Tag Archives: politics

Day 450: Changing The Cultures At Work

Recently I quit my job and moved unto a new employer, with new office, new colleagues, new routines, and a new culture. It has been very interesting, primarily, because I have been able to observe the difference in culture.

At my first job, there was a pressure and stress to the atmosphere. There was a lot of animosity under the surface, irritation because of changes in the organization, or just general dissatisfaction with the amount of work that was pressuring the employers. There was also this interesting tendency to reward/look positively at putting in long hours at the office. It was seen as good to work more, and I found myself, on a couple of occasions, competing with my colleagues about who was working the most. When I look back at it now, I find it fascinating, because there is absolutely no value in merely working – the focus – should be on the RESULT. If the result is dependent upon working more hours, then it might make sense – however if the result is instead dependent on the QUALITY of work put in – and not the quantity – then it does not make sense to put in more hours than what is needed.

Another point that was quite noticeable at my old work was the hierarchical structure and the competition existent between some of the co-workers. And mostly, the competition had to do about achieving a higher standing in the eyes of those higher up in the hierarchy. Many times this created a tense atmosphere, which led to mistakes being suppressed and withheld, rather than being opened up and discussed. Consequently, information sometimes got lost, and the organization as a whole lost strength.

Though, the most compromising point existent at my old office must have been gossip. It is a very destructive habit. It creates separation between individuals, it separate groups, creates many misunderstandings, and assumptions. Gossip, while it might sound as if a problem is being discussed and opened up, it is only a way of immersing oneself in emotions while attempting to destroy another and get backing from others to feel justified about it. Gossiping is cowardly and should not be allowed in any office. For a organization, gossip is like a illness. I would imagine, that the same organization, free from gossip, would be able to perform with 100 % more efficiency. However it is very difficult to do, because gossip easily becomes like an addiction. Then we become addicted to our problems as well, because they offer us opportunity to bring up our gossip and have others join in.

Hence, the big differences thus far that I have noticed, is not so much in the description of the work, but more in the culture existing at the office – and it is fascinating the impact that this culture can have on how the work is experienced. And culture is not something that is easily changed. In-fact, there are organizational experts and motivational speakers specialized in only changing the culture/the general approach of the employees of a workplace – and in most of the cases without much success. The reason for that, as I see it, is simple. It has not yet been effectively understood how the culture, the accepted and allowed set of behavior in a office, is created – and that employers must put in A LOT more resources into working with/directing the underlying problems that the employers have that come through as for example gossip.

One practical correction that I have applied at work in order to support myself to be more effective has been to push myself to be professional – to keep my relationships and myself directed and targeted at and towards fulfilling the goals/responsibilities of the organization. To do that, I have pushed myself to keep in my mind a overview – to see not only my own personal life – but to as well see how my position, and the actions I take in my position, influence and effect others. Doing that, I have also come to see the value in what I am doing. And due to this personal relationships has become less important, in favor of prioritizing fulfilling the responsibilities I have.

On a final note, I want to add that, when it comes to office politics and work environments, even though it might feel like we cannot change them, I cannot emphasize enough the importance of us taking back the initiative and ACTING. We cannot wait for others to change – if we want a different atmosphere – we have to create it – and that always begins with ourselves. If we want less gossip, first we must make sure that WE do not gossip. If we want less stress and more structure – then we must first make sure that WE live and create that for ourselves – that we stand as an example. And I have experienced this at my past work place – things do change when I change. As such, blame is NEVER valid – we always have the power and capacity to do something about our situation.




Day 415: Redefining Debate

When facts become about winning, that is when discussions will loose meaning, decisions will be made that makes no sense, and people will disagree with each-other just because, even though they might not disagree with one another on a factual level. In the western world, we call this phenomenon ‘debating’ – taking the-bait – and trying to overturn the opponent to ones own world view.

It is really interesting to look at the nature of debating, because what is really the point with it? If we enter a discussion with the mindset that we are going to convince the other person that we are right, while at the same time being convinced that we ourselves are right and the other is wrong, then how much space is there for us to actually learn something and reconsider our own points of view? Not that much I would say.

I have noticed with myself that I will, especially with my siblings, enter a debate mode. I will enter into the discussion with a certain point of view, this view will be challenged by my siblings, and then I will defend my view. The reason as to why I defend my view is because I fear losing, fear losing in the sense that my siblings will not agree with my perspective and the way I see things. Obviously, it is completely irrational, because my perspective will not disappear or become diminished only because someone else disagrees with it – if I see what I see – and I see that it is in-fact so – then why am I so fearful about what others say about it? On a physical level, there is nothing for me to lose.

