Excess Stage Orange In A Tweet

[LfcCharlie4]

This is not to demonise Orange, in fact I think most “spiritual” people could do with integrating a LOT more orange as it leads to gaping holes down the line. 
 

But, I follow a few “money” accounts on twitter as they often give good advice regarding business, but I always laugh at how deeply ingrained they are into Orange & are missing out on a LOT of other areas of life, the screenshots below explain more ?

The second tweet regarding Biz & how great it is, is an example of why integrating Orange is so important. 
 

The first contains some GREAT advice, but of course, asides from mission, lacks any advice regarding spirituality & love etc. 

What I’m saying is integrate and learn from Orange the key aspects- work ethic, managing money, financial freedom, practicality in life etc 

Remember though, there’s more to life than the “grind” and it’s okay to enjoy life too! 

[Carl-Richard]

Would be interesting to see where he is at in a few years. Assuming he is young, he has a good shot at evolving to green, something along the lines of Joe Rogan (not peak green).

[Fran11]

48 minutes ago, LfcCharlie4 said:

 most “spiritual” people could do with integrating a LOT more orange 

Agree.

I feel that because Yellow is not as easily identifiable, people sometimes are too quick to label anything that shows traits of Orange and below as being solidly coming from a lower stage.

Remeber all Stages have healthy asspects, even Red and Purple 

Edited September 30, 2020 by Fran11

[fridjonk]

All solid advice, except for the "piping hoes" advice. 

[aurum]

1 hour ago, LfcCharlie4 said:

I think most “spiritual” people could do with integrating a LOT more orange as it leads to gaping holes down the line. 

This is a common critique I hear but I actually have a different perspective on it.

I've met quite a few spiritual who live very meager financial lives. Some even don't use money at all, they buck the entire system. And I've had to consider why that is.

The classic retort would be something similar to what you said, which is that they have some form of limiting beliefs about money/receiving. You especially see this in law of attraction / new age communities where it's all about "manifesting abundance". 

And perhaps that is sometimes the case. But I've also had to acknowledge that this explanation does not account for many of the people I've met.

What I've found is that at stage Green, there is a transition to a "less is more" type of thinking. In essence, a lot of spiritual people who have passed through Green have made a conscious choice to live with less wealth.

From Orange that seems crazy. Live with less money? But from Green+ it makes perfect sense.

I think people are right to be skeptical of our current economic system and the way we use money. It's not just limiting beliefs. There's a real critique to be had that goes beyond platitudes of "make money but be sure to enjoy it!!".

Anyway, this is my perspective. Curious what you think.

[Parththakkar12]

52 minutes ago, aurum said:

What I've found is that at stage Green, there is a transition to a "less is more" type of thinking. In essence, a lot of spiritual people who have passed through Green have made a conscious choice to live with less wealth.

I think this is a lack of integration of Orange.

What would you choose? Less money or more money? Is this really that complicated?

I understand it if you're choosing to live a deeper, more fulfilling life and you're prioritizing the fulfillment/satisfaction/freedom it gives you to break out of wage slavery, or the materialistic rat race/hamster wheel, or a soul-draining job/business that pays a lot. Having said that, I think it's a simple and obvious decision if all you have to choose from is less money vs more money.

Minimalism can be healthy, especially when you're bootstrapping your life purpose and you're being strategic with money. Having said that, you do not want to be minimalistic all your life! You want to die having experienced all the material pleasures you wanted to. You do not want to absolutely deny yourself materialistic pleasure.

[aurum]

1 hour ago, Parththakkar12 said:

What would you choose? Less money or more money? Is this really that complicated?

Actually, it is complicated.

Wealth in our current economic system is not generated independently from community and others in the world. The way things currently work is that more for me usually equals less for you. Or alternatively, more for me equals greater ecological destruction and taking of wealth from future generations.

I think this is why Green becomes all about sharing. When we focus on sharing, then there's plenty for everyone. We are no longer trapped in a zero-sum game. But this may require a reduction in individual wealth. Green is okay with this because it is collective thinking, not individualistic.

Additionally, excess commodification and purchasing power destroys communal ties. Communities rely on being able to help each, but when everything becomes a commodity that can be purchased, you lose real relationship with the people around you. Hence, a lot of the great loneliness of modern society. 

