Love is simply what is.
If you are a serious student of spiritual texts and teachings, you know that the best of them talk about love. It has nothing to do with fireworks or psychedelics. Psychedelics simply show you your deepest nature -- if you have the courage to look at yourself in your rawest form.
The reason some of guys have a hard time buying this whole love business it because you're still thinking of reality from the materialist paradigm. This paradigm can extremely subtle, such that even people who have an awakening or two -- such as Sam Harris -- still have not transcended it. According to materialism, the universe must be neutral, impersonal, and devoid of any sentimentality. This is a hyper-logical, hyper-masculine, reductionistic way of understanding reality. And it is untrue.
Consciousness is Love. It is not dumb matter or energy or even "simply what is". What is, is LOVE! And why it is, is LOVE!
Be careful not to underestimate God's goodness. That is the key mistake here. God is not neutral as you might assume.

This attitude is overly-simplistic, overly-reductionistic, & misses a giant swath of the spiritual terrain.
To teach spirituality and not teach the metaphysical nature of Love is incorrect not only from the standpoint of doing your students a disservice, but also from the standpoint of Truth itself.
By shutting off your mind through self-inquiry, you've disconnected yourself from the very source and purpose of existence and awakening: LOVE. Love is not an emotion or feeling. Love is identical to Truth.
This is the danger of Neo-Advaita and Neo-Buddhism as commonly taught in the West today. The nuances and depth of awakening is lost, reduced to a binary flatland.
I have interacted with many enlightened masters. I was once told of the following case: A modern day Buddhist came to an enlightenment self-inquiry intensive, inquirying into the question of What am I? After a few days of intense inquiry he had an awakening to Absolute Love. But he immediately rejected the awakening as inauthentic because his Buddhist dogma led them to believe that Love is not a real thing. He was trapped in looking for Nothingness. This is a mistake. The Love is right there, yet you deny it.
We are not really in disagreement here. There are just aspects of the Absolute you have not yet become conscious of because you've over-reduced it.
I understand that some of you guys will disagree with me. But I can only lead you as best as I know how. Whether you want to follow is up to you. Nothing said here should be taken as dogma. Discover the many facets of the Absolute for yourself. Directly! Through no human source.
P.S. I have no problem with you guys doing psychoanalysis. My only point was that psychedelics will take you deeper than any talk-therapy will. But of course you're welcome to use them both. I support the use of multiple tools.

You are wrong.
You have simply not awoken to what God or Love are.
Emptiness is, ironically, just one facet of a much deeper thing which you have yet to access. You have not accessed it because self-inquiry is not a very effective tool to get there. And these various Buddhist and Neo-advaitan approaches which are popular today are fundamentally dogmatic and shallow. The realization of Emptiness and No-self is just the beginning of this work, which you have mistaken for the end.
If you are not conscious that you are God and that you are imagining all of physical reality, your awakening is skin deep. And if you are not conscious that Truth and Love are identical, again, your awakening is skin deep.
Everything I say here on this matter I have personally verified and become directly conscious of. And so have others before me.
I have told you guys many times, you don't understand how deep this goes.
If you do not want to follow my teachings to God and Love, then this is not the right place for you. This is not something I will compromise on. There is enough ignorance around here as it is to have to deal with supposedly awake people who deny God and Love. You can fool yourself, but you ain't foolin me.
God's eye is watching you.
You are being guided here to something far deeper than you yet understand. If you doubt that, by all means, do your own thing or follow some other teacher.

@Omni Expand your ways of practice. Offer more, serve the world. Teach what you know. Make videos sharing what you do. Help those who want to get into it. Also, aim to become the best in the world.
Money is a consequence of your mindset. You can't make more money thinking about it in the first place. You need to improve yourself and aim high.

@winterknight I just had a mini-epiphany.
When you recommend psycho-analysis to supplement this work, that's exactly why I recommend psychedelics. Just like psycho-analysis the psychedelic's function is not primary to enlighten you but to clear out lesser blockages, shadow issues, and to show you what is getting in way of awakening.
The benefit of psychedelics is that it's faster, cheaper, more direct than months of talk therapy, and gives awakenings as well. But of course for those who cannot access psychedelics, I can see the value of psycho-analysis.
I've not done formal psycho-analysis but I'd guess 3-12 months of psycho-analysis = 1-3 psychedelic trips. The cost savings would also be very significant.
I've noticed that most people who take psychedelics don't have very deep awakenings on them because first the psychedelic must clear out psychological baggage (AKA, psychoanalysis). The existential insights require a purified mind and heart. The deep existential insights tend to come in later trips, after the mind has been purified a bit of its human baggage.
Just a useful insight I thought I'd share with you guys.
The oversight I made in the past is that I tended to think of the psychedelic purely as a gateway to nondual states. But that's only half of their function. The other half is the psycho-analytic resolution of psychological baggage.

@Extreme Z7 The ultimate irony is that Trump inherited $400 million from daddy and lost it all in terribly mismanaged business deals.
Trump's wealth is a total con. But stage Orange doesn't care. To stage Orange, the appearance of wealth is as valid as actual wealth and it doesn't matter to stage Orange that his wealth was acquired through white collar crime and various kinds of exploitative schemes. Stage Orange just wants that golden toilet, damn the costs.
To stage Orange, success = truth.