In-fact, it is in reverse. When I approach a discussion from a starting point of wanting to convince another, I am closing myself off from hearing their perspective, hence, closing myself off from expanding and learning from another, thus actually creating loss within myself and my reality.

Hence, what is really going on here? Why is it that I feel a need to protect myself, my views, my perspectives, and to make sure that others agree with them? The way I see it, it is about insecurity, and because I build my self-image through others, and then, when others respect and agree with my views, apparently my self-image is strengthened, and when the opposite happens, it is weakened. If I however, would trust myself, and have a stable, constant self-image, not based upon the stimuli/response of others, then I would not be in fear of changing my point of view, and not in fear of allowing the perspective of another into me, for me to consider it unconditionally.

Hence, the solution that I see is to dare to step beyond ‘my information’ and ‘your information’ and see, realize and understand that it is simply different perspectives, different kinds of information, and that it does not matter who or what is the bearer of the information. What is important is the perspective in itself, the words in themselves, and whether they are supportive or not – and to be able to establish that – I must dare to be open and unconditional – and thus I will practice approaching discussions from this starting point. Hence this is how I will redefine ‘debating’; ‘A discussion with another to establish what information/perspective/direction is BEST and to support mutual growth and expansion for all participants’.

Additionally, a supportive principle to live by with regards to this point is to ‘investigate all things and hold unto that which is good‘.

Learn more about this way of living

Day 36: Liberalism – Freedom vs. Principled Freedom

liberals_585In this blog I am going to take a closer look at liberalism – and answer the questions – what is liberalism? And what is the problem with liberalism, and how can this be changed into a solution, and what will be the rewards for walking such a solution?

Firstly – what is liberalism?

This is taken from Wikipedia:

Liberalism (from the Latin liberalis) is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality. Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property.

According to my research on this subject – which involves primarily the opinions, and ideas of Chris Hedges, and Noam Chomsky – what I am able to see is that Liberalism is a very complex, and wide array of beliefs that intermingle – shape shift – and ultimately comes out very differently depending upon whom it is that is explains the point of liberalism. Thus I will here give the point liberalism a very simple definition that I am going to work with – and that is that liberalism is the drive towards equality between human beings, without a authoritarian state – where human-beings are allowed to express themselves according to their free will, and compete on the marketplaces of the world without stifling regulations – in essence be free so to speak.


According to my understanding – the idea of liberalism is primarily based upon the desire that each human being is to be free to decide his own life without anyone telling him, or her what to do – thus the epitome of free choice – each human being completely free to decide who, and what they are going to be in this world.

The problem I see with this approach is that allowing everyone to be completely free – also means the one accepts and allow abuse to take part in this world. I mean – that is the definition of free – EVERYTHING is allowed and there are no boundaries, no rules, no principles, and no guidelines – if you want to become super-rich – go for it! Or, if you want to get children, and raise them to become your slaves to take care of you when you’re old – then go for it! Or, if you want and desire become a pedophile and satisfy your innermost hidden desires – then go for it!

The obvious problem with this is that such a notion of freedom can’t exist without harm, and suffering – in-fact – the world we see today is the results of freedom given to individuals to determine themselves, and their lives without any practical principles being decided upon as limits for the freedom one is allowed to exercise – because obviously there must be such a principle for a society to exist wherein all participants have a fulfilling, and dignified life.

Thus – the problem with unrestricted freedom is that it does not have an outcome that is best for all – it has an outcome of simply allowing people to do what they want no matter the consequences of their actions – and for our world to be safe, secure, and without unpredictable events – such a unrestrained freedom can’t be allowed to exist – thus freedom must be restrained through principles – there must be boundaries that make free will, and free choice be not completely free – but free to the extent where it does not cause anyone harm.

Let’s take a practical example – imagine a country where there is no laws – and no principles – there is complete, and total freedom; here on individual decides to become drunk, and then take his car and go driving. While driving this individual due this drunken state by mistake hit’s a child that become paralyzed for the rest of his life; this is not an outcome that is acceptable for a effective, and honorable society – because this is a freedom that comes at the expense of beings sacrificing their lives and well-being for another human-being to be free to make harmful, and destructive decisions.

If we look at how the current financial system functions – we’re able to see how the freedom given to people to make money by any means necessary is having tremendously harmful effects for certain other people – wherein through the stock-markets of the world – prices of resources, and the economies of countries are being used as pawns in a giant casino gamble – where from one day to another – an entire country can collapse and fall into ruins due to a wealthy person placing his money in such a way as to manipulate the pricing of particular resources. This type of freedom is not acceptable – as it’s a freedom that cause HARM – and cause people to live lives of uncertainty, and fear – instead of a life that is best for them.

