do at any given moment ... each person would choose different things to do differently in their lives, so the collective WE isn't really on the same page anyway...

which is probably what the whole problem is ...??

Ty
26th December 2010, 21:25
xbusymom,

Yes - I think the collective WE is an illusion.

Ahkenaten asked earlier "how does the collective We ascend?" to which I gave my thoughts at the moment. In thinking more about it, though, the collective WE never ascend. Christians believe they can ascend to heaven, but on an individual basis, not as the result of some collective action. Buddhists believe they can reach enlightenment through a series of reincarnations, each one bringing them closer, providing, on an individual basis they have lived a good Buddhist life. I know of no belief systems where collective action helps the individual ascend to a better place.

However, ironically, the very paradigm we are talking about escaping does do that. The collective actions of many provide a surplus that helps the needy "ascend" from death or a life of crime to a life of poverty. It provides opportunity for many to ascend from poverty to middle class ...etc. It isn't perfect, and can certainly be improved but I prefer my modest life within the paradigm to anything I've been able to envision outside of it.

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 21:28
Hi Ty Totally 150% thanks to you for your thoughtful comments! I want to make it crystal clear that what I am talking about here in no way whatsoever is about anything even remotely resembling the "Utopian" model. I do not think the Utopian model as is conventionally understood is congruent in any way whatsoever with the larger reality we live in. I do not aspire to living in a Utopia - though others may. I also am not talking about anything in the way of a conventional grassroots social or political movement here - there have been times of radical change in human history and in the history of the earth that were not wrought by human design, that is by the conscious mind making a "To Do" list and checking off the items on the list. The kind of change I am talking about is more like a pure force of nature - like I said somewhere else here, a storm rising and moving across the landscape, a giant flock of birds suddenly shifting direction in flight almost as of one body and mind etc. Actually I don't have much faith in the conventional models of social change - as far as I am concerned, they have failed universally.

Actually I think as a species, "WE" is a very large group and I do not intend to exclude anyone.............though I will concede that those of us interested enough to even spend time trying to wend our way through this enormous and bewildering tangle of ideas and concepts are probably very few, indeed! But - even so, I do think whether we like it or not change is inevitable and we are on the brink of ENORMOUS upheaval and change.......................so the exhortation to the group to arise, awaken, etc. may even to a tiny extent, encourage people to turn their attention to the important subject of change and the role the conscious and even partially-awakened mind can play in creating a better reality for us all.

I too believe massive change is on its way in now whether we like it, participate in it consciously one way or the other, or not.

But because I believe that we actually have co-created the current situation, we could also create something else better and new................
but maybe I have vastly overestimated, as many have before, the power of our individual free will to act as agents for positive change. Some think that our lives live us (our genes, as one example, are expressing mysterious and relentless elemental truths about us THROUGH our minds and bodies ) rather than us living our lives.

And - there may be much truth in that.

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 21:33
thats just it... If I could have done better with the info and the circumstances at the time of any decision I had made - I would have done better, but since I did the best I could with the situation as it was ... et.al. the only thing about hindsight is what one can learn what NOT to do for future scenarios... no one can go back and fix the past...

so to answer your question- I don't know- really ... I think we all do the best we can according to what we think is the right thing to do at any given moment ... each person would choose different things to do differently in their lives, so the collective WE isn't really on the same page anyway...

which is probably what the whole problem is ...??

On some level (the mundane) the collective WE is not on the same page definitely - but on the higher levels I am sure we can strike some common ground, which brings us back for one thing to the language problem, how to even communicate with one another to get some kind of resonation process, if you will, going?!

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 21:43
xbusymom,

Yes - I think the collective WE is an illusion.

Ahkenaten asked earlier "how does the collective We ascend?" to which I gave my thoughts at the moment. In thinking more about it, though, the collective WE never ascend. Christians believe they can ascend to heaven, but on an individual basis, not as the result of some collective action. Buddhists believe they can reach enlightenment through a series of reincarnations, each one bringing them closer, providing, on an individual basis they have lived a good Buddhist life. I know of no belief systems where collective action helps the individual ascend to a better place.

However, ironically, the very paradigm we are talking about escaping does do that. The collective actions of many provide a surplus that helps the needy "ascend" from death or a life of crime to a life of poverty. It provides opportunity for many to ascend from poverty to middle class ...etc. It isn't perfect, and can certainly be improved but I prefer my modest life within the paradigm to anything I've been able to envision outside of it.

THAT is a very interesting concept that you have introduced.................first that the collective WE is an illusion. I say to you - how do you know that to be absolutely true? AND I find it to be very interesting when you say that the various religious philosophies posit the individual ascending based on personal actions and presumably merit accumulated! I am no expert on the subject but I do believe that the Buddhist model and the Hindu model upon which it is based, do imply at least that the collective effects of meritorious individual lives lived does radically effect the very cosmos, or energetic field if you will. And there may even be other interpretations or understandings in this regard that relate to Christianity and other religious philosophies that raise the bar from the individual meritocracy to the collective energetic.

The current paradigm may be a rough sketch of where we collectively and ideally wish to head ourselves and it is helpful to envision it in that way...................however it is a very rough sketch. And that is looking at it from the positive side of things......................the problem we are seeing now is the negative consequences with the paradigm as presently lived with its inordinate emphasis on the individual (this is my view) at the expense of the collective WE, factoring in Gaiia - the collective we is being sacrificed for the individual. The system is out of balance.

xbusymom
26th December 2010, 22:08
THAT is a very interesting concept that you have introduced.................first that the collective WE is an illusion. I say to you - how do you know that to be absolutely true? AND I find it to be very interesting when you say that the various religious philosophies posit the individual ascending based on personal actions and presumably merit accumulated! I am no expert on the subject but I do believe that the Buddhist model and the Hindu model upon which it is based, do imply at least that the collective effects of meritorious individual lives lived does radically effect the very cosmos, or energetic field if you will. And there may even be other interpretations or understandings in this regard that relate to Christianity and other religious philosophies that raise the bar from the individual meritocracy to the collective energetic.

The current paradigm may be a rough sketch of where we collectively and ideally wish to head ourselves and it is helpful to envision it in that way...................however it is a very rough sketch. And that is looking at it from the positive side of things......................the problem we are seeing now is the negative consequences with the paradigm as presently lived with its inordinate emphasis on the individual (this is my view) at the expense of the collective WE, factoring in Gaiia - the collective we is being sacrificed for the individual. The system is out of balance.

I did not realize that is what I had said but that is exactly right! WE are ONE being having an experience of differing variables within the same 'time-range' and the whole goal (driven by the energy-vibration of thought intention) is to simply see where the different choices would take each unit of the collective us ..

...but saying it the simple way sounds like someone is whacked out of their mind and is not as easy to follow as your above train of thought-

which explanation would be easier for you (each person) to understand...

jeannacav
26th December 2010, 22:16
I think this is all about individuals.
I think the collective is the sum of individuals.
this is radically different from a tribe behaving in a collective way because of an agreed-upon set of umm what- to- call- it 'rules'.

To move into a different paradigm, we must all 'put our own houses in order' meaning live in a way we find best, and this will create a consensus collective reality.

----
When I was in my 20's I took a long bicycle trip.
This was before people did that sort of thing.
After 6 or 7 weeks of getting places by bike and making the daily choice of how fast or where to ride, or any number of things, I was different.
When I returned, I had no way to express how I felt, but here is how I put it.
"I am not sure I want to be civilized".
What I really meant was I wanted to be out of this paradigm.
I could see the shallowness of everything around me.
For years, the only thing that could give me a break was serious music, because it opened a portal in my brain and I was transported to other dimensions.

It is still hard for me to be IN this society.
(You know, no cell phone, linux operating system, searching for free energy, talking with trees and small animals as friends.)
And, I must admit I am a little concerned that other societies cannot cut it for me either.
(Goodness, I made myself sound weird!)
I see no reason to consider living in a world where individuals are less than sovereign or where they are unable to show mutual respect.
So, I am looking for a place, or a group of others who want to create that place of individual sovereignty.

Hi faluting strange,

jeanna

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 22:21
I did not realize that is what I had said but that is exactly right! WE are ONE being having an experience of differing variables within the same 'time-range' and the whole goal (driven by the energy-vibration of thought intention) is to simply see where the different choices would take each unit of the collective us ..

...but saying it the simple way sounds like someone is whacked out of their mind and is not as easy to follow as your above train of thought-

which explanation would be easier for you (each person) to understand...

Ha Ha I am Totally Willing to run the risk of sounding 'whacked out of my mind" in my admittedly crude attempts to talk about elusive and slippery subjects such as these! I have no idea whatsoever which way of communicating is easier to understand.................as I have said the language itself is breaking under the weight and strain!! One thing I thought is granted history has told us that some - again using Buddha as an example, there are others of course - have actually trod these paths,
and successfully dealt with these complex and important matters..........................................
and their lives stand as examples of options available to us if we so chose. The problem is one of magnitude - although the problems we face today are similar to the problems always faced by human beings throughout recorded history - the sheer scale of the problems I believe is, to my knowledge, unprecedented. The sheer scale of the problem would seem to require a much more ambitious "solution" or "example" in order to have a countervailing impact than those posed by individuals at different crucial junctures in human history in the past.

xbusymom
26th December 2010, 22:31
I think this is all about individuals.
I think the collective is the sum of individuals.
this is radically different from a tribe behaving in a collective way because of an agreed-upon set of umm what- to- call- it 'rules'.

To move into a different paradigm, we must all 'put our own houses in order' meaning live in a way we find best, and this will create a consensus collective reality.

----
When I was in my 20's I took a long bicycle trip.
This was before people did that sort of thing.
After 6 or 7 weeks of getting places by bike and making the daily choice of how fast or where to ride, or any number of things, I was different.
When I returned, I had no way to express how I felt, but here is how I put it.
"I am not sure I want to be civilized".
What I really meant was I wanted to be out of this paradigm.
I could see the shallowness of everything around me.
For years, the only thing that could give me a break was serious music, because it opened a portal in my brain and I was transported to other dimensions.

It is still hard for me to be IN this society.
(You know, no cell phone, linux operating system, searching for free energy, talking with trees and small animals as friends.)
And, I must admit I am a little concerned that other societies cannot cut it for me either.
(Goodness, I made myself sound weird!)
I see no reason to consider living in a world where individuals are less than sovereign or where they are unable to show mutual respect.
So, I am looking for a place, or a group of others who want to create that place of individual sovereignty.

Hi faluting strange,

jeanna

yes, I think everyone is looking for that but, unless you (anyone) are able to just pick up and move to/create a 'intentional community', like-minded people are just too far away from each other to make any real headway...

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 22:40
yes, I think everyone is looking for that but, unless you (anyone) are able to just pick up and move to/create a 'intentional community', like-minded people are just too far away from each other to make any real headway...

So xbusymom do you believe that it is impossible for us to work with others to make real headway towards a number of things we are discussing in this thread unless we are able to live physically together in a more or less conventional community, whatever it is called?

xbusymom
26th December 2010, 22:45
Ha Ha I am Totally Willing to run the risk of sounding 'whacked out of my mind" in my admittedly crude attempts to talk about elusive and slippery subjects such as these! I have no idea whatsoever which way of communicating is easier to understand.................as I have said the language itself is breaking under the weight and strain!! One thing I thought is granted history has told us that some - again using Buddha as an example, there are others of course - have actually trod these paths,
and successfully dealt with these complex and important matters..........................................
and their lives stand as examples of options available to us if we so chose. The problem is one of magnitude - although the problems we face today are similar to the problems always faced by human beings throughout recorded history - the sheer scale of the problems I believe is, to my knowledge, unprecedented. The sheer scale of the problem would seem to require a much more ambitious "solution" or "example" in order to have a countervailing impact than those posed by individuals at different crucial junctures in human history in the past.

I agree, and I am also past the point of caring what anyone thinks of me for how I choose to say things that I know are truth...

you are also right about the extreme volume of change coming... unless you believe that it is all/only an individual choice for yourself (the mandelbrot theory)... but aren't we digressing here??

maybe the question of whether we CAN escape the control paradigm should be whether we WANT TO bad enough to create our own individual reality with our daily choices of what we give our attention to...

whether we follow along with the company's procedures or society's rules/laws... or NOT. I think being awake and aware is simply the forethought of the status quo consenquences, or if we are willing to go thru the results of a decided action to the other side of our created reality.

jeannacav
26th December 2010, 22:54
yes, I think everyone is looking for that but, unless you (anyone) are able to just pick up and move to/create a 'intentional community', like-minded people are just too far away from each other to make any real headway...

I must have made this unclear.
I am NOT suggesting that anyone should or even can move to an intentional community.

In fact Avalon forum is a kind of community I am talking about.
We do not know what we even look like, but we are talking with each other about matters that WE find important.
etc.
No travel to another community is needed.

And, I am suggesting the way to do this is to live ones life truly and others will join.

thank you,

jeanna

Ty
26th December 2010, 22:58
there have been times of radical change in human history and in the history of the earth that were not wrought by human design, that is by the conscious mind making a "To Do" list and checking off the items on the list.

So true. There are no doubt many factors contributing to the major shifts in human history, two of the largest being greed and technology. Since the fall of the Roman Empire, technology has been a key ingredient in transitioning from the Dark Ages to the Middle Ages and then to the Industrial Age. The Information Age is likewise being driven by technology and this, I think, will contribute largely to collapsing the Nation State paradigm.


I too believe massive change is on its way in now whether we like it, participate in it consciously one way or the other, or not.

But because I believe that we actually have co-created the current situation, we could also create something else better and new................

I'm not sure what you mean that we co-created this paradigm. Naturally, it had to come from somewhere and the US does have founding documents so in that sense, yes, the primary system we are living under here was intentionally created. And it has been intentionally modified over the years. So in that sense, yes. We co-created it. But I doubt you are referring to that.

If (when) this paradigm falls, the prevailing conditions will not, I fear, be conducive to willful creation of something better and new. The existing powers will be doing everything they can to retain their hold. They will not step down voluntarily so that another system can take their place.

Transition periods, the shifting of power, in history are rarely peaceful. I don't see this one being any different.


Some think that our lives live us (our genes, as one example, are expressing mysterious and relentless elemental truths about us THROUGH our minds and bodies ) rather than us living our lives.

"Life is what happens while you're busy making other plans." - John Lennon

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 23:07
I agree that the element of HOW MUCH DO WE WISH TO CHANGE OUR REALITY drives this whole thing. When people get really up against the wall so to speak, that is when change can happen, though that point comes at different junctures for each person. OK to summarize, first there is the WAKENING process wherein people become more tuned into themselves, the role they play in the collective reality, and what is going on in the world. Then there is the AWARE part which gets to ACTION, i.e. adjustments in daily behavior etc. with a view to fine-tuning one's life in order to more likely realize becoming the better person we wish to be - refining communication with others to share ideas, assist them in clarifying their feelings and adjusting and/or correcting thinking and action as needed - again all with a view towards moving the individual, and to the extent that individuals influence each other, the collective, to a better way of being in the world.

Then, as the collective is communicating on these issues maybe - just maybe, a more clear picture of what an alternate paradigm would look like, with more distinctive features, would emerge. Just maybe........to evoke an image - A GLORIOUS PHOENIX arising from the ashes of our past.

A kind of organic process, a phenomenon of nature so to speak, NOT deliberative, not a reactionary outcome of the usual action/reaction spinning merry-go-round we have been running on for so long...................

something like that

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 23:16
So true. There are no doubt many factors contributing to the major shifts in human history, two of the largest being greed and technology. Since the fall of the Roman Empire, technology has been a key ingredient in transitioning from the Dark Ages to the Middle Ages and then to the Industrial Age. The Information Age is likewise being driven by technology and this, I think, will contribute largely to collapsing the Nation State paradigm.



I'm not sure what you mean that we co-created this paradigm. Naturally, it had to come from somewhere and the US does have founding documents so in that sense, yes, the primary system we are living under here was intentionally created. And it has been intentionally modified over the years. So in that sense, yes. We co-created it. But I doubt you are referring to that.

If (when) this paradigm falls, the prevailing conditions will not, I fear, be conducive to willful creation of something better and new. The existing powers will be doing everything they can to retain their hold. They will not step down voluntarily so that another system can take their place.

Transition periods, the shifting of power, in history are rarely peaceful. I don't see this one being any different.



"Life is what happens while you're busy making other plans." - John Lennon

I think we created this reality whether consciously (only very superficially so) or unconsciously (more likely this is the level at which we created it) ..................... and because I believe we created it MOSTLY BY MISTAKE we could create something else as well.....maybe even something better. There have been attempts to tweak this thing for quite awhile with varying groups vying for control, and overall, though on one level, the most superficial - things seemingly getting better for the individual - on the macro scale as I said improvements in the lot of the individual have been at the expense of the whole Gaiaa and this is getting worse to the point that the existence of the Gaiaa is threatened.

Again I am not talking about wilfully imposing some set of ideas on the chaos - this is what TPTB are doing and I believe that ultimately in the face of the creativity of chaos and nature, they will be unsuccessful though they will not give up without a fight! I am talking about creating a more fertile environment for another kind of change - a kind of sea-change that engages our very active, very imaginative, very creative and VERY POWERFUL UNCONSCIOUS selves on some kind of collective consciousness, if you will, level. Facilitating change - not reappropriating and egoistically trying to harness and redirect for the same old EGOISTIC purposes that has been our collective dilemma.

Anyway this is just an emerging concept.

I agree that radical change is rarely peaceful unfortunately - and think we are in for a rough ride.

xbusymom
26th December 2010, 23:17
So xbusymom do you believe that it is impossible for us to work with others to make real headway towards a number of things we are discussing in this thread unless we are able to live physically together in a more or less conventional community, whatever it is called?

no not impossible, just not as quick as I would have liked it to be... I have to constantly remember- "baby-steps"

I also keep being reminded to 'get your house in order' ... looking at this from several different perspectives... this could mean...

clean up your living area (your home-address)
un-toxify the house for your spirit (your body-house)...
organize or clarify the energy environment of your thought-structure (your mind)
clean up the bigger housing unit (the planet)
correct the disheveled structure of the universe-cosmos (re-organize the harmonics of the dimension)

somehow I beginning to think we will not make real progress /change until we get this clean-up accomplished on whatever level (or maybe all )

astrid
26th December 2010, 23:21
Yep... its amazing what the human spirit can do when faced with SERIOUS adversity, and when they group together , welll.....
I think it boils down in part to most forgetting how powerful and creative we are. BUT thankfully, and very encouragingly we are now starting to see more and more evidence of peoples, NOT just whinging about how bad things are, (let face it we all do it) but of talking about HOW THE **** we are going to dig ourselves out of this mess!!
I often look at the micro to gauge what is happening in the macro, its happening, and RIGHT HERE Is proof of this.

( i just posted another thread on an article on how to set up peoples banks, without wall st , fits in the same theme as this)

Ty
26th December 2010, 23:25
THAT is a very interesting concept that you have introduced.................first that the collective WE is an illusion. I say to you - how do you know that to be absolutely true?

I don't. That's why I said "I think..." At any rate, my primary reason for saying it is to continue the line of thought in recent posts on this thread. Specifically:

xbusymom: "each person would choose different things to do differently in their lives, so the collective WE isn't really on the same page anyway... "

Ahkenaten: "should we perhaps consider what Ba Ba Ra said about focusing on the individual who in turn focuses their energies on becoming the very best person they can be, and in that way, bootstrapping all of us upward"

If the collective WE isn't on the same page, what is it that makes it a collective WE? Wouldn't all of the indivduals need to be striving for the same end? It seems to me as if they would, and the thread has progressed to the realization that probably isn't the case. So I guess in a very loose way we could say there's a collective WE that seeks something different, something better. But I would argue it is a very weak bond holding the collective together if that something being sought isn't a shared vision.


I do believe that the Buddhist model and the Hindu model upon which it is based, do imply at least that the collective effects of meritorious individual lives lived does radically effect the very cosmos, or energetic field if you will.

I don't know if that's true or not. But I do have a friend who is Buddhist and I know that it is the individual and the way he or she has lived his or her life that determines where they end up when reincarnated.


And there may even be other interpretations or understandings in this regard that relate to Christianity and other religious philosophies that raise the bar from the individual meritocracy to the collective energetic.

None that I've ever come across.


the problem we are seeing now is the negative consequences with the paradigm as presently lived with its inordinate emphasis on the individual (this is my view) at the expense of the collective WE, factoring in Gaiia - the collective we is being sacrificed for the individual. The system is out of balance.

Have you studied any systems that focus on the collective instead of the individual? I'm not aware of any that have worked as well as ours. And if we are emphasizing the individual more now it is a return to the roots of the system where the individual was paramount.

The first government we had in the US was a collective effort and it failed miserably. William Bradford, the first Governor of the new land, writes of the Pilgrim's experiment with collectivism/socialism, which was mandated by their sponsors in London. This was the first year in the new land [bracketed comments are mine]...


"The experience that was had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanity of that conceit of Plato's and other ancients applauded by some of later times; that the taking away of property [individual ownership] and bringing in community into a commonwealth [collective ownership] would make them happy and flourishing; as if they were wiser than God. For this community (so far as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For the young men, that were most able and fit for labour and service, did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men's wives and children without any recompense."

And what happened after collectivism was replaced by capitalism and the concept of private property?

"This had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been by any means the Governor or any other could use, and saved him a great deal of trouble, and gave far better content."

The Pilgrims soon found they had more food than they could eat, so they set up trading posts and exchanged goods with the Indians. The profits they realized allowed them to pay off their debts to the merchants in London.

As nice as "sharing and cooperation" sound, I believe collectives fail because when push comes to shove, many people will act in their own best interest, not the best interest of the group. It requires a large degree of selflessness in everyone and too few humans are currently wired that way. Maybe we'll evolve to that point but I have my doubts. If a group like the Pilgrims, in their dire situation couldn't make it work, I have to wonder if anyone can.

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 23:28
no not impossible, just not as quick as i would have liked it to be... I have to constantly remember- "baby-steps"

i also keep being reminded to 'get your house in order' ... Looking at this from several different perspectives... This could mean...

Clean up your living area (your home-address)
un-toxify the house for your spirit (your body-house)...
Organize or clarify the energy environment of your thought-structure (your mind)
clean up the bigger housing unit (the planet)
correct the disheveled structure of the universe-cosmos (re-organize the harmonics of the dimension)

somehow i beginning to think we will not make real progress /change until we get this clean-up accomplished on whatever level (or maybe all )

spring house cleaning is definitely in order!!!

¤=[Post Update]=¤


Yep... its amazing what the human spirit can do when faced with SERIOUS adversity, and when they group together , well.....
I think it boils down in part to most forgetting how powerful and creative we are. BUT thankfully, and very encouragingly we are now starting to see more and more evidence of peoples, NOT just whinging about how bad things are, (let face it we all do it) but of talking about HOW THE **** we are going to dig ourselves out of this mess!!
I often look at the micro to gauge what is happening in the macro, its happening, and RIGHT HERE Is proof of this.

( i just posted another thread on an article on how to set up peoples banks, without wall st , fits in the same theme as this)

Yes people setting up alternative banking systems is definitely part of the picture and a practical way to address some big problems and IT CAN BE DONE, HAS BEEN DONE and IS BEING DONE

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 23:33
I don't. That's why I said "I think..." At any rate, my primary reason for saying it is to continue the line of thought in recent posts on this thread. Specifically:

xbusymom: "each person would choose different things to do differently in their lives, so the collective WE isn't really on the same page anyway... "

Ahkenaten: "should we perhaps consider what Ba Ba Ra said about focusing on the individual who in turn focuses their energies on becoming the very best person they can be, and in that way, bootstrapping all of us upward"

If the collective WE isn't on the same page, what is it that makes it a collective WE? Wouldn't all of the indivduals need to be striving for the same end? It seems to me as if they would, and the thread has progressed to the realization that probably isn't the case. So I guess in a very loose way we could say there's a collective WE that seeks something different, something better. But I would argue it is a very weak bond holding the collective together if that something being sought isn't a shared vision.



I don't know if that's true or not. But I do have a friend who is Buddhist and I know that it is the individual and the way he or she has lived his or her life that determines where they end up when reincarnated.



None that I've ever come across.



Have you studied any systems that focus on the collective instead of the individual? I'm not aware of any that have worked as well as ours. And if we are emphasizing the individual more now it is a return to the roots of the system where the individual was paramount.

The first government we had in the US was a collective effort and it failed miserably. William Bradford, the first Governor of the new land, writes of the Pilgrim's experiment with collectivism/socialism, which was mandated by their sponsors in London. This was the first year in the new land [bracketed comments are mine]...



As nice as "sharing and cooperation" sound, I believe collectives fail because when push comes to shove, many people will act in their own best interest, not the best interest of the group. It requires a large degree of selflessness in everyone and too few humans are currently wired that way. Maybe we'll evolve to that point but I have my doubts. If a group like the Pilgrims, in their dire situation couldn't make it work, I have to wonder if anyone can.

