Parththakkar12

That is precisely true. It is ego as is all survival. What you're missing though is that enlightenment won't make you 'ego-less' or 'self-less'. There are some parts of you that will be committed to the survival of your 3D human body all your life. You have multiple egos, egos within egos within egos. All collective egos are part of you as this universe is a fractal universe. The death of one of those egos won't make your other egos die. The more you awaken though, the more aware your ego will get.

Please list potential challenges that could come in the way of actualizing this vision.

Another important collective ego dynamic which happens with Tier-1 (especially Stage Blue) collective egos : Open-minded people get demonized, ridiculed and ostracized. Collective egos tend to be closed-minded, dogmatic and ideologically tribal. In such a situation, if you are out there questioning all ideologies and narratives, you will be made fun of, demonized and ostracized because you 'can't see the obvious truth' or you are 'worried about nothing' or you're just flat out 'weird'. This is a huge issue, as collective egos get very heavily attached to the concept of what's 'obviously true' or what's 'true by common sense'. This gives you a license to be closed-minded and dogmatic with no checks and balances of what's actually true. 'The mainstream narrative is the mainstream narrative because it's true' is a huge myth. This is especially evident because the mainstream demonizes and shuts out open-minded people, so the general collective isn't really deriving the mainstream narrative by open-minded investigation. Rather, more often than not, the mainstream narrative is just rumor that spreads through the grapevine of closed-minded people! Another example of this is the statement : 'If you have a problem with our society, maybe the problem isn't the society, maybe it's you who is the problem. Our society is the best society!' Being open-minded comes with huge costs in today's society. It will cost you belonging in the mainstream society. You will not really have an ideological tribe. You may even lose out materially/relationally because of it. Most people are too cowardly/chicken-shit to pay these costs for the truth. It's just pure cowardliness and survivalism that's keeping our society unconscious. That's why we have our collective egos battling each other today!

@Leo Gura Out of curiosity, do you consider anti-vaxxers conspiracy theorists? @LaucherJunge I completely understand. In every hierarchial system the leaders will spread a narrative that benefits only them individually and it's on the people to do their own research, fact-check everything the leaders say and ask them the tough questions. That's the only way to have a democracy that's really transparent.

There is only one solution to this issue : People step into mental autonomy. The general public needs to take responsibility for what they believe and don't believe. If you don't you are literally asking to be mind-controlled.

Spiral dynamics is a model of psychological evolution which you can apply to masses of people, or the average person. You are a special case. I have never heard of someone wanting a life like you want! Models have their limitations, i.e. they can track general trends and they're used to generalize. This sounds like a challenge you'd have from excesses of Stage Green. You sound like you're trying to run away from a system, which you'd otherwise be reliant on for survival, but you don't trust to be on your side to help you create what you want. You are trying to isolate yourself from society. Now that's an absolutely respectable preference, but if you're facing issues with this, this would be my interpretation. This is a major shadow of asceticism in general. If you're interested, my suggestion for you would be to learn systems thinking. My hope for you is that it will help give you context to the aspects of the system you're resisting. Maybe you can learn to connect with the system and understand that it is also a part of you! This could help you create inter-dependent relationships and also give you creative power in the world.

One of the implications of Oneness is that everyone has a part in themselves that sees what's true. Some resist it more than others. So, all conflicts in perspective/perception are resolvable and will be resolved given enough time. In a Blue/Orange society though, there is no fundamental belief in the Absolute Truth of Oneness. Say we have a situation in which 2 people perceive 2 different things. The one who agrees with the mainstream more will be considered 'true/right' and the other person will be called 'crazy, deluded, conspiracy theorist'. This is the opposite of what we want to do if we're to raise the collective consciousness. Once we understand what this whole process of evolution/expansion is, we understand where ideas come from. Original ideas come to you universally as a result of open-minded questioning, contemplation and exploration. The ideas that come to you will be the ones that naturally serve the expansion of the universe, which is all the universe cares about. This is the whole basis of trusting your intuition in consciousness work. In our society though, there is also no awareness of how intuition works, where ideas come from. Stage Blue especially, hasn't stepped into logical autonomy/conceptual autonomy/mental creativity so they don't know what an original idea even means. In fact they don't really believe in original ideas, why would they if their forefathers have figured it all out?! They believe in indoctrination so strongly, that if someone comes up with a crazy idea, they'll say that it's a product of wrong indoctrination. So if someone comes up with crazy-sounding ideas, it will automatically be dismissed as delusion, when in fact the one with the most original ideas is the closest to the truth!

