Apparition of Jack

I feel like if Warren gets in it will be Obama 2.0. I think on some level she does truly believe in creating big structural change for the US, but on an even deeper level she believes in “playing ball” with the establishment and emphasising compromise over actual policies. Obviously though America is more progressive now than under Obama so she will have to make more room for the left, but as a POTUS I don’t think she’ll be half as effective as what Bernie can be.

Blue: Mr Rogers

Racism is a tricky thing, and not really that straightforward IMO. It’s possible to be racist in some contexts and not in others. It’s why people can have friends of other races and then go home and complain about “other races ruining their country.” In this instance they see their friends as human and close relationships, but then see broad ethnic groups as just a vague idea that’s somehow bad for their civilisation. Its like how there’s a lot of Hispanic Trump voters who want a wall to keep Hispanic migrants out. They themselves might look like and even be related to these migrants, but due to a number of different cultural factors they end up identifying with the dominate, ethno-cultural group they inhabit (and some of the racist ideas this group holds.) So as for Stella’s father, I’d say it’s possible for him to both marry a Puerto Rican woman and hold discriminatory views against Native Americans. The contexts around each relationship are different, and it’s these relationships that her father’s ego can accept or not accept (marrying someone from a Hispanic US territory vs having his daughter date someone from a discriminated minority that also has a lot of social ills within its own community.)

@kag101 Id say a secure and healthy ego is good, but only so long as you’re using it as a base to then go further and get to egoless states of awareness. Being neurotic isn’t good for anyone and you should work on securing your ego first, but if you’re serious about self-actualisation/ awakening it can never be an end goal.

@Leo Gura How much are we able to improve this dirty commune called society though? I realise that I’m not getting out of here any time soon, and even if I could society still offers too many benefits to give up too quickly. But a lot of it sucks as well, and it’s those sucky parts that I’d like to help change. But it can seem like there’s so many of them and their causes are so complex that it can seem overwhelming trying to navigate / uplift them all

@Homer My intuition says that the answer would probably lie within the fact that Yellow is the beginning of Tier 2 over Tier 1. On the surface, Yellow and Green share a lot of values - humanism, environmentalism, sustainability, and so on. However, the difference between the two is the approach they would take to promoting these ideas. Green would start a mass political movement, Green would make badges and get people involved and go on debates with Stage Orange/Blue politicians and find as many Green allies as possible to give themselves the best chance of implementing their vision. Yellow - and I'm talking true Yellow here, someone who has integrated deeply all the best and worst parts of Green - would probably take a "back seat" position in trying to manage a society. If a true Yellow politician emerged, expect them to still go on debates, but expect that debate to almost turn into a sermon as the Yellow thinker explains fully and cognisantly their big ideas in a way that Blue, Orange and Green people can accept. Instead of trying to start a mass political movement, they would probably harness the existing organs of power and direct them in such a way that they create the maximum level of value for their capabilities. A true Yellow politician would probably also try to avoid the limelight, as their individualist / lone-wolf aspect means they generally prefer to operate on their own terms without being beholden to a large, even if well-meaning, Green community. Also, if they are true Yellow, then it's also possible they'd start to bring mysticism and consciousness into their thinking, as the beginnings of Turquoise start to develop. Whether they'd share that knowledge with the general public or not would be up to them - they could decide either way, depending on what they feel would be the most beneficial to society. All of this is just speculation though, I think we've still got a long way to go until anyone of this calibre can come close to holding meaningful mainstream political power. The addition of Marianne Williamson is a unique development in this regard, as she is obviously bringing a lot of Yellow/Turquoise wisdom to the political arena, but I would not consider her true Yellow as she still has a large Orange / Green aspect. Also these are just my ideas. How accurate or not they are I cannot aay.

