Eph75

As @Rilles says, what kind of insights matter. Generally speaking... Making sure that we are as openminded as possible is a prerequisite to insights, as insights happen outside of our conventional thinking. Stretching your understanding by exploring what is outside of your usual consumption of information and practice will also set you up for having insights. In in such terms you can greatly increase the chances of insights, but the happen uncontrollably, and only when time is right. * not taking chemical substance into consideration, which changes how the brain operates

Blue, not necessaily moral but creates structural order through specific moral values. It's more about conformity that brings predictable order to chaos than high morale per se. Levels of morality is independent from SD. Orange is result driven and uses strategies to achieve results, highly useful, but the drive is egocentric, for personal gain, or in groups if the purpose of the group serves the personal agenda. Earth, people, health is simply collageral damage in the strive towards personal success, which is status oriented. Green stage is still a 1st tier stage where own stage is seen as the highest development and the spiral isn't seen. The values move from materialistic gain to humanistic values, but it still demonizes others just like all stages in the 1st tier does. True inclusiveness through understanding systemic interconnectedness is a yellow trait, inclusiveness through understanding of structures and not value driven per se. And here's where all perspectives become seen, not just selected perspectives. The understanding of perspectives and the systemic understanding makes effective actions readily available. I believe that we humans can and will seemingly adopt values that are other than our own values, which e.g. could look like the Blue stage conformity around religion-like ideology, without actually embodying those values. This would so result in, e.g. seemingly green people expressing green values in a learned and dogmatic way, operating from a lower stage around these adopted green values. Actions seem semi-green but the expression is highly pathological. A phenomenon that is much more than just a lower stage shadows. Green is vulnerable to consensus and a strong voice operating from a different stage around apparently shared goals can and will become dominant in such a scenario.

The problem is just that dopamine will default towards quick "fixes" via such things that is unhealthy, and not towards what's actually good for us. But that doesn't mean that we can't get to a point where we get our serotonin flowing from accomplishments of what has healthy aspects. When getting our fixes that way, dopamine will kick in to ensure that we chase more of the same.

Nothing excludes different stages shadows operating through the values of a later stage. Anger, aggression, power for example - red. Grouping, we-they-think where "we" are ultimately good and "they" are seen as bad, devils, demons and are dismissed without consideration, religion-like conformity - blue.

And it gets complicated when those "abusers" turn out being included within those minority "in-groups". The abusors are still needed to be found within the "out-groups" which makes for ineffectiveness around making actual change, fighting windmills for breadcrumbs while not seeing, or ignoring, grave problems within the "in-groups". It all gets very subjective and based on feelings and less objective action and impact oriented. Centered around protecting ideological values more so than actual change/effect/improvement. Very ineffective and often times misdirected.

Post-modernism value people, expression and feelings highly, which is where green lives, but in doing so there is a selectiveness around which groups are viewed as "in-groups" that are respected, and others that are viewed as "out-groups" that are ignored or demonized. We see this manifest in many different ways, cancel culture is one of these where the views of the "out-group" is simply shut down, invalidated and ignored. Social media shuting down individuals and groups that are causing ripples that won't and can't be explore is another. Respecting all gender identities but demonizing white CIS men is another. Fighting for feministic values among Western men while ignoring the growing misogyny through immigration is yet another. The common denominator is that the values in themselves are sound, yet the predetermined split into groups that are deemed valid and those deemed invalid. Argumentation around these obvious flaws is fairy straight forward and staying in such argument will grossly reveile those flaws. That's why we don't usually see constructive discussion around highly relevant topics that need deep exploration. Argumentation is met with aggression, discussion wants safe spaces there ideas are not being challenged, polarization grows, opposition is cancelled out and so on. This will only hold up for so long before it all breaks down, and the trouble with this is that a lot of things will need to break before they can be rebuilt. Unfortunate collateral damage. See it as the youth of a green revolution. The 60's hippie revolution was too narrow and too isolated to make much of a dent, and it ebbed out eventually. Today there are a lot of green and green-aspiring politicians that fuels this revolution, and also the news-media and social-media along with internet phenomenon greatly changes the game. In the green we see there isn't just love, there is a lot of love, but there is a lot of deep hate as well.