Thanks for the clarification! Is that a quote from Bradford's book about the history of the Pilgrims at Plymouth Plantation? That was the first book in American History!! I agree about collectives and the inevitable emergence of self-interest. Talk to your Buddhist friend and see if he/she thinks that on the energetic level the individual's 'advancement' also interconnects with the different realms, spirit worlds or dimensions, that we inhabit. It was my understanding that to a certain extent, the individuals contribute to the betterment of the collective we, and for example that is what the Bodhissatva vow is about. But I am no savant. When I speak of a collective WE I am not speaking of a political entity or on that level, I am speaking energetically.

And consistent with that, I was not speaking about people being ideologically, politically, ethnically, religiously, or philosophically on the same page and therefor of one mind - I think on an energetic level we are of one mind, the human species-mind, and that is the level I am envisioning the potential of positive change occurring on.......a big stretch no doubt, but considering the alternatives and what we are up against, well worth the effort I think!!

With respect to political/social systems and theories I am not aware of ANY including so-called socialism or communism, that have successfully achieved their ostensible goal of the advancement of the collective.............

The struggle seems to have been in recorded history, between groups vying for control over land, and within groups, for control over the hierarchical pyramidical structures which persist in so-called democracies etc.

Ty
26th December 2010, 23:46
Hi jeanna,

I know the feeling you had after your bicycle trip. I've had it three times, all when I was younger.

The first was with the help of some hallucinogenics while sitting one a forrested hill considering the world. Something clicked. I could see the oneness, I could feel the oneness. It was like a doorway had been opened and I could peer into the innerworkings of the structure of life.

The second time was in college. I went to a very liberal college in AZ. It was their policy to divide the freshman class up into groups of 12 or so and each group to psend 3 weeks in the wilderness, with a guide of course. My group went to the Grand Canyon. 3 weeks hiking into and through the Grand Canyon, the last three days of which were spend in solitude, fasting. Fasting was optionaly but isolation was required of everyone. We could keep a journal but couldn't take books or anything else to help pass the time. Just me myself and I for 3 days in a side canyon, confined to a fairly small area so not to encounter my neighbor. Youo look at yourself preety deeply in that situation.

The third time was when sitting at my desk at work, reading one of Carlos Cataneda's books after a 3 week vacation. "What am I doing here?" I remember asking. This isn't what it's all about.

But life kept bearing down on me and now here I am 30 years later wondering where the time went and why I didn't do more with it, take more chances, try a different road. Too late now though so I embrace the paradigm and focus on the positive aspects of it.

C'est la vie

Individual sovereignty is what one of my most influential authors predicts will replace the current paradigm. James Dale Davidson's "The Sovereign Individual" is a very enlightening read.

Ty

Ahkenaten
26th December 2010, 23:50
I agree with the concepts embodied in the "Sovereign Individual" but colloquially the term was hijacked last Spring by a bunch of phonies with their so-called sovereign citizen movement - so as long as we use the term as the dictionary defines it that is fine with me!

xbusymom
26th December 2010, 23:52
Ahkenaten: "should we perhaps consider what Ba Ba Ra said about focusing on the individual who in turn focuses their energies on becoming the very best person they can be, and in that way, bootstrapping all of us upward"

If the collective WE isn't on the same page, what is it that makes it a collective WE? Wouldn't all of the indivduals need to be striving for the same end? It seems to me as if they would, and the thread has progressed to the realization that probably isn't the case. So I guess in a very loose way we could say there's a collective WE that seeks something different, something better. But I would argue it is a very weak bond holding the collective together if that something being sought isn't a shared vision.


...
Have you studied any systems that focus on the collective instead of the individual? ...


the only collective mindset that comes to mind is the hive-mind of the insect world- ants, bees, and the like are all able to sacrifice the individual for the good of the group- there is no individual except for the one ruler of each tribe.


As nice as "sharing and cooperation" sound, I believe collectives fail because when push comes to shove, many people will act in their own best interest, not the best interest of the group. It requires a large degree of selflessness in everyone and too few humans are currently wired that way. Maybe we'll evolve to that point but I have my doubts. If a group like the Pilgrims, in their dire situation couldn't make it work, I have to wonder if anyone can.

maybe this is just the exact paradox we have to correct... we individuals- as single gears of the whole mechanism- cannot be more or less important than the whole thing. and we have to have the equality (and respect for that equality) for each 'part-ner' to be able to function correctly in the whole "running of the machine", if one part in a car breaks down - it does effect the other parts and the whole car runs bad.

so in order for the collective to work right - we have to have each individual be the best he can be separately... (there again working into the mandlebrot theory)

Ty
27th December 2010, 00:07
Thanks for the clarification! Is that a quote from Bradford's book about the history of the Pilgrims at Plymouth Plantation? That was the first book in American History!!

The quoted passages are from his book. The whole passage is from a site I found discussing it. Don't remember which though.


The struggle seems to have been in recorded history, between groups vying for control over land, and within groups, for control over the hierarchical pyramidical structures which persist in so-called democracies etc.

Yes, unfortunately. I have to wonder how much of it is genetic, left over from our "survival of the fittest" beginnings.

Ty
27th December 2010, 00:23
maybe this is just the exact paradox we have to correct... we individuals- as single gears of the whole mechanism- cannot be more or less important than the whole thing. and we have to have the equality (and respect for that equality) for each 'part-ner' to be able to function correctly in the whole "running of the machine", if one part in a car breaks down - it does effect the other parts and the whole car runs bad.

I agree that is the problem keeping collective modes of organizing human activity from working well. But I don't think it is something we will see change much in our lifetimes. We can influence ourselves in one direction or another. It is far harder to influence someone else. For the most part, I view it as a waste of effort.

Which returns me to a remark I made earlier - I think the "collective WE" are too few to have an impact. Though I would love to be proven wrong...

Ahkenaten
27th December 2010, 00:52
add to this that some of our fellow Avalonians (i.e. Observer) believe that our reality is controlled by reptilian beings from another dimension and has been since time immemorial......................

it's enough to make a grown man cry!!!

sygh
27th December 2010, 01:28
Ahkenaten,

Yes, but means of communication can be restricted by money, and the rules applying to the internet are changing into the new cloud configuration. It's going to cost. Websites will have to start chargeing their patrons a higher fee for usage. The economy is actually calling for people to turn off their TVs and turn on their computers.

Not trying to be a bummer here but the above doesn't bode well for the financially strained.

xbusymom
27th December 2010, 01:53
Ahkenaten,

Not trying to be a bummer here but the above doesn't bode well for the financially strained.

which is why it is such a good idea to start now to get an alternate economy going in the local communities...

http://www.timebanks.org/
http://www.ithacahours.com/
http://www.localharvest.org/farmers-markets/
http://www.craigslist.org/about/sites
http://www.findafleamarket.com/STATES.htm

any ideas on how to use these alternate methods to keep local economies running smoothly for needed supplies and services will greatly improve the chances of being able to weather the storm...

that is the non-compliance we need to focus on - don't allow the contrived fiat-economic crash to affect you...

gryphynsclaw
27th December 2010, 02:54
Interesting ideas, however from my simple perspective it seems the foundation has to be secured by two points before anything can be built upon it.
First as stated in the original post is stop reacting. Consider, observe, and decide. Even in these posts I see or I think I see reaction... and when it comes right down to it control is run by planned reaction. Pull this string and the majority are going to move their left arm, the ones that don't will be in conflict with the ones that do. Maximize the conflict, integrate a 3rd or 8th variable and in the end everyone does what we want them to anyway or at the very least don't pay attention to what we are doing. It all starts with reaction.

Second, stop being so greedy, and that is not just money, food etc. Help your fellow man, it doesn't have to be a great sacrifice, but it should be something that you do go out of your way to do.

Awake or not if these two things could be put forward with out ego driven self advancement, the world would change, control would loss its grip and then civilization could move in a non-destructive way.

Brad

Galaxy
27th December 2010, 03:19
Interesting ideas, however from my simple perspective it seems the foundation has to be secured by two points before anything can be built upon it.
First as stated in the original post is stop reacting. Consider, observe, and decide. Even in these posts I see or I think I see reaction... and when it comes right down to it control is run by planned reaction. Pull this string and the majority are going to move their left arm, the ones that don't will be in conflict with the ones that do. Maximize the conflict, integrate a 3rd or 8th variable and in the end everyone does what we want them to anyway or at the very least don't pay attention to what we are doing. It all starts with reaction.

Second, stop being so greedy, and that is not just money, food etc. Help your fellow man, it doesn't have to be a great sacrifice, but it should be something that you do go out of your way to do.

Awake or not if these two things could be put forward with out ego driven self advancement, the world would change, control would loss its grip and then civilization could move in a non-destructive way.

Brad

i wish it was that easy

gryphynsclaw
27th December 2010, 03:52
In an effort to avoid misunderstanding, the remark about pulling the string was an example of control not a suggested course of action.

I do see the start as that easy. Because recognizing the way something works is a large part of changing, stopping or improving it. Human reaction is well studied and understood and has been used as a populace control system for a very long time. During that time it has been refined a great deal.

If you will permit me a "simple" example of nature which may or may not be of any use to this discussion.

Consider a birds nest, a structure that is build, with out any engineering or advanced education. A simple intertwining of twigs and grasses. It is not complicated, yet removed from a tree it can be struck with a stick that (a guess) exerts probably 2,000 times the force of its components. Yet you can pick it up after that impact and for the most part or in most cases it will still be functional. To remove another nest, you can examine it, noting any spots where fingers may be pushed through it and with a simple pulling action of less force then its components completely destroy the nest.
Consider the nest a control construct, by applying a striking force as some have stated in this thread you only accomplish drawing attention to your self and your actions. Which can then be incorporated into the control formula and all your work at its destruction becomes only so much more control even if you don't know it.
Yet by simply becoming aware of the control "game" is similar to finding those finger holes where destruction can be accomplished.

Brad

sygh
27th December 2010, 16:54
It would be wonderful to get the World Wide Labor Force to Unite (WWL-FU). If only we could change the gap between the haves and the havenots but here's the thing that bothers me... because everything is so financially intertwined now (which was/is the plan by the way), I firmly believe whatever we try to do through nonpartisipation would be squashed rather quickly -unless the whole world partisipated. You will be poorer and they will be richer.

In the US, we are not going to get any definitive answers as to how many times a mortgage has been sold. The Federal Reserve has been and will continue to back the banks and mortgage companies that defaulted with a blank check. We've got Dobbs and Frank writing the consumer protection plan. How is that possible? International corporations don't have to count on you as a worker, or a consumer. Even our farmlands are incorporated on an international scale. There are people who are starving and would gladly work for peanuts and the product they would make would sell to those who would gladly buy them.

Maybe the most important aspect of changing anything is to first decide what it is we actually want and then follow through.

Ba-ba-Ra
27th December 2010, 17:41
I think we created this reality whether consciously (only very superficially so) or unconsciously (more likely this is the level at which we created it) ..................... and because I believe we created it MOSTLY BY MISTAKE we could create something else as well.....maybe even something better.
Anyway this is just an emerging concept. ..................
.

Perhaps this is what we should be exploring. Start a group that truly believes we are creating this world (If folks want to argue that point, they can start another group that discusses whether or not that concept is true). But if we have a group that believes it - could we explore more fully exactly how and then change it?

I actually am in a small group (5 people) who are doing this locally. It's been a very interesting exploration and we're beginning to connect the dots. So far we are only working on the personal level.

Ahkenaten
27th December 2010, 18:27
OK everyone - as I said in an earlier post I really need to go through all the contributions made to this thread, summarize and post them in one post document. Then perhaps we should consider after letting that summary sit for awhile to gather some moss, whether to proceed as Ba Ba Ra and others have suggested, i.e. set up another group to discuss whether or not any collective WE can change the world, AND - if we agree that is possible, then proceed to "explore more fully exactly how and then change it" as Ba Ba Ra put it in post # 137. I think as a courtesy we might also consider notifying all contributors that WE are taking this to another level. This summary is going to take a few days - there are lots of great ideas here....................I do think it is important to capture all the input so far in one post to share with others!!

In reviewing what has been contributed through today what I think is unusual about the perspective on this thread as compared to many others' efforts along these general lines (people like David Wilcock, etc.) is that we are coming at this issue from the bottom up, i.e. from the perspective of the individual, that is inherently valuing the individual's role in the CREATION, rather than from the TOP DOWN, i.e. arriving at some ideas about universals that could apply and moving those ideas down the intellectual/spiritual/energetic feeding chain from the universal to the individual................

Our bottom-up approach is very distinctive and has, I believe, potential for making real and important contributions to the entire large discussion about WHERE WE ARE HEADED AS A SPECIES DURING THIS TIME OF PROFOUND CHANGE. Thank you again, everyone, for your thoughtful and insightful contributions to this important and provocative discussion!!

PHARAOH
27th December 2010, 18:55
NancyV, it seams from your post that like most of us you went from one way of living to the extreme opposite. Don't feel bad as we've all experianced this in some way, form or fashion of some sort (normal). However as Xbusymom stated these were my suggestions. We would all love to believe that "FEAR" has nothing to do with our decisions but the fact is that we have allowed "FEAR" to determine what courses of action we will take or not. Humans tend to move away from that which they percieve to be hurtful or painful to that which we perceive to be more pleasurable which is why we go along with the programs. Your post spoke to this in greater detail. As for your 4 husbands signing up for Military service; this is no excuse to obey orders if they knew what they were doing was wrong. Which went back to my example of doing what the boss tells you or else. The fact is we are the power! And we can choose to say NO at anytime. Will thier be consequences? Maybe but that is what empowered people do at any cost. This is true freedom.

P.S. Keep in mind that I always include myself in all of this (WE).

Ahkenaten
27th December 2010, 19:21
It certainly helps, but I think for the sake of completeness it is important to realise that this illusion is a CONSENSUS illusion. For this reason, those of dark intent that have discovered the means to influence the illusion, by proxy (because we ALL create it) have figured out that their modes of control is to delude us (the ones with creative powers) into creating according to their script as opposed to our own.

That is why the awakening is akin to extricating yourself from a fast flowing river. (The “stepping outside” you refer to). Otherwise we are swept along the path of the river – one that has been dammed and manipulated into flowing in an unnatural direction. It is OUR energy however that makes the river flow. It is our intent that directs the flow of the river, but the aim of the dark intent is to “program” situations, through any means appropriate to the social matrix at the time, that encourage us to direct our intent according to their objectives rather than those of our hearts. Our egos are their control levers.



I concur. Yes we can.

Hi John, re: Your Post #65 (sorry it has taken me so long to get back to you on this) Thanks for your thoughtful comments! As a point of clarification, in an attempt to transcend the dualistic good/evil intent box - you mean by "consensus" that we all created it, thus are fully engaged whether we know it or not, am I correct? As a tiny point, generally consensus means everyone coming to some common agreement...............I do not think, other than that we are clearly all engaged on various levels of consciousness in creating our reality that there IS ANY COMMON AGREEMENT - rather the way I see it is that there are various colored threads in a tapestry - but because there is discord in the underlying pattern (no conscious awake and aware common agreement) the tapestry has some pretty harsh and ugly spots. Maybe this tapestry thing is a bad analogy!

So - I would rather avoid the consensus term only because I DO NOT THINK at this point there is a common agreement between us all as co-creators of our reality, and the lack of common agreement is at the root of the problem, i.e. the discord, strife, etc. I am not convinced that the root problem is dualistic or dialectical........I think it runs deeper than that and goes to each of us as individuals, or particles, if you will, of the Creation

What do you think about that? A small point, really - but I thought it significant!

Ahkenaten
27th December 2010, 19:35
NancyV, it seams from your post that like most of us you went from one way of living to the extreme opposite. Don't feel bad as we've all experianced this in some way, form or fashion of some sort (normal). However as Xbusymom stated these were my suggestions. We would all love to believe that "FEAR" has nothing to do with our decisions but the fact is that we have allowed "FEAR" to determine what courses of action we will take or not. Humans tend to move away from that which they percieve to be hurtful or painful to that which we perceive to be more pleasurable which is why we go along with the programs. Your post spoke to this in greater detail. As for your 4 husbands signing up for Military service; this is no excuse to obey orders if they knew what they were doing was wrong. Which went back to my example of doing what the boss tells you or else. The fact is we are the power! And we can choose to say NO at anytime. Will thier be consequences? Maybe but that is what empowered people do at any cost. This is true freedom.

P.S. Keep in mind that I always include myself in all of this (WE).

Hello Pharoah - Thank you for your thoughtful comments. Although I do not pretend to fully understand this and absolutely am not in that frame - it has been suggested that it is possible to operate at a level where the "Battle of Life," i.e. the struggle between good and evil is engaged by individuals who, as warriors or soldiers, sacrifice themselves for what they perceive as the greater good. I have never been able to fully grasp this concept, and in general personally have been opposed to war on principle..................while realizing that there may be times where one must fight.

I referred earlier in this thread to the dialogue between Lord Krishna and Arjuna on this subject - a moving exchange that takes place as two armies of people who are related to one another, face off on the battlefield of a major war.

This subject is very deep and very paradoxical. I do not pretend to fully grasp the import of the discussion - but I will say that it is possible to conceive of a state of being, or frame of mind and a SITUATION wherein one is acting as a warrior, and in that sense, outside of history and a conventional frame.

While of course I agree that individuals can hold to private values and it is morally acceptable - in fact - at times required of a moral being - to refuse unlawful and immoral orders, on the other hand, sometimes outsiders (those not actually engaged in the field of battle) are not in a position to cast judgment on those playing the role of warrior.

This is a VERY DIFFICULT perspective, and the deepest paradox...........but I think it is something that we must look at.

I respectfully suggest you read Juan Mascaro's translation of the Bhagavad Gita (Penguin books) and then you can tell me what you think. I would be VERY interested to hear what you have to say!!

Intraphase
27th December 2010, 19:59
@Teakai


If one is OK with the idea of killing to feed humanity (or just because meat tastes good), then how does one reject the idea of killing for the survival of humanity?
I just don't see how it's reasonable - but was interested in how you justified it to yourself. (And I'm not calling you unreasonable - I'm saying that, to me, the idea is unreasonable.)
Kill the cow because it tastes good, but don't kill the reptillian who wants you dead and has been killing you and yours slowly for years. (replace reptillian with sociopathic, murderous human if you don't think reptillians exist)

There are many strategies and combinations of strategies for dealing with the Reptilia.
We live on vacuum pressure balance 1/3/23/73 they live on 1/3/24/72. Their basic function is to protect the core functions at 0.1/0.1/99.9/0.8 They protect the cores time keeping functions separating geometry time from flowing time. If you have dealt with them head on and lived its because they are training you to be strong.You might have mentioned they were after / harassing / harming family members. I don't know what to say about that. I truly hope not. If they don't disapprove of you, you are allowed to live (access core occasionally) if they don't approve your toast/dead or your worked like a puppet.

Write out a formal legal case and bill of particulars and demand an "honorable battle" with a "master" don't accept a battle with a masters extended body as a drone reptile. Masters when gathered together use drone bodies to supply mass to a routine battle to terminate a 'core circuit' wired through the inner core boundary before everything is coverted to pure info that can be transported instantly from core to outer boundary roundtrip. You sound like a reasonable and passionate person that's the kind they seek for allies and advice about humans.

Killing a drone reptile is irrelevant.To bring a master close to death draws the other masters because you may be obligated to take its place as a protector of the core functions.The upside is if you kill a master or negotiate a personal treaty with Greater Reptilia you gain access to vacuum pressure 25 where the serious business occurs. Including acquiring sanctuaries bridges and ships. So try not to look at your battle with Reptilia from to close or to far away. Their are "honorable" advantages gained there.

My two favorite Camelot witnesses were the boy who wrote "New Berlin" and "Jessica" who spoke of the beings who travel as crystal ships. The boy warns not to remove the green emeralds, so that the boy who built reptilia isn't destroyed. He also accurately describes the roll out of the machinery(two ghost holes) to manufacture the basic fabrics that form the background environment(timespace vs spacetime). Witness Jessica accurately predicts the results of system wide defeat of Greater Reptilia as a rather heartbreaking confrontation with the wizard of oz - the little boy in old man form doing equations.

In the end there is only thought and action. All else is an information construct including the green line / core dramas. Reptilians value honor and strength and wage war against the opposites of those to protect the cores momentum circuits/pipes. I hate to admit it publicly, but because you raised the logical tangent, I am at peace with them even though I've killed a few drones by accident. It is a different level of the system though. 23 <->24. They have saved me a bunch of times so I am extremely biased, but I do favor the human form first.

Best bet to battle someone using Reptilia assets against you, is gain those assets yourself; and even the playing field. Just my opinion not personal advice. That process is a casebook/bill of particulars, you want reversed, as a writing process and also using whatever energy rhythm management tools used: dreams, meditation, martial arts, painting, jogging, sailing... anything that focuses animal instinct mind.

With practice you can command opponents to stand down with your eyes in focus thereby achieving victory by denying your opponent the battlefield, A real time saver.
Best of All.

:spy::peep::spy:

Ahkenaten
27th December 2010, 20:33
the only collective mindset that comes to mind is the hive-mind of the insect world- ants, bees, and the like are all able to sacrifice the individual for the good of the group- there is no individual except for the one ruler of each tribe.


maybe this is just the exact paradox we have to correct... we individuals- as single gears of the whole mechanism- cannot be more or less important than the whole thing. and we have to have the equality (and respect for that equality) for each 'part-ner' to be able to function correctly in the whole "running of the machine", if one part in a car breaks down - it does effect the other parts and the whole car runs bad.

so in order for the collective to work right - we have to have each individual be the best he can be separately... (there again working into the mandlebrot theory)

Hello Xbusymom - on the Hive mind idea...................many look at that as a negative..............there is something about us humans that emphasizes the individual out of the Hive, i.e. some call it ego, others think of it in other ways. I do not know whether we will merge into a Hive mind again, perhaps through technological advances, but it appears to be ONE conceptual path to transcend the negatives associated with disproportionate emphasis on the individual, or ego..........I do think that if you were to poll people on this they probably would have an instinctive, visceral aversion to the concept though!!

Ahkenaten
27th December 2010, 20:38
Ahkenaten,

Yes, but means of communication can be restricted by money, and the rules applying to the internet are changing into the new cloud configuration. It's going to cost. Websites will have to start chargeing their patrons a higher fee for usage. The economy is actually calling for people to turn off their TVs and turn on their computers.

Not trying to be a bummer here but the above doesn't bode well for the financially strained.

Yes I agree Sygh and these technological/informational/economic issues will exert an enormous influence on people's awareness and thinking.................and I am concerned about anything that limits participation in the virtual world that is becoming so key to our increasing interconnectedness and awareness

¤=[Post Update]=¤


In an effort to avoid misunderstanding, the remark about pulling the string was an example of control not a suggested course of action.

I do see the start as that easy. Because recognizing the way something works is a large part of changing, stopping or improving it. Human reaction is well studied and understood and has been used as a populace control system for a very long time. During that time it has been refined a great deal.

If you will permit me a "simple" example of nature which may or may not be of any use to this discussion.

Consider a birds nest, a structure that is build, with out any engineering or advanced education. A simple intertwining of twigs and grasses. It is not complicated, yet removed from a tree it can be struck with a stick that (a guess) exerts probably 2,000 times the force of its components. Yet you can pick it up after that impact and for the most part or in most cases it will still be functional. To remove another nest, you can examine it, noting any spots where fingers may be pushed through it and with a simple pulling action of less force then its components completely destroy the nest.
Consider the nest a control construct, by applying a striking force as some have stated in this thread you only accomplish drawing attention to your self and your actions. Which can then be incorporated into the control formula and all your work at its destruction becomes only so much more control even if you don't know it.
Yet by simply becoming aware of the control "game" is similar to finding those finger holes where destruction can be accomplished.

Brad

Gryphynsclaw I love the bird's nest metaphor...............complex but simple at the same time

Ahkenaten
27th December 2010, 20:46
It would be wonderful to get the World Wide Labor Force to Unite (WWL-FU). If only we could change the gap between the haves and the havenots but here's the thing that bothers me... because everything is so financially intertwined now (which was/is the plan by the way), I firmly believe whatever we try to do through nonpartisipation would be squashed rather quickly -unless the whole world partisipated. You will be poorer and they will be richer.

In the US, we are not going to get any definitive answers as to how many times a mortgage has been sold. The Federal Reserve has been and will continue to back the banks and mortgage companies that defaulted with a blank check. We've got Dobbs and Frank writing the consumer protection plan. How is that possible? International corporations don't have to count on you as a worker, or a consumer. Even our farmlands are incorporated on an international scale. There are people who are starving and would gladly work for peanuts and the product they would make would sell to those who would gladly buy them.

Maybe the most important aspect of changing anything is to first decide what it is we actually want and then follow through.

Sygh - unfortunately for the evil machinations of TPTB though everything is interconnected on the economic level, it is a decentralized model and being a decentralized model, it does not lend itself to top-down controls. This is why TPTB are in a panic right now, things have gotton out of hand so to speak, events on the ground are moving much quicker than they thought - and they want to seize the moment and introduce top-down controls in the form of international currencies, etc. to consolidate their pyramid control structure with the all-seeing eye on the top!! My personal belief is that they have lost control of the system - as I have stated elsewhere, and it is my most fervent and sincere hope for all of our sake - history is ahead of their game, and they have lost it. I do not believe they will be able to impose a strict top-down control system in any form, though clearly that is the intention - because their timing is off, and moreover their entire control paradigm, getting back to the "removing consent" is based on a distorted, self-serving (self in the sense of the lower aspect of humans even hybrid reptilians, the Self BEING THE EGO) and incorrect understanding of the greater reality within which we all exist - a reality that is based upon a fundamental, energetic interconnectedness (my belief which I cannot prove) of all beings.

