Your Most Radical Viewpoints?

[Nahm]

38 minutes ago, LfcCharlie4 said:

 if you can chime In how desire arises post awakening & how the “law of attraction” / creating our own dream reality works!

The word desire means something different to each person, just like the word love. 

While I don’t per se disagree, I don’t find it precise to say desire arises post awakening. There is ultimately nothing to desire, as the fuel of desire is actually holon activity of an a part unknowingly pursuing it’s own wholeness, which it believes is not already the actuality. In that specific regard, desire is delusional. Desire in a way is no more than a misinterpretation of self, love, creation, and role in it. How could some thing be desired in a dream when the “thing” is me, the dream?  It ‘dies’ with the limiting misidentification as human and the paradigm of separate physical things. It was never ‘wrong’, it was natural, because, infinite being is absolutely innocent. I could not in good conscience ‘blame’ a thirty year old for desire anymore than I could a two month old. It’s natural, yet not justifiable, hence the discord, and shaming individuals is never the way, and is always the expression of one’s own internalizing & holding of shame. 

Law of attraction could be said to be the turning point. From desire of ‘things’ without, to the recognition of the wholeness, and the source of all ‘things’, within. Reactionary behaviors & choices, as well as victim mindsets, etc, which could be rationalized via desire are scrutinized when one is said to be attracting one’s own experience. This inevitably brings one to inspect one’s own intentions & desires. 

It could be said that the awakened one is fueled with desire in spreading the message, which I’d be fine with. But I think upon more scrutiny that experience is simply sharing this love, and one in doing so is truly empowered, with inspiration, passion and joy. When the lens of loa really is worn, when it is seen I create my suffering, and without it joy is the default, this is seen to be true for all others. Very eye opening in regard to world views, religions, wars, politics, etc. The entire landscape lens changes. 

How creating our dream reality works... (goes & gets pedestal). 

The “answer” at the end of the day, is God, which is to say the question too, is God. The ‘catch’ is of course, we’re God, and not-two. The word perhaps ain’t nobody tryin ta hear, is responsibility. The experience of reality prioritizes itself. Care for the body mind and then outward. One aligns, one get’s one head on straight, one abides by the heart, one get’s one’s immediate environment aligned, and one then does or doesn’t, continue creating one’s reality in the realization one is nondual, everyone, the whole show.  This natural unfolding of experience for an individuation, is the exact same unfolding for the multiplicity, the whole, or collective, co-creating.

 

My ‘radical idea’ to contribute here is most simple. A community such as this creates a website which has a democratically created outline of acceptable parameters for a company. Could be ceo makes X$ in comparison to the entry level $. Could be x% of environmental impact. Could entail timelines to reach these parameters. Could have a ‘on probation’ warning facet. Otherwise, it’d have simply two columns, companies which meet these parameters and we buy from them, and companies which don’t and we don’t. I believe companies would be interested to be in the ‘we do’ column. Competition is to fierce and too fast to sleep on it. People might like this, because people work for companies, and are in large part getting fucked over every which way they turn. But the majority has the power, always. We’re all creating this, always. 

It’s an idea that arose from your question, it’s not perfect, like any idea, it’s a contribution. For the record, I would never, ever, commit suicide, and there is no logical reason to utilize the middle name of someone in media, should I be murdered by them. 

 

38 minutes ago, LfcCharlie4 said:

P.S. when’s the book gonna be available!

Feelin the love, thanks. Soon. If you’re interested you can get notified when it’s done. 

[Preety_India]

@Nahm if you don't mind me asking, what's this book gonna be about? 

 

[Nahm]

@Preety_India

Self realization, awakening, reality, emotional understanding & clarity, dreamboard, creating, etc. You know, easy read coffee table stuff. 

@LfcCharlie4

Not trying to thread hijack, but I’m just going to nab this opportunity to add something along the lines of radical views. I’m not posting this video in support of it, or for discussion & comments, etc, like threads and videos usually are posted on the forum. I want to post this to share it, because it led me to be so profoundly moved by the work that @Leo Gura is doing that it brought me to tears yet again. And that is not to short change the community at all, nor any of the awesome creators here. The layers upon layers of delusion and emotional suppression inadvertently conveyed in this video are astounding. Infinite love, respect & appreciation for you Leo. Your work is amazing, and it matters. 

 

[aurum]

13 minutes ago, Nahm said:

I want to post this to share it, because it led me to be so profoundly moved by the work that @Leo Gura is doing that it brought me to tears yet again. And that is not to short change the community at all, nor any of the awesome creators here. The layers upon layers of delusion and emotional suppression inadvertently conveyed in this video are astounding. Infinite love, respect & appreciation for you Leo. Your work is amazing, and it matters. 

