Consept

I dont really know too much about CRT but i get the gist of it from what youre saying. If you think about it on a wider scale especially where youre from (im guessing America) there is a real issue with race, both underlying and occasionally or quite frequently it bubbles to the surface. But its carried within probably everyone in America (and most other countries) maybe just in different ways, the fact that you dont even feel comfortable talking about it is testament to that. So the question is how do you get past these issues? keeping quiet about them or not addressing them in healthy ways wouldnt really be a solution. i understand maybe you dont want to talk about them at work but i cant see another environment where you would go out of your way to discuss these issues. Also understand just because you want to keep silent about them, other maybe poc's may have to deal with the underlying bias' of other people in different but consistent ways. If you as an individual had trauma it would it would make sense to address these traumas through therapy or whatever other healthy ways, mostly involving shining a light on your fears and traumas, you of course wouldnt get passed them by staying silent and not opening up about them. This does not change when its extrapolated onto a population, the result is just more people suffer on both sides of the fence. Maybe CRT is not the best way, i dont know enough to have an opinion on it, but i think having this general conversation between all races is what will heal the ongoing trauma and progress your society. America has a lot of violence, oppression, hatred and all kinds of things in its past, it was founded on a genocide that was only a few hundred years ago, there is still hatred actively going on, on the fringes of society, it will take time and effort to heal all of this.

This is cool but theres loads of people who share love and light in poverty stricken regions of the world but they still get sever diseases, i dont think the 20k or so that died from ebola were all negative people, in fact a lot of Africans are extremely positive. What youre saying is somewhat true in that if you live healthily and joyfully probably your immune system and body will be in better condition but its not a super power you can still get ill, i see this ideology a lot in new age circles and from a meta non-dual perspective it doesnt really hold much water. Please also note i dont hold any fear in regard to covid and im not looking for an answer on whether i should take it or not, i will most likely take it. I was aiming the piece and those that have not questioned why they dont want to take it and wanted to raise conversation around that topic.

To be honest ive seen more fear and scare mongering from people who believe in conspiracies (not saying you do), and people against measures to curb the disease than i have with people that consume mainstream media, most of them seem to just get on with it and follow the measures without making a big fuss, i dont think theyre doing it because they fear they will die. As i said most likely vulnerable people will fear it because there is around a 7% chance theyll die if they catch it so i dont think its an irrational fear. But anyway let me ask a question, lets say you go to your doctor and after tests he informs you that you have cancer, theres some chance that you may die although he doesnt know exactly, it may also make you sick and affect your life dramatically. He says good news though we have an experimental drug that has been developed this year and has passed all required tests and has an efficacy rate of 95% so more than likely if you take this drug youll be completely cured, its so far been tested on 100,000 people without any serious issues unless youre allergic to it in which case the effects are still minimal and very few people are allergic, all the best scientists and medical professionals in the world have been working on it and approve it. Would you take this medication?

Again dont take selfish as an insult as i mentioned in the piece its merely an observation. If you watch what your mind does and what youve written, everything is to justify you not wanted to have some sort of inconvenience in order to potentially save lives, youve even gone as far as to say 'people die', in which case i could switch that back on you and say you shouldnt have a problem taking in it because worst case someone will die and well people die anyway. Its not that you should trust pharma and governments whole heartedly but you have to weigh up whats more likely a worse outcome, on one hand a disease that has killed 1.6 million people already, youre argument is that most of those lives arent important because theyre old or sick anyway. On the other hand a vaccine that has been tested and over 100,000 people have taken without anyone dying or becoming seriously ill after taking and which could save loss of life going forward. Even if it doesnt work the intention by creating and public taking it is somewhat selfless. Also think, lucky for you youre probably quite healthy, but lets say you had underlying health conditions that didnt affect your life but damaged your immune system, most likely you would think it was selfish for people not to take the vaccine as this will risk your life, if you have an egocentric outlook on the healthy side, no doubt youd have one on the underlying condition side and most likely youd be quite angry at those that refused to take it because of fear or whatever other reason.