Interpersonal Development is like Calculus and Personal Development is like Algebra.  You need Algebra for Calculus, but Calculus is way more advanced than Algebra is.  Interpersonal Development work, like Calculus, is really sweet when you're ready for it, but it's a horror when you're not ready for it.  You will fail your ass off in Calculus brutally and with no mercy given if you haven't mastered Algebra.  That's what people are afraid of with relationships is failing their ass off, because we've all been there many times.  But when you're prepared for Calculus, you've met all the prerequisites for Calculus -- studying Calculus is amazing!  It's a new, exciting venture.

@GenuinePerspectiveXC
You keep quoting from the abstract. You need to read the entire article and critically analyze the data and descriptions to put it in proper context. Not using terms in the proper context leads to misunderstanding. 
It seems like you are trying to recontextualize terms and statements to support a pre-conceived view that you hold. 
A mind which observes and explores data to see what it reveals is very different than a mind that seeks evidence to re-enforce and promote a pre-existing view. 

@SoonHei This gets into cause and effect. “Blame” is merely assigning a cause to an effect. I.e. there was a person that stole my car. The person (caused) my car to be stolen (effect). This can have practical value in life, yet is often quite limited to a proximal cause. Upon closer inspection cause begins to expand to include many variables. This can give a more holistic view of a situation. For example what are all the variables in our community that is (collectively causes) car theft. Again, this can have practical value. Upon deeper inspection, the cause inputs expands into infinity - as do all things. 

If you want to test environmental effects on performance on a test, the most important experiment is to change environment. These studies did not do that. These studies look at environmental impact in healthy environments from childhood into adulthood. The environments are not “different”. The authors conclusions you state are based on SHARED environments and the authors stress this point and even ask the reader not to misrepresent the data by considering it to be different environments. 
Have you read the paper and put the conclusion you quote into context? Or did you simply cut and paste a statement from the abstract, assuming you know what it means without reading what the data and authors actually say about it in the paper?
The conversation is not about wether IQ tests are biased toward one person with lots of resources over another person with lots of resources. The conversation is about whether IQ tests are biased toward a person with lots of resources over a person with few resources. The studies did not address that at all and these studies are not applicable to this domain. 
Regarding the studies you link: Neurological maturation follows an internal developmental genetic program that is influenced by the external environment. Different genes are involved at different stages of development. Genetics will interact with the environment to different extents during different stages of development. The article you cite includes studies in which twins were in shared or similar environments. It is saying that within shared or similar environments the genetic program is influenced by the environment to different degrees at different stages of development. This is somewhat interesting, yet not at all surprising. Importantly, the data cannot be extrapolated to more general conclusions that environment does not have considerable influence because these studies were done in a very narrow set of environmental conditions. The authors state:
” It is important to specify the populations to which any results can be generalized and not misinterpret what they mean. The samples were drawn almost exclusively from Western industrial democracies. These settings have characteristic environments. Only a few of the participants were raised in real poverty or by illiterate parents, and all study participants had access to the contemporary educational programs typical of those societies. This is the domain to which we can generalize.”
The data in these studies cannot be extrapolated outside of this narrow domain. Generally, when people discuss the environmental impact on IQ, they are not talking about environmental impact of two people in essentially the same environment. The criticism is to those that are  over-stating the genetic basis of IQ because the tests are biased toward individuals in healthy environments with resources. The discussion isn’t about environmental impact between two people with with lots of resources. It’s about the environmental impact on a person with lots of resources and a person that lacks resources. A person that is in a good environment and a person in a bad environment. The studies you linked do not address this and one cannot make any conclusions within this domain. Doing so is a misrepresentation of the data. The authors themselves ask the reader not to do this.
This was your original statement to which you linked the article:
”Identical twins growing up in different environments (one good, one bad) will score the different scores when they are young.  However, by age 60, their IQs will be identical again”
You are misrepresenting the data of the studies you link in a way the authors themselves specifically asked you not to do. They specifically said the studies did NOT involve different environments of “one good, one bad” and specifically said the studies do not apply to that domain. The authors themselves say that doing so is a misrepresentation of the data. This is directly from the authors of the article you cite! 
 

I do not look at the world through the filter of IQ at all. To me that is a narrow and foolish way of looking at people and societies.
You are treating IQ as a fixed human quality but it isn't. The IQ of a society is like the wealth of a society. As a society grows it can raise the IQ of its members.
The reason you're caught up on the issue of IQ is because you're at a stage Orange level of cognitive development, so you're stuck on rationality and quantifying the world. Given your worldview, if a thing cannot be qualified or rationally grasped, it isn't real and does not exist. You're not yet developed enough to notice that this is very limited and distorted way of looking at the world. You've also filled your mind with IQ ideology by watching videos and reading Reddit or whatever, which now colors how you see the whole world. But you're not yet conscious enough to see that that's just one out of an infinite number of models and perspectives, and a very crude and narrow one at that.
You're also not conscious yet of the socially-constructed nature of IQ scores and tests. You hold IQ as some kind of biological absolute, which it isn't. You might as well be arguing that poverty is a genetic trait. This would be to misunderstand the social and systemic causes of poverty.
If you want to evaluate people, level of ego development is the best metric. And ego development is fully changeable with practice, effort, and improvements to society. It is not a genetic absolute in the way that having 10 fingers is.
I seek to hang out with wise people who are conscious enough to realize that reality is too complex and subtle to be quantified. But since such people are rare, I have to settle for dealing with the narrow-mindedness of rationalism and scientism.