Thank you Nahm for sharing this. I feel like most of us just argue with Leo on this forum and don't often express gratitude. And yet his work has helped likely everyone here.

I'd love to see more Leo appreciation in the future.

19 minutes ago, Nahm said:

The layers upon layers of delusion and emotional suppression inadvertently conveyed in this video are astounding.

It's so fascinating because she's saying a lot of the same things we talk about here, i.e surrender, forgiveness, seeing beyond just temporary pleasure and seeking true happiness. I suppose it really comes down to the intention behind those words.

Curious what your interpretation was.

[SOUL]

33 minutes ago, DocWatts said:

The problem is when you begin drawing false equivalencies between Centrists or Liberals and the Right

I didn't draw a false equivalence but when mainstream liberals and centrists media and politicians attack the 'left' like what was said by some the previous election and just past election then it is accurately said they are doing the same thing as the right.

I distinctly remember one saying how Bernie made her 'skin crawl' even though she couldn't explain why. Another was invoking the cold war of how if 'they won' he'd be dragged into central park and killed while talking about Bernie questioning how is Bernie not like that.

The attacks coming against Bernie, the squad, Justice Dems and anyone who dares challenge the establishment dem party from the left are the norm and often are laced with moral implications even if not all are explicitly so.

Don't want someone to say it happens then don't do it, that simple. Again, you are complaining that you want 'the far left' to 'play nice' with people who don't do it themselves to the 'left'. I'm apolitical when it comes to party, I'm an independent so not party affiliated if that matters.

34 minutes ago, DocWatts said:

Why do you think Bernie Sanders has been so successful? Do you think he'd be one of the most powerful people in the US Senate right now if he'd run as an Independent

He has been an independent for decades and he only ran as a democrat because third party candidates aren't viable in the current political environment of the US. He became one of the most powerful US Senators as a independent.

Polling from the recent cycle confirms progressive policies are popular with the majority of all Americans from all political parties and even establishment democrats passionate resist them. It's only been the recent pandemic events happening that they have embraced the most watered down versions of them and only under the constant pressure from progressives.

So again... if centrists and liberals don't want to be viewed as hostile as the right towards the 'left' then they should just stop being hostile to them and they won't be viewed that way. Pretty simple solution if you ask me but I guess I'm not politically savvy enough to understand it.

I'd prefer civility as well but complaining about the 'left' not being nice enough? Hm

 

[Dingo]

• Primary/secondary/high school psychonautics classes (meditation, sensory deprivation, psychedelics... many methods for self-exploration)
• Country leaders can only be ellected, if they've undergone a year of proper psychedelic/holistic therapy.
• Ellected officials lose the right to privately own anything, the state provides them high-quality lifestyle and their lives are publicly monitored at all times while in office. (experimental)
• Reintroduce the role of the shaman into our societies.
• One day per year all artificial light is disabled, so we can marvel at the night sky.

[LfcCharlie4]

@Nahm Amazing explanation & you’re right, desire creates semantic issues & is usually associated with attempting to fulfil that illusory separate self & sense of lack “outside of ourselves!”

I loved your explanation as the answer being God, and then to use the law of attraction from a place of love to create our dream reality!!

@aurum thank you for those great points!! I will definitely mull on all of those  

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, UDT said:

@Leo Gura Dont hate the player, hate the game.

I don't hate anyone or anything.

Hate leads to the dark side.

Quote

Am I judging you for making good bank selling PPC ads in the early google days? I´m not, but according to your logic youre a dirty rapist of fat white walmart chicks in their mid 40s

Firstly, I did a lot more than resell ads. I did creative work.

Secondly, if you knew the full extent of my manipulations your jaw would probably drop. But the key difference is that I didn't bullshit myself or others about the reality of what I did. Survive if you must, but don't come to a forum about truth and consciousness and expect to not get called out for your bullshit.

Rape people if you must. But don't come here telling us you're a hero. Be honest that you are a rapist.

I never make moral arguments. I'm simply interested in truth and consciousness.

[Nahm]

1 hour ago, aurum said:

Thank you Nahm for sharing this. I feel like most of us just argue with Leo on this forum and don't often express gratitude. And yet his work has helped likely everyone here.

I'd love to see more Leo appreciation in the future.

I feel that too. 