Youre right it is human nature, but egocentric is a lower level of consciousness, there will be times when it is appropriate to drop down to this level when your survival is really under threat. What is happening here is survival is under threat for a lot of people 1.6 million so far, but fear of, as you say an unknown in which after multiple tests no one has died and all the scientists and experts say that it wont kill anyone, has overided peoples ability to weigh things up accurately and led to people dropping to egocentrism. Same thing happened with people panic buying at the start of the pandemic, there was plenty of food for everyone but fear of the unknwon took them deep into egocentric behavior

Yeah this is actually a big problem as well, the whole vaccine link to autism is based on parents blaming vaccines that their kids are autistic, once this is considered a thing it leaves the connection there in peoples minds. There are lots of grifters, specifically in the alternative medicine sector who see this as a gap in the market in which they can stoke up distrust of modern medicine and offer themselves as an alternative. One example is Dr Buttar who jumped on the whole covid hoax thing and boosted up his social numbers and getting paid to speak on channels and at events as well as promote his alternative treatments. This clip below is of him treating a girl a few years ago, the girl was forwarded to him from an anti vax organisation, if you want actual conspiracies, sometimes look at those pointing the fingers. The clip is hilarious btw

Heres a good test, find someone, a friend a family member or even acquaintance, who has what you would consider to be an unhealthy lifestyle, maybe they dont do any exercise or eat junk food for every meal, try and get them to change to super clean, super healthy diet and get them to exercise and meditate regularly. If you do try and even if you are successful you will see how hard it is to get someone to change their ways and this is just on a one to one basis, imagine that times however many million in your country with someone on TV or an advert telling them what to do, its pretty much impossible. In the UK you can even get the gym paid for you if youre unfit and its affecting your health but still we have one of the highest obesity rates in europe

To add to what Leo said, vaccine companies are immune but its the government that picks up the liability if something goes wrong for you, in which case you can claim money if your complaint is upheld. This is very necessary to do it this way otherwise pharma will stop making vaccines, they did want to stop in the 80s as it wasnt cost effective considering the production cost, testing and the fact that you only give one shot and then thats it, traditional medicine that you have to take regularly is much more profitable, in fact vaccines only make up about 2-3% of pharma profits in the US, total amount is actually less than alternative medicines. So if you add on even 0.001% of cases where something might go wrong its pretty much impossible to make it worth their while, hence the government brought in the Vaccine Injury Court - https://time.com/3995062/vaccine-injury-court-truth/ Meds can be useful but obviously there are huge incentives to keep people on drugs or to prescribe certain drugs and a lot of the time they dont actually have that much effect, there are of course drugs that are very useful and save lives. I think its more of an issue in places like America where the industry is more commercialised, Im from the UK and i was actually shocked at how many ads for meds they have when a visited the US a couple of years ago, in the UK the most youd see is an ad for cough syrup or parcetomol but in the states it was like anxiety tablets and all types of meds. There are also many instances of pharma companies buttering up doctors to prescribe certain drugs, all these are problems of capitalism invading public health. There would need to be pharma companies but it would need to be much more balanced than what is currently happening in the US

Not to pounce on you, but we're talking from the point of view of someone who, through fear or otherwise believes that the virus wont affect them, so really we're asking for a somewhat selfless act in that theres minimal risk to the person but lets say theres some and by taking the vaccine it can have a positive effect in terms of others being less likely to be infected. As Leo says it also will affect them in the long run, either in terms of the economy or them getting it or someone close to them getting it. So a lot of the people who will get it or expect others to get it is not necessarily out of fear, they may also think it wont affect them directly but theyre taking it despite whatever risk there is because they know everyone is better off if the virus is no longer around. Those that are scared are probably those that are vulnerable or those that may go bankrupt if things dont get back to normal, you can call that selfish but i would say their survival is a real risk at least a lot more than the side effects of the vaccine. So if we were to weigh it up, i think their fear of their survival makes a lot more sense and also does not significantly affect others, so in that way its along the lines of expecting others to sneeze into a tissue instead of the air when in a confined public area.

Government will always reflect the overall consciousness of the people. Politicians say what they think people want or care about because they need to do that to get into power, whether going to enact or not is another thing as theyre most likely funded by some other rich people, but if the public make enough noise they will have to address a particular issue, otherwise they wont be elected for another term. So the fact is majority of people are not interested in their health or healthy eating or exercise, we live in the information age where we can get all kinds of information, so the government not informing you is not really an excuse especially when if they did inform you wouldnt listen. Also when things are brought in like the sugar tax which are meant to deter people from excess sugar, people protest it, there is an argument that its a tax on the poor as well. I dont think the information is hidden or censored and most governments do have guidelines on good health and advice on exercise. Im not saying theyre perfect as theyre definitely not, but think what you would do in their position when youve got a nation, definitely here in the uk, that just either wont care or will literally protest if the sugar is reduced in their sugar water or healthy school meals are introduced https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-scotland-42569280

OK but why do you know this to be true? its still stuff that was written by someone else be it in the past or now, there are many stories from many different cultures that can be interpreted in many different ways, none of this is in your direct experience and there doesnt seem to be much evidence for it apart from writings which youve interpreted in a certain way, so why are you so sure that it is true?

