Who's Interested In Conscious Politics?

[Leo Gura]

12 minutes ago, Aakash said:

BUT they drastically underestimate how big of a feild it is and then they say they're right or left for this reason.

Yes, this is a common problem. Tier 1 thinkers tend to be too simplistic and one-dimensional. They don't see systemic problems. That requires Tier 2 Yellow cognition. And even then it's tricky. We have to admit that we don't always know how complex systems will behave. Which is why a scientific approach to public policy is so important. We need to split test solutions and track actual results.

Imagine the following approach:

Democrats propose change A to the education system.

Republicans propose change B to the education system.

A coin is tossed to see which change we split test first. We try it out for 10 years and we track the results with a non-partisan committee of scientists. Then we implement the other change and track those results for 10 years. Then at the 20 years mark we look at the data and select whichever produced the best results. Citizens could also be allowed to vote on which produced the best results. Once this process is complete we settle the issue forever and move on to other issues.

In this way we don't keep rehashing issues like abortion rights, taxes, marijuana, immigration, etc.

Of course partisan & ideological people will not want to agree to such a system because their ideology does not want to be tested in the court of real-world experience. That's the whole point of an ideology. It's held true come-what-may.

[Aakash]

@Leo Gura so what your basically saying is the only way to solve the problem is to first solve two issues to get over this hurdle 

1) which of the two ideologies is currently the best via scientific investigation 

2) wait until the limitations show of the chosen ideology, to show, 

to show that neither are the option. 

SHIT, well done, thats actually a pretty viable solution from my quick thinking and possible to do because all it needs is a change of presidency or prime minister. 

so it doesn't drastically change peoples fundamental beliefs yet. until the period of trail and the left or right idelolgy chosen has reached its limit. 

30 minutes later after finishing listening to music edit: 

its a good starting point, better than the available options now. However, it is only the beginning phase. some starter questions would be: 

A) does every country need to choose the same ideology, or will some be operating in their normal ways ?

B) is the measurement of productivity the same as we have now i.e economic measurements and political activity or will there need to be some new variables to take into consideration ?

C) Does government turn completely, and work towards the goals of the entire ideology or are the opposite party able to follow their own agendas ?

D) what happens to the legislation after the change, does the laws get restarted? 

what i do like is if it is a 10 year period, they are automatically elevated to their highest consciousness for that ideology because they need to win lol. 

 

 

Edited June 9, 2019 by Aakash

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Aakash said:

the only way to solve the problem

No, there are many ways to solve problems and I was just giving one example of a possible Tier 2 solution. It's certainly not the only method I would use.

Split-testing ideologies is really not that good because ideology itself is the problem. Ideally we would create an education system which teaches children so well about how ideology works that all ideology would be wiped out within a few generations. Of course this will never be allowed in practice.

In the meantime, we have to work within the bounds of what people can handle. We can't reform society too quickly or it will backfire.

It would be nice to have some objective ways of adjudicating public policy issues. Because right now it's just people spouting their opinions without any concern for what the effects of the policy are. For example, tax cuts are made without no concern about how they impact society or if the economy is actually made better or worse by them. We need a definitive answer as to which tax rate leads to highest consciousness. This is a scientific question, not an ideological one. If the optimal tax rate turns out to be 90%, that's what we should make it. If it turns out to be 10%, then that. The point is not to get attached to any specific policy but rather focus on maximizing consciousness for the majority of people. Whatever helps to push us in that direction is what we should all agree on.

Of course in practice there will be tons of resistance, since people are selfish devils. But in the long-run higher consciousness always wins out.

I am not suggesting we scientifically test entire ideologies. That's doesn't seem possible. Ideologies are not empirical by design. But what we can scientifically test is very narrow concrete policy proposals such as:

A) End the drug war for 10 years, monitor social stats to see if crime rate and other indicators rises or falls.

B) Restart the drug war for 10 years, monitor social stats to see if crime rate and other indicators rises of falls.

Then pick the best one.

