BlueOak

@OBEler I understand. My biases are being a Xennial and inbetween two generations, with the natural benefit of connecting them just by being present. So naturally I reason from that perspective, seeing people enter a brand new reality with technology and learning it was my life. Also that i've done a lot of programming for example, which can be creative rather than purely intellectual. You can be a methodical programmer, but the geniuses of that field were more like creating art. Those programmers could do the work of a team, and still be more efficient in their code. The same with creative writing, I've written with older people and it didn't impede their creativity, perhaps only their output. So we see different extremes. I don't know your field, but you see the drop off in high performance like a coach would perhaps on the sportsfield at the highest levels. Whereas reality gets along just fine. In reality experience, a good partner/friends, and the willingness to take care of yourself matters a lot. From a kid I never intended in my life to be someone who can't change his mind, and I prefer to be challenged or enriched with insight, so for me i'll be bedridden or dead before being too rigid takes hold of me. Even if I won't be doing calculus in my 90s.

@OBEler You are looking at your own limitation of connecting with that generation, culture, or group of people. Do some self reflection. Your perspective is brilliant, dumb, intricate, shallow, correct, incorrect, beautiful, and hideous. Its everything and so is everyone elses, it's infinity viewed any way you like. There is always someone out there, of any age who can be insightful, able, intelligent, charming, skilled, anything or the opposite of these qualities. Its very limiting to consider people dumb because they reason differently to you, or don't choose a certain device/technology to address a problem, or even that they don't address the problem you see at all. They are in a different mind, a different culture, a different era, religion, friend group, valueset, whatever. Dismissing a generation like this, is going to cut you off from them, it's going to naturally distance you from what is a link in a chain. It is more beneficial to be able to hear them, through the filter of age, or anything else in the way like your hatred of long words! They still shape reality here just like you do. The fact your education, or experience gave you some insight a group of people might be lacking, is a function of our continued evolution in our school systems or culture, it is one teacher from the previous generation teaching the next. It does not make someone else let alone an entire generation moronic. They had different experiences that they observed shaping their reality. You have a lot of arrogance, take it from someone who was very arrogant, who thought themselves in their 20's 'better' or at least more intelligent than those around him. Life is going to humble you over and over until you lose it. Until you realise you are no better than any previous generation, you are just different. My 20's for me and my friends were spent maturing, and we all had a lot to learn about ourselves, life, and how to treat others. I'd take an old me over a young me any day, what you'll hear most people say is they wish they had the youth AND the experience.

Practice it here. Listen to everyone's point of view and be willing to integrate them or change your own. When I read this, it sounds like you have fixed beliefs, which will crystalize in the mind, causing what you say you don't want. (Many people cause what they say they don't want most). Inside their own bodies, people have a great deal of influence over what happens. Sure age brings some pitfalls, you'll get injured more and the injuries will take longer to heal for example. You'll pick up permanent problems, that's age. There is a reason though you can see an 80-year-old weightlifter and an 80-year-old that can barely function, beyond just happenstance, or random chance. That's diet, exercise, air quality, stress. keeping your mind sharp, and being willing to integrate or accept new ideas and ways of thinking or operating. I fully get the perspective that the way I think of the world in its entirety becomes more outdated the older I get. Part of the macro are the people I used to connect to, die. The more of these connections and perspectives I lose, the more my reality is harder to connect with others. Then I can come to a forum like this and constantly be forced to challenge or update my mind. Its the willingness and ability to do so that will create or not create the conditions you describe. (And diet, exercise, engagement with new perspectives etc).

And what's yours then? Is it better? I love it when people challenge or add to the analysis of something, because that's how I grow my understanding, but usually, when someone does what you just did, its a knee-jerk emotional reaction because they didn't like what they read or it challenges their values or beliefs.

I've heard people say, wait till they come to you and ask, or use your intuition, try to offer it without your name or label attached, or I when I had them more regularly, I used to offer it in a way that was thinking of them rather than me. Myself, I'm mostly wanting to hear these things from people, because I could use more of these insights in my life. For me, spiritual experience cuts through reality to different points in time or permeates it. There is no static answer or point when it starts or ends. So there is no one comprehensive answer to your question of when spiritual experiences should be represented or not represented.

Universal love doesn't have any pre-conditions, terms or conditions. Though this post could be interpreted to just letting go and forgiving yourself/others. Reconnecting with the universe, in a more giving/receiving harmonious cycle. When you add more and more hoops to jump through to achieve this, it tends to get people caught in the hoops.

