The emotional confusion about the people "in charge"

[Asyloth]

I've often heard, especially coming from people like David Icke (whom I have the utmost respect for, one of the people I've learned the most from, that doesn't mean they're a 100% right either) that the "powers that be" or "people in charge" or anything, those taking the real decisions about the direction civilisation is taking shall we say, if ever there really are people with that much power (which wouldn't suprise me at all don't worry) are from a special bloodline or people with something "special" in their genetic pool, which once again is more than possible but that's not the point I'm trying to make.

I've often heard people associating that with a "non-emotional" behavior or logic, for having myself gone through a all set of emotional experiences, probably more or less all of it in different environements, situations, context, after what I've seen with the alternative community, what I've seen in the professional area, and for having hung around some of "this kind" of people for some time in this same professional area.

I feel today like I can go from a "sensitive" person to a "non-sensitive" person anytime I like, it looks like this is a skill people automatically receive after gone through a set of emotional suffering so I would like to rectify that the "non-emotional" state of the people in charge is probably not due to any genetic difference but rather due to an overload of emotional suffering because of the responsibilities some of these people might have on their shoulders.

But I was thinking exactly the same about it until I arrived myself to the same situation. So I just felt like this was interesting enough to post on my one and only forum

[WhiteLove]

Posted by Asyloth (here)
I've often heard, especially coming from people like David Icke (whom I have the utmost respect for, one of the people I've learned the most from, that doesn't mean they're a 100% right either) that the "powers that be" or "people in charge" or anything, those taking the real decisions about the direction civilisation is taking shall we say, if ever there really are people with that much power (which wouldn't suprise me at all don't worry) are from a special bloodline or people with something "special" in their genetic pool, which once again is more than possible but that's not the point I'm trying to make.

I've often heard people associating that with a "non-emotional" behavior or logic, for having myself gone through a all set of emotional experiences, probably more or less all of it in different environements, situations, context, after what I've seen with the alternative community, what I've seen in the professional area, and for having hung around some of "this kind" of people for some time in this same professional area.

I feel today like I can go from a "sensitive" person to a "non-sensitive" person anytime I like, it looks like this is a skill people automatically receive after gone through a set of emotional suffering so I would like to rectify that the "non-emotional" state of the people in charge is probably not due to any genetic difference but rather due to an overload of emotional suffering because of the responsibilities some of these people might have on their shoulders.

But I was thinking exactly the same about it until I arrived myself to the same situation. So I just felt like this was interesting enough to post on my one and only forum

I am partly with you on that, I mean there is definitely confusion present, lack of emotion too I'm sure. But the way I see it, the issue can be simplified down to a single simple question. Do you think de-militarization helps bring peace to a world? All people in charge all over the world answer this: No. Militarizing the world brings peace. Look at Donald Trump. He just had his successful rally, he proudly presented that he will rebuild the military, everybody were clapping their hands in joy and pride. That's what they want you see. They want to feel that power of bringing war to the world. Because when they are asked the question: Do you think de-militarization helps bring peace to a world? They all answer no. As simple as that.

When Trump says he will build the military strong, he will bring back the companies and the money from abroad and that it's a long road ahead (which he actually said in that same precise context) - it's scary. In an interview on Alex Jones show recently he said: "when you go to war you need to do so properly". Whatever that means, those are not words of peace freedom and joy, that you can be sure of.

Trump is not who you think he is. The suffering is going to be as high as his stake. This guy strongly indicates he will make the military ready and then go to war properly, to bring all assets back from abroad. You should be alarmed. This could turn into something the world has never seen before, the indications are that some of the conditions and some of the convictions are there. I think the world is scary enough as it is, the words coming out Trump's mouth might reach a level of power to take it to a whole new level. Can you imagine the kinds of effects on the world when Trump gets elected and does so based on the proposal to rebuild the world's most powerful military force. It is going to put a tremendous military stress on nations all over the world, which is why if Trump gets elected it's going to become even more militaristic than it already is. And that is a truth seeker's nightmare.

[Asyloth]

I've got to admit that when I'm on project avalon, and when I'm in the professional area (I won't say the company names), not that far from people with some real responsibilities, I do feel like I'm looking at the bright and dark side of the same force (I'm using the references I know).

There's so much to talk about that it seems impossible to have a conventional conversation.