As such – what can be concluded is that – the problem with liberalism is that unrestrained freedom have consequences that are not acceptable – and can’t be accepted and allowed in this world.


What is the solution? How can liberalism be aligned so that it isn’t harmful? As I see it the point that must change for liberalism to be effective is that freedom must change so that it’s instead of free-freedom – instead principled freedom. Which means that instead of one being able, and allowed to do exactly everything that one want to do – one is only allowed, and able to do that which one want to do but that isn’t harmful, or destructive for anyone else. So – freedom to the extent where it’s not harmful.

If one on the one hand take a look at this principled freedom – it’s actually more free than normal free-for-all freedom – because in the normal free-for-all freedom there must always be a winner, and a looser – the winner get’s to experience his freedom – yet at the expense of another that loose his freedom – and that can’t be called real freedom – it should instead be called bullying, or abuse – because that is in essence what it is.

Principled freedom on the other hand does not have any side-effects as harm – an example of living out principled freedom would be that one decide to go and take a bath one afternoon – and obviously taking a bath doesn’t harm anyone – and thus it’s a principled decision that one is free to make and it doesn’t infer on anyone else’s freedom – because one do not require a slave to go and take a bath.

In relation to trade, and economics – free-trade must change into principled free-trade – which means that we’re not anymore allowed to manipulate prices on false values of supply and demand – because this many times places the producer of the product into a state of poverty – because when the price is able to be deflated, or inflated upon the basis of rumors on the market – then that is obviously a point of freedom that is abusive, and harmful – when it means that the one selling his product can’t place food on the table for his family that night – because he wasn’t paid anything for the crops he sold.


The rewards for changing the liberalism and it’s primary component of freedom – from free-for-all freedom – to principled freedom – is that we can now as a humanity begin to trust one another – because not anymore will we have to be afraid that suddenly someone is going to stab a knife in our back as they decide to “live out their freedom” – because now there won’t exist any personalized idea of freedom that is harmful for the whole – freedom will be aligned to what is best for all – as principled freedom.

And as for trade – here we will have the reward that trade will not anymore be a gamble – and as a producer you won’t fear being scammed, and receive absolutely crap pay for what you’ve created – because the freedom to utilize various means to manipulate prices – will not be allowed anymore – as such a freedom do have consequences that are harmful for the greater whole.

With principled freedom becoming the landmark for humanity – we will have a world that is safe for our children to grow up in because harm will not be allowed to take place in the name of freedom, and free choice.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Day 31: Problems With Socialism

Today I am going to look at socialism through goggles of problem/solution/reward – looking firstly at – what is socialism? And then taking apart socialism to look at what the specific philosophy implies – and what the effects will be of implementing such a system – and how such an idea could be changed, molded, and directed to support what is best for all.

Firstly – what is socialism? Here is a definition taken from Wikipedia:

Socialism is an economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy.[1] “Social ownership” may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership, or citizen ownership of equity.[2] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[3] They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets or planning, how management is to be organised within productive institutions, and the role of the state in constructing socialism.[4]

A socialist economic system would consist of a system of production and distribution organized to directly satisfy economic demands and human needs, so that goods and services would be produced directly for use instead of for private profit[5] driven by the accumulation of capital. Accounting would be based on physical quantities, a common physical magnitude, or a direct measure of labour-time in place of financial calculation.[6][7] Distribution would be based on the principle to each according to his contribution.

As a political movement, socialism includes a diverse array of political philosophies, ranging from reformism to revolutionary socialism. Proponents of state socialism advocate the nationalisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange as a strategy for implementing socialism. In contrast, libertarian socialism proposes the traditional view of direct worker’s control of the means of production and opposes the use of state power to achieve such an arrangement, opposing both parliamentary politics and state ownership.[citation needed] Democratic socialism seeks to establish socialism through democratic processes and propagate its ideals within the context of a democratic political system.

Modern socialism originated from an 18th-century intellectual and working class political movement that criticized the effects of industrialisation and private property on society. In the early 19th-century, “socialism” referred to any concern for the social problems of capitalism irrespective of the solutions to those problems. However, by the late 19th-century, “socialism” had come to signify opposition to capitalism and advocacy for an alternative system based on some form of social ownership.[8] Marxists expanded further on this, attributing scientific assessment and democratic planning as critical elements of socialism.[9]

In essence one is able to classify socialism as the sharing of property according to each one’s ability to work – wherein accumulation of capital is not allowed for the benefit of individuals – but capital is mostly owned by the state; capital being buildings, machines, cars, factories, etc.