Another important thing : The demonization of 'conspiracy theorists' or whstle-blowers is something that is used by the mainstream leadership as a Blue/Orange tactic to suppress perspectives that go against the narrative they try to peddle. There's a very specific reason this works : Most people are ideological, i.e. by definition, SD Tier 1 cannot hold 2 opposing ideologies in their mind without getting attached to either one of them. They will be attached to the authority meeting their needs. In exchange for this, people (especially SD Stage Blue) will buy into the narrative hook line and sinker and get attached to it cuz they essentially worship the authority! If they don't buy into the narrative, they have to admit that they're being deceived by their leaders, who are supposed to have their best interests at heart (like a parent would), which is waaay too painful to admit for them. It would mean massive change in their perspectives and in the world/system they live in, which they fear the most. What this means is 'conspiracy theorist' becomes a pejorative term and it can be used as a term of collective slander. Slander tactics are employed by the leaders in order to create a perception of us vs them, like 'Those evil conspiracy theorists/quacks/hacks/phonies/nutcases/traitors/heretics/cult leaders/money-greedy people will try to corrupt/infect/fill your mind with all sorts of nonsense BS, but we're here to protect you from them as we care about our civilization/culture, which is the best civilization...' Slander is a well-known tactic used by mainstream media to create collective distortion of your perception in order to collectively incite panic/hatred/disdain/contempt/disgust/fear/anger relative to the object of your slander. A prime example of this is Fox News. They will slander people who are against Trump and call out his shenanigans, people who are pro-choice, people who want any sort of change. They will sneak in their judgements in their 'objective reporting' and create potential for rumor. There is only one solution to this : The whole society evolves to understand that morality is relative and judgements are subjective. Because we are attached to being good people at all costs, being judged negatively is equivalent to death. Only raising of the collective consciousness can resolve this situation. As far as conspiracy theorists go, I think they deserve a fair chance because of the nature of our hierarchical systems and the way our collective survival works.

There is one thing David Icke said which I can confirm is 100% accurate : The mainstream leadership DOES NOT GIVE A SHIT about the general public. They will propagate whichever 'truth' serves their agendas, damn the consequences to everyone else. Now I haven't done a lot of research, but I have done a little bit of contemplation. The conclusion I've come to is that it's perfectly possible that the elites are lying through their teeth about a bunch of important stuff. What he says is not only very well within the realm of possibility, it is the logical conclusion of the way people live and the system we have. Look at my posts on the threads 'Collective Ego Mega-Thread' and 'Creating Social Change' for my reasoning behind this. People expect the leadership to be just, fair, responsible people who govern them democratically, without understanding the brute realities of collective survival. We have a part to play in the proper functioning of democracy, and that is to do our own research and find the truth for ourselves. If people don't take responsibility for their citizenry, we get an authoritarian totalitarian state which uses every trick under its sleeve to gain control of people's minds, their realities. At Stage Orange, they won't overtly take away your freedoms, they'll instead control your reality, what you believe according to the materialist paradigm and use technology to their advantage. There are oligarchs up there who will not bat an eyelid when it comes to peddling a narrative which serves their agenda.

Will the election even happen though, in light of COVID?

@Hello from Russia There is a problem with using the high-achievement attitude towards this work. Ask yourself 'Who is it that wants to 'achieve enlightenment'?' Then if you get an answer 'Me', your next question is 'Who is this 'me'?'. That's where I'd take my self-enquiry if I were in your place. Achievement is something the ego wants. You can get all the results you want in your life by having an achievement attitude, except enlightenment and good relationships. The problem with this attitude in a relationship context is that relationships are inherently vulnerable and you can't 'achieve' a good relationship by only your own efforts.

@Ya know I don't think it's possible to succeed at sports without Orange. There are certain things about Orange that you have to integrate, like goal-orientedness, the willingness to push your limits, the willingness to leave your comfort zone and take massive action, teamwork/team spirit, the desire to be strong/belief in your strength, competitiveness, etc. You will fail if you don't have these qualities in your personality/value system.

