Cherry in Thin Air

Elena: The Human Being as Monarch- Civil Rights

I would like to explore Civil Rights here eventually equating those rights of each and every individual to the same rights Monarchs have had. There is nothing a Monarch has had as a right that every human being should not have. The legitimate characteristics of a Monarch are those of a conscious, dignified being able to DECIDE on what is good for the people. It is my claim that every human being, conscious of his and her integrity with the whole of humanity, has the capacity to decide what is good and not good for the people. The capacity to discriminate is in every mature person with consciousness and many a child. Every single human being can in his and her own capacity state and protest what is harming them and what is good to them. Consciousness is consciousness of the whole or it is not consciousness. The whole of the human being including the multiple nations and the Earth we inhabit. Every human being is capable of discriminating, expressing and stating what needs to be stopped and what needs to be strengthened.

It is my claim that every human being has the right to participate in socio-political life with full capacity, as a Monarch would do, and that that is the essence of true democracy: that every individual is conscious enough to respond for the whole, like legitimate Kings and Queens have done.

It is the hierarchic status quo of our times what keeps people in positions of power or powerlessness. There is no consciousness in the ilegitimate power in which only a few are privileged not only economically but politically or legitimacy in a government by the few for the few.

The right to own cannot be the right to disown

The right to speak cannot be the right to silence

The right to associate cannot be the right to impede association

The right to self-determination cannot be the right to impede the self determination of others

The right to physical integrity cannot be the right to kill

Kill teams in Afghanistan: the truth

These disgusting photos of murdered Afghans reveal the aggression and racism underpinning the occupation of my country

• • Share921
  • 
  • 
• Comments (255)

• 
• • Malalai Joya
  • The Guardian, Wednesday 30 March 2011
  • Article history

The disgusting and heartbreaking photos published last week in the German media, and more recently in Rolling Stone magazine, are finally bringing the grisly truth about the war in Afghanistan to a wider public. All the PR about this war being about democracy and human rights melts into thin air with the pictures of US soldiers posing with the dead and mutilated bodies of innocent Afghan civilians.

I must report that Afghans do not believe this to be a story of a few rogue soldiers. We believe that the brutal actions of these "kill teams" reveal the aggression and racism which is part and parcel of the entire military occupation. While these photos are new, the murder of innocents is not. Such crimes have sparked many protests in Afghanistan and have sharply raised anti-American sentiment among ordinary Afghans.

I am not surprised that the mainstream media in the US has been reluctant to publish these images of the soldiers who made sport out of murdering Afghans. General Petraeus, now in charge of the American-led occupation, is said to place great importance on the "information war" for public opinion – and there is a concerted effort to keep the reality of Afghanistan out of sight in the US.

Last week my initial application for a US entry visa was turned down, and so my book tour was delayed while supporters demanded my right to enter the country. The American government was pressed to relent and allow my visit to go ahead. Ultimately it too will be unable to block out the truth about the war in Afghanistan.

The "kill team" images will come as a shock to many outside Afghanistan but not to us. We have seen countless incidents of American and Nato forces killing innocent people like birds. For instance, they recently killed nine children in Kunar Province who were collecting firewood. In February this year they killed 65 innocent villagers, most of them women and children. In this case, as in many others, Nato claimed that they had only killed insurgents, even though local authorities acknowledged that the victims were civilians. To prevent the facts coming out they even arrested two journalists from al-Jazeera who attempted to visit and report from the site of the massacre.

Successive US officials have said that they will safeguard civilians and that they will be more careful, but in fact they are only more careful in their efforts to cover up their crimes and suppress reporting of them. The US and Nato, along with the office of the UN's assistance mission in Afghanistan, usually give statistics about civilian deaths that underestimate the numbers. The reality is that President Obama's so-called surge has only led to a surge of violence from all sides, and civilian deaths have increased.

The occupying armies have tried to buy off the families of their victims, offering $2,000 for each one killed. Afghans' lives are cheap for the US and Nato, but no matter how much they offer, we don't want their blood money.

Once you know all this, and once you have seen the "kill team" photos, you will understand more clearly why Afghans have turned against this occupation. The Karzai regime is more hated than ever: it only rules through intimidation, corruption, and with the help of the occupying armies. Afghans deserve much better than this.

However, this does not mean more Afghans are supporting the reactionary so-called resistance of the Taliban. Instead we are seeing the growth, under very difficult conditions, of another resistance led by students, women and the ordinary poor people of Afghanistan. They are taking to the streets to protest against the massacre of civilians and to demand an end to the war. Demonstrations like this were recently held in Kabul, Marzar-e-Sharif, Jalalabad and Farah.

This resistance is inspired by the movements in other countries like Egypt and Tunisia – we want to see "people power" in Afghanistan as well. And we need the support and solidarity of people in the Nato countries.

Many new voices are speaking up against this expensive and hypocritical war in Afghanistan, including soldiers from the Nato armies. When I last visited the UK I had the honour of meeting Joe Glenton, a conscientious objector who spent months in jail for his resistance to the war in Afghanistan. Of his time in prison, Glenton said: "In the current climate I consider it a badge of honour to have served a prison sentence."

So while the world looks in horror at the "kill team" photographs, Joe Glenton's courage and humanity is an important reminder that the war in Afghanistan need not last forever.

