Leo Gura

Who's Interested In Conscious Politics?

763 posts in this topic

@Revolutionary Think I've only remember the ones with Peter Ralston. And yea that curly dating guy.

I do not see him debating any T1 humans, yet there are emerging T2 channels around the web, not a lot of T2 people around, but still they gather and discuss solutions/situations.

Would love to see Leo contribute to that, @Aakash that's why I poke in the liver. If he has any.

For eg:


I do not smell any transcend and include stuff around, unless some divine intervention happens.... for the very reason this new structures are forming.

In the next 10 years if shit doesn't hit the fan, these structures will merge with government .
And how will we have Leo for President if he just stays at his cave doing his paintings ? This is our goal, isn't it



 

Edited by Yog

O.o Ooo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right because in some situations people live in dysfunctional families and dysfunctional neighborhoods where the people around them aren't really that helpful we can't keep demonizing the government even though the government isn't perfect we have to zoom out and see the big picture not just look at things with our own lens. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a corrupt corporate culture the CEO's would at least have the responsibility to see that their workers are not exploited and can at least make ends meet and not have to have 2 to 3 side hustles just to live comfortably. I don't think a person being exploited and overworked by inside a corrupt culture that's it's a failure of their personal responsibility.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

What we need is Universal Basic Collective Responsibility.  

The problem with only talking about personal responsibility is that it becomes a blank check for selfishness. People take personal responsibility to maximize their profits & success by exploiting and manipulating the collective.

The easiest road to wealth & success is by exploiting the collective. So of course that's what people do.


You are God. You are Love. You are Infinity. You are Leo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Joseph Maynor And how's the schools teaching nothing about finances help? Easier said than done and if school is charging you money that you don't have but, you need the job to make the money to go to the school to have the education so the job hires you... You see how you just can't boil it down to something and make it too simplistic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Conscious politics.  Get your highlighters out.

 

According to the book Spiral Dynamics, Perot was stage BLUE, lower than both Bush and Clinton. If you have the book, read about him on page 127, fourth paragraph.


"Wanting keeps me from the awareness I already have it. I already am it.” — Byron Katie

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Joseph Maynor said:

Perot is at Yellow or Turquoise.

I think we should trust Beck and Cowen more than ourselves. The 90s was their time after all.

Plus, I highly doubt that Beck would mistake a Yellow person for Blue. 


"Wanting keeps me from the awareness I already have it. I already am it.” — Byron Katie

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perot is old-school Blue/Orange.


You are God. You are Love. You are Infinity. You are Leo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Be mindful of mistaking high level orange for yellow. A high intellect does not necessary mean yellow. There are many brilliant philosophers, scientists and economists that are at a very high intellectual level within Orange. Orange intellect can go quite high and be mistaken as yellow. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Revolutionary Think said:

@Serotoninluv Yes. I've seen first hand people with high IQs who are extremely dogmatic, have no sense of nuance, and they're stuck in their ways. 

Yep. It’s common with minds that strongly value intellect/logic/reason and are attached and identified with these dynamics. For example, Richard Dawkins has a very high intellect, yet is still Orange. One indicator, as you mentioned, is a “stuck in their ways” attitude. A form of rigidity and defensiveness to their views and intellect. These are often constrained within logical frameworks. As well, they are still immersed within a strong personality, Orange will often personalize ideas as “mine” and “yours” and want to engage in debate utilizing Orange level tools such as logic, facts and evidence. Nothing wrong with that, yet Orange is constrained within it. Yellow minds have conversations that are much less about personalities and more about fluid exploration. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a comment


I am using a new account named "Nightwise". In in fact intend to stop using this account from now on and use that account instead. So I am not planning on using these two account interchangeably or intermittently. Only "Nightwise" from now on. I am doing so merely because I like the username much more. For some reason, that feels to be important to me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Electoral college is to protect smaller states from being ruled by a handful of super populated states.

Our country is a republic not a mob democracy and the electoral college was designed to make sure the mobs do not rule. Furthermore, to eliminate the electoral college you'd have to eliminate the states themselves. In other words it would only be fair if America was just a single state with no electoral college (wouldn't be necessary) instead of what it is, a union of states with their own unique laws.

I'm gonna jot down a list of other objections that i may have as i continue watching but so far I agree with almost everything you're saying especially in regards to dealing with govt and lobby corruption, greedy corps, and military industrial complex

Great work friend. @Leo Gura

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also if you missed the biggest issue is that our monetary system is ass backwards based on debt. The federal reserve shouldnt even exist as we borrow our own money at interest and keeps driving out currency to the ground.

Our money should be based on our labor, not speculation. Its should be immune to inflation. Also, usury should be illegal.