@Human Mint ♥️??

SD isn't about seeing people in colors but the recognition of patterns and how to navigate them and problems that are spanning across the boundaries of different value systems. SD isn't prior to these behavioral systems, the systems are and you will come to recognize them without SD, through the growing of systems thinking, which too is covered and described by SD in tier 2 Yellow vMeme. SD is only a model/tool that describe a system and makes it easier to articulate such behavioral difference and how people move through the stages in a predictible way. Just like all models, it's incorrect, but helpful. It's also helpful for ones own development. Use the model or not, at one point in developmental growth you will end up seeing that which the model points to, and you will navigate people and circumstances relative to the value systems of those phenomena, becoming a spiral wizard, with of without SD in your knowledge bank.

@aklacor727 @SamC & @NatureB beat me to it. Communication is imperative in order to not make him feel denied or rejected. And communication that is not directly connected to those situations where he expresses his desire for sex. Sex drive/lust makes us myopic and reasoning at such times is more limited than otherwise. I think this is an interesting point. Do you know what that place looks like and what it takes for you to get there? Also, how does your boyfriend fit into that emotional equation? How can he contribute to make this happen? If you have an idea what this would be, communicate with him so that he can [choose to] be an active component in the creation of such a sustainable long term future as you mention you want, not making him feel like a bystander in his own life, waiting for something unknown?

As mentioned enlightenment happens on the consciousness and spiritual developmental lines while the spiral is reflecting the value systems appearing through cognitive development, the how we think, the complexity of the sense we make out of what we are able to perceive and the quality of actions that are available to us. Enlightenment happens unrelated to spiral stages, and as Wilber also states, happens more in the mystic state as rationality later introduced in development dismisses much of that which calls for an open-mindedness in order to reach such enlightenment states, and also why spirituality has in large been shunned in later developmental stages and the Western world, and religion along with it. We often see a misconception that enlightenment is Turquoise simply because spirituality and consciousness is "rebooted" through the "mirroring" of first tier stages in the second tier stages. Turquoise bringing back the mystical, magical from the Purple stage, back through deeper cognition, a different flavor if you will, more relevant, and more "grown up". The typical historical enlightened beings we think of were not on a cognitive level that of Turquoise, but we do see those mystical and magical parallels. Waking up can happen anywhere. Growing up is something entirely different. An enlightened being is still subjected to the cognitive limitation and value system of the place and time they find themselves in. Love experienced, that love would be relative framing created or allowed by the stage. Not the same as Turquoise perception of love. "Absolute love" can be early stage inclusive but relative to nature and animals, or even later stage relative ethnocentrically, or later stage inclusive relative worldcentrically. The enlightened being might not express himself but the underlying perception of the relative world won't come from the future. They won't be coming from post-states and beyond, they will be different enlightenment versions for each state. They are more detaching from the circumstances where cognitive abilities are called for in the relative world. Turning to non-duality negates that cognitive "need" through disidentification with the relative world. So hypothetically, yes there could be an "enlightened nazi" but that nazi would probably not interfere with the relative going-on and hence not be percieved as holding nazi values. Has there been one? Yeah, that's it right? You wouldn't really know, just like you wouldn't know who were pro-nazi, never expressed it, and later denounced nazism after the fact.

Relationship means compromise and meeting each others needs. Give and take. When sharing lives with someone there is going to be circumstances in which both can't have what they want, expecting so would be a bit childish. In regards to your question, the question is really how fundamental and how important are these needs? There are trivial desires/needs that make little practical difference if they we let go of. On the other hand, there are things that no person has the right to deny us and not allowing ourselves, or our partner, to pursue such e.g. "dreams" makes no good relationship. Often we're much too attached to ideas that consititues desires and needs, and when adding distance and perspective, a lot of such attachments to desires are better off being "detached". Dare one ask what kind of conflicting needs we're talking about?