Ton and Elena on the Human Being as Monarch

i think part of your problem with me is that i actually read you more ‘carefully’ than you like…. i look beneath the surface and in the process question some of your motives and that makes you uncomfortable. a problem with you elena is that you take yourself way too seriously, did you even stop for a moment to consider the difference between the ego/egoism and egotism… you have a very deeply held sense of self-importance… this condition also renders you hypersensitive to any point of view which diverges from your own and the most unfortunate condition which grows out of your exaggerated sense of self-importance is that you seem to be completely humorless.

several times you say that i called you names… i think you are imagining things again elena…. i did point out some of the things i find objectionable about your attitude….but there was no ‘name calling’ — other than ‘elena.’ i’ll say it again because you obviously ignored the point, what i find most objectionable are the various manifestations of your apparent superiority complex… did you even bother to read the wiki link on Adler ?

speaking of ‘empathy’ let’s just go through your last post so that you may see yourself through the eyes of another…. i’ll jot down here some of the ways you attempt to put another below you…. and i quote:

” you don’t care… you just enjoy putting me down with sarcasm.. that so called aggression that you call humor. So much lowlessness that you indulge in… only hurting your own self…. There is an essential respect that you cannot bring yourself to hold and that leaves very little room for a dialogue…. You are well treated here but you do not treat well…. It is plenty even though you look down on it. Were I to not consider you worth it you would be simply banned….”

(segregating me here in my own ‘cell’ IS a form of banishment elena, you don’t want to admit to it or banish me outright because it would be ‘politically incorrect’ and it would contradict what you’ve been saying. it would make you look like a hypocrite to banish me outright so you take the next best option and banish me to what you think of as the corner, the periphery, the margins. the main reason you keep me around here in isolation is for your own purposes, to you i’m merely a diversion from your ‘real work,’ i’m a plaything for you elena, and since i give you some attention you are willing to tolerate me… but barely).

to continue:

“since your valuation is nil why do you keep participating here? Why is it Ton that you cannot bring any beauty from within yourself and share it with the world but delight on putting everything I stand for down in every one of your posts? Why have you lost the capacity for empathy?”

yes elena, i could say the same of you… do you see all of the negativity in your writing/thinking? here’s some more:

“The fact that you find so horrifying that I say We are One and speak for you is just your identification.”

i wouldn’t describe it as ‘horrifying’ at all… and ‘identification’ with the idea is something you should look at in yourself.

“Do you have to call me names…?”

what ‘names’ elena?

“You have not understood a word I said… You haven’t wanted harmony in these two, four years, why would anyone wish that from you… all your complaints and attacks… a grumpy friend that repeats himself over and over again…. we’ve gotten used to his negative presence… I can barely tolerate that you exist but that is because you are unwilling to acknowledge every positive expression that I send out to you. You can neither take nor give positive things, forgive or apologize but with all your negativity you can’t get yourself to leave”

i hope you will look at this and see all of the negativity that YOU actually ‘send out.’

“…the lowlessness… You seem unable to move beyond US and yet hate the fact that We are One….”

no elena, i don’t hate anything, i’ll say it again, i object to the arrogance of anyone who thinks that she can speak for me and everyone else.

“…I am insulting or hurting you…”

yes you are and you know it, at least if you read between the lines you are admitting to it… and don’t deny it.

“…when I was as negative as you are…”

there you go again elena… so you are placing yourself in a superior position again. i’m not negative elena, what i’m doing with you is called ‘fighting fire with fire,’ i’m holding up the mirror so that you can see yourself… and i think on some level it’s working.

” It is fine if you do not agree and don’t wish to be part of that Oneness and in not being conscious of it…”

oh dear elena, i’m ‘not conscious’ eh– gee, where have i heard that before? now that i’m excluded from your exclusive club of ‘conscious’ enlightenment, the ‘we are one’ club… just pitiful.

“…justify all the separations you wish to have with people, but you don’t have to call me names because I am not interested in the lovelessness that you so enjoy.”

gee elena what names am i calling you? i know you prefer the amorphous perspective described by ‘we are one’ — your intransigent insistence sounds to me very much like a vestige of your long-time involvement in the brainwashing of the cult. in looking at things ‘objectively’ it is important to draw distinctions… you frame this approach negatively by saying that i’m justifying “separations with people” — what lovelessness are you so enjoying elena?

“My words are like mud in pigsty… ’ve failed to live up to it enough to continue failing because you so wish it.”

absolute baseless nonsense tinged with self-pity and an inversion of inflated self-importance.

“I am sorry for your world in which people allow to be treated less than a human being.”

what do you know about ‘my world’ elena? i will ask you to consider: how are you attempting to treat me here… always diminishing and marginalizing the other, does that make you feel better about yourself?

“You are a free man Ton, you can choose to be something else.”

gee elena, thanks for your permission… isn’t it you who continually accuses me of trying to make you into ‘something else’? you might want to look a little more deeply at this.

