Parththakkar12

@The observer How do you define love?

Also the way the media is trying to paint it is absurd. The media is trying it's damnedest to paint it as a positive movement of 'showing solidarity for Black people', doing the 'Black lives matter' thing. There's looting, riots, burning police cars, etc. I mean, how much can you delude yourself as the media?! This is a new high in the media's self-delusion. Like damn, being Leftist is literally all that matters to them! Do they not think that Antifa will take advantage of this? Are they that willing to play dirty against the Right?

I'm starting to feel scared for our world tbh. If one White cop killing a Black guy on camera can induce such a huge outcry and reaction, there's tons of more skeletons in the closet which will come out one by one. How many more protests will we see? What will the collective do to the systems we currently have? Shit is getting really ugly in the US. The reaction is nation-wide. I'm starting to feel scared for the safety of Americans tbh. Are you guys safe in there? Or is the reaction getting out of hand? What will happen to the supply chains for your essential services?

Yeah but what bargaining power do you have as a protester? Why should anyone listen to you? You're just out on the streets potentially breaking the law. I'm having trouble understanding the 'importance and significance' of protests as you call them.

When I look at a protest, I get the feeling that they don't really understand how the system works, or the complications of making it work. Do they do their homework before getting on the streets, or is it just emotional reactivity? This is a pretty serious topic as real people's lives are on the line if it turns violent. I can understand why a politician would get scared of protests. However, would the politician make good decisions when they're scared? Why is it necessary to put pressure on politicians in such a crude manner? Do you even know what you're asking for? As a protesting rally, what bargaining power do you have? Who is to decide whether what you're saying makes sense or not? Why should politicians even pay attention to you, if your solutions may not be the best?

Communication of what? Is it a resistance to 'evil'? It generally happens when some crime happens. What do these people expect? Do they expect to live in a perfectly safe society? Do they really think that if the police/government did its work perfectly that we would have a crime-free society? Do we still believe this collectively? Generally, from what I've seen, the protesters don't have respect for due process. This turns out to be hypocritical on the part of protesters, in that they sabotage the working of their own government when they're asking for better government!

Having a prison system that teaches people to be present with their emotions. A lot of prisoners have no ability to suppress their emotions, which gets in their way in their transition from Red to Blue. A lot of them just can't move to Blue. Blue requires that you prioritize following an ideology above reacting to your emotions. This requires that you suppress your emotions, but some of them aren't capable of that. They need systems of mental health facilities that teach them how to live a life of peace and alignment even if they can't suppress their emotions. This would mean teaching them to be present with their emotions as opposed to suppressing them. If you can't suppress your emotions and you can't be present with them, you'll inevitably end up reacting to them. This is how their Stage Red mind works - 'I feel like killing someone, I kill someone'. It's not that we don't feel like killing people from time to time, it's just that we have an ideology that says 'Killing is bad' that's stopping us from doing that. Now some of us are exceptional in that we understand that morality is relative and that those emotions of anger and hatred need to be understood. But that's not the norm. I don't think teaching them morality will work. If anything, that creates more criminals as it externalizes and demonizes 'evil'. This is exactly what's happening in jails today. There's another danger with doing that: A lot of people underestimate an ability Stage Red people have - fake morality. They won't really have a morality integrated into their psyche, but they want to appear as good people. So, because they're emotionally reactive, their morality will depend on their emotional reaction. This will enable them to change their morality at a drop of a hat, to suit their emotional reaction. They will go through a process in which they have an emotional reaction, they're acting unconsciously according to that emotional reaction, so they will identify with which-ever ideology suits their best interests in that situation. This is how sociopathy works. This is exactly what Trump does. This enables them to pull off manipulative shit that deceives everyone else who is moral. The normal person will think that their morality is real, when in fact it is fake and it can change depending on their emotional reaction.

I'd like to have Leo's opinion on this (as he's interacted with lots of people on Non-duality/religion) : At what Spiral Stage does literalism start to become untenable? I think that it is only at Tier 2, i.e. Stage Yellow does this become possible. The reason is as follows: At the transition from Green to Yellow, you start to develop the ability to sit with two opposing ideological perspectives without getting attached to either one. This creates a sensation of cognitive dissonance which you're able to hold. This is where you really start to see that your interpretations of something are actually different from their interpretations of it. So you stop getting attached to the 'literal interpretation' of it. Now your focus starts to go on resolving paradoxes, filling semantic gaps and having clear communication between ideological perspectives. This, I'd assume, is a part of becoming a 'Spiral Wizard'. My question is not only for Leo, all of you can chime in.

