Parththakkar12

They're the ones who understand how large-scale operations like testing and modelling work. We have 3 months of lockdown behind us. We have the results of covid in front of us. Their models say that the percentage of deaths isn't as high as predicted. Always ask the question : who benefits from saying this thing? Business leaders are critically looking at the stats because they stand to lose their businesses if they don't. But epidemiologists stand to benefit from reporting higher predictions than actually happen! Pharma companies stand to benefit.

Scientists, academics, leaders, experts don't really have to know much about the economy and how it runs. As far as business leaders go, they're starting to say that we should care more about the economy. They're questioning the stats put out by the scientists and experts, because the deaths have been far lower than anticipated. Business leaders are saying we should worry more about unemployment because more people will die of it.

Oh yeah? What if another virus, say ebola comes up? They're bringing up more viruses. Do you have a magic wand that you'll spin and boom! The economy recovered?

According to you. In the short term. Long term, the economy is gone. Good luck with that. Also, you're making a false equivalency between talking about a problem with the intention of solving it, and whining. I never said covid doesn't exist. No conspiracy theories. I'm debating the way it's being handled.

Wait... weren't we discussing how to survive best and collectively have the highest quality life here? Survival isn't even a concern from a nondual perspective. Let's not bypass the issue of living a life by saying 'What life? There's no such thing as a life.'

Then tell me - What if the lock down never ends? What if the economy never reopens? How does this help the community's survival? The way I see it, the world is being put in a lose-lose here. One option is the passive, weak, scared one in which you follow the lockdown and sit tight holding onto everything you've got. The other one is the active one in which you move forward and question everything. You do risk getting the covid in this one but you have a life. Would you want to live an enslaved life in which you're locked down, in fear of the next virus or whatever that's gonna hit you? Is that what you want for yourself and the world? What guarantee do you have that another virus won't come and terrorise you more? Passivity is worse than death, it's living death. By supporting this, you're committing to passivity.

Precisely! What we have to understand as progressives is that most people will be PC and say they're pro-diversity to your face, but really they aren't pro-diversity. They have a shadow that wants a segregated community where they have their culture, customs, traditions, etc. So yeah, they will perceive diversity as a threat to the survival of their community. I can perfectly understand that. Diversity cannot be preached to them, it's gonna have to be sold to them. You'll have to convince such people that diversity benefits them. And there is the possibility that they never see that you're right, even IF you are. (which is a huge 'if' btw) For this, you'll have to include them too! You'll have to stop demonizing them. You'll have to be willing to admit to things that don't benefit them and own up to them. You'll have to make a genuine effort to include them. You'll have to be open to possibilities of your ideas not actually taking society forward, but actually backward, which is why they could be resisting you. Imagine this : What if what you're defining as progress isn't actually progress, but it's actually moving us back? The conservatives will be able to help you see that if it's true. They'll say stuff like 'Yeah this was tried back in my day. Didn't work for these reasons.' You'll have to be willing to consider this possibility and restructure your ideas to actually make progress. This is where your key to true progress lies. Once you have them on your side, there's nothing stopping you from having all the progress you want. I'm telling you Green people this stuff because you're the side that's more conscious. It's always the responsibility of the side that's more conscious/progressive to build a bridge to higher consciousness for the side that's unconscious.

Somebody tell me what this is. Is this true? Or is this laden with conservative projections? Did they really say 'undo your whiteness'?

@Leo Gura, @Zak is asking you : ARE YOU A CULT LEADER?! The forum wants to know!! Not the best question to ask on here.

Interesting idea. I don't know of many lower-ranked employees who would like to share the loss margins if the higher-ups mess up though. Would this require them to invest in the stocks of their company too? It will take immense levels of trust between people. It could work. I'd say it's worth a shot.

