BlueOak

You have to meet people where they are, otherwise they will not accept your governance. Even if the powers that be allowed a stage yellow leader who had the capacity and understanding to arrange a broad spectrum team to represent him both privately and publicly, one who had the temperament to fully allow his perspective to be adjusted and overridden on core issues that he was in duality toward - even in that rare 1 in a million individual, he's not going to adequately cover millions of people in what really matters to maintaining governance and peace: public and international perception. But we are not at the stage where any influential power will allow a stage-yellow leader because such a person, by definition, is less susceptible to being swayed toward any single position. Therefore, the government itself must be structured in a consciously higher framework so that it collectively gets as close to a tier 2 country as possible. Like this thread represents more than you or I; collectively, we represent a group. The highest form of which would be a council of leaders, not political parties, chosen not only for their skill (Skill is an important stage orange component), but also their capacity to adequately represent and speak to the concerns and challenges facing a wide spectrum of people. This is not a closely tied-together stage blue or red population; it is very well-educated and extremely diverse in makeup. Yes, skill is a factor, but it is one of many; skill should dictate who is selected after the shortlist to represent different sectors of business, the different faiths, the different civil institutions, regions of the country, infrastructure, environmental agencies, and educational bodies etc have been made. Then these positions need to be interlinked. Environment and Infrastructure should be, if not the same office or position, then closely linked as an example. Rather than replacing the whole government at elections, individual positions and how they link together need to become more of the focus. tl;dr A system is elected, not just an individual

That's like asking a religious person to give up faith, a capitalist to give up money, or a soldier to give up his uniform. You can't replace stage orange/green with blue/red and have it not result in massive social unrest. (Which should be demonstrated at the start of this thread).

Update: Russian air defense pushed out of Crimea under sustained attack.

@Karmadhi Pre 2014, In regards Ukraine and Russia all I can say is I was told the opposite if we are talking on a personal level, between people. There was not the level of hatred you are telling me there was. A vote before this would have been preferably yes from our perspective but Putin would have never respected any of Ukraine leaving his control, certainly not in those border regions. Why do the EU not donate as much as the US? They are, but also GDP https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/ As a % of their GDP's some countries are giving more than the US is. On top of that, as you are aware though, Europe is still remilitarizing, and does not have the same military industrial complex that the US does. Its barely a few % of America's military budget, as opposed to a much large chunk of the EU's, In raw numbers if we added all of Europe together, the number is not as dissimilar as you are making out (one graph has it being more). https://www.statista.com/chart/28489/ukrainian-military-humanitarian-and-financial-aid-donors/ https://www.statista.com/chart/27278/military-aid-to-ukraine-by-country/ You keep coming back to the US does X. I really couldn't care less, when they were doing it I felt exactly the same. The moral equivalency as a reason to do something is what allows it to continue. It tries to excuse something going on. You wanting the war to end for humanitarian reasons is understandable, if it was going to end here i'd be with you. It won't until the will or capability of Russia to expand aggressively is stopped. They have a long pattern of fighting conflicts to expand their influence, and there is little indication that they have changed their mind: Their state TV says this nonesense all the time, and have done for decades in one form or another.

Imagine there is in fact a playful monkey on your knee, you can't really cage him up he's always got the keys. So what do you do? What do you do with any animal that's jumping around, looking for you attention? That Cat that keeps jumping up on your lap, or the dog giving you puppy eyes and resting its chin on your leg. I'm using this softer imagery as you are a bit harsh on monkey, which is probably why he kicks up a fuss. It doesn't sound very integrated in your experience, like a piece of you edged out.

True. Infinite love has no conditions and no expectations. That was my biggest realization during that work when I became infinite love for 5 minutes. Whatever story we are telling ourselves here about why, is a story too. I love stories :D. The BS is love, the problems are love, the fantasy is love, the mental wellness is love, lack of peace is love, having your life in pieces is love, having it together is love. Wholeness.