Thus – what socialism aims to do is to level the playing field – and have each individual on equal terms be able to compete with each one’s time being valued equally – one hour of labor for a steel worker – giving the same salary as one hour of work for a lawyer.


carnivalThe main problem with socialism is that it’s focus is at directing property – directing labor – and directing money – and within this the ruling principle is fairness – meaning that monies should be divided fairly by the sweat of one’s brow – and not by for example inheriting the money; the problem with this is that there is no underlying principles as to what the system is to achieve – it’s merely a band aid solution to quell the competitive nature of man and enforce fairness – but there is no consideration towards changing the nature of man – and not basing the system on fairness – but instead basing the system on what is best for all – wherein what is best for all is the objective – and the final goal.

In Sweden where I live we’ve have socialist political system – and what this means is that differences in class is equalized through taxation, and policies are enforced that aim at having all participants in the system earn the same monies – and when everyone earn the same amount of money – that is then apparently considered an achievement – but I mean – is this really all we can expect out of a political ideology? That monies are to be divided fairly between people? Shouldn’t there be MORE to a political dispensation? And obviously – the answer is YES – there should be more! There should be a goal – a clear objective – that dividing money between people is not a goal in itself – but that it’s a means of reaching a perfect society wherein EVERYONE live a life of perfection – and earth is taken care – and everyone is able to live life’s that are fulfilling and enjoyable.

Due to me living in a socialist country – I’ve had direct experience of the outcomes of a socialist system – and I am with certainty able to say that simply dividing monies between people – and equalizing wages – that does not produce humans with integrity – self-respect – and with the ability to CO-operate – what the equalizing of wages have created in Sweden is instead a country filled with complacent people that have everything they feel they need to live a comfortable life – yet there is not DRIVE to perfect society – and to perfect each and every individual in the country – not only by giving them the material they require to live – but also through perfecting the psyche – perfecting the motivation – perfecting the mental well-being of each and everyone – because that type of perfection is not something that arise simply by giving monies to everyone.

And that is why I say that the problem with socialism is that it stops at only considering property, and money – and how this should be divided between people – I mean – that is only one point that must be attended to and sorted – but when that point as achieved – and all have a basic materialistic foundation and welfare – then the process of establishing a society of perfection must continue until there really is perfection – perfection being that there is no crime – there is no mental retardation – there is no illness – there is no violence – there is no unemployment – there is no depression – there is no outcasts – there is no fear – then – when everyone in society are fulfilled – we can say that we’re getting somewhere – but simply dividing monies – that isn’t enough.

As with communism – the primary point that socialism miss is the self – the individual human-being and his experience of himself – as instead all focus is placed on money, property, capital, salary, and fairness – while instead focus should be placed on asking ourselves how it is that each individual human being is partly responsible for creating the world we live in – and how we’re within this able to re-educate each and every human being to only create that which is best for all.

Because – what must be understood is that an ideology – and a philosophy can only be implemented and truly become the very living flesh of each inhabitant of a country – if that point is lived, understood, and embraced by each and everyone – if that isn’t the case – then it’s merely empty words that have been written down in a policy but where there is no substance behind the words – because the country’s inhabitants merely follow the policy out of fear of punishment – that is then not change – that is simply coercing people to adapt to a particular idea instead of making everyone co-creators – co-responsible – seeing that a society can only be as effective as it’s individual citizen – because each citizen is a brick in a wall – and unless all bricks are effective in fulfilling their purpose – the wall will be unstable, and not be able to stand point and function effectively.

To conclude what the problem with socialism is – socialism doesn’t consider the inner workings of man – seeing that what must be changed is not merely how resources are own and distributed in this world – but what must be changed is each individual human being – and that sharing resources can’t be the final goal – but there must be a much more ambitious principle – else the political dispensation is simply a organized way of giving up into being less than what we’re capable of being; thus – socialism doesn’t strive towards true magnificence in every way – and does not consider that to reach such magnificence – each individual human being must be magnificent.


What is then the solution?

The solution is that we within developing our societies become more ambitious in how it is that we want life on earth to be – and how it is that we want life in society to be; I mean – simply saying that “I want to survive” – “I just want to have peace” – that’s not enough – if we’re to create a new world we’re we can truly be happy, and thrive as a race with the rest of existence – we require to dare to set high standards for ourselves – and in this we can’t stop at saying that resources should be divided equal among people to each his own contribution – we must state a living policy – a living ideology – and through our words create the foundation of a world of magnificence – wherein resources are not merely divided equal because that is fair – no – resources are divided equally to all to support each human being to become his utmost potential as a human-being – and education is given to everyone because we see, and understand that when some are more educated than others, this is more than often abused and from this slaves, and masters are born.