My best guess is that option A would be much better than option B. But we don't know that for sure. We need to run a test and see. There may be unforeseen problems with ending the drug war. For example, maybe too many teens start doing heroin and we have massive overdose deaths.

Countries could also run different tests at the same time and pool their results. So, for example, the UK could run this drug war test for 20 years while the USA is testing something else. Then we look at their results and use it to help shape our next policy choices. This would be the intelligent way to go about it. In this way we could crowd-source the evolution of government very quickly. Imagine 100 countries running such tests for 100 years! The end result would be a really smart and efficient government. Of course our currently government is nowhere smart enough to adopt such an approach. But one day it will be.

The structure of the best government for maximizing consciousness is really a structural engineering problem. Some designs will be much better than others. The problem is that no one really knows what the best design is. This requires an evolutionary process to discover. Just like designing the best rocket.

What we should all be able to ultimately agree upon is that maximizing consciousness and love is best for all life forms overall. Of course it would be bad for selfish unconscious devils, so they will be the ones who will try to stick a wrench in the works.

[Aakash]

15 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Split-testing ideologies is really not that good because ideology itself is the problem. Ideally we would create an education system which teaches children so well about how ideology works that all ideology would be wiped out within a few generations. Of course this will never be allowed in practice.

Yup this is why I said it’s a good start, I didn’t say wipe out ideology because its simply not possible within the next 1000 or so years. It’s got to be a very small change to start a chain reaction. Education would obviously be a good choice but it’s impossible to teach religion in school education properly and therefore will automatically be rejected. For me, the only way to understand ideology is to understand enlightenment because the mind can’t cope without a reference point and therefore needs some sort of evidence grounded in truth. 

 

19 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The point is not to get attached to any specific policy but rather focus on maximizing consciousness

Again This statement itself is tailored to the truth. As you said what ever way pushes us in that direction. I agree, but this can not happen without getting rid of ideology first. 

Yeah I agree that would be good, 10 years may be abit too short for repeat evidence but yeah I see where your pointing too. 

This is why I have this moral dilemma about becoming enlightened before you help the world. You can’t know entirely if your pushing agendas in the right way without knowing what the truth is first as you’ll get lost in misconceptions, this is to have a serious impact. Otherwise what ever your doing is still good in a way just not as highly effective. 

It’s basically a game of what is the point of life. 

Will you be discussing this in your conscious politics video ? 

[Leo Gura]

17 minutes ago, Aakash said:

but this can not happen without getting rid of ideology first. 

It's always a matter of inching our way upward. We don't need to get rid of all ideology. We can start split-testing certain concrete policies immediately. For example we can easily split test legalization of marijuana. Reasonable people can agree to such an idea.

We can even split-test the building of a Mexican border fence. Just put massive gates along the fence which we can open at any time to nullify the barrier.

The point of doing a public split-test is so that after the test is done people agree to whatever the results are. It's a consensus building device.

[Leo Gura]

2 minutes ago, Shiva said:

I think at this point, this topic has demonstrated well enough that now is not the time to make videos on politics yet.

Yes, but then again, when will it ever be the time?

This thread also demonstrates how badly conscious politics is needed.

[Shadowraix]

2 minutes ago, Shiva said:

To get back to the original question:

I think at this point, this topic has demonstrated well enough that now is not the time to make videos on politics yet.

Bad apples ruin it for the bunch. ?

 

[Aakash]

@Leo Gura yeah I was thinking so big picture, I didn’t even consider that. Yeah lol, that would actually be a good place to start lol. 

This is why I think the ego is also a good thing, it makes people passionate about a certain duality to dive into and apply to real life. Ofcourse it’s toxic after some point. 

Lol I could apply that same thinking with changing the world as an ego , damned if I do, damned if I don’t as regret! Your actually the reason I didn’t go about doing it already and try changing the world! You basically implied that if your not enlightened you’ll start a cult and to me that translated to if your an ego, you’ll basically be raising a cult! Bruv your actually the reason why I’ve been confused for like 5 months about this now. Ever since you showed me my hood upbringing was cultish and that’s the reason I saw the world as evil from that perspective 

Edited June 9, 2019 by Aakash

[SerpaeTetra]

Just run man, you know you want to...not sure how many old people will vote for the guy who thinks he is god though, haha

[Leo Gura]

31 minutes ago, Aakash said:

@Leo Gura yeah I was thinking so big picture, I didn’t even consider that. Yeah lol, that would actually be a good place to start lol. 