Meditation is good for all stages, just try different methods and do the ones that helps you to grow inner silence. With inner silence a lot of other things will follow automatically as it's a bit like the mind needs to do stuff, subconsciously but also consciously without us realizing that it is unhealthy to us. If you are stuck spending your energy on racing thoughts the negative/nonsense stuff will dominate that energy consumption. Silencing the mind chatter will redirect energy consumption towards more useful things, and thoughts will be more profound and with more clarity. Starting with becoming aware of ones crazy monkey mind and to learn this silencing of the mind through meditation makes the rest of the journey more directed and effective. Doing the work simply is doing and not just holding a random idea once in a while. It's like having a job but staying at home vs. going to work, doing that job. Obviously the former is problematic and won't produce results. People are stuck in mental masturbating and procrastination and spend a lot of energy on doing this but never move to action/practice. Results come through experience, through doing the work. E.g. Silencing of the mind comes from (e.g) meditation, by telling ourselves us not "having time" to meditate a sizeable amount every day, while at the same time wasting hours and hours on useless distraction won't do it. Prioritizing "doing the work" generates the results! Don't underestimate the power of procrastination. If we never procradtinate around the should and musts that we already are aware of, we'd get places, and fast. You know this yourself, but you find it overwhelmingly hard to make good choices in the moment to use that moment in a useful way. Turning to distraction becomes our comfort blanket while avoiding the cause of the anxiety we're feeling. What kind of work in terms of Personal Development you do matters less, it is more about the habit to work on yourself consistently and not falling for the tempatation of distraction. In order to grow developmentally, i.e. changing the how in the way we make sense of what we can take in, we need to stretch outside of our comfort zone, outside of what we already know and understand. Learning what we already know deeper will not catalyze developmental growth the same way, and certainly not deliberately so. Deeper knowledge will make us approach new challenges as the thresholds gets lowered the more we learn, but deliberately changing our strategy into consistently pursuing that which is slightly outside of our current understanding and stay with that uncertainty gives us that stretch and makes us figure out how to be able to comfortably hold that increased complexity. Not stretching too far is important as a too high a stretch will add too much complexity and too many layers of complexity for us to make sense of, even when stretched. Such challenges can be demotivating and conterintuitive and resulting in us shutting down into the comfort of that which we already are able to understand. The book list is less important, as development is flavorless and is about the structure in which you operate and not about specific content. If you are interested in a certain topic - e.g. consciousness Mastery - stretch yourself into learning ever more complex content and put yourself into practical situation that will challenge you to live in such stretched complexity. An example could be to get that job that you think you might not be able to pull off, but which forces you to stretch. Or, an education where the content seem more complex than that which you can currently grasp. Or, learn to know your anxieties and put yourself into situation that challenges these anxieties. For example, a lot of us have social anxieties, not wanting to out ourselves in situations where we are uncomfortable. Go to that meditation retreat that you think sounds interesting but some how seem offputting. It is within such situations that how we think changes. It doesn't have to be complicated. Just do it. Know when you are avoiding something and bring yourself to doing it. It will change "how" you think over time and the "what" in your thought will be different and more complex. In terms of reading, getting into a reading habit will crystalize the direction that is Yours and interesting parts of one book opens multiple doors into adjacent "rooms". Simply follow the trail that is being layed out in front of you. There is always a spinoff. Finding your purpose helps with the direction, but purpose will also become a result of this process. The clarity that a solid meditation practice brings is tremendously helpful here as it will connect dots much more effectively when not actively doing the work, and also as a background process while doing that work. Just think about it, when removing a lot of noise, the brain will keep doing its thing, and it will be less noisy, negative, distractive and more leaning towards potentiality, creativity and clarity. In a sense it will become more effortless to do that work, flowing with instead of against the stream. This developmental growth perspective relate to cognitive developmental lines and not specifically the consciousness line, but affects everything we percieve. Specifically pursuing consciousness work just adds a content and a direction towards you want to move, the practice becomes the same. Meditate? Stretch! Longer, more, different types, find new paths. Books? Stretch! Find more complex topics, more complex depth, New authors. Key is practice, doing the work, and less thinking about. There is a feedback loop happening here, when going deeper into development, directly feeding back into whatever content we're developing around, accelerating both development and knowledge and understanding of that specific topic. The intertwined nature of cognitive and consciousness development is a beaut.