That's an insult to my man Jack Sparrow

I can see only one way to truly make this co-op situation work. The following conditions must be met: Everyone is competent, productive and self-motivated Everyone is in their life purpose and knows what they're contributing People place their life purpose above individual goals like money, status, etc. Their life purposes align with each other. Everyone is a good and competent leader, people know what they're doing in their professional relationships. If these conditions aren't met, good luck making it work. I don't think it stands a chance. People are too achievement-driven and survivalistic to self-sacrifice for the community, especially if you've moved through Orange into Green. At Blue, okay, maybe they can be self-sacrificing, but of course we know what happens at Blue. Fascism, authoritarianism, strict hierarchies.

The Daily Prophet

There is a very heavy ideology justifying why you have the right to own a slave. Not only that, there is a very heavy ideology in the slave's mind on why they should serve their master. It's like 'My master is my God, I should worship him. My survival depends on him and he deserves my services.' If you go and tell such a person that slavery is bad, they'll look at you like you're bitching and moaning about the weather, like 'Yeah I know it's bad, but it's okay.' A possibility of being free and not being a slave will literally not occur to them! It took the likes of Martin Luther King to even awaken them to the idea that slavery is unfair, or segregation is unfair. In such a situation, the victim of slavery doesn't see themselves as victims of slavery. Since there's no victim, it's no cry no foul. If you are a white slave owner who understands that slavery is bad, you will find it very hard to let go of your slaves. Because you know that someone else will pick them up and their slavery won't end because of you. In the ultimate sense, the slaves themselves are also responsible for their slavery, so they will find their way to a different master. Covertly, they will rely on slavery as their survival strategy because they don't know any other way of survival. Therefore, you as a conscious slave owner, may keep slaves but choose to treat them better.

@abrakamowse I would never want to have a flat hierarchy in my business. It may work for some people, although I'm very skeptical about long-term reliability. I would bet against it working after the initial excitement wanes.

@remember Flat hierarchy means there's no leader. No leader, no action.

Now I come here just to chill and joke around. I used to take this discussion very seriously, but then I became more conscious. Don't get me wrong, this subforum has aided my expansion like nothing else. It's an incredible opportunity to practice Love, taking other perspectives as part of your own. It has really helped me to get into Stage Yellow, the ability to take on different perspectives and really deeply understand the spiral. It has helped me integrate my nondual awareness with the dualistic world and appreciate the contrast. If you really want to challenge your degree of openmindedness, this subforum is one of the best. Can this turn into a distraction? Yes. The effect it has on you really depends on how you use it. It's all good and fine to get lost in the technicial nitty-gritties as long as you don't lose sight of the big picture. Having said that, there is one huge thing that's common between spiritual leadership and government leadership - it's community leadership. If you're really looking to create your own community, create genuine change in society, raise the consciousness of the collective, this is the game in town. Also, this is a community of very smart people who are good at debating. If you want to gain some intellectual credibility and really have people challenge you, this place is the best.

I've heard some interesting analysis about Hitler's childhood. His father had overtly abused him and his mother was an enabler. Later in life, when he became involved in World War 1 as a foot soldier, here's what happened in his psyche - The Allies beat Germany fair and square. The Jews, then, started to take advantage of this whole situation to make money and do business at the expense of Germany. This whole situation was a repeat of Hitler's childhood. To Hitler, Germany represented himself, the Allies represented his father and the Jews represented his bystander enabling mother! If you ask an abuse victim, they resent bystanders/enablers a lot more than the abuser themselves. This is why he developed such a deep hatred of Jews and he'd go on to be an Anti-Semite.

7:21 Cenk's reaction to Trump catcalling his niece is so scripted! It's like 'I gotta react to this. This is how I'm gonna react.' IMO, that didn't even warrant a comment. That warranted a long moment of silence! On a serious note, it's important to discuss Trump's upbringing. This puts responsibility back into the hands of common people relative to him. This will help people see what they can do about this. They can direct the energy they put into bashing Trump to work on getting more aware about causes of sociopathy and doing something about it.

