Parththakkar12

The one who has the power decides what counts as 'hate speech'. That's literally how this works. If you want this to change, you have one option. That is to start your own platform and moderate it as you want to.

Lol I'm not mad. I find it interesting that someone would want to identify as so many things. My personal practice my whole life has been dis-identification.

Not enough labels. Statistically speaking, we need at least 137.62 labels more! Thank you for coming to my TED talk.

You are God. You are Love. You are Infinity. You are Leo. ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????!

@Leo Gura, you had said in your 'Collective Ego' video that if people create their own little splinter groups on this forum, you have a problem with it. You'd want to moderate it and stop people from creating their little factions on the forum. Why is that?

I understand what he's saying though. He's talking about freedom in the context of democracy, like you're 'asking for freedom' from some authority power-structure. This, I'd say, is freedom with a small f. It's freedom you go crying to your authority figures for. True Freedom is not given to you, it has to be woken up to. No system can give it to you. It is prior to systems. To be fully clear, I'm not promoting naive libertarianism which says 'We should be given full freedom'. All throughout history, society has unconsciously evolved because of the actions of unconscious, ruthless actions of dictators. We've never gotten to choose our society. For the first time in history, we're getting to choose the kind of society we want to live in. If we choose Freedom, we will be able to create radical systemic reforms that we could only dream of previously. Heck, we could even consciously create new systems.

This is where I disagree. Freedom is a facet of the Absolute. It is a high-consciousness value. It is not about selfishness. I understand your fear of devils, criminals, etc. misusing it to cause suffering. However, I will assure you of this - High-consciousness survival strategies will out-perform low-consciousness strategies in the long run. The power will be held by the most enlightened mystics and they will create a society based on Consciousness and Love. This is because Free-will is the ultimate power. The more you are in your power, the more you'll be respected and the harder it will be for someone to intimidate you.

Ohh damn. Now I see what you're saying. You're saying that collectively safety comes first. Moreover, you're saying that safety should come first. You teach about individual enlightenment and living a conscious life individually. When you're living that life, quality of life/going for what you want/being in touch with your Infinite nature is more important than safety/security. What if the same were true collectively? What if, collectively we're going through an ego death and redefining ourselves as a world? What if, collectively, prioritizing safety and security is no longer tenable? Do you think that is a possibilty?

Isn't censorship a Blue thing to do? There's a very broad definition of what is considered 'hateful content' and that will get banned. I think it's based on a political agenda. Because Google, Facebook and Youtube are doing this, there is an asking for free-speech platforms. There are a few cropping up like Bitchute.

There you go. You guys happy now?

Hahahahahahahahahahaha!! It's like Trump said, 'tell them it's no big deal' and they said 'Oh, it's just the flu, no big deal.' Then Trump said 'Tell them they're gonna die from it' and they said 'COVID!! COVID!! 1 trillion deaths in US!!!!' You ask them 'The world population is 8 billion. How is it 1 trillion?' They'll say 'Including the virus, it's 1 trillion!!! Everyone get scared!!! AAAAAAAA!!!' *PANIC PANIC PANIC* Then Trump said 'Oh no, you scared them too much. Lets tell them it's no big deal.' They said 'It's no big deal. What? We don't keep records of what we report the previous day. We never said it was a big deal. Prove us wrong.' Has it ever been this blatant in history? #survivalism

We are all one. The 'collective' is a concept in the minds of individuals. There is no difference between individual freedom and collective good. This dichotomy is created at Stage Blue because all stages below Orange are materialistic, so they don't see the Oneness of it.

Stage Blue takes religion and superstitious thinking more seriously than science.

Point. What I meant was an elite, who occupies a position of power, starts to believe stuff along the lines of 'I'm here because of my hard work. I deserve it while those losers out there, they don't!' That's what I meant by identifying as an elite, or a 'winner in the free market'. You are a huge exception to this, because you're living your Life purpose. Your life's work is integrating perspectives. Makes sense.