1 hour ago, Parththakkar12 said:

You want to die having experienced all the material pleasures you wanted to. You do not want to absolutely deny yourself materialistic pleasure.

This is exactly what I'm questioning.

In order to deny something to myself, I have to first desire it. But what if I had no desire for certain materialistic pleasures? Then it's not denial. Like I said above, it becomes a conscious choice, which is much different.

I think the great facade and doublethink of our stage Orange society is that what we have is abundance. I see that we are in deep scarcity, only we don't even recognize it. Big buildings, yachts and planes are not real wealth. Or perhaps a more generous phrasing would be that they are poor substitutes for the wealth we have lost.

Edited September 30, 2020 by aurum

[Preety_India]

 

He will never be truly happy.. 

 

One day he will be sick of success. He will be sick of fighting for it. 

 

 

That day he will realize that nothing is permanent in life, whatever he is holding on to is a false sense of security and that happiness is a state of mind and not something you chase around everyday. 

Now he is getting more money. Good for him.Not everyone makes money this way. People drain their souls to get money.. And that's the usual way. 

He doesn't need to be a monk. 

But you don't need a ton of money to be happy either. It's ego gratification. 

To me the definition of a happy life is this 

 

- a profession you're passionate about that pays you enough to get all your basic needs. 

 

- you are healthy 

 

- a fulfilling relationship 

- and you are enjoying life everyday with family and work and great friendships. 

 

 

 

 

 

[LfcCharlie4]

@Carl-Richard Good point. 
 

@Preety_India Yep, everyone has a different “ideal” of their dream life and that’s okay. For me, I love running businesses, I don’t need them to be happy, but I wake up everyday excited to work. (Only if it helps people, I couldn’t work in certain industries ofc) 

@aurum I actually agree with you, and think it goes far deeper than SD stages, and also involves things like personality & the type of person you are. Learning the Enneagram helped me understand & appreciate so many different perspectives & what makes different people “tick.”

For example, Ramana Maharishi & Eckhart Tolle are Enneagram 9s- very peaceful, chill guys usually, (typical stoner) very naturally meditative is this type. But compare their style to say Nisgardatta who was bossy & authoritative because he was a type 8.

So, in relation to your points, certain people, will be much happier with less (5s for example tend to be minimalists naturally) and more than happy with a “simpler” life, 7s (I’m a 7, Russell Brand is an extreme 7 lol) are much more “go, go, go” the active type who love to be doing things, so in your community scenario, the guys doing the busy work & running round with a coffee, whereas the 9s would be running the meditation & therapy sessions lol. 
 

But, I think you raised great points, and that’s where Green can really help balance Orange and realise there’s more to life than material pleasures- monetary, sexual, objects & more to life than the pursuit of individuality, a switch to a more collective approach helps people grow on a number of levels.

I also think it helps wealthy people become more conscious & use their money more consciously, instead of hoarding. I mean let’s be real, nobody needs more than like $10M really once you have a few nice houses & cars etc, To us, the guys with 15 cars & 3 yachts & 7 mansions seem silly, but they are simply trying to fill a void with “stuff.” Now, dont get me wrong, we can all enjoy materiality & “Orange” things, and I’m certainly not demonising it, but it’s never going to make us happy, alone, kt can be fun, bring joy etc sure. 
 

And, yes My integrate Orange was aimed a lot more at younger “spiritual” people who can’t even hold down a job etc, your example I also know of, and I believe that comes from a more conscious choice, rather than having no money because they don’t have the skills to make money. 
 

To me, money = freedom, and the lower your living costs are, the less money you need for that freedom. I personally am in a wealth creation phase, and have plans to build wealth over the next few decades, but as I mentioned in another post, the idea is to always be investing in things I believe in & to always be giving back, I see no value in hoarding millions, but instead want to use money consciously. 
 

I can definitely see the value in giving up use of money, living on very little for those who want the simple / hermit / monk style of life, I am almost certain it’s not for me, but I am defo not shitting on anyone who wants to live that way, I don’t think there’s any “right” way for a “spiritual” being to live, but agree they would focus on more than just their individual needs.

2 examples of deeply awakened beings living “western” & “family” lives are Rupert Spira & Francis Lucille, so I think it can work either way for Green+ beings. (Id class these 2 as Turquoise) 

 

Wow, I rambled, sorry! 

[commie]

34 minutes ago, aurum said:

Actually, it is complicated.