Osho, The Secret of Secrets, Volume 2, Chapter 15 I can't relate to how this would manifest in a lower developed countries. There's a lot of references to lower stage development phenomena in that text. According to this it would be the boundaries that are created between groups of girls/women and boys/men that brings about that second "homosexual stage". Such boundaries do not exist in the Western world [using Sweden as my reference] , there are no separation between boys and girls apart from dressing rooms/showers, nor is homosexuality discouraged or demonized in any way, it is almost the opposite, revered and respected. I can stretch towards imagining that where taboos are created, expression finds ways that are not the default expressions, while not implying homosexuality being unhealthy in any way, instead liking it with e.g. the origin/cause of the Japaneese tentacle porn phenomenon emerging from the taboos created around porn. Repression is paradoxically enforcing expression towards becoming "creative" in the taboo arena. All speculation of course, thinking out loud here. I'm interpreting this as such circumstances where the boy-girl interaction are not being hindered and homosexuality not demonized, passning through that second stage to the third would be more or less seemless (?) "If the child is allowed the natural phase of autosexuality, he moves on his own to the second phase, the homosexual – but very few people move to the second phase. The majority remain with the first phase." At the same time it is implied that most people never move past the autosexual first stage and remain self-centered around masturbation and having sex with an opposite sex partner is essentially just two people masturbating in a shared act, thus self-centered around their own pleasure and not truly interested in the pleasure of the partner - autosexual. A lot of people are stuck here for sure, this resonates. What seems confusing is why you would be drawn to same sex due to the vast difference between male and female where the homosexuality offer a well known arena, while it seems more plausible that the opposite would attract through curiosity. The mere knowledge of how to pleasure a same sex partner through the understanding of sexual preferences and how the same sex mind works seem like weak reasons to becoming homosexual or having a hidden homosexual side. Nor does it seem relevant that you would have to pass through a homosexual phase to become truly hetrosexual on a deeper connection basis. Maybe it is more metaphorical. Interesting theory nontheless. @How to be wise What's your deeper understanding of this?

@Preety_India Be careful with hard labels and potential projections. The OP describes something similar to that which many teenagers/young adults expresses. Implying NPD/BPD is a ginormous leap. Adding hard labels is not very helpful from a change-work perspective.