As the paradigm falls, and I feel what we are witnessing is the death throes of an ill-conceived abomination of nature - something new and brighter CAN rise from its ashes, bringing us back again to the exhortation to WAKE UP etc.

Ahkenaten
27th December 2010, 20:59
@Teakai



There are many strategies and combinations of strategies for dealing with the Reptilia.
We live on vacuum pressure balance 1/3/23/73 they live on 1/3/24/72.
Their basic function is to protect the core functions at 0.1/0.1/99.9/0.8
They protect the cores time keeping functions separating geometry time from flowing time.
If you have dealt with them head on and lived its because they are training you to be strong.
You might have mentioned they were after/harassing/harming family members. I don't know what to say about that.
I truly hope not. If they don't disapprove of you, you are allowed to live (access core occasionally) if they don't approve your toast/dead
or your worked like a puppet. Write out a formal legal case and bill of particulars and demand an "honorable battle" with a "master"
don't accept a battle with a masters extended body as a drone reptile. Masters when gathered together use drone bodies to supply mass
to a routine battle to terminate a 'core circuit' wired through the inner core boundary before everything is coverted to pure info that can be transported
instantly from core to outer boundary roundtrip. You sound like a reasonable and passionate person that's the kind they seek for allies and advice about humans.

Killing a drone reptile is irrelevant.
To bring a master close to death draws the other masters because you may be obligated to take its place as a protector of the core functions.
The upside is if you kill a master or negotiate a personal treaty with Greater Reptilia you gain access to vacuum pressure 25 where the serious business occurs.
Including acquiring sanctuaries bridges and ships. So try not to look at your battle with Reptilia from to close or to far away. Their are "honorable" advantages gained there.

My two favorite Camelot witnesses were the boy who wrote "New Berlin" and "Jessica" who spoke of the beings who travel as crystal ships.
The boy warns not to remove the green emeralds, so that the boy who built reptilia isn't destroyed. He also accurately describes the roll out of the
machinery(two ghost holes) to manufacture the basic fabrics that form the background environment(timespace vs spacetime). Witness Jessica accurately predicts
the results of system wide defeat of Greater Reptilia as a rather heartbreaking confrontation with the wizard of oz - the little boy in old man form doing equations.

In the end there is only thought and action. All else is an information construct including the green line / core dramas.
Reptilians value honor and strength and wage war against the opposites of those to protect the cores momentum circuits/pipes.
I hate to admit it publicly, but because you raised the logical tangent, I am at peace with them even though I've killed a few drones by accident.
It is a different level of the system though. 23 <->24. They have saved me a bunch of times so I am extremely biased, but I do favor the human form first.

Best be,t to battle someone using Reptilia assets against you, is gain those assets yourself; and even the playing field. Just my opinion not personal advice.
That process is a casebook/bill of particulars, you want reversed, as a writing process and also using whatever energy rhythm management tools used: dreams, meditation,
martial arts, painting, jogging, sailing... anything that focuses animal instinct mind.

With practice you can command opponents to stand down with your eyes in focus thereby achieving victory by denying your opponent the battlefield, A real time saver.
Best of All.


p.s. seems funny to speak of such things publicly

Mr.Intraphase - I DO not see how this topic is germane to the thread "Can We Withdraw Consent from the Control Paradigm?"

NancyV
27th December 2010, 22:14
NancyV, it seams from your post that like most of us you went from one way of living to the extreme opposite. Don't feel bad as we've all experianced this in some way, form or fashion of some sort (normal). However as Xbusymom stated these were my suggestions. We would all love to believe that "FEAR" has nothing to do with our decisions but the fact is that we have allowed "FEAR" to determine what courses of action we will take or not. Humans tend to move away from that which they percieve to be hurtful or painful to that which we perceive to be more pleasurable which is why we go along with the programs. Your post spoke to this in greater detail. As for your 4 husbands signing up for Military service; this is no excuse to obey orders if they knew what they were doing was wrong. Which went back to my example of doing what the boss tells you or else. The fact is we are the power! And we can choose to say NO at anytime. Will thier be consequences? Maybe but that is what empowered people do at any cost. This is true freedom.

P.S. Keep in mind that I always include myself in all of this (WE).
Thank you for your comments, Pharaoh. I don't feel bad and not sure why you would think I would. A bit of projection maybe?

I do agree that there is often an element of fear in many situations, which is a natural human animal instinct. But it is how you react to that fear which determines if you are courageous or dis-empowered. Fear as a natural instinct can be acknowledged, controlled and overcome or one can dwell on it, allow it to dis-empower himself and be unable to act in an effective manner. Perhaps the larger percentage of humans allow fear to control them, but there is a percentage who can ignore the fear and do things the normal person would not be able to do.

As far as my 3 husbands who were in the military, (3 of my 4 husbands were soldiers, the other was an artist.) each of them knew what they were doing, did it willingly and I did not hear one of them ever use the "excuse" that they were following orders to justify any of their actions. You see, these were (and are) men who accept their own responsibility for all their actions in life. I prefer to have friends (and husbands) who don't whine, who are not constantly dwelling on fear and thinking about fear, and who accept full responsibility for themselves and their lives. Perhaps you are hinting that they SHOULD have disobeyed some orders that YOU think were not moral or ethical. Well, the world doesn't work that way. We don't get to decide what other people decide is right or wrong. So you can spend your time judging people for doing what you consider is wrong or you can accept that they are not like you. I have no problem looking at those whom I might consider to be "evil" and accept that either they don't think they are evil, they LIKE being evil, or they are totally ignorant (in my opinion), or I lack a true understanding of good and evil. But I don't think I can change them and I accept that they will continue to exist in this particular matrix game. Or not.

None of us truly knows the extent of this matrix we live in. It seems to me that a good way to be self empowered is to focus on yourself and your own power, to mind your own business, not try to change others, and not worry about whether others are waking up to some of the realities you think you are waking up to. If they don't opt out from the control paradigm as much as you do, so what. We are each playing our own individual game here even though we may also be playing together, or it appears that we might be playing together at times.

I don't normally play the "WE" game. The only time I truly acknowledge WE is when merging with other beings on other dimensions, but then it's still not really WE, it's ME. Just a bigger me. My point is there really is only one of us, and it's me.

Nancy :)

Ty
27th December 2010, 23:00
Hello Xbusymom - on the Hive mind idea...................there is something about us humans that emphasizes the individual out of the Hive

I think that something is that we are self-aware. Unlike bees, ants, termites and perhaps other insects, we have a sense of self and with that a sense of self-preservation. Other than insects I can't think of another example of self-sacrifice for the greater good anywhere in the animal kingdom. The closest may be when elephants surround their calves to create a nearly impenetrable wall of protection but that's not quite the same thing. That's more like a parent sacrificing himself or herself for a loved one. Not so much for the common good as for another individual.

Teakai
28th December 2010, 00:44
Tekai - thank you again for provoking me to profound thinking on an important subject: I agree that our thinking must be straight and not screwy! We must be strong enough and intellectually honest enough to take criticism from others and reexamine our selves at every point. I repeat - I do not advocate killing reptilians or human beings by the way nor would I advocate that others do so. Not advocating the killing of others is very different than defending oneself against an attack in which some killing might occur. On the other hand I do not advocate the killing of animals either. Not advocating the killing of animals does not to me equate necessarily to being a vegan or a vegetarian - correct me if I am wrong in my logic. To me those two views are not in conflict with one another. I DO think what we are talking about here is the very important personal ethics piece of the bigger puzzle (i.e. the Control Paradigm) - and the equally important piece of accuracy and clarity in the use of language. My language is not very refined or acutely philosophical, but is intended to provide a rough sketch of the concepts.

The way I see it - and this is only one of any number of ethical frames one could use - there is an ethical continuum, if you will with on the extreme left what I call relative situational ethics. That pole includes those decisions made on the fly based on personal whims, impulses, or what is expedient in the moment. A number of personality types we call "criminal" or "sociopaths" often operate from that ethical pole. There is no underlying core or central principles other than doing what the SELF dictates is to the advantage of the SELF to inform action. On the extreme right is the other pole, which I call absolute fundamentalist ethics. What I mean by that is that those operating from that ethical pole believe there is some underlying set of rules, albeit the "10 Commandments" or something else that should be used when making any decisions or taking any action. Neither of these ethical poles necessarily cover all situations where people make decisions or do things on impulse. So I have laid out the poles, the extremes on either end - and then on the horizontal line connecting the poles lies an ethical continuum that flows between those extremes, upon which people may place themselves, or be placed, based on their actions/philosophies reflected in actions.

When it comes to the issue of eating meat for food and I am using that subject only to illustrate a point (or not taking a concrete stand on that issue, as the case may be) anyone will fall on a place on the line representing the ethical continuum consistent with their views on the issue of killing. I suspect that most people fall not on either extreme pole but somewhere along the line between the two. Some people (like me) feel more comfortable with the ambiguity of NOT taking a firm I WILL NOT EAT (kill or allow others to kill) ANIMALS (or fish, or other creatures) than they would feel about dialing themselves across the ethical line towards the extreme right hand side of the continuum, closer to that pole I call the fundamentalist position - OR dialing themselves to the extreme left where one grants oneself permission to do as one pleases in the moment, including killing other living beings! Some people call the extreme left pole NIHILISM. Similarly, I also would not categorically say I will not EVER kill a person either because I cannot guarantee what I would do given a life-threatening situation for me or my family and loved ones. Granted it is not ethically clear-cut, and it is a VERY ambiguous moral position to be in but it IS internally coherent and logical. I suspect there are many that occupy a position somewhere on the line connecting the poles either by conscious choice, or by default. When it comes to the issue of clear-thinking, and attempts to resolve all conflicts ethical, intellectual or otherwise in one's thinking so that one is coherently whole, of course this is an important issue for thinking human beings. Where I and others fall along the line on that particular issue is based on a personal choice one makes - or it is a moral/ethical position occupied by default, purely based on actions one takes without being aware of it.

Having laid out the ethical framework, I DO agree an important part of the Control Paradigm is the values associated with food and eating choices. Making a better world together involves addressing the important issue of food. Clearly fish farming and massive corporate agriculture with genetically modified and systematically contaminated food is NOT the answer and it is not healthy or sustainable - though sometimes I do not know what the word sustainable even means!! I personally think the small grass-roots local, community based sustainable organic farms and gardens is the answer, if there is one, and within that, people coming to an awareness (and clearly this awareness is now growing) that THE CHOICES WE MAKE THE WORLD WE CREATE. I do not believe, however, in dictating values, morals, or principles to others. That is a CORE value to me!! Painful as it is - and critical as our situation may be - I still feel more comfortable with everyone coming to their own conclusions about these matters on their own, not under coercion. So to raise people up, this is what I think the Middle Path is all about and why it is important - NOT dictating to others, instead showing by example. Respecting the differences that exist between people, and recognizing and honoring that people come to their own comfort zone in their own time and in their own way. IDENTIFYING COMMONALITIES and de-emphasizing differences is important. I do think such an awareness is rapidly growing though I do also feel that we may not have enough time to deliberately make the changes nature will require of us if we are to survive and continue to maximize our human potential without completely destroying the earth!

Again, using the dietary subject as an example only for the purposes of discussion, I discussed this issue with a life-long friend of mine that I respect very much yesterday who has been a vegetarian for almost as long as I have known her. She said that she feels these choices are a personal decision. She does not feel that the time to have the discussion about it is when people are "sitting down to eat a steak"! - and she feels that IF THERE ARE OTHER FOOD CHOICES in general, it is in our best interests and in the best interests of other living things and the planet, that we do not eat meat. She does, however eat seafood. That happens to be the point on the ethical line I drew that SHE places herself and it is where she feels comfortable and where she is acting in harmony with the rest of her values, which are not surprisingly, humanitarian, environmentalistic, etc. She would NOT place herself over on the extreme right pole of the ethical continuum because she would NOT use a rigid set of rules and then apply them to the actions of others or use them as a screen through which to view others decisions and actions!

She DOES NOT feel that it is helpful or appropriate to dictate her values to others - and that in fact when one goes to any extreme it often has the effect of eliciting a reactionary response - NOT bringing the other person along. I respect this person VERY much and I am only sharing what she had to say to add to this discussion.

So - in concluding my points about this particular facet of what I consider to be a very important discussion about personal and collective ethics within the whole "Control Paradigm" issue - where I come out thinking this through is that as a practical matter we each fall at some point on the continuum I sketched out. Some other visual model than a line with a pole at either end might help move this discussion along but this is the best I can come up with right now. As we develop together, we can best move forward by envisioning where, ideally, we would like to be as Ba Ba Ra said, and put our focus there and each move towards being the best person we can envision being at the same time maintaining respect for others. In that way, perhaps, with conscious tolerance towards others, we can raise ourselves up, and the inconsistencies and wrinkles in our collective thinking and behavior thereby will become less extreme and hopefully, eventually be ironed out.

Anyway I am still thinking about all of this. As I said, I PERSONALLY (though I do NOT want this discussion to be limited to personalities and personal eccentricities or differences!!) am not especially anti-violence so not taking a firm anti-animal consumption stand is not at all inconsistent within my own value system. I NEVER would engage in any crusade to convert others to my point of view, even if I were to decide to dial myself over further to the right on the model I drew!!



Ahk, I wasn’t criticising, either. Honest. I was simply pointing out an observation and querying your take on it.

And it’s not about ethics, either. Or dietary choice. Or morality. Or personal life choices. Or judgments on the life choices of others.
It’s only about self honesty.

It seems to me that by eating meat one is advocating the killing of animals. You might not be inflicting the death blow, you may not even have given it a great deal of thought, but, by your action you are saying, this is fine by me. You are consenting to the killing, by eating the effects of the killing.
Aren’t you?
Unless you are being held down and force fed against your will, that is.

If you are a person who says – no to killing and you don’t eat meat and you act in a way that supports what you think – then you can reasonably and logically say – no killing the reptillians/psycho humans except maybe only in self defence. Then one is being honest with themselves. Their reasoning and actions are logical. There is integrity.

Or, you can eat meat and you can be fine with that, and you can be "Kill the reptilians”. And you are being honest with yourself and there is integrity.

But when one says OK to killing animals (and if they’re eating it, they’re saying OK to it) – but draws the line at killing the reptilians?
What is the reasoning there?
Why do you think it’s OK to kill the cows and not OK to kill the reptilians – except in self defence?

This isn't a rhetorical question – I am really interested in your answer to this question.

Ahkenaten
28th December 2010, 00:55
I did not say nor did I mean to convey that I am across the board against killing, period, Tekai. I said that, in general I am against violence.By in general, what I was trying to convey is that broadly I am against violence and certainly I would not ACTIVELY AND ENCOURAGE OTHERS TO COMMIT VIOLENT ACTS. And this is where I stand at this point in time. Thus it is not inconsistent for me NOT to take what I consider at this point to be an extreme position (in this case against killing animals - i.e. I presume either vegetarianism or a vegan) on the dietary issue either. This is honest - this is really where I am at this point. And the two positions are not mutually exclusive or contradictory in any way.

P.S. I think that you are setting up a situation of extremes, in other words - either a person is against killing period, across the board no matter who or what it is, regardless of the circumstances and thus in that context can only honestly advocate for non-violence towards any creature OR

conversely, that a person is OK with killing and thus can consistently kill others under any circumstances including eating animals.

This is illogical because it sets up an artificial either/or dichotomy and that is not the only frame in which these issues are to be considered. This is called a logical fallacy. I think it would be helpful in this regard to refer to some texts providing authority and examples of the various logical fallacies which, while seeming to be logical - are not.

I am being honest about where I stand - and it is in an AMBIGUOUS position, not a black/white position on the entire issue. And, I CHOSE to remain silent on the specific subject of when, or if I think that killing in any way might be appropriate (other than to provide some examples like self-defense, etc.) THAT is my choice.

Advocating killing someone or something (you mentioned the idea of killing someone planning mass destruction for example) is very very different than actually engaging in those acts. I would not ADVOCATE that you or anyone else take such action - that is your choice. Conversely, I would not advocate that anyone pursue a course of strict veganism either - that is your choice.

Here is a link to a list of the various logical fallacies that occur and are helpful to identify when discussing issues with others. I wonder if you think that what you are laying out here is an example of any one of them?

http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/fallacies.html

gryphynsclaw
28th December 2010, 01:25
I think that something is that we are self-aware. Unlike bees, ants, termites and perhaps other insects, we have a sense of self and with that a sense of self-preservation. Other than insects I can't think of another example of self-sacrifice for the greater good anywhere in the animal kingdom. The closest may be when elephants surround their calves to create a nearly impenetrable wall of protection but that's not quite the same thing. That's more like a parent sacrificing himself or herself for a loved one. Not so much for the common good as for another individual.

There are several animals that will sacrifice themselves for the good (most often) protection of the group. Not going to mention dogs, because that could be argued that human conditioning influences their actions. However, wolves which are not human conditioned will do so, as will horses wild and domestic . I have personally witnessed both. The killdeer bird will pretend injury to draw predators away, many times this will lead to their death. Anyway, there are thousands of examples and this in itself should show humans that animals are just as diverse and individual as humans. To believe animals are just animals with no intelligence, feelings or soul is the equivalent of saying all the people from continent "X" are soulless morons.

I was honored one time by a female woodchuck, as she moved her babies, she brought each one of them up to me, one at a time to show them off. This was in the middle of the woods, not near a house or people, so she was not sensitized to people or me. That speaks more to me then if an animal will throw itself on the bomb for the good of the rest..... Because just as there are animals that won't do that, there is also many many people who would not either.

Brad

Ahkenaten
28th December 2010, 01:31
There are several animals that will sacrifice themselves for the good (most often) protection of the group. Not going to mention dogs, because that could be argued that human conditioning influences their actions. However, wolves which are not human conditioned will do so, as will horses wild and domestic . I have personally witnessed both. The killdeer bird will pretend injury to draw predators away, many times this will lead to their death. Anyway, there are thousands of examples and this in itself should show humans that animals are just as diverse and individual as humans. To believe animals are just animals with no intelligence, feelings or soul is the equivalent of saying all the people from continent "X" are soulless morons.

I was honored one time by a female woodchuck, as she moved her babies, she brought each one of them up to me, one at a time to show them off. This was in the middle of the woods, not near a house or people, so she was not sensitized to people or me. That speaks more to me then if an animal will throw itself on the bomb for the good of the rest..... Because just as there are animals that won't do that, there is also many many people who would not either.

Brad

Someone said something like "No greater love haveth one than he who would lay down his life for his friend" or something close to that. Animals are capable of that sacrifice and it is not always in the context of protecting their young. And this has been observed across species as well. "Noble" and selfless behavior is not the exclusive provenance of human beings.

Teakai
28th December 2010, 01:38
I did not say nor did I mean to convey that I am across the board against killing, period, Tekai. I said that, in general I am against violence.By in general, what I was trying to convey is that broadly I am against violence and certainly I would not ACTIVELY AND ENCOURAGE OTHERS TO COMMIT VIOLENT ACTS. And this is where I stand at this point in time. Thus it is not inconsistent for me NOT to take what I consider at this point to be an extreme position (in this case against killing animals - i.e. I presume either vegetarianism or a vegan) on the dietary issue either. This is honest - this is really where I am at this point. And the two positions are not mutually exclusive or contradictory in any way.

Ahk, I think possibly the mixed message and confusion comes from your not wanting to speak/type openly.

You seem to have a strong enough position in that killing (not dumb animals) is only OK by way of self defense.
How do you know that you are not negatively influencing anyone by strongly voicing this opinion?

The rapist who abducts the unresistant and terrified girl isn't going to take her somewhere safe.
Maybe we are already well past the point where we should have started screaming and making lots of noise and fighting back.

I think it would be interesting to explore people's aversion to what they may consider to be acts of violence.

So, I am still interested in why, at this point in time - you are adverse to killing off the reptillians/psycho humans.

Ahkenaten
28th December 2010, 02:01
Ahk, I think possibly the mixed message and confusion comes from your not wanting to speak/type openly.

You seem to have a strong enough position in that killing (not dumb animals) is only OK by way of self defense.
How do you know that you are not negatively influencing anyone by strongly voicing this opinion?

The rapist who abducts the unresistant and terrified girl isn't going to take her somewhere safe.
Maybe we are already well past the point where we should have started screaming and making lots of noise and fighting back.

I think it would be interesting to explore people's aversion to what they may consider to be acts of violence.

So, I am still interested in why, at this point in time - you are adverse to killing off the reptillians/psycho humans.

Tekai - I am speaking very openly to you here. But you must listen to hear me. I never said that killing is only an option in the case of self defense..........I just used that as an example. Frankly, I am not particularly averse to violence. I think your example of the abducted girl is not analogous to what we are discussing here. Again - I WILL NOT advocate to others that they take certain violent actions under various scenarios, up to and including killing reptilians. To digress, for my part, I believe that the term "reptilian" is only useful as a metaphor to discuss those humans who act from their lower, "reptilian" brain. I am not convinced that "reptilians" i.e. extraterrestrials known as reptilians, actually even exist, nor does it really matter to me. As for myself and what I would or would not do - especially if it be violent acts of any kind, this subject is private and between me and my conscience and is not a subject for discussion here.

Perhaps it would be helpful, as an exercise, for you to lay out your points as bullet points for review. Then maybe you will see that although what you think you are trying to get at is honesty, there is no way of avoiding the fact that more effective use of tools (language and logic) would be helpful for isolating differences of OPINION, laying out coherent arguments, strengthening arguments, in order to arrive at clearer communication, understanding differences, and sharpening and clarifying issues related to contradictions, false premises, etc. Do You Agree?

I think that it might be very instructive in that regard to consider setting up separate threads on some topics very worthy of debate that you have raised including, but not limited to, for example:

Violence - is any violence acceptable in ethical human behavior?

Dietary Choices and Ethics - A Serious Look at Meat-Eating and Its Consequences for our Survival and Evolution

.................................................. ..............

As for my influencing in any way anyone by anything I say, I think we all must presume that we all influence others (not the least ourselves, who are very very influenced by what we say) and so if I was worried about influencing others at all I would not post on this board. Of course, to some extent, I am influencing others AND MYSELF and that is why I am very careful, as a rule, with what I say! It is not only the words we say, but the underlying intention that informs them - AND THE UNDERLYING ENERGIES AND SOUNDS ARE CREATIVE OR DESTRUCTIVE AND THUS VERY POWERFUL. Analogous to a magical incantation, if you will, capable of actually bringing things into being.

I will not advocate therefor that others kill other humans, "reptilians" psycho humans, or cows willy-nilly. To do so, I believe, is irresponsible behavior and not helpful at this juncture.

gryphynsclaw
28th December 2010, 02:48
Perhaps this is what we should be exploring. Start a group that truly believes we are creating this world (If folks want to argue that point, they can start another group that discusses whether or not that concept is true). But if we have a group that believes it - could we explore more fully exactly how and then change it?

I actually am in a small group (5 people) who are doing this locally. It's been a very interesting exploration and we're beginning to connect the dots. So far we are only working on the personal level.

(Sorry if I have contributed to leading this thread astray with past posts.)

I believe this to be a fantastic idea, however following the initial idea out a few steps into possible directions, I could perceive messes. Then I got to thinking about lore pertaining to one of those shadow type groups that claims existence from prior to humans. It supposedly is divided into guilds and each guild answers only to its guild members. As a group only guild reps interact with other guilds and the whole. These reps are chosen for their communication abilities and in no way represent position with in the guild. btw: this one has supposedly been working against the control from its inception. Anyway, it might not be a bad idea as this moves forward (if it does) to limit people to one such group and of common interests.

Brad

Ahkenaten
28th December 2010, 02:55
(Sorry if I have contributed to leading this thread astray with past posts.)

I believe this to be a fantastic idea, however following the initial idea out a few steps into possible directions, I could perceive messes. Then I got to thinking about lore pertaining to one of those shadow type groups that claims existence from prior to humans. It supposedly is divided into guilds and each guild answers only to its guild members. As a group only guild reps interact with other guilds and the whole. These reps are chosen for their communication abilities and in no way represent position with in the guild. btw: this one has supposedly been working against the control from its inception. Anyway, it might not be a bad idea as this moves forward (if it does) to limit people to one such group and of common interests.

Brad

Could you say more about what you meant to convey in your post, i.e. exactly how do you envision these "guild reps" for the purposes of discussion, working? Is it kind of a set and sub-set thing with the subsets dealing with segments of the larger issues, for example?!