None of those folks were awakened except the Buddha.
It's very rare for a Western philosopher to be awakened.
Heraclitus, Plotinus, Berkeley, and Hegel were some of the few I think were awakened.
Buddha-nature/Buddha-mind is God. Nirvana is God.

@Serotoninluv You’re being self righteous by calling me self righteous.
If that is indeed what you’re doing - the probability is likely extremely high, coordinates however could swing out disproportionately to knock out a satellite or two to bring about a different possibility or rather, sum of universal quantum feces to contemplate.
In the end, relative to x, whether x be utility with respect to delusion or utility with respect to a human organisms potential, there will exist better beliefs than others.
To speak honestly on that because I value the seeing of exacting appearances over mirages, yes I think am a bit self righteous, it’s likely a defence mechanism, one which I think has some value which will evolve overtime like any other reactionary mechanism within me. The difference here being I’m certainly not the one in denial about it.
Personally though I don’t see it as TOO self righteous if someone values using a parachute to survive the free fall after jumping out of an aeroplane over their belief in being able to manipulate quantum time in order to survive the fall. I also think the person who values the parachute is doing the other “quantum mathematical being” a favour by yanking their chain here so they land more safely. Not only does he pretend to know (he possesses superficial knowledge that has deluded him to believe that he has any kind of authority on the subject), he pretends to know more than others while at the same time surreptitiously sidestepping ways to answer direct questions and derailing directions. He's a bullshitter and that bullshitter is someone you're happy to defend.
There’s more ways to look at a situation than to give it the narrow definition of being self righteous, that only adds sauce to the quantum bullshit salad.
Parachute anyone? Yes please pass the sauce, I’ll grab the pepper as well if you don’t mind, “oh and let’s try and miss the trees on the way down too of course. Hey where can I get a barbecue round here in free fall for this bacon I got here in my hand that I’d like to fry and eat!”
@Becks I wasn’t referring to you, please speculate away that’s all cool and it can help in the learning process. I’m just sick and tired of the pretenders, it harms other people. You’re not pretending to be an expert, you just come across as a sincere learner, so am I and it’s the only reason I’m here, not to be some “guru” as others here pretend to be rather than just acting like real authentic human beings.
Why would you invite a pretender to your birthday if they were only ever pretending to be your friend? If ONLY I had quantum powers to flush them down that quantum tunnel they profess to know so much about. The water bill would be enormous with all the bullshit they need to flush down in order to hide and repress in their subconscious! 
 

Its also extremely ignorant to say that any activity whatsoever, so of any kind in reality, is illogical. It shows a lack of open mindedness, all that simply needs to be concluded is that the logic on how that thing which looks to be contrary to how we believed something should normally behave is not yet known. Its analogous to when you notice behaviour from another person that seems to be unusual, its not that they're "outside the laws of logic", that's ridiculous and dogmatic, its much more sensible rather to simply assume that the logic on how they operate is not yet well understood.
There's no basis by which anyone can argue for throwing logic in the bin, zero.
If anyone here can provide such an example I'd love to hear it. I will personally wire you $10,000 if you're able to but I know you're most likely completely full of shit.
Whether its telepathy, speaking to aliens through psychedelics, traveling to the 100th dimension in reality if there is one, unbelievable transcendental meditation or whatever it is, its ridiculous to assume these things can't be explained using logic. Any dogmatic notion here sound like escapism, after all, they use logic to pronounce their lack of faith in logic, that shows you the likelihood of denial operating there.

At present, non-materialism is what's known as a non-conversation when it comes to self actualisation.
Most of speculation here is merely delusional, at present, the metaphysical has evolved into group-centric, which means its now protected by its owners where perceived (not necessarily actual) outsiders are perceived as "materialists" when in reality such persons are just engaging in quantum tunneling into their own delusions about life.
Most people that speculate on these subjects don't even understand quantum physics let alone being able to provide proper realisations that aid self actualisation. Its pure conjecture, pure thought experiment.
These people act like they can perceive the non-physical even though perception of any kind, even feeling and intuition is what's known as physical.
There's no such thing as non-material, there's just gradients of material, not realising this just shows you how much independent thought these folk have put into it.
And @Inliytened1 try not to tie yourself up with this stuff, quantum mechanics arose out of science so you're talking nonsense, its not like it was created by a guy in a cave meditating though the imagination can easily lead us to postulate things beyond being the practical physical.
I recommend thinking more critically about these things, these experiments ARE DONE BY SCIENTISTS not mysticists so for you to say such things is nonsense.
Please don't mislead by pretending that you can use the metaphysical in any way shape or form to benefit your existence in any way other than to form part of your theorisation. If you can, please explain very specifically exactly how you do so and I'll show you how that is just physical.
"Scientists today (..)!" is just a delusional label you're creating in your mind and you have literally zero idea what the real consensus is beyond your partial understandings of what is represented in the media. There would be literally thousands of scientists in support of quantum mechanics in many different ways, after all, there are THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of scientists in the world working on that very subject.
People on this forum really need to show more respect to self honesty, it really sounds like they're just show boating sharing there "beliefies" rather than demonstrating that they're capable of and looking to engage in the proper examination of subjects from an extremely self honest perspective.
 