“In time we will realize that Democracy is the right of individuals to every right that was in its times, alloted to kings. The right to speak and decide, to be treated with decency, to serve and be served by people in a State of “love”, that is, to serve with one’s work for the development of ‘life’. To belong to the Kingdom of Human Beings without racial, national, social or academic separations. To love and be loved. To die at the service of the whole and to be honored in one’s death for one’s life and work was legitimately valued. To be graceful and grateful, to have the pride and the humility of being One with the Universe, One with every realm of Existence, One with every living and deceased soul. To treat with dignity and be treated with dignity for One is dignified and so are All others and so is Life itself. To walk the path of compassion, not in the sorrow of guilt but in the pride of being. To take responsability for one’s mistakes and sufferings and stand up again and again like a hero and face the struggle that is put at one’s feet and in one’s hands. Millions of people, millions and millions of people might take many generations to realize the consciousness of our humaneness but there is no other dignified path for the human being.”

grandiose blustering.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandiosity

Reply

11.            Elena - March 30, 2011 [Edit]

Thank you Ton, at least in this post your sarcasm is much more under control. It is not that I am being negative for stating the facts, but that it is negative to practice them as consistently as you do.

We don’t agree and that is all right!

You deny everything I say and that is fine.

You think it is grandiose blustering and narcissism and I am willing to take that. You don’t realize the difference between greatness and grandiosity and conform the human being to anything less than a Monarch. You wish to put everything I stand up for down one way or another and you can do it for your self but you cannot impose that on me, as I cannot impose beauty on you.

I am as free to stand up for what I wish to as you and don’t have to change to have your approval. I do not need your approval Ton. A dialogue would have been enjoyable but you don’t know how to dialogue or stand up for your understanding with clear reasoning, your structures are not transparent. You dismiss the points attacking the person which is a well known technique of taking attention away from the issues or give homework because you yourself don’t know the lesson. Again, as in all other posts, you reduce the subject to our subjectivities and in so doing reveal your understanding. I’ve given you a page because you’ve proved that your only aim here is to mark my misgivings, not address the subjects. There is no need for you to be in the pages with subjects because you don’t read them, address them or wish to understand them. I hear all your criticism, I thank you for it. It is not that I feel in any way superior to you or anyone else for that matter, it is that the argument is based on solid enough ground and you are unable to deconstruct it or actually deal with it, not because you are inferior, We are One Ton, but because you are not willing to make the intellectual effort. You are biased before you’ve even begun and you've been angry with me long before you can remember. It is all in these blogs for anyone wishing to look at it and you are right in having being angry with my anger but my apologies have been of no worth, you cannot take anything positive.

It is a fact that I believe in what I am standing up for as the most humane approach to the problems at hand and I might very well be mistaken but until I am shown the contrary with serious enough argument and facts I will continue to stand up for it. I also believe that in a democracy there is such a freedom: to stand up for what one believes, so I have that right wether you like it or not and we will live under those freedoms in this blog for as long as possible. As long as you limit yourself to disagreeing without abusive language or behavior, you can use as much space as you find fitting. It is a great deal more than I was given in the FOFBlog for disagreeing with you and your manipulative discourse.

I feel very good these days Ton and wish the same for you. Life out of the cult has proved promising and little by little I recover the integrity of being. You have been right about very many things but you don’t have the love that is needed for a dialogue. Never the less I value your presence and consistency. In this friction, we polish our being. 

Indian Flower

Elena -The Human Being as Monarch

 Hello Ton,

If you cared to read me carefully you would understand what I am saying and how I mean and use the word monarch as much as many other things, but you don’t care to read or understand, you just enjoy putting me down with sarcasm or that so called aggression that you call humor. So much lowlessness that you indulge in… only hurting your own self: US.

It is more than fine for me if we don’t agree and I don’t need to call you names for disagreeing like you are so eager to call me. There is an essential respect that you cannot bring yourself to hold and that leaves very little room for a dialogue.

You are well treated here but you do not treat well. You have a page for yourself because you deserve it. It is plenty even though you look down on it. Were I to not consider you worth it you would be simply banned.

You think that I think myself superior and am narcissistic because I don’t agree with many things you or others say and I don’t think that is a narcissistic or superiority complex. On the contrary, what motivates a person to work as I do is something totally different. It is a worthwhile struggle in the process of becoming. I am studying and exploring a subject and make good effort in that whether you or anyone else values it. What I don’t understand is why, since your valuation is nil why do you keep participating here? Why is it Ton that you cannot bring any beauty from within yourself and share it with the world but delight on putting everything I stand for down in every one of your posts? Why have you lost the capacity for empathy?

The fact that you find so horrifying that I say We are One and speak for you is just your identification. I am speaking for myself. For me, We are One. Am I not entitled to live by that if that is my choice? Do you have to call me names because I so choose? That We are One is a fact to me and it is fine with me if for you it is a slogan or however you wish to put it. You have not understood a word I said in that post. It is a complex one, worth reading carefully. If You don’t want to hear what is actually in it, so what Ton? You haven’t wanted harmony in these two, four years, why would anyone wish that from you? Can’t I just love you with all your complaints and attacks? Like a grumpy friend that repeats himself over and over again and still matters to us because we’ve gotten used to his negative presence?

You think I can barely tolerate that you exist but that is because you are unwilling to acknowledge every positive expression that I send out to you. You can neither take nor give positive things, forgive or apologize but with all your negativity you can’t get yourself to leave, like a couple in a bad marriage.

I am at least happy to know that you are here because you choose to and we will continue to disagree for a long, long time because agreeing is not a sine qua non condition to belong to the Public Square. As long as the lowlessness doesn’t descend into crime and abuse I can take a great deal of disagreement.