If you see that the perpetrator is a part of yourself, you will see the actual reasons for actions that seem outwardly monstrous. These reasons often times reveal the vulnerability of the perpetrator. This helps us to stop demonizing them and get a handle on how we're responsible for those crimes/abuse.

This is a nice long-term benefit. However, I feel that we need to be able to get along as separate countries first if we're having border disputes. If we talk about uniting India and Pakistan today, both sides will feel outraged like you're taking away their identity and rightly so. Pakistan has been trying to colonize India since the beginning of time. We need to be secure in our identities as countries first, especially Pakistan. A country secure in its identity would never try to colonize another country. Both countries need to be nationalistic first, but in a co-operative manner. Once we're able to actually resolve these issues and get along as separate countries and really be in love with each other in fact, then we can think about unification. (Using a marriage analogy lol) Overall, I'm fully on board with you when you give the benefits of integration of countries. That would be some seriously awesome progress for humanity if we were to actualize it!

Very important videos.

@Leo Gura You'd said in your Radical Openmindedness video to 'Consider that Trump is a creative genius who is actually helping mankind evolve.' Looks like someone took that advice waaaaayyy too seriously!!

@Serotoninluv I've heard some conservatives say that they have problems with gay marriage. Like they don't have a problem with gay sex, but they have a problem with gay marriage. This is because if they decide to adopt a kid, that kid will grow up with two fathers, instead of a father and a mother. Now I understand that the mother being the primary caregiver is a patriarchially imposed norm, so it's not so clear. What do you think about this?

Another reason why Trump wins : He provides the most entertainment value to the public from all the candidates. This is very important. America is an entertainment-obsessed culture. I often like to joke around that Americans have the unique ability of turning everything into a meme. I was watching Marianne Williamson and I was watching the way people responded to her. The problem here isn't that she makes no sense or that she's airy-fairy (I think there is a little bit of that) the problem is that the people listening to her have very short attention spans and they want to be entertained! If you want to think about complex and serious issues, you need to be willing to invest your concentrated focus and brain-cells to think about what she's saying. Most of them weren't willing to do that. I'd give her the least points when it comes to entertainment value or meme-value. That's why she loses.

Hey, if you apply creativity to con-artistry and manipulation, maybe he is a creative genius! Who knows.

Let me make an attempt at explaining this. I think that his appeal comes from the fact that he doesn't come across like the general elitist politicians who are politically correct all the time. He comes out there with this attitude of 'I don't care what anyone thinks of me. I'll say whatever's on my mind. I'm gonna be impulsive af. I am the biggest creative genius in the history of mankind, sorry, the history of the universe and I'm gonna show you how it's done!' This can be new and refreshing for certain Republicans who resent Obama for being there for 8 years. This also makes it so that all the skeletons hidden in the closet of political correctness come out in full display. People can't stop him because they're restricted by morality/political correctness when Trump isn't. He has no morality, which he leverages as a strength and he manipulates/dominates everyone using this edge.

I think he's conscious that he's lying, but doesn't give a fuck. He consciously manipulates people to believe what he wants them to believe and people are left gaslighted and in a battle of 'For what Trump said' vs 'Against what Trump said'. Trump actually doesn't care what comes out of his mouth at all!

Because they are NPCs brainwashed by the Leftist media. Simple as that. Same for the Right. The big guys up there don't give a fuck about freedom of speech, or civil liberties. All they want is power and control. You need to understand this about them. They will program you with whatever serves their best interests relative to power and money. This goes for big tech companies and all governments. This isn't good or bad from an objective perspective. This is just how it works when you have unconscious masses who just want to do their thing and not be involved in politics, or community, or systems.

There is one thing you don't do with NPCs and that is to argue with them. Whatever the fuck you do, NEVER argue with an NPC or you will incur their wrath! They will not budge from their ideology. They cling to their ideology for a sense of reality and they will fight tooth and nail to prove themselves right. Being right to keep their sense of reality intact will be their number one priority.

You can have respect for their view-point. However, there is no need to see them in high regard! They are very ordinary and manipulate-able. You can do what you want to do and justify what you do using the narrative they're programmed with! They will get very ideological and support what you do because of your justification, which they will agree with. For example, you have someone who is obsessed with productivity and who thinks productivity is king, i.e. they're an NPC in that regard. They see you contemplating some metaphysical concepts and they try making fun of you. You can show them a practical application of what you're contemplating, like say in marketing or in sales or relationships. Then they'll think you're a genius!