@Ibn Sina Let's say I take enjoyment out of making fun of people. In fact I do it so much that I do it to everyone I meet. And not just playful teasing, but straight up cruel mockery. Obviously a lot of people would get hurt by my behaviour, right? People would call me out and want to get me to stop. What you're essentially saying is "Why should I care about the people I hurt? I benefit from mocking people, so why should I stop?" And just to reinforce the point, maybe I come from a powerful group of people where mocking others is seen as a sign of wit and prestige. When people start to question my behaviour, I just say "But it's natural to mock others. That's just the way it is." Obviously the point is that it's not "just the way it is," it's instead a set of behaviours I have been taught from the power dynamics around me and want to keep these dynamics going. All the mental and psychological damage I cause from insulting people doesn't matter to me, when really in a more conscious society it would.

@Nak Khid Just FYI, it's probably best not to just copy+paste entire articles and post them here. Most people won't read them that way and important information will get overlooked. Maybe try just posting the link and maybe one or two crucial paragraphs instead next time.

Leo actually has a bunch of videos on epistemology, it's one of his favourite subjects. It's a very useful tool for awakening and grasping non-duality

What Trump has done is nothing like claiming tax exemptions for donating to charity. What he has done is defraud the government of millions of dollars of his taxes over the years, which is illegal. There's a good reason why Trump, unlike Bush, Reagan or even Nixon, has refused to release his tax returns.

@The Don Finding loopholes is not the "law of the land." That's why they're called "loopholes." In a high-conscious society, no loopholes would exist.

@The Don It's so legal you'll go to prison for trying it https://taxfoundation.org/must-pay-federal-income-tax/

LOL

@The Don I'd like to hear your thoughts on what stage Green teaches us

Stage Red revenge/willpower reacting against Stage Blue rules and regulations:

So your beef is with relativism then? In that case, what, may I ask, is it about relativism that you disagree with specifically?

I never said that. In fact Green resonates with a lot of people. Look at Bernie Sander's movement. It's the biggest popular political movement in the US for 40 years and it's a solid Green. The issue is to get more people into Green, since it's Green wisdom that can match the complexities of our rapidly evolving world, moreso than Orange or Blue wisdom. Also, I think you're severely underestimating Green, if I may be honest. Green is not a group of cackling SJWs making fun of whoever isn't as "woke" as them on twitter, anymore than Blue is a group of fire-and-brimstone preachers who want to burn gay people at the stake and make everyone wear grey clothing. What you're presenting here is a bad caricature of Green that very rarely lines up with the reality of Green. Green is simply a recognition that cultures can be relative, that society's needs can't be fulfilled through private profit alone, that the environment is crucial to our well-being, and so on. Its the beginning of awareness of the inter-connected nature of our society, which is exactly what is becoming more and more true as globalisation increases. Logic, reasoning, meta-analysis, critical inquiry - these are all tools at Green's disposal. In fact, in the hands of a healthy Green person, they will become more effective than in the hands of a healthy Blue or Orange person. Just because it hasn't made the full jump to Tier 2, doesn't mean that Green isn't incredibly advanced as far as human development goes. There's a reason why it's the final stage in Tier 1, and why it's also the stage that Tier 2 comes out of.

That would be nice, but unfortunately it's just not realistic with the current political climate of the world today. Most people are still at stage Red/Blue/Orange, so the lofty, integral wisdom of Yellow would go completely overlooked. Plus, we're not talking about getting a handful of people into positions of power here, we're talking about changing the fundamental Spiral makeup of society. Leaders can only rise as much as their citizens allow them too, after all. I agree there's no need for unnecessary demonisation and mud-flinging, but you have to understand, Orange and Blue will fight back against Green no matter what. Even if Green came to the table with an open heart, open mind, good intentions, and warm and fuzzy feelings, Blue and Orange would just take advantage of that and go back to denying minorities their rights / dumping CO2 in the atmosphere / etc whilst laughing at those "silly Green hippies." We cannot solve our large-scale problems with nationalistic and profit-driven thinking. Yes, Yellow wisdom will play a part in all this, but they can only help insofar as they help bring up the Orange and Blue culture to a Green level of development so that this new Green culture can then fix our systemic problems. If Yellow simply tried to placate the lower stages through cautious mediations, all of these problems will still come to bite us in the ass.