@TrynaBeTurquoise I’ve had psychedelic-induced conscious states that I call “trans-human” because that is how it seems upon “return” to the human mind-body. The human mind-body has certain limits, yet it has much more potential than we are aware of.
I think the question of how the different effects of psychedelics relate to the human psyche is an interesting one from a human perspective. I’ve done about a dozen different forms of psychedelics and know the different essences of spirits you describe. I don’t think it is “actual” by how the human mind perceives and contextualizes “actuality”. I think it is an “actuality” beyond human contextualization at this time of human evolution. Perhaps in 200 years, humans will have explored these realms and have a better understanding.
The question of whether access to these dimensions are psychedelic-dependent is one have explored and contemplated and my sense is “no”, that they are not psychedelic-dependent - but it sure as heck helps. Ime, when the ego/person/human contextualization machine is consistently dissolved to such a degree that it isn’t appearing while sober, there is a greater chance of “accessing” these dimensions. I did 5-Meo 24 days straight, with only a few days off. One thing I noticed was that as consciousness contracted back into human form, there was a human contextualization into a human “experience”. This tendency of contextualization began to dissolve and after about 10 days disappeared and there was what I now contextualize as “trans-human” consciousness though out the day (even sober). In other words, the “god-consciousness” stuck. The last “regular” thoughts I had from a human person perspective was sitting down on my meditation cushion to vape as I did each day and there was a realization that “I” didn’t know if I had vaped already or not. The duality between “sober” and “5-Meo” perception and contextualization broke down. Concepts like “breakthrough” dissolved as there was no distinction between “pre” and “post” breakthrough. It was permanent “breakthrough”. 
Multi-dimensional phenomena occurred throughout the day, even when I was sober. For weeks straight. Yet I’m not sure how how to contextualize this relative to the human mind-body. From a human perspective, I would say there is a relationship with a particular mind-body and resonance. The experiences that Leo has recently described that seem extraordinary or unbelievable to many, seem completely normal and ordinary to me. In part because forms of extraordinary and unbelievable would manifest throughout the day for me. Yet these manifestations have been different than what others with a high baseline conscious level describe, so perhaps there are different “flavors” that human mind-bodies resonate with. This would relate to the relative nature of reality and I don’t think all beings would need to “access” the same dimensions to show “actual existence”. This idea is within a contracted human contextualization. For example, the physical land and culture we refer to as India “actually exists” and any of us can venture there. Yet that criteria of “actual existence” is within a human perceptual framework and there is a more expansive “actual existence” beyond these human constructed parameters. Should we assume a finite human mind can define “actual existence”? How will humans define “actual existence” in 200 years?
With that said, psychedelics definitely alter my resonance dynamics. I don’t need much, yet there is also desire in my mind-body to do it “naturally”. I’ve been taking a break from psychedelics and working on developing abilities without psyches. At times it’s been difficult to be off “the juice” because my resonance level seems muted and I can’t just turn it on at will. At times, I feel like a wizard without my wand. Yet, I feel a desire to develop what has been revealed to me naturally, so I can access and fully embody it sober. . . I still drift into dimensions sober that I previously could only access with psychedelics. These appearances used to cause distress in the mind-body as it seemed like a “flashback” or I was losing my mind. Yet now, it seems pretty normal.The body no longer reacts as if it is an amazing occurrence. It’s more like being conscious of a lucid dream.

This gets at the flexible nature of a yellow mind. What you are pointing at is that yellow does not have attachments to ideas and can “go with the flow” like the fluidity of a river.
Yet, it’s not like one intentionally changes their mind to become more flexible. That suggests there is an owner that is giving up attachment for one idea for attachment to another idea. Yet, I think it can be a helpful exercise to transition. I don’t think trying to change my mind from an idea I hold as important to another idea would have worked well for me. I don’t think my ego would have fallen for it. What works better for me is getting into a mindset in which I’m curious about how idea and how/why people become attached to particular ideas. Why is idea “x” important to me and idea “y” important to her? What happened for me to believe “x” and her to believe “y”. If I had the same conditioning as her, would I also believe “y”? This helped me to let go of my own beliefs and really consider someone else’s beliefs and the underlying dynamics of why we believe what we do. Yet, I would also be selective with what I am engaging with. I wouldn’t recommend doing this on toxic websites. Rather, in areas in which ideas are floating around that can lead expansion. For example, years ago I blew off talk of so-called paranormal abilities as “woo woo” nonsense. Then, I became curious and started resonating with people that seemed spiritually mature talking about stuff like intuitive abilities. This open a whole new area of curiosity and exploration.
I would also focus on the second part of your post. That is, to let go of attachment to thought stories because “they don’t matter much”. Rather than changing to another thought story to replace it, just allow whatever arises. Maybe awareness of bird chirps or a felling in the body may arise. Let it appear and disappear. Perhaps another thought story will arise. Allow it to appear and disappear. Maybe the two thought stories will merge and create a higher level thought story. Then maybe desire for food or drink may appear. . . After a while, that “person” that is attached and takes ownership of thought will begin to dissolve. There is an energetic shift away from the person to a transcendent energy that is super cool. . . . This is upper green transitioning into yellow. Yet you are in striking distance. A mind-body first becomes aware of it in others and a curiosity and energy toward it arises. One notices yellow in others before it is embodied and naturally arises within themself. It is much easier for one to be “pulled up” to yellow when they are with a yellow-centered person they resonate with. 
 

