Who will lead the revolution, the civil disobedience?

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

One of the problems in our society in terms of leadership is this:

the mentally ill are often predisposed to leadership positions because they require a lot of support (which leaders often set themselves up to receive).

We as a culture need to move away from these "pathological leaders" and foster the philosophy that everyman can be a leader.

Too many of the USA's best and brightest are falling through the cracks.
They are the hippies and the baristas and the street artists of the world.
They are the dancers and the players and the free spirits.

But no one wants them.
Like Gypsies, the creative and the genius are driven before the Juggernaut of popular belief and smashed back into the mire of ignorance and darkness.

In order to see the light we have to lift each other up higher.

[Freed Fox]

Posted by Tesla_WTC_Solution (here)
We as a culture need to move away from these "pathological leaders"

I think this is truly the heart of the issue, and the reason behind so many's dismissal of the leader/follower paradigm. The fact is that most prominent leaders fit this description, but that does not mean that it should apply to every one.

To accept and follow a leader does not mean you are surrendering your autonomy, nor is it a declaration of your inferiority (or the leader's superiority). A leader can be someone who maintains the unity and focus of a group; someone who aids each individual member in reaching his/her potential and contributing more fully to the whole.

There is a collective trauma among us, perhaps; a reflexive knee-jerk at the idea of a leader who will exploit us and deceive us and lead us astray while reaping the benefits of our subservience... But it doesn't have to be this way.

I think it would be incredibly beneficial to see a new leadership paradigm arise. One that is not a replacement for sovereignty or self-empowerment. Admittedly it my not be entirely new; some see this as what Jesus was doing.

[Peace of Mind]

Don’t worry about finding a leader, everyone is a leader, and everyone has unique qualities that will be vital to the whole. Just be you and just do what you can do. To be a better person go within and be honest with yourself, face your fears, your faults, and your deficiencies. Realize them and remove them through your heighten awareness, remove the limits and if you find it hard to do so…raise the ceiling while building yourself up to bust through the border later. After fixing the self you’ll automatically become the example you want to see in the world. We all are followers to a stint. So knowing this… always be what you want to see in the world and allow the universe to do the rest.

Don’t force the issue, but do be vigilant and exercise patience. Opportunities will surface for you to assist the self and others. The universe will align you with those that are seeking to do the same. Without commitment there will be no change, can’t change something without actually putting in the work, right? Wishful thinking will only guild you in the right direction, you have to have courage to step on the path and follow that path the universe has set for you through your thinking.

The main issue with today is people really aren’t willing to do the things necessary to bring about the change they seek. They let fear stagnate them, they let others persuade them into doing nothing by telling them things like “ you can’t change the world”, “ life isn’t fair”, “get yours because I got mines”, “it’s a dog eat dog world”, “the world will never change, especially in my life time”, “don’t worry about what others do, just worry about yourself”. These are world known quotes people use every day and it is part of the reason why we suffer. There is absolutely nothing holding us back but ourselves, all we have to do is commit so others will do the same. Hardly anyone is going to do something if they don’t see it already being done. Too many people not knowing just how powerful they are, afraid to be something they envision themselves to be. We all want this and it’s mindboggling at times to see why we can’t get it.

As far as wondering what we here can do…well that’s easy. All we have to do is form a few threads dedicated to solving problems. I’m sure the people here can do anything they put their minds to.

Peace

[161803398]

At the moment, America's best and brightest are being assassinated.

Take a realistic look at most of the leaders in history -- they were paranoid or insane. Some of them were just really sick assholes.

It takes a special combination of qualities to be a great leader....someone with his head screwed on who can state the obvious with enough strength to focus our energies to a couple of powerful points and make change.

In today's world -- the person would almost have to have a death wish with though......hmmmm, maybe its time for another martyr/saint/savior.

If one appears I am sure the powers that be will kill him off as quickly as they can find him. We would have to hide him in the weeds.

[RMorgan]

Posted by Freed Fox (here)

Posted by Tesla_WTC_Solution (here)
We as a culture need to move away from these "pathological leaders"

I think this is truly the heart of the issue, and the reason behind so many's dismissal of the leader/follower paradigm. The fact is that most prominent leaders fit this description, but that does not mean that it should apply to every one.