Sorry, it turned out a long one (again). @Daffcio So, here's a thought. But before that thought, let's recognize that it's impossible to say anything about your circumstance in particular as the devil is in the details, and the things mentioned in the OP can be interpreted in so many ways that any answer here will be guesses and the more confident advice is quite likely being someone else projecting their reality onto yours. Let's find a common denominator that we can agree on, and that's that you don't like being imposed on and controlled by your mother, so that's what needs to change, right, in some way. The rest is your perspective, our perspectives, and of course your mothers perspective. In the B = f(P, E) equation, B being behavior and behavior being a function of person and environment you might be able to make some sense out of this and perhaps some ideas on actions that can affect B positively. The (her) behavior (B) is readily available for your to observe, you see how she acts, you make your interpretation, and your response is that you don't like it. For a second here, before we continue, recognize that at the time she is operating through this equation on her end, you are simultaneously operating through it on your end. She (P) contains the essence of her persona, the social "programming" that started out in her early childhood and spans up until this very moment; which including all her biases, expectations, shame, guilt, judgement, labeling of what is right/wrong, good/bad, the values that drive her, and the list goes on and on. In short, what maker her her. Let's get back to how you can help change her later in this post. The circumstance she find herself in (E) which is an environment (or situation) here she is a parent and you are her child activated specific parts and flavors of her "programming" and hence f(P, E) results in what it does. Stay a moment here, and reflect over this equation. It makes it readily apparent that we are not as free as we think we are, we are largely controlled by whatever content/baggage we have in our "backpack". Switch out the P in this equation and you will get vastly different outcomes. This is just how things are, we have to accept them so that we can transcend the outcome, the behavior (B). There's a very simple profoundness in this, the challenge really lies in shifting focus from the B to the P so that we can better explore and understand the perspective that the P holds. When gaining understanding, we can better choose our own reaction to the B's. Let's go back to the B = f(P, E) and look at it from your POV. Just like she has her B which is the function of her and the environment/situation that is taking place, you have your own B that is the functional response from being you (P) and that same situation. For a moment, let's make another recognition; you are your own person AND you don't have the exact same "programming" as she does. From many aspects her values and behavior will, subconsciously (to both her and your), have been transferred to you since the moment you were born, especially throughout the formative years spanning from childhood to upper teenage years. Other things in your persona come from other influences, such as school, friends, social media, even Actualized.org. Other things may also have come about as a rebellion against traits her persona. Let's awe at the complexity that lies within the interaction between two human beings. The odds that there will be abrasions when two individuals interact is fairly high, especially when there's some sort of conflict brooding within either individual. The people we choose as friends are much at the mercy of the P's and how well aligned they turn out to be - we simply don't give people that we don't align [enough] with a chance. Parents we can't choose. Notice that the E isn't the same for you and her. For her it's a parent-child situation and it activates a multitude of programmed "scripts" within her. These scripts are running in her and they are expecting certain outcomes in order not to be considered an "error" or simply "does not compute". For you it's probable that you are considering yourself an adult and respect your freedom. Living at home with mom certainly will present some challenges when adult freedom input into parent-child scripts simply won't produce very constructive outcomes AND vice-versa, parent-child input into your adult freedom script does the same. Here's a another recognition; you cannot expect her to understand your perspective, just like she cannot expect you to understand her perspective. So what is change? Can you force her to change? If not, is moving out and cutting her off a solution? The reality we experience is created within ourselves, in our minds, based on our programming. The recognizing of us owning our P as well as the our B, we enable ourselves the ability to change ourselves in such ways that we better operate under conditions that we cannot change, or control, which are the E of our equation. So, can we change other people? Yes, in a sense we can. By changing ourselves in such ways that we produce other behavior in ourselves, we effectively change the E of the other persons equation, and the B of that other persons equation will be different. Now, we can't choose what kind of other person behavior that will result in, but we can allow ourselves to which to a sense-and-respond kind of behavioral pattern and experiment with our own behavior, note the outcomes that change produces in the other person's B. ~ In terms of perspectives, as mentioned, it is impossible to make sense of the situation itself, the devil is in the details and a devil can be awakened in any person under challenging circumstances (E). And it's clear that this is a triggering situation for the both of you. Question is what is triggering you, and how can you find out what is triggering her? Just to throw a parental perspective out there: What you describe can very well be the fear of a parent, worrying that they are not doing enough to keep you safe and "on track" with life, coming form a place of loving caring, wanting for you to be the best you can be, from her subjective POV. Fear makes us to strange things. The fear of failing as a parent is a very real thing and it can come in many different flavors. Living under the constant threat of having to experience shame and guilt in regards to ones parenting, or living with shame or guilt from recognizing something has already gone "wrong" in terms of the parents ideas of what being successful looks like, not the least your quarrels and lack of effect on the situation (her E) or you (your B and ultimately your P) makes people do things that are not very constructive in term of working towards the parents wanted outcome - it's just the f(P, E) at play. ~ A benefit of adding objective understanding to behavioral patterns and understanding of other peoples perspectives, is that it makes it easier to work with our triggers so that we can emotionally detach from the situations (E) as they arise, so that we can in a more sober way make sense of that's going on, and better choose our responses. ~ The key in personal development and self-actualization is to work with ourselves and develop ourselves. This development happens in our own equation and not in the equation of others. Yet, we tend to externalize our thoughts and find the problems out there, within others, in other things or in other circumstances. Externalizing problems cannot make change, but it certainly can escalate that problem or create more problems around it. And it certainly creates a pattern of blame and justification through which we consistently remove ourselves from any and all equations, creating a victim-hood phenomenon which quickly becomes an addiction in itself. By externalizing all problems, the ego protects itself from change and at the same time strengthen itself by adding a sense of self-importance at the same time as it is diminishing others when identifying them as being problematic. This is a pattern that we need to break, and turn to ourselves to look for changes within ourselves that moves us towards better outcomes. ~ Is the solution to tell you mother to stop controlling you? By gaining understanding of her perspective you can identify and choose responses that are constructive rather than destructive and brings you closer instead of adding distance. How? If you take a step back from the content of the situation and look at the structure of the going-on's as well as you as an individual and try to put yourself into her shoes, seeing potential perspectives of hers, what kind of answers do you come up with, that is pointing towards change within you, that can change the situation that causes her behavior (B) are she does? Sometimes, a sober, calm conversation around feelings is what the doctor orders. Without expectations from the other. Just opening the heart and vulnerably sharing ones thoughts. Finding out what those thoughts of ours are, so that we can communicate and communicate them well is a great challenge. And within that challenge lies true developmental grows. Impact feedback focusing on how you feel and what the effects on you is good here, as it makes it about you and not about her and she will have less reason to try and defend herself. ~ A fotnot; there are shit parents (and people) out there that are too toxic to be possible to affect, and there's always a point at which we need to realize that cutting people out of our lives is the best thing to do, and if that is what is needed to be done, so be it. From the limited sense I make from your OP, I don't think this is the case for you. Regardless, when cutting people out of our lives, we need to be aware that the problem may still be within ourselves and doing that can be the easy way out for the ego to avoid us growing towards accepting responsibility for ones own reality. ~ Again, sorry, monster post.