Distance, light, motion, and/or subjective consciousness allows for the reflection. Sense of self for example. I perceive myself as different from you and the conversation we are having. This allows another perspective of the same thing. When I choose not to, I see myself as you, me, and the conversation.

I've heard many definitions for the soul: A representation of being solo, or a cut-off piece of infinity. One of the subtle energetic bodies around yours. A representation closer to stillness, prone to less physical influences. A record of your lifetime(s) patterns. It can be the link Kundalini travels through to infinity, as you raise yourself up from animal urges to be enlightened enough to give and receive. Not just take take take, where in doing so you cut yourself off from yourself, earth, life, the universe, yourself. It's helpful to transcend the word in spiritual discussions, its more than a single angular symbol that you can cut into pieces and separate out from everything else. Whatever you believe is going to be, make it something helpful and life-giving, connected, that cycles through everything then back.

Yes. The reflection or thing itself is the source. This below is one way to represent the mind/universe visually. If I were to draw it myself, with perspectives differing by distance, each reflection would have slight differences. We all have a small influence over reality and what can be observed, so these reflections are slightly altered within each person. You can see that through this thread and casual conversation, how we all describe it differently. Some call these effects Placebo, or other terms in Quantum mechanics. https://scitechdaily.com/quantum-breakthrough-scientists-rethink-the-nature-of-reality/ Quote: The researchers solved this fundamental problem by combining information about the past of the system, with information about its future in a description of the dynamics of the system during the measurement interaction, demonstrating that the observable values of a physical system depend on the dynamics of the measurement interaction by which they are observed. 1, Perspective changes what part of infinity is observable. 2, So things like the depth of perception changes what you can observe. 3, The perceived future influences what you can observe. We can see this in casual conversation, when for example I am very pessimistic I observe more negative things, the reverse for an optimist. This description will forever be incomplete (infinity is beyond description), but its very neat to have Tesseracts commonly around now to see visually in this way to have people considering them. Here is a colorful one to finish:

This made me burst out laughing. I hope you post more. All I can do is highlight the problem, but you are spitting some answers out, its refreshing. If we can get people out of their head, it'll help.

@Raze 1, Let me try a different approach first Raze: Do you understand why the risk goes up to shipping, and thus the insurance when there is uncertainty in trade? I understand you personally don't feel there is any difference between many countries (or just China/BRICKS) looking after their own international waters, and one country that has for decades guaranteed them, but are you able to consider others do? Especially given world tension? The people making these decisions have to focus on the odds. So as the insurance goes up, everything in your life is more expensive. That means fewer houses get built, more homeless, food costs more meaning more starvation, jobs are lost because of increased costs and reduced profits meaning more addiction and crime, fuel costs go up (and so everything costs more), there is less money to spend on things, and so the economy goes backward. Trying to give you a broad overview here, in essence, everything about life, from the small to the big is taxed by insurance companies on those routes. This is even me taking your perspective that nothing else would change, there would be no piracy, or tariffs, competition for the routes, blockades over international disagreements (as in Yemen we have seen for the first time attempted since Somalia) etc. When that happens, supply chains will buckle, and competition for local resources that don't require shipping across long routes increases. There are so many knock-on effects to trade. Insurance for those routes goes up, if the shipping companies are willing to take the route at all. We are at a turning point as to whether we go back to warring nation-states, all trying to build local supply chains and do everything ourselves, or turn into two competing power blocks leading to a larger war, or finally give the UN some real authority and remain a globalized system. That's three outcomes I see here. 2, Now the usual response: All Nations push their sphere of influence outward until they reach another one. Because all nations are made up of individuals who don't see a line on a map and say I won't act outside of that. Stage, Red, Blue, Orange, Criminals, Politicians, Businessmen etc have similar characteristics one country to the next. Certainly, China used to be inward-facing culturally, but now it's not. I could list: Tibet, Turkmenistan, BRICS seeking to replace the Dollar, Material Support in Russian wars, Volunteer manpower in Russian wars (alleged), Naval Bases/Ports in places like Sri Lanka, and Australia, China's growing influence over countries in Africa, the Belt and Road initiative abroad, pushing its population/influence into Myanmar, the standoff with Japan over Senkaku Islands, its disputes with Bhutan or India over borders, or importantly taking over the territorial waters of SIX OTHER COUNTRIES in the Pacific and the Spratly Islands. China being the fastest growing fleet, the rise of international nationalism/fascism supported by these individuals, all as to why China is pushing its influence outward and seeking to be a trading empire. But all I really need to say is: All Nations push their sphere of influence outward until they reach another one.