Yes. Even if it wasn't true, it would still be love. Let me give you an example: have you ever been in a really good mood? I mean, everything is going great. Then BOOM Out of the blue, you are blindsided by something; maybe someone sideswipes your car, causing you some dull pain in your leg. That's the feeling. I don't know how to remain in a loving state when that happens, with large amounts of energy moving through my body. Because getting angry when you are like that is like jumping off a building, it physically hurts. At the moment, I'm nowhere near a loving state; I could get angry and get a small headache, because it is no big deal.

@zurew I won't tag Leo again, he gets tagged enough, but to both of you: I am seeing this pattern come up with people seeking an absolute truth more at the moment, and I understand why, there is more uncertainty in the world. So perhaps it helps to define a few more grounded truths that people and society can stand on to regain more certainty in their lives. But if we are in this forum, having this conversation, there is no universal truth beyond what is occurring at this very moment. Because infinity is every possibility that could exist. In this context or lens: It is every falsification and every nonfalsification about everything.

Oh, and for the OP if you don't 'see love'. Its everything. Hope that helps you awaken to it. From this message, to your left toe, to the bird and the concrete. Everything.

Yes! But what about the guy shouting at me in the face? - If you did a video on that it'd be great. Is it only about detaching the preconditioned emotional response so I am less triggered by anger and can maintain that love for the experience? He and his concerns, his emotions taken as a reflection of myself, etc. Or is there something I am missing Question to anyone/everyone.

What about all the other collectives (collective you's) that exist? You are just a concept in your head, as are they, but all of them would have an impact on creating the dream. The word dream also bothers me, as that's a concept in your head; it brings implications that can or cannot exist depending on what you want to experience. You couldn't create an awakening process if you didn't create a sleeping one as an example; you couldn't have insights into it or reveal spiritual truths. Everyone here wouldn't have this shared experience (and that's fun, even if it's just in my head), but it's all optional. I think the attachment to it is overdone. People here (including me) are understandably very individualist, given their culture, their framing, and their experiences. You could just as easily swap I, for we, or me for them, and then have to design a slightly different way of framing your reality to realise it. So if anyone is saying it has to be this way or that, not really. That's all your creation, from the seed of an idea/life to now.

I understand why a lot of people on Earth say they create things, and when they reach this awakening, they understand they create a family, etc. But you are not even here. You are not creating anything, creation is a concept you decided on after a long series of events. This is nothing to create, nothing to watch, nothing to see, or nothing to have and hold. Then there is everything: to create, hold, watch, and see. - Because all reality is now. So at this moment, this WORD is reality. When you shrink everything down to this focal point we are looking through.

I think blowing our minds every so often helps, but that's just me. Could you speak it in an analogy or story? That's what others have done historically. Then people can keep whatever BS makes them happy, and some of the ideas will filter down. I've heard you speak about writing a book before. I have no problem being alone with or from people because we always are creating an experience. What I struggle with is being alone from the act of creation itself. Everything else, all the concepts, the framing, the construction— Did you ever have that? I want to be able to make sense of the world and create meaning from nothing, while realizing there is nothing to make sense of but what I choose to create. It's extremely addictive all the same, like a person doing a painting or writing a story. A void. Create a concept. Create a meaning. Change happens: Creating a void. Create new concepts. Give them new meaning

There is no truth, as you are trying to define it in infinity, which encompasses all possibilities and none.

Also, annoyingly, I can't edit these earlier posts anymore, which is unfortunate; I didn't realize the edit window was so short! Oh well. It was a good concept to try to keep the thread organized.