@ivankiss Interesting stuff that is. Morgue has a few videos about this stuff, here are two.

It's all levels of beliefs. "You" are a belief. Your experiences are beliefs, and you noticing that your past experiences can change, in your mind, is a belief. The unknowable cannot be known and if you think you know anything about that, that is a belief. Beliefs come with levels of delusion, starting with pure conceptualization, which is a not very sophisticated belief, I'm sure you barely believe it yourself. You turn to validating concepts through direct experiences, which is a much more sophisticated belief. Those you can believe with certainty. It's all beliefs, this statement too is a belief, and, can't be anything but beliefs. If you meditate or not, you're just shifting yourself from "some" belief to "some other" belief, maybe that belief gives you a sense of added clarity to what you believe, which makes you believe that you have become an even more sophisticated believer. Or, possibly, or possibly ultimately, you realize that reality is masturbation, happening in your mind. So, wack away at it. Falling into the trap of thinking it's "right" is a belief and thinking that it's "wrong" is a belief as well. It all traps you into disbelief, and it gets worse from here on, you believe. At least you believe that it feels that way. You do believe that you are absolutely certain about that. Needing to get yourself out of that trap is a belief, only to realize you never had to do anything to begin with and that's the problem, fulfills some belief as well. The only thing we can do is to stop labeling things and be with what is, without holding on to believing that anything is "this" or "that". Another belief. There's no way out of it, that's the limitation of being, and yeah, that too is just a belief. I AM. Surrounded by an infinitude of beliefs. Mental masturbation? I believe so. Did I have to meditate to realize this? Yeah, I believe so too.

@Preety_India Drumroll.. We're all biased, based on our value system, which is greatly dictated by our level of development, which is dictating what we are able to percieve, which is dictating the range of action that are available to us and which we sensibly can pursue. This is irrelevant from an outcome driven perspective, which is about making a dent in that which is percieved as a problem. The more meta, structural and systemic level this can be effectively addressed at, the greater impact and change potential there is. The more gridlocks are created around difference focus, the more content fixation is being exercised and the lesser or no impact is made. Potential is negligable and time is wasted as the problems are allowed to grow in the meantime. Effectively more harm is likely to be added to the system than good. But it's not really about exercising value systemic dogma in an ideological way judging whose perspective is right(er), i.e. always "mine" and whose is wrong(er), i.e. always "yours". You will always see the other as "more biased" and you will always see yourself as "more objective". This is the essence of self-deception. Is there a problem? Yes, what that problem is, that is what needs to be explored. It can be readily available, such as mentioned crime and we all want less crime, but it could be hidden in forms of unmet needs, e.g. as fear of culture as we know it changing over time, fear of change, fear of losing something or fear of becoming more of that which the immigrants are trying to escape from. The way forward is to better understand the problem in a less biased, more subjectively objective way, so that effective actions can work the problems. Does it feel bad or wrong to accept that you, just as everyone else, are biased? Gaining greater awareness of ones own biases allows for navigating self, so that we better can navigate others, into helping themselves navigate their own biases.