@Emotionalmosquito You are highlighting the exact problem! Dating or socialising was never entirely in your head like dating has become. I'd venture 10%-20% was intellectual before, even less was analytical. Everything you just talked about is experiential, as in it is something we would have, in eras past, been doing all our lives. It'd be as simple as breathing, and sure some would be better than others at it, some people are more charismatic than others. But right now, it's becoming uncommon to find many capable of socializing naturally, let alone being good at it.

@bebotalk tl;dr, Everything you can think of in your life, from the most simple thing you interact with, to the most complicated thing you know, is reliant on global trade functioning reliably and free of pirates, or each country imposing their own conditions, insurance being affordable, people being willing to take the risk, the interconnected nature of our supply chains and industry. Increasing this interconnected nature of the world, is the key to human development, fracturing it leads to all the worst outcomes we can picture. It's largely about trade. If I can make a suggestion study global trade. Trade is the biggest external force on all countries, and by most people not being aware of or understanding it, they miss the critical piece that defines world politics. I'm no expert I just know the basics, and to look for it when a war breaks out or a conflict is brewing. The reason the American dollar underpins world currency is because they secure global trade. It's not quite that simple but without them doing so, the dollar wouldn't. That trillion-dollar debt they are in, would collapse or begin to roll back their economy. The Americans moving toward isolation have to accept a completely different worldview, and I still don't know whether that pattern will continue until it hits a point and people realise what I am telling you in some form, or if these meaningless wars and loss of life will hasten the end of its trading empire, currently the pattern is the latter. Being English I hope they reverse their isolationism trend, or else liberalism is done globally, and the world is likely to swing further authoritarian in the short/medium term until we hit the conditions of WW3, or some bleaker future of constant regional wars. I don't see any other liberal powers rising anywhere, I could give a few fledgling examples where it might but people would laugh. - Maybe the Hague will surprise me and act like a global court, rather than a political tool, we'll see. Maybe the UN will get rid of the Security Council, so Russia, America, the UK, China or any of their allies etc, can't just throw their weight around without consequence. Anything is possible I guess, but unlikely. Let's picture a future 200 years from now, where America is in Russia's position in terms of power. They are not the superpower. They are a regional power. What they say applies to their sphere of influence and nobody else's, probably not even South America as much as it does, as Brazil in this scenario remains in BRICS, and so we have several socialist countries in South America (just an example, could be fascist, anarcho-capitalist, whatever). Trade is much less secure, because each country has to secure their own territorial waters or accept China/BRICS doing so. So either BRICS replaces America, or we get some unlikely global organization of cooperating countries, or that is the end of globalism, and means every country in its locality needs to find everything for all its supply chains. That means your quality of life is going to take a big hit. Less food variance, fewer luxuries, fewer necessities, less building materials, less resources for industry, and things are more costly. It means technology stops advancing at near the same rate, because we've only got to this point due to having a system where each country can specialize in part of the supply chain. That means farming doesn't advance to fix the food shortages, industry does not advance, and that means the climate is not addressed, it probably gets worse as people go back to using coal or other local fuels. Everything slows or degrades. Global trade underpins everything. Without it Africa starves as an example.

The semiconductor industry is vital to America and every country on this planet. If you want China and BRICS to have a stranglehold over everything from washing machines to fighter jets, then sure. Otherwise, you have to wait until you've set up your country's version of it. Taiwan is currently a wedge region to stop China from having a launching pad to the rest of the Pacific. So rather than worrying about one region Taiwan, you'll be having to arm and try to defend 5 countries. Unless you are suggesting going full isolationist, giving up control of global trade in that region completely, and pulling back to Hawaii, that didn't work out great last time. A lot of the bases in those countries allow for you to deploy your navy internationally when required. Global trade through that area is worth trillions. China is trying to take over all the sea lanes throughout the region and everyone else's territorial waters. Including where all your trade goes. What you are suggesting, going much more isolationist (if that's the gist), is going to take a complete and utter change of how you view the world. That means leaving everyone else to their own business and whatever happens globally, happens. (Currently, that'd be BRICS and Authoritarian dominance) This is where America is headed politically, but it also means you won't have near the influence or get your own way. There will be wars, there will be a reshaping of borders, and your quality of life will take a hit because you will no longer be a trading empire. The dollar won't have the same power if it's not being backed up by America securing the trade routes. If BRICS take over, it'll be whatever currency they end up deciding on that guarantees world trade. *Oh and the real mud in the eye will be, every country going to war to reshape borders in former colonial regions will lay the blame firmly at your (and our) feet, with no consideration at all for the fact they are shooting the guns. Its like an open ticket to play the victim the world over.