UK Election Videos, Parties, and Polling Numbers Debate Thread here Thread Aim: A Broad Spectrum Coverage of the Election. Videos and Data; the other thread above is excellent for debate. Contents: 1, Party Videos 2, Early Polling Data 3, Important Election Updates - Please suggest videos or articles 4, Ongoing Polling Data and Videos - Please suggest polls 5, Final Election Results Starting with lesser known parties Alliance for Democracy and Freedom: https://adfparty.uk/ Rejoin EU: https://therejoineuparty.com/ Reform UK: https://www.reformparty.uk/ Plaid Cymru https://www.partyof.wales/ Sinn Fein https://vote.sinnfein.ie/ Democratic Unionist Party https://mydup.com/ The Green Party https://www.greenparty.org.uk/ The Liberal Democrats https://www.libdems.org.uk/ SNP https://www.snp.org/ Labour https://labour.org.uk/ Conservatives https://www.conservatives.com/ Monster Raving Loony Party https://www.loonyparty.com/

BBC Election Debate Highlights. Annoyingly, I haven't located a full clip of this, if anyone does please let me know. This is the BBC's general page for election coverage: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/crggn4j2lm0t LBC Debate analysis: GB News Comments: D-Day Question: D-Day Context

@creativepursuit The world does try to change others, not allow what is. This is a good synchronicity for me in this podcast below. Gratitude. Transactions have been on my mind of late, more than ever. His view is overly bleak and disconnected (and he calls out that I'd think that), but it is a necessary framing to the people he's talking to in the time we are in. To start with, he speaks to Gen Z's need for attention or validation and to the distant and overly cerebral world we inhabit. It's part of the ongoing collapse of anything but the necessities, which is part of the larger pattern we are in now. Life goes through contractions and expansions, like breathing. I see this through a long-term view of putting people back in touch with the earth, which is as real as it gets here. This was the first video I watched of his, the latest on his channel. It is true that when you are real with others, they usually can't handle it unless you prepare the ground/conversation/person first. Most people prefer fake happiness to an uncomfortable truth. Dopamine makes people go after shorter solutions, hard-wired into the brain, and the cerebral nature of our current existence has led to a large-scale addiction to short bursts of it. Fast solutions. It is false that humans, society, etc, don't have patterned problems (and solutions); he's completely wrong there. He just can't see them. I can see them most of the time now because I spent my life looking for them, certainly with a conversation with a person capable of reflecting on their life. True, we don't fix things outright with a prescription; we improve or worsen lives. It becomes people's (or my own) willingness to address the problems I can identify as an example. Prescriptions aren't inherently wrong, no more than a rock is; it just depends on how they are used, and I agree there has been an overreliance on them. He speaks a bit about the transactional nature I am still stuck in; I appreciated that and would like to hear an entire video from that perspective. His judgment about falling flat on the face when seeking a result is extreme, but it seems to be the reality I am in now as well. People do change their thinking I have, often. It depends on how much suffering you experience, and your willingness to adapt. Things tend to move in small adaptations and, for many, are driven by collective experience; he doesn't recognize this enough in his analysis: Everyone expands and contracts, inescapably in life, even if it's slow going. Time doesn't exist for infinity (which you are), so speed doesn't matter anyway. Yes. Internal peace, you don't go anywhere to find it - I especially liked that line. I would always like to see more videos on viewing experiences in a transactional nature as being a pitfall, and the allowance of what is over what I would want. I tend to think these things are eternally holding me and others back.

You define what you are inside your mind. You don't exist outside of your mind; nothing does. The people telling you something here are parts of yourself. In this physical body, infinity masks itself in the concept of this form that you walk around as, held together by the mind. If you go one step further, the mind is also a concept we use to create this experience. Without it, there is infinity, which I've experienced as either an infinite love, an unending void, or infinite sorrow. Set an intent to experience infinity in a way you'll recognize, because experience is the only way we know anything for sure. I can tell you that nothing exists but this moment. No past, no future, just this moment you are having. Everything else is a thought in your head, holding together how we frame reality.

First off, remember that you are not anywhere; there is no one here and nothing to have. You, in this physical concept, created yourself in this specific way. You can identify what that is by how excited or energetic something feels: This will become important later. What defines a billionaire to you? -> What does that allow you to do? -> What does that require in your mind? -> Is the process of that what you want to experience daily? If you take this far enough, you'll identify why you'd want something. You can also identify what's wrong with your chosen method of getting it. Even if you convince yourself intellectually that this method is something you'd want to do, if no energy backs it up, you'll always be at a deficit when you attempt it. You either create energy in the experience you are having or use it; How do you tell what your intent in creating yourself was? What gets you excited or in a state of energy naturally? This becomes self-perpetuating; you are infinite, and when the form you are maintaining aligns with its intended purpose, you become your limitless nature.