To accept and follow a leader does not mean you are surrendering your autonomy, nor is it a declaration of your inferiority (or the leader's superiority). A leader can be someone who maintains the unity and focus of a group; someone who aids each individual member in reaching his/her potential and contributing more fully to the whole.

There is a collective trauma among us, perhaps; a reflexive knee-jerk at the idea of a leader who will exploit us and deceive us and lead us astray while reaping the benefits of our subservience... But it doesn't have to be this way.

I think it would be incredibly beneficial to see a new leadership paradigm arise. One that is not a replacement for sovereignty or self-empowerment. Admittedly it my not be entirely new; some see this as what Jesus was doing.

Hey mate,

I agree with you; The leadership paradigm should change, but first we need to drive a cultural change, and for that, we need strong leaders.

I´m not talking about that kind of absolute leader, nor someone to be worshiped. I´m talking about someone who can inspire people, someone who can get people organized around common goals.

As Jung used to say, "The true leader is always led". This is absolutely true. The true leader is led by the will of the people, not the contrary. The true leader is there to amplify and organize individual ideals exponentially, bringing them to the collective realm.

Governments all over the world are killing or neutralizing potential leaders for a reason; They are the catalyst of change, meaning that they have the potential to exponentially accelerate change.

I know that proactive and aware individuals can be their own leaders, which is great. However, we´re not talking individuals here; We´re talking about the collective, and you might agree that the vast majority of people, for several reasons, can´t thing independently. Liking or not, this is a fact. Thinking that all of a sudden everybody will wake up, become aware and start acting proactively is utopia.

People, as a collective, need leaders, at least for now. As far as I know, I´m not aware of a single society in human history who could thrive without leadership. It wont be easy to change this paradigm.

Raf.

[161803398]

a good leader is a focal point.

[christian]

Posted by RMorgan (here)
The leadership paradigm should change, but first we need to drive a cultural change, and for that, we need strong leaders.

I´m not talking about that kind of absolute leader, nor someone to be worshiped. I´m talking about someone who can inspire people, someone who can get people organized around common goals.

As Jung used to say, "The true leader is always led". This is absolutely true. The true leader is led by the will of the people, not the contrary. The true leader is there to amplify and organize individual ideals exponentially, bringing them to the collective realm.

I think Alex Jones is a wonderful example of such a leader, as are many others who put themselves out there. Alex breaks things down very succinctly, he identifies essential dangers, challenges, and tasks, and he inspires people to stand up for themselves. He is leading the people to self-empowerment, I find. The leaders we need are people who visibly stand up to tyranny, everybody can be that type of person, on whatever scale. Everybody who stands up, acts, and raises his or her voice for freedom and decency is such a leader.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Cso6kdHZ794

[Peace of Mind]

The “leaders “will emerge when they reclaim their power. As of now, we continue to hoist up and follow our flawed and corrupt governments without holding them accountable. A leader also has to see if there is anyone to lead. A leader cannot lead if there is no one to support him/her. A leader will rise out of despair, he/she will gladly sacrifice self for the many, and he/she will have courage because he/she will see the support. I doubt anyone is going to rise to the occasion if the need for the leader is not made clear. We have to make this clear individually so it can spread; I’m sure this will be very contagious and hamper any resistance.

We cannot sit by and let our leader’s suffer/die/or be harmed without punishment…in the least show the perpetrators that we are on to their evil ways, we don’t do this. If we don’t show ourselves to be worthy of freedom and equality then I ask the question “do we really deserve to be lead out of the flames”? We have to show what we feel, how do we expect a leader to truly recognize what we want if we don’t show it? This is the only way I see any type of benevolent leadership forming.

Peace

[Fred Steeves]

I actually see this as two different subjects. There is setting an example, which can be easily confused with leadership, and then there is leadership as talked about here. The only way I can square "leadership" with the way I currently see the world, is a multifaceted group, with each individual possessing their own unique and natural talents and education, all acting as one complete yet diverse people.

Whenever any given situation is presented the group, the one or ones fitted to deal with it will naturally step to the forefront, and represent the group. When said situation has been handled, they simply blend back in as one with their brothers and sisters. When a different situation presents itself, a different part of the group will naturally step forward to represent.

