Great distinctions Tessa. The language aspect is important - words are maps of the territory being discussed, not the territory itself. This itself is important to keep in mind.
It is further complicated by so many of our exchanges being written, and online, and thought out only in our own minds... whereas oral cultures created knowledge by way of negotiation - one person speakes and then the other feeds back their take, until common ground is found.
Further complicating matters still are the biases of particular languages, in particular English, which color our perceptions. This includes the syntax of sentences.
Your point is particularly well-taken that it is helpful to accept how much we don't really know, since so much of what is considered objective are models. Some would argue that objectivity itself is questionable, as it is all based on projections - I think this is one of the complexities humanity is dealing with in general right now.
What I find is that there are a precious few things I actually can know, and they are usually learned through suffering and compassion. When we get down to such root things, we can begin to rebuild a consensus reality. This is why TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION processes are so important, for they take into account the SUBJECTIVE experience of numerous parties, especially victims of violence or genocide. And from these perspectives, we can hone in on a common reality again. Indigneous perspectives are particularly important in so many ways including this one. As we strive to overcome the current push by bosses to colonize all of humanity and life, we can learn much from those who have been resisting this assault for 500+ years. Grateful to you <3
"The language aspect is important - words are maps of the territory being discussed, not the territory itself. This itself is important to keep in mind.
It is further complicated by so many of our exchanges being written, and online, and thought out only in our own minds... whereas oral cultures created knowledge by way of negotiation - one person speakes and then the other feeds back their take, until common ground is found.
Further complicating matters still are the biases of particular languages, in particular English, which color our perceptions. This includes the syntax of sentences.
Your point is particularly well-taken that it is helpful to accept how much we don't really know, since so much of what is considered objective are models. Some would argue that objectivity itself is questionable, as it is all based on projections - I think this is one of the complexities humanity is dealing with in general right now.:
I agree as long as we don't sacrifice the Spirit of the movement of being to methodologies of applied insights.
Reintegration is a releasing of a revealed 'dis-integrity' energised by mutual patterns of reinforcement. No one comes home alone! Release and be released.
And yet the freedom to accept is a recognition of integrality not a requirement of moral guilting. I know there is no sense of this in what you say, apart from perhaps specially addressing victims - which is a primary vector for wielding power as morally proscribed correctness (gaslighting).
The more insightful the tools brought into our world the more insidious their misapplication.
True forgiveness of our sins in others releases both. This is not a double edged sword that turns against its user to trap them in their own making.
I appreciate the thoughtful comment, which offers a lot to consider. You seem to offer wisdom, so I am trying to grasp your precise meanings. You take a great deal of care in your winnowing through frameworks of understanding. (I can lose my own trajectory trying to find exact words, but that's just me. Hence, my preference to go with the emotive inspiration - hiopefully winnowed from reactivity - but still speaking as plainly as possible.)
What I receive in your comment, as I digest it, is a sincerity of purpose stemming from having found something true. It seems important to you to distinguish between beingness, which is mutually achieved, and attachment to method, which can lead one astray - is that right?
It is not up to me to speak for Indigenous cultures, except that anything I have found to be true has simultaneously proven to be a coming home to my natural Indigenous self. And this is a language and landscape that has been so systemically eliminated from the world as to be nearly unspeakable or unitelligible. I've heard it in Jesus's teachings and in zen koans, but also when talking plainly with numerous Native people across Turtle Island and beyond.
I am not into guilt at all. I am into awareness of reality, including that of genocide - and avoiding the many errors in volition (or its sacrifice) leading to its manifestation. This may seem 'negative' or paradoxical, but I have found this to be the essential boundary or law to be followed (generally received as the first or second commandment in most traditions: Ahimsa, Love Thy Neighbor, Do Not Kill, etc.)
In this commitment to nonviolence, I am far MORE free rather than less. Whether taught by Hebrew prophets, Jesus, Indigenous elders, or others, the direction of life energy to passionate beingness thus remains freely accessible, and on target. And sin, the missing of the target, is thus released.
If you can say more, lead the way. When we access the Reality beyond genocide, we will know we are making sense again. Until then, I'll go with compassionate communication, talking circles, seeking wise elders, active peacemaking, and other methods of mutual unfoldment as I can find. (Means and Ends in alignment.) And one day, recognizing each other as human, we will find more interesting things to do than blow up gas pipelines and firing missiles into nuclear plant zones.
I was triggered by vaccine mandates, and mandatory mask wearing.
I'm still triggered by loud people on the bus.
Tyrants don't trigger me, because I don't associate with them.
Not associating with unpleasant people is a good form of inoculation. But most regular people I encounter in public are far from being unpleasant. Maybe it's the rural character vs. uptight city folks.
Thanks Tessa! Always refreshing to read your writing. Your comment on “things” reminded me of a wonderful book by Iain McGilchrist called: “The Matter with Things: Our Brains, Our Delusions and the Unmaking of the World.” One of the arguments he makes is that there is a difference between the kind of attention favored by the left hemisphere of the brain with its emphasis on what is capable of being manipulated and controlled and the kind of attention favored by the right hemisphere of the brain that is more attuned to the presencing of the whole and of relationships. What you attend to shapes what you perceive. “Western civilization,” by focusing on domination has doubled down time and again on technology and so contributed to the “unmaking of the world” as while both hemispheres are needed, the perception of the right hemisphere is more accurate. Here’s a review of the work: https://channelmcgilchrist.com/the-matter-with-things-by-iain-mcgilchrist/. You might also be interested in this brief update of my old webpage from when I ran for Congress in 2018. I now have some difficulties with some of what I wrote back then, but the update still seems pretty good to me: https://www.schwartzbergforcongress.com
Thank you, Steven!!! All this is very interesting. I am unfamiliar with Iain McGilchrist's work, sounds very intriguing!! And of course, thank you for your own link, I love the visuals a whole lot! :