If you are a leader, you are in a position where the decisions you take are very important to the overall system. Who you are and what your role is in the system is actually a massive leverage point in the system. Your position is the one with the most power in the system, i.e. the system will do what you want it to do. A lot of lives could be affected by the decisions you take. If I could create my own society, here's what I'd do relative to leadership positions : I feel that it is very important that we put the most evolved and competent people in leadership positions. Specifically someone who is able to jump between different perspectives and understand how systems work, how ideologies spread, how to create change. This is tremendously important for the following reason : The post I've linked goes into detail about why collective egos defend certain ideologies. Now, say you are a Stage Yellow leader who understands this about ideologies, that they are created/spread according to the goals of the specific system and thus they define good vs bad, right vs wrong. If you aren't attached to the contents of the ideology, the following options open up: What you can do is that you can now use ideology as a tool without getting attached to any specific ideology yourself! You can define a certain system goal, powerfully and consciously create and spread an ideology in that system accordingly (cuz most people are simple-minded black-and-white thinkers). You can analyze what happens when you spread a specific ideology. You can understand whether the ideology was a success or failure, its pros and cons, potential details and improvements, potential rules and conditions, potential complications in it, etc. You can get really good at creating the right ideology according to the specific group you are working with and the goal of the system you're heading. Say you spread an ideology. But, because you didn't quite know the people you were working with, you made an ideological mistake and it starts to backfire. This can happen if you don't know the system well enough. You will be able to switch course whenever you see it backfiring! When you are attached to the ideology yourself, you will be too busy defending your ego when it is made clear to you that the ideology is backfiring. You will be able to catch yourself falling into this trap if you are a Tier-2 thinker. My reference is 'Thinking in Systems' by Donella Meadows. In the chapter on Leverage Points, the most powerful leverage point she gives is Paradigms! Say this society collapses under its own weight and it's up to you what kind of a society you'd want to create from scratch. What would you create?

I want to share an insight about creating social change. A lot of Stage Green people want social change. These are people who are dissatisfied with the status quo and tend to enter power-struggles with the status-quo. This does not work. If you enter a power-struggle with the status-quo, the status-quo will win. Maybe you'll get some results in the short-term, but it won't carry through long-term. The reason for this is that whenever you have a certain status quo, it's because the majority of people are clinging to it. You'll always have a lot more people for the status quo than against it/for change. If you come in to create some change you individually want, you'll come across as an idealist/rebel/threat. People cling to the status-quo because it meets some need for them. If you say 'Screw their needs! They're evil oppressors who contribute to systemic abuse.' You're right about that. That is how collective ego survives. Any majority wins system survives at the expense of the best interests of the minority. However, you're doing the same by not taking their needs into account! If they say 'Screw you', you'll never get the change you want. There's an alternate strategy. You can focus on creating your own world, regardless of the status quo of the world around you. Here, you can focus on creating a new status quo which you'd be in favor of! You can have other people whose best interests align with yours cooperate with you on this. What you're hoping for is that the new status quo works better than the old one for those clinging to the old one. This way you're not screwing over people clinging to the old status quo and they could be a lot more accepting of your ideas. My claim : If you have a well-integrated Blue, you will understand the importance of having a status-quo for collective survival. If you have a well-integrated Orange, you'll have the pragmatic abilities in you to find the win-win solutions with people who seem to be your arch enemies when it comes to creating change (those clinging to the status-quo). That way you can get it done without having to enter a power-struggle! What do you think?

Too much enlightenment for me! I see people roasting TikTok videos and I forget all about awakening!

@Jacobsrw Makes sense! Maybe you are at a stage where believing in an awakened ego could be damaging. I'm not claiming to be more awakened than you, but we have our unique awakening journeys. If you are at a stage where it isn't healthy for you to believe in an awakened ego, if you start believing in it, you could turn into a Zen devil! When I say awakened ego, I don't mean Zen-devilry. In fact, I just realized that maybe you don't fully trust people who claim to be conscious intuitives who say stuff that conspiracy theorists say because of the risk of blindly believing a Zen-devil. If you are prone to that, it'd be best to stick to your definition of enlightenment and do practices accordingly.

When I say intuition, I am including the insights that come to you when you contemplate something. Those insights are Universally, Intelligently designed to get you out of your mental delusions/boxes and to give you a broader understanding. They come to you in response to genuine curiosity relative to the question you are contemplating.