Thanks for your impressions. I can now see the dynamics with better clarity. In particular, I used way too much personification. Statements like “your statement of ‘abc’ shows you have a deficiency in ’xyz’” creates personality dynamics. Impersonal statements such as “the statement ‘abc’ does not include the relative nature of ’xyz’” are much better. Not only does it reduce personifying the other person, it reduces the personification of a “me”. As soon as someone says “you”, that immediately creates a “me” (since there is no “you” without a “me” relative to “you”). Stating “you have a deficiency” is inherently also saying “I don’t have this deficiency and I am able to judge that you have the deficiency”. This adds in all sorts of underlying personality dynamics that alter the energetics and are a distraction. A core component of yellow is that these types of personality dynamics are transcended and ideas are appearing without personal ownership and identification. . . One of the most challenging aspects is not drifting into a “I am right, you are wrong dynamic” or that in someway I am better/more developed than you. 
I also like your point about self reflection - it’s much better than self defense posture.
Also, I went into a weird orange/yellow hybrid state in which I tried to establish orange level credibility and grounding, yet used yellow level abstraction that would appear highly ambiguous, irrational and irrelevant from an orange perspective. . . I like your comment that the specific topic of race was as relevant as saturns moons. . . 

But you don't need to engage from their system of operation. You don't need to be orangey so that they listen to you, often we need to realize that they will not be able to change their opinion about the topic of contention. For example, you can't convince a fundamentalist Muslim that all is God, and it's futile to even talk about it, or to argue it. What helpful however is to bring him a step closer to that truth, and maybe that step is to somehow get him to question some of the muslim principles, and not even directly, maybe just plant a seed that some day might come to fruition.
It might not at all come to fruition, but sometimes the planting of the smallest, weakest seed might be the best we can do, even if it is very unlikely that it will take root. Sometimes there is no other potential, and the smallest potential must be sought.
With the ego we need to be careful so that it never suspects it is taught when it is not really willing to be taught. When teaching things that go contrary to the identity, it is imporant for the ego to be manipulated into changing itself, as outside influence is being defended against.
 
Holy shit I just realized it is basically Inception... like the movie Inception. That is exactly what a Spiral Wizard must do!

Not so much on 5-MeO-DMT.
Although during my highest dose trip I had such a massive heart opening and kundalini activation that it shot out of my fingertips like invisible Jedi force lightning and pealed the skin on my fingertips, which remained pealed and cracked for a few weeks and took time to heal. It was a very overwhelming experience. Too much God too fast.
On DPT, however, I have more visionary abilities. Like I described in some of my recent blog videos, I experimented with performing healing on myself and even healing the collective consciousness of mankind as a whole. DPT is a better tool for that. I'm still trying to figure out how it work. Seems like performing miracles is possible with it.
I suspect that to be able to preform miracles one needs to have or somehow develop extraordinary, superhuman visionary capacity more so than just pure nondual consciousness. These seem to be distinct aspects of consciousness which can be developed independently, or perhaps together synergisticly.
I think it may be possible to actually tap into the collective consciousness of an entire species and modify the trajectory of its evolution through one's will. Of course at this level of consciousness it's not your human will, it is the Will of God at work creating the entire universe. It's very hard to explain because it is utterly nonlinear and beyond words or any kind of human logic. Ordinary laws of cause and effect don't apply there. I have much more exploring to do there to make sense of how it works. Seems promising so far. Of course no one will believe it. It's hard to believe even as you're doing it. To the human mind it seems nuts and impossible.
My theory is this: if you want to perform a miracle which objectively registered in other people's mind, you have to actually tap into the collective consciousness of all sentient beings and make the change at that level. Because the physical world has to be consistent across individual minds. You can't just change a thing for one mind but not another.

@Bryanbrax Too many wacky visuals in that video -- gives the wrong impression.
Think of it as nothing changes visually. Just awareness increases and sense of self collapses or expands.
It feels like being hyper-present. You become so present & aware that you literally see through the substance of physical reality. What once looked physical now seems like a hologram. Physical objects appear empty, like a hallucination or a mirage. You can see them still, but they lack reality. It can also feel like the air got sucked out of the room. Everything becomes crystal clear and luminous.
It also feels like divinity and pure magic.

It happens because you haven't developed a clear and mature vision for your life yet. You don't know what you want to offer to the world. If you knew, you'd be hungry and tireless.
The drive to constantly satisfy yourself alone is boring. The drive to satisfy yourself by serving the world is unstoppable.