@Nickyy Why the singling out of Green though? Orange and Blue - the two stages that currently dominate world politics - do everything you accuse Green of doing, and do it worse. Yes, Green has limitations, but it also has serious benefits, as it moves on and transcends the limitations of Orange and Blue that preceded it. And it's those benefits - a strong call to environmentalism, a desire for a more equitable distribution of wealth, a concern for cultures and nationalities outside of its native culture/nationality - are the sorts of ideas the world we need to navigate the turmoils of climate crisis, exuberant inequality, violent nationalism, and so on. This is also not to demonise Orange and Blue. These stages are necessary parts of the Spiral with their own internal wisdom. But as far as meeting the challenges of the 21st century, they are rapidly becoming out of date. If you're serious about Self-Actualisation, pushing into Green at this conjuncture in human history should be one of your top priorities, IMO.

@The Awakened Viking Yes, Green has limitations, but why focus on them now? Orange and Blue have limitations too, and it's those limitations that we're seeing are causing all of the major problems around the world with climate destruction, rising nationalism, etc. At this point in history, it's Green that the world needs. Just because it isn't perfect, that doesn't mean we can't just ignore it or try and skip it ahead because Yellow sounds "nicer" or "more rational." Embracing and embodying Green is a crucial part of the development processes.

He has the same message of compassion and kindness over and over again, but the Dalai Lama has always been one of my personal favourite teachers out there

To me, I think there's a spectrum of whether something is a cult or not, rather than just a cut-and-dry "they are" or "they aren't." To that end, I would say that Hare Krishnas display some cult-like behaviours, and depending on how deep you go with them these behavious can either become stronger or weaker. As with any organisation, it will seek to sustain itself in the face of things thats threaten its identity, which is when the cult-like behaviours can become stronger. I would say that overall they're relatively harmless at this point in history, and compared to some other religious/spiritual groups out there they're a lot more affable to people not wanting to be involved with them. Also, there is obviously inklings of truth to their message, otherwise no one would join them in the first place. But if you're serious about self-inquiry / self-actualisation / enlightenment work, there's probably not a whole lot you could gain from them that you couldn't gain way more succinctly from say, a non-sectarian yoga or vipassana retreat instead (that come without all the human baggage.)

If all you knew about Australia was from its popular media image, it would seem that way, but Australia actually has a lot of Blue that politicians and businesses have weaponised to keep the country from progressing. Overall, I would say Australia is at mostly Orange with a large Blue shadow and some growing hints of Green here and there. I would say compared to America, Australia has a more "flat" level of development than the US. There are Blue places in America which are very BLUE, and such a thing would be a rarity in Australia, but there are also many places in America which are deeply GREEN, which is also pretty rare for Aus. So while the polarities in America are larger, the overall development of the country might be slightly less than Australia as a whole.

I think this is a good case study of a country not being able to progress too much if the social systems of that country are undeveloped. Morales may have tried to be a great reformer, but because Bolivia is simply too stuck in stage Red/Blue, even he couldn't make that many changes and started acting corrupt himself. Spiral Wizardry would help here. Find whichever politician is the most advanced in Bolivia and support them, whatever their shortcomings may be. Otherwise, i predict troubles within the country for a long while to come.

I think we have to distinguish between "debating someone" (i.e. pointing out flaws in someone's reasoning, which even Leo does), and "having a debate" (i.e. setting up an argument between two sets of people with a pre-agreed upon position which needs to be supported/opposed), which is usually nothing more than mental masturbation for people with too much time on their hands. The first one can be a useful tool for awakening (assuming you're doing it with the intention of getting the other person to critically examine their worldview and aren't just trying to puff up your own ego), the other is pretty useless.