What you really seem to like is to talk about US, personal things, inner conditions. You seem unable to move beyond US and yet hate the fact that We are One. You never actually address things in life objectively, you always have to put whatever you say in the context of teaching me a lesson or demeanoring what I say, in other words, you can never move beyond our subjectivity. And then when I actually address you like this, you think I am insulting or hurting you. It’s a difficult and delicate thing especially because I am now convinced that there is so much love. If I had been given some of that love when I was as negative as you are, my suffering after the fellowship wouldn’t have expressed itself so violently.

Love is in the connectedness and whether the expression of that connectedness takes a negative or a positive bent, the connectedness keeps working on the being and people become part of each other and begin to realize their Oneness. We are One Ton, We Human Beings are One Being. It is fine if you do not agree and don’t wish to be part of that Oneness and in not being conscious of it, justify all the separations you wish to have with people, but you don’t have to call me names because I am not interested in the lovelessness that you so enjoy.

This Oneness is the most magnificent experience I’ve ever had and cannot turn myself against it. My words are like mud in a pigsty in relation to that Oneness. I’ve failed to live up to it enough to continue failing because you so wish it. This Oneness makes Kings look like toddlers and toddlers like Kings! That we are all Monarchs is a reality for me and if that is not in your world or can fit in it, I am sorry for your world in which people allow to be treated less than a human being.

In time we will realize that Democracy is the right of individuals to every right that was in its times, alloted to kings. The right to speak and decide, to be treated with decency, to serve and be served by people in a State of “love”, that is, to serve with one’s work for the development of ‘life’. To belong to the Kingdom of Human Beings without racial, national, social or academic separations. To love and be loved. To die at the service of the whole and to be honored in one’s death for one’s life and work was legitimately valued. To be graceful and grateful, to have the pride and the humility of being One with the Universe, One with every realm of Existence, One with every living and deceased soul. To treat with dignity and be treated with dignity for One is dignified and so are All others and so is Life itself. To walk the path of compassion, not in the sorrow of guilt but in the pride of being. To take responsability for one’s mistakes and sufferings and stand up again and again like a hero and face the struggle that is put at one’s feet and in one’s hands. To Love. To Be.

You are a free man Ton, you can choose to be something else. Millions of people, millions and millions of people might take many generations to realize the consciousness of our humaneness but there is no other dignified path for the human being.

Ton on We are One

8. Ton

on the one hand you can barely tolerate the fact that i continue to exist:

e: “why don’t you find yourself another blog to participate in?”

and on the other hand you say: “I sincerely thank you for your participation.”

you’ve got me segregated away safely in a box where i can’t ‘ruin’ your monoblog…. although you attempt to cover up the fact with a mountain of words it’s apparent to me that you are confused elena… i’m not going to get involved in the tit-for-tat quibbling which is so typical of this exchange with you, it leads only in circles within circles and it resolves nothing… it’s simply not worth the painstaking effort required to sort through the barrage of words with which you attempt to bury the fact of the matter… but i will respond to a couple of issues here in order to illustrate my point and hopefully (for your sake), some of your confusion can begin to clear through stimulating a process of your own self-examination.

e: “We are One and I thank you for the friction with which you enter my world so that I learn to better acknowledge and impregnate my self with your suffering.”

you see elena, if you could truly “be the words” of your favorite slogan, then you would realize and acknowledge that if “we are one” then it’s your own suffering you are talking about… but instead you project this ‘suffering’ onto me which is just another attempt on your part to separate yourself from, and elevate yourself above my supposedly ‘poor and sad state’ which you look down upon in judgment from your imagined superiority, and identify as my ‘lowly’ condition of “suffering” — while you rise above it and in the process use the suffering of another to inflate yourself (‘impregnate my self ‘ is the phrase you used). you see elena, if you truly and deeply knew and truly lived that favorite slogan of yours (“we are one”), then there would be no use for this silly game of superiority/inferiority one-upmanship that you are so fond of playing.

e: “If I treat you anything else than a monarch, that is, a legitimate human being, then I am myself far from achieving the consciousness that I am after.”

the question for you is not “IF” — it’s a question of how often, how, when and where do you treat another as anything less than… obviously it’s quite a bit more often than you are aware of and that’s what you should REALISTICALLY be looking at elena. look elena, i certainly don’t expect or necessarily want to be treated like a “monarch” (what world are you living in anyway?)… what i would expect is to be treated as an equal, which is something you are apprently still learning about. you don’t even realize when you are trying to put me down in order to step on me in order to give credence to your own inflated ego. why the inflated ego? see the wiki article below as a place to start your researches. no elena it’s not a question of “IF” — the question is one of discovering how, where, and when you treat me (and others) as inferiors in the playing out of a superiority complex.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superiority_complex

“Democracy is the social realization of our selves as human beings, each monarchs in a society in which no one enslaves or mistreats anyone else.”

in the real world elena, democracy is the antithesis of monarchy… please don’t continue to confuse the monarch who prefers to speak for her subjects (“we are one”), with the ideal of democracy which implies the individual speaking for herself as an individual…. two different things entirely.