If i understand your point, youre saying that most likely the vaccine will be damaging possibly because of lack of testing an that most people just want the pandemic to be over so they wont research to see whether it is potentially dangerous, government can leverage this to just get the vaccine out and then not be able to pull it back if something does go wrong. I would say there has been sufficient testing, probably more than youd get from a lot of medications currently on the market, the only thing you can say is that there isnt long term testing over say 5, 10 or more years, but this is the case with most drugs, majority of people who take medications dont look at research papers spanning multiple years. Realistically that couldnt happen with this virus because you cant wait on someone to monitor people for 10 years whilst over a million people die per year, that just doesnt make sense and is not ethically right. People do want the pandemic to be over so a lot would just take it, but this goes both ways, most people who are against or think its dangerous wont really research either, theyll just go with their fearful feeling and look for things that can confirm it. In this instance if you arent going to research it comes down to whos perspective you believe to be more valid, viral experts, scientists and whoever else created and approved the vaccine, or members of the public who have no background in the field but are going off of a fear reaction that the virus is dangerous. Personally id go with the experts but i can understand if you are fearful yourself why you might go with your uncle Jim on facebook. Youve said that those involved in the vaccine or government are not necessarily evil people at that the behavior is unconscious. I dont really see it like that, i think a lot of peoples intention is to save lives, some maybe in it for the money but even in that circumstance, killing people is not going to get them money. Your opinion is really just based on whether the vaccine is harmful, they have tested a lot of people and its not been the case, so it would really be on you to prove that it is harmful.

High Wycombe (just outside London) ??‍♂️

If formlessness is impermanent what would there be if it wasn't there?

Thats not true, there are still safety guidelines and it has to be fully tested, it hasnt got a license which is a completely different thing - "The consultation document said that if there were a “compelling case, on public health grounds, for using a vaccine before it is given a product licence, given the nature of the threat we face, the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation may take the very unusual step of advising the UK government to use a tested, unlicensed vaccine against covid-19, and we need to make sure that the right legislative measures are in place to deal with that scenario.” The document added, “A covid-19 vaccine would only be authorised in this way if the UK’s licensing authority was satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate the safety, quality, and efficacy of the vaccine. ‘Unlicensed’ does not mean ‘untested.” "

Well you could go off the trials theyve already done, that will give you indication, plus the past research done on the sars vaccine as i believe a lot of the research for that was used for this. So if you wanted to say that it wasnt safe, which there could be an argument for, youd have to say why the research and testing done so far is flawed or wrong

@No Self Hey, thanks for taking the time to read and for replying in such depth, very much appreciated. I resonate with a lot of what you say, so great to get the conversation going. Ill have to look into that, surely must exist as its prevalent with most people. Yeah you might be right here, i tend to have a bias toward spirituality but in the context of the piece it could just be framed as genuine open-mindedness rather than going the full spiritual route. Having said that all all attraction to ideologies could be said to be because of a spiritual deficit or a misunderstanding of spirituality, the result of which is buying into an ideology wholesale, but either way the topic could be more concise. Essentially im trying to go as meta as i can with anything i write about but it gets difficult as it gives you such a wide scope that you an end up writing a book trying to deconstruct everything. Yes this is an excellent commentary on the flaws of the right and left, this could be a fruitful topic in of itself, as you dont get many articles that criticise and show the limits of both sides. Both are potentially dangerous if they are not grounded in some kind of non-biased (as possible) understanding. Yes ultimately which side whos on doesnt matter, what needs to be worked out is what is the best thing for the planet and for us as humans, it would be great if civil, non-partisan discussions could take place that involve various experts in each relevant field coming to conclusions on what we should do. Problem is the public still have tribal tendencies, in which they may get bored of that type of politics, they need entertainment, sense of belonging, purpose etc, if politics was how i laid out the current average person may not be interested in it unfortunately. Thanks for your input as well, very true, it is about how we learn through life, the issue is communicating this to the average person, or maybe the way is just to lead by example