1 hour ago, aurum said:

It's so fascinating because she's saying a lot of the same things we talk about here, i.e surrender, forgiveness, seeing beyond just temporary pleasure and seeking true happiness. I suppose it really comes down to the intention behind those words.

Curious what your interpretation was.

The points that stuck out to me...

The premise is the question, “Can I Be Gay and Catholic?”  (Why would this even be in question?) 

-Created a foundation to support widows and orphans, awesome. 

-“Struggling with same sex desires”. As if that is a problem, something to deny, correct or feel ashamed of. The struggle is with emotional suppression influenced by ignorance, dogma, and misplaced authority. 

-“If you’re attracted to the same sex you’re not supposed to be married, you can’t have sex or have a romantic relationship, if you’re gay”....”so the question is can you be happy?”  This potentially tricks the viewer into the same delusional dogma, as if being gay and or happiness were in question in the first place, by anyone other than the presenters of the video. They‘re riddled with judgment and their own shame, yet fully deluded by their own beliefs, and projecting this out for the world to share with them, vs inspecting & addressing their own issues, which there isn’t to begin with for anyone who is not a bigot. 

-“There’s such a lie out there...sex does not make you happy”...There isn’t a “lie out there”, but it sets the stage for their dogma coming. Who says sex makes you happy in the first place? Expression, being yourself without judgment, guilt, or shaming yourself...being the happiness you are, ‘makes you happy’. 

-(because I’m gay) “Then I’m gonna have to be alone, or a nun, or the cat lady”.  Could also just be you, as you are. 

-Then she misinterprets Jesus in a rather extreme falsity...”If you want to be my disciple, then you will deny yourself, pick up your cross, and follow me daily”.....She uses this to support the suppression of herself, and her sexuality....and this is really the telltale line of their intentions in this video.....

-”To deny myself doesn’t mean to ignore it, to brush it under the rug, to pretend like I’m totally attracted to dudes and get married....which I did.” “It means to look at yourself and deny this part of you (sexuality, being gay). 

-“I found a true joy in denial of self”. That one kind of speaks volumes for itself. 

-Then she uses the example of cheese cake. That it’s ok to desire it, but it’s sinful to act on that desire that I know is not inline with Christ. This is literally God saying this. She carries this analogy in to health, stating that it is unhealthy, to be gay and act upon being gay. ...”So it’s the same” she says. 

-Then the real punch right in the source...”Take every thought captive to the obedience of Christ, not the obedience of your own feelings”. Translation, put the church and it’s dogma ahead of your feeling and common sense. 

-“The moment I’m done with that cheesecake, I feel sick”...”It’s the same with these sexual desires too...” She’s shaming herself, and seems to actually believe she is not. 

-“I found that true joy through mass, through the community, through being authentic.” That one also speaks for itself. 

-Then she equates being gay with “pornography, perversion, lust, greed, pride...all these other things that are weighing us down and keeping us from true joy”.  “I’m at church every single day, because Satan knows what silence with the Lord will do”.  Shame and emotional suppression doesn’t equate to there being someone else, even a Satan, at fault. 

-“What advice would you give gay people in parishes”....”Be real, be truthful...He knows He is God and we are not, so be real in the truth of Jesus Christ.”   It’s as if she has never read anything Jesus said. 

-“And don’t just be truthful without the love of Christ, truth and love, do not separate them”. The truth is there are gay people, and the lady saying this is gay, and is suppressing herself, to feel better about judging and shaming herself, for being gay. The only reason this seems to be a problem is because people feel better about themselves from judging other people and believing they are better than others because they are religious. They are literally creating their own suffering and their efforts are to entice others to do the same. 

-“There’s always something to battle with and I’m not ashamed to say that”. There’s nothing to “battle with”. It’s her own dogma and judgement and shaming of herself and others.  Jesus never said a word about Satan, or being gay. 

-“I’m not coming from a place of judgement, I’m coming from a place of unzipping my heart and sharing”. 

-“When people ask me how can I be gay and Catholic...I answer, why is being gay coming before your Christian identity”?  Where to even begin with this delusion & suppression, really. 

-“What do you tell, especially young people who come to you?”...”Do not waste the blood Jesus shed...believing that these desires are not sin. Don’t change what sin is. There are people who judge you and force you to be different.”  That’s literally her, in this video. 

-“And please, please please, please, do not identify yourself with your attractions and your own feelings, please. You’re a daughter or a son of Christ.” (Unless you’re gay, according to - her - whom - is gay.) 

-“Let Him be God, and not you”.   ?