First of all, your definition of growth may differ from someone else's definition of growth. Lets keep in mind that coming to school is not a commitment that kids voluntarily make, it's forced upon them. Only the most conformist kids would be open to your definition of growth. They're the ones who will end up getting the best grades. It is very likely that you will be in the illusion that kids are growing, when really they're just conforming to your expectations. In such scenarios, shame is always beneath the surface of conformity. It's okay if you're willing to make this compromise. Conformity at Green will be less painful than at Blue/Orange. The reason I keep saying it's okay to compromise, is that any mass-scale program will have to be a one-size-fits-all. It isn't logistically possible to tailor it to the individual. This responsibility lies with the parents.

I find it hard to trust that shaming won't happen. Schools have relied on shaming since the beginning of time and it takes an extremely conscious parent or teacher to not do it. Here it seems like your priority is to have a politically correct, pleasant cover of non-racism as opposed to giving kids a healthy up-bringing and schooling. Which one is your priority? It's okay to want to use kids as an accessory for your agenda of anti-racism, lets just be honest about what we're doing here. Are you assuming racial biases are unhealthy? That is an assumption. Saying that they're unhealthy is the textbook definition of shaming someone for having biases. What we need to be concerned with is people (mostly adults in positions of power) unconsciously acting according to those biases. I understand what you're wanting. We need a Turquoise society to really pull off what you're asking for. It takes extremely conscious people to not shame a child for being unconscious, or to do a call out without adding in your projections.

I'm on board with good vs bad being relative. It's relative to what you want from the situation. In the example of the father being an alcoholic, the wanted outcome is him taking ownership of his family and honoring his commitments. So, when he does the opposite, that's bad relative to the specific situation. I still maintain that it isn't bad from an objective, universal perspective. Likewise, self-centeredness isn't objectively bad. Self-centeredness isn't an antithesis to being empathetic. Now kids are naturally empathetic, much more so than adults. The reality is that you lose that capacity when you're socialized into a cold and brutal world. Kids are naturally self-centered from age 2 up until a certain number of years. So, the best way to ruin someone's capacity to be empathetic is to shame them for being self-centered, or for 'having biases'. (The biases we have a problem with are anti-black/anti-POC biases, not anti-white biases!) Their self-centeredness will only get suppressed and express itself covertly and manipulatively. I'd suggest we trust subsequent generations of people to be much more empathetic than us. Human beings have progressively become more conscious and loving throughout history and this will only get better with time. They're much farther ahead from what you're wanting to teach them. They'll be able to see stuff like systemic racism much better than us. As far as biases go, every human was biased, is biased and will always be biased. Good luck indoctrinating this basic nature out of humans.

There's a big assumption that's kinda like the elephant in the room - the assumption that narcissism/self-centeredness is objectively bad. The way you're 'trying to teach empathy for others' is by teaching white boys to make an enemy of themselves. You realize that if you tell them 'You're racist', they won't rebel, instead they'll internalize it, right? They won't be able to call your bluff cuz they don't know any better. Also, in my experience, lessons of empathy being shoved down your throat is not a very pleasant experience. Whenever I've empathized with someone, it's always been by choice. I believe that kids have the right to be as self-centered as they want, because they aren't committed or responsible towards anyone the way adults are. Child-child relationships are just fun and games. This stuff is what adults need to be concerned with. If you really want to teach kids empathy, I have a better suggestion - be empathetic towards them yourself. If you role-model empathy to them, they will pick up on that. Same goes for adults, but kids pick up on it very quickly. Kids aren't born with racial identification, it's indoctrinated into them. I don't think it's necessary to really pro-actively indoctrinate them with awareness of racial issues. If they come asking you questions, well, no problem answering them then!

I was once a conservative, then I saw conservatives as having big egos - so I became anti-conservative.

The whole function of Donald Trump is to entertain the world with his crazy antics. This is partly why he was elected at all. I just can't take him seriously. Who takes him seriously? I'm confused. Who has the divine ability to take Donald Trump seriously? If you have that ability, you deserve a gold star from me. ⭐