Who's Interested In Conscious Politics?

[Aakash]

@Norbert Lennartz Thank you, for making me waste my time replying to you. 

You were basically straight up trolling in my eyes

20 minutes ago, Norbert Lennartz said:

What are you trying to analyze just because there are tensions? What kind of primitive motivation is that?

Wheres the tension, 

anyways i've given up with you lol, you basically validating yourself that you know how to run society via a post that can literally be read as "i told leo to think about politcs" lol. 

 

Edited June 9, 2019 by Aakash

[Norbert Lennartz]

 

48 minutes ago, CreamCat said:

I think you better watch Leo's conscious politics videos first.

Then what? Do you think he'd tell a different story than he does here? Don't you think he bashes Trump and Libertarians? Don't you think that he will present his utopia of good government and will dismiss anything but utopia?
Provided he still makes these videos at all. I'm not sure about that. He doesn't master the subject. I am accused of not disturbing. One wants the "conscious politics". And the "Messiah" will come. All pleading is to beat a dead horse. No. "Conscious politics" is a very dead stinking horse that one cannot ride or eat. Well, the vultures can still.

[Aakash]

@Norbert Lennartz You got me hella triggered after sending that link LOL, The reason you don't see the utopia government is because you won't be around to see it in your lifetime, so you can't envision it. its the single thing i hate the most about people, they lack imagination 

The dream will live on in the youth to create a utopia, while you sit around in your life eating bread and debating how your dynamic of being APOLITICAL is going to create a better government and passing off the buck to other people. 

This is why i dislike how enlightened people view the world, i don't care if its peaceful and blissful to you. You know everything about the world, fucking do something about showing people general things. Don't teach them non duality, teach them the foundations of their politics and their beliefs

its sad to see man 

your probably just as smart as einstein and brave as ghandi! 

its not your fault society fucked you and fucked us all, i saw my friends potential and expectations of living a good life turn into drinking and smoking. They basically had their imagination robbed, but i don't blame you, i actually sympathise. 

it just goes to prove my point that people don't understand that politics is about creating laws and creating the reality that we see today. WERE literally creating the very concepts that we are living under. once you understand this, youll realise how crazy the life were living now is. were each concept holds equal value, so why does some concepts last longer more than others when it goes to war with others? 

well i've not become conscious of this, but according to leo's principals its because reality is maximising the goodness of every duality in reality. so were talking about bringing our CONSTRUCTED laws to mirror RELATIVELY balanced laws in the big pictures.  

Edited June 9, 2019 by Aakash

[Norbert Lennartz]

@Aakash

1. nobody knows how to create a "society". It doesn't exist like that. We had already worked it out metaphysically. Social life, property, justice, all the stuff arises out of itself. That's what you have to know. 

2 Anarchy is a utopia. Why do I write that where I would most likely call myself an anarchist? Funny what? Because a successful criminal is enough so that it cannot be anarchy. Anarchy is a meta ideal and makes all such sense. Democracy is also an ideal.  But it cannot function as promised. So you promise something and the term is empty. And the same applies to "good government". You can promise everything and keep nothing. The reason is in 1.

[Aakash]

@Norbert Lennartz  Again this is exactly where leo's theory falls flat on its face, that no other enlightened person has said that life is maximising good. if you don't buy into this then what you've stated is infact utopia yes. i would still bet my money on leo being right from a conceptual point of view, from examples i've contemplated myself from society and the nature of surival, but i'm not sure. 

in an ideal society there will be no need for stealing and criminals, because all will be following their passions, organised crime would not be needed. The things that are popular today, will not be popular in the future. there are always extremes and if someone is honest about themselves and they love killing then even that can be done in an organised fashion. You could pair a killer up with a person who literally loves being cut, those people we call psychopaths. 

But if what leo says is true, then even this will be routed out eventually. 

FINALLY YOU SPEAK SOME FUCKING SENSE. THANK YOU, I WAS GOING TO GO DINNER WITH A BITTER TASTE IN MY MOUTH FROM BEING TRIGGERED, BUT NOW I'M HAPPY AND GLAD I'M SPEAKING TO SOMEONE WHO KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT. 

also people don't know how to create a society, because they're not aware they are creating their own reality literally, if they knew this- everything would change. you could no longer blame the person next to you for your own problems that includes you yourself not knowing how to create a great society, this will cause intraspections and from the fire of imaginiation, this problem will sort itself out. Leo is only a trigger as any great philosopher is, philosophers create NEW CONCEPTS from which to predicate connecting duality concepts will emerge 

Thanks you made me a happy person, please do continue with your point and how you think this can be done, even if you have to use liberatarian principals! i feel i could learn something from you

Edited June 9, 2019 by Aakash

[RichardY]

21 minutes ago, Norbert Lennartz said:

1. nobody knows how to create a "society". It doesn't exist like that. We had already worked it out metaphysically. Social life, property, justice, all the stuff arises out of itself. That's what you have to know.