Half a million subscribers. The name of the channel is literally “Ascension”. 

[Preety_India]

5 minutes ago, Nahm said:

I feel that too. 

The points that stuck out to me...

The premise is the question, “Can I Be Gay and Catholic?”  (Why would this even be in question?) 

-Created a foundation to support widows and orphans, awesome. 

-“Struggling with same sex desires”. As if that is a problem, something to deny, correct or feel ashamed of. The struggle is with emotional suppression influenced by ignorance, dogma, and misplaced authority. 

-“If you’re attracted to the same sex you’re not supposed to be married, you can’t have sex or have a romantic relationship, if you’re gay”....”so the question is can you be happy?”  This potentially tricks the viewer into the same delusional dogma, as if being gay and or happiness were in question in the first place, by anyone other than the presenters of the video. They‘re riddled with judgment and their own shame, yet fully deluded by their own beliefs, and projecting this out for the world to share with them, vs inspecting & addressing their own issues, which there isn’t to begin with for anyone who is not a bigot. 

-“There’s such a lie out there...sex does not make you happy”...There isn’t a “lie out there”, but it sets the stage for their dogma coming. Who says sex makes you happy in the first place? Expression, being yourself without judgment, guilt, or shaming yourself...being the happiness you are, ‘makes you happy’. 

-(because I’m gay) “Then I’m gonna have to be alone, or a nun, or the cat lady”.  Could also just be you, as you are. 

-Then she misinterprets Jesus in a rather extreme falsity...”If you want to be my disciple, then you will deny yourself, pick up your cross, and follow me daily”.....She uses this to support the suppression of herself, and her sexuality....and this is really the telltale line of their intentions in this video.....

-”To deny myself doesn’t mean to ignore it, to brush it under the rug, to pretend like I’m totally attracted to dudes and get married....which I did.” “It means to look at yourself and deny this part of you (sexuality, being gay). 

-“I found a true joy in denial of self”. That one kind of speaks volumes for itself. 

-Then she uses the example of cheese cake. That it’s ok to desire it, but it’s sinful to act on that desire that I know is not inline with Christ. This is literally God saying this. She carries this analogy in to health, stating that it is unhealthy, to be gay and act upon being gay. ...”So it’s the same” she says. 

-Then the real punch right in the source...”Take every thought captive to the obedience of Christ, not the obedience of your own feelings”. Translation, put the church and it’s dogma ahead of your feeling and common sense. 

-“The moment I’m done with that cheesecake, I feel sick”...”It’s the same with these sexual desires too...” She’s shaming herself, and seems to actually believe she is not. 

-“I found that true joy through mass, through the community, through being authentic.” That one also speaks for itself. 

-Then she equates being gay with “pornography, perversion, lust, greed, pride...all these other things that are weighing us down and keeping us from true joy”.  “I’m at church every single day, because Satan knows what silence with the Lord will do”.  Shame and emotional suppression doesn’t equate to there being someone else, even a Satan, at fault. 

-“What advice would you give gay people in parishes”....”Be real, be truthful...He knows He is God and we are not, so be real in the truth of Jesus Christ.”   It’s as if she has never read anything Jesus said. 

-“And don’t just be truthful without the love of Christ, truth and love, do not separate them”. The truth is there are gay people, and the lady saying this is one of them, and is suppressing herself, to feel better about judging and shaming herself, for being gay. The only reason this seems to be a problem is because people feel better about themselves from judging other people and believing they are better than others because they are religious. They are literally creating their own suffering and their efforts are to entice others to do the same. 

-“There’s always something to battle with and I’m not ashamed to say that”. There’s nothing to “battle with”. It’s her own dogma and judgement and shaming of herself and others.  Jesus never said a word about Satan, or being gay. 

-“I’m not coming from a place of judgement, I’m coming from a place of unzipping my heart and sharing”. 

-“When people ask me how can I be gay and Catholic...I answer, why is being gay coming before your Christian identity”?  Where to even begin with this delusion & suppression, really. 

-“What do you tell, especially young people who come to you?”...”Do not waste the blood Jesus shed...believing that these desires are not sin. Don’t change what sin is. There are people who judge you and force you to be different.”  That’s literally her, in this video. 

-“And lease, please please, please, do not identify yourself with your attractions and you feeling, please. You’re a daughter or a son of Christ.” (Unless you’re gay, according to - her - whom - is gay.) 

-“Let Him be God, and not you”.   ?

Half a million subscribers. 

That's awesome. 