leave it to an egoist (or should i say a someone who likes to call herself a “monarch”), to confuse egoism with her own narcissistic tendencies… egoism is an ethical theory that treats (enlightened) self-interest as the foundation of morality. on the other hand egotism is the practice of talking and thinking about oneself excessively because of an undue sense of self-importance…

elena, unlike you in your preaching of “oneness” i don’t think we (that’s you and i), stand so far apart on certain issues… (although when you attempt to insult or belittle me that does tend to widen the divide). what you don’t seem to recognize or acknowledge is that it’s all a matter of perspective, you don’t recognize or acknowledge the validity of different perspectives because you have a certain deeply felt need to always be right and to always have the final word on any given topic. if you examine the situation i’m sure you can agree… and that if you take a stand for “we are one” which merely represents one point of view and not the absolute and final word…. it’s incredibly stupid and narrow minded to think that this is the final word and that another perspective cannot shed some more light… you act as if another perspective must necessarily be rejected out of hand because it doesn’t issue from you, the “monarch.”

sure, from 200 kilometers up the earth looks like a single luminous egg floating alone in space…. the planet is an organism and in that sense every discrete form of life on her is part of the whole…. this is nothing new, it’s as old as the earth herself. but seen from another perspective that is just as valid and just as ‘true’ — the ‘reality’ of the situation here on the ground is that the earth is formed of ‘we’, that means all of ‘us’ as individual organisms and this fact, this reality is responsible for much of the strife and turmoil which plagues the planet…. in that sense we are not just ONE, it is more accurate to say we are many who are interconnected and interdependent. it is this later condition which gives rise to conflict.

speaking of conflict, what i object to in your soapbox diatribe is the myopic insistence that you are right while anyone who takes another perspective is wrong. what i also object to is that when using the ‘royal we’ you would be so arrogant and presumptuous to think that you can speak for me as an individual…. i don’t know where you get the idea that this is o.k. to do… i have a feeling it issues from the same source as does this formulation of yourself as a “monarch” — maybe you spent too much time on the imaginary top of the follyship pyramid scheme ? you will never speak for me elena, that is what i object to… it is the arrogance that makes you think you can do so that i’ve objected to all along…. when you speak for yourself then you’ll have my attention and my respect. what i object to is that you think you can presume to sit on your high horse and to speak for “we” for “us” as if you were a “monarch.” inserting your perspective in place of my own individuality, and your unaware habits of presuming to be able to speak for others, that’s what i will always object to… in any form…. in your case as a petty “monarch” and in the case of politicos and the more influential and grandiose variety of petty despots… you see it’s the same mentality, your own circle of influence is thankfully more limited and that’s the only difference between you and those like you who have the audacity and the arrogance to throw slogans around like “we are one” and presume to speak for ‘the masses.’ maybe another difference would be that you’re less clever than the professional politicos who are able to use these types of slogans to further their narcissism and their own egoistic motives…. the fact that you’re not so clever as to manipulate others with this sort of nonsense, is probably to your benefit and to “ours” — you see, i don’t need another petty ‘monarch’ to speak or to think for me.

e: “The puffed up world in which you seem to limit your existence to might no be aware of the abundant crime that is happening today but if you only dared to look beyond the charismatic prism that you seem to enjoy to stand up and demeanor the few people that you do interact with without ever seriously putting an effort to add something of value, you might actually begin to live your life out with love.”

when you attack me like this, i know i’ve hit a nerve… you might want to examine this elena, it sounds like you are projecting something of yourself into your idea of me (the other)…. you really have no idea of what my world is like or the nature of my interactions in it…. withdraw projections elena.

Wave

On Consciousness- Ton and Elena on We are One. 2

Continuation of Ton’s post and answer

Ton: the question here is how can your one-way equation work the other way… how does the inner life of the individual give form to and ‘sculpt’ the outside ? i would say that only through the development of individuality is this a possibility… nothing changes in a world where the sheep believe so strongly in a conformist mantra like “we are one.”

Elena: I would thoroughly agree with you if we take into consideration what I said about We are One before that. There has to be an individual or an identity PRESENT for there to be an ACT and not simply a repetition of the same forms but there is a huge difference when that happens in relation to what happened before. The processes are upside down and backwards to each other. In the first process that we’ve been talking about in which the individual is a passive entity being molded by the outside world there are various phases that would need to be studied more carefully and some of them are legitimate and therefore positive but if the process is not overcome at the right time then it transforms into an illegitimate process with descending, decaying characteristics and the individual turns against his own self and the society in which he or she live. “Turns against” in the sense that they enter an involuting rather than an evoluting process. Something worth noticing about this phase is that the outside world is active and the individual is passive. The individual is being molded and hardly has an effect on the forces that mold him or her. When the individual separates from the particular group or “smaller unit” or “immediate organism” that he or she initially belonged to, there is a “change”. As I write about this it is somewhat shocking to me how similar the process of reproduction is: Two forces unite and create a whole new being within one of the beings that then separates from it and develops his and her own life. It’s surprising to me that our “life”, “socio-cultural life” moves very much under the same patterns or could we actually call them laws? But let’s not deviate from the point. I was saying that it is worth noticing that the outside world is active and the individual passive but the perception the individual has of the phenomenon is very much of being tremendously active. It is probably the process of Growth as conceived in the System. The individual feels him and herself very active towards the world but is in fact essentially passive in that he and she are not yet mature or “individuated” enough to have become active in the true sense of the term. The “Wold” ACTS on them and they allow for its action like a plant growing into flower.