[161803398]

Most of the present leaders in North America at least are looking at things quite differently than we are. The empire looks like its going to fall. Another empire is going to rise...they are afraid that is going to be Iran and they are doing what many people do when they are afraid of something -- actually making it worse by doing the very things that are going to hasten a collapse. You see the Ahmedinijad in the news...what is he doing...smiling, yes? He must know America is screwing itself more than he ever could. Not saying he is a great guy...I hear he's not. But he knows what he is doing. If you are taking winners and losers....right now the American government is acting like the biggest loser in the world. Go to a courtroom one day....see the guy who is yelling, threatening and making an ass of himself...you know who is?....he is the LOSER! This is just how the universe operates. Right now the American government is a loser on steroids. The CIA tries to manipulate that all time to even things out a bit and take out some pretty good people. I worry what they are doing to the gene pool .

The only way America can get back on track is to STOP, sit back, think for bit, CUT back, stop bombing people to hell, and move forward with a creative plan.

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

I envision a world without excess industrialism.
A world where there are gardens and walking paths.
Quiet places full of green things.
Not all these cars, trucks, and trains... something more efficient.

Local agriculture and greenhouses,
better transportation,
better energy sources, are what is needed.

the space and the technology to feed and clothe the hundreds of billions of people mother earth can support with human help.

[161803398]

That would be great but remember what happened to the Native North Americans -- taken out by control freaks.

[SKAWF]

we when the mass has no clear plan or direction...
what usually happens is that there is a build up of pressure.

usually the spark, or event needed to release all that pressure
is often determined by the opposition.....

when they take things too far.....

then BANG!.

it will be the person who brings calm and reason to the situation, i think, who will end up being the leader.

[Youniverse]

Posted by ceetee9 (here)

Posted by christian (here)
Who organizes schools of fish or flocks of birds? — All the members within the group naturally use their higher senses to act in coherence, harmony, and entrainment.

The old paradigm model of leadership is based on crude "order and obedience." First humans have to wake up to the fact that each one is a powerful being with abundant potential. Then the free will decision must be made to use that power to also work together with others. Then everything falls into place naturally.

There will always be those, who will embody particular talents more pronouncedly. Everybody will move into the right position according to his or her special talents, if the aforementioned steps are taken.

I don't want to participate in a new paradigm that merely directs sheep. I want to see a genuinely self-empowered humanity, I want everybody to consciously choose the path to enlightenment. What I can do to promote that is living it as whole-heartedly as I can, to let it shine, and to inspire others to do the same.

You hit the nail on the head Christian. Bravo!

Ya this is pretty much how I see it right now too. Everyone must be a leader simultaneously on equal terms. Then as christian said it comes down to who has certain talents and serves. Certain indivduals are talented in leading the way but do so as a form of service to the group, like a sort of duty.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by christian (here)
The old paradigm model of leadership is based on crude "order and obedience." First humans have to wake up to the fact that each one is a powerful being with abundant potential. Then the free will decision must be made to use that power to also work together with others. Then everything falls into place naturally.

May I suggest a somewhat different way of looking at this?

Most groups that I have worked with or in which worked well, including families, schools, workplaces, neighborhoods, web forums, open source software projects, ... knew, for most decisions, who the "go to" person or persons was for that decision, at that time. One person, or the consensus of some people, determine most things, but who determines what is quite shifting and varied.

The main problem we are having with the traditional "hierarchical" way of organizing society is that a few attempt to be the "go to" people for any decision they consider worth controlling. It is the attempt to acquire a monopoly on decision making that is the problem.

Where it works well, the "go to" people form a complex and ever shifting web. Everyone has some areas where they make the final decision, and this shifts. The child gets to decide when and where to run and play ... until sleep time, other duties, or the truck coming down the road empower the mother to override that. Most of the time this is actually pretty obvious to most of us. We know we shouldn't, nor want to, decide everything involving others, demanding to have it our way. We also know that it would not be a good idea to demand a democratic vote on every detail of everything we do that involves others. Rather we have a pretty good idea who (individually or by consensus of a small group) is calling the beat for each of those myriad aspects of our shared existence, and we usually choose to follow that beat, or call out that beat if it's us, or go for a change in who's calling it, when appropriate.