This is why I think the ego is also a good thing, it makes people passionate about a certain duality to dive into and apply to real life. Ofcourse it’s toxic after some point. 

Lol I could apply that same thinking with changing the world as an ego , damned if I do, damned if I don’t as regret! Your actually the reason I didn’t go about doing it already and try changing the world! You basically implied that if your not enlightened you’ll start a cult and to me that translated to if your an ego, you’ll basically be raising a cult! Bruv your actually the reason why I’ve been confused for like 5 months about this now. Ever since you showed me my hood upbringing was cultish and that’s the reason I saw the world as evil from that perspective 

Well, you also don't want to be so paranoid about that that you become paralyzed and don't help the world at all.

You don't have to be perfect to improve the world. That's too high a standard which few people can meet.

Try to help the world as best as you can while being careful not to start a cult or do harm. That's all. Be very self-aware and open to feedback. Be careful with constructing or preaching ideologies. That's where a lot of harm can happen.

26 minutes ago, SerpaeTetra said:

Just run man, you know you want to...not sure how many old people will vote for the guy who thinks he is god though, haha

I have no interest in working in government. I am a lone wolf type. I don't have the temperament for it. Other people do. Bernie Sanders is perfect for that job. Much better than I would ever be. He's passionate about it. He deserves it the most.

[Aakash]

@Leo Gura alright yeah that makes sense, thanks I needed that. I guess it comes with time when you see the ego as less of a bad thing and more of a part of life for the diverisity of duality to survive and be noticed. 

I know what to do now. I have my life purpose and i should start with your book list and the books about cult dynamics. 

 

[Aakash]

@SerpaeTetra too be honest, he’s better off as a philosopher, that’s exactly perfect. It’s philisophers through history that set presedence for the society we know now. The only issue back in the olden days was philosophy was very deep and intellectual. Not many people had the education standards then to understand and therefore the knowledge of philosophy was only used by someone of aristocrat status, kings would have people interpret it to him by specialist and would act accordingly. Well some anyway, most were barbaric and ego driven. As conscious Action really started in Greece where Alexander the Great allowed for groups to keep their culture. 

The problem was those who did use the philosophy at that given time never saw major changes because mankind was in such a survival state. The average man had no use for philosophy until this day and age. Where money supply is booming and survival needs have been taken care of by society. Giving people time to actually reflect on metaphysical questions. 

So therefore I conclude although Leo’s efforts will be in vain, in his lifetime. Just like all the philosophers before him. It will hit mainstream education in many MANY years to come. As a result, ironically, it’s a job well suited towards him. 

I too, would have done exactly what he is doing, as I’ve told him before and put things together for mainstream society. I contemplated all this stuff way before I knew about actualised.org however after he made the philosophers quote today. I realised my particular ego was always set on action. To reap rewards as well as inspire people. But it’s best suited to what I want ironically. I want to be the guy to go on Fox News for example and say on national tv your all living a lie, I didn’t want to be the guy in the background. This is why I thanked Leo, because he basically saved me 80 years of my life having to research all of this stuff. Watch out Fox News, imma coming for ya claart blud.

Edited June 9, 2019 by Aakash

[Norbert Lennartz]

Leo posted here that all (man-made) rights are human constructs.
https://www.actualized.org/forum/topic/35707-whos-interested-in-conscious-politics/?page=6#comment-440031

So all man-made laws are mental constructs. And he uses them for himself (mostly after Bernie Sanders-manner) to fight the devils he has in mind. Well, let him do it privately.

But you can't fight diabolical things with human thought constructs. You need the spirit that lives in everything to eliminate the diabolical things, not the limited mind that lives only in Leo or lives only in Bernie or in me. That's why Jesus says God is the law up to the iota. Leo is not the law, Bernie is not, I am not.