Wealth in our current economic system is not generated independently from community and others in the world. The way things currently work is that more for me usually equals less for you. Or alternatively, more for me equals greater ecological destruction and taking of wealth from future generations.

I think this is why Green becomes all about sharing. When we focus on sharing, then there's plenty for everyone. We are no longer trapped in a zero-sum game. But this may require a reduction in individual wealth. Green is okay with this because it is collective thinking, not individualistic.

Who cares about what is usual? If I had more money, others would have more money too. THAT is collective thinking. Alternatively, money can be used to prevent destruction (even hoarding it can have that effect). As long as we're going to have money, I would therefore like to have more. The more we have, the less it matters. It's quite simple.

Even if nobody shared, it wouldn't be a zero-sum game by the way. THAT is more complicated.

34 minutes ago, aurum said:

Additionally, excess commodification and purchasing power destroys communal ties. Communities rely on being able to help each, but when everything becomes a commodity that can be purchased, you lose real relationship with the people around you. Hence, a lot of the great loneliness of modern society.

Being able to purchase things isn't the issue. Being able to purchase people (even if only for a few hours a day) is.

There's a woman where I live who sells produce. But it's more expensive than the cheap produce you can buy in a chain store. Would I lose real relationship if I could afford to routinely buy from her instead of a cheaper supplier? No, I only lose the opportunity for relationships I never had by not participating in the production myself... and more purchasing power would only increase my ability to participate. Of course there are ways to participate which require no purchasing power but in the societies we live in, they are limited and aren't available to everyone.

34 minutes ago, aurum said:

In order to deny something to myself, I have to first desire it. But what if I had no desire for certain materialistic pleasures? Then it's not denial. Like I said above, it becomes a conscious choice, which is much different.

Do you consciously choose not to desire certain materialistic pleasures? I only make conscious choices about the ones I do desire, and I do not somehow choose to stop desiring either.

What I choose to do is to notice the fact that satisfying these desires is at best pointless. Since I naturally do pointless things all the time, I often satisfy such desires but I certainly don't care about which ones I have satisfied since having satisfied them in the past gives me at best zero satisfaction.

[LfcCharlie4]

@commie Also good points, thanks for making them! 
 

For me, it’s about conscious wealth creation & use.

[Carl-Richard]

Orange is pursuing success for the sake of success, money for the sake of money. Going green doesn't mean you give up all your money. It's just that your priorities change. Maybe that will lead to you becoming less wealthy, but that isn't necessarily the case.

[aurum]

2 hours ago, LfcCharlie4 said:

I think you raised great points,

I appreciate that. And I appreciate the level of nuanced thinking you're bringing to this dialogue as well, I'm enjoying it.

Let's see if we can go deeper.

2 hours ago, LfcCharlie4 said:

Green can really help balance Orange and realise there’s more to life than material pleasures- monetary, sexual, objects & more to life than the pursuit of individuality, a switch to a more collective approach helps people grow on a number of levels.

I would argue that it's not just that there's more to life than material pleasure. I think most people would agree to that.

But there still seems to be this assumption that we actually desire a lot of the material things our Orange society has told us are the good life.

For instance, let's look at buying a house. 

Is it that we should want to buy the house and we just need to learn that it won't make us happy? Or is something lost in the mere act of purchasing a house? Perhaps we lose the joy of actually building your own shelter and working with your hands. Perhaps we lose community since traditionally houses would be build communally, which is now outsourced to a construction company.

And I'm not saying to not buy a house. I certainly have no idea how to build a realistic shelter so I will be continuing to purchase that commodity. I'm making the point that purchasing items themselves can actually backfire to when it comes to what we really want.

Consider if I make you a home made gift with my own creativity, talent and love. That care is going to shine through in the gift. But if I just purchase you a gift and put no uniqueness or creativity into it, something is lost. It's not the same. But this is what our consumer culture encourages because it drives the economy.

2 hours ago, LfcCharlie4 said:

I mean let’s be real, nobody needs more than like $10M really once you have a few nice houses & cars etc,

Even these goals I would argue are more of a result of our stage Orange society than an actual reality.

For instance, consider the neighborhood of Vauban in Germany:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vauban,_Freiburg

Here, everything is built within walking distance. As such, people don't need cars. What good is a car when everything you need is right in front of you? It has no value. So do we still need to appreciate the "material pleasures" of a car?