In short, this is not a question of "Do we empower the Bosses or do we empower ourselves?" Rather this is a question of forming and nurturing a healthy web of responsibility. Group matters are properly reflected in the dynamic structure of the group, and are not just an accumulation of the acts of isolated and individual sovereign beings.

Yes, as you say Christian, we do make a "free will decision" "to use" our "power to also work together with others." Then in cooperation with others, developing a healthy web of responsibility, decision making is distributed across the web in a complex and shifting manner, with many decisions made by a single individual, but with who (which individual or consent based group) makes which decision being a rather subtle question.

[Youniverse]

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by christian (here)
The old paradigm model of leadership is based on crude "order and obedience." First humans have to wake up to the fact that each one is a powerful being with abundant potential. Then the free will decision must be made to use that power to also work together with others. Then everything falls into place naturally.

May I suggest a somewhat different way of looking at this?

Most groups that I have worked with or in which worked well, including families, schools, workplaces, neighborhoods, web forums, open source software projects, ... knew, for most decisions, who the "go to" person or persons was for that decision, at that time. One person, or the consensus of some people, determine most things, but who determines what is quite shifting and varied.

The main problem we are having with the traditional "hierarchical" way of organizing society is that a few attempt to be the "go to" people for any decision they consider worth controlling. It is the attempt to acquire a monopoly on decision making that is the problem.

Where it works well, the "go to" people form a complex and ever shifting web. Everyone has some areas where they make the final decision, and this shifts. The child gets to decide when and where to run and play ... until sleep time, other duties, or the truck coming down the road empower the mother to override that. Most of the time this is actually pretty obvious to most of us. We know we shouldn't, nor want to, decide everything involving others, demanding to have it our way. We also know that it would not be a good idea to demand a democratic vote on every detail of everything we do that involves others. Rather we have a pretty good idea who (individually or by consensus of a small group) is calling the beat for each of those myriad aspects of our shared existence, and we usually choose to follow that beat, or call out that beat if it's us, or go for a change in who's calling it, when appropriate.

In short, this is not a question of "Do we empower the Bosses or do we empower ourselves?" Rather this is a question of forming and nurturing a healthy web of responsibility. Group matters are properly reflected in the dynamic structure of the group, and are not just an accumulation of the acts of isolated and individual sovereign beings.

Yes, as you say Christian, we do make a "free will decision" "to use" our "power to also work together with others." Then in cooperation with others, developing a healthy web of responsibility, decision making is distributed across the web in a complex and shifting manner, with many decisions made by a single individual, but with who (which individual or consent based group) makes which decision being a rather subtle question.

I think what you're saying, Paul, is something like Thom Hartmann talks about in "The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight"? Hartmann talks about the success of the tribal model over tens of thousands of years. This system is no secret to many tribal groups and Indigenous people today. The leader for that day depends on the goal for the day. There may be a chief, but he is there under the consent of the group. If the group decides the chief is not serving the needs of his/her people, he/she is replaced. The key, IMO, is a group of people that keep their egos in check and so would never dream of doing something detrimental to the group or to nature for that matter. And a leader leads not because of ambition or a thirst for power, but because of his/her duty and service to the group.

[realitycorrodes]

Thank you RMOrgan for the below:

I know that proactive and aware individuals can be their own leaders, which is great. However, we´re not talking individuals here; We´re talking about the collective, and you might agree that the vast majority of people, for several reasons, can´t thing independently. Liking or not, this is a fact. Thinking that all of a sudden everybody will wake up, become aware and start acting proactively is utopia.

People, as a collective, need leaders, at least for now. As far as I know, I´m not aware of a single society in human history who could thrive without leadership. It wont be easy to change this paradigm.

For those who proudly claimed they don't need to be led - that's great.

The discussion I was hoping for was to help those millions out there who are mindlessly led by a greedy corrupt few.

As being led is what they seem to do then it maybe helpful to lead them somewhere where they can begin to learn how to be a free man on the land.

Some of the ideas suggested are great, but I get the feeling they assume the greedy bunch currently leading will just sit back and let the "utopian" idea take place - personally I don't think so.

When one is being pinned down by a force, one needs to know how to set oneself free of that force. Most of the ideas presented were one's that applied once the person had unpinned themselves from the force - not how to unpin themselves.

When people suggest things will happen "naturally" - I wonder why then they have not "naturally" happened already.