All of that is projection. What exactly is your metaphysic?
 

21 minutes ago, Norbert Lennartz said:

2 Anarchy is a utopia. Why do I write that where I would most likely call myself an anarchist? Funny what? Because a successful criminal is enough so that it cannot be anarchy. Anarchy is a meta ideal and makes all such sense. Democracy is also an ideal.  But it cannot function as promised. So you promise something and the term is empty. And the same applies to "good government". You can promise everything and keep nothing. The reason is in 1.

Anarchy is nowhere. Utopia, means nowhere.

Edited June 9, 2019 by RichardY

[Leo Gura]

This discussion is now turning into total nonsense.

@Norbert Lennartz Do not comment on this thread any more. You are not adding anything of value.

[Aakash]

Jheeeze that’s what I like to see etherial cat! Questions about politics not related to left vs right! 

Question getting to the root of how politics work 

[ValiantSalvatore]

What are some examples of conscious politics or politicions in the past? 

What do you think will happen in the future, will consciousnsss become an inevitable subject to talk about, because of a.i and automation? 

Are there conscious politicians and what characteristic makes them conscious? (besides consciousnsss itself) 

How can spiritual pratices influence politics?

Why is consciousnsss not a subject inside politics? 

Is consciousnsss to much of a hot topic, for instance when looking at debates etc? (jp, sam harris, matt dilahunti) 

Should highly spiritual people play a role in politics or will this only cause corruption? 

How much are spiritual talks for instance by sadghuru, the Dalai lama and Eckhart Tolle influencing the political landscape? 

Why are there so few conscious alternativ and why is it so hard to convince people to become more conscious? 

Would conscious politicians change the way society and countries and a state works? If yes how and what would need to be adressed? 

What is a conscious option, possibility or alternative for dealing with populism and far-right people? 

Do you think spiral dynamics is a valid model that could be used for a more conscious discourse and would the model be succesful if it would be used be yellow politicans? 

What would be dangerous about conscious politics? 

How much would multiple awakenings of politicans shake the political playground? 

Who do you intuit has an approach or election program providing the most conscious value to society, regardless if it is a party or an individual. 

What would be a conscious approach to liberterianism? 

Why are egaliteran parties still lacking conscious approaches, how could they move to yellow? 

What is the most conscious thing you could sell the public to help the public to move up the spiral and become more conscious? 

How can conscious politics be useful for discussing changes with friends and family, also when joining a party, what woud classify conscious politician? 

Is classim neccesary and what could or not be conscious about it? For instance the cast system in india? 

Are there any subjects that are already conflated, so it would be inevitable to not regard it as conscious politics, such as global warming, destruction of the rain forest, potentially terrorism? 

What is "non-conscious" politics? 

How much religion is still needed? Looking at for instance two/one german party it is named after a religion partially the name does not neccesarly matter, yet still has a connotation. Why does religion still seem to be so important? (stage blue believe in purpose etc?) 

Any future trends that will be inevitable or would need to be adressed? 

 

 

[CreamCat]

People are overwhelming Leo Gura with too many questions and too many comments. Give him a rest.

[Aakash]

i've personally thought about most of these questions, the easiest response i can give to all of them simulataneously, is for you guys to adopt big picture thinking/ systems thinking to see the interconnectedness of the world. once the picture is developed add your own variables accordingly and simulate the results, as accurately as you can. 

kinda like a cascade effect, you have to know where the ripples will expand

you can think of these as sort of consciousness zones is you'd like, its points where people get together to design current systems that make functionality of the whole (the big picture possible) 

for example, 

6 hours ago, Etherial Cat said:

What's your thoughts on the erosion of fundamental rights as such as the right to privacy due to technology? 

1. don't apply your judgement to what your looking at

2. what is the thing actually happening that you can visibly see constantly happening 

3. technology in privacy terms is about tracking, all data is tracked and therefore the only right thing to say is that it is okay with permission, 

the person is made aware of it by their own means and they should be more transparent about what cookies are for example so people know what they are. its simply not an erosion of rights, its just whats happening by a case of misunderstanding and inattentiveness

currently the biggest problem in technology privacy 

is the changing of laws to stop independent news reporters from broadcasting their news as they state its only an opinion and not real validated news. So social media companies are coming together to clamp down on content producers. 

the larger issue is about monopolisation and conglomerates, being outside the laws of regulations by having too much power. 

you can blame the organisations, but its a simple rule of thumb to use, that if you were in that position you would do it too. This is how you take their perspective and work your way around understanding a topic from multiple perspectives 

FOX news is not actually spewing bullshit, they're reporting news , within their legal rights. its not their fault that they post low consciousness news and this is why independant news groups have appeared. its Legislature that companies regulate their framework to fit first and foremost. 