But once the flower is open and has the capacity to reproduce itself and form new flowers, once the individual is mature enough to act legitimately, THEN we can talk about an “individual” with “identity”. It’s interesting that we can only then say that there actually is an identity because before that there is “identification” but not identity.

Again, here it doesn’t mean that a human being is not a sacred being from the moment they are born but that to be in essence is different as to having developed a full spirit.

Back to the point again. The outside world is active and the individual passive even though they feel strongly active in the process of growth. There is a ‘budding’ I in its full capacity struggling to become like a sperm trying to reach the ovum but what actually determines the outcome is the state of the organism in which all that is taking place: the womb, the society in which the individual is meant to develop.

When the individual matures into consciousness of the Whole, when they become mature enough not only to reproduce physically but to Act out the consciousness of their self that includes the consciousness of everything around them: people as much as nature and within both their multiple dimensions, what is interesting to observe is that the interaction between the individual and the “world” that surrounds them becomes “objective”. The world has an “objective” effect on the mature identity and the mature identity has an objective effect on the world it lives itself out in. Perhaps I would define subjectivity as having an effect in only one dimension but objectivity as having an effect in all dimensions. The power of an objective act is that it permeates the being as much as the beings around it while a subjective act basically affects the individual involved and maintains the inertia of the status quo. No innovation, creation or originality is possible and the repetition becomes vicious over time. While repetition tends to strengthen the will for some time, if no progress accompanies it, it tends to stifle and involute the process._____________

Ton: elena: “We are all living out a hierarchic sovereignty in which we act out our superiority towards others. We struggle to put others down so as to float above, mostly because we are ourselves so tremendously depressed in a world that values nobody.”

yes elena, i couldn’t agree more… i’m glad that you’re learning to see yourself through our interactions.

Elena: Your misinterpretation of my affirmations and your need to give your self credits that you don’t have reveal your state much more than my self. What I mean with that affirmation is that the millions of people committing suicide, the millions being killed like cockroaches the world over reveal the tremendous depression of our selves as human beings. We are not conscious of our humanity and are killing each other like rats within nations and internationally. The puffed up world in which you seem to limit your existence to might no be aware of the abundant crime that is happening today but if you only dared to look beyond the charismatic prism that you seem to enjoy to stand up and demeanor the few people that you do interact with without ever seriously putting an effort to add something of value, you might actually begin to live your life out with love._____________________

Ton: while you’re on the subject, here is an author i can recommend:

http://danielgoleman.info/

‘Here at The Corporation, we believe in working hard, and productivity. But we also believe in team. Because it was The Corporation that first recognized how profitable society could be if we all forgot ourselves and just worked together. Working together has provided us with jobs and happiness…a world built on (war and) peace… (holding up a piece of plastic) And plastic…where everything is wonderful and…above all… Magic! We’ve got great things in store for the future, because the corporate way is THE way…but don’t take my word for it, just listen to this… ‘

Visioneers

Elena: This last part seems like more of what you actually believe in but pretend to be superior to. What would be interesting about studying that is realizing how they use the same principles but against themselves and others but you don’t realize that. You think that pointing a finger at them and thinking you are better makes you greater but it only reveals the same unconscious process that they are eagerly indulging in.

I sincerely thank you for your participation. It is unfortunate that you stand so far apart and still have to resort to such lowlessness to address me. It is not only that you should treat me like a monarch because I am a legitimate human being, it is that when we are unable to treat others like that, we are ourselves far below our own humaneness and keep each other in degenerative processes. This has of course become “normal” for you, as you prove in the next post in which making fun of it and demeanoring me is understood as “humor” but that humor is only a buffer disguising the aggression.

We are One and I thank you for the friction with which you enter my world so that I learn to better acknowledge and impregnate my self with your suffering. If I treat you anything else than a monarch, that is, a legitimate human being, then I am myself far from achieving the consciousness that I am after. Democracy is the social realization of our selves as human beings, each monarchs in a society in which no one enslaves or mistreats anyone else.




  

Picture... with love

Ton and Elena on We are One (corrected on the 29th of march)

Corrected on the 29th of March

Hi Ton,

I think I now have the time to address your post.

8.         ton – March 26, 2011 [Edit]

elena, thanks for taking time from your work to respond… you’ve got a lot of irons in the fire don’t you… i’m not sure where the ‘appropriate’ site is to post this but i’m sure you can move it or censor it as you wish.

e: “For your conflicts on individuality you might wish to look at post number 2 that I posted this morning at…”

you see elena, there you go again… I have no ‘conflict on individuality’ — what i object to is YOUR formulation, your dogmatic insistence and emphasis on the primacy of the collective at the expense of the individual —

Elena:

It seems you’ve never actually understood what I am talking about. We are One is not at the expense of the individual, it is I AM at its peak consciousness. Without that consciousness there is no individuality but individualism is rampant.________________

as evidenced by your constant refrain: “we are one.” i think you are at last finally able to realize and acknowledge the impossibly naive, limited and narrow-minded perspective your intransigence represents, you have at least begun to resort to words like “interdependent” rather than the amorphous and nondescript “Oneness.” congratulations for beginning to clear that up for yourself.