And we state that the point with dividing resources equally among everyone is so that each can be FREE to LIVE – free to develop and expand to our utmost ability – becoming perfection in every way – and within this we will achieve a world of individuals that do really care about creating a world that is magnificent – wherein we are able to expand our care to the animal kingdom, to nature, to the plant-life, and the insects – and make sure that not only humans are able to live a fulfilling life – but that each, and every form of life that enters this world is cared for, and considered as we’d like to be if we were in the same position as that life form.

Thus – as most ideologies that have been develop by humanity – socialism lack the ambition to create heaven on earth – it lacks to ambition to set a target for humanity as a whole that only absolute perfection will be satisfactory and anything less but absolute perfection is a compromise. I mean – how could socialism in anyway be a solution to the strife of mankind – when socialism allows gossip, allows fear, allows mistrust, allows violence, allows judgment, allows jealousy, allows competition, allows comparison – these are all parts of the current human psyche that must be corrected and removed in order for a world of true perfection to come forth – and because socialism doesn’t consider, or establish a solution for the condition of the human psyche – it’s a inefficient and unrealistic political ideology that only offers a band-aid solution – so at least most people don’t have to starve to death.

To conclude, and summarize – the solution as to how to perfect socialism, and create political ideology that is best for all – is to be ambitious and set high standards for ourselves – and demand nothing less but absolute perfection from ourselves, and our fellow neighbors – it’s to consider, and find solutions for the malfunctioned psyche of man – to make sure that there exist no hidden agendas as psychological disorders within people but that all are effective in caring for their inner, and outer well-being.


What is the reward for implementing such a political system?

The reward is that we will have a purpose in our life’s – for the first time a purpose that is of meaning, and value – the purpose being that we are here on this earth to manifest perfection, and to create heaven – and that we are here on this earth to make sure that when we leave – the earth is in a better condition than when we came here.

Within this what will develop between people in society is real friendship – because people share the same passion for life, living, and all strife for perfection – thus people will be able to trust each other and bond at a much deeper level than can ever be conceived in todays consumerism system – there will be no more fear – and within this each persons individual self-expression will slowly but surely emerge from the darkness of the physical – so that within this we’ll have a society, and a world that is organic, and filled with life as living, caring, and considerate human beings – all operating by the same principle – to give as they’d like to receive as what is best for all.

A system that holds these ambitions are already in development – check it out here – equal money.

Enhanced by Zemanta


SocialismWikipedia: Socialism is an economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy.

Day 27: Democracy

In this post democracy will be discussed – as the problem with democracy, and the solutions that are available – and the rewards that will come by implementing the solution.

Firstly – let’s look at – what is democracy?

hands”Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. Democracy allows eligible citizens to participate equally—either directly or through elected representatives—in the proposal, development, and creation of laws. It encompasses social, economic and cultural conditions that enable the free and equal practice of political self-determination.

The term originates from the Greek δημοκρατία (dēmokratía) “rule of the people”,which was coined from δῆμος (dêmos) “people” and κράτος (kratos) “power” or “rule” in the 5th century BCE to denote the political systems then existing in Greek city-states, notably Athens; the term is an antonym to ἀριστοκρατία (aristocratie) “rule of an elite”. While theoretically these definitions are in opposition, in practice the distinction has been blurred historically, The political system of Classical Athens, for example, granted democratic citizenship to an elite class of free men and excluded slaves and women from political participation. In virtually all democratic governments throughout ancient and modern history, democratic citizenship consisted of an elite class until full enfranchisement was won for all adult citizens in most modern democracies through the suffrage movements of the 19th and 20th centuries. The English word dates to the 16th century, from the older Middle French and Middle Latin equivalents.

Democracy contrasts with forms of government where power is either held by one person, as in a monarchy, or where power is held by a small number of individuals, as in an oligarchy. Nevertheless, these oppositions, inherited from Greek philosophy, are now ambiguous because contemporary governments have mixed democratic, oligarchic, and monarchic elements. Karl Popper defined democracy in contrast to dictatorship or tyranny, thus focusing on opportunities for the people to control their leaders and to oust them without the need for a revolution.”

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy


Democracy is currently an ideal, and a idea – a belief that somehow people can come together in this world and by their free will, and by their own consent make an informed decision and choose how they want society to function – obviously – this is ONLY an idea, and consequently and illusion – because that is a characteristic of an idea – it’s not a real, manifested, and practical living. The question is – how come this idea is not practically lived?

The first point that must be realized is that human beings have no free will – the other point that must be realized is that – some people have understood that we as humans do not have free will, and have within this spent lot’s of time, and effort to map out exactly how to manipulate the will of human beings to have it to be the will they want it to be – this is currently called social engineering – and also goes by the name of commercial – marketing – propaganda – or cognitive disinformation – it’s the process of repeating information in a way that entice the malleable minds of people to accept the information repeated as being real – and how the world functions – while that is not the case at all.