Now you may have a question : 'Say we have a democratic system in which the higher-ups are supposed to consider the perspectives of the people below them in the decision-making process, in theory. Which means, in theory, there is supposed to be discussion on important decisions between the higher-ups and representatives of people below (say between CEOs and union leaders) But that doesn't really happen in practice, i.e. the higher-ups are controlling the narrative and the discussion is controlled by them, and the people below them keep getting deceived. What's the problem here?' This is a case of people below not really asking the good questions to the people up above. If you're gonna keep your eyes closed to the reality of abuse of power committed by your authorities, the system will be transparent in theory, but in practice it'll function like an authoritarian system where the higher-ups have all the control and the perspectives of the people below isn't counting. Now the people below have valid reasons to not ask the tough questions to the higher-ups such as : Not wanting to let go of authority that protects them, even when they know that abuse of power is happening Everyone in the system is a stakeholder and one change you propose could change the lives of everyone involved. Therefore people holding on to the status quo won't appreciate your efforts to change the system, and there could be politics against you which could be a threat to your position in it. You don't feel autonomous enough to leave the system if the higher-ups there dodge your good questions. You don't have an alternate strategy of meeting the needs the old system was meeting for yourself Even if the higher-ups genuinely want to solve your problems, you don't have good enough solutions for them that they can implement. This could be an issue of a lack of their competence for their position, like they as a person are incapable of solving your problems even if their position allows/requires them to. This is also a lack of knowledge on your part on what they could be doing that they aren't for selfish reasons. You go overboard with this and propose solutions that aren't really implementable, and you're gonna have to trust them to be on your side when they tell you that it's not implementable. Learning systems thinking, learning about your system, which needs it meets and how would be a good idea in such a situation.

At Stage Blue, people don't have an autonomous conscious mind discerning which beliefs are worth considering and which beliefs aren't. This makes them very easy targets to indoctrinate. As a defense mechanism to this, they start clinging very heavily to good vs bad/right vs wrong. If you make a statement they consider right, they'll be totally on your side no matter what, and if you make a statement they consider wrong, they'll attack you metaphorically/literally. The reason for this is they're insecure with their own beliefs, cuz they haven't stepped into logical autonomy. For more on this check my comments on the thread 'Is India really a democracy?' If you create a hierarchical system of such people, what the person in power says goes because they're gonna claim to have the absolute truth! The voices of people below will be suppressed and the people in power will literally control the narrative. People will value their authority figures more than investigating for and finding the truth, even if their perspectives aren't honored by the system. This is pure authoritarianism/fascism/religion in the best case. The people above will expect the people below to get indoctrinated with the narrative they peddle and not ask questions. Questioning the narrative is seen as equivalent to being a traitor/disloyal to the authority and it will be punished. It won't be seen as good as people will want to cling to the hierarchy more than finding the truth! If your voice isn't heard in a system, you have zero power to change the system. If you want change, the only thing to do is to exit this system and create your own system where you have the power you want.

Some additional points about human systems : Every human system needs a leader. Without a leader, the system doesn't move forward and do what it needs to do. So you need someone directing/leading the system. Say I'm the leader in a system and you're also part of it. I think that we should go left, and you think we should go right. Because I'm the leader here, we will go left. Thus by definition, the leader has the most power in the system. Also, we can't have everyone be a leader in the system, as everyone has different opinions and decisions will never be concretely made. I'm not 100% sure about this one, but I think a system can have only one leader. Now you may give me a counterexample of corporations having a board of directors, but I think that each member on that board leads their own systems, and there still is one CEO whose decision is final and binding. Please correct me on this if I'm wrong. I think that being a creator/designer of a system is an even more powerful position than being the leader!