1, Let me take your perspective and then offer a simplified question to it: I provide a burglar(person) I know to be looking at your home with tools, information about your home, some training to break in but not a specific time or day, and limited cover after he's done. Am I responsible for the robbery? You may argue the burglar(person) had many reasons, so I will say I unconditionally agree with any reasons you state here before you do. I could also take this a bit further and say I had a hand in the criminals(people) having that identity in the first place, because I want the area's property value lower or, more accurately, to be in my favor. If it helps to unbias this analogy, dropping 'criminals' and 'burglars' to say 'people' in its place, the point remains the same. If Iran did not directly plan this, they helped set the conditions for it to happen, provided the training and tools, stoked fanaticism, and pushed a new Islamic imperialism not only into the region but also aligned with BRICS to topple Western world power. The best you will come back with is others do this too. I will answer yes. The only way to change it is to highlight that everyone does it, and it's a flaw in all global interactions, rather than excusing it or pretending it's not happening. It's not about sides but the human need to create an opponent and use it to make destructive foreign policy or geopolitical gains. 2. It's a militia force; it takes a lot of training, preparation, and a strong officer core to form a disciplined, organized force; no soldier is disciplined without it. In this execution, they fundamentally underestimated the response they got. If anyone with any planning or sense were in charge of that operation, they would have seen this response a mile away. The first thing the person next to me said when this happened was that Gaza was going to be leveled. It didn't take a genius to see it. You can't have it both ways. You can't tell me Iran is not incompetent while also saying everyone is incompetent, which is it? If you are arming, training, and supporting a large proxy force to exert your influence over an area, and it goes on a rampage of mass murder, taking hostages in one of the biggest acts of terror I have ever seen, and you miss the organizing, planning, and logistics of the operation, you are incompetent. That word is insufficient; you are grossly negligent, bordering on incapable. Anyone can be assassinated; anyone can get hit with friendly fire, especially in an urban warzone. US foreign policy goals in the Middle East are brain-dead. The US lost in Syria to BRICS. As for intelligence services worldwide, not knowing an attack was coming? I covered that. Let's call it speculative and leave it at that.

Stage Green mostly. with some yellow, but she raises a few good points of people's denial. There is nothing here to help directly integrate into a cohesive global system (Yellow), but you need to see the problems stated in green before you can address them. She'd need to look beyond her own country even more into a global dynamic to go further. The main point(s) I would take away is that Islamic and socialist imperialism is trying to emerge, which is something I hadn't put into words before directly to link them, beyond just saying BRICS. That would be mostly China and Iran, with some Russian elements. I don't think she fully considers culture in her argument; that is, it's cultural in Iran for men to look at women as lesser, and though I can hate that, the Western world has moved away from externally trying to change countries towards their values. In fact, there has been a lot of influence the other way on Western values: In this context, something the manosphere at its worst in the West has been pushing for is to treat women as lesser. Before anyone defends the entire ideology, I have watched a few balanced speakers from the manosphere's general perspective, who I appreciated, but that is the most harmful element I've seen. I'd equate it to the women who use their husbands as bank accounts and sleep around. We need to increase the family's value, not devalue or emphasize value judgments on any individual part of it. If the family functions healthily, that's what matters. It is fair to say that Islamic and Soviet propaganda telling us that by helping to protect women from getting raped, we are imposing imperialist ideals is rife now, and something I hadn't considered. Its never stated directly as that, but that's what it equates to. At the same time, BRICS are trying to impose their imperial ideals. If it's a purely an ethical decision, all reasonable efforts that don't result in a large war should be made to stop women getting raped, regardless of the external circumstances or risk. Maybe that's just a male perspective inside of me to protect, but it's there. Israel was goaded by the Iranians into doing what they've done, probably going further than even Iran thought. Again, nobody makes the argument that thousands of Hamas teenagers in Gaza moved as one without a lot of coordination and leadership, because on its face that statement is lacking. Iran's propaganda will be working overtime, and I need to be more cognizant of that in the overall world dynamic. Despite the horrors being inflicted in Palestine, the new BRICS alliance and its member's external wars have, in part (Yes America too), brought this new reality into being.