So – let’s go through these two points in more detail – to look at exactly how it is the human beings have no free will, and how the let’s call it – automated will – of people is then manipulated, and coerced into a very limited, and dumbed down understanding of this world, and reality.

How is it that people have no free will?

The reason that human beings have no free will is because we haven’t designed who we are – and we haven’t ever investigated what it means to live – what we’ve done as a race is to take the easy way out – which is to copy all the knowledge of our parents, and assume that everything they told us, showed us, and lived as themselves is correct, and the way reality functions – and then decided to make that knowledge our primary guide for living in this world; obviously making our small adjustments to this knowledge, personalizing it a bit so we don’t just take everything word by word! Because – hey – we can’t be that much of a copy-cat – we must be, and feel a little bit special in our views, and ideas of this world; but in essence – and looking at the basic principles of how we understand our world, and reality to function – we have simply copied everything that our parents have told us.

Thus – we have no free will – because we’ve never cared to create a free will – because having a free will implies that we’ve actually investigated everything, and within that freed ourselves from any form of limitation as knowledge – cross-referenced everything – and in-fact stood able to see everything that is here for what it is – not trying to place our accumulated knowledge as a thin linen over the world to have it be in the color that we’d desire it to be in – that would be free will – a will being FREE of any form of restriction – able to consider everything with no fear – with no desire – with no opinion – with no little voice in the head telling us who, and how we should be – obviously this is not how we exist – our will is tainted, and chained to millions of small reactions, experiences, thoughts, backchats, assumptions, ideas, definitions – all knowledge that we’ve accumulated and downloaded from our parents – just as our parents have downloaded from their parents – and so on into infinity.

As such – this is why we do not have free will – and as such we are unable to in-fact implement actual, and real democracy – which implies that EACH citizen stand as a voice of reason – in giving a vote, and sharing a perspective as to how society is to be constructed and built – because it’s not even our will that we’re communicating, and sharing – it’s the will of past accumulated knowledge.

So – this is our first problem – we’ve become automatons unable to function by our own will, directive, and critical thinking – now – let’s look at the second point as to why democracy is currently not able to exist in this world – which is the point of elitism, and people that have been completely subdued, and hijacked by greed – and have within that decided to go to any lengths to control the automated minds of others to align with their own wishes of more power, authority = money; what I am talking about here is the tendency of such people to use propaganda – as disinformation – to control the minds of others to be as they’d like others minds to be.

This is not a new problem – it’s been existing FOREVER – I mean – all of society is based upon disinformation – as people presenting themselves to be one thing in order to be given respect, and be considered as more important than others – we can go back to the ancient Egypt to see this very same pattern playing out – back then the manipulation techniques was less refined but still very effective – back then the ruling class convinced the other people (slaves) that apparently the ruling class had been selected by gods to live a completely awesome life with lot’s of money, and sex – and that all others sadly had to be slaves – and this was completely accepted by everyone while clearly – it’s a fucking lie!

Today – the disinformation techniques have been more refined – today it’s not openly admitted that anyone is a slave – instead people are led to believe that they are free to create their own life’s, and that apparently there is no ruling class – because we live in modern society that values equality, and justice – really? Who say’s that? Oh – right – the television, and some documents signed by the president – hmm – yet looking around this apparently equal society I’m able to see homeless people – people without food – people without sanitation – I’m able to see the majority of people scurrying about trying to earn money to survive – in complete fear, and totally indebted – spending most of their wake lives trying not to piss of their boss – so that they can make ends meet when the month comes to an end – and within all of this mess – some people tend to live without a worry in the world – having EVERYTHING and more than they could ever need – in the form of money, and material possessions beyond what any normal person could earn in several lifetimes – yet still – with all of this around us – as proof that we still live in a feudal society – we tend to believe that we are free, and treated with justice in a society that care’s for it’s people – no – it’s not true – we the people have become automatons and we’re currently being fooled by other automatons that have been pre-programmed to be the apparent elite of this world.

Thus – this is our second major problem – there are people that seek control, and power – and these people will spew out enormous amounts of false information in this world – and make people believe that they make decisions that are informed, and by their free will – while really they are just being cleverly manipulated to do precisely with the slave-lords want their slaves to do – to work, and produce more material possessions, and services for their masters.

That is really what has become of democracy today – it’s the lie that is told to the average person in this world – that apparently he’s free to choose – while really – he’s being manipulated – and democracy is a part of that lie as a veil that is lowered before the eyes of each human being in this world – to believe that they are living the life they’ve chosen – while they’re in-fact living a life that has been decided for them already by other people.