Now you are coming into the world, perhaps badly brought up, with limited minds. And this mind gives you images of government, of state, of democracy, with fear and greed.

You know what a constitutional state should be, what a society and what democracy is. And yet you have no clue what this thought is. You think so: I think, so I am - and see a chair. Then you ask, why is the chair if he does not think? That's your pathetic conditioning.

And you unconsciously transfer this conditioning to your life, which of course is just as pathetic.

The solution would be to simply switch off these harmful programs in the brain. Are you sure that you would have even had the idea of government if you hadn't "known" what it is? But you want to know. And then you make it the starting point of your philosophy and all your thinking and push aside the Holy Spirit who dwells everywhere. And then your miserable thinking becomes the Absolute, the Absolute of your social contract, your positivist legal system, your fake democracy, which is of course a huge self-loat. All sparring in the brain.

And then you say. The starting point is 10% or 90% taxes, whatever.
Do you see the Ceasar on your coin? asks Jesus. Go away and don't try me.

What is your right? There is no right, except that of God. 

Such discussions show that you have not understood the emptiness of your own terms. With your words, you are constantly borrowing as "spirit of society" and do not sufficiently understand what Stirner knows to say: "Right is above Me, is absolute, and exists in a higher one"; "With absolute right/law right/law itself passes away; the dominion of the "concept of right" is at the same time extinguished".

[Joseph Maynor]

1 hour ago, Aakash said:

@SerpaeTetra too be honest, he’s better off as a philosopher, that’s exactly perfect. It’s philisophers through history that set presedence for the society we know now. The only issue back in the olden days was philosophy was very deep and intellectual. Not many people had the education standards then to understand and therefore the knowledge of philosophy was only used by someone of aristocrat status, kings would have people interpret it to him by specialist and would act accordingly. Well some anyway, most were barbaric and ego driven. As conscious Action really started in Greece where Alexander the Great allowed for groups to keep their culture. 

The problem was those who did use the philosophy at that given time never saw major changes because mankind was in such a survival state. The average man had no use for philosophy until this day and age. Where money supply is booming and survival needs have been taken care of by society. Giving people time to actually reflect on metaphysical questions. 

So therefore I conclude although Leo’s efforts will be in vain, in his lifetime. Just like all the philosophers before him. It will hit mainstream education in many MANY years to come. As a result, ironically, it’s a job well suited towards him. 

I too, would have done exactly what he is doing, as I’ve told him before and put things together for mainstream society. I contemplated all this stuff way before I knew about actualised.org however after he made the philosophers quote today. I realised my particular ego was always set on action. To reap rewards as well as inspire people. But it’s best suited to what I want ironically. I want to be the guy to go on Fox News for example and say on national tv your all living a lie, I didn’t want to be the guy in the background. This is why I thanked Leo, because he basically saved me 80 years of my life having to research all of this stuff. Watch out Fox News, imma coming for ya claart blud.

If he's an INTP, then it suits him to be a philosopher.  In that he's functioning from his strengths.  Each personality has a different set of strengths.

Edited June 9, 2019 by Joseph Maynor

[Norbert Lennartz]

@Shiva Give up the IRS moderator job.

[Norbert Lennartz]

@Shiva if I?
What are you dreaming about?
 

[Leo Gura]

@Norbert Lennartz What is your solution for improving government? Which policies do you support?

[Shadowraix]

@Norbert Lennartz You seem to conflate the relative and absolute a lot. Be careful with that. Seeing through the illusions of the relative doesn't mean such illusions aren't useful in the relative. We bring understanding of the absolute into the relative to improve the relative. 

[Norbert Lennartz]

24 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

@Norbert Lennartz What is your solution for improving government? Which policies do you support?

Simple. Very simple. Make God great again.
§1 Everyone may leave with property in an orderly manner.
The rest does not matter. Do what you want.

Will you try me?
 

[Truth Addict]

56 minutes ago, Norbert Lennartz said:

Simple. Very simple. Make God great again.

Which God exactly?