Concerning structural issues I prefer a decentralized approach but if I am not mistaken one of the things people have expressed concerns about again and again here in Avalon is the secrecy and compartmentalization, and cross-knowing only on a "need to know" basis that characterizes some of these societies and their counterparts, the 3-letter agencies. If this is where you are headed, what would be the purpose of mimicking that model?

gryphynsclaw
28th December 2010, 02:57
Have tried to edit previous post a couple times... not working... the last line pertains to specific focus groups with in the experiment so as not to muddy the experiment itself.
Brad

¤=[Post Update]=¤


Could you say more about what you meant to convey in your post, i.e. exactly how do you envision these "guild reps" for the purposes of discussion, working? Is it kind of a set and sub-set thing with the subsets dealing with segments of the larger issues, for example?!

Yep... that is it

Brad

Ahkenaten
28th December 2010, 03:00
Have tried to edit previous post a couple times... not working... the last line pertains to specific focus groups with in the experiment so as not to muddy the experiment itself.
Brad

¤=[Post Update]=¤



Yep... that is it

Brad

Sorry I think you and I were acting simultaneously on the thread perhaps canceling each other out!!!

OK I got the set/subset part - what about the compartmentalization and secrecy part????!!!!

gryphynsclaw
28th December 2010, 03:32
I do not claim to know all the ins and outs and probably not that much when it comes right down to it.
There are actually 2 stories about its creation. The simple versions: 1; One of the powerful members of a ruling group did not agree with the direction things were going, but not wishing to loss his place in the inner circle he set up a secret group to act as a counter measure for the controlling group.
2; There were 3 races, the ruling race engineered a slave race (humans), as a slap in the face to the other races the slave race looked more like the ruling race then the others. This lead to a violent war, which resulted in one race being completely wiped out. The 2 remaining decided that things could work to their advantage by pulling the strings behind the scenes. Those who did not join back up with the ruling race went on to a continued resistance.

The secrecy is due to this being an ongoing fight with all sides still very active (according to what I have heard). They never have more or less then 1500 members world wide and only one guild with in the group actually interacts with the world and then mostly in a quiet way. An interesting side point is the group that works with the general populaces is not that powerful with in the group and do take orders sorta from the group. However, their word is beyond question and they can buck orders without repercussions.

Brad

gryphynsclaw
28th December 2010, 03:49
I got side tracked, part of the initial reason for bring it up in( besides the focus groups) the discussion has to do with the experiment. One of the things the controlling group initiated was religion but more importantly opposing religions makes the control so much easier. But, one of the motivating factors for doing so was to stifle humans natural abilities. So, the proposed experiment(s) touching on a factor that is a major threat to the controllers (if any of this is even almost real) could have some amazing results. Anyway.... just a few thoughts

Brad

Teakai
28th December 2010, 03:56
Tekai as one human being to another I am, as I said before NOT PARTICULARLY AGAINST VIOLENCE PER SE!




I am pretty fed up with TPTB myself - I have referred to them many times as satanic demons from hell on this Forum! But even so I will not advocate killing them. .


Why wouldn’t you advocate killing them?

Ahkenaten
28th December 2010, 03:58
I will not, period.

gryphynsclaw
28th December 2010, 04:07
Concerning structural issues I prefer a decentralized approach but if I am not mistaken one of the things people have expressed concerns about again and again here in Avalon is the secrecy and compartmentalization, and cross-knowing only on a "need to know" basis that characterizes some of these societies and their counterparts, the 3-letter agencies. If this is where you are headed, what would be the purpose of mimicking that model?

I missed this part earlier,
There is no reason to have the secrecy, it could and probably should be extremely open, any secrecy should be between the sub-groups so as not to contaminate their results. Meaning they would be privy to the over view but perhaps not the specifics unless it could relate to what they were doing or assisting in their effort. It really isn't secrecy.... Say, my point of focus is on "X", yet as I get wrapped up in "J" from another sub-group from too much info, it could color and possibly contaminate my focus.

Brad

Teakai
28th December 2010, 04:11
Violence - is any violence acceptable in ethical human behavior?



Yes. I’d say so.

Do you think it’s somehow more ethical to stand aside and allow violence to be played out?
Doing nothing unless you yourself are put into a corner?

Perhaps we need to agree on the meaning of what is perceived to be violence.

Do you consider it a violent action to murder someone by genetically altering their crops so that they fail, or so that they have no nutritional value, so that people starve to death?

Or, as another example – is it an act of violence to kill children using toxic vaccines?

Ahkenaten
28th December 2010, 04:28
Yes. I’d say so.

Do you think it’s somehow more ethical to stand aside and allow violence to be played out?
Doing nothing unless you yourself are put into a corner?

Perhaps we need to agree on the meaning of what is perceived to be violence.

Do you consider it a violent action to murder someone by genetically altering their crops so that they fail, or so that they have no nutritional value, so that people starve to death?

Or, as another example – is it an act of violence to kill children using toxic vaccines?

As I said I think these topics should be posted as separate threads from this one and explored there by those sharing your interests.

Teakai
28th December 2010, 04:41
Tekai - I am speaking very openly to you here. But you must listen to hear me. I never said that killing is only an option in the case of self defense..........I just used that as an example. Frankly, I am not particularly averse to violence. I think your example of the abducted girl is not analogous to what we are discussing here. Again - I WILL NOT advocate to others that they take certain violent actions under various scenarios, up to and including killing reptilians. To digress, for my part, I believe that the term "reptilian" is only useful as a metaphor to discuss those humans who act from their lower, "reptilian" brain. I am not convinced that "reptilians" i.e. extraterrestrials known as reptilians, actually even exist, nor does it really matter to me. As for myself and what I would or would not do - especially if it be violent acts of any kind, this subject is private and between me and my conscience and is not a subject for discussion here.

Perhaps it would be helpful, as an exercise, for you to lay out your points as bullet points for review. Then maybe you will see that although what you think you are trying to get at is honesty, there is no way of avoiding the fact that more effective use of tools (language and logic) would be helpful for isolating differences of OPINION, laying out coherent arguments, strengthening arguments, in order to arrive at clearer communication, understanding differences, and sharpening and clarifying issues related to contradictions, false premises, etc. Do You Agree?

I think that it might be very instructive in that regard to consider setting up separate threads on some topics very worthy of debate that you have raised including, but not limited to, for example:

Violence - is any violence acceptable in ethical human behavior?

Dietary Choices and Ethics - A Serious Look at Meat-Eating and Its Consequences for our Survival and Evolution

.................................................. ..............

As for my influencing in any way anyone by anything I say, I think we all must presume that we all influence others (not the least ourselves, who are very very influenced by what we say) and so if I was worried about influencing others at all I would not post on this board. Of course, to some extent, I am influencing others AND MYSELF and that is why I am very careful, as a rule, with what I say! It is not only the words we say, but the underlying intention that informs them - AND THE UNDERLYING ENERGIES AND SOUNDS ARE CREATIVE OR DESTRUCTIVE AND THUS VERY POWERFUL. Analogous to a magical incantation, if you will, capable of actually bringing things into being.

I will not advocate therefor that others kill other humans, "reptilians" psycho humans, or cows willy-nilly. To do so, I believe, is irresponsible behavior and not helpful at this juncture.

Ah, Ahk, you do screw my words around. I’m not talking about killing anything willy nilly. Where did the willy nilly come from?

You.

I also didn’t introduce the idea of influencing people to act violently. Where did that come from?

You.

So, Ahk, if I said, that I don’t think it’s at all likely that the human race will withdraw its consent and that the only real way to fix the problem is to remove the problem will that idea be disregarded out of hand as being violent?

Because, frankly, I think we are too far gone in making a decision, en masse that is going to have the affect of thwarting the intentions of the ‘ptb.’ Whatever type of beings they are.
They will simply kill those who object or thwart their plans.
How could we possibly think they wouldn’t – because they’re killing us anyway.

Not being a scaremonger – just being realistic.

The example of the rapist and the girl is very relevant. The longer people keep their heads down the further along the track we get to ultimate control.

And of course you don’t have to answer what you would or wouldn’t do. Nobody said you had to. That can be your own special secret :lol: (OK – now I’m pulling your chain)

Teakai
28th December 2010, 04:44
As I said I think these topics should be posted as separate threads from this one and explored there by those sharing your interests.

Why should they?
They are all statements you have made on this thread. Why are they suddenly irrelevant?

Teakai
28th December 2010, 06:05
I will not, period.

So, it's just your own, personal unsubstantiated, unreasoned opinion, then?

Teakai
28th December 2010, 06:28
Actually, Ahk - I've just had another thought on the topic (I bet you're just dying to hear it :))

This thread is about ways in which we can stop buying into the system, but what's ironic is that the catalyst by which the 'ptb' are hoping to gain overall control is by withdrawing the system from us.

It is only then that humanity will make the choice as to whether they want safety at any price or freedom.

Teakai
28th December 2010, 07:28
@Teakai



There are many strategies and combinations of strategies for dealing with the Reptilia.
We live on vacuum pressure balance 1/3/23/73 they live on 1/3/24/72.
Their basic function is to protect the core functions at 0.1/0.1/99.9/0.8
They protect the cores time keeping functions separating geometry time from flowing time.
If you have dealt with them head on and lived its because they are training you to be strong.
You might have mentioned they were after/harassing/harming family members. I don't know what to say about that.
I truly hope not. If they don't disapprove of you, you are allowed to live (access core occasionally) if they don't approve your toast/dead
or your worked like a puppet. Write out a formal legal case and bill of particulars and demand an "honorable battle" with a "master"
don't accept a battle with a masters extended body as a drone reptile. Masters when gathered together use drone bodies to supply mass
to a routine battle to terminate a 'core circuit' wired through the inner core boundary before everything is coverted to pure info that can be transported
instantly from core to outer boundary roundtrip. You sound like a reasonable and passionate person that's the kind they seek for allies and advice about humans.

Killing a drone reptile is irrelevant.
To bring a master close to death draws the other masters because you may be obligated to take its place as a protector of the core functions.
The upside is if you kill a master or negotiate a personal treaty with Greater Reptilia you gain access to vacuum pressure 25 where the serious business occurs.
Including acquiring sanctuaries bridges and ships. So try not to look at your battle with Reptilia from to close or to far away. Their are "honorable" advantages gained there.

My two favorite Camelot witnesses were the boy who wrote "New Berlin" and "Jessica" who spoke of the beings who travel as crystal ships.
The boy warns not to remove the green emeralds, so that the boy who built reptilia isn't destroyed. He also accurately describes the roll out of the
machinery(two ghost holes) to manufacture the basic fabrics that form the background environment(timespace vs spacetime). Witness Jessica accurately predicts
the results of system wide defeat of Greater Reptilia as a rather heartbreaking confrontation with the wizard of oz - the little boy in old man form doing equations.

In the end there is only thought and action. All else is an information construct including the green line / core dramas.
Reptilians value honor and strength and wage war against the opposites of those to protect the cores momentum circuits/pipes.
I hate to admit it publicly, but because you raised the logical tangent, I am at peace with them even though I've killed a few drones by accident.
It is a different level of the system though. 23 <->24. They have saved me a bunch of times so I am extremely biased, but I do favor the human form first.

Best be,t to battle someone using Reptilia assets against you, is gain those assets yourself; and even the playing field. Just my opinion not personal advice.
That process is a casebook/bill of particulars, you want reversed, as a writing process and also using whatever energy rhythm management tools used: dreams, meditation,
martial arts, painting, jogging, sailing... anything that focuses animal instinct mind.

With practice you can command opponents to stand down with your eyes in focus thereby achieving victory by denying your opponent the battlefield, A real time saver.
Best of All.


p.s. seems funny to speak of such things publicly

That wasn't me, Intraphase. Though I'm pretty sure I remember somebody mentioning quite recently that they had been.

I found your statement that the reptillians value honour interesting, because they do seem to act without it quite a lot, but that might be my observation from the viewpoint of being the dumb animal amongst the controlling lot that have chosen to come to this dimension.

In your opinion can the interfering reptilians be gotten rid of somehow, or are they always going to be an influence on life on earth?

Intraphase
28th December 2010, 12:30
Mr.Intraphase - I DO not see how this topic is germane to the thread "Can We Withdraw Consent from the Control Paradigm?"

If you look at all of creation/existence as a great cloud of awareness surrounding a series of ships of lights then the reptilians are the guardian force. Similar to you I see the "former" PTB on the run and a lot of groups vying to become the new version of the PTB. That's where dealing with "others" kicks in. Withdrawing consent from the old PTB is a moot point because they are defeated/routed. Not coming under the thumb of some new aggregates of PTB forcesis best negotiated by an individual as an individual with the understanding this is a small planet in a small galaxy on a single vacuum pressure/lightmach. I can withdraw consent because I have learned how to achieve computational mass and can force a 'stalemate' similar to a blowfish being difficult to swallow.


Mr.Intraphase - I DO not see how this topic is germane to the thread "Can We Withdraw Consent from the Control Paradigm?"

Yes we can withdraw by writing a paradigm that supersedes the paradigm used as shackles. It can be a fantasy paradigm to "bliss out" emotionall or intellectually or it can be a practical assertion of rights, properties,declarations and rules of operation enforced by the paradigms author. The role of timespace vs. spacetime enters the equation, in that if you have full access to yesterday you now have an ally named 'self' who can burrow further inward and outward and liberate more selfs thereby becoming an author of creation as opposed to being a low a paid actor with reptilian stagehands.In the great game of consciousness the prizes are as stated; sanctuaries, bridges and ships. The green world below/inward is like a governor on a lawn mower it keeps the daily world regulated. Birds have wings people have feet etc. To enter a 'non-consensual' (withdraw consent) frame of reference is to achieve absolute freedom balanced by absolute responsibility which manifests first as multiple versions of the self engaging in elaborate geometric negotiations of timespace. The old PTB faded because they forgot where the real power was.
The new PTB is still an unwritten book of plays and gambits best observed during any mass extinction event of the human form such as the 2004 tsunami or the Haiti earthquake. When computational space opens in the abstract realms due to sudden unexpected deaths observe the players in motion, chart their alliances. Hundreds of years later your still ahead of them.The only other way I know to withdraw consent is to leave the great cloud and re-enter the infinite one and silence the mind for an eternity, a very difficult thing to achieve, total silence.

Ty
28th December 2010, 14:44
I think we created this reality whether consciously (only very superficially so) or unconsciously (more likely this is the level at which we created it) .....................

Anyway this is just an emerging concept.


Ahkenaten, I've been thinking about this. Curious about when in our evolution/history you think this reality was created and what preceded it. Any thoughts on this?

Ty
28th December 2010, 15:04
There are several animals that will sacrifice themselves for the good (most often) protection of the group. Not going to mention dogs, because that could be argued that human conditioning influences their actions. However, wolves which are not human conditioned will do so, as will horses wild and domestic . I have personally witnessed both. The killdeer bird will pretend injury to draw predators away, many times this will lead to their death. Anyway, there are thousands of examples and this in itself should show humans that animals are just as diverse and individual as humans. To believe animals are just animals with no intelligence, feelings or soul is the equivalent of saying all the people from continent "X" are soulless morons.

Brad

My comment was targeted at the "hive" mentality and sacrificing one's self for that greater good of "the hive". In the animal world, that would equate, in my opinion to herds (wildebeests, antelope, zebra ...etc), schools of fish or flocks of birds.

Wolves mate for life and (like the elephants in my example) exist in small packs. Their sacrifice would be for the good of the pack or their mate or their young, all comprised of recognized and valued individuals. Likewise, from what I've read on the killdeer bird, their behavior is to protect their young. Both good examples of animal sacrifice for the benefit of a close comrade - mate, pack-mate or offspring.

I'm not sure in these instances though that a hive mentality even exists. I'm not sure it does in herds, schools and flocks either, but their behavior seems more uniform and less individual so I view them as more hive-like. I agree that animals have intelligence of varied degrees and feelings and perhaps a soul. I've had dogs my whole life and parrots for the last 10 years or so and have seen intelligence in both.

Anyway, a minor point but I did want to clarify my position.

gryphynsclaw
28th December 2010, 15:43
Ty, I understand and did take it from a different perspective.
Off the top of my head the horse herd does come to mind and while it may be a weak example; horsed do as a herd move and act as a unified group. There is zero doubt in my mind that they communicate on a mental level both within and without their own species. Which is some what provable.
A stud horse will put itself in harms way for the good of the herd. I have seen a stud with a 30+ herd take on a bear. He could have easily removed the herd from that area and the bear was not being threatening at the time. So, was it acting out of a perceived future threat? The herd was not in danger at that time. Or was it perceiving a danger to the herd that was not present? Was it willing to sacrifice for a perceived future danger?

I find this all interesting and often wonder, if people could not learn from something as simple as understanding animals they believe beneath them. To what extend does this play in the current reality.......

Brad

Zook
28th December 2010, 17:09
Hi Ahks,


I would be VERY INTERESTED in anyone's views on this important subject!!!:cool:

No. Not allowed. You can't withdraw consent from the control paradigm unless you consult me. Even then, you'll need to transfer your consent over to me along with instructions for withdrawal (carefully written in English and encrypted in hexadecimal). But be forewarned, my transfer fees can be enormous! (I offer a discount rate on Tuesdays, however).

Of course you can!

You withdraw consent everyday with each and every act in opposition to the control paradigm. No matter how small the act. This, of course, is a beast apart from withdrawing oneself from the control paradigm, e.g. the recluse.

:smow::typing:

Ahkenaten
28th December 2010, 19:36
Ahkenaten, I've been thinking about this. Curious about when in our evolution/history you think this reality was created and what preceded it. Any thoughts on this?

This is a very puzzling question that I have been thinking about. I am beginning to think that the human species has been around here on earth for much longer than most of us have been educated to believe and that the "reality" construct that we occupy is very, very ancient. I don't know if you have read any of Michael Cremo's works, but I began looking into this issue some years ago and it seems, though I am no expert, that our mathematical, linguistic and musical concepts may be legacies, or the surviving superstructure, if you will, of the social and religious paradigm of a very ancient and highly developed culture. Also interesting in this regard is the magisterial Hamlet's Mill by De Santilla and Dechend. Others hinted at the same idea ..... Plato in his essay on Atlantis and Schwaller de Lubicz in his studies of the sacred geometry underlying Egyptian architecture. Anyway beginning with the tentative premise that a very highly developed possibly world-wide civilization existed in the distant past, of which ruins in the Andes in South America, Mexico, Egypt, and Balbeck Lebanon are but remnants; there MAY have been a power structure, governing elite, if you will who - I know this may sound pretty woo-woo, continued on in some form working through, for example the Egyptian priesthood, preserving the sacred knowledge and traditions encoded in symbols, mathematics, harmonics, language structures, and the CALENDAR. Now what we may be seeing is the reemergence of the ancient old power structures and systems of thought that have actually provided shape and form to human civilizations since the ancient times without the masses being aware of it........

Anyway this is just a sketch of the conclusions I am coming to, very tentative still. I think the heart of the mystery concerning what I call the Control Paradigm, is the symbol of the Pyramid with the all-seeing eye.

Someone has kept the mysteries alive through the languages, mathematics, harmonics, calendrics, for thousands of years............the interconnections between these systems are too many to be purely coincidental.

Maybe, just maybe, we are coming out of a terrible period of darkness into the light. Maybe, just maybe we will be able to wake up to who and what we are. However - there clearly is a struggle going on for control of the earth and humanity.

I hope I am making some sense. If you had told me even 10 years ago that I would be seriously entertaining any theories like this, I would have told you that you were nuts!!

Ahkenaten
28th December 2010, 19:41
Hi Ahks,



No. Not allowed. You can't withdraw consent from the control paradigm unless you consult me. Even then, you'll need to transfer your consent over to me along with instructions for withdrawal (carefully written in English and encrypted in hexadecimal). But be forewarned, my transfer fees can be enormous! (I offer a discount rate on Tuesdays, however).

Of course you can!

You withdraw consent everyday with each and every act in opposition to the control paradigm. No matter how small the act. This, of course, is a beast apart from withdrawing oneself from the control paradigm, e.g. the recluse.

:smow::typing:

Ha Ha Ha Mr. Zook I just gotta love you somehow! Well, can I turn over my identity completely to you immediately in every way? Do I have your permission? What a riot. I was looking for a way outta here without jumping off a bridge. You are so funny! Can we do it today, today's Tuesday and I always love a bargain!

I agree we can oppose every day in every way we can. Of course that is different for everyone...............and a matter of personal choice. I once considered the anchorite route but I could not do without my coffee in the morning!

YOU MADE MY DAY MR. ZOOK!!!:kiss:

Ahkenaten
28th December 2010, 19:53
Mr.Intraphase - I DO not see how this topic is germane to the thread "Can We Withdraw Consent from the Control Paradigm?"


If you look at all of creation/existence as a great cloud of awareness surrounding a series of ships of lights then the reptilians are the guardian force.
Similar to you I see the "former" PTB on the run and a lot of groups vying to become the new version of the PTB. That's where dealing with "others" kicks in.
Withdrawing consent from the old PTB is a moot point because they are defeated/routed. Not coming under the thumb of some new aggregates of PTB forces
is best negotiated by an individual as an individual with the understanding this is a small planet in a small galaxy on a single vacuum pressure/lightmach.
I can withdraw consent because I have learned how to achieve computational mass and can force a 'stalemate' similar to a blowfish being difficult to swallow.


Mr.Intraphase - I DO not see how this topic is germane to the thread "Can We Withdraw Consent from the Control Paradigm?"

Yes we can withdraw by writing a paradigm that supersedes the paradigm used as shackles. It can be a fantasy paradigm to "bliss out" emotionall or intellectually or it can be a practical assertion of rights, properties,
declarations and rules of operation enforced by the paradigms author. The role of timespace vs. spacetime enters the equation, in that if you have full access to yesterday you now have an
ally named 'self' who can burrow further inward and outward and liberate more selfs thereby becoming an author of creation as opposed to being a low a paid actor with reptilian stagehands.
In the great game of consciousness the prizes are as stated; sanctuaries, bridges and ships. The green world below/inward is like a governor on a lawn mower it keeps the daily world regulated.
Birds have wings people have feet etc. To enter a 'non-consensual' (withdraw consent) frame of reference is to achieve absolute freedom balanced by absolute responsibility which manifests first
as multiple versions of the self engaging in elaborate geometric negotiations of timespace. The old PTB faded because they forgot where the real power was.
The new PTB is still an unwritten book of plays and gambits best observed during any mass extinction event of the human form such as the 2004 tsunami or the Haiti earthquake.
When computational space opens in the abstract realms due to sudden unexpected deaths observe the players in motion, chart their alliances. Hundreds of years later your still ahead of them.
The only other way I know to withdraw consent is to leave the great cloud and re-enter the infinite one and silence the mind for an eternity, a very difficult thing to achieve, total silence.

I am not personally convinced of the existence of so-called reptilians except insofar as the term is used as an adjective or metaphor to describe people governed by the lower parts of their brain stems. Because there is no objective proof of the existence of such entities to my knowledge, we get into the are of highly subjective personal experiences and beliefs which may be very real and compelling to the individuals involved, but perhaps not for others who do not share those beliefs and experiences.

Thus I feel that the subject of reptilians is not germane to this thread.......if the theme of reptilians is central to your world-view and philosophy perhaps it would be best to explore the nuances of the reptilian meme on a separate thread devoted to that subject.

Just a thought.

Zook
29th December 2010, 00:54
Ha Ha Ha Mr. Zook I just gotta love you somehow! Well, can I turn over my identity completely to you immediately in every way? Do I have your permission? What a riot. I was looking for a way outta here without jumping off a bridge. You are so funny! Can we do it today, today's Tuesday and I always love a bargain!
[...]


The discount special this Tuesday will not cost you a dime of that fiat stuff ... just the fat stuff.

Let's see, how about I waive your transfer fee in exchange for two hogs, a cistern of goat's milk, and the plumpest of your fifteen delightfully plump sisters.

:smow::typing:

Ahkenaten
29th December 2010, 01:03
The discount special this Tuesday will not cost you a dime of that fiat stuff ... just the fat stuff.

Let's see, how about I waive your transfer fee in exchange for two hogs, a cistern of goat's milk, and the plumpest of your fifteen delightfully plump sisters.

:smow::typing:

Zook - OK - DEAL! But......................how the heck will we process this transaction - two hogs, a cistern of goat's milk and the plumpest and most delectable of my fifteen gorgeous sisters :boink:via Paypal!??!!

angel in disguise
29th December 2010, 01:05
Of course you can... Through a ´Claim of Right´... Notice of Intent and Understanding... Look it up... Robert Menard is a good start although I wouldn´t rely solely on his words. Do your own research;)

Ahkenaten
29th December 2010, 01:08
Of course you can... Through a ´Claim of Right´... Notice of Intent and Understanding... Look it up... Robert Menard is a good start although I wouldn´t rely solely on his words. Do your own research;)

I say to you Angel - why would anyone try to negotiate with Devils within an extralegal paradigm they created? It really doesn't make sense to me.

angel in disguise
29th December 2010, 02:02
You want freedom???... Where there´s a will there´s a way. Not important what other´s think of your way... It´s lawful and deserved for those who seek it. We only need live by the ten commandments to fully cherish it. Freedom is yours if you want it and you can accomplish it by peaceful non-compliance if you wish to do so. I agree it is not everyone´s choice but one thing we all have in common is choice. YOU choose to be free or be ruled... Those who choose to be ruled certainly make it harder for those who choose to be free by complying to all the stupid regulations imposed upon us however it is a fight I am willing to fight no matter what. I made my choice... make yours ;)

Ahkenaten
29th December 2010, 02:31
My point Angel is that a lot of these approaches are about attending seminars that ostensibly teach people how to fill out forms to obtain their freedom, etc. I do not believe filing requisite papers with the current Rulers will obtain freedom for anyone. That is the point I am trying to make here. Removing Consent is first about state of mind, then moving on from there, refining one's approach and honing one's intellect through sharing information with others and mutual support.