@Mikael89 If you're unable to unify Truth and duality by transforming your life as an individual, then there will be no growth. The ego always try to come out on top, finding all sorts of excuses to avoid purification and goodness.
Attachment to non-dual language and the absolute perspective is a famous breach for devilry. It took me a few years to realize this. Purification is emotionally HARDER and it's okay to be afraid. Use all non-dual avoidance you feel like. You're not improving the quality of your life by derailing through "there is no <insert whatever>" statements.
Clue: DUALITY is the ultimate miracle.

Conscious politics - Part I (detailed, some places almost transcript, small parts left out)
prerequisites: (conceptual) understanding of non-duality, Spiral dynamics, self-deception, survival, collective ego, devilry (What is the devil, The mechanics of evil), how ideology works, relativity & relativism, systems thinking, Love. 
Politics & government is thoroughly self-deceptive, both politicians and voters. 
He'll be talking about republicans&democrats, but conservativism vs. liberalism is a global topic. 
Why deal with politics, and not just one's own spirituality?
The world's problems can't be solved by turning inwards. There are individual problems, but also collective problems. One way to contribute to collective problems is denying them or trying to reduce them to individual problems (as many spiritual schools do).
There are lessons to be taken from the Absolute to the relative, but not in a simplistic way. Don't create a duality between spirituality and politics.
A well-structured society helps in raising consciousness. If you want to be a bodhisattva and help enlighten the whole world, you'll not be able to do it one person at a time. If most people put their hands away from politics, the least conscious end up leading us. 
By doing nothing, the status quo (unconscious politics) prevails. Selfishness, fear, exploitation. 
Spiritual schools (Buddhism, Christianity, Advaita, ...) which emerged thousands of years ago are not good enough to solve today's problems. The don't understand ecology, system's thinking, modern psychology. 
The problems with today's politics
We are returning back to the Athens, where citizenship, philosophy, psychology, morals and ethics, politics were all integrated, and from great thinking, political advances emerged. Theory informs your practice. Today, the theory is insufficient, so practice is all wrong. 
First problem: Selfishness, bias, ideology, immediately corrupts this discussion. We get into culture wars. Distraction. We need to create enough elevation to open ourselves up to something new, above both sides. Beyond left and right. But the problem is, the sides are not equally evolved,  the right is usually less conscious - so for the person on the right, Leo might seem leftist, but he's trying to get above. Any view you have is limited and highly partial. Politics and government are a matter of life and death, so devilry takes over.
Second problem: Government is taken for granted. We do not appreciate, how far society has evolved, precisely because politics works so well. You can go about your life and be safe, use roads, subway, electricity, the internet... and not think of politics. This is not seeing what the government does for us. The government is a technology. A thousand years ago democracy seemed insane. Free speach, fair judical system, separation of church and state, religoust freedom, minority rights, the right to protest, a social safety net, diplomacy, environmental protection, police and accountable representatives, ... is all advanced social technology, radical in their time, someone had to think of them and then fight for them.
The government has to govern on a completely different scale than a company. Hundreds of millions of people sometimes. Somehow, life in the 21st century is amazing compared to previous. 
What has the government done for you?
Protects from opression, enslavement and genocide !!! Also prevents internal oppression (exploitation, scam, cults, mafia, corporate oppression etc.) Ensures property rights. There are no property rights unless they are invented and protected.  Court systems. Peaceful means to resolve conflict - otherwise people go for each other's throats. Prevents torture and cruel punishment.  Police, firefighters, riot control, investigating all kinds of crimes, prison, natural disaster relief, emergency health care, ... Infrastructure: Water, transport, sewage systems, post office, ... Public education and universities. People used to be illiterate.  Grants, loans, subsidies. Poverty help. Insurance. Pollution regulation. Standards of living. National parks, protected natural areas. Minority rights Vaccines and disease prevention.  Research and development, space exploration, preservation of historical artefacts (imagine a pyramid owned by a shady corporation) Statistical data Food regulation and meat inspections. Meat used to be terribly dirty.  Banking regulation, currency enforcement, market protection, accountability for business Satellites, allocation of radio bandwidth Peace&arms treaties, diplomacy Foster homes, adoption services. Prevention of proliferation of nuclear weapons. Imagine corporations having them.  Certification and accreditation. Critique of stage orange (and libertarianism):
Some of this the private sector can do (like space exploration), some of this it can't (protection about enslavement, uncorrupt police, ...). If given the chance to do so, the private sector will enslave you, you are going to be part of one emerging largest corporation, and you'll not have a vote in it. Human nature. Corporation today only have a selfish motivation, and are not accountable to anyone. Too powerful corporations are anti-democratic, because they can have more power than a government, but the employees have no say. 
For SD stage orange, freedom is taken as an ideology. Libertarianism is a fantasy. The "free market" leads to enslavement. There was never a truly free market anyway, they are always manipulated by someone and propped up by power-play and aggression. There is no "non-violence principle" - it has to be ensured with aggression. That's what government is. Individualism is also a fantasy, even apes don't survive as individuals. Being able to talk about how we're all individuals today is a result of collective development. You're part of the entire colony. 
Other problems with SD stage orange: 
Doesn't see collective problems. It assumes anyone can take more responsibility for their lives. There's a sense of entitlement, that both winners and losers deserve what they have. This ignores systemic problems at work. They are about maximizing profit and economic growth. Never-ending economic growth won't happen and won't solve our problems, in fact economic growth makes them worth. Materialism and anti-spirituality Toxic masculinity and minimizing femininity and feminine values Me, me, me, my own survival at all costs. Survival of the fittest.  What is government? Why does it exist?
Simplistic version: Government is a human invention. In the animal kingdom there are no rules. Anything that you can do to ensure survival is fair play. It's brutal. The government is here to protect us from that.
More detailed: A lion has to hunt every day. Humans accumulate resources. (Meat, houses, tools, weapons, corn!) Humans live in tribes. Short term, conquering a neighbouring tribe and stealing their resources is the best strategy for a human tribe. But a few years later, a stronger tribe conquers us. And then an even stronger tribe ... Think of a greek city-state. In ancient times killing all the men, raping women and enslaving them and their children was the standard. Understand that that is freedom! It's gang warfare. The most powerful ends up conquering everybody else. People don't like it.
That's why people unified under (quite brutal) governments at first. To protect them against even greater brutality of enslavement, murder and genocide. If you don't unify, you'll be enslaved. Morals were not evolved yet at the time. It was the brutality of the animal kingdom. That is what freedom means. 
Freedom is not an absolute good from the human perspective. True freedom is: I am allowed to do whatever I want, you are allowed to do whatever you want, and there are no rules. Freedom is something we need protection against. Therefore we accept limitation for the sake of fairness and peace. We need some set of basic rules. 
But how do you get a diverse set of people with different languages, and values and ethnicity to agree on the same rules? People by default don't know that it's wrong to murder and scam and rape, because that's survival. It's a very serious problem. Appreciate the depth of the problem that government solves - this is our most remarkable technology. 