Edited by Angelo John Gage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Angelo John Gage said:

Electoral college is to protect smaller states from being ruled by a handful of super populated states.

The smaller states are over-represented in the Senate. In fact this is one of our biggest problems. The least developed rural states have a majority strangle hold over the Senate which makes it impossible to pass progressive legislation.

What the smaller rural states don't appreciate is just how much their boats are lifted by the largest and most progressive states like NY, California, Washington, etc. These states pay the bulk of taxes because they add massive economic value. Yet their votes are not worth as much.

Votes should be allocated by people, not by state. Otherwise you have a backward democracy where the minority opinion actually rules the majority. Just think about it, why should a president with the minority of popular votes win while the one with the majority lose? It makes no sense. If the guy you voted for won the popular vote but lost the election, you'd rightly be upset. Especially if two such elections lead to disastrous policies like the Iraq War and the Trump administration. What makes all this particularly galling is that the most conscious candidates are actually winning the popular vote, but still losing the election!

If California was properly represented under the principle of 1 person, 1 vote, America would be able to pass significantly more progressive legislation. Right now we have the least developed parts of the country cockblocking humane legislation.

California, NY, and Washington lead the way on progressive legislation: clean air, clean energy, living wage, etc, etc. Alabama ain't putting forth the most conscious & loving policies.


You are God. You are Love. You are Infinity. You are Leo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Angelo John Gage said:

Also if you missed the biggest issue is that our monetary system is ass backwards based on debt. The federal reserve shouldnt even exist as we borrow our own money at interest and keeps driving out currency to the ground.

I mention this a bit in the video. Yes, the currency needs to be not fucked with. I am all for balanced budgets and no going into debt.


You are God. You are Love. You are Infinity. You are Leo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

The smaller states are over-represented in the Senate. In fact this is one of our biggest problems. The least developed rural states have a majority strangle hold over the Senate which makes it impossible to pass progressive legislation.

What the smaller rural states don't appreciate is just how much their boats are lifted by the largest and most progressive states like NY, California, Washington, etc. These states pay the bulk of taxes because they add massive economic value. Yet their votes are not worth as much.

Votes should be allocated by people, not by state. Otherwise you have a backward democracy where the minority opinion actually rules the majority. Just think about it, why should a president with the minority of popular votes win while the one with the majority lose? It makes no sense. If the guy you voted for won the popular vote but lost the election, you'd rightly be upset. Especially if two such elections lead to disastrous policies like the Iraq War and the Trump administration. What makes all this particularly galling is that the most conscious candidates are actually winning the popular vote, but still losing the election!

If California was properly represented under the principle of 1 person, 1 vote, America would be able to pass significantly more progressive legislation. Right now we have the least developed parts of the country cockblocking humane legislation.

California, NY, and Washington lead the way on progressive legislation: clean air, clean energy, living wage, etc, etc. Alabama ain't putting forth the most conscious & loving policies.

The Electoral College was created for two reasons. The first purpose was to create a buffer between the population and the selection of a President. The second as part of the structure of the government that gave extra power to the smaller states.

The first reason that the founders created the Electoral College is hard to understand today. The founding fathers were afraid of direct election to the Presidency. They feared a tyrant could manipulate public opinion and come to power. Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers:

"

HAMILTON

To the People of the State of New York: THE mode of appointment of the Chief Magistrate of the United States is almost the only part of the system, of any consequence, which has escaped without severe censure, or which has received the slightest mark of approbation from its opponents. The most plausible of these, who has appeared in print, has even deigned to admit that the election of the President is pretty well guarded. 1 I venture somewhat further, and hesitate not to affirm, that if the manner of it be not perfect, it is at least excellent. It unites in an eminent degree all the advantages, the union of which was to be wished for.