This is why democracy is currently not possible in our world.


Though – in having said this – I do not want to bash on the initial idea of democracy – and the principle that democracy as a ideal is founded upon – because it’s a COOL principle – it’s a COOL idea – democracy implies EQUALITY it implies EQUAL CONSIDERATION – it implies LISTENING – it implies HEARING – and it implies no more slavery because everyone is here to make a decision by equal means – where the majority rule. That is how a society should function.

To be able to manifest this principle, and way of living into practical – physical reality – we require to first, and foremost – take back the control of our own minds – that is of essence. We must understand that currently we’ve become automatons that function by assumption, and broken knowledge that was handed down to us by those who went before us – and within this we require to stand up – and push ourselves to develop, and create actual – and real free will.

Within doing this – developing real free will – the second problem – of elitists trying to manipulate the will of the people with false information – will cease to exist – as such manipulation requires that people are dependent, and mentally inferior in order to function – a human that has developed integrity, and clear critical thinking skills can’t be swayed be the manipulation tactics of propaganda and social engineering – because a human being that has develop the skill to be stable, and directive – will not have any dysfunctional knowledge in the form of emotions, feelings, or thoughts running wild within – and as such there is no switch to through manipulation trigger within a self-developed human-being – that human being has taken back to control of his switch so to speak – and is now standing and using his switch in order to make informed decisions – that result in what is best for all.

As such – to conclude – the solution to being able to implement REAL democracy – is to free our own minds from the bullshit that we’ve allowed to fester within – and become our way of living – we must purify ourselves, and not anymore allow ourselves to make decisions within fear, or desire – but to instead make sure that we stand principled, and directive – and that we don’t allow propaganda to influence who we are.


The reward for developing ourselves in to free individuals that are able to stand self-independent – and clear – and evaluate critically everything that is thrown at us – is LIFE – and real democracy will become the road to life – as a world that is best for all – were everyone is considered – and everyone is cared for – were everyone is heard, and everyone is given to opportunity to voice themselves, and were no one will be forgotten.

The reward is that we’ll be able to develop a society were fear is but a distant memory – a story told around the campfire to children that have no concept of fear – because they’ve lived, and grown up in such a supportive, caring, and compassionate environment – that they’ve never ever experienced themselves in danger, or threatened in anyway – they’ve had EVERYTHING they ever wanted to have – and it’s been given to them unconditionally – because that is the principle by which society functions – GIVE AS YOU’D LIKE TO RECEIVE.


Enhanced by Zemanta

2012 Democracy Is The Key To Freedom

The way to change this world rests in politics and as has been proven by activists through out the centuries – no change will ever come through refusing to partake in the political scene while only focusing upon “resisting” the “badness” of the government.

Through voting we elect officials and as such invest them with the power to make decisions for the entirety of society – these decisions then become the physically manifested reality of our day-to-day lives. The reason as to why our lives are fucked up is not due to democracy and politics itself, but due to us as the public being uneducated and brainwashed voters and as such voting for the wrong people.

Nobody other than us as the public has created the system as it currently function and we have done so through voting. The men in power that make decisions to go to war, to exploit other countries natural resources, to wreak havoc on the lives of those already marginalized, are as much our decisions as theirs – because we voted them into power.

Activists avoids politics and focuses upon creating change through demonstrations, acts of violence and resistance, and building plans for alternate realities, but what they do in essence is that they blame the decision making process in society as democracy and politicians for the problems in the world, and then they themselves avoid and refuse to take part of the process of democracy and politics – isn’t that alarmingly schizophrenic? First disagreeing with what is here and then refusing to themselves take the power in their hands to do something about it, but instead merely resisting and demonstrating against the system of actual power and authority – is our activists bribed by corporations to spread the lie that democracy is useless?

Politics and democracy is not as difficult as it looks. In order to get into power you need to have the majority of the votes – one vote over 50 % of all votes – and once this is achieved you are in a position to legally and with the support of police and government employees to change everything in society – from how food and wages are distributed – to what corporations should be allowed, and who should own these corporations – when you get the power through democratic election not even the rules and limitations of money stand in the way as the rules of money are based upon laws that the publically elected have created and as such new laws can be created.

The best thing about democracy is that the minority – the 50 % minus one vote – can’t change the course of direction that the majority decide upon and as such those that are currently rich and wealthy – which is about 1 % of the worlds population – will have no ability to hinder a new world raising forth from a democratic process of election. Thus – if we decide it to be poverty needs to be no more, because we have the majority and are as such able to change the direction of the world.