Overeating is definitely a compounding factor, as you can only store so much energy and nutrients, so digesting after that is wasted energy. In addition to that different types of food take more energy to digest, and so in return, you tire yourself out more digesting it. The quantity of food to the nutrient value needs to be taken into account. The reason why I said it wasn't diet specific, is because you can eat animals that are not going to clog up your digestive system as much, and alternatively you can eat overcooked food (reducing its value) or junk food as a Vegan. Generally, you are right that it's harder to overeat light foods. You have to eat a lot of vegetables to feel that, and the more you chew or just eat slower, you psychologically think you've had a larger meal. It's easier on grains to overeat, or cereal which are packed full of carbs and harder to digest, or proteins like nuts or beans/lentils.

One thing missing or I missed. I rarely see talked about. The lighter the food, the less energy is wasted in digestion. If it's a heavy dense food, or processed food - vegan or not, you use more energy in the digestion of it, and therefore feel more tired. You can see easy examples of this when having a very large meal and feeling sleepy. Things like bread, a biscuit, meat or a banana, eating them in the evening, when bread takes 6 hours or more to digest is not going to let your body rest at night when it needs to. Thus you wake up more tired than necessary. The body gets no time to detox naturally at night, and you get gradual problems. Having that one biscuit at night just before bed is not helping you in the slightest, stick to liquid preferably water if you have to have something. This is independent of veganism, you can eat junk food as a vegan if you like, and it'll still have this effect. @LoneWonderer You are welcome, best of luck. Last tip, mixed nuts are a good fallback for a snack or for protein, berry nut mixes are also excellent as a combo.

Here are some inherent problems with all of this mess: 1, Manners and discipline are not regarded as virtues anymore. Here in this very thread, they are somewhat vilified, more so in the wider population. At the same time, people will look at the behavior of not having these qualities, and complain about it. 2, Behaviors such as people saying 'Go teach your boy to be a man' to women, never really consider the words they just said. That's often the man's or male role model's job. I've seen this so many times recently in different forms across different groups, in this social trend, it makes my head spin. This is very important to highlight because it's about fathers or male role models teaching their sons or students, the responsibility of things like fatherhood and instilling things like discipline and manners. 3, Being civil is a good starting point for anything. People are less likely to be confrontational if you are not being so yourself. You are much more likely to have a normal conversation with them, or make a deal in business, or communicate on a forum if you keep yourself in check. Being belligerent or antagonistic is a sure way to provoke the same. 4, Being civil does not mean being a doormat. A constantly confused point of view I hear from people. 5, Discipline is one of the requirements of success. Being focused, remaining disciplined, and on task. 6, Saying Women like X. You've already failed in your analysis. Putting billions of people into easily demonstratable labels is a farce. There are certainly trends and patterns you can point to, but to take an absolute position is unhelpful. Its a current contributing cause of the dating crisis, and a large contributor to the population problems developed nations are experiencing. Be more like this 10% of people. Sorry 90% (Reality) you are not the ones we are focusing on now. We'll build entire systems and sites that support highlighting a very small number of people, that everyone is chasing, and social networks to enforce this belief in the culture. We'll lure you in with exaggerated photos and videos. Oh no, we have created a dating problem. Let's focus on this 10% instead, what could go wrong! *facepalm* Focus on the values an average man, with average looks/charisma, average everything, brings to a woman. Highlight that and all this mess will finally cease to exist, or at least begin to unravel back to normality. (Obviously doing the same for women too) 7, Said it a hundred times. In purely cerebral electronic communication we lost things like the ability to socialise in person. It's much harsher, cutting, the words like an edged blade in a conversation. In-person, we'd be considering each other's reaction, we'd be moderating language somewhat, and projecting more understandable positions. Adjusting and projecting to the group visually, by tones, by subject matter, body language, by group dynamics, smell/sight, and familiar touch or mannerisms etc. More would develop, and conversations would be more than a symbol on a page interpreted largely in a disconnected way from the speaker. It's the same over a phone, and texting it loses so much of what is possible, or of that person, people are reduced to: Nice guy. Jerk. Not a nice guy. Simp, Narcissist, Fool, whatever so much more easily, because these symbols on the page are all we have to surmise them. - This sort of limitation in turn, is what created rigid and limiting categorization in dating, leading to less tolerance or acceptance, and less couples getting together. Ditto politics, ditto business, and the rigid angular nature of communication this way is in part why the world is dividing on the macro.