Kari Lynn
29th December 2010, 02:49
lol Zookumar and Ahkenaten lol
You know that does sound like quite the deal though, considering how hard it is to withdraw oneself from the control paradigm. But darn, I have no sisters!

angel in disguise
29th December 2010, 02:52
To make it simple... It is peaceful non-compliance I live by... I have signed no papers to be free, for me paperwork is not natural as is the the same for the world we currently live in... completely unnatural. I feel like we are already in a prison so if I go to prison for wanting freedom then so be it. My food and shelter will be paid by the fools who comply and therefore I am free... as free as I am in this crazy world.

Ahkenaten
29th December 2010, 06:53
To make it simple... It is peaceful non-compliance I live by... I have signed no papers to be free, for me paperwork is not natural as is the the same for the world we currently live in... completely unnatural. I feel like we are already in a prison so if I go to prison for wanting freedom then so be it. My food and shelter will be paid by the fools who comply and therefore I am free... as free as I am in this crazy world.

Hi Angel - I salute you then! I would hate it if you had wasted your hard-earned $$ on one of those seminars! :cool:

xbusymom
29th December 2010, 07:47
am I reading this right...??

You don’t want to play the sovereignty card within their contrived legality game-system. It won’t get us out of the paradigm-that just takes us deeper into the rabbit hole...

... continuing to buy into their monetary system and false economy is a trap

... the political puppets won’t help fix the system either because they already have their piece of the pie

and... and now –with the food safety bill being passed into law- we have the source of our physical health and fuel being rigged leaving us with a deteriorating body/mind and zero energy to fight off the mind-control grid...

Who have we got in our corner? (without launching into a violence which THEY have already made contingencies for – the police work for them too). what kind of non-compliance do we have left to work with- what is going to make a difference- ...??

Intraphase
29th December 2010, 10:45
I am not personally convinced of the existence of so-called reptilians except insofar as the term is used as an adjective or metaphor to describe people governed by the lower parts of their brain stems. Because there is no objective proof of the existence of such entities to my knowledge, we get into the are of highly subjective personal experiences and beliefs which may be very real and compelling to the individuals involved, but perhaps not for others who do not share those beliefs and experiences.
Thus I feel that the subject of reptilians is not germane to this thread.......if the theme of reptilians is central to your world-view and philosophy perhaps it would be best to explore the nuances of the reptilian meme on a separate thread devoted to that subject.
Just a thought.

I didn't broach the subject. I responded to it when raised as one of the many combinations of consciousness and its colors.
What list of phenomenon should a person consult as they pursue the intent of withdrawing consent from the current paradigm.
Are you of a mind that all is as it appears to be and buying a farm in a remote local would be a logical solution to the question posited.

The original question: Can we withdraw consent from the control paradigm.
Implies sub question: Who specifically, or what group constructed the control paradigm being discussed.

I live in a paradigm I constructed. I am responsible.


..if the theme of reptilians is central to your world-view and philosophy perhaps it would be best to explore the nuances of the reptilian meme on a separate thread devoted to that subject.

No thanks, see how easy it is to withdraw consent.
Be nice to newcomers or risk being perceived as a leaky cup.

Zook
29th December 2010, 13:35
lol Zookumar and Ahkenaten lol
You know that does sound like quite the deal though, considering how hard it is to withdraw oneself from the control paradigm. But darn, I have no sisters!

And you don't produce no daughters! Hmmm ... I'll bet you're popular in the mountainous slopes of Mypos. (You're prolly too young to catch that reference ... but hey us old folks gotta laugh, too!) LOL!

:smow::typing:

PHARAOH
29th December 2010, 14:16
Ahkenaten, We ourselves are Reptilians as we interbread with them and are now part Reptilian. I'll give you examples. This goes way back to the creation story and the Annunaki. In order to keep the peace between the Reptilians and the newly bread being.

1. Sperm aka "Se-Men"/ "Seaman" cells appear as tadpoles.
2. We are in a sac of water for nine months breathing.
3. For the first 3 months we look just like a reptile in the womb.
4. We have a tail at the end of our back bone.
5. We have scaly skin and shead.
6. We have webbed hands and feet.
7. Not to metion that pea size part of our brain which make us aggressive and unreasonable.

I could go on, but I'm sure you get the picture. Just meditate on this idea and you will see for yourself.

Ahkenaten
29th December 2010, 14:30
am I reading this right...??

You don’t want to play the sovereignty card within their contrived legality game-system. It won’t get us out of the paradigm-that just takes us deeper into the rabbit hole...

... continuing to buy into their monetary system and false economy is a trap

... the political puppets won’t help fix the system either because they already have their piece of the pie

and... and now –with the food safety bill being passed into law- we have the source of our physical health and fuel being rigged leaving us with a deteriorating body/mind and zero energy to fight off the mind-control grid...

Who have we got in our corner? (without launching into a violence which THEY have already made contingencies for – the police work for them too). what kind of non-compliance do we have left to work with- what is going to make a difference- ...??

What I was saying to that person is that filing some paperwork is not going to obtain one's freedom..........

As for your other points, well taken and that was the purpose of posting this thread, to elicit others' ideas concerning this issue. And as you yourself have already pointed out, there are in fact other ways to withdraw consent.

Ahkenaten
29th December 2010, 14:43
Ahkenaten, We ourselves are Reptilians as we interbread with them and are now part Reptilian. I'll give you examples. This goes way back to the creation story and the Annunaki. In order to keep the peace between the Reptilians and the newly bread being.

1. Sperm aka "Se-Men"/ "Seaman" cells appear as tadpoles.
2. We are in a sac of water for nine months breathing.
3. For the first 3 months we look just like a reptile in the womb.
4. We have a tail at the end of our back bone.
5. We have scaly skin and shead.
6. We have webbed hands and feet.
7. Not to metion that pea size part of our brain which make us aggressive and unreasonable.

I could go on, but I'm sure you get the picture. Just meditate on this idea and you will see for yourself.

I loved Zachariah Sitchin and David Icke but you will notice that their books are located in the fiction section at Borders!! Now on that reptilian thing,
it is an interesting way to frame a discussion that opens the eyes to other layers of our reality but as of yet there is no proof that reptilian extraterrestrials even exist and the fact that in our embryonic state we seem to develop from a zygote through the "evolutionary" phases, i.e. fish, amphibian, mammal may well echo some actual stages in our evolutionary development on earth by no means means that humans are "reptiles" or proves that we are reptiles. If that is proof that we are presently reptiles then all mammals are reptiles because they, too go through similar stages in their embryonic development. I think it would be more meaningful to think of that as some sign that humans share many traits with other animals on earth and are in debt to a common heritage. On the problems with the "reptile brain" .... I think it is a little more complex than that. The systems that intermediate the instinctive and aggressive impulses coming from the medulla oblangata play a role in damping down the aggression...........i.e. impulse control seems to have been overridden in the system perhaps due to our rapid development outstripping the organism's ability to rewire the system to keep important impulse and aggression control systems operating properly.

Kari Lynn
29th December 2010, 15:39
And you don't produce no daughters! Hmmm ... I'll bet you're popular in the mountainous slopes of Mypos.
I'm sure momma would be doing the dance of joy if we visited, but I don't like the "Ducks" there. lol

(You're prolly too young to catch that reference ... but hey us old folks gotta laugh, too!) LOL!
I'll let you think that lol.

xbusymom
29th December 2010, 17:40
... and that was the purpose of posting this thread, to elicit others' ideas concerning this issue. And as you yourself have already pointed out, there are in fact other ways to withdraw consent.

I was trying to further along the conversation by summarizing what we have looked at so far that won't work... process of elimination... and whatever answer is left after figuring out what NOT to do - then MUST be the correct answer of what TO DO... right?

((my head usually starts swimming at this point of the equation)I was also hoping that there would be more brainstorming ... not more debate of what the problem is- we already know that - and I have run thru my list of ideas)

xbusymom
29th December 2010, 17:48
LOL I often think the answers are right in front of our faces but we can't see them because they are hiding just at the end of our noses and we get cross-eyed trying to look:rolleyes::frusty:

FrankoL
29th December 2010, 21:35
I don't think so. It will not happen, it is not the case. Let me explain. If you are smart enough, than you would know, it is impossible. Please, just turn around and you will realize, what is my point. Observe your neighbors, coworkers, people that surrounds you,... look at you. It will not going to work.

Hypothetically speaking, if we could manage to withdraw a consent from current paradigm, whats the point. What we would gain: no stress in our life, complete happiness, 100% love, no work, free from control, all material things available at no cost, ... sounds great.

We all can admit that negativity is a part (half) of our existence. Greed, lust, lying ... you name it. Do you understand the negative polarity? If you do, you have lived it. Others are/have too. By saying that, it explains it all.

Anyhow if the shift occurs - a change of paradigm, it is already a part of the agenda (ie wikileaks, financial meltdown, ET disclosure ...).Or even master reset of the game might happen. Great portion of people will continue mastering themselves in next, similar one IMO.

Ahkenaten
29th December 2010, 22:53
LOL I often think the answers are right in front of our faces but we can't see them because they are hiding just at the end of our noses and we get cross-eyed trying to look:rolleyes::frusty:

Hi x busy mom - I am going to summarize all the input over the next week or so on this thread. There's lots of stuff here! Then maybe we can look at what we have. Thanks for all your thinking and contributions on this! Ahk

Ahkenaten
29th December 2010, 22:57
I don't think so. It will not happen, it is not the case. Let me explain. If you are smart enough, than you would know, it is impossible. Please, just turn around and you will realize, what is my point. Observe your neighbors, coworkers, people that surrounds you,... look at you. It will not going to work.

Hypothetically speaking, if we could manage to withdraw a consent from current paradigm, whats the point. What we would gain: no stress in our life, complete happiness, 100% love, no work, free from control, all material things available at no cost, ... sounds great.

We all can admit that negativity is a part (half) of our existence. Greed, lust, lying ... you name it. Do you understand the negative polarity? If you do, you have lived it. Others are/have too. By saying that, it explains it all.

Anyhow if the shift occurs - a change of paradigm, it is already a part of the agenda (ie wikileaks, financial meltdown, ET disclosure ...).Or even master reset of the game might happen. Great portion of people will continue mastering themselves in next, similar one IMO.

Good points all, but I do not necessarily agree that conscious change - which is what this is about - is impossible at all. The fact is that change is fundamental to this reality we share................and change will occur whether we like it or not, whether we consciously participate or not. My interest is in whether we can exert a positive influence on the emerging new reality and I framed the discussion as "withdrawing consent" because I personally believe our consciousness, especially if directed, CAN and DOES influence that greater reality. And it is just a next step to fantasize what could potentially come of some degree of collective directed consciousness and intent.

The language is rough, granted - but I think it points in a direction some are interested in pursuing.

gryphynsclaw
29th December 2010, 23:42
Ahkenaten, I have a deep fascination with what was here before and your post #176 kinda got things clicking in my head. Granted it doesn't mean they are probably right, but it is nice to make connections or seemingly connections. (Probably committing a grave sin with this next part, because I don't recall the writer or when it was written) A prominent scientist wrote a book I believe was called "a bridge of light", which pretty much ended his career. The basics of the book was that remnants of the last civilization of man still existed in South America and was the source of UFO's. If I remember correctly they were staying hidden so as not to influence the current age too much, but help when they should.
If humans or some intelligent species has occupied Earth for the length of time some findings are suggesting. Why does there have to be Gods, Aliens* or what ever? *I think that what we refer to as aliens do exist, but perhaps they aren't as big an influence or any influence on this planet at all. In the length of time suggested man or ? could have advanced to superior intelligence & technology several times over. And perhaps that is just what has happened. Which brings your question and the whole idea of a new construct to the top and of much more importance. Being a planet of cycles, we will probably do it again and it would be nice to break the chain so to speak and come up with a workable livable system.

Brad

Ahkenaten
30th December 2010, 00:35
I would strongly urge anyone interested in this thread to view all four of these video clips from Exopolitics TV...............Jerry Wills' message, especially as he summarizes in tape 4, are on spot I think concerning adopting a frame of mind and behavior flowing from that conducive to positive change.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rI8a4oSJ6do&feature=fvw

Ty
30th December 2010, 02:13
This is a very puzzling question that I have been thinking about. I am beginning to think that the human species has been around here on earth for much longer than most of us have been educated to believe and that the "reality" construct that we occupy is very, very ancient. I don't know if you have read any of Michael Cremo's works, but I began looking into this issue some years ago and it seems, though I am no expert, that our mathematical, linguistic and musical concepts may be legacies, or the surviving superstructure, if you will, of the social and religious paradigm of a very ancient and highly developed culture. Also interesting in this regard is the magisterial Hamlet's Mill by De Santilla and Dechend. Others hinted at the same idea ..... Plato in his essay on Atlantis and Schwaller de Lubicz in his studies of the sacred geometry underlying Egyptian architecture. Anyway beginning with the tentative premise that a very highly developed possibly world-wide civilization existed in the distant past, of which ruins in the Andes in South America, Mexico, Egypt, and Balbeck Lebanon are but remnants; there MAY have been a power structure, governing elite, if you will who - I know this may sound pretty woo-woo, continued on in some form working through, for example the Egyptian priesthood, preserving the sacred knowledge and traditions encoded in symbols, mathematics, harmonics, language structures, and the CALENDAR. Now what we may be seeing is the reemergence of the ancient old power structures and systems of thought that have actually provided shape and form to human civilizations since the ancient times without the masses being aware of it........

Anyway this is just a sketch of the conclusions I am coming to, very tentative still. I think the heart of the mystery concerning what I call the Control Paradigm, is the symbol of the Pyramid with the all-seeing eye.

Someone has kept the mysteries alive through the languages, mathematics, harmonics, calendrics, for thousands of years............the interconnections between these systems are too many to be purely coincidental.

Maybe, just maybe, we are coming out of a terrible period of darkness into the light. Maybe, just maybe we will be able to wake up to who and what we are. However - there clearly is a struggle going on for control of the earth and humanity.

I hope I am making some sense. If you had told me even 10 years ago that I would be seriously entertaining any theories like this, I would have told you that you were nuts!!

Thanks Ahks,

I have read Cremo's Forbidden Archeology. Found it very interesting and convinced me that the popular timeline of human evolution is at best incomplete.

Also have been watching Ancient Aliens on the History Channel. They have discussed an immense number of "anomalies", the simplest explanation for which is that there was an advanced civilization pre-dating or alongside the commonly accepted timeline of our evolution.

It's still a bit of a leap for me, though, to believe that we somehow created this reality, either accidentally or on purpose. They only way I can find to reconcile that, not just with our own existence but all the other life on Earth is is if it happened prior to rudimentary evolution. Otherwise evolution explains everything.

Wish I had more time to look into this kind of stuff.

Thanks,
Ty

Intraphase
30th December 2010, 10:06
What I was saying to that person is that filing some paperwork is not going to obtain one's freedom..........

As for your other points, well taken and that was the purpose of posting this thread, to elicit others' ideas concerning this issue. And as you yourself have already pointed out, there are in fact other ways to withdraw consent.

That's your opinion. My responsibility is to respect your opinion.
I suggested to Teakai that she do what you already did; write a casebook -argument, thesis, thread.
I would only suggest something which has already occurred so as not to grossly weaken my own position.
The threads opening premises and strategic assessments coupled to a set of tactical assertions implies momentum.
I analyzed your argument and assessed its strength and weaknesses and can mail it to you or post it as a counter-argument.

I won't debate certain things. Green is green, a color is a color. I live in the real world where "The Game" is a substitute for the laws of the jungle.
Specifically that is, a: "Show me the money environment." like Nicholson when he confronts the Chinese gangsters who want to buy some computer chips in "The Departed."
"No ticky no laundry." of course he gives them fake chips and their missiles still suck.
In the game ideas are money and even more they can become hard assets. Real time real world synchronized realities. It really is a show me the money/momentum-rhythm-balance world.

Time is a big part of the game.
So when you speak of freedom there is the matter of degree.
Freedom always leads to cause and effect relationships and as time loses its grip on you as you gain knowledge of the game you have to be prepared for the effect showing up before the cause. That's always one of the most difficult barriers to accept. That you are your consciousness as your argument stated and that consciousness is outside of time. There are lines that run from the last great burst of momentum to its decaying leading edge that create the fabrics interlocking waveguides. Part of freedom is actually accepting responsibility. To quote a very talented sorcerer, "I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, "Move from here to there" and it will move."

So freedom is a form of consciousness that " Creates - Attends - Dismantles " its own creations after going through that five fold gaseous state of thought form coalescence you liked as the five stages of perception: Pure Self - Full Self - True Self - Whole Self - Natural Self. So to be free is to own your self, every self, every word, every deed and adjust them in the timeless world of pure geometric restrictions.
In practical everyday application that means sometimes you have to "take a grenade for the team" mostly you just roll along and pretend that you don't know. "Anything A-Bout The Nothing".

It is a text based game of interlocking descriptions and actions similar to the computers use of assembly code, operating systems and specialized programs for specific tasks.
Those five stages described are what people describe as ascension or bridge building. If you succeed the universe/ship of lights and cloud of awareness allots you computational assets (ships-bridges)to travel through geometric timeless worlds safely without creating random creations in realms where thought and action are too closely merged and vary for comfort and safety. In essence it grants you the benefit of the doubt that you have realized the complexity of cause and effect and that a degree of automation is worthwhile in a similar vein of not having to script every breath and movement of limbs.

If you see only information constructing information than the reptilian data fields are just another level of the game.
Its been so long since I fought a dinosaur that I am not qualified to speak to the nuances of subduing reptilia and forcing them to acknowledge your existence as a self generated independent sovereign traveler.
But those are the words arguments and information containers used with those colors of consciousness. Suffice to say I am at peace with the reptiles and like them and they use respect as a display of affection, I would never keep any species as a pet unless it was necessary to the way. Most people find that those are the prevalent opposition to their momentum when they start to step out of time and gain a degree of comfort with not analyzing cause and effect until all the geometric information is available.

If you want that counter-argument is yours for the taking.
I admire your overall position strategy and tactical reasoning.
Often its people with slight areas of difference who find the greatest sources of momentum.


Somewhere between George Orwell's tyrannical totalitarian superstate of "1984" and William Golding's anarchical unwinding of civilization in his "Lord of the Flies" lies a more nuanced way.
I personally can not detach and separate from the life system without losing continuity. The most precious aspect of momentum is continuity expressed in rhythms and balances even though
they are sometimes arrayed in opposition. I'm here until it ends or a new beginning is generated. Therefore I know I shall gain full knowledge of the sequential progressions involved and learn new knowledge.

In the end I believe in myself.
This isn't the only island of creation.
I myself have started from scratch alone.
To me, that's freedom as absolute responsibility.

Mean Mr. Mustard Seed - Beatles

Mean Mister Mustard sleeps in the park
Shaves in the dark trying to save paper
Sleeps in a hole in the road
Saving up to buy some clothes
Keeps a ten bob note up his nose
Such a mean old man
Such a mean old man

His sister Pam works in a shop
She never stops, she's a go-getter
Takes him out to look at the queen
Only place that he's ever been
Always shouts out something obscene
Such a dirty old man
Such a dirty old man


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63Hvny7pX8g&feature=related

Samurai
30th December 2010, 11:37
Can We Withdraw Consent from the Control Paradigm?

If this means can we consentually withdraw from the control paradigm - havnt we already?

if this means can we withdraw OUR consent TO the control paradigm - havnt we already?

we see it, we disagree with it, we are constantly aware of it, we are no longer effected by it in the same way the controlled are.

However we have a necessity to live within the structures we find ourselves in, and removing ourselves from these structures is to remove ourselves from where we can make the biggest change.

If the question is can we bring down the control paradigm by withdrawing our consent (i dont consent to you controlling us), then the answer right NOW is no.
no, because altho as David icke says 'we are many they are few' in relation to the controllers, im afraid at the moment the truth is the controlled are many and the uncontrolled are few.

xbusymom
30th December 2010, 16:23
I had the same thought this morning as Intraphase... what if the paradigm is not just the social engineering or depopulation or whatever??... what if the paradigm is bigger than that...?

If this is a cycle, then the unbalanced wobble in power might just be par for the course...

or maybe it is just like the sleep cycle... if it is interrupted – it starts over- you don’t just pick up where you left off... and since no one really knows how long this cycle is... or what is involved with the parameters of the cycle... then no one can say what is really going on.


However we have a necessity to live within the structures we find ourselves in, and removing ourselves from these structures is to remove ourselves from where we can make the biggest change.


If the polarized mechanics of this 3D dimension require the tension of good/bad, then we will never get fully out of the control grid of this paradigm. “One mans’ trash is another mans’ treasure” will always exemplify the viewpoint that each person has their own deciding vote on whether a particular situation is good or bad to them.

Ba-ba-Ra
30th December 2010, 18:57
It's still a bit of a leap for me, though, to believe that we somehow created this reality, either accidentally or on purpose.


Ty


Ty, I'd like to suggest a simple concept to begin this process, if you're interested. Take a lucid dream. You see people, you feel emotions, you preform tasks - and while you're in it - it all feels real, as if it's happening. For example if someone is chasing you, you feel the fear, you think you're running, you feel your heart beat. Where is all this happening?.... and who created it?

I think most of us would say that's just a state of consciousness. Of course, what we call awake, is another state of consciousness, but who's to say that we aren't creating this one as well? A scientist will tell you the chair you're sitting on is mostly space, with some molecules (atoms, electron, protons, etc) whirling around at phenomenal speeds. Yet to you the chair is solid and stationary. You can't put your finger through it. Science keeps breaking down matter, and the more they break it down, the less solid they find. We all accept this as true, yet we also believe it's all solid. So, would you say that somehow we've accepted two diametrically opposed beliefs systems about the world we live in?

Once you can accept that each state we live in is really just another state of consciousness -(deep sleep, dream state, lucid dream state, daydreaming, awake) then can you expand that to the possibility of other states of consciousness that we either haven't learned to access, or potentially we access and don't remember. Many people now have had out-of-body experiences. Perhaps that's one of them.

Okay, now go back to what we call awake state. Begin paying attention to each action you originate or respond to. Can you watch where it goes and see how life might have gone differently if you had reacted differently. I think we're all pretty much aware of how our actions create our reality with other humans. Now try it with something none human. Plants are often a good place to begin. Find one plant that you can truly love - and just love it. Sing and talk to it as if it were a baby, touch if affectionately, etc. Now see what happens. But you must do it from the heart & truly feel it.

Ty, I know this sounds simplistic and maybe eerie-fairy to some. But I encourage you to try it. Once you see results (and the first attempts may take some time- but as with learning to play an instrument as you practice your skill will grow), then keep expanding outward, love your house and property in the same way, then your street, then neighborhood, etc.

Ahkenaten
30th December 2010, 19:23
Thanks Ba Ba Ra for your post above. I think finally the subject of change comes down to the individual and the collective we. As Jerry Wills put it in tape four of the series I posted above, we must be mindful of our state of mind and that there is a need to "bring everyone along"........(best expressed, I believe, in the Bodhissatva Vow, though I am not prosletyzing that view here) we must treat others as we wish to be treated, understanding that they are part of ourselves. In interacting with others (and by 'others' I do not mean only humans!), our being the best person we can be is very important because in our behavior, attitude, words, expressions and projection, we can be a sign, a light and a hope for others, an exemplar of what is GOOD. It is in that sense that I posit the concept of our "creating our reality" and is in that creative and truly loving sense that I have hope that we can change for the better both individually and collectively - again, not to be relentlessly repetitive, IF WE FIRST WAKE UP to who and what we are!!

Teakai
31st December 2010, 00:45
Thanks Ba Ba Ra for your post above. I think finally the subject of change comes down to the individual and the collective we. As Jerry Wills put it in tape four of the series I posted above, we must be mindful of our state of mind and that there is a need to "bring everyone along"........(best expressed, I believe, in the Bodhissatva Vow, though I am not prosletyzing that view here) we must treat others as we wish to be treated, understanding that they are part of ourselves. In interacting with others (and by 'others' I do not mean only humans!), our being the best person we can be is very important because in our behavior, attitude, words, expressions and projection, we can be a sign, a light and a hope for others, an exemplar of what is GOOD. It is in that sense that I posit the concept of our "creating our reality" and is in that creative and truly loving sense that I have hope that we can change for the better both individually and collectively - again, not to be relentlessly repetitive, IF WE FIRST WAKE UP to who and what we are!!

Ahk - for fear of rehashing a very tired point - I do very much agree with much of what you say here, that we have to be conscious of our state of mind.
To my way of thinking it is the most fundamental step of all.

And that means to be conscious of our own thoughts and opinions and where they arise from, and why we hold onto thinking that is inherited and not our own.