Thank you Peace of Mind for the below, I particularly resonate with the bitter truth you stated.... “do we really deserve to be lead out of the flames”?

If we don’t show ourselves to be worthy of freedom and equality then I ask the question “do we really deserve to be lead out of the flames”? We have to show what we feel, how do we expect a leader to truly recognize what we want if we don’t show it? This is the only way I see any type of benevolent leadership forming.

[realitycorrodes]

Educating is different from Leading.

I am talking about someone who will organise those around the world to make a stand against the tyranny by disobeying on mass.

I am talking about a leader that is not manufactured to jump through the hoops of a rigged democratic circus - someone who stands outside of the political distraction.

Someone who just goes straight to the root of power - the individual - and organises them without defaulting to someone else's ballot system. Communicates directly with them, without using

phony models of propaganda etc. etc.

No middle man - like TV - interpreting and fiddling the information.

Leader to people directly - if that is possible.

And the information being how to organise the visionary people to present a formidible force for mass change.

I was not talking about the unknown sage sitting in the himalayas who has organised their own inner world of peace - and has decided they are free by their own standards.

Although, I do feel self realisation is a valuable aid in advancing to a more peaceful abundant and loving society - something has to be done to throw off the oppressive forces that have been holding the majority of frightened unimaginative humans down.

It may be that the majority when they hear what the visionaries have to say about a more peaceful abundant and loving society - may not believe such a thing is possible - and may be too frightened to make the changes needed for fear of the "forceful oppressors" punishing them for stepping out of line. If such is the case then Peace of mind maybe right...

“do we really deserve to be lead out of the flames”?

[realitycorrodes]

People like David Icke and Alex Jones don't need to educate anymore, the people they have educated are doing the educating.

They need to realise the time for educating has had it's day. If they were better than they are they would start organising the people who believe in real change to

become a force for change. This would show the real color of their skin - cos there is a big difference between sitting comfortably in a lecture room educating to

being someone visibly out in the opon bravely for everyone to see organising millions of people to act in the same synchroniced moment as a unified civil disobedience...for example.

If only one person becomes civilly disobedient they get throw in jail - but if millions do it at the same time - well that is real change. We need someone to organise this synchronicity, IMHO.

Once the oppressors see a focal point of real change ( a bone fide leader) who organising the people into a significant force for real change visibly out in the open so all the other frightened sheep can see, then they are going to want to protect their status quo- their status quo being the frightened sheep they shepherd!

All this arrogant rhetoric about how free you are, while being hidden away behind a computer does not pose any threat to the status quo. What does not pose a threat to the status quo does not pose any real change. Sorry - except perhaps in one's own mind?

When was the last time we so a focal point of genuine authentic change? JFK? lol

Even the half hearted ones got taken out of the game reasonably quickly and personally I don't even think they were genuine authentic leaders of change.

Just something to think about....in my humble opinion.


The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it.

[Dennis Leahy]

You are convinced that "civil disobedience" is going to foment change. Will it? And if it does, will it foment the kind of change you are hoping for - or merely lance the boil? Are you thinking that millions of people, rising up, spilling into the streets, and shouting is the desired civil disobedience - and what the probable consequences are?

Does civil disobedience (in your definition) include the first ever nationwide general strike?

Do you have a plan that will remove the bad guys, or is the plan to yell at the bad guys and tell them to become good guys? (The latter seems to be the plan of most activists and activist organizations. I don't believe they have ever sat down and thought about this glaring mistake in their plan/strategy.)

Do you realize who runs the world? And, who runs your country? Do you think it is OK if they remain in control of the country, or do you expect them all to step down? If they are going to remain in control of the country, what do you see modifying their actions (to make them benevolent?)

Got any leverage to force the bad guys to do what we want?

If the bad guys can be forced out, what's to stop a new set of bad guys - herded into power by the Global Rulers/Financial Elite/Corporatists - from simply taking up where the last group of mercenaries/puppets left off?

Have you read "The Reset Button" document to try to see if that might be a starting place, and if not, to at least have a clearer picture of the big picture of what you are hoping to achieve?

Would you recognize an unstoppable plan and strategy if you saw one? How far are you personally willing to go - in non-violent action of some sort(s)?

Dennis