An example of Orange recontextualizing Green for their own benefit.

[Forestluv]

I just read an essay on an Orange-level democratic forum that tried to label Bernie as "pure" and Biden as a "progressive". In the context of spiral dynamics, it is common for Orange to see benefits in Green and try to take green benefits from an Orange position. For example, Tony Robbins would be considered Orange-centered. He does a lot of personal power seminars - things like personal goal setting. I think it's some healthy orange level stuff. Now imagine Tony notices that a lot of people are moving toward things like mediation and yoga. Tony may think "There is a lot of demand for meditation/yoga for personal growth. How can I market meditation/yoga to increase my business profits". He could even recontextualize yoga as meaning "personal power". This would be an orange-centered mindset seeing value in green, from an orange-level mindset and wanting to use it to benefit at an orange level.

This is very similar to a dynamic with Biden. . . Biden is clearly orange-centered. A lot of orange-level Biden supporters are seeing that there are benefits of green progressives - from an orange level mindset. One may think, "Bernie has a lot of support. How can we use green progressiveness to benefit to reach our orange goals?" This is very different than asking "Bernie has a lot of support. How can we evolve such that we understand and embody those green progressive perspectives". . . In this essay on a orange-level forum, the author tried to label green progressive as "pure" and orange centrist as "progressive". He tried to make the case that Biden is in actuality a progressive. This orange-level recontextualization is trying to capture green benefits at their orange level. They are not asking "How can Biden and I evolve up to Green?". It is trying to redefine Green to be Orange. 

Another major point of SD. . . one cannot understand dynamics higher than their current conscious level. On the orange-level forum, there were hundreds of comments saying "Yes!! Biden is the true progressive!!". They can only perceive at their current conscious level. They could not perceive at a higher conscious level (green or yellow). I wrote the below response on that orange forum. My prediction is that there will be a major backlash and people will call me a "Bernie Bro" or that I am trying to sabotage Biden and I'm actually a Trump troll (although a Trump troll would be nowhere near this level of awareness and nuance). I might even get flagged on that website - not because they are unintelligent - rather because they are at an orange conscious level. . . In contrast, my hunch is that the average conscious level on this forum is higher than Orange and the response here will be much different. This doesn't mean that everyone needs to agree. Feel free to criticize or add in some nuances or deficiencies. The important thing is that on the orange level forum it will be criticized from below "You are anti-Biden and doing Trump's work". Here, it will be criticized from the same level (green/yellow) such as "i think your points are incomplete because it doesn't integrate the perspective of xyz".

Again, the original essay tried to define Bernie as "pure" and Biden as "progressive". I couldn't use the terms "green" and "orange" in my response since they are unaware of SD theory. Yet, green = progressive and orange = centrist. My response:

To me, this is a re-contextualization of the meaning “progressive” and redefining progressive by the term “pure”. Another way to view it is along a progressive spectrum. Yet to me, this essay looks more like recontextualizing progressive and taking ownership of the meaning. In the “pure” context (as you frame it) — people like AOC, Thalib, Omar, Jayapal, Khanna and Bernie are progressives. I would not label them as “pure”, I would label them as progressive. To me, creating a recontextualization in which progressive is now called “pure” and centrism is now called “progressive” would be resistance to progress (from the perspective of the original meaning of progressive).

We could also create a construct in which there is a progressive spectrum. Here, we could call AOC and Bernie “strong” progressives and Biden a “weak” progressive. Yet simply calling Biden a “progressive” would lose the spectrum and create a binary construct of “non-progressive” vs “progressive” — yet this is obviously untenable since AOC, Bernie etc. are clearly not “non—progressives” — to circumvent this, one can add in the term “pure”, yet to me this is inaccurate and disingenuous. Using this terminology along a progressive spectrum, it would be more accurate to call AOC, Bernie etc. “pure progressives” and Biden an “impure progressive”. The resistance to doing this comes from the desire to avoid looking at this spectrum and acknowledging that Biden is at a very low level along this spectrum. By recontextualizing the term “progressive”, such that Biden is now a “progressive” dissolves the spectrum and allows Biden to claim all the positive attributes of being a progressive. This would be a benefit from the POV of a Biden supporter, yet is a hindrance to actual progress. 

[Preety_India]

That's an excellent response 

Brave of you to do that. 