I think it was Busymom, who mentioned earlier about getting one's house in order - and I think that house is us, our mind - and we must declutter it of all ideas that have no place there, but are just junking up the place and misguiding us.

How do we be a guiding light to anybody, let alone ourselves, if we cannot reasonably explain our own thinking?

Now, you keep saying about people waking up, yet you yourself (and I'm not just singling you out, it's food for thought for everybody who does the same) cannot justify why you strongly hold certain opinions, which are in essence opposite to other opinions you hold.

Normally, I'd let this go, but this site being what it is and you being so determined to wake up, and urging everyone else to wake up, I just feel compelled to say it.

jeannacav
31st December 2010, 02:35
I would strongly urge anyone interested in this thread to view all four of these video clips from Exopolitics TV...............Jerry Wills' message, especially as he summarizes in tape 4, are on spot I think concerning adopting a frame of mind and behavior flowing from that conducive to positive change....

Wow, thanks for this.
I like Alfred Lambremont Webre and now, I have met (in a way) Jerry Wills!


This is a great interview.
Um a little depressing given his prediction, but very timely for this forum.

I am sometimes discouraged by how easily the conversations here at PA devolve into arguments and lack of respect.

Mutual respect and leading the way, by doing not talking.

Thank you a lot,

jeanna

Oh, and we are divine and of god.
We are powerful... more powerful than the HAARP!
Cool

Ahkenaten
31st December 2010, 03:13
Hi Jeanna - I am personally VERY impressed with Jerry Wills for whatever that is worth. While he may not have the brightest prognosis for our collective reality considering where we seem to be heading, all hope is not lost!! I stumbled upon Jerry when doing a websearch on Ollantaytambo, one of my pet interests, and synchronistically came up with his website, Expeditionstv.com.....................it turns out someone else on Avalon also came upon him over the past few days, to me an interesting coincidence. I am glad you enjoyed this interview. If you want to check out what he has been doing down in Peru and Bolivia, visit his website at Expeditionstv.com --- there are short films of various expeditions he has led down there including Tiawanaku, Bolivia, the sacred waters (INCREDIBLE) and others. Again, and this is only my very humble opinion and when I say humble opinion I really mean it!!! I am VERY impressed with Jerry Wills and the information and personal integrity he offers to our quest.

Ahk

Intraphase
31st December 2010, 14:53
I watched all four videos and thought they gave good witness to their perspectives.
There was a lot there because they covered so much ground. The interviewer was talking of a heavy (weighty in consequence) structure of the universe's core to the galaxy core to the solar system's sun core as a transmission of the vital life forces. Jerry's testimony was consequential in that the entities he dealt with disappeared after 911.

If this point we share as an extended now in spacetime vs. timespace is used as a zero mark on a number line then the beings he was dealing with existed on a timeline that originated here but collapsed. That kind of fits in with the interviewers description of an overall transmission system. Transmission as both gears in fluid time and also subtle waves of consciousness capable of passing through the heavier equipment seamlessly.

I am very earthcentric on the one hand believing deeply it all works out in an acceptable way and balance that by looking at the social order as a learning environment built from the top down as a university that attracted colleges that built high schools that funded grammar schools and kindergarten until finally a construct rolls around called 12/31/2010 and almost seven billion differentiated forms of consciousness look at each other and say in harmony: :nono:"Now What?!!!":nono:

Jerry's point about everyone having to be dragged across the goal line to safety or else we would just be creating a bunch of time mafia hoodlum "hells" based on competing matrixes of evolution is deeply understood here.

The U.S. intelligence services know stuff that is so tangential-weird to everyday reality that they have a hard time coming to grips with it themselves. Groups of people getting together and pooling their (computational/quantum) resources to effect an outcome that affects knowingly or unknowingly the destiny of the "whole" group is always a tricky business. Some governments, religions, and small but powerful groups have tried and the end result is always a new level of knowledge regarding the intricate webs that form our everyday reality. They find themselves bound to their past and future identities without knowing for sure if that is an authentic time line of what they regard as self-identity.

The one key observation I have about time lines is that it is a complex process involving dual direction expansion of a sphere of information that overwrites empty or previously created time slices. So to travel far into the past is to travel far into the future and maintain a solid level of communication and transportation between three points separated by vast physical distance and negligible time distance . If a person was on earth now and wanted to extend their time field the limit would be about 4 billion in each direction for 8 billion solar revolutions.

I imagine living deep in the past alone (to gain access to a distant future) is to boring for anything less than the most dedicated of players. Talking to stromatolites could be tedious after a few million years.

Excellent contrast in their perspectives.

When I need an attitude upgrade I use this silver hammer to knock myself on the head a few times.

Life is the question.:photo:
Love is the answer.

If that doesn't do the trick.

Time is the lock.:lock1:
Consciousness is the key.

My POV as a worldview besides life as a university is that there is a clocking construct at the center of creation similar to your panopticon concept. Anything that happens or doesn't happen here has already happened or not happened out there. Seven billion differentiated conscious beings do not assemble spontaneously to utter a collective :bored::bored:"Duhhh...:tape:

A big part of Hegellian dialectic that I was introduced to by your rhetorical question to create a thread was the idea of a final "Totality" where the three stages fold in on themselves and the thing examined is known anew. Maybe that is one aspect of the current series of phenomena. The universe looking in the mirror and taking its own picture so it has something to contemplate and share with the infinite silence beyond the border areas of consciousness.

Intraphase
31st December 2010, 14:57
Thxs for starting the topic

Ty
31st December 2010, 15:10
Hi Ba-ba-Ra,

I used to marvel at the similarity between the structure of the universe as we currently understand it and the structure of matter. Within a table leg, at the atomic and subatomic level lies another universe. Who's to say that our universe isn't a table leg in some higher dimension?


Of course, what we call awake, is another state of consciousness, but who's to say that we aren't creating this one as well? A scientist will tell you the chair you're sitting on is mostly space, with some molecules (atoms, electron, protons, etc) whirling around at phenomenal speeds. Yet to you the chair is solid and stationary. You can't put your finger through it. Science keeps breaking down matter, and the more they break it down, the less solid they find. We all accept this as true, yet we also believe it's all solid. So, would you say that somehow we've accepted two diametrically opposed beliefs systems about the world we live in?

No. I wouldn't say these are diametrically opposed. That solid matter is mostly empty space I just accept as the nature of matter. Kind of like accepting that humans are, if I remember right, 78% water. Everything is made up of something else and, like you said, each time we think we've drilled down to the basic building block we find another level. Last I heard we are now down to the muons, pions, gluons and such in the quantum realm. Have they detected anything smaller? I know they theorize now with String Theory that all matter is the result of vibrating strings, but there is a sharp divide among theoretical physicists on this theory.

There are several important differences I see betweeen dream-state and awake-state that lead me to believe that awake-state is more than just a state of conciousness. The main one is scope. In the dream-world our dreams (at least mine) always center around ourselves. It's like watching a movie where we are in every scene, nothing happens beyond the frame and only the people in that frame share the experience. I have tried to have "shared" dreams before with no success. To meet someone in the dream-state who I know in my awake-state and see if we have the same memory of the dream. So far have never been able to link up in the dream-world. Perhaps it's worth trying again. Interested?

At any rate, it seems that in the awake-state the world rolls on outside of the frame of it we occupy. That events outside of our frame are perceived identically by dozens, hundreds, thousands of people. If "we're" creating this, are we all creating the same shared remote events? Or is the reality I perceive in my awake-state just my reality and everyone in it who I consider to be "real" are just manifestations I interact with like in my dream-state?

If so then you don't actually exist and whatever response you give to this is actually me, whoever I really am, offering Ba-ba-Ra's perspective. And all the thousands of posts in this forum which I didn't even know existed a month ago, many sharply different opinions, are just me discussing and debating with myself?

I'm not denying that there are other states of conciousness. The problem I have believing that our awake-state is nothing else, beyond what I said above, is... where does it end? If what I experience in my day to day life isn't "reality" is the Earth? The solar system? The universe? Maybe that's the case. I don't know one way or the other. If it is, then it would be easier for me to believe that none of us really exist and our shared perceived reality is just the manifestation of someone else's dream. Wouldn't that be the ultimate control paradigm? That would rob us of any power at all to change things.

Of these three choices...

1) That "reality" exists outside of our conscious or subconscious creation of it
2) That "reality" is being manifested by someone, somewhere and we are all living in his dream world
3) That "reality" is being consciously manifested by each of us, knowingly or unknowingly, and only the appropriate "I" exists, everyone else is just a manifestation...

... it seems to me that 1 or 2 are the more likely. I'm sure there are more than these three and would like to explore them as well if someone wants to elaborate on this.


Find one plant that you can truly love - and just love it. Sing and talk to it as if it were a baby, touch if affectionately, etc. Now see what happens. But you must do it from the heart & truly feel it.

It's been demonstrated that this has a positive effect on plants. I don't know if it's been shown to be anything more than the benefits of increased CO2 though. But even if it has, it indicates a level of communication and connectedness that we don't currently understand and can't explain. It doesn't necessarily imply that "reality" is just a state of conciousness.

I have a friend with some psychic abilities. He grew up in an atypical environment and had to rely more on his primitive or innate instincts to survive. I think that resulted in him developing an ability we probably all have but fail to develop. But again, it doesn't necessarily imply some kind of shared consciousness.


Ty, I know this sounds simplistic and maybe eerie-fairy to some. But I encourage you to try it. Once you see results (and the first attempts may take some time- but as with learning to play an instrument as you practice your skill will grow), then keep expanding outward, love your house and property in the same way, then your street, then neighborhood, etc.

Thanks Ba-ba-Ra for the encouragement. I have not yet looked at the videos posted a few posts back. Perhaps they will help me see things in a different light.

Ty
31st December 2010, 16:10
Hi Teakai,



And that means to be conscious of our own thoughts and opinions and where they arise from, and why we hold onto thinking that is inherited and not our own.


This is a very interesting topic. Thought is at the root of all discussions here and may be a central and as yet not thoroughly explored subtopic.

I've been involved in a discussion about the origin of thoughts with someone off and on for a couple months. Her position is that we have no control over our thoughts.

Now, everyone reading that had some thought in reaction to it. Why did you have it? Where did it come from? How did it originate? Could you have had another thought or were you only able to have the thought you had?

Her argument is that every thought is the result of prior experience. Every decision is the only decision, among your apparent choices, that you could make. That if thought originates in the brain from the firing of neurons then what determines which neurons fire is the sum of your prior experience.

This ultimately gets down to free will and whether it exists. She believes it's an illusion. I'm reluctant to accept that but haven't been able to penetrate her argument.

It may be tempting to dismiss this, but if she's right then our thinking is always our own, whether inherited or not. We wouldn't inherit thinking that wasn't congruous with our prior experience. We couldn't.

Mulder
1st January 2011, 07:08
"I read a book called "Abduction to the 9th planet" where the aliens wanted to suggest to us through this man that the best way to "win" this tyranny is to stop going to work.
Everything will stop and eventually the entire system will crash.
It means doctors and police and everybody must not go to work.
Then we could all live on a permanent vacation being self sufficient."

It was recently the Anniversary of John Lennon's death, and I've been thinking how he & Yoko actually promoted opting out, by their "bed protest." Lennon very wisely said that the Govt WANTS you to be violent, so they can bring in the "Police State" and everyone should just stay in bed!!! I watched old news reels of Lennon & Yoko in bed and he said to the effect that all the protests and violence wasn't stopping the war, so people should stay home instead. It's EXTREMELY wise & insightful. I personally like to "take the power back" and out-smart my opponent, so I think staying home would take back the power. But you'd have to understand the Govt's response would be to cut off all water & power, so you'd all have to prepare first.

Teakai
1st January 2011, 08:55
Hi Teakai,



This is a very interesting topic. Thought is at the root of all discussions here and may be a central and as yet not thoroughly explored subtopic.

I've been involved in a discussion about the origin of thoughts with someone off and on for a couple months. Her position is that we have no control over our thoughts.

Now, everyone reading that had some thought in reaction to it. Why did you have it? Where did it come from? How did it originate? Could you have had another thought or were you only able to have the thought you had?

Her argument is that every thought is the result of prior experience. Every decision is the only decision, among your apparent choices, that you could make. That if thought originates in the brain from the firing of neurons then what determines which neurons fire is the sum of your prior experience.

This ultimately gets down to free will and whether it exists. She believes it's an illusion. I'm reluctant to accept that but haven't been able to penetrate her argument.

It may be tempting to dismiss this, but if she's right then our thinking is always our own, whether inherited or not. We wouldn't inherit thinking that wasn't congruous with our prior experience. We couldn't.

Hi Ty – well, I think there are thoughts that arise from bodily needs – eg. I’m thirsty, hungry, cold etc.
There are reactive thoughts – I’m afraid, I’m angry, I’m annoyed. etc.

And there are thoughts that arise from a state of higher consciousness.

But, are thoughts the same as opinions?

To my thinking an opinion is a specific idea we hold based upon learning (brainwashing) or our life experience.
The opinions we hold may or may not have any real substance.

If we analyse all the opinions we have and put them up to the light and see if they hold water, then we can know if they are worth keeping – or if we are lighter and less burdened discarding them as they are worthless to us, and by holding onto them we are just carrying around inherited baggage and making our choices through their filter.

A friend once told me about a study that shows that the brain/body knows it’s going to make an impulse action 3 seconds before we are consciously aware of it. I haven’t looked into that very deeply and have no idea how they figure it out – but am just passing that idea along.

I also do not think there is free will as such.
The extent to which I see the freewill part is that we are free to observe and act from the lower brain (ego identity/survival) or from the higher brain (soul/Christ).
To make the choice to operate through higher brain thinking, one must first let go of and de-clutter all the baggage that is holding them in lower brain observation.

I guess it may be seen as a sub-topic, but the way I see it – correct thinking is vital to making the right choices.
And I don’t mean correct as in right or wrong, but in that we are making our choices through an elevated mindstate that does not have the filter of self interest and self survival blurring it.

Ty
1st January 2011, 15:05
Hi Ty – well, I think there are thoughts that arise from bodily needs – eg. I’m thirsty, hungry, cold etc.
There are reactive thoughts – I’m afraid, I’m angry, I’m annoyed. etc.

Agreed. But are these not just states of existence that result in certain neurons firing to tell us we're hungry, thirsty, angry...etc?


And there are thoughts that arise from a state of higher consciousness.

Perhaps that's the avenue out of the prior experience loop. Then it begs the question - what is higher consciousness? If it's just a different way to think then we're back to what made those neurons fire. If it's something else, then what?


But, are thoughts the same as opinions?

To my thinking an opinion is a specific idea we hold based upon learning (brainwashing) or our life experience.

Sounds like you're reinforcing my friends theory. Is an idea not just a thought or a collection of thoughts? And an opinion essentially the same thing?


If we analyse all the opinions we have and put them up to the light and see if they hold water, then we can know if they are worth keeping – or if we are lighter and less burdened discarding them as they are worthless to us, and by holding onto them we are just carrying around inherited baggage and making our choices through their filter.

And if we do that, what determines which ones we decide are worth keeping or discarding? If it isn't certain neurons firing then what is it? And if it is, then what determined which ones fired? See the loop? No matter how I tried to penetrate the argument it always came back to the same thing.


I also do not think there is free will as such.
The extent to which I see the freewill part is that we are free to observe and act from the lower brain (ego identity/survival) or from the higher brain (soul/Christ).
To make the choice to operate through higher brain thinking, one must first let go of and de-clutter all the baggage that is holding them in lower brain observation.

What allows us to make that choice or determines it's outcome if not neurons firing? The question always comes back to this and what determines which ones fire and whether we have any control over it. I want to believe we do but haven't yet identified what mechanism that would be outside of whatever bio-chemical-electrical triggers that cause neurons to fire.

xbusymom
1st January 2011, 18:32
But you'd have to understand the Govt's response would be to cut off all water & power, so you'd all have to prepare first.

dont forget about food- and with the new Codex Alimentarius food bill- we are quickly cut off from growing our own food now too...

I keep thinking there has to be a loophole they haven't thought of...

gryphynsclaw
1st January 2011, 20:36
dont forget about food- and with the new Codex Alimentarius food bill- we are quickly cut off from growing our own food now too...

I keep thinking there has to be a loophole they haven't thought of...

I don't remember exactly when or who wrote it, but there was a book about controlling populations. One of the main factors was to insure it has food but not too much. Because a starving or over fed population will revolt. Face it they can pull the strings to make the majority of the population do pretty much anything with out resulting to force. However, you can be assured there will be limited amounts of that more as a demonstration of it then as a suppression tactic.

Ty, I don't see the importance if we have independent thoughts; originated by ourselves or pulled from the universe or some other place. I believe the importance is in the connections and realizations that come from them. Perhaps, making those connections can lead to independent thought. Or maybe the universe just constantly feeds up bits and pieces, leaving freewill on what we choose to hear or act on up to us.

Brad

Teakai
2nd January 2011, 00:01
Agreed. But are these not just states of existence that result in certain neurons firing to tell us we're hungry, thirsty, angry...etc?


Yes. It's a body mind reaction.
Although there is the well known case of the old Yogi who hasn’t eaten in something like 75 years – and there’s the young Indian boy who, by choice, hasn’t eaten or drunk in something like 6 months.

They have used their mind to elevate themselves above the point of the physical.




Perhaps that's the avenue out of the prior experience loop. Then it begs the question - what is higher consciousness? If it's just a different way to think then we're back to what made those neurons fire. If it's something else, then what?


I’d say that the level of the higher brain is more observatory – it watches without the influence or interference of ego self identity.

That way, when one makes choices they can use the mind as a tool – rather than the mind using them.

Higher consciousness is always there in every one of us – only it’s junked up by the thoughts and opinions and physicality we identify with being who we are.

So long as we believe ourselves to be our thoughts and ideas we are thinking from that perspective.
We continue loop thinking.
We can move the clutter about, but it’s still there.
We need to surrender who we think we are in order to discover the reality of who we are.
The perspective of ego identity will not make the choice to really choose higher mind, because that would be death to the ego identity and ego is all about survival – it’s a bit of a paradox – therefore, shuffling clutter won’t work, because the clutter is what makes up the ego identity.
It has to be disintegrated.
Held up under scrutiny to the light of reason and dissolved.

The thing is, is that once you have done it, you can look back and see the before and after. You can see the process taken.
But while being in the state of ego identity it is virtually impossible to consider that there is another part of you that exists and that the you you think is you – is actually not you at all.

So, above all else - what we really have to wake up to – is ourselves.

It took me around 2 years of denial before I could give any kind of consideration to the possibility that I might not be the person I thought I was.






Sounds like you're reinforcing my friends theory. Is an idea not just a thought or a collection of thoughts? And an opinion essentially the same thing?


Well, there are thoughts – it’s hot, it’s cold, she’s nice, I’ll make potatoes for dinner, I hate work etc. These are fleeting and changeable – but they are thoughts that arise in the mind.

There are ideas, which are thoughts which when put into action bring one through to an end result. Like the lightbulb or the safety pin.

Then there are opinions to which we may become very much attached. Religion, how we vote, what we think about education, our views on morality, which make of car is the best etc.
These usually arise from what we have been taught to believe and our experiences in life which are very strongly affected by our subconscious beliefs.

We know we’re attached to them because when they are threatened or someone disagrees with them or has an alternate viewpoint - we get angry about it.
We see ourselves as being threatened – and go into survival (fight or flight) mode.
This is the absolute province of ego thinking. It's all about survival.

From the higher mind one moves into observer mode – it does not have judgment calls based on prior learnings. It is just a state of unbiased observation.


And if we do that, what determines which ones we decide are worth keeping or discarding? If it isn't certain neurons firing then what is it? And if it is, then what determined which ones fired? See the loop? No matter how I tried to penetrate the argument it always came back to the same thing.


If they don’t have any substance to them, then they are not worth keeping. If you believe a certain opinion/belief to be valid because it was taught to you in church, or at school or by your parents, or because somebody said it and then investigating whether the source itself is at all legitimate.

It is my personal finding that when we do this – very little, if anything remains.

As a finite example, this idea can be viewed as a blackboard (the blackboard being the higher mind) written all over with white chalk (the white chalk being that which makes up our ego identity – that is, thoughts we think, or we have adopted from others about ourselves that we believe to be who we are).

As we take each opinion/belief, hold it to the light and watch it disintegrate, a small section of the blackboard is exposed. The more we do this, the more of the blackboard is exposed.
Eventually we will have cleared the blackboard and just have the blackboard. From the clear surface of the blackboard we can then make choices that are not influenced by false preconceptions.
The loop has been removed.

We have undergone a process which takes our point of observation from a reactive state where we are a victim of the mind to a non reactive state where we can use the mind as a tool.


What allows us to make that choice or determines it's outcome if not neurons firing? The question always comes back to this and what determines which ones fire and whether we have any control over it. I want to believe we do but haven't yet identified what mechanism that would be outside of whatever bio-chemical-electrical triggers that cause neurons to fire.

Our point of observation.
We have moved from the passenger seat into the driver’s seat.

Ty
2nd January 2011, 15:34
Hi Brad,


Ty, I don't see the importance if we have independent thoughts; originated by ourselves or pulled from the universe or some other place. I believe the importance is in the connections and realizations that come from them. Perhaps, making those connections can lead to independent thought. Or maybe the universe just constantly feeds up bits and pieces, leaving freewill on what we choose to hear or act on up to us.

The connections and realizations, are themselves the result of other thoughts. Every conclusion we reach, we reach by some process of evaluation and that process seem always to involve thought. Even what seems to be intuition, originates in thought. I'm using "thought" in a very broad sense here as a simple way to refer to neurons firing or neural activity.

So even if the universe is constantly feeding up bits and pieces that we choose between, the process of choosing only has the appearance of free will. At least if the argument holds up.

In the sense that we can't change it, it isn't important. Whatever it is, however it works, that's the way it is and we live with it. In the context of this thread, it is the ultimate control paradigm. If we really don't have free will at our personal level of beliefs, choice and decisions that lead to actions... does anything else matter?

Ty
2nd January 2011, 15:48
From the higher mind one moves into observer mode – it does not have judgment calls based on prior learnings. It is just a state of unbiased observation... We have moved from the passenger seat into the driver’s seat.

I like the idea that there is a higher conscience that operates outside of the prior-experience, neural activity loop.

Some questions about this...


You said it took you a couple years of denial before considering there might be more to you than you thought. Once you acknowledged it, how long did it take you to access a higher state?
Do you go through day to day life in this state or is it more like meditation - something you set aside time for?
How do you know you are in the driver's seat?


Optimally, I would like someone to punch a giant gaping hole in the "free will is an illusion" argument. Preferably one that doesn't require a higher state of consciousness that can't easily be employed in our day to day lives.

I hate the idea that my thoughts and choices are pre-ordained or unavoidable.

Ahk, I opened this topic here because it seems like the ultimate control paradigm. If you feel like it's derailing the thread from your original intent I'll start a separate thread.

Intraphase
2nd January 2011, 18:21
Boy that's a tough one.
I'll try to tie into into the observer and the observed but also link it thematically into withdrawing consent from the controlling paradigm.
Because my mind craves simplicity I recently saw the observer and observed as an asterisk surrounded by a circle in an attempt to understand the discussions I would read using those terms.
The observers seems to know every outcome and is what people call pure silent clear light thought as a form of momentum without resistance. In the little vision I saw the asterisk and circle around it was the observer and the open spaces (five slices) were the living being in time. To go to the controlling paradigm the most pernicious (pestilent-baneful-insidious) is time. All of the groups who vie for control of this world seek undue influence of the hidden veils of timespace both the breathing ones that circulate from inward to outward and back, but; and most importantly the rather stationary ones that can be used as a hidden power source before that veil is depleted and dies. The nazi bell is a glaring cliche one but there are many less obvious including all the symbolism employed in architecture by religions, governments and groups seeking longevity.

Because of the range of exposure to mild to moderate trauma and unfathomable glimpses into other worlds I rebuilt my mind after a one hundred percent complete meltdown.
I don't believe it's necessary for a person to experience that, but back when it happened in the fall of 1984 there wasn't very much information(easy to access sources) to push a person in the direction of temporarily setting aside all previous known beliefs and conclusions and starting anew by building only the most simple and powerful ideas into a core belief structure of ones "right to exist" and think grow and learn in their own way time and speed. That period was when I finally came to grips with the idea that the body is the actor on the stage and the observer and the observed are the audience member and star performer. Some people call it the dreamer and the dreamed but I favor the previous because it implies a permanent observer and various lives and stages of the observed in motion of thoughts and actions in various lives and scenarios.

To Ty's free will question I could give an avalanche of arguments.
I had to do a violent criminal case 12/31/01 involving extreme sensations (with a physician present) so currently I'm doped up to prevent long term memory registration from registering and retaining the emotional charge, but I can make 99% unassailable arguments for free will. I watch the construct of free will in action all the time where two or more person with no previous connection in this life "OR ANY OTHER LIFE" engage in the most heinous examples of free will by following the most destructive deplorable course available. That is my real world example(crime) I see the aftermath of the collisions and go into the surrounding veils to gather the tidbits of information the investigator needs to start narrowing the search between several alternative possibilities.

