The New Cult of Brian Rose and David Icke

[Consept]

2 minutes ago, DrewNows said:

Why be regulated? 

Well whats your solution for someone who says for example we should hate and try and attack Jews in a compelling way?

[DrewNows]

2 minutes ago, Consept said:

Well whats your solution for someone who says for example we should hate and try and attack Jews in a compelling way?

Allow/encourage/support Jews who speak up against being attacked 

[Consept]

3 minutes ago, DrewNows said:

Allow/encourage/support Jews who speak up against being attacked 

Lets say they do and are still attacked regularly, what then?

[DrewNows]

6 minutes ago, Consept said:

Lets say they do and are still attacked regularly, what then?

It’s not necessarily about the content, it’s about the structures, and they will evolve. Force needs to be a natural happening or the lessons aren’t learned. If speaking out or against feels natural then we must hold compassion. 

[LaucherJunge]

@Consept
And how do we protect conspiracy theorists from being attacked? Oh right, we don't.

[Consept]

9 minutes ago, DrewNows said:

It’s not necessarily about the content, it’s about the structures, and they will evolve. Force needs to be a natural happening or the lessons aren’t learned. If speaking out or against feels natural then we must hold compassion. 

Theres so many issues with unregulated free speech, people could use a platform to condone rape, to condone pedophillia for example, people could start anarchy. In an ideal world we'd all be able to regulate ourselves and all be responsible but thats just not the case at the moment. If you look at it most speech is allowed now, but to say it should be 100% unregulated I just cant see how thats workable, youd have to show me how that model would work as we are now. 

[Consept]

3 minutes ago, LaucherJunge said:

@Consept
And how do we protect conspiracy theorists from being attacked? Oh right, we don't.

Are people physically attacking conspiracy theorists? 

[LaucherJunge]

1 minute ago, Consept said:

Are people physically attacking conspiracy theorists? 

Well as an example, the police are attacking and arresting people here in Germany that simply try to hold up the constitutional laws. Police states will beat up conspiracy theorists, well even worse actually. What's worse physical violence or people losing their whole life jobs, family, career... because of it?

[gswva]

There is probably no final answer to the issue of free speech. It's an endless game between unbiased love and egos.

[Consept]

2 minutes ago, LaucherJunge said:

Well as an example, the police are attacking and arresting people here in Germany that simply try to hold up the constitutional laws. Police states will beat up conspiracy theorists, well even worse actually. What's worse physical violence or people losing their whole life jobs, family, career... because of it?

Well i dont anything about it to speak on it, but either way a workable solution for freedom of speech would still be needed

[DrewNows]

@Consept playing into the hands of good and evil (the old paradigm) and we are now reaching a turning point, (naturally) forced to stretch our views to consider, understand and figure out where every position is coming from so we are able to make a responsible choice for ourselves. The government doesn’t give a choice, that’s our issue here 

[DrewNows]

I just shared the ralph smart teal swan live talk, it’s addressing all this and more, very powerful indeed 

[LaucherJunge]

8 minutes ago, Consept said:

Well i dont anything about it to speak on it, but either way a workable solution for freedom of speech would still be needed

I would agree that it makes sense for a structured society and system to have some limits that are just fitting according to the general development of that society, the problem is one would need a system which is willing to basically self-reflect and able to adjust as we go and this is almost impossible to keep up in a system where there are people who simply have too much power and control, at least that's the case because these people don't tend to charge of their ego.

Edited May 6, 2020 by LaucherJunge

[Jacobsrw]

As @Serotoninluv stated, all objective measures of what constitutes one’s measure of a thing is completely relative. In this instance, free speech needs to be applied relatively not objectively. 

@DrewNows it’s not so simple as you say. People don’t operate in such ways that warrant the ability to speak as they wish without precipitating consequences. And letting consequences unfold naturally is almost as absurd as relentlessly enforcing a fascist state. There needs to be a balance. Each context requires regulation according to its locality not its nation. Also watch @Leo Gura episodes on conscious politics. It provides good rationale as to why a government requires regulations in order to ascend the consciousness of its people. 

Similar to what @gswva said, you will never satisfy each person while people continue to operate at the level of ego. What’s more important is developing conscious beings opposed to civil citizens. Civility will become the product of consciousness ascending in humanity. 

Edited May 6, 2020 by Jacobsrw

[Jacobsrw]

@LaucherJunge conspiracy theorists who purport unmonitored free speech need to be realistic in what they are asking. Information will be monitored depending on the distribution of what has been delivered. We don’t live in a utopian world where words are not dangerous. They have a right to be protected, but they also have responsibility in how they conduct their speech.

Rather than attesting free speech regulations. People should be more concerned in the rigour of their communication. This is far more important. One should speak in relation to the context they are speaking not the idea they are proposing.

Edited May 6, 2020 by Jacobsrw

[Jacobsrw]

@DivineSoda agreed, we may not approach this issue in the same way but we do desire the same outcome. Thank you for your contribution ?

Edited May 6, 2020 by Jacobsrw

[DrewNows]

@Jacobsrw To me the government is like a collective ego. Consequences do unfold naturally but the collective ego is avoiding responsibility for selfishly keeping the people at its whim. Why do I say this, because people are losing their rights and wellbeing without a choice. The collective, my way or the high way mentality is ignorance 

[Jacobsrw]

@DrewNows that’s exactly right. Just the very fact you described society in such a manner, substantiates why regulation is important to establish. If incessancy of ego is inevitable, than so too will be irresponsibleness.

We might already learn by consequences and constructing  regulations as a result but we shouldn’t merely rely on this type of approach. That would be like walking a mine field, waiting for one to detonate and making parameters to avoid that area in the future. We should think with precaution and forecast what could happen and construct regulations to suit, much like a pre-mortem. Without responsible regulation we have barbarianism and tribalism. Underdeveloped countries can appreciate this.

Edited May 7, 2020 by Jacobsrw

[DrewNows]

@Jacobsrw i agree there’s always a place for discernment, unfortunately most of the shady approaches are merely karmic repercussions of a broken system, shady government activities (abuse of power) over a long period of time now finally reaching a tipping point and resurfacing a shit load of “under the rug facts and theories”. It’s clear there’s a political bandwagon effect, as well as profit to be made from vengeful individuals. Again from my view it’s like a collective ego backlash, so it’s a good time to promote presence and connection but it can’t really be controlled. If the government can’t afford to give the people what they want (perhaps a trust in uncertainty), but instead continues to push this fear and (a perceptual) agenda, no telling where this goes. To me this topic could just as easily be on how to regulate capitalism, the media or government corruption 

[Jacobsrw]

@DrewNows that’s true corruption is flooded throughout government. Although, people don’t realise how much worse it would be without one. The problems of government isn’t predicated on a handful of people conspiring. It’s a system which independently harbours toxicity throughout its framework, which many leaders are unaware of, and consumed by. There is a lot of unconsciousness in government more than there is conscious sinisterism. The government may not be innocent but it is not knowingly deluded.

You raise a very good point. It’s all well to regulate citizens but those who pass amendments to regulate citizens must also be regulated. This is also very tricky, because it’s not as simple as a few people in power, it’s that rules and regulations have been developed overtime and culture from those who don’t even exist anymore. At the very least we need more inquiries into what the government is doing behind the scenes. However, that is also contentious as most of society is so dominated by egoic biasness that comprehending secretive government information would not go well. Society is almost not conscious enough to know the full scope of a thing, this is evident by civil rights wars and protests.

This is much more complex than people assume it be.

Edited May 7, 2020 by Jacobsrw