Absolutely. Hierarchy is needed, leaders are needed. Leaders are the life-blood of the whole system. Nothing gets done without leaders. Leaders, by definition, will have the most power. The elites are not only leaders in the system, they are ideological leaders too. A leader will also naturally have the most narrative-control. Problems start when the elites get too identified with being elites, or normies get too identified with being normies. When elites get too identified with being elites, they will then create narratives which benefit themselves at the cost of people. They will also create narratives demonizing 'conspiracy theorists' because it benefits them. People will blindly believe it. When I look into the perspectives of high-quality, nuanced 'conspiracy theorists', this is most of what they try to call out. This is unsustainable, it will hurt the system. Now why do I think there is something in the conspiracy theorist's perspective? Because as far as I've seen, they are able to integrate the mainstream narrative in their worldview, they're able to explain why the mainstream is pushing a specific narrative. But the mainstream narrative is not able to integrate the perspective of the 'conspiracy theorist'. They create an 'us vs them', project it onto the 'conspiracy theorists' and then demonize/ridicule them. I see more fear in the mainstream perspective. I don't think anarchism is the solution. Rather, I think the solution to this issue would be to have elites who have higher levels of consciousness. The more conscious our elites get, the more integrative and nuanced their perspectives will be, the more democratic and fair it will be for everyone. For this, the solution would be to become more conscious yourself and help raise the consciousness of people. When people become more conscious, they will naturally want elites who are more conscious. Now, if becoming more conscious takes you outside the current control structures and systems, the current elites will really resist it.

Individually, we have infinite power, i.e. we can do anything as people. However, in society, we occupy certain positions in the system. These social positions have limited power, have finite degrees of freedom and have certain constraints on them. In the posts I've linked, I talk about the amount of power different roles in the system have. The elites, in our current system, have a lot more power than the masses. They are able to dictate the narrative of what people believe and don't believe. People don't critically examine what they're being told, which creates a cult-like dynamic. I also explain why critically examining their narrative is important for democracy to actually work. I'm not advocating for bitching and moaning about the elites or demonizing them. Those are what you may call 'conspiracy theorists'. There are some of them though who understand what I'm saying here and are calling for people to start critically examining the mainstream narrative. I'd like to know your thoughts/opinions on my analysis of systems. Also, how exactly are you defining 'conspiracy theorist'?

One possibility is an anarchist world in which there is no centralization of power. In this type of world, everyone is fully free. It's the CHAZ style police-free, government-free world. Now there could be hierarchy, but it's all in the context of corporations, who co-operate with each other. Another possibility is to have a world government. Here, there would be a centralization of the whole world's power. The most awake people would lead the world into greater levels of consciousness and evolution. I am completely spitballing here. I don't know how any of these can be actualized, which ones are more practically implementable, achievable etc. What do you think? Which of these 2 would be more favorable? Do you have a different ideal world?

Randomly searching for enlightenment videos on youtube in early 2017. My level of development wasn't that high at the time, so I kinda ignored him. Then, later, in early 2019, I remembered Leo from 2017. That's when I really started getting into his content. I was shocked and amazed at how much deeper his content had gotten!

I'm all for monopolies. I'd like to create one for myself! I like having power.

If the question is more thoughts or less thoughts, my answer is less thoughts. To elaborate, your relationship with your mind will evolve. The more conscious you are, the less you will excessively worry, or needlessly grind over inconsequential stuff, the more constructive your thinking will become.

Good question. If you look at it from a non-dual perspective, there are no such things as 'germs' or 'viruses'. Conscious doctors are looking into alternative interpretations of germ theory. They're critically examining Louis Pasteur's experiments and conclusions when coming up with concepts like 'viruses' or 'bacteria'.

Do you agree or disagree with: Lockdowns, martial Law, bringing the military onto the streets to enforce lockdowns. Masks Sanitizing your hands every x amount of time Social Distancing. Is it worth the mental health problems/loneliness it will cause? Printing trillions of dollars/Other economic measures like Stimulus packages. Are the lockdowns worth the economic ramifications? Vaccination. If you agree, would you want it to be voluntary or forced? Mainstream media reporting style Social media censorship of 'conspiracy theories' Which of these would you want to be voluntary? Which of these would you want to be enforced? Which of these measures are worth the pain and suffering they cause? For which ones do the benefits outweigh the costs, for which other ones do costs outweigh the benefits? Please give explanations for your answers.

https://www.businessinsider.in/retail/news/85-of-independent-restaurants-may-go-out-of-business-by-the-end-of-2020-according-to-the-independent-restaurant-coalition/articleshow/76325019.cms

You leave it to the employer/leasing company to make their decision. It is a case by case decision. Take away their criminal record and look at the person the way they are, right now. Do you trust them? If yes, that's a trustworthy person irrespective of their past. Just because some bureaucrats in uniforms decided you aren't trustworthy, doesn't mean it's true.

Nice question. Check out the thread on this subforum titled 'Is India really a democracy'. I've done some in-depth research on Stage Blue psychology/inner workings of the mind and I've posted it there. Blue still triggers me. I, tbh, don't really want to have anything to do with Stage Blue people, i.e. people whose egos cling to Blue. The issue with them is they don't want to evolve, their survival strategy is to cling to the status-quo. They will play fair and unfair to do that. If you're stuck with Stage Blue and want to extricate yourself from that situation, my posts will really help you.