A real solid argument for free will is based on all the forms and styles of behavior that can protect free will such as reprogramming yourself one word at a time. Seizing the inner eternal spark and building an immortal soul wall of selfhood, around it to serve as sanctuary and a searchable library of records and quick and easy to scan pointers or words of wisdom.
Obtuse abstract arguments against free will are those that quickly breach the point of abstraction and they are the silly ones such as why can't I fly or why can't I wake up tomorrow as a Samurai in the 7th century.

To me time is the controlling paradigm and this silly but rather healthy body I'm stuck in that is threatening to hang around another fifty years.
I see the social order as a rather fine tuned comedy where god is the character in that little sea shell thing at center stage cueing the actors and making sure they don't forgot their lines and making sure they hit their stage marks. God in the sense of our original underwriter and creative partner in this huge passion play called life, hoping like all the actors and audience members that the curtain doesn't fall down accidentally or by sabotage.

Coincidence and free will are definitely part of the big (orchestra)mixing board of life.

Ty
2nd January 2011, 21:21
Hi Intraphase,


I watch the construct of free will in action all the time where two or more person with no previous connection in this life "OR ANY OTHER LIFE" engage in the most heinous examples of free will by following the most destructive deplorable course available. That is my real world example(crime) ... A real solid argument for free will is based on all the forms and styles of behavior that can protect free will such as reprogramming yourself one word at a time.

Maybe I'm missing it but it seems like these examples all reflect conscious choices. As such they originate with neural activity. What I'm seeking is the mechanism that puts us in the driver's seat of that activity (as teakai puts it) and not at its mercy.

I don't know that there is an answer to this but thanks for taking a stab at it.

Teakai
3rd January 2011, 00:18
Hi Brad,



The connections and realizations, are themselves the result of other thoughts. Every conclusion we reach, we reach by some process of evaluation and that process seem always to involve thought. Even what seems to be intuition, originates in thought. I'm using "thought" in a very broad sense here as a simple way to refer to neurons firing or neural activity.

So even if the universe is constantly feeding up bits and pieces that we choose between, the process of choosing only has the appearance of free will. At least if the argument holds up.

In the sense that we can't change it, it isn't important. Whatever it is, however it works, that's the way it is and we live with it. In the context of this thread, it is the ultimate control paradigm. If we really don't have free will at our personal level of beliefs, choice and decisions that lead to actions... does anything else matter?

Hi Ty - free will is an interesting subject. It seems you are saying that if we don't have free will, then everything is a done deal.
I would disagree with this, because as we start to use the mind as a tool, we would take a different action than if we were simply being a victim of mind and having it controlled for us.

If everybody began using their higher mind - the 'system' would collapse - because higher mind has no fear, so it can't be controlled by fear tactics.
It doesn't make its choices with it's own survival taking precedence.
Fear arises in the region of the lower brain.

In the brain is the amygdalla, it's like a little switch which you can consciously click backwards and forwards. Backwards it connects to the primitive brain, click forward to connect with the higher brain.

Teakai
3rd January 2011, 01:15
I like the idea that there is a higher conscience that operates outside of the prior-experience, neural activity loop.

Some questions about this...


You said it took you a couple years of denial before considering there might be more to you than you thought. Once you acknowledged it, how long did it take you to access a higher state?
Do you go through day to day life in this state or is it more like meditation - something you set aside time for?
How do you know you are in the driver's seat?


.

Ty, maybe denial isn’t a good word for it. Fact is, I just couldn't even comprehend that I wasn’t what I thought I was.
How could I not be me? What was I if I wasn’t me? I must be this me, because there’s no other me about that I can see – that sort of thing.

The 2 years after the introduction of the idea was like a slow wearing away and opening to the possibility. I guess one way to think of it is that a seed was planted and it took 2 years for it to grow enough that I could see the bud.

That was about 15 years ago.

Compared to some my journey has been quite slow and very gentle. Some people have instant awakenings when terrible and tragic things happen in their lives.
What they thought was their preconceived reality crumbles before their eyes and some, if they don’t succumb first, come out the other side of the event with a whole new awareness of themselves.

Higher mindstate isn't something you reach for or attain, it's your true state - it's always there, only we don't see it for the junk we're focusing on. I had lots of junk. :)

I do meditate for approx 20 minutes morning and night. I’ve been doing that for a few years. Now I don’t have mind chatter at all.
I can truly say that I am a completely different person to the one I thought I was.
This thought makes me laugh to think on it because it really is so amazing.

What started me on the journey – and I think this is amusing, too – is that a telemarketer rang to try and sell me a phone – and during the conversation she told me about a book by Betty Eadie, called Embraced by the Light.
Well, one thing led to another and I read this and read that and thought about this and that and then I'd do other stuff for a while and think about other stuff instead, and slowly I trudged my way along.

Higher mind state is limitless though. Just clearing the clutter puts you there by default, but then there are limitless possibilities that it contains.

Because I am in control of the thoughts I choose to think and I can observe them without attachment to them. I am aware that I am not my thoughts, but the thinker and the observer of them.




Optimally, I would like someone to punch a giant gaping hole in the "free will is an illusion" argument. Preferably one that doesn't require a higher state of consciousness that can't easily be employed in our day to day lives.

I hate the idea that my thoughts and choices are pre-ordained or unavoidable.


It’s my take that the free will exists in you choosing what mind state you work from.
Prior to that your ultimate freewill choices were made in the soul state. (Before earthly incarnation)
As soul state is at the level of higher mind, if you work from the level of higher mind, then you are pretty much allowing yourself to be guided – by yourself. That is, the part of you that is blocked by conscious memory.

Higher mind state is a really fascinating and infinite thing – I view it as when you have a torch, and you stand up close to a wall. The closer you stand the smaller the light and the more defined are its edges, but the further you step back the bigger the light grows and the less defined the edges of the circle becomes – and there is no end to the amount of steps back you can take.

If everyone did that our lights would all eventually join together and there would be only light.

But, if only you did it – your peace of mind would not be dependent on others doing it also because you have already moved yourself into that place of non judgmental observation.

loveandgratitude
3rd January 2011, 06:31
A copied this article about two years ago and I did not write down the author but I felt these are the fundamentals of the mind control ooperating in our society today and how to avoid mind control.

10 WAYS OF MIND CONTROL

The more one researches mind control, the more one will come to the conclusion that there is a coordinated script that has been in place for a very long time with the goal to turn the human race into non-thinking automatons.* For as long as man has pursued power over the masses, mind control has been orchestrated by those who study human behavior in order to bend large populations to the will of a small "elite" group.* Today, we have entered a perilous phase where mind control has taken on a physical, scientific dimension that threatens to become a permanent state if we do not become aware of the tools at the disposal of the technocratic dictatorship unfolding on a worldwide scale.

Modern mind control is both technological and psychological.* Tests show that simply by exposing the methods of mind control, the effects can be reduced or eliminated, at least for mind control advertising and propaganda.* More difficult to counter are the physical intrusions, which the military-industrial complex continues to develop and improve upon.

1. Education -- This is the most obvious, yet still remains the most insidious.* It has always been a would-be dictator's ultimate fantasy to "educate" naturally impressionable children, thus it has been a central component to Communist and Fascist tyrannies throughout history.* No one has been more instrumental in exposing the agenda of modern education than Charlotte Iserbyt -- one can begin research into this area by downloading a free PDF of her book, The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, which lays bare the role of Globalist foundations in shaping a future intended to produce servile drones lorded over by a fully educated, aware elite class. **

2. Advertising and Propaganda -- Edward Bernays has been cited as the inventor of the consumerist culture that was designed primarily to target people's self-image (or lack thereof) in order to turn a want into a need.* This was initially envisioned for products such as cigarettes, for example.* However, Bernays also noted in his 1928 book, Propaganda, that "propaganda is the executive arm of the invisible government." This can be seen most clearly in the modern police state and the growing citizen snitch culture, wrapped up in the pseudo-patriotic War on Terror.* The increasing consolidation of media has enabled the entire corporate structure to merge with government, which now utilizes the concept of propaganda placement.* Media; print, movies, television, and cable news can now work seamlessly to integrate an overall message which seems to have the ring of truth because it comes from so many sources, simultaneously.* When one becomes attuned to identifying the main "message," one will see this imprinting everywhere.* And this is not even to mention subliminal messaging.
*

3.Predictive Programming -- Many still deny that predictive programming is real.* I would invite anyone to examine the range of documentation put together by Alan Watt and come to any other conclusion.* Predictive programming has its origins in predominately elitist Hollywood, where the big screen can offer a big vision of where society is headed.*

4. Sports, Politics, Religion -- Some might take offense at seeing religion, or even politics, put alongside sports as a method of mind control.* The central theme is the same throughout: divide and conquer.* The techniques are quite simple: short circuit the natural tendency of people to cooperate for their survival, and teach them to form teams bent on domination and winning.*

5. Food, Water, and Air -- Additives, toxins, and other food poisons literally alter brain chemistry to create docility and apathy.* Fluoride in drinking water has been proven to lower IQ; Aspartame and MSG are excitotoxins which excite brain cells until they die; and easy access to the fast food that contains these poisons generally has created a population that lacks focus and motivation for any type of active lifestyle.* Most of the modern world is perfectly groomed for passive receptiveness -- and acceptance -- of the dictatorial elite.* And if you choose to diligently watch your diet, they are fully prepared to spray the population from the above.

6. Drugs -- This can be any addictive substance, but the mission of mind controllers is to be sure you are addicted to something.*

7. Military testing -- The military has a long history as the testing ground for mind control.* The military mind is perhaps the most malleable, as those who pursue life in the military generally resonate to the structures of hierarchy, control, and the need for unchallenged obedience to a mission. *For the increasing number of military personal questioning their indoctrination, a recent story highlighted DARPA's plans for transcranial mind control helmets*that will keep them focused.

8. Electromagnetic spectrum* -- An electromagnetic soup envelops us all, charged by modern devices of convenience which have been shown to have a direct impact on brain function.* In a tacit admission of what is possible, one researcher has been working with a "god helmet" to induce visions by altering the electromagnetic field of the brain.* Our modern soup has us passively bathed by potentially mind-altering waves, while a wide range of possibilities such as cell phone towers is now available to the would-be mind controller for more direct intervention.

9. Television, Computer, and "flicker rate"-- It's bad enough that what is "programmed" on your TV (accessed via remote "control") is engineered; it is all made easier by literally lulling you to sleep, making it a psycho-social weapon.* Flicker rate tests show that alpha brain waves are altered, producing a type of hypnosis -- which doesn't portend well for the latest revelation that lights can transmit coded Internet data by "flickering faster than the eye can see."* The computer's flicker rate is less, but through video games, social networks, and a basic structure which overloads the brain with information, the rapid pace of modern communication induces an ADHD state.* A study of video games revealed that extended play can result in lower blood flow to the brain, sapping emotional control.* Furthermore, role-playing games of lifelike war and police state scenarios serve to desensitize a connection to reality.* One look at the WikiLeaks video Collateral Murder should be familiar to anyone who has seen a game like Call of Duty.

10. Nanobots -- From science fiction horror, directly to the modern brain; the nanobots are on the way.* Direct brain modification already has been packaged as "neuroengineering." A* Wired article from early 2009 highlighted that direct brain manipulation via fiber optics is a bit messy, but once installed "it could make someone happy with the press of a button."* Nanobots take the process to an automated level, rewiring the brain molecule by molecule.* Worse, these mini droids can self-replicate, forcing one to wonder how this genie would ever get back in the bottle once unleashed. Expected date of arrival?* Early 2020s.

A concerted effort is underway to manage and predict human behavior so that the social scientists and the dictatorial elite can control the masses and protect themselves from the fallout of a fully awake free humanity. Only by waking up to their attempts to put us to sleep do we stand a chance of preserving our free will.. Our only way to investigate what information is being thrown at you.

Ty
3rd January 2011, 14:26
Hi Teakai,

Thanks for your thoughtful replies. To some extent I'm playing Devil's Advocate here. I do believe in free will and am looking for a way to justify that belief. Some evidence that we have control over which neurons fire in our day-to-day choices and decisions.

I meditated when I was younger. My first experience was my strongest. After clearing the chatter in my head I was suddenly an observer in (not of) a Flintsones cartoon. It was as real as my day-to-day life and I was in it. No eternal truths or insights into the nature of reality but definitely an altered state of consciousness. Not sure it would qualify as a higher state though.

I have always felt there was more to life, reality ...etc than we can normally see and measure. But I must say that my friend's argument through me for a loop. I'm not sure that a higher state of consciousness is anything more than a different set of neurons firing. And while meditation may be a way to access a higher/different way of thinking, once there, I see the same dillema. We may have reached a higher brain state, but are we controlling which neurons in that state fire or not? It would be nice to think we are but I don't know any way to determine that with any certainty.

At any rate, I'm willing to put it to rest as unresolved.

Thanks again for taking the time to explore with me.

Ty
3rd January 2011, 15:29
Hi loveandgratitude,


10 WAYS OF MIND CONTROL

Well that's depressing. But I'm not sure there is any concerted effort orchestrating all this.

Diane Ravitch's "The Language Police" is a good book on the deterioration of education. She has been in the field for 30 years and worked in both Clinton and Bush administrations. In addition to the reviews on Amazon, http://www.strike-the-root.com/3/chapin/chapin15.html gives a good overview of her book which documents what's been happening with textbooks and standardized tests in the last 30 or so years in an attempt to eliminate bias.

I remember the wired article referenced in #10. It was about using DBS - Deep Brain Stimulation - as a means to treat the chronically depressed. It worked and provided relief where nothing else did. I would argue that's a good thing. I believe DBS was also used to help people overcome their fears, though I may have it confused with a different treatment. Like most things it can be misused but if we limit our tools and methods to things that can't be, what would be left?

As for nanotechnology this also holds much promise for certain treatments. Tests are now underway that incorporate this as a cancer treatment. Metalic nano-particles are injected which seek out and attach to cancer cells. Lasers are then used to heat them, killing the cancer cells. Of course this technology also lends itself to misuse.

I found this interesting:

The central theme is the same throughout: divide and conquer.* The techniques are quite simple: short circuit the natural tendency of people to cooperate for their survival, and teach them to form teams bent on domination and winning.

It seems to me instead that each of the 3 areas cited - sports, politics and religion - far from short circuiting this "natural tendency" actually reinforce it. The members of each team are certainly cooperating with each other. To a lesser extent so are their fans as they support each other and root for their team. Each team then does battle in one form or another with an opposing team. The same, though maybe to a greater or lesser extent, with politics and religion.

For better or worse, it seems to me like that accurately mirrors our history since the advent of agriculture.

Same with this:


Most of the modern world is perfectly groomed for passive receptiveness -- and acceptance -- of the dictatorial elite.

There are exceptions but by and large I think the norm through history is that most people are followers not leaders, which is really all that says.

Thanks for posting this. I don't agree with the premise (or conclusion) of some concerted effort to control our minds but it does provide food for thought.

Intraphase
3rd January 2011, 16:12
A good pointer for physical consciousness is a google search for "Default Mind Network"from Scientific American. It seems the mind never stops chatting itself up. Sometimes the conversation is kicked upstairs through the sub mind filters and arrives at a conscious thought or progression of inner dialogue. For the more eclectic levels of so called quantum consciousness as the wave particle duality battle I suggest this page. http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/penrose-hameroff/orchOR.html About a third of the way down the illustration drill right down to lattices of positive and negative charged water pockets engaged in quantum computing deep deep deep in the micro realm.

(Please advise if article is inappropriate so I can edit it :mad2:out)


The Brain’s Dark Energy

Imagine you are almost dozing in a lounge chair outside, with a
magazine on your lap. Suddenly, a fly lands on your arm. You grab the
magazine and swat at the insect. What was going on in your brain after
the fly landed? And what was going on just before? Many
neuroscientists have long assumed that much of the neural activity
inside your head when at rest matches your subdued, somnolent mood. In
this view, the activity in the resting brain represents nothing more
than random noise, akin to the snowy pattern on the television screen
when a station is not broadcasting. Then, when the fly alights on your
forearm, the brain focuses on the conscious task of squashing the bug.
But recent analysis produced by neuroimaging technologies has revealed
something quite remarkable: a great deal of meaningful activity is
occurring in the brain when a person is sitting back and doing nothing
at all.

It turns out that when your mind is at rest-when you are daydreaming
quietly in a chair, say, asleep in a bed or anesthetized for surgery–
dispersed brain areas are chattering away to one another. And the
energy consumed by this ever active messaging, known as the brain’s
default mode, is about 20 times that used by the brain when it
responds consciously to a pesky fly or another outside stimulus.
Indeed, most things we do consciously, be it sitting down to eat
dinner or making a speech, mark a departure from the baseline activity
of the brain default mode.

Key to an understanding of the brain’s default mode has been the
discovery of a heretofore unrecognized brain system that has been
dubbed the brain’s default mode network (DMN). The exact role of the
DMN in organizing neural activity is still under study, but it may
orchestrate the way the brain organizes memories and various systems
that need preparation for future events: the brain’s motor system has
to be revved and ready when you feel the tickle of a fly on your arm.
The DMN may play a critical role in synchronizing all parts of the
brain so that, like racers in a track competition, they are all in the
proper “set” mode when the starting gun goes off. If the DMN does
prepare the brain for conscious activity, investigations of its
behavior may provide clues to the nature of conscious experience.
Neuroscientists have reason to suspect, moreover, that disruptions to
the DMN may underlie simple mental errors as well as a range of
complex brain disorders, from Alzheimer’s disease to depression.

Probing Dark Energy

The idea that the brain could be constantly busy is not new. An early
proponent of that notion was Hans Berger, inventor of the familiar
electroencephalogram, which records electrical activity in the brain
with a set of wavy lines on a graph. In seminal papers on his
findings, published in 1929, Berger deduced from the ceaseless
electrical oscillations detected by the device that “we have to assume
that the central nervous system is always, and not only during
wakefulness, in a state of considerable activity.”

But his ideas about how the brain functions were largely ignored, even
after noninvasive imaging methods became a fixture in neuroscience
laboratories. First, in the late 1970s, came positron-emission
tomography (PET), which measures glucose metabolism, blood flow and
oxygen uptake as a proxy for the extent of neuronal activity, followed
in 1992 by functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), which gauges
brain oxygenation for the same purpose. These technologies are more
than capable of assaying brain activity, whether focused or not, but
the design of most studies inadvertently led to the impression that
most brain areas stay pretty quiet until called on to carry out some
specific task.

Typically neuroscientists who run imaging experiments are trying to
pinpoint the brain regions that give rise to a given perception or
behavior. The best study designs for defining such regions simply
compare brain activity during two related conditions. If researchers
wanted to see which brain areas are important during reading words
aloud (the “test” condition) as opposed to viewing the same words
silently (the “control” condition), for instance, they would look for
differences in images of those two conditions. And to see those
differences clearly, they would essentially subtract the pixels in the
passive-reading images from those in the vocal image; activity of
neurons in the areas that remain “lit up” would be assumed to be the
ones necessary for reading aloud. Any of what is called intrinsic
activity, the constant background activity, would be left on the
cutting-room floor. Representing data in this way makes it easy to
envision areas of the brain being “turned on,” during a given
behavior, as if they were inactive until needed by a particular task.

Over the years, however, our group, and others, became curious about
what was happening when someone was simply resting and just letting
the mind wander. This interest arose from a set of hints from various
studies that suggested the extent of this behind-the-scenes activity.

One clue came from mere visual inspections of the images. The pictures
showed that areas in many regions of the brain were quite busy in both
the test and the control conditions. In part because of this shared
background “noise,” differentiating a task from the control state by
looking at the separate raw images is difficult if not impossible and
can be achieved only by applying sophisticated computerized image
analysis.

Further analyses indicated that performing a particular task increases
the brain’s energy consumption by less than 5 percent of the
underlying baseline activity. A large fraction of the overall activity–
from 60 to 80 percent of all energy used by the brain–occurs in
circuits unrelated to any external event. With a nod to our astronomer
colleagues, our group came to call this intrinsic activity the brain’s
dark energy, a reference to the unseen energy that also represents the
mass of most of the universe.

The question of the existence of neural dark energy also arose when
observing just how little information from the senses actually reaches
the brain’s internal processing areas. Visual information, for
instance, degrades significantly as it passes from the eye to the
visual cortex.

Of the virtually unlimited information available in the world around
us, the equivalent of 10 billion bits per second arrives on the retina
at the back of the eye. Because the optic nerve attached to the retina
has only a million output connections, just six million bits per
second can leave the retina, and only 10,000 bits per second make it
to the visual cortex.

After further processing, visual information feeds into the brain
regions responsible for forming our conscious perception.
Surprisingly, the amount of information constituting that conscious
perception is less than 100 bits per second. Such a thin stream of
data probably could not produce a perception if that were all the
brain took into account; the intrinsic activity must play a role.

Yet another indication of the brain’s intrinsic processing power comes
from counting the number of synapses, the contact points between
neurons. In the visual cortex, the number of synapses devoted to
incoming visual information is less than 10 percent of those present.
Thus, the vast majority must represent internal connections among
neurons in that brain region.

Discovering the Default Mode

These hints of the brain’s inner life were well established. But some
understanding was needed of the physiology of the brain’s intrinsic
activity–and how it might influence perception and behavior. Happily,
a chance and puzzling observation made during PET studies, later
corroborated with fMRI, set us on a path to discovering the DMN.

In the mid-1990s we noticed quite by accident that, surprisingly,
certain brain regions experienced a decreased level of activity from
the baseline resting state when subjects carried out some task. These
areas–in particular, a section of the medial parietal cortex (a region
near the middle of the brain involved with remembering personal events
in one’s life, among other things)–registered this drop when other
areas were engaged in carrying out a defined task such as reading
aloud. Befuddled, we labeled the area showing the most depression
MMPA, for “medial mystery parietal area.”

A series of PET experiments then confirmed that the brain is far from
idling when not engaged in a conscious activity. In fact, the MMPA as
well as most other areas remains constantly active until the brain
focuses on some novel task, at which time some areas of intrinsic
activity decrease. At first, our studies met with some skepticism. In
1998 we even had a paper on such findings rejected because one referee
suggested that the reported decrease in activity was an error in our
data. The circuits, the reviewer asserted, were actually being
switched on at rest and switched off during the task. Other
researchers, however, reproduced our results for both the medial
parietal cortex–and the medial prefrontal cortex (involved with
imagining what other people are thinking as well as aspects of our
emotional state). Both areas are now considered major hubs of the
DMN.

The discovery of the DMN provided us with a new way of considering the
brain’s intrinsic activity. Until these publications,
neurophysiologists had never thought of these regions as a system in
the way we think of the visual or motor system–as a set of discrete
areas that communicate with one another to get a job done. The idea
that the brain might exhibit such internal activity across multiple
regions while at rest had escaped the neuroimaging establishment. Did
the DMN alone exhibit this property, or did it exist more generally
throughout the brain? A surprising finding in the way we understand
and analyze fMRI provided the opening we needed to answer such
questions.

The fMRI signal is usually referred to as the blood oxygen level-
dependent, or BOLD, signal because the imaging method relies on
changes in the level of oxygen in the human brain induced by
alterations in blood flow. The BOLD signal from any area of the brain,
when observed in a state of quiet repose, fluctuates slowly with
cycles occurring roughly every 10 seconds. Fluctuations this slow were
considered to be mere noise, and so the data detected by the scanner
were simply eliminated to better resolve the brain activity for the
particular task being imaged.

The wisdom of discarding the low-frequency signals came into question
in 1995, when Bharat Biswal and his colleagues at the Medical College
of Wisconsin observed that even while a subject remained motionless,
the “noise” in the area of the brain that controls right-hand movement
fluctuated in unison with similar activity in the area on the opposite
side of the brain associated with left-hand movement. In the early
2000s Michael Greicius and his co-workers at Stanford University found
the same synchronized fluctuations in the DMN in a resting subject.

Because of the rapidly accelerating interest in the DMN’s role in
brain function, the finding by the Greicius group stimulated a flurry
of activity in laboratories worldwide, including ours, in which all of
the noise, the intrinsic activity of the major brain systems, was
mapped. These remarkable patterns of activity appeared even under
general anesthesia and during light sleep, a suggestion that they were
a fundamental facet of brain functioning and not merely noise.

It became clear from this work that the DMN is responsible for only a
part, albeit a critical part, of the overall intrinsic activity–and
the notion of a default mode of brain function extends to all brain
systems. In our lab, discovery of a generalized default mode came from
first examining research on brain electrical activity known as slow
cortical potentials (SCPs), in which groups of neurons fire every 10
seconds or so. Our research determined that the spontaneous
fluctuations observed in the BOLD images were identical to SCPs: the
same activity detected with different sensing methods.

We then went on to examine the purpose of SCPs as they relate to other
neural electrical signals. As Berger first showed and countless others
have since confirmed, brain signaling consists of a broad spectrum of
frequencies, ranging from the low-frequency SCPs through activity in
excess of 100 cycles per second. One of the great challenges in
neuroscience is to understand how the different frequency signals
interact.

It turns out that SCPs have an influential role. Both our own work and
that of others demonstrate that electrical activity at frequencies
above that of the SCPs synchronizes with the oscillations, or phases,
of the SCPs. As observed recently by Matias Palva and his colleagues
at the University of Helsinki, the rising phase of an SCP produces an
increase in the activity of signals at other frequencies.