I want to share some insights on systemic change. A system is an interconnected set of elements that is coherently organized in a way that achieves something. A system must consist of three kinds of things : elements, interconnections and a function or purpose. (Quoting from 'Thinking in Systems' by Donella Meadows) A system of humans can be looked at in an analogous manner to a system of interconnected parts of a mechanical machine with gears, crankshafts, wheels, axles, etc. So, if we look at a system of humans, which is also a collective ego, (from a certain perspective) the elements are human beings. The slots where the elements are would be analogous to roles that humans play in a human system. In a human system, unlike a machine, every role/component has certain degrees of freedom in the system, in the sense that there are specific limited ways that every role can alter the configuration of the system. For example, say you have a worker working a menial job with a very specific job-description. No executive power, very little agency when it comes to deciding their job-description, etc. The only way they can alter the system is by leaving their job, i.e. the system would then have to let them go and find someone to replace them. Every role also has certain constraints which the system imposes on it, because by definition of a role, it is limited. Now, lets look at an oppressive system. There can be many definitions to this, but my definition is : a hierarchical system in which the people above don't consider the perspective/best interests of the people below before making decisions that impact the system. The system is set up to suppress the voices of the people in lower positions such that the people in higher positions can get away with selfishly controlling the system to their advantage. A democratic system, on the other hand, would be one in which the authorities hear the voices of the people and consider them as important when making executive decisions. There's 3 types of roles in the systems I'm talking about : Roles whose voices aren't considered important to the decision-making process of the higher-ups. Examples of these are daily-wage workers, manual labourers, etc. These people are typically SD Stage Blue people who just blindly follow authority. They, in fact, may even prefer a system that doesn't depend on their opinion as that makes their job/survival simpler! Having an 'oppressive system' here may be beneficial to the overall system even if it exploits individuals. For example, if you're an army in a battlefield, you want the commander to just be able to give orders with the confidence that their soldiers will just blindly follow them without questioning them. Roles whose voices are considered important to the decision-making process of the higher-ups. Examples of these are union-workers, people 'holding authority accountable', all sorts of activists, exposers, whistle-blowers, etc. (SD Stage Green) These people want the authority above them to consider their best interests when making executive decisions, i.e. they don't really want to be calling the shots per se but they want to be a part of a more democratic decision-making process. Essentially they want the authority to take care of them, but they have their eyes open to potential exploitation. Some of them may even want to break down the hierarchy cuz they just see authority as a bad thing, like everyone should have an equal say in every decision. This would be the death of the system, as it lets go of the different and unique roles inherent in the system. Roles who are actually the ones calling the shots, with or without considering the best interests of the individuals below them depending on the types of relationships between lower and higher positions. If we're looking to solve systemic oppression/create social change, what we're essentially looking to do is to create a new system, which does the survival functions of the old system and more, which is a viable alternative to the old system. We can use ideas which we like from the old system and let go of stuff we don't like about it, so we're not completely demonizing the old system. Whether the old one gets replaced by the new one is out of our control, as that is for the collective to decide. Please feel free to add your analysis to this/ask questions.

I don't think we're ready for UBI yet. The way our collective egos survive, the powerful people of the world will just somehow use it as yet another tool to exploit those with lesser power. Collectively it's a low consciousness society with low consciousness leaders. The real way to go about this would be for people to do really well in the capitalist economy, so much so that the amount of money everyone has would be next to infinite (in an idealization). Thus everyone can get whatever they want and we aren't killing each other for power. This will require thousands of years of raising of collective consciousness and for every individual to take responsibility for the collective (which conscious business/life purpose is all about in today's date).

@Milos Uzelac Wasn't specifically directed at you. Interesting to see it rings a bell for you though!

That is the whole point! That's why this would work to create real change. This may require you to wake up to God-consciousness, or the reality that you are the creator of your world.

@Milos Uzelac A lot of what you're saying like holding authority accountable, waking up to injustices on a social level happens at Green. This includes forming unions, dissidence towards corporations who don't really care about them and so on. Blue, on the other hand, just blindly obeys authority without questioning it! It's very easy to exploit the Blue collective ego for Orange corporations. Blue people don't really give a damn about anything except just going about their day and not upsetting the status quo too much. Now they will suffer the most because of this, but I still feel that if they don't evolve quickly enough, there's no saving them from this.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/01/coronavirus-trump-considering-halting-us-flights-between-hot-spots.html We know Trump doesn't give a flying fuck about what's going on. My question is, why are we expecting better from him?! Lets just get ourselves a bag of popcorn and watch the shit-show unfold! Then, when the dust settles, lets peek outside from under our little shells and decide what to do about the mess.

Most celebrities are spreading the message that 'You should wash your hands, adhere to social distancing, etc.' So yeah they are using their fame to help the situation!

Is this considered a 'conspiracy theory' in America? Here in India (especially the medical community) it's considered a fact. We have contacts in Wuhan who attest to this. Of course China won't tell this to anyone.

My mom is a doctor. This knowledge is what she bases her treatment on!