[DocWatts]

14 minutes ago, SOUL said:

So again... if centrists and liberals don't want to be viewed as hostile as the right towards the 'left' then they should just stop being hostile to them and they won't be viewed that way. Pretty simple solution if you ask me but I guess I'm not politically savvy enough to understand it.

I'd prefer civility as well but complaining about the 'left' not being nice enough? Hm

It's not about being 'nice' for its own sake, it's about not alienating people who might otherwise be sympathetic towards the types of policies and reforms we would like to see enacted.

You're right that Progressive Policy proposals tend to be broadly popular, but if politics were just a matter of having better policy positions, the Republican Party would have gone the way of the Whigs and the US wouldn't be the only industrialized Democracy without a Universal Healthcare system. 

Let's also make sure to differentiate between Individuals that support egalitarian policy but in a more cautious way, and Institutional Obstructionism due to conflicts of interest. It would behoove us to be more understanding and patient with the former, while continuing to Call out the latter. 

[SOUL]

27 minutes ago, DocWatts said:

It's not about being 'nice' for its own sake, it's about not alienating people who might otherwise be sympathetic towards the types of policies and reforms we would like to see enacted.

You're right that Progressive Policy proposals tend to be broadly popular, but if politics were just a matter of having better policy positions, the Republican Party would have gone the way of the Whigs and the US wouldn't be the only industrialized Democracy without a Universal Healthcare system. 

Let's also make sure to differentiate between Individuals that support egalitarian policy but in a more cautious way, and Institutional Obstructionism due to conflicts of interest. It would behoove us to be more understanding and patient with the former, while continuing to Call out the latter. 

Can you give any examples of them not being nice? I don't mean twitter trolls or content creator crankiness because those aren't the people who work on policy with other representatives.

It kind of sounds like you are playing the centrist civility card they don't actually use themselves with the 'left'. It seems like you are content to admonish the 'left' for something you don't hold the rest to.

I will also need to see some evidence that this being nice thing you say will work to actually change their priorities from their corporate donors to their constituents because I have yet to see it.

Edited January 29, 2021 by SOUL

[DocWatts]

24 minutes ago, SOUL said:

Can you give any examples of them not being nice? I don't mean twitter trolls or content creator crankiness because those aren't the people who work on policy with other representatives.

It kind of sounds like you are playing the centrist civility card they don't actually use themselves with the 'left'. It seems like you are content to admonish the 'left' for something you don't hold the rest to.

I will also need to see some evidence that this being nice thing you say will work to actually change their priorities from their corporate donors to their constituents because I have yet to see it.

The negativity of which I was referring to was directed at people outside of the political apparatus, with unreasonable expectations for what someone working within our political system should be able to accomplish. The catalyst for my earlier thought was seeing people complain that legislation mandating that a $15 minimum  be phased in over four years, rather than going in to effect immediately; while also ignoring that the Bill would also eliminate the sub-minimum wage for tipped workers and disabled people. Yeah that's not ideal, but it goes a long way in fixing a serious problem.

Contrast that attitude with that of actual policy makers themselves, who know that they have to work with moderates in order to have any chance at getting legislation passed.

I'd argue that Bernie has been using this in a highly effective way to move the policy platform of the Democratic Party to the Left. Would he be in the position of considerable influence he's in now if he'd burned all his bridges by obstinately refusing to work with people that didn't share his democratic socialist ideals? 

Think of it another way; if Moderates in the Democratic Party get shit on by the Left no matter what they do, what motivation is for them to put any effort in to be better? By all means criticize when it's warranted, but also give due credit when appropriate as well. 

Game Denial, or demanding purity within a corrupt political system, is a good way to build up unrealistic expectations while getting nothing accomplished. When what we should be working on is changing the Rules of the Game. I'm fully behind organizations like Wolf-PAC which are looking to do just that, but in the mean time we'll be far better off doing the best we can with the system that's in place.

[SOUL]

1 hour ago, DocWatts said:

The negativity of which I was referring to was directed at people outside of the political apparatus, with unreasonable expectations for what someone working within our political system should be able to accomplish. The catalyst for my earlier thought was seeing people complain that legislation mandating that a $15 minimum  be phased in over four years, rather than going in to effect immediately; while also ignoring that the Bill would also eliminate the sub-minimum wage for tipped workers and disabled people. Yeah that's not ideal, but it goes a long way in fixing a serious problem.

Contrast that attitude with that of actual policy makers themselves, who know that they have to work with moderates in order to have any chance at getting legislation passed.