Freedom is counterintuitive: 1) It seems like a great thing, but we have to limit it, 2) This seems negative, but united people can do much more than individuals or small groups, so counterintuitively by giving up some freedom we get new freedoms. (Like building airplanes and flying freely all around the world!, or watching youtube )
Community vs. individualism
We need community for practical reasons. But also, we are built for it. It feels good, gives us a sense of purpose. There are tradeoffs between individualism and collectivism, these need to be dynamically balanced. 
Society is a "holon". It's being a part and a whole simultaneously. My hand is a part of my body, my cells are parts of my hand, they are autonomous, but can't function without all the other parts. My hand needs my teeth and my heart and my brain. Human beings are also "holons", parts of society. 
It's not all about individuals. At each level of reality, many units together are more than the sum of its parts. Groups of people have emergent properties. You can't reduce society. Governments are not only responsible for managing people, but also groups of people, and collective ego's. And of course, society itself is a giant collective ego. You can see this is getting complicated, and none of this is reflected by usual political analysis. 
Fundamentally reality is dividing itself and finding ways to reunite with itself, on all levels. Mankind has started off as a united group of people somewhere in Africa, until it wondered of and divided into tribes and nations, and these clashed with each other, and eventually started to bleed into each other to a point where it's untenable to stick to one tribe. We are recognizing that we are a global species. If you deny and resist that, it leads to war etc. ... the proper way is to unite. Until mankind starts colonizing other planets, and divides again, then reunites again ...
An arc to human history: More equality and consciousness, less brutality and enslavement, greater complexity, greater freedom, greater unity (in the very long run). 
What is politics and government really about?
First of all, individual and collective survival. Survival is relative to an identity. Whatever you identify as is what needs to be survived. Identity is central to politics! It's not just right vs. left, everybody is playing identity politics, all the time. Collective identity being just as important as the individual on. 
Low consciousness = you are not conscious of your own selfishness. (America isn't conscious of how it's selfish as a nation.) Selfishness is karma. It becomes it's own worst enemy. In practice, selfishness has repercussions, it's quit tit for tat. Relationships need to be quite even. 
Politics is about
Distribution of power and resources. Not just Marxists, everyone is redistributing power and resources! Every corporation lobbies their government. That's business, that's life, that's survival. But there are better and worse  Reduction of brutality and oppression. Creating a fair playing field. At least it should be about - and is in the long term.  Creating infrastructure and systems. That allow for greater complexity, greater freedom.  Community. Not just pragmatism. You can participate with others (in a festival, singing the national anthem, football, a religious gathering...) Evolution, and the emergence of higher holons.  Creating a consensus, amongst millions of people with different survival agendas. Not everyone can be satisfied, but there are some decisions, which benefit most. Seeking a consensus. But we also have debates, culture wars, actual war... it's about changing the culture in such a way which benefits you and your tribe. There's no objective "best", no objective right and wrong. We're making it up as we go.  ... Government must be inclusive
Government must be inclusive, in a manner that other organizations don't have to be, which makes it much more difficult. Government is the highest structure we have developed. If I have a hippie commune, and someone troublemaker makes it in, we can kick him out. It's fine. The whole society doesn't have that option. It has to deal with the poor, the sick, the addicts, the crazy, the insane, the psychopaths and sociopaths, criminals, religious fanatics, terrorists... you can't exclude them. No other country will take them  You need to integrate them, and develop infrastructure to deal with them.
You can't just say fuck them, because then while you're sleeping in your comfy bed next to your comfy wife one of these poor mentally deranged people will break into your house and kill you. Wouldn't it be better if we found ways to solve these problems in a humane way, give them treatment, help, so they stop being harmful to themselves and the rest of society? Because hopeless people who have no nothing to loose and feel like nobody cares for them are those who will go into a school and shoot your children. Take fringe cases seriously. 
Likewise for other governments and countries. The poorest, least developed countries in the world have serious pathologies - you can't ignore them. These may be people who feel so oppressed that they get on an airplane and .. 9/11. It's smarter to integrate. Because happy people don't crash into buildings or start wars. 
So these kinds of isolationist policies where you build walls and jails and ignore don't work. 
Government is uniquely difficult
because it must work for all people. You can't take your high-IQ or billionaire elite and build your own country. Because people have so many different worldviews and survival agendas.   Most people don't understand, what's going on. They are to desperate to pay bills and survive to think about philosophy. The government must be pragmatic because these issues are life and death issues. In a lot of countries, billions of people deal with famine, poverty, slavery, drugs, abusive relationships, exploitation by their bosses, toxic pollution, genocide... (So put away your culture wars.) No human knows what the best design it for government. It's natural selection, but we are consciously participating in the evolution. This is a big responsibility. 
**
Thought experiment: Imagine you can be born as whoever. You can also pick your government.
But, there is a caveat. You know that after this life, you will also incarnate as everybody else. Now, what kind of government do you want?
**
What keeps people from having an objective sense of fairness is their own bias. A person born rich will never think they're going to be born in Africa, or exploited by some corporation who pays a slave wage, or as a young girl sold for prostitution because he's so locked into his own persona. He blocks all the suffering of the other people in the world out of his mind. But if you know you're gonna be all the people, you want a fair government which doesn't oppress anybody.
The trick with conscious politics is stepping out of our own egoic survival agenda. 
The true aim of government should be to elevate consciousness and love. 
This is what everybody wants. This is what life is about. Government should be creating a healthy ecosystem for raising the consciousness of all people. 
This is being easily dismissed. But if you don't know your aim, you can't reach it. Because if government is not designed for high consciousness values, it's by default being designed by devilry. Selfishness and greed. 
I'm not talking about creating a theocracy! (pre-trans fallacy)
Can you do that? Yes! That's what we've been doing all throughout evolution, it just has a lot of degrees. 
The entire reality is moving towards consciousness and love. Reality is an infinitely expanding love fractal. 
We can be aligned with the force of evolution, or against it. Create beautiful societies, or go extinct. The choice is ours. 
I'm talking about expanding our circle of concerns towards all beings. 
We need to have infrastructure which helps all people meet their basic needs, so that they can spend the rest of their lives raising consciousness. The more conscious all of your neighbours are, the better neighbours, coworkers and citizens they will be, the better inventions they will create, the more responsible they will be...
Government taxes people, a large pool of money is created, but then people (entire professions) leach off the system. But that doesn't prove government is bad. What you want is not a small government, you want a great uncorrupt effective government. You can't get rid of taxation, that's a fantasy. Solution is to end the self-dealing by becoming more engaged and holding people more responsible. Propper way to end government corruption is by getting educated and engaged as a voter. Don't undermine the government by privatising everything... there's no accountability with corporations. The government's purpose needs to be the well-being of human beings, not profit. 
The biggest problem of most government is white-collar crime, lobbying, subsidies to companies who don't need them, the revolving door... 
Starting a new organization won't help. We already have a massive organization called the government. We have to keep evolving it. Our best bet is engaged citizenry. 