@Preety_India Notice how you are reading into things based on your biases and how that disrupts and direct away from a deeper discussion emerging, which incidentally is what I was pointing to earlier, the post-modern paradox. These discussions much too often gets shut down, just like this, on these kind of premises; people looking to hear that immigrants are e.g. associated with being criminals, wanting to make the percieved opposition out to be e.g. racist, xenophobic and against immigration by emphasizing such connections, when the need is a discussion around such as, but not limited to, that immigrants are highly over-represented in [more] serious crime (based on readily available statistical data) and how to find a way to change this. Notice that this does not mean that immigrants are criminals but rather that a lot of such crime is committed by immigrants. This is nowhere a racist claim, nor is it a right-wing expression. These connection are biased, even though such claims may be, and are, emphasize by right-wing people, they still are not right-wing claims. The result is that crucial discussions that are so deeply need cannot happen and the discussion gets diverted away from the issue(s) at hand and into grid-lock situations. By leaning into the discussion and helping it forward by adding perspective, and gaining perspective, and through healthy discussion and collaboration, allows for getting at the core of problem(s). In this post-modern paradox where the post-modernists defence of the immigrants, based on ethnocentric values, the contradiction lies in the inability to facilitate and help that very discussions to happen, by appearing to be the protectors of values and expressions of people, yet only accepting the importance of values and expression of one group [immigrants] while cancelling/negating the importance of values and expression of another group [priviledged white people]. The effective result is that the problems keep growing which leads to increased friction within the system, and thus leads to increasing intolerance towards the phenomenon. The immigrants become the victims in this equation, while the critique is mainly against our own system and our inabilities. There is a sense of there being a need and expectation not to meet the opposition in discussion and collaboration, in such sense that it would be equivalent to agreeing to and adopting the perspectives, or part of the perspectives that the opposition hold. Stretching oneself into constructive conversations around difficult topics will allow post-modernism Green to stretch towards growing towards and into Yellow, overcoming the unhealthy expression that prevents that development from happening. The best we, all of us, can do is to promote the introduction of such discussions and put collaboration into focus, and also actively help shifting people towards having outcome-oriented mindset where the focus is positive-action-orientation rather than focused on the differences in opinion that we hold. We need such Yellow catalyzers to help facilitate these discussions and add the guidence that is needed, so that the negative side-effects from a Green-Orange or Green-Blue clash is minimized and positive outcomes can be maximize through actionability that addressesdifficult problems and the challenges in order to impact those at the core. Food for thought - how can you help; help yourself to help that discussion to become productive?

@datamonster Absolutely, this is another aspect of a dysfunctional system. Approval or denial of applied asylum must happen faster so that immigrants can begin an integration process as quickly as possible. People need to feel purpose and have a sense of usefulness. Just sitting around for years does no one good. Getting deported after years in the country due to a slow bureaucratic machine is unacceptable.

@Rilles Oh yes, that was likely to be the case/not surprising. The expression from the pressure building up within a system is likely to appear on either extreme end of the spectrum, or both.

Yes, there is no particular need in having such "tests", the differences in values and morality are known already so it's more a matter of addressing what is already known, and being the best we can be at addressing new problems as the emerge, as fast as possible so that small emergent problems don't grow into large systemic phenomena. As you say, these are Yellow traits and no society today is Green enough to allow for the stretching into Yellow a world view and such levels of systemic awareness, as the Green machine is too caught up in such post-modern contradictions still, in a sense working for change but it at the same ensuring status-quo by such limitations. It may be seen as dark and dystopic, but it isn't, and the discussion climate is slowly warming up, and things changing, and progressing, as things always have and will. An interesting parallel is that of the Corona epidemic and it agitating the same structural problems, as they are structural and not exclusive to e.g. immigration. But with Corona there's no value system protecting anything, we're all against Corona and the lack of actionability and seemingly lack of high-level reasoning within government has been easier for more people to spot, and easier to hold as a thought as it's not a hot topic.