Consider having $10M. If you lived in an indigenous culture or somewhere that thrived on gift economy, your $10M is worthless. These things only have relative value because of the circumstances we currently find ourselves in.

As long as we live in the modern world, a car or $10M may have relative value. I'm not arguing against that. It's clear that to an extent it does.

I'm saying, what if things changed? What if we developed an economic system that wasn't so dependent on purchasing (i.e transactions) and more dependent on gift, sharing and relationship? Would it make the world a more beautiful place? I think it would.

2 hours ago, LfcCharlie4 said:

To me, money = freedom

In our modern society yes, but freedom to do what? To passively consume? To destroy the environment? What are we doing with this freedom? Because money is not the source of freedom. Money is a web of social agreements we've all made with each others. If there's freedom, it's because we created it.

2 hours ago, LfcCharlie4 said:

personally am in a wealth creation phase, and have plans to build wealth over the next few decades, but as I mentioned in another post, the idea is to always be investing in things I believe in & to always be giving back, I see no value in hoarding millions, but instead want to use money consciously. 

And I respect that. Don't take anything I'm saying as me arguing you shouldn't continue that path. I don't know you and I don't know what your financial situation is or what your goals might be. I believe you have good intentions.

My point is I believe there is a far more nuanced conversation we should be having around money / economics. And you won't find it in most self-help books because most self-help books are designed to help people get what they want, not challenge our collective systems.

Edited October 1, 2020 by aurum

[aurum]

1 hour ago, commie said:

Who cares about what is usual? If I had more money, others would have more money too. THAT is collective thinking. Alternatively, money can be used to prevent destruction (even hoarding it can have that effect). As long as we're going to have money, I would therefore like to have more. The more we have, the less it matters. It's quite simple.

Even if nobody shared, it wouldn't be a zero-sum game by the way. THAT is more complicated.

You are certainly free to make as much money as you'd like. My intention is not to tell you to NOT do that. As I said in another post, I don't know you or your situation or what your needs are.

[LfcCharlie4]

@aurum you too man, I love having these kind of discussions that you literally can’t have anywhere else online, where you’re questioning the collective, and it’s evolution. 
 

Firstly, yes, we are brought up around marketing that “things” will make us happy, of course more conscious companies are better than this now. 
 

it’s true, we just take things for granted & don’t appreciate the work & time that goes into that house. I remember Rupert had a video on how he was Managing a team of builders building his families house & said it was like Satsang. 
 

We don’t appreciate enough the care, love & attention that goes into truly great works of anything due to our consumer economy, I couldn’t agree more. All about finding that balance. 
 

Like if you take your spouse out to expensive restaurants always, why not cook a homemade meal, from love. 
 

Thank you for sharing that neighbourhood! If allowed, that is somewhere I certainly want to visit Post-Covid, tangent but I also think travelling can get us out of the “bubble” we live in and become exposed to different cultures and ways of life.

Yes, $10M only has value in THIS kind of society, take it to the tribes in the jungle and it means nothing, take it to a real estate broker in Las Vegas and they’ve seen 10x that. Crazy when you think of it. 
 

Yeah, I agree, I’m not sure a gift based economy is the next step, but certainly evolution will be when people more so work on what they love, not just for survival needs, nobody can argue about that making the world a better place. 
 

Oh yeah, I don’t mean absolute freedom, I mean “external” freedom, in terms of freedom from working a 9-5 you hate, freedom to do as you wish, freedom to go beyond your survival needs. 
 

Oh, I agree, them goals are based on living in this system, if we were brought up differently, they would be different, of course.

 

And, me too, I don’t think hardly anyone realises “The Economy” could evolve drastically still, to something where people actually get to focus on what they love doing, the polarity between richest & poorest is reduced drastically & humanities values continuously evolve. Almost like what Leo suggests in his conscious politics videos. 

[LfcCharlie4]

Here’s two great videos that always stuck with me regarding pursuing a career / business you love : 

 

https://non-duality.rupertspira.com/watch/what-is-the-right-job-to-do

This is what drives me these days, both doing something I love & the desire for freedom, so I never have to do a job I don’t enjoy, I am lucky though as I started this at 18, and never had to endure really shitty jobs, I worked for my dads cleaning company but actually quite enjoyed it!