Hey guys, so ive decided to build up a habit of writing, most likely will be around topics like spirituality, society, just different things. Usually i quite enjoy it even if its not for anything in particular, im trying to work on my attachment to outcome as well, many times when i was writing the piece below i was thinking about what other might think about it, so stuff to work on other than the actual writing. Anyway opinions welcome both on the content and the way it was written - Whats wrong with being woke? For a few years now there have been opposing sides engaging on the battlefields of twitter, youtube, newspaper sites comments sections and pretty much any place you can leave a comment and get a reply. This so called culture war has on one side the woke, social justice warrior far left and on the other the anti-woke which can include anything left leaning to centrist to far right. The war seems to be about what should be defined as mainstream culture, the woke might say people should be free to express themselves without any discrimination, failure to do this could suppress some peoples contribution of perspective and new ideas, the anti-woke might say people should be free to express themselves regardless of who is offended, failure to do this could suppress some peoples contribution of perspective and new ideas. Since both sides are arguing for and against this term its important to know what exactly ‘woke’ means. Ill save you the full etymology, but the term woke initially came from the African-American community to highlight those that were aware of the social and racial justice issues going on in the 1940s. The saying more specifically was ‘stay woke’ as in, be aware of how we’re being treated and raise awareness to others. In a spiritual context you might say someone is awake if they are aware of the illusion of ego, so essentially someone who is not run by their mind, the implication being that if you are run by your mind, you are asleep or unconscious, i am aware putting about 5000 years of spiritual searching into a sentence, but i will cover this topic in more death in another piece. Woke tends to imply a spiritual context, when i started hearing the term more and more a few years ago, i thought this was what people were talking about, what i came to learn is that its more a catch all for left wing politics. Specifically referring to things under the umbrella of social justice and socially liberal causes such as LGBT rights, third wave feminism, black lives matter and so on. Of course this differs with the spiritual idea of being awake, as being woke is being aware of some kind of content, whereas being spiritually awake is to be aware of illusion and so it is a negation. This idea of being aware of something that others aren’t is something that has been with humans, probably since they could be aware of something someone else was not aware of. There is a thing within all of us where we search for certainty but also to be right in comparison with most others. The trope of ‘i once was blind but now i see’ is the common denominator of all ideology, religion, lifestyles, its the pseudo hero’s journey of ignorance to enlightenment. ‘At one point i didn’t believe in God, now my eyes are open and i know God is real’ or At one point i believed in God, now my eyes are open and i know he’s not real’. This journey is prevalent in many films and tv shows, The Matrix is a great example in which office drone Neo, through the help of rebels, discovers that the world he lives in is a simulation and thus breaks out and realises there are no limits. This story gave birth to the term ‘The Red Pill’ of which Neo is given the option to take to reveal this illusion. The term ‘The Red Pill’ or indeed other colours of pills, has been co-opted to mean ones acceptance of a particular ideology as the dominant ‘truth’. As you can see there is a clear distinction between the spiritual meaning of awakening of realising all is illusion and the ideological meaning of accepting a particular ‘truth’ or more accurately a perspective, the main difference is content and belief. Another way to frame it would be a spiritual perspective would encompass all perspectives and be aware of delusion and other mental tricks, an ideology rejects all other beliefs except one. What is clear though, is that we all search for truth and we all seek to be awake, the mistake is that we believe a particular concept will mean that we’re awake. Whats funny is that no one seems to classify themselves as asleep, if someone suddenly becomes woke, they will assert that previously they were asleep and now they know what’s going on, if they then think wokeness has gone too far and pull back they would say, previously they just didn’t get the whole picture, now they do. This is pretty much the case for most people, question it yourself, what did you once believe that now you think is stupid and have you now got the whole picture? The point is that the picture is always the picture, our perception of either a small part of it or the entirety of it is what changes. It is a constant journey to see the whole thing, what limits this is being stuck on one section of the picture and fighting others who say there is more to it than that, however those saying there’s more could also be stuck on another part of the picture. Survival, both individual and tribal also plays its part in this, if you notice most people who protest or fight for justice for a specific issue are people affected by that specific issue. It seems obvious that this would be the case, but again its all to do with perspective, if you see yourself just as what you’ve defined yourself as then of course you won’t consider others causes, especially if it is seemingly in opposition with your cause. The feminist movement and the mens rights movement are often in direct conflict, this is because its often seen in a very binary way, either women are exaggerating or men are trying to distract from female issues. The truth is that there are issues on both sides, the dismissal of either sides plight just builds contempt and a stubborn need to win. Dropping all binary positions and seeing whole perspectives and incorporating systems thinking is not where we’re at as a society, we’re not really even close to that. It maybe something to consider teaching in schools but I’m sure there will be many parents that object to their child being taught that the ideology that their parents have taught them is probably not true, just look at creationism still being taught as undeniably true in some schools. So what can be done now? Ultimately it comes down to each individuals ability to widen their perspective and to not hold fixed positions. As i mentioned earlier we all seem to think we’re at the absolute pinnacle of knowledge, we need to realise we’re not and take a student outlook of constant learning. Specifically learn about the positions that oppose yours, what truth can you find within them? Most of the time we look at opposing views with our hearts beating just in case there is something that makes sense, in our heads we dismiss or belittle the opposing side to make ourselves cope with what might be truth and hang on to the perspective that’s given us certainty. Let go of fixed positions, true awakening and getting out of the matrix is the understanding that these positions are illusion, being enslaved in the matrix is thinking you have the right position that you need to defend or that there is a final boss position that you need to get to.