Elena:

I am not doing anything new Ton, simply expanding on the same principles that I have spoken on from the beginning.

e: “It should not surprise us that human beings are, like Nature, interdependent on each other.”

yes as i have been saying for some time now, acknowledging interdependent interconnection is much more accurate than lumping everything into your favorite slogan “we are one.” i would go further in your assessment here in that ‘we’ are not only ‘interdependent on each other’ but more importantly we are interdependent and interconnected to all of Great Nature… this obvious fact is too often overlooked by ‘modern’ people who are conditioned in many ways to be insulated and isolated from the natural world.

Elena:

People are part of the natural world as much as of the world of human beings and the world of other dimensions. The interconnectedness between them all is something I’ve been speaking about since I started writing in the fofblog. I don’t know why you are only inclined to acknowledge it today._________

Ton: e: “The forms within which people live have a structural force that sculpts their inner psychology. What IS outside of our selves, molds our inner as much as outer self in as much as we abide by the force of being one with the whole.”

what you don’t mention here is the importance of nonabiding with the force of being one with the whole…

Elena: We don’t agree on this Ton. It is important to realize that one’s childhood and youth personality is molded by the society one lives in, THAT is the beginning of “conscious consciousness” and awareness of one’s self as an individual separate from the mass of society. It can or cannot conform to the status quo but that initial revolt against the status quo that has conditioned or “programmed” the individual to a great extent is simply the beginning of a long process that can mature into full consciousness or simply reproduce, in the long run, exactly the same patterns that the individual was revolting from.

“Non-abiding with the force” of social conditionings is the first step towards maturity and individuation and it is actually recognized in society by the acceptance of the 21 year old age as maturity but separating and acquiring consciousness of one’s independence of one’s family and society is only an initial step. I don’t know whether this could be approached from the point of view of “steps” for it is not a linear process or one that is prescribed in natural development but I do believe that it is possible for each and every human being, if we look for it with enough will.

As I understand, what you are talking about is this moment in which the individual separates and “individuates” his and herself from the masses of people and their overall unchecked programming but We are One is not about that. It is about the conscious realization that “being” is consciousness of human kind, nature and all cosmoses that are included in those realms as a wholeness. That they are connected and interconnected is almost an oxymoron? because in the realization of their Oneness it is superfluous to state that they are connected and interconnected. It all depends on the dimension from which we are looking at phenomenon. In the physical dimension we see things as being separate but learn of their interconnectedness. Knowledge is knowledge of the whole or partial knowledge and in its partiality and ignorance, tends to deviate into a descending octave.

The stage of separation that you are speaking about in which the individual becomes independent from the immediate society and family is definitely a necessary step in the process of becoming a mature human being but traditionally, that initial separation entails multiple characteristics that run along with it such as “rejection” of some or all “authorities”. That rejection of parents, teachers and other authorities within the status quo may be necessary in the process of individuation for in that process the individual is struggling to acquire his and her own sense of authority. We are trying to stand on our own two feet during that period. One could call it the “No process” and remember that in it one says No to the world as it was presented to one in childhood and youth and begins to present one’s own version of how things are or should be or at least will be in as much as one can participate in them but that is not consciousness of our Oneness.

During that “No process”, some of the main characteristics are rejection, judgement, negation that can turn into aggression, negativity, violence and separation or positively resolve into mature response or both in due course. It is a period of Physical and psychological separation from people and ideas, that mark a time in which one chooses to belong to one or another ideology and lifestyle. In choosing one group of people and ideologies versus another there is a new consciousness in the individual that separates us from the “old” consciousness within family or social group, but this also is not consciousness of our Oneness.

No matter how many groups and ideologies people are prone to move in or out from, as long as they are groups separating from one another or the rest of mankind, they are not conscious of our Oneness.

What is of value to realize in relation to these groups is that they are all conditioned by specific forms of separation that entail points of conflict with each other and that often live out their existence in judgement, aggression and subtle or overt forms of violence.

Without consciousness of our Oneness we will always find points of conflict in our relations because we stand on our egoness against the egoness of the other without the willingness to share what rightfully belongs to all of us. The conflict rises in the sense of egoness in the instinctive consciousness of the individual and is generally related to who owns what, who has a right to what, and can be resolved in the consciousness of Our Rights in relation to what we share.

It is not only that the individual has rights as most people think today and justify all the selfishness of their actions with it, it is that WE all have the same rights and have never actualized that consciousness in our practical lives.

So going back to your affirmation, in my understanding, non-abiding by the mass behavior one was conditioned to live by in one’s youth, is as necessary as abiding by consciousness of our Oneness in the maturity of our lives. What one learns when one can look at life as it is, separate from one’s self, is the STATE of things, the reality of our consciousness today and its manifestation in our actual practical lives, the fact that we are living in a wildly schizophrenic, upside down and backwards period of time with very little consciousness of our Oneness and powerful selfish, egotistic, instinctive consciousness in which people, families and nations are pulling and manipulating ‘life’ towards their own personal advantage, without the compassion or consideration for the whole.

Each stage of consciousness purports particular forms of behavior and that is why becoming conscious of our unconsciousness is so critical to any possible evolution.