The symphony orchestra provides an apt metaphor, with its integrated
tapestry of sound arising from multiple instruments playing to the
same rhythm. The SCPs are the equivalent of the conductor’s baton.
Instead of keeping time for a collection of musical instruments, these
signals coordinate access that each brain system requires to the vast
storehouse of memories and other information needed for survival in a
complex, ever changing world. The SCPs ensure that the right
computations occur in a coordinated fashion at exactly the correct
moment.

But the brain is more complex than a symphony orchestra. Each
specialized brain system–one that controls visual activity, another
that actuates muscles–exhibits its own pattern of SCPs. Chaos is
averted because all systems are not created equal. Electrical
signaling from some brain areas takes precedence over others. At the
top of this hierarchy resides the DMN, which acts as an über-conductor
to ensure that the cacophony of competing signals from one system do
not interfere with those from another. This organizational structure
is not surprising, because the brain is not a free-for-all among
independent systems but a federation of interdependent components.

At the same time, this intricate internal activity must sometimes give
way to the demands of the outside world. To make this accommodation,
SCPs in the DMN diminish when vigilance is required because of novel
or unexpected sensory inputs: you suddenly realize that you promised
to pick up a carton of milk on the drive home from work. The internal
SCP messaging revives once the need for focused attention dwindles.
The brain continuously wrestles with the need to balance planned
responses and the immediate needs of the moment.

Consciousness and Disease

The ups and downs of the DMN may provide insight into some of the
brain’s deepest mysteries. It has already furnished scientists with
fascinating insights into the nature of attention, a fundamental
component of conscious activity. In 2008 a multinational team of
researchers reported that by watching the DMN, they could tell up to
30 seconds before a subject in a scanner was about to commit an error
in a computer test. A mistake would occur if, at that time, the
default network took over and activity in areas involved with focused
concentration abated.

And in years to come, the brain’s dark energy may provide clues to the
nature of consciousness. As most neuroscientists acknowledge, our
conscious interactions with the world are just a small part of the
brain’s activity. What goes on below the level of awareness–the
brain’s dark energy, for one–is critical in providing the context for
what we experience in the small window of conscious awareness.

Beyond offering a glimpse of the behind-the-scenes events that
underlie everyday experience, study of the brain’s dark energy may
provide new leads for understanding major neurological maladies.
Mental gymnastics or intricate movements will not be required to
complete the exercise. A subject need only remain still within the
scanner while the DMN and other hubs of dark energy whir silently
through their paces.

Already this type of research has shed new light on disease. Brain-
imaging studies have found altered connections among brains cells in
the DMN regions of patients with Alzheimer’s, depression, autism and
even schizophrenia. Alzheimer’s, in fact, may one day be characterized
as a disease of the DMN. A projection of the brain regions affected by
Alzheimer’s fits neatly over a map of the areas that make up the DMN.
Such patterns may not only serve as biological markers for diagnosis
but may also provide deeper insights into causes of the disease and
treatment strategies.

Looking ahead, investigators must now try to glean how coordinated
activity among and within brain systems operates at the level of the
individual cells and how the DMN causes chemical and electrical
signals to be transmitted through brain circuits. New theories will
then be needed to integrate data on cells, circuits and entire neural
systems to produce a broader picture of how the brain’s default mode
of function serves as a master organizer of its dark energy. Over time
neural dark energy may ultimately be revealed as the very essence of
what makes us tick.

by Marcus E. Raichle

The Scientific American March 2010, Volume 302, Issue 3

Ahkenaten
3rd January 2011, 16:42
Interesting - "neural dark energy" in the human brain seems to be somewhat analogous to the "Dark Matter" that physicists are presently so intrigued with! Perhaps also analogous to the large amounts of "junk DNA" in our chromosomes, and the amount of our consciousness devoted to "unconscious" activities such as dreaming, etc. ! I think that "we," humans and other things we see around us are expressions of something from a higher dimensional plane. That accounts for so much about us and our reality that is otherwise inexplicable. It is very difficult to imagine, let alone visualize what that OTHER, or "Higher Self" is.............................the fourth dimension would be difficult enough, but if we are talking about up to the 26th., well - then, clearly we have a challenge grasping, let alone understanding WHO and WHAT we really are. As a practical matter, the regular practice of scientific meditation techniques seems to be a proven way to navigate the Abzu.

Ty
3rd January 2011, 17:53
Intraphase,

Thanks for the info. Very interesting read. Can't say I followed all of the quantum article but did follow the one you included in your post. Seems like the nature of consciousness is still an open question that we are a ways from having an answer to.

Intraphase
3rd January 2011, 20:30
That is the part the government is one part terrified of, the other part fascinated with and a third part wants to simply walk away and order a hot dog and beer and go watch a ball game with their grand kids. When I went looking at Teakai's links it was tough to find the whole sequence but I did stumble on a sequence where he (Ickes) goes off on the very "flexible" nature of timespace vs spacetime. If he hit those notes (hidden sub realities) more often people would probably not chuckle so much. I treat each witness I hear as "real' testimony as opposed to true or false. A trick I learned when quitting drinking (1990.) To see things as real as opposed to true or false.

Physics in simple form says there is 1%matter - 3% energy 23% dark matter 73% dark energy. So I am pretty sure most phenomenon witnessed are not on our home ratio of 1/3/23/73 but on some variant. Scientology reports that as soon as you clear your thought field to a certain degree you end up a character on a WW2 battlefield re fighting the war as your mind field sphere expands through the fabrics that are imprinted in the past and are now on the ratio below us 1/3/24/72. So I always use the third number to classify what part of the group mind should I assign as the phenomena home ratio. I call our shared world here lightmach23 just for convenience and the world of the near past lightmach24.

I see myself very much like the guard in the central tower in a panopticon with each cell in the seven story circle of cells on the outer wall another version of myself extended into the world in that direction.

In literal terms at the center is a core ship with a black monolith laying horizontal with my energy body laying on it like a ergonomic recliner. Then there are four very wide circular rings of metallic stairs usually covered in a light white haze before a ring that floats freely about 4 & 1/2 feet off the edge of the top final circle where there is no mist but fancy black chairs and consoles. Each of 64 console has a 32 miniaturized version of that same ship icon-form (8X4 Stacks)at each consoles sides. Sometimes in the mist there are little white ships moving outward from the black stone slowly depending on what my younger self are up to. The first time I made it to this ship there was only myself (8yr) there sitting at a console smiling at me as I appeared in the energy body-robot form. It took a vast effort to raise that form up on one elbow so I could look across at my younger self. Very quickly we exchanged places as a showing of equality and I saw the energy body resting on one elbow looking at me sitting in the chair by the console. Then I was back on the black rock except I knew I was in someplace I was meant to be.

I was about 40yrs then but long before that as a child this energy body had tried to walk past me nonchalantly when I was still that little boy in the console chair. At that age I had awoken in an empty world carrying a picket fence to symbolize my retention of choice. As this white florescent creature (10ft)moved smoothly along similar to sliding forward (without breaking surface contact) on a smooth carpet with nice leather soles on your feet something inside me caused me to jump into it. Once inside I could see the original fence holding version of self still there and realized I was supposed to jump out of this energy body also.
After that I was two exact duplicates in one body and one version of me remained in the white energy body continuing to slowly walk through this empty world.
That's the informational style I used to build a core and a near core outward.

Finally after endless occurences I woke up again in the energy body and realized I was in the outward most extension of the system. There were 36 versions of myself in a circle outside of the floating ring and no little ships in the mists. Somehow I knew I had to walk once clockwise around the stone and twice counterclockwise and that was the sequence expected of me. All the other selfs were nineteens and would not make eye contact, maybe, they felt my suspicion, was to watch out for tricks and deception. The last time I saw a gathering of my nineteen year old selfs was pre-911 and I was not "specifically!!" alerted to it. The showed me a symbolic scenario(elaborate virtual missile rising out of a bunker) instead.
So I did what was requested on the 'two verse one' clocking style motion and exited the energy body. During the laps one of my nineteens held two over lapping circles with five stars in the fish shaped overlap. I presume they were taking responsibility for the time line I seem to be stuck on: Siddhartha/Jesus/KingArthur/ChiefMassasoit/USA founding documents. So I guess that was there confession. I only have one child self and one ancient self (the energy robot)and one linear real time body sitting here typing while mulling this over for the ten millionth time. In worlds where the parameters are flexible that huge configuration of core - extensions - outward limit. Seems to be a popular method of calculating position and authentic identity. I've created a five level core code with two additional variations to make sure only authentic selfs run the equipment.

In our real time world where you need at least one witness to know the event occured on our home ratio of 1/3/23/73 I have had only one extremely disturbing events. In 07-07-79 I had to watch all that equipment pass through this ratio (grand canyon 60 cubic square miles)and witness it operate from outside (with two friends)and then in 02-04-2004 (while alone) I tested myself by watching it without witnesses. I was actually comfortable enough to curse my other selfs a bit and tell them piss off which I am sure they found amusing and reassuring as to my mental health being good. The locale was a deserted highway after 2:00 AM. During the next year I would begin my most extensive research period to date so my younger selfs poked their heads in behind the great research push so I wouldn't forget all the other type of functions involved.

For a short period of time I had four child selfs but now I am back to just one and the other four are now sovereign travelers in their own right although I still count them as allies in the pursuit of honorable gaming and dignified transactions.

When the government was first learning RV they thought I was Siddhartha Jesus King Arthur and Chief Massasoit all wrapped up in one body. Now they know better.
I do transport and communications functions for other beings and I am here because I hope other selfs want to see unprecedented levels of business opportunities afforded to this world. At a minimum I would want nine consortiums gated through timespace with an earth style uninhabited planet on the other side of the gate.
Seems like a reasonable step. Exo-politics baffles me still. Because I expect the gear to show up and be real on our 1/3/23/73 ratio of normal earth physics.
I expect to kick the tires(appear inside automatically) and demand licenses and registrations.:jaw::nod:
So if someone called me on the esp-telephone talking this or talking that I usually hang up instantly. Same with ufo's. God have mercy on anyone who pulls that type of crank call on me. I have my own gear and operate openly and have warned or helped on all "public good" chores completely except 911. I keep my links updated because I know how civil service works and don't take offense when I'm approached by strangers. I have links for all tips including this poverty stricken version of terrorists that has to UPS or FedEX their weaponry over here.

Its still a game though.:thumb:
I've challenged my other selfs to appear on 03-23-11 at 2:15 AM EST.:frusty:
If they can pull it off I'll help them by announcing a follow-up 03-23-13 AM EST
offshore eastern seaboard display of gear. If not than they have to admit their not as clever as they thought they were at manipulating the junctions between realms. Last time down the highway they did succeed in a micro flash of me in the daylight with a moment of total darkness to let me know they are trying their best possible methods to approach this world geometrically.

I found that in "the game" the only person you can trust 100% is yourself and still verification is a vital part of the process. This whole riff, be it interesting, is just an example that there is no limit to consciousness, although the legal threading and humane filtering of something technical (transport gear) into our spacetime from common timespace is a rather tedious and effort intensive process.

Heres the Icke link where he stays on the core message about everything being a construct as opposed to having eternal permanence. The second is a dimensional video. The third is about four mathematicians who cracked up contemplating "infinity"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5ASd2W-v9Y


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xE7xRgfPjAI&feature=fvw



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw-zNRNcF90&feature=PlayList&p=397710758E9BCB24&index=0&playnext=1

Ahkenaten
3rd January 2011, 20:36
Intraphase could we stay on topic please.........................if you would like to explore the issue of energetics as relates primarily to you, please set up another thread, with respect and warm regards - Ahk

Teakai
3rd January 2011, 23:22
Hi Teakai,

Thanks for your thoughtful replies. To some extent I'm playing Devil's Advocate here. I do believe in free will and am looking for a way to justify that belief. Some evidence that we have control over which neurons fire in our day-to-day choices and decisions.

I meditated when I was younger. My first experience was my strongest. After clearing the chatter in my head I was suddenly an observer in (not of) a Flintsones cartoon. It was as real as my day-to-day life and I was in it. No eternal truths or insights into the nature of reality but definitely an altered state of consciousness. Not sure it would qualify as a higher state though.

I have always felt there was more to life, reality ...etc than we can normally see and measure. But I must say that my friend's argument through me for a loop. I'm not sure that a higher state of consciousness is anything more than a different set of neurons firing. And while meditation may be a way to access a higher/different way of thinking, once there, I see the same dillema. We may have reached a higher brain state, but are we controlling which neurons in that state fire or not? It would be nice to think we are but I don't know any way to determine that with any certainty.

At any rate, I'm willing to put it to rest as unresolved.

Thanks again for taking the time to explore with me.

You're welcome, Ty.

You mentioned about loop thinking and I'm just wondering how you see that working in regard to free will.

Edit to ad:Or not.
Maybe a brain and consciousness free will thread would be good so we could poke it all about with a big stick and make soup.

Teakai
4th January 2011, 00:13
Intraphase could we stay on topic please.........................if you would like to explore the issue of energetics as relates primarily to you, please set up another thread, with respect and warm regards - Ahk

Ahk - please don't take this the wrong way - but Intraphase's post does concern all of us.

The things is, though, is that you are viewing what is from a defined perspective and are not understanding what he is telling us. So, he is on topic - and it does relate to all of us - only that may not yet be comprehensible to some of us.

This is your thread - and you are looking for ways to stop consenting to the system.
Only you are only looking at possible solutions from the place of your understanding at this time. You are looking to get out of the box, while being in the box, and it's known that one cannot solve a problem with the same mentality that made the problem.

Just sayin'.

Ty
4th January 2011, 15:03
Maybe a brain and consciousness free will thread would be good so we could poke it all about with a big stick and make soup.

Good suggestion teakai. Done. Please direct any other thoughts on this topic (ie free will or consciousness) to "Free Will and The Nature of Consciousness" http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?10427-Free-Will-and-The-Nature-of-Consciousness
... where we can "poke it all about with a big stick and make soup."

Intraphase
4th January 2011, 19:09
O.K. for me withdrawing consent from the controlling paradigm is a complex process involving an entire lifetime to pay off the system I got stuck in 1959-2064.
I found a link you may enjoy which goes to your comment about the hidden meaning of the eye in the little pyramid on top of the big pyramid that they use on the American dollar.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3DgAptBAEE&feature=&p=1666170A3DD024E5&index=0&playnext=1

I needed to find that graphic as a gaming token and you helped me find it and I thank you sincerely. The Mists of Avalon and The Golden Sword token/icon.

Thank you for your tolerance.
The bid is: 03-23-2011 2:15 AM EST

Anchor
4th January 2011, 22:47
Hi John, re: Your Post #65 (sorry it has taken me so long to get back to you on this)

Me too, I think I took longer!


As a point of clarification, in an attempt to transcend the dualistic good/evil intent box - you mean by "consensus" that we all created it, thus are fully engaged whether we know it or not, am I correct?

The context for my comment is my perspective that ultimately there is only one of us here, as fragmented reflections of the creator experiencing itself through various methods (ours being the human experience, isolated behind a veil of forgetfulness of our true natures).

In this way reality is truly a co-created illusion because it is the sum of its parts. We lack the conceptual frameworks and degree of consciousness to accurately process the concept of infinity and yet there are an infinite number of parts, so some mental abstraction is necessary – and consequently differences will arise in each of us who attempt to process this idea.


As a tiny point, generally consensus means everyone coming to some common agreement.

Yes I think I see what you mean. However, in my usage, I mean to say that the consensus is implicit. It just happens as a consequence of the actions of us all – there is no decision about the consensus as such - the process is not one we have a say in it just is - however, that does not mean we cannot exert influence on (manifest change in) the "consensus" illusion.


So - I would rather avoid the consensus term only because I DO NOT THINK at this point there is a common agreement between us all as co-creators of our reality, and the lack of common agreement is at the root of the problem, i.e. the discord, strife, etc. I am not convinced that the root problem is dualistic or dialectical........I think it runs deeper than that and goes to each of us as individuals, or particles, if you will, of the Creation

It seems to me that you are penetrating the archetype I have come to scrape the surface of. It is one that defines how each of us are experiencing the notion of separateness, whilst intellectually working with the potential that we are all in fact part of one.

This seems to me to be a good thing!


A small point, really - but I thought it significant!

So do I.

Thanks.


John..

Ahkenaten
4th January 2011, 23:02
Thanks John for your thoughtful post. While of course a topic as ambitious as this inevitably brings many perspectives, a good thing; to me the root issue relating to what I have called withdrawing consent from the control paradigm is that of "consciousness" if you will, the creative principle, metaphorically the "Holy Ghost" - the One which the Bible explicitly prohibits humans profaning or cursing. It is HERE (non-local here) that "our" creative power resides. And I am convinced that is the HERE from which we (individually and collectively) must 'operate' in order to withdraw consent, ascend, or whatever one wishes to call it. This topic is especially relevant, I think, to the current dialogue between Avalonians on Bill's Charles threads........................................... for me anyway, it is where the rubber hits the road. Granted as humans we occupy a certain bandwidth on the energy spectrum and it may be quite a reach for us individually, let alone collectively to dial up the resonant frequency ---- but increasingly it seems to me that this is what may be required of us at this time.

Thanks for helping focus this thread...................this central concept I believe integrates most, if not all, the various colored threads in this particular part of our tapestry!

Sebastion
5th January 2011, 00:26
Hi Ahk:
This will be my 1st post here on Avalon. I have been reading and enjoying this forum for nearly a year with very great interest, especially the latest and greatest with Bill and "Charles". You have hit the nail on the head here regarding "consciousness". I am well learned regarding this subject and well experienced. Suffice it to say that I am one of the few who has dared to go to the end of the proverbial "rabbit hole". The end all culminates in the Heart of the One, Itself. I have pretty much kept this to myself and only those closest to me as I have seen too many eyes glaze over as I spoke about it. It was and is a sacred journey! However I believe its time to open up and lend all the support I can at this time. The name given to the entire experience is known as Cosmic Consciousness, yet even that description is limited!
I have a keen interest in your particular thread and have thought long and hard over how to correctly address the problem(s) you have laid out. There are no easy answers, especially if you are inexperienced in what consciousness itself really is. Education and experience is paramount. One must understand that you are consciousness 1st above all things and that you are a sovereign entity, one who has taken all their power back and is totally responsible for your own energy. I could go on and on but will refrain for now. The power of consciousness increases exponentially when people come together with the same will and intent while sharing the same vision. This cannot be overstated as long as that focus is maintained energetically. Henry Ford once said " If you think you can or cannot, you are right".

Ahkenaten
11th February 2011, 21:20
It would appear that a broad cross-section of Egyptians have "removed consent from the control paradigm." It remains to be seen how this will roll out, i.e. if certain factions can manage to seize control of this movement and commandeer the energy and non-violent intentions of the people for other purposes. It would serve all who are truly interested in the potential of the human being to pay very close attention to what is happening now in Egypt......and to send all of the people of Egypt best thoughts and hopes for a positive outcome and future.

Intraphase
16th February 2011, 04:08
It would appear that a broad cross-section of Egyptians have "removed consent from the control paradigm." It remains to be seen how this will roll out, i.e. if certain factions can manage to seize control of this movement and commandeer the energy and non-violent intentions of the people for other purposes. It would serve all who are truly interested in the potential of the human being to pay very close attention to what is happening now in Egypt......and to send all of the people of Egypt best thoughts and hopes for a positive outcome and future.

Absolutely!!!!

Nice to see you!!!!

Northern Boy
16th February 2011, 05:10
The one problem with withdrawing consent is they don`t like it when you refuse to play the game. It is a game that favors them. First you have a populous that elects a body to steward the land for the people ie: governments . Then governments appoint judges to rule over the populous and take the power away from the people. The chain of command goes from PEOPLE>GOV >judges to Gov>Judges >people= hijacked system


The whole idea when going to court is to know who is playing what part. And what to say . It helps as when we go to court we are all considered Dead people

Visit this site to get a clear picture and more of what`s Written below

http://spiritualeconomicsnow.net/?p=164

Since common law courts no longer exist, we know that the case never has anything to do with “facts” or live men and women and so, anyone who testifies (talks about the facts of the case) is doomed. ALL courts operate in trust law, based upon ecclesiastical canon law–– ritualism, superstition, satanism, etc.––which manifests as insidious, commercial law and we are in court to take the hit, if they can get us to do so. They use every trick in the book––intimidation, fear, threat, ridicule, rage, and even recesses, in order to change the jurisdiction, when they know they are losing, in order to make us admit that we are the name of the trust. When we do so, we are deemed to be the trustee––the one liable for administering the trust. Ergo, until now, it has been a waste of our time, energy, and emotion to go to a place where it is almost certain that we will be stuck with the liability.

We all know from our indoctrination, programming, and schooling that judges are impartial and have sworn an oath to this effect. This means he must not favour either plaintiff or defendant. But, our experience reveals that he does, indeed, favour the plaintiff, indicating a glaring conflict of interest––that the prosecutor, judge, and clerk (cleric) all work for the state––the owner of the CQV trust. So, as the case is NOT about “justice”, it must be about administering a trust. They all represent the trust owned by the state and, if we are acting as beneficiary, the only two positions left are Trustee and Executor. So, if you detect a judge’s partiality, although I doubt the case will get this far, you might just want to let them know that you know this.


Then if you want more info go to here

http://one-heaven.org/ecclesiastical_deed_poll/edp_introduction.htm

Ahkenaten
16th February 2011, 05:19
yes Northern Boy - I get it! When we stop consenting to play, game over.

GlassSteagallfan
16th February 2011, 06:14
Jeanna, I do like all the points you make, but I would point out that the euro is in the process of literal collapse right now. The results which can be seen across European states (only not in the mainstream news - surprise surprise :) )

It is predicted that the US currency will collapse not long after that.

This is what a lot of people are warning about - to get prepared for when this happens, with food, water and basic needs because when it happens, it's not at all pretty.
The US wasn't always the reserve world curency - it would be a costly mistake to consider it will always remain so - especially when we aware that definite and determined measures are being taken in order to ensure its collapse, and that' it's collapse is essential for the forwarding of the 'nwo' agenda.

I'm not at all pointing this out to promote fear, but it is an issue that does need to be taken seriously. Listen to independent forecasters - I really like Gerald Celente, but there are others saying the same thing.




Lyndon LaRouche is a forecaster who has been spot on since the 1950's. He is currently banned from coporate media, but his political action committee is fighting to restore Glass Steagall which will bankrupt the 'lower' elite or the British Monarchy. The Glass Steagall issue is hot due to the January 27th 2011 release of the Angiledes Report (FCIC report) which states the US did everything wrong and a collapse can happen again. Phil Angiledes will be testifying in Congress on Wednesday, Feb 16th. Hope you all see this..

Thanks

Ahkenaten
16th February 2011, 06:24
Add to that the China, India and South America factors in international economics that are throwing a wrench in the works of the plans of the old empire builders...............in brief, the US Empire and hegemony is being eclipsed by real-life, real-time action on the ground. No amount of spin (i.e. the US conflating a "democratic" movement in Iran with a "democratic movement in Egypt" in an attempt to position itself in control of, and leading events) will change the stark reality of change that is now occurring with economics and rising up against the current order at its root..........................NOTE: economics is the driving force of history NOT ideology, much as we are constantly being fed the lie that conflicting ideologies are the core problem. The tipping factor for people withdrawing consent from the control paradigm may very well be the escalation in food and basic commodity prices around the world. Gerald Celente is truly one to listen to very carefully.

GlassSteagallfan
16th February 2011, 06:38
Bingo!

The solution can't be business as usual. We have to create a new reality, an new model. But first we must imagine it.

What should life on Gaia be like? What should humans be?

The old paradigms, the old models are worthless. It is time for us to create a new world.

A new world plan is already on the table but it is opposed by TPTB. Number one is to bankrupt the current monetary system by restoring Glass Steagall in the USA. This frees up 'credit' to rebuild the country. Number two is to build NAWAPA, a water project that will employ 7 million people in north america and take 50 years to complete. Obama has to be ousted first - his money people tell him to oppose Glass Steagall.

Ahkenaten
16th February 2011, 06:43
There are lots of ideas out there for positive change -----though no one discusses it very much - using examples from Iceland to Ireland to Argentina (re IMF), it is entirely possible to declare massive debt a nullity. That would sure free up lots of money and energy................taking down Glass Steagall certainly opened the floodgates for the fun and games we have seen in recent years in the banking industry.

Northern Boy
16th February 2011, 09:32
Money is a control mechanism . If the people of a country can elect its leaders do they not own its resource`s?

If they own the resource`s of the nation and a government allows a corporation to exploit those resource`s then shouldn`t you be compensated for this directly instead of the government or receive the end result at a discounted rate?

These things are not happening Government has lost sight of what they should be protecting .

GREED runs this land called earth. Corporations take from it and when they are done most simply walk away leaving Governments to clean up at your expense and tax dollars. No consideration is given to the environment . Then they have the nerve to try and blame humanity for the CO2 levels, and many will of course want to do their part, but now they are letting the ones who caused the problem off the hook and looking for you to pay for the clean up again .