1, Because all far-right governments or leadership require an opponent to exist. If these regions settle down, those in them will lose power or influence. So either Iran directly planned this or created the conditions for it to exist (alongside all other involved actors). If it is the latter, they had a massive failure on their end. Having missed this huge movement of manpower, logistics, and planning without their knowledge. So much so, it begs the question: why are they still supporting them now? Answer: Because it aligns with their interests to do so. 2, Having a large number of teenagers in their ranks. I was using their age, their more disorganized militia nature, and the fact that any large action in a region as heavily watched as this one, makes the case of how unlikely it is would have escaped everyone's notice. I suppose I could choose to believe everyone is incompetent instead.

If Hamas doesn't do what Iran wants, Iran will stop arming, training, and funding it. It won't support an organization that doesn't align with its interests. Iran's whole approach is to use these proxies to maintain its influence over the region, thus distancing itself while simultaneously achieving its goals. Thank you for the article on Hamas; it was informative. Your article highlights 12-15 as children but shies away from directly saying it: Generally, Hamas considers 16 to be an adult, so this still aligns with teenagers being the bulk of the force, as the average was 18 or lower for males in the region: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_child_suicide_bombers_by_Palestinian_militant_groups However, it does indicate those younger than 16 would be in non-combat roles for the most part. The US's primary goal is money, maintaining trade connections, and the dollar underwriting world currency. The USA foreign policy is essentially Stage Orange personified. They do this by creating countries that are friendly to this policy, essentially democracies, when possible because they share similar values and encourage stable economic development in their trading partners. Some countries can't sustain a democracy, but they can still block their rival's influence by picking the right leader (and still buying their guns or products/contracts).

1, Yes, the leaders are adults, as is the case with most armed forces of any nature. There is little proof of anything in a militia or irregular force; however, the data indicates you are wrong. Again, 40% of Gazans were 14 years old, and the median age was 18 before the war; this will be skewed lower for males in a conflict zone. Therefore, any fighting militia force taken from the population will be of that age on average. I am happy to read or see if you have data that says otherwise. If not, I will draw logical deductions over your feelings or opinions, with no offense intended. If you want to dismiss this as data speculative, fine, but they are still a militia force, and any movement or organization of a large force, especially a disorganized one, will involve much communication and planning. That's just how it works; people don't all mass one day, press a button, and everyone arrives armed and ready on the spot on the same day at the same time, with the same plan. 2, Iran has different levels of influence over its proxies; they arm and use Hamas to exert their influence over the region: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_support_for_Hamas https://theconversation.com/how-much-influence-does-iran-have-over-its-proxy-axis-of-resistance-hezbollah-hamas-and-the-houthis-221269 I am genuinely surprised you are making this particular argument, but if you are, please, by all means, link some sources that are beyond your personal opinion; perhaps you have information I don't, and if so, I'd be glad to hear it. Who arms and trains Hamas: https://www.npr.org/2023/10/26/1208866508/irans-foreign-minister-on-the-hamas-attack-and-the-war-that-has-followed https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/28/world/middleeast/israel-hamas-weapons-rockets.html https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-guns-weapons-missiles-smuggling-adae9dae4c48059d2a3c8e5d565daa30 These sorts of articles and sources can be pulled forever. 3. Yes, but democracies prefer democracies. When they can create them, they do, but they'll settle for dictators aligned with them if not just to deny an opponent. Generally, people in this world try to make it like they are rather than accept it for what it is.