@Captain black1 Yes, I saw it earlier this week.
I'm glad he's exploring Wilber's work, but Michael Brooks still doesn't understand the significance of Wilber's work and what Spiral Dynamics / developmental psychology means for politics.
Michael is in high stage Green, but he's a bit too attached to Marxism, socialism, and the progressive movement to move into Tier 2. He's still operating at Tier 1 thinking. It's fine, but there's a higher level.
Of course Michael makes valid critiques of the IDW and conservatives. But there are also important critiques of Marxism which he is missing. For example, one of the biggest critiques of Marx is his materialism. Materialism is false. Marx actually bastardized Hegel. Marx took Hegel's masterpiece philosophy -- which was idealist and quasi-nondual -- and lowered it by turning it materialistic and atheistic.
A political philosophy based on materialism and atheism cannot possibly work in the long term. It will be fundamentally limited by misunderstanding the true metaphysics of reality.
The whole trick with going to the highest levels of politics is being extremely careful not to get hung up on any pet ideology, whether Marxist, capitalist, or whatever. All ideology is limited and partial. Tier 2 politics is going beyond ideology.
For Michael to move into Tier 2, he'd have to go through a painful process of dropping stage Green. This won't serve his immediate survival agenda as a political analyst.
He's still a bit too intellectually arrogant to move into Tier 2. He'll need some mystical experiences to open him up and humble him.