It was desirable that the sense of the people should operate in the choice of the person to whom so important a trust was to be confided. This end will be answered by committing the right of making it, not to any preestablished body, but to men chosen by the people for the special purpose, and at the particular conjuncture.It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.It was also peculiarly desirable to afford as little opportunity as possible to tumult and disorder. This evil was not least to be dreaded in the election of a magistrate, who was to have so important an agency in the administration of the government as the President of the United States. But the precautions which have been so happily concerted in the system under consideration, promise an effectual security against this mischief. The choice of SEVERAL, to form an intermediate body of electors, will be much less apt to convulse the community with any extraordinary or violent movements, than the choice of ONE who was himself to be the final object of the public wishes. And as the electors, chosen in each State, are to assemble and vote in the State in which they are chosen, this detached and divided situation will expose them much less to heats and ferments, which might be communicated from them to the people, than if they were all to be convened at one time, in one place. Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption. These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one querter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils. How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union? But the convention have guarded against all danger of this sort, with the most provident and judicious attention. They have not made the appointment of the President to depend on any preexisting bodies of men, who might be tampered with beforehand to prostitute their votes; but they have referred it in the first instance to an immediate act of the people of America, to be exerted in the choice of persons for the temporary and sole purpose of making the appointment. And they have excluded from eligibility to this trust, all those who from situation might be suspected of too great devotion to the President in office. No senator, representative, or other person holding a place of trust or profit under the United States, can be of the numbers of the electors. Thus without corrupting the body of the people, the immediate agents in the election will at least enter upon the task free from any sinister bias. Their transient existence, and their detached situation, already taken notice of, afford a satisfactory prospect of their continuing so, to the conclusion of it. The business of corruption, when it is to embrace so considerable a number of men, requires time as well as means. Nor would it be found easy suddenly to embark them, dispersed as they would be over thirteen States, in any combinations founded upon motives, which though they could not properly be denominated corrupt, might yet be of a nature to mislead them from their duty.

Another and no less important desideratum was, that the Executive should be independent for his continuance in office on all but the people themselves. He might otherwise be tempted to sacrifice his duty to his complaisance for those whose favor was necessary to the duration of his official consequence. This advantage will also be secured, by making his re-election to depend on a special body of representatives, deputed by the society for the single purpose of making the important choice. All these advantages will happily combine in the plan devised by the convention; which is, that the people of each State shall choose a number of persons as electors, equal to the number of senators and representatives of such State in the national government, who shall assemble within the State, and vote for some fit person as President. Their votes, thus given, are to be transmitted to the seat of the national government, and the person who may happen to have a majority of the whole number of votes will be the President. But as a majority of the votes might not always happen to centre in one man, and as it might be unsafe to permit less than a majority to be conclusive, it is provided that, in such a contingency, the House of Representatives shall select out of the candidates who shall have the five highest number of votes, the man who in their opinion may be best qualified for the office.

The process of election affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications. Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States. It will not be too strong to say, that there will be a constant probability of seeing the station filled by characters pre-eminent for ability and virtue. And this will be thought no inconsiderable recommendation of the Constitution, by those who are able to estimate the share which the executive in every government must necessarily have in its good or ill administration. Though we cannot acquiesce in the political heresy of the poet who says: ``For forms of government let fools contest That which is best administered is best,''yet we may safely pronounce, that the true test of a good government is its aptitude and tendency to produce a good administration.

The Vice-President is to be chosen in the same manner with the President; with this difference, that the Senate is to do, in respect to the former, what is to be done by the House of Representatives, in respect to the latter.

The appointment of an extraordinary person, as Vice-President, has been objected to as superfluous, if not mischievous. It has been alleged, that it would have been preferable to have authorized the Senate to elect out of their own body an officer answering that description. But two considerations seem to justify the ideas of the convention in this respect. One is, that to secure at all times the possibility of a definite resolution of the body, it is necessary that the President should have only a casting vote. And to take the senator of any State from his seat as senator, to place him in that of President of the Senate, would be to exchange, in regard to the State from which he came, a constant for a contingent vote. The other consideration is, that as the Vice-President may occasionally become a substitute for the President, in the supreme executive magistracy, all the reasons which recommend the mode of election prescribed for the one, apply with great if not with equal force to the manner of appointing the other. It is remarkable that in this, as in most other instances, the objection which is made would lie against the constitution of this State. We have a Lieutenant-Governor, chosen by the people at large, who presides in the Senate, and is the constitutional substitute for the Governor, in casualties similar to those which would authorize the Vice-President to exercise the authorities and discharge the duties of the President. PUBLIUS.

"

I will say though, what the founders did not see, is that the electoral college can be corrupted as it is today, since lobbies and special interests have literally bought almost all our politicians. So I see your point but the thing is, such a minority would ALWAYS lose and NEVER be represented if every single vote was 1 for 1 based on popular vote. If you wish to implement conscious politics, you know  people who are unconscious vastly outnumber those who are and would always lose to the lower consciousness masses (for now). Perhaps there should be a voters who meet certain requirements to be able to have the right to cast a vote. Sounds messed up, but if we have to get license to drive a car, I think we should have a license to drive our country. 

Another crazy idea floating around by Bernie and others is to lower the voting age to 16 years old. Is a 16 year old mature enough? If anything voting age should be raised. I even don't think 18 year old these days are wise enough to make choices that change the course of our nation. Perhaps in a nation where your policies are enacted and people become more aware, sure, but not these days lol. 

 

 

Edited by Angelo John Gage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now