Chomsky is pure stage green. Rather than present the facts alongside his bias, he gets a conclusion and then tries to shape facts to fit it. I understand why an Anti NATO stage green would put this argument together, they look for one accepted truth (NATO expansion) and ignore every other facet or reason, while at the same time trying to argue for the moral highground - in two pointless wars no less. Because its simple, makes them feel they are correct morally, and can be easily communicated. Last September, almost 4 months ago - Quote: 27,449 civilian casualties in the country: 9,701 killed and 17,748 injured. He knows what the word casualty means and if he doesn't he should, because people like to twist it to mean what they want it to mean. https://ukraine.un.org/en/247232-ukraine-civilian-casualties-24-september-2023 He's also conveniently ignoring the war started in 2014, which at other times people will use to their advantage in discussions. Where the UN listed 3,404 civilian casualties. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War Though in Mariupol alone that would be a fraction of the dead. Putin has been bombing the country's civilians for almost two years and entire cities have been leveled to nothing, not just Mariupol. Sievierodonetsk for example was rubble, ditto Lysychansk. Chernihiv was badly hit. Sumy saw a lot of fighting. There are so many towns or villages that no longer exist, and the people in them don't either. Go type in any of these names and rubble, or look for pictures of the city at the time of fighting. There were people in all of them as it was going on, especially early on. He can't look at all this, and seriously conclude what he's just said about casualty numbers. Putin has pardoned all crimes committed in Ukraine. You can do anything you like there as a Russian, and they often do as any military would with barely any functioning discipline. Meanwhile, they send ex-convicts and conscript Ukrainians in occupied territory to fight Ukrainians, while sending them into a meat grinder, with barely any ammunition, just to find artillery pieces to hit. Humane? Putin's been shooting missiles at civilian buildings for near two years. What the hell is he talking about? Arguing morality by anyone with all this violence (in both wars) is absurd. So I dug around further as I can't read the article directly: I was and still am strongly against the 2nd war in Iraq, it was a dumb futile act, with a pointless aim. A bit like the Russian war, though I understand many of the reasons why both occurred. Did any foreign leaders visit Baghdad? This is backward logic. Nobody went to Moscow either. Because neither of those governments were being supported, they went to those they were supporting. When Iraq had been overcome in the meaningless war, then they went to Baghdad Neither side is backing the Minsc Agreement, they didn't then, and they don't now. This is a fantasy in his mind alone. As Russians themselves often tell me, Russia is not giving up territory they've bled for, and that Putin has staked his reputation (and probably his life) on. Could it be possible, sure, if Russia was struggling to hold what they have. Again someone who doesn't understand why NATO expands, I swear there is a mental block in people. There was fear in Finland of an attack. This is either willful blindness or he just hasn't watched any interviews or done any reasearch. At the time people in Europe were panicked, rightly so, we didn't know what Russia's plans were, or understand Russia much at all, to be blunt. It's also was not inconceivable that Russia could have launched further attacks. Their state TV threatened it five times a week, and Putin or his cronies did every so often. Now, after a wearying war, it's hard to believe that Russia could. After rebuilding though, they can certainly take bite-sized chunks out of Europe bit by bit, which is all they need to do over time. Unless their population crisis catches up to them and neuters their ability to do so, or they have a change in leadership and view towards Europe. So holding Russia here and draining their ability to push their aggression further is a logical choice. Deterring China by making the prospect of war too great, is the strategy, and it's a better one than a war. Will anyone with an anti-NATO position, ever in their entire lives, be capable of understanding that countries join NATO out of fear of Russia? Probably not. I can understand a Russian's fear of seeing what they perceive as the enemy getting closer, it's just infuriating they can't see the same from the opposite position. But then nobody ever really looks at the smaller countries' wishes or what they feel about it all, certainly not this guy.

Veganism has worked for me for 12 years so *shrug*. Took two months to adjust from a junk fast food, steak-eating, fried food bacon/eggs diet. Get a regular B12 boost and plenty of varied fruit/veg. I had more energy than I ever had before. Don't overdo the beans at the start, put up with the detox, which you'll have from all the junk coming out of you. Get through that adjustment and you are done. I found the best B12 boost either a vitamin supplement or yeast extract (I liked the bitter taste). The only time I felt better was on a raw food diet, with even more nutrients, and less toxins to expel. Energetically you are eating the food in its natural form, uncut or unspoiled which when you are sensitive to such things you can feel the difference. Your entire relationship with animals will change when they are no longer food to you, they did for me at least. *Though if you want a step above it all, which I understand others will dismiss given their framework for reality. Give thanks when you are having food, put yourself in a state of gratitude when eating. Remember you have a certain level of influence over what it becomes (like all of reality) Help with the heart, help with the injury, help with the mood, help with the headaches, help with whatever it is, ask/instruct yourself. - Humans disconnect themselves energetically from their food with metal cutlery, most cultures anyway, at least tribal ones still used wood. Its all energy, the entire material universe (ask a physicist), and it's all represented by your mind, which you have limited influence over. People call it a placebo effect in modern science (or quantum terms), whatever you call it, use it. Put it in your hands and connect with it on a meaningful level, do this in combination with yoga or Taoist practices, to feel the energetic connection.

Go talk to women more with no expectations whatsoever. Do a lot of that. It'll put you in reality and out of your conditioning quicker. The important part is, you having no expectations, except maybe a conversation. Then when you've done that for a while, and socialized with the opposite sex, like the thousands of generations before you did, before computers/phones made all your interactions cerebral rather than EVERYTHING ELSE + cerebral. That's body language, that's voice, that's environment, light touch, emotions, harmonizing with the group, smell, apperance, group dynamics, personal dynamics, that's relating to the person/people you are talking to, listening, filing the silence, humor, developing the art of conversation etc etc etc. Then try to do what some people are advising you. Don't feel bad. Purely cerebral electronic communication has broken a lot of people, most of a generation at this point.

Read the words out loud, it doesn't have to be all the time. Try to remove surplus words or redundancy in the narrative or passage. Unless going for a more flowery poetic style, then some surplus words are inherently used. Try to meet or get in contact with editors or small independent publishers. Get feedback often. I am going to give away a tip I plan to use here, use YouTube, read passages, and see what people say. You could also post a small section on the various sites for writers out there, to not only generate interest but also get feedback. Music is my vehicle for inspiration. I feel I should give each song credit at the end of the work! If you are just starting out, spend some time on roleplaying forums writing collaboratively, and get feedback. A forum with good writers is a great place for a writer to train. It will sap you creatively from your professional pursuits, so it needs to be balanced and then stopped, at least for me to have the energy to put into my own stories.

America's position towards China vs Taiwan is deterrence. Making the act of sending troops over the ocean towards Taiwan too costly or problematic to be viable. China's position is gathering strength and trying to suppress Taiwan diplomatically. My personal opinion is. As the semiconductor industry is moved, Taiwan becomes less critical and more vulnerable. Though it won't matter if relations stay this chilled, nobody in that region wants China to have yet another base to launch its naval efforts from, and full control of the trade routes in the area. If China just waits for American decline, waits for the semi conductor industry to move elsewhere (or be replicated elsewhere and competitive), and tries to improve relations with countries like Japan so they are not in fear of what China expanding its sphere of influence means, then Taiwan might slowly become Chinese anyway via trade. It depends if personal ego overrides common sense, and it has to be now now now, which it often does in men of power.

Again the macro is: The US sphere of influence pulling back to be more isolationist (very gradually). Expect to see more regional struggles for control as it happens.

A laymans way to view it is. In the human body there are places where a lot of activity takes place. The stomach, the mind, the sexual organs, the heart, the throat, the liver, the kidneys etc. These places use a lot of energy, or have a lot of energy pass through them for their day-to-day activities. The cleaner these are, the less full of toxins, getting the right nutrients, exercise etc, the more effectively they function, and the healthier you are. That's how you can describe it to anyone who just sees a body. Then you can mention a physicist will tell you we are all energy vibrating very slowly. Then they can link in their mind an energetic chakra and a physical point on the body, which are the same thing. If you want more sensation of this, developing body awareness and energetic awareness are good ideas. Yoga and meditation focusing on the body are very good ways to do it. Mantak Chia teaching Taoism was also excellent for me.

When I finished writing this I just spilt 2 liters of water on my carpet. So I took that as a sign to say, possibly look into water wastage or recyling water as well lol