You see i didn't judge anything up until this point, once you've got a larger picture 

4. you can start judging and interpreting what ever you like 

Now you can say, maybe fox news can start doing more consciousness news , but will this provide them viewers? NO 

the average attention span for a person watching TV at night is non exsistent, when your watching news, your not actually understanding whats happpening, your taking in partial knowledge and the article last one minute before the next one comes on, your quick judgement gets saved in your short term memory. This is the demonization you then spew to other people. One minute time frame is not enough to understand the dynamics of a system and so for you liberals out there, when you see democrats on tv news at 10 at night, you basically just hypnotising yourself with the sentence "democrats did XXXXXX action, they are bad" and then you say to yourself "okay now i can use this in my arsenal to attack democrats" this is if you don't know big picture thinking. 

so showing high consciousness stuff is simply not possible for them to survive as a company. They will use the fact they show posts about some positive things too, i.e a new drug thats come out to solve Y reason. so stopping independant outlets is bad because your enticing hypnosis essentially lol. But its way more complicated than that, i can't be asked to write it all out. 

 

basically my point is: you can actually answer any question yourself, that is not about spirituality, including spiral dynamics, you have it in you to answer it yourself, just when your taking the perspective, actually be in that persons shoe

  

[Stevo]

Looking forward to this episode possibly even more than the free will episode.   

[Aakash]

@Leo Gura  i've waited years! to be able to have these kinds of talks with people, your content is specific and doesn't touch the surface level of 'conscious subjects' whether that be science, mathematics or others. you literally talk about the principals and fundamentals on which a subject is founded, which is the most important thing for you reaching your goal. 

BUT 

is there any way you could make a sub forum for conscious subjects, it would be good to expand peoples mind 

conscious videos of business, conscious videos of politcs etc ---- not that there are many but a forum is basically a compiling websites. Its like conspiracy theory but done the right way. 

Edited June 10, 2019 by Aakash

[Norbert Lennartz]

11 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

This discussion is now turning into total nonsense.

@Norbert Lennartz Do not comment on this thread any more. You are not adding anything of value.

Nonsense, nonsense, nonsense.

I have a responsibility to God, not to what others call nonsense, just because they do not personally understand it. Some do understand it!

What is the point of not writing it here? If I write in another thread, it is also nonsense for you.

But you cannot bear it. It bothers you to concentrate on your work and that is why you condemn it. That's how I see it. I am not angry with you because of that.

So Leo, explain your house rules or just kick me out. But please don't try to push me onto your slagheap. That is not consequent.

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Norbert Lennartz said:

So Leo, explain your house rules or just kick me out.

The house rules are: BE HERE TO LEARN!

You are being shown advanced things here which are over your head.

I fear you may have to be kicked out cause you're not interested in learning and it's a waste of time dealing with such people.

[Leo Gura]

You guys pose some great questions. Unfortunately to answer them all would require writing several volumes on Conscious Politics.

[Norbert Lennartz]

@Leo Gura

I have no problem at all with the guidelines.

You don't have my education, which you are currently not able to accept. That is actually quite normal.
 

But your education leads you to perceive mine as "nonsense". You've looked at some lost libertarian Youtubes (which I don't even look at, probably they are really bad) without worrying about the work of the outstanding people like Ludwig von Mises and then generalizing your prejudices about me. That is clear enough.

I'm not giving up my best teachers because the Gentleman wants me to.

[DnoReally]

41 minutes ago, Norbert Lennartz said:

 

Ludwig von Mises

dont

[Odysseus]

1 hour ago, Norbert Lennartz said:

@Leo Gura

I have no problem at all with the guidelines.

You don't have my education, which you are currently not able to accept. That is actually quite normal.
 

But your education leads you to perceive mine as "nonsense". You've looked at some lost libertarian Youtubes (which I don't even look at, probably they are really bad) without worrying about the work of the outstanding people like Ludwig von Mises and then generalizing your prejudices about me. That is clear enough.

I'm not giving up my best teachers because the Gentleman wants me to.

You can quote Stirner, Nietzsche or other intellectuals as much as you want. Their words don't hold any inherent truths unless you're able to understand and apply them. And let's be true by this point you're unable to do so because of your festering ideological bubble. If you're willing to confront your shadow drop your misinterpreted 'education' and just try to feel into the void. 

[Norbert Lennartz]

Have you noticed that in all your posts the characteristics of propaganda are clearly recognizable?