I'd argue that Bernie has been using this in a highly effective way to move the policy platform of the Democratic Party to the Left. Would he be in the position of considerable influence he's in now if he'd burned all his bridges by obstinately refusing to work with people that didn't share his democratic socialist ideals? 

Think of it another way; if Moderates in the Democratic Party get shit on by the Left no matter what they do, what motivation is for them to put any effort in to be better? By all means criticize when it's warranted, but also give due credit when appropriate as well. 

Game Denial, or demanding purity within a corrupt political system, is a good way to build up unrealistic expectations while getting nothing accomplished. When what we should be working on is changing the Rules of the Game. I'm fully behind organizations like Wolf-PAC which are looking to do just that, but in the mean time we'll be far better off doing the best we can with the system that's in place.

I'm still pretty baffled at what you are disgruntled about.

First you were telling me the 'left' needs to be nicer to get policy through which now you say Bernie is actually doing this. So the nicer isn't about legislators but of the people, the electorate being nicer to get them in favor of the policy...the policies they already overwhelmingly support?

This really seems like some deep algorithm bubble feed issue, people online crap all over each other every which way. People aren't going to react and behave the way you want them about things in the way you think they should.

Humans are a highly social yet a particularly temperamental unhinged animal with access to a technological dopamine device in their pocket. So your gripe is that one particular group of the sleepwalkers is not nicer? Hm...ok.

If I were to gripe it would be that all humans could be nicer ...online, offline, in line, all lines...but hey, I'm radical like that since it is the topic anyway.

 

Edited January 29, 2021 by SOUL

[Dryas]

No radical points. Incrementalism ftw. 

[DocWatts]

@SOUL

I suppose my point is that politicians and legislators don't operate in a vacuum, there's a larger cultural context that politicians have to work within. How the Left, in a broader cultural context, conducts itself matters. If the Left is seen by the rest of the Culture as being unreasonable, it's going to make it harder for Progressives to get elected, and to be effective once in office. 

The only way that social change is  going to happen is to build a broad base of support for the policy platform we would like to see enacted. That's exactly how things like marijuana legalization and gay marriage came to be accepted; the Left was successful in making itself seem reasonable to the rest of the Culture, to the point where these issues are no longer controversial to most people. If we want things like Police Reform to happen, it has to be pitched in a way that's not scary to people in middle America. People like Bernie realize this, but not everyone ln the Left does.

Your point about algorithm bubbles that lead to echo chambers is of course true, but how these bubbles interact with the rest of the culture matters. If the rest of the country associates Leftists with its most radical and extreme elements, then the social policies that the Left advocates for are going to be significantly hindered. The easier it is for people to make a caricature of you, the harder time you're going to have selling them on your ideas.

So, Pragmatic Idealism ftw.

 

[Boethius]

My most radical view is that I think we are all being held to account, even now, for our ability and willingness to live our lives out of an abundance of love. As Bertrand Russell once said, actions born out of a motive that is ultimately other than love are at best useless, and are more likely harmful at worst.

[Danioover9000]

@LfcCharlie4

On 1/28/2021 at 10:56 AM, LfcCharlie4 said:

Thought this could be an interesting thread, what is a 'radical' take you have (regarding society, economics & politics) that you think would actually work & benefit society? 

Mine is that individual Economic & Financial education in the modern day is far more beneficial than advocating for systemic change that will take decades, if not centuries. It will also benefit society more in the short term if the majority of citizens were financially literate. 

For example, take 2 18 year olds. 

One educates, starts a business, invests for 3 decades, becomes wealthy, offers great value to society & actually has resources to help at least on a local level& inspire some change. 

One dedicates their life to social change & activism for those 3 decades, has an average job & salary and doesn't have any real resources to make any kind of changes. 

This opinion arose from seeing endless politics & economic debates on Twitter, TikTok & even on here. 

I guess in a nutshell, it's also be the change you want to see. 

I'm not saying don't advocate for change etc, I'm just saying debating online everyday isn't going to get you that far & probs isn't going to make much of a difference in the grand scheme of things. 

What's your 'radical' viewpoints? 

   Are you asking to share what our life purpose is at the moment?

[tsuki]

Another radical idea: mandatory therapy before claiming any public office.

Therapists being apolitical is the trick.

[StarStruck]

1 hour ago, tsuki said:

Another radical idea: mandatory therapy before claiming any public office.

Therapists being apolitical is the trick.

Agreed. It is important for everybody with traumatic youth. I remember you recommending psychotherapy to me and it is helping a lot. Thank you for that. Good thing it is paid by my health care.