The reason why we’ve not had change in the world even though democracy has been introduced is because we’ve not utilized it effectively, we’ve become brainwashed to make decisions in self-interest and for the benefit of our individual lives – instead of taking decisions that are in the benefit of the whole. But still the election process remains the same and we only need but to change our starting point when we elect a new government – from wanting to satisfy our own individual worlds, to instead wanting to satisfy the world in it’s entirety – then we’ll have a new world come forth that is best for all – heaven on earth.

Investigate democracy and realize that activism is but a teenage-rebellion behavior that won’t ever muster to any change – we need to come together and vote for a democratic party that will in-fact bring through a world that is best for all.

Being Pragmatic Can Mean Many Things

Pragmatic is the most looked up word in the Merriam Webster dictionary this year.

In common understanding, the word pragmatic has a positive connotation to it – when you are pragmatic, you’re sensible, reasonable, and you don’t let emotions get in your way – reality is seen for what it is and decisions are taken accordingly; yet does this definition of pragmatic in-fact make the word positive? Or is this word secretly a word of evil – used to manipulate and deceive?

Let’s take a look at the dictionary definition of pragmatic:

Pragmatic according to http://www.thefreedictionary.com/mat

  1. 1.   Dealing or concerned with facts or actual occurrences; practical.
  2. 2.   Philosophy Of or relating to pragmatism.
  3. 3.   Relating to or being the study of cause and effect in historical or political events with emphasis on the practical lessons to be learned from them.
  4. 4.   Archaic

a)    Active; busy.

b)    Active in an officious or meddlesome way.

c)     Dogmatic; dictatorial

What can be deducted and understood from reading the above definition is that pragmatic is related to physical consequence – to what you do, or do not do, which can be measured physically here. For example – if you take a tennis ball, and you throw it into a glass window so that it breaks – it’s pragmatic to assume that the cause of the window breaking was the tennis ball that was thrown into it. Yet – the interesting question remains – does the fact that you’re pragmatic mean that your actually reasonable, actually benevolent, and truly caring – or does the definition and meaning of pragmatic have secret alleyways and backdoors in which you’re able to hide your true intentions?

Let’s look at the following scenario: a CEO finds out that he’s able to make more profit if he fires his old employers and replaces them with young employers, as young employers would be more productive and effective – herein the CEO study the practicalities of the situation and he’s as such pragmatic. The CEO goes through with his newly found solution and he makes profit – yet the old workers are now laid off without any ability to get a new job, or a full pension, which means that their life is going to become a lot tougher; and as you see – the CEO was pragmatic in this case – yet still he was evil and created consequences for others that he himself wouldn’t have wanted to experience.

This is why the current definition of pragmatic can’t be trusted – the word is open for interpretation, and it doesn’t have a pre-determined value, foundation or principle – it’s instead but the act of being able to see cause and effect. As such the word can be used in order to abuse – stating that it’s pragmatic to earn money, and benefit on the plight of the old – it’s pragmatic to re-direct production to sweat-shop factories – because it makes me more money! The fact that those actions in nature are evil isn’t considered.

Thus – when someone state that he’s pragmatic – realize that this doesn’t mean or say anything about his character, or about the nature of the decision he will make – what makes all the difference is from what starting point you apply the mentality and view of pragmatism; when pragmatism is applied from within and as the starting point of greed and profit it’s abusive – when it’s instead applied from within and as the starting point of what’s best for all – it’s a solution that will bring heaven to earth.

Pragmatic as such is but a skill, a ability to consider cause and effect – it’s not a value and not a principle – yet when the principle of what’s best for all, as doing onto another what you would like to be done onto you is integrated into the definition of the word – it becomes a effective and trustworthy tool, which one can practically live and consequently make a difference in this world.

Pragmatic as it’s current definition is as such abusive – as it’s open to interpretation, wherein the foundation and principle is for the observer to decide upon with his free will – instead of the principle and foundation already being decided and set in stone; as what is best for all.

To be pragmatic and live the word, as a statement of what is best for all would mean that I: consider all my actions and their consequences, making sure that I harm no one – pushing and willing myself to at all times remain consistent in looking at myself as a practical being, realizing that the very fact that I exist, and live as a physical entity – means that I have a responsibility for how and what I live – as my way of life ripples out into the world, and my reality. As such to be pragmatic means that I stand within the principle of what is best for all – and from such a vantage point look at this reality through and as cause and effect – asserting myself that I as the cause will always bring forth the effect as what is best for all.

Let’s live as pragmatic beings – within the principle of what is best for all and as such create a new world – for real – that is physical, tangible, substantial and not but a dream in our mind!

Here you can read more about the birth of practivism – pragmativ living within the consideration of what is best for all: