How to be wise

@Francis777 Moderators regularly abuse their power. Make sure that Leo checks any warning point you’ve been given.

@Francis777 That’s your ego speaking. It can begin to see that going any further will mean its death.

I think Eastern Buddhists is a better example of Blue spirituality.

Those moderators were abusing their power.

@Leo Gura I got a warning point for saying “you got put in your place”. Can you please review that warning point.

@ryandesreu Yes, if you consistently spoke like a turquoise person, then we’d have to assume you are in turquoise. Think about it, how do you know that Osho and Sadhguru are in tier 3? How will their actions reveal that they are in tier 3? If we analysed them based only on actions, there’s no way we could differentiate them from tier 2 or even tier 1.

I think to study the spiral level of Donald Trump, we have to look at him before he launched his presidential campaign in 2015. After 2015, he obviously made sure that his positions would agree with the Republican base since he was running. Here’s Trump’s political positions before 2015: “Before Donald Trump ran for President of the United States as a Republican in 2015, he had a history of affiliating with various political parties, including the Democratic Party. His political views during those times were generally more centrist and, in some cases, aligned more closely with Democratic stances than the conservative positions he later adopted. Economic Views Trump was generally pro-business, favouring deregulation and lower taxes. However, he also supported universal healthcare at various points, a position more commonly associated with Democrats. Social Issues On social issues, Trump was relatively moderate compared to his later Republican platform. He was pro-choice for a period and supported gay rights, including advocating for the amendment of the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include discrimination against gays. Foreign Policy Trump's foreign policy views were less clearly defined before his presidential run, but he was critical of the Iraq War, a position that aligned him with many Democrats at the time. Party Affiliation and Political Donations Trump's party affiliation fluctuated over the years. He was registered as a Democrat for several years and even considered running for the New York mayoral office as a Democrat. He also made donations to Democratic candidates, including Hillary Clinton. Public Statements Trump often made public statements that were less ideologically rigid before his 2015 presidential campaign. For example, he praised Bill Clinton's presidency and was critical of George W. Bush, particularly over the Iraq War. Reform and Government Trump expressed views in favour of campaign finance reform and was critical of the influence of lobbyists, a stance that resonated with many Democrats. It's important to note that Trump's views were not consistently Democratic or liberal, even when he was registered as a Democrat. His political positions seemed to be pragmatic and issue-specific rather than strictly ideological. This flexibility in political views has led some to describe him as a political chameleon, adapting his positions to suit his goals and the prevailing political climate.” All in all, this is very significant when trying to pinpoint his spiral level. If you were to assess him based only on the above, rather than post-2015, what spiral level would you allocate him?

@ryandesreu Remember that spiral dynamics measures value. If somebody really argues for a particular position or stance, we must assume they agree with it, even if their actions aren’t fully aligned with it. For example, most stage blue people in the Middle East aren’t priests or pundits. They live an average life. The only way you’d know if they were religious is if you asked them.

I think words do matter. In your example, why would the person driving the hummer say that we must improve the environment? How would that benefit him? Clearly he must believe in climate change to a certain degree.

If he wins, they will be joining him.

@Leo Gura If Trump becomes president he’ll just pardon them all.

Thank you Leo!

@Leo Gura Conservative media isn’t brainwashing anybody. They are just telling their viewers what they want to hear.

I recently saw a discussion between McKenna and Ram Dass. This really is a discussion between head (McKenna) and heart (Ram Dass)

@MsNobody Why don’t you collaborate with Leo on the psychedelics course? I think he can use your energy.

Leo is the killer of the bird. That’s the lesson.

Tribalism is a bigger problem in Africa than corruption.

You can understand it with the 16 personalities theory. Your type is INTP, so your hero is Ti, or Introverted Truth.

This story is in the “Fun” section. ?

We need to know how Leo damaged his body so we don’t do the same.

@Leo Gura @zurew @Israfil It is imperative to recognise the grave dangers posed by addictive substances. Such drugs should not be readily accessible to the general populace. By making the acquisition of these drugs a stringent and complex process, we can ensure that only those with a determined and perhaps legitimate need have the ability to obtain them. This approach stands as a necessary measure to safeguard society from the harms of addiction.

Portugal doesn’t sell cocaine at the pharmacy.

He himself was poor and an orphan, so it makes sense that he gives extra emphasis to these people in the Quran. What does usury have to do with spirituality? As for modest clothing, this was all pre-Islamic. He didn’t invent the hijab, he simply adopted it from his society. By the way, the hijab is not spiritual. As for acting modestly, it really just is sexual allergy. Nothing spiritual to it. He was spiritual in the sense that he was channelling Gabriel (just like Neale Donald Walsch channels God). But to claim that he knew anything about enlightenment or awakening is just deceiving yourself. He had nothing to do with the spirituality of Buddhism.

@Leo Gura The assertion that the drug war has been a failure is not accurate. The goal of this effort is not the wholesale eradication of drug use, an aim that is unattainable. Instead, the focus is on containment, moderation, and regulation. Evidence supports that these objectives have been largely achieved, as the usage rates of the most dangerous and addictive substances have been kept at manageable levels. Consider what would likely transpire if these drugs were suddenly made legal and readily available to the general public. A historical example that illustrates the potential peril of this approach can be found in China during the 19th century. At that time, the British trade in opium had catastrophic consequences for Chinese society. Addiction became so rampant that it wreaked havoc on the economy, with vast sums of money squandered on the drug. This addiction crisis led to two actual opium wars, where the Chinese fought desperately to compel the British to halt the opium trade within their borders. Ironically, while opium was being traded so freely in China, it was illegal and punishable by death in Britain itself. The aftermath of this period was devastating; it took a full century for China to recover from the mass addiction and rebuild its shattered economy. This episode serves as a sobering testament to the importance of maintaining a strong stance against addictive drugs. Therefore, while it may be tempting to label the modern drug war as a failure, it is essential to weigh the potential risks of a more permissive approach. The lessons of history serve as a powerful warning, guiding us towards the continued necessity of keeping addictive drugs illegal. By doing so, we may avoid repeating the tragic mistakes of the past.

@RedLine Waking Up is not the same as Cleaning Up or Growing Up. They are distinct paths.