Our differences in relation to these issues are critical to our interchanges in relation to cults and our mutual participation in them. What your position on the subject justifies is the same narrow and blind approach to consciousness that was held in the Fellowship cult: That consciousness is an individual enterprise and that people must separate from life to evolve in an individualistic pursuit through sacrifice and effort. That is not the fourth way and aspects of other ways were introduced to enslave people into a severely egotistic precipice. Because such individualism and egotism is already a germinating tendency in society, it is not only possible but relatively easy to enslave people in such cults. These phenomenon are taking place with horrifying “normality” with millions of people belonging to different cultish organizations.

I need to move on to other things today, I’ll address the rest of your post when I have the time.

3 Study of Emotional intelligence

Part 3 cont.

"Of course, to consider the workplace, indeed to consider any area of social life, any

human exchange, as somehow entirely devoid of emotion is highly problematic.

Greed, after all, is no less an emotional phenomenon than, say, philanthropy."

Elena:  In statements like this one is where we begin to realize the superiority of esoteric systems of knowledge versus traditional knowledge. In the division of functions, the instinctive realm or centre has specific characteristics and although we could affirm that there is no such thing as greed in the animal realm, we can affirm that without consciousness when the human being acts through the ‘prism’ of the instinctive center, there is a characteristic trait to our actions in which the ‘egoness’ is strongly felt and greed, (amongst many other forms of inhuman behavior), or the excessive appropriation of things that people don’t actually need, manifests.

In greed in human beings we find the impulse to own, to keep, to protect for one’s self with a zealousness that we can also recognize in animals when they are protecting their territory. It is an instinctive emotion or what in the system is called the queen of clubs or the emotional part of the instinctive center and it has the capacity to show force, aggression and impose its ‘sovereignty’ over its possessions by killing those who threaten them.

We would live in a very different world if we declared that no one owns anything but what he needs and by that I don’t mean just food and clothing but everything that a human being would need to develop his and herself into a conscious being. In our present times owning in excess gives people the possibility of submitting others to their service, great deal of leisure time, travel opportunities, access to better education, greater production capabilities amongst other things but the whole status quo is based on an economic transaction, that is, an instinctive transaction similar to what animals would do if they were people but we are not animals, we are human beings in a process of actualizing our consciousness as such.

If instead of associating because we are determined by instinctive, economic needs, we organized ourselves to associate not with the mere consciousness of the profit of the association but with the consciousness of the human and natural benefits of the association, we would have to include the instinctive center’s needs, that is, the basic human needs for survival but also the emotional, intellectual and sovereign rights of not only the people but the natural world involved.

It’s ironic that human beings today live from their instinctive centers and yet are not nearly as smart as a cockroach at protecting nature. The destructiveness that characterizes the people of our times does not only reveal the tremendous ignorance of the people in power but the enormous greed that they incarnate in their actions.

The more we look at our world, the clearer it becomes that every realm of our lives from our families, to schools, to military, to work, business, production, show business, etc, etc, etc, are all under the control of instinctive consciousness characterized by the use of authoritarian mechanisms based on hierarchic status quos.

Parents expect to be obeyed because they use force as much as teachers from kindergarden to masters degree only that by the time people reach the masters degree they no longer have anything alive enough to protest the status quo. And in the area of education above all the others, we must be able to look clearly at the methods in which the utterly fascist structure is put in place with teachers who never, ever, ever allow their students to speak and it has become the norm that these teachers are so considered the ultra cum lauden, lauden cum ultra, that they think and act as if only they could have the right to speak while hundreds of students, thousands in a lifetime submit and obey.

What we need to realize with that is not that the teachers might not be actually prepared enough in their field. What we need to realize is that the FORM, the structure that they abide by to convey their knowledge is what produces and reproduces the authoritarian fascist structure of life characteristic of the hierarchic instinctive order of beings. Animals command their lives in such a way and in them it is a question of survival but when that is carried out by human beings, it is conducive to self-destruction. What is right in the animal realm is not right in the human realm. In the human realm such conditioning are performed in such a way that they take everything human away from our lives.

We would then ask why was it right for Kings? I am inclined to believe in Steiner’s interpretation that legitimate monarchy was indeed connected to consciousness and that we needed the guidance and protection that they were able to carry out. I also believe that the consciousness of kings is now accessible to every human being. That we are all sovereign in our world: the human world. That if to be a king is to be dignified is possible to all people especially if the true meaning of dignity is the consciousness of the divine within.

If to be gracious is the quality of kings, I believe every one of us can ingratiate our selves with the different cosmoses within and without our selves and carry the consciousness of all those dimensions with grace which is only the outer expression of our gratitude to higher cosmoses than the one we are presently dwelling in.

If it is the power of kings to be served by others, that power never came from authoritarian rule but from submission through love. Legitimate sovereignty inspires legitimate love and to submit is not submission in the same way in which people are obliged to submit today but the acknowledgement of one’s being in relation to the other. To acknowledge that there are people who are more knowledgeable, more wise, more capable than one’s self in almost every area of life is not to submit one’s self to mistreatment or undermining of one’s sovereign rights. The more wise and knowledgeable the individual, the less authoritarian he and she becomes.

That would brings us to the characteristics of sovereignty, the thin layer in which authority is legitimate or not, we can each deduce that for our selves with what we already know.