@Preety_India Reality is hard and nuanced, and most of all complex. You're lacking respect for the complexity of what is. It is in the face of volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity (VUCA) that we, need to come together into collaboration around that complexity, so that we increase our combined ability to face and handle these new circumstances and these new problems that they bring. Again, racism can't be generalized, when talking about different countries that are vastly different in nature. In Sweden, racism is foremost an expression between different groups of immigrants and not native population against immigrants. An interesting question here is, what exactly do people mean by racism, and what it includes - a question that calls for contemplation. The word carry vastly different meaning depending on where you are and who you are. Just like feminism wrongfully has gained a bad rap due to some radical elements that make a lot of non-constructive noise. I understand that you are speaking from a different point of view, of course, what else is there, and that being valid, what else could it be, yet such a one generalization won't be valid for all nations. I am focusing on the situation in Sweden for the simple reason that this is my playground. I wish you could visit Sweden and look for this western racism, and you will find something different, something far more complex in terms of something that few are willing to talk about, that goes way beyond the black-and-whiteness (absolutely no pun intended) of most peoples logic's and assumptions. It is the contradictions held within the post-modern, ethnocentric, Green vMeme values when stuck in itself, unhealthy, that is currently preventing the overcoming of itself. In a sense it is the symbolism held within thoughts that produces such symbolic [non] actions that we are experiencing in Sweden, instead of producing actions that address the actual problems that have arisen. Seemingly out of fear of having such actions being confused and deemed as being racist which it of course is not. Paradoxically, more so, avoiding the problems becomes polarizing, segregating and racist in itself, if one were to compare the two side-by-side, and the outcomes they produce. So please, don't underestimate the complexity, and face that complexity rather than condensing the problems perceived down to good and bad, as that position does not hold the power of change. Anyways, this is not trying to rub anyone in either way, but is only pointing to the need to go meta on self to be able to address the real problems, which aren't immigration-related at all, but the limitations of self to handle that uncertainty that happens when the boat get unbalanced and starts to rock. Immigration is just bringing that inherent dysfunction into light so that we can get to a point where we can address it, as individuals. I wouldn't go so far as to say that this will be detrimental for the long term stage of development (COG) but rather presents such challenges that will force us to come together to face our lack of ability to handle the situation and grow from there. There will be a wider spread over different stages of development in the societies but handled well, it will accelerate the development of the immigration people and not noticeably regress that of then general population. This too shall pass, we shall overcome these challenges. And we shall face new, greater challenges ahead. That is the only certainty there is. The main concern right now is to limit the collateral damage until such a point that we are able to come together in a more collaborative and constructive way. To do so we need to give ourselves breathing-room and time to deal with what is rather than continue adding to the existing problems, so that we can become who we need to be to help those in need. But enough said about Sweden, we're an insignificant drop of 10 million people in the whole.

@Preety_India That is a myopic view of a complex problem. The problems that arise from large immigration can't be dismissed that easily and the problems seen are systemic and will need to be addressed in near-time. The problems are vastly different in different countries and it's not helpful to lump "West" into the one and same category. Unfortunatly, in Sweden, the inability to have constructive conversations about such hot topics, on a political level, has resulted in polarization and more-or-less the ignoring of an array of negative side-effects and thus postponing actions. This lack of actionability in Swedish politics isn't exclusive to immigration, nor is it a new phenomenon, but is deeply widely systemic. The mistakes made so far will have long term consequences, and those mistakes don't have to do with immigrants or racism per se but rather naivite about the need for a sustainsble short and long-term plan in terms of impact on the Swedish systems e.g. wellfare, but most prominently the absolute lack of plans in terms of what successful integration looks like. A lot of these problems seen arise from a Swedish post-modern approach towards and inability to handle Blue value system problematics that result from a fast and large change in population dynamics. Approximately 20% of the Swedish population are immegrants and over the past years Sweden have kept one of the highest rates of immigration per million citizens out of the Europe an countries and the consequences of this is easy to see, not the least in terms of violent crime. These kind of things are reactions towards types of dysfunction perceived and such expressions and the underlying needs need to be acknowledge and understood for what they are, rather than seen as racism and "up coming peaks of nazism". Only then can they be addressed in ahealty and progressive way. Ignoring or dismissing these expressions just increases the pressure in the system until such a point that it depressurizes into unheatly expressions. We need to stop viewing happenings as black-and-white and good-and-bad which further polarizes, and instead acknowledge that everything is shades of gray and welcome the exploration of each others perspectives to gain understanding of the percieved problems and underlying needs so that we can reach actionability and actual results rather than maintaining fixed positions and endless hateful discussions. We all can start with noticing any emotional attachment to this subject, it is rather evident, and work towards detachment from it to further improve our own abilities to create positive change.

♥️??