What ways do you speak of? Without the vaccine and even with some measures in place quite a lot of people have died, what do you think everyone has got wrong? Respect to your mum, but are there any specific studies you can point to that say this is dangerous?

Getting my mum to understand that she actually has to take some action, throwing it out to the universe and sitting on facebook wont get her the house shes been trying to attract

Its not been bad as im on infleximab atm so ive only had one flare up in the last 3 years or so, before that it was pretty bad. Yeah i get you, i will ask the docs before getting and do my own research as to whether it could affect my condition, obviously if it could i wont get it. In theory in the UK, im considered a vulnerable person so as long as it doesnt have some negative side effects i should really get it as im highly likely to contract covid if i come in contact with someone with it. If i get sick ive got a line to the department at the hospital and ill go in and get some treatment if need be. It really can be a horrible disease but i think theyve got decent meds atm. I fully understand being cautious if its fully active, look into whether it could have side effects for you or if anyone with a similar condition has had a trial. The other thing to be aware of is that if it is active it may make it easier for you to contract covid or flu, i get flu really easily. So it could actually be a good idea, providing it doesnt affect your condition, to get it just to protect yourself.

was thinking the same!

Paul Hedderman, i think hes one of the best non-duality teachers around, but does basically no marketing or promotion -

This is the key part of what you said, yes to some extent it is faith in that you are trusting experts in virology and disease and medicine to tell you what the best thing is in this instance. Also yes they may not be right in all aspects, they may not understand holistically how to solve illnesses, as in they may not be aware of how diet and stress can affect someone. However vaccines have a long history, not all good of course, but for the most part theyve potentially saved millions of lives both from death and also from debilitating illnesses, this is well documented. So this process of developing vaccines has historically done a lot of good, with very minimal but some bad happening. Overall its a net positive, especially when you consider something like 500,000 people worldwide yearly were either paralysed or died from polio and now its next to zero (im aware its not just the vaccine that caused this, but modern medicine as a whole). So if it comes to trusting what professional scientists and medical people who have studied for years to understand vaccines and how to improve on them, and know all the ins and outs of the negatives and positives and who are willing to do thorough testing, backed up by an organisation which in theory does not let ineffective or dangerous vaccines through, backed up by a history which shows quite clearly the positive effect that has happened due to vaccines, or trusting my aunt who posts memes about how dangerous vaccines are on facebook that she got from other facebook people, none of whom have read a science book in their life, then i would probably make an educated guess and go with the professionals. Imagine you were stranded on an island and you had a survival expert and a conspiracy theorist who had no survival experience but was always undermining the expert, who would you listen for your best chance of survival? I have ulcerative colitis which is quite a serious auto immune disease and i still feel that way. Selfish doesnt have to be taken as an insult its more of an observation, as in if i care more about my condition and my survival over others then yeah the technical definition is that its selfish, if i put others first over my own survival then that would be selfless, as im not acting from the 'self'. There maybe a good reason to be selfish but it still is what it is, its definitely not selfless. Realistically we all have moments of being selfish and selfless, its not cut and dry. Most people will end up taking the vaccine because they cant fly or go to certain events without one, which of course is also a selfish intention, but it will ultimately help others which is more of a side effect for the person with this intention.

I dont mean selfishness as a judgement, what im saying is that you or whoever are putting your self-preservation, fear, idea of freedom ahead of others. The research that is usually done in this state is to find something wrong with the vaccine in this case, what the person is looking for is justification for these fears, so that when questioned on it they can point to something that is usually irrelevant or misunderstood and say 'look its not my fears there is danger here'. This is why you get conspiracy theories because usually there isnt enough evidence or anything definite that proves their fears, therefore some exaggerations, conscious or unconscious, have to stretched to to uphold the fearful beliefs. Having said that i do i agree that people shouldnt just take it blindly and should get their head around what it is and maybe the history of vaccines, most people wont do this but in theory its important. They should also go into it not trying to prove right their fearful assumptions and just try and learn. Ideally youd want this taught in schools from a relatively young age so kids dont grow to be adults and only start learning about vaccines in this fear state