[amor]

Just a story I thought might add to understanding of Mr. Trump. In the 1950's when my brother and his young friend, Red, were children, they ran into Donald in the Astoria area. His bather must have been a success in his building business by that time because my brother reported that Donald was very proud of himself and his father and boasted that he would one day be rich and powerful.

[thepainterdoug]

I have almost lost my ability to think, to write down anything of any value anymore. everything is so over saturated and it doesn't seem that any of this new knowledge is really helping anyone. and if it is, its old knowledge anyhow.
what can i say about trump, the system , this thing of ours, that hasn't been said a million times. humans are competing with each other. so we are animals. and with that comes suffering and blood to follow. if humans cared about their action thru an interconnected sensibility, then it would be different, but it isn't. its this, what we have.

[seah]

Posted by Asyloth (here)
[...]
I feel today like I can go from a "sensitive" person to a "non-sensitive" person anytime I like, it looks like this is a skill people automatically receive after gone through a set of emotional suffering so I would like to rectify that the "non-emotional" state of the people in charge is probably not due to any genetic difference but rather due to an overload of emotional suffering because of the responsibilities some of these people might have on their shoulders.

I feel that there is a definite difference between the "non sensitive" person you are speaking about sometimes feeling and the other kind that the ptb demonstrate, but I can understand why you would reach that conclusion and I have given it some thought myself.

[Mike Gorman]

You need to take into account that dispassionate thinking is a valued quality among the 'old guard' -your John Wayne types, the 'hard men' all evince this ability to weigh up and consider matters without emotional input. The idea that 'EQ' is valuable would be as alien to these people as would having a morning spliff to colour the day! The valuing of emotional intelligence has always been a feature of the better leaders in history, but sometimes you need to be ruthless.

[NeedleThreader]

Having a job in general forces you to 'become' somebody that you necessarily aren't, i.e. the non-sensitive person who, depending on the level of involvement with their job, has to switch from waking up in the morning: "let's sip some coffee, smoke a spliff, read the project avalon forum, be in total zen-sprititual mode, walk the dog and give loving attention to it"------- and then have to put on the stupid tie, those nice shoes, and go to work. Or go grocery shopping where there is an 'acceptable' form of behavior which may or may not tie into your non-sensitive or sensitive self. Since we have to make tens of thousands of choices a day, instead of maybe just a thousand, we have to cognitively choose whether or not to 'switch on' your empathetic self.

We are being slowly molded into a desensitized mind set. Technology and the internet has accelerated this way of thinking. It is making us numb and unable to take action, you know the story.

I have been interested in this duality within myself lately, it's like I can have ultimate compassion at one point during the day, but then switch to kill or be killed mode like I'm stepping into a different person at will. I have ruled out split personality disorder because I look around and see everyone doing the same thing. This gives me hope because I feel like if push came to shove, and the shi*t really hit the fan, at people's core they are compassionate human beings.

[Asyloth]

You've said it perfectly NeedleThreader, that's exactly it.

(The coffee and spliff in the morning, that's me, but when I work I automatically become another person, a person I've built that is in adequation with the professional environnement, but sooner or later, like half a year maximum, I get tired and I get back to my true self even at work, and when that happens I usually get fired, I've worked in more than 10 companies already, and it's always more or less the same story, even though I'm making more and more efforts to make it go the right way)

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Posted by NeedleThreader (here)
I have been interested in this duality within myself lately, it's like I can have ultimate compassion at one point during the day, but then switch to kill or be killed mode like I'm stepping into a different person at will.

A good example of this duality and fickle human behaviour and emotion was just the other day, I was driving along with a friend in the car. We were having a pleasant, peaceful conversation about love, and wisdom, and conscience and all that, and the next second a car cuts right across me into my lane, causing me to swerve. I said "look at him, stupid f*****, what's he doing!" etc etc...

All we can do is try to be the best we can be. But being 'perfect', and making every single thought you have a loving one is virtually impossible!

[Ba-ba-Ra]

My thoughts for what they are worth:

I suspect that learning the process of shifting our emotions from our solar plexis to our heart chakra is the next stage of evolution.

I also suspect that those in charge understand this which is why all the news we get from main street are just of few minute bits on each story which only gives one the ability to react emotionally, yet not enough information to form an intellectual response. We are being trained to not have the patience to listen to long and informed dialogues.

Patience to not react emotionally gives one the moment to reflect on a situation. I'm not talking about dispassionate thinking here, but rational responses.

Thanks for considering.