 

 

[Spiral_Wizardry_Fan]

@Serotoninluv

SD stage yellow as described in the Clare Graves book suggests that when a perspective is developed such that it understands all other perspectives and thinks of the collective good, it is solid yellow.

 

My argument is that Joe Biden embodies Stage Yellow, and so did Obama. The reason is simple.

I think Biden appeals to all the stages in SD in the following way:

Green - Bernie would have been the best choice but I'm okay to settle with Biden because he's still better than Trump

Orange - No doubt these people loved Obama and they will love Biden

Blue - Biden is a decent man & Trump is not

Similarly I think Biden understands that the demographic spread of these SD attributes across the country and he can appeal to all of those in an effort to beat Trump. I am predicting that he will soon do something to ensure the entire solid green Bernie supporter base starts supporting him. And as far as the actual evolution of the entire society is concerned, the Dems are right in embracing stage orange policies until 'everyone' reaches there and maybe in the next 8 years, America would be ready for Bernie's ideas.

 

The reason I think this is stage yellow politics is because of the application of systemic understanding to the problem of how to unite & grow colletively, given the constraints. Now one might argue that corruption is a stage orange value that needs to go, but maybe Stage Yellow understands that it is inherent in societies, so be it, and treat that as a constraint or even make use of it for the greater good?

 

 

[Forestluv]

@Spiral_Wizardry_Fan Appealing to a higher stage is not the same as having embodied that stage. For example, you state:

Green - Bernie would have been the best choice but I'm okay to settle with Biden because he's still better than Trump.

People will vote at for the person closer to there highest conscious level. Turquoise, Yellow and Green will vote for Bernie since Green Bernie is closer to their conscious level than orange Biden. If Biden is the nominee, Turqouise, Yellow and Green will vote for Orange Biden, since Orange Biden is now closer to their conscious level than Red Trump. 

It’s very common to conflate orange level rational, logical thinking with yellow. There are many highly intelligent orange level  scientists, philosophers and politicians.

One indicator that Biden is centered below Yellow and Green is that he is not conscious of toxic orange capitalism ad plutocracy. Compare green/yellow level Anand Giridharadas to orange Biden. From a yellow perspective, its very important obvious they are at different conscious levels. Anand is a good person to watch for a an hour integrated yellow level perspective of social/economic/power dynamics. 

[jimwell]

@Serotoninluv If I were American and it's either Biden or Trump, I would vote for Trump. It's because of what I just posted.

Everything, including Spiral Dynamics is situational or multidimensional, not linear.

[Forestluv]

@jimwell Yes, both Trump and Bernie shake up the status quo. Trump does from below, Bernie does from above.

Hitler would have also shaken up the current status quo as would re-introducing slavery. This would be a regressive shake up. 

Martin Luther King also shook up the status quo, yet he did from above. He was a progressive shakeup. 

SD theory is based on a relative hierarchy along both vertical axes (e.g. purple to turquoise) and horizontal axes (weak vs strong orange, healthy vs toxic orange etc). As well, there are various developmental lines such as cognitive, emotional, spiritual etc. 

As you stated in your essay, there are often crisis points, yet the crisis point is relative to the stage if development. For example, red tribal villages reached a crisis point while evolving into more complex cities like the roman empire. A red level social structure was insufficient for more complex societies - it would have been anarchy. This was a crisis that led to blue religious-based authority hierarchies to maintain order. This is a red to blue crisis.

Similarly, the US is orange centered and an orange level crisis may be needed to evolve to green. For example, the implosion of toxic orange capitalism. A red or blue level crisis, such as a civil war over slavery, would not be optimal. This was progressive back in the year 1820, yet is now regressive in the year 2020. 

[jimwell]

@Serotoninluv But everything is situational. What is important now is immediate change, not change from "below' or "above".

Look at the global situation. The developed countries (though they are not actually developed) have extreme wealth inequality, homelessness, health care (people die of illnesses because they can't afford it), 8-5 low salary jobs, depression, mass murder and self-murder (suicide) suffering or problems. The developing countries (though every country is actually developing), also have those problems except mass murder, but with additional mass starvation and extra judicial murder. What else can be worse than this?

Yes, Bernie can shake up the status quo from "above" but it will be certainly very slow, especially on a global scale. AS mentioned in my most recent thread, it can take hundreds or thousands of years because societal evolution depends on the "consciousness" of the majority.  

The global situation is very ugly and unacceptable. It is a very slow, painful death. The world needs to take a gamble. It's sensible to try Trump and Stage Red because immediate change is needed.

[Forestluv]

@jimwell It’s dependent on the developmental stage of the culture. An red level crisis in a red centered society will promote evolution to blue, not green or yellow. The society has not reached that stage. Liberia is going through a red level crisis, they are transitioning to blue - they are not ready to evolve to green. 

If you want a crisis to induce a rapid change, then increase the intensity of the crisis at the appropriate stage. Fir the US, this would be an intense orange level crisis. For example, the majority of Americans are immersed in orange capitalism. An intense crisis might open their minds and help evolve to green. For example, if there was a massive implosion of toxic capitalism such that there was massive poverty, suffering and death. Here, the orange level people would become more open to green. They may think “wait a minute, perhaps capitalism has downsides. Maybe a mixture of capitalism and democratic socialism is best. Perhaps its not a good idea that four trillionaires in own 98% of the wealth. Maybe we should consider how Scandinavia does it”. 

A red level crisis will not be as efficient. For example, if America tried to re-inteoduce slavery and there was a massive crisis and war. People may think “wait a minute, maybe white people shouldn’t own black people as slaves”. This would help people evolve up to blue and orange, yet would not help an orange society evolve up to green.

 A Trump crisis is great for helping those at red/blue evolve up to orange. Not orange to green. The current Trump crisis is promoting some red/blue Americans to evolve up to orange. A lot of red/blue republicans evolved ng to orange will vote for Biden. Yet Trump is not triggering a massive orange to green transition. This is why Bernie has actually lost popularity compared to the Orange centered obama administration. The US is not ready for it. 

A better crisis to promote a transition from orange to green would be if Biden was elected and went toxic corporate/capitalist/plutocratic orange that triggered widespread poverty,loss is f healthcare etc - and lots if billionaires buying their fifth mansion and third yacht they don't even use.THEN people would start thinking “I’ve been a capitalist my whole life, yet this hyper capitalism  thing isnt working. Whats that stuff about democratic socialism Bernie talked about?”. 

What is “needed” is relative to the developmental level of the country.  There is no universal global need because countries are at different stages. Some middle east countries “need” a change from blue to Orange. The US needs a change from orange to green. Scandinavian countries need a change from green to yellow. 

One cannot impose a green level political system onto a red level country. They would not tolerate it.

[jimwell]

@Serotoninluv  

You don't understand. I didn't mean to say a stage red country will jump to stage green because of a stage red crisis. I meant a crisis sparks change. And it can be for the better.  A crisis in a stage red country can trigger a change to stage blue. A crisis in Orange can trigger a change to Green. Just introduce a serious crisis, to spark change. The coronavirus is not a stage red crisis nor a stage orange crisis. But it triggered  significant change to blue-orange societies like South Korea and Japan. Their governments acquired some Stage green characteristics to cope up. If the coronavirus pandemic gets very serious, countries around the world will unite to fight it. Their cooperation as a way to cope is what triggers changes from Red to Blue, Orange to Green, etc. If Trump creates  a very serious crisis in the US, it can spark a change from Orange to  Green. If Duterte creates a a very serious crisis in the Philippines, it  can trigger a change from Blue-Orange to Orange-Green. The Philippines also has Orange characteristics because it is heavily influenced by the US. Even if it doesn't reach a level higher in the Spiral, a crisis will still trigger good changes. Because humans and societies  will be forced to get better to survive. Enough discussion. I have expressed what I want to say. Just read my thread again. 

[Forestluv]

@jimwell Thank you for clarifying your points. I think you make some good points. According to spiral dynamics theory a major crisis can induce induce a spark to evolve up a level. You did frame it this way (can spark a change) and I agree with that. My comments below are some thoughts about how a crisis doesn't necessary spark a change that leads to upward evolution of cognitive development. In some cases, a crisis would have the opposite effect - it could cause toxic immersion deeper into one's stage and block upward development.  So, I'm not disagreeing with your point, I am just adding more nuances to it.  

3 hours ago, jimwell said:

@Serotoninluv  

The coronavirus is not a stage red crisis nor a stage orange crisis. But it triggered  significant change to blue-orange societies like South Korea and Japan. Their governments acquired some Stage green characteristics to cope up. If the coronavirus pandemic gets very serious, countries around the world will unite to fight it. 

A portion of people will respond by evolving higher, yet not all. When faced with an imminent mortal threat, it is more common for humans to become even more self-centered to survive. For example, if the coronavirus pandemic gets very serious, it's likely that stage red get paranoid, start blaming gay people, other ethnicities etc. and start killing them.

Look at how people have responded to serious pandemics in the past. I'm not talking about minor pandemics like the current coronavirus. I'm talking about massive pandemics that wipe out entire civilizations - millions of people - like the black plague. Those were red and blue societies. How did they respond to the black plague and imminent threats of death? Did red evolve to blue? Did blue evolve to orange? . . . How did red respond? They blamed the Jews and tried to kill the Jews. How did religious blue respond? Did religious blue pause and think "wait a minute. Let's think about this rationally. Let's gather some facts and evidence. Let's figure out the cause of this illness and develop treatment". Heck no. They thought god was angry at humans because of immoral homosexuals, apostates, jews etc. "Let's kill them, to please God!!". . .

How have purple/red/blue responded to what they perceived as imminent threats to their lives? They are witches!! Burn them at the stake!!

A crisis and threat of death does not always promote upward evolution, it can also promote regression. 

3 hours ago, jimwell said:

If Trump creates  a very serious crisis in the US, it can spark a change from Orange to  Green. 

If it was that easy, all we would need to do is create a crisis to spark a change from Orange to Green. My neighbor is at an orange level. Perhaps we should burn down his house. This would certainly create a crisis in his life. It could spark a change from Orange to Green. . . I live in an Orange level community. Perhaps we should start murdering some of the children in the neighborhood. This would certainly cause a crisis in the neighborhood. It could spark a change from Orange to Green.

I don't see the mechanics of cognitive development like this. It's not just any generic crisis.

I see lots of people saying "It's better to re-elect Trump than elect Biden. This will cause a crisis and allow orange to evolve to green". Well. . . how has that been working so far? Many people in the U.S. are traumatized by Trump. That is a crisis. Is orange evolving up to green? Nope. Orange is getting stronger and green is getting weaker. Green level Bernie Sanders has lost support since 2016. As well, Trump is appointing red/blue level conservative judges that will make it much harder for decades to progress into green. 

Personally, I don't think re-electing Trump to trigger a massive life-threatening crisis so we get to stage green is best. That's too much 3D chess. I'd say let's elect the highest conscious person possible and keep progressing. 

[jimwell]

@Serotoninluv

You have made some good points. But I have already implied a major tragedy can spark a change also for the worse. I have already clearly mentioned the global situation is very ugly and unacceptable it's worth taking a gamble. So I choose Trump. The ideal situation would be for societies around the world to grow or evolve to Stage Green in a few years or decades. But that's not reality, unfortunately. Societies around the world will eventually evolve to Stage Green but in hundreds or thousands of years. Trump and Stage Red is the wild card. 

[Forestluv]

@jimwell You may be right. Yet I always vote  for the highest conscious candidate that has a chance to win. The idea of “regress to progress” doesn’t resonate with me. To me, it’s like saying “lets traumatized and kill the children in the community to cause a crisis that sparks an orange to green transition”. I understand that theory, yet in actual practice I can’t go down that path. 

This isn’t hyperbole. Trump is literally putting children in cages, traumatizing them and some have died. 

Your proposal is high risk and would cause massive suffering. Are YOU willing to be caged, tortured and die for your endeavor? Or would you prefer children do it?

[Milos Uzelac]

22 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

@jimwell You may be right. Yet I always vote  for the highest conscious candidate that has a chance to win. The idea of “regress to progress” doesn’t resonate with me. To me, it’s like saying “lets traumatized and kill the children in the community to cause a crisis that sparks an orange to green transition”. I understand that theory, yet in actual practice I can’t go down that path. 

This isn’t hyperbole. Trump is literally putting children in cages, traumatizing them and some have died. 

Your proposal is high risk and would cause massive suffering. Are YOU willing to be caged, tortured and die for your endeavor? Or would you prefer children do it?

Thanks for this correspondence with this it reminds me of a sort of Marxist-Leninst vibe (my assumption based on some observed historical similarities ) position that @jimwelljimweltook in this discussion and I felt it today when today the because of the risk of a coronavirus spread in a crowded Belgrade University they abruptly ended all our planned lectures and escorted us all out, after we watched a video that our assistant sociology professor showed us called Living Wage Now! showing the range of worker oppression, exploitatintimidation and death by horrfying work-place related freakish infrastructure crumbling accidents (in 2014 a Bangladesh textile factory the factory roof  crumbled under peopleand killed more than 1100workers and other people employed there) in Cambodia and Bangladesh caused by below living wages, employee job indimidation, sexual predatoring of female employees by male workplace managers or employees and out of contract overtime 4h+ labor all this suffering and unrestrained exploitation so oligopolic world famous garment brand companies production line affiliates who have a job market monopoly in the region and can't be state regulated more heavily since they can simple always move their production line for cheaper labor and outsource jobs so they can sell their branded clothes even more cheap to encourage more consumers to buy them and to encourage more people to buy them to advance and expand orange consumer, brand status-association and display of wealth, and reproduction and repetition of narcissistic exhibition of personal style of living and looks to others in countessly produced  and displayed photographs - overly selfish personal gain and advancement orange culture and I am reproducing it in a large portion in my choices that resulted in allowing all this time to be financially dependent and similiarly consumer product bombarded by my father and allowing that to continue for 2 years in degrees since I discovered Leo's content and channel. 

That's what I thought about and felt when watching that documentary and then observed in some behaviour in people when we talked on the faculty grounds in reacting in a panic sort of don't infect me self-survival driven collective mood but joking about it happening to others about the news of to the virus spread. I felt that Marxist-Leninist feeling of class cleansing and karmic justice redemption in the coronavirus, it's market repercussions and a looming negative feeling I have (or perhaps because I don't have adequate expertise knowledge prediction skills about it, and I am speaking out of ignorance and feeling of an underlying hate, selfishness and uncultivated love towards people and the world and I am to close minded in pessimism) of a close future world turmoil caused by the current world political heading and direction till now mostly orange uncritical and complacent consumer and self serving middle class individuals including me through leasening the unrestrained cheap price driven consumption.

But I know deep down it was surrendered lie caused in panic and my current self induced social isolation and that I deep down can't accept just dying now without achieving anything, making connections with new people and rekindling, saving and cultivating freindships and family relations that I screwed up and correcting my mistakes and not getting distracted from the overlying goal of the teaching and aim of this community , that I have so much left to do mentality and make right mentality I can't die just yet because of my not to leave unfinished business current ego driving factor in my mind because of the strive to make things right and better in my relations with my close proximity community that I share interactions with and to eventually, finish faculty and my fantasy wish to gather intellectual knowledge, pedantry, term precision, and skill and have enough free personal time to translate untranslated academic studies or books from English into Serbian or vice versa and as an ultimate fantasy that I thought about in different times during the day over the past couple of months obsessively to be able to write a sociological/historical scientific paper or a book title dealing with that theme on my own, achieve economic independence and be on my own in a first career job atleast. 

I had the share feeling of @jimwell in spiral dynamics like fashion adding a past lives karma assumption of rebalancing unconscious suffering infliction through the world which was I then in myself actually disguised past traumas and current struggles, feeling of inferiorty and a large degree of alienation in having close quality cultivated and intimate relationships with people projected disguised as an ideological paradigm on society.

Sorry if I bothered you and was intrusive with this sudden comment reply but I wanted to share my underlying feelings in my experience and current position that created these generalised feeling towards the rest of society that I see daily and that surrounds me in hopes to add an intuitive current personal experience and life position as one of the possible sources that my generate this worldview for some to manifest itself to, in this world sociologically important (in my view) discussion. 

Edited March 13, 2020 by Milos Uzelac

[jimwell]

@Milos Uzelac

No, you didn't bother me. I'm happy you expressed your feelings and you understand my ideas and feelings. But you not using periods is what bothers me. It's difficult to understand. Please use sentences in expressing your ideas next time. 

[Milos Uzelac]

@jimwell Yeah I am glad you understand as well, sorry about that I was writing at 2 am my time a liitle drunk after buying and drinking some Corona beer as a joke with colleagues on college for photos after we were being escorted out of class. 

[Annoynymous]

@Serotoninluv Back in 2012, i was in deep stage Blue territory. At that time, i used to think how my ideas are "Truth" and others are fault. I would then judge others as "evil" and "Nonsense". When my blue paradigm shattered, i was embarrassed to the fact that how i used to think others as deluded whereas i was the one who was deluded thinking that i know/have the truth. 

I think stages like blue/orange/green has a tendency of thinking that their perspective is the superior one and everything other than that doesn't count. So what they tend to do is that whenever they hear some foreign ideas, they are prone to judge it,  recontexualize it according to their consciousness level or just throw it away. They won't accept anything that doesn't fit into their inner world.

So orange centred people will obviously try to steal the show from progressives by claiming that it belongs to them. Although i don't agree with you about orange being politically centrist. I think they are the opportunist who will do anything to change the course of the game to their favour.   

[Forestluv]

42 minutes ago, Annoynymous said:

I think stages like blue/orange/green has a tendency of thinking that their perspective is the superior one and everything other than that doesn't count. 

Yes, one feature of Tier 1 is they are not aware that their own perspective is relative. 

For example, some at Blue stage might think that homosexuality is immoral and believe their opinion is right. Someone at Green stage might think that sexuality is relative and people should marry who they love. Yet Green will not be aware that their view that sexuality is relative is itself a relative view.

42 minutes ago, Annoynymous said:

@Serotoninluv Although i don't agree with you about orange being politically centrist. 

"Centrist" is a relative term that is dependent on the era and location. For example, in the 1700s the "centrist" position was that slavery should be legal, yet slaveowners should not be allowed to beat their slaves to death. The "progressives" were stage orange back then . 

Some societies are "centered" in blue, some countries "centered" in orange etc. In the U.S., the democratic party "centrists", like Biden, would be considered orange - for example, they are heavily oriented toward corporate profits. However, in the future "centrist" can move. In 40 years, AOC and Green may be the "centrists" and the "progressives" will be Yellow. . . As well, there are places in the world, like the middle east, in which "centrist" is orange. It's context-dependent. 

 

 

[Annoynymous]

8 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

"Centrist" is a relative term that is dependent on the era and location. For example, in the 1700s the "centrist" position was that slavery should be legal, yet slaveowners should not be allowed to beat their slaves to death. The "progressives" were stage orange back then . 

Some societies are "centered" in blue, some countries "centered" in orange etc. In the U.S., the democratic party "centrists", like Biden, would be considered orange - for example, they are heavily oriented toward corporate profits. However, in the future "centrist" can move. In 40 years, AOC and Green may be the "centrists" and the "progressives" will be Yellow. . . As well, there are places in the world, like the middle east, in which "centrist" is orange. It's context-dependent. 

Again, i don't agree with you.

Even when you american people call the republican as "stage blue", i get surprised. If the  blue republicans visits my country, the would be labelled as progressives aka green. Don't get me wrong. My country is a blue one. Even if it is blue, it believes such bizarre religious ideas that even blue republicans won't like. So i am trying to say that even stages are relative to different country and environment.It is just not about the time.

[Forestluv]

22 minutes ago, Annoynymous said:

Again, i don't agree with you.

Even when you american people call the republican as "stage blue", i get surprised. If the  blue republicans visits my country, the would be labelled as progressives aka green. Don't get me wrong. My country is a blue one. Even if it is blue, it believes such bizarre religious ideas that even blue republicans won't like. So i am trying to say that even stages are relative to different country and environment.It is just not about the time.

Yes, that is what I am trying to say. It is both time and location.

Time: What was progressive in the 1700s in America is now conservative. What is now progressive in America will be conservative in the year 2200.

Location: What is currently centrist in the US is progressive in the middle east. What is currently progressive in the U.S. is centrist in Norway. 

The SD spiral stages are the grounded framework. Terms like "conservative", "centrist", "progressive" are fluid.

Currently in the U.S. corporate democrats, like Joe Biden, are "centrist" because they are at the center of America's conscious level (orange).  In Canada, Joe Biden would be considered relatively conservative, since he is below the average conscious level (low green). (For example, on the issue of M4A). . . Yet in Iraq, Biden would be considered progressive. 

 

[remember]

22 minutes ago, Annoynymous said:

It is just not about the time.

relative to a historical development, it is also about time. we would need to assume that time would exist as a linear aspect of reality, which it does not. true relativity would only be measurable in spiral colours then. but bringing in cultural development also brings in historically important events and consciousness leaps, or spiral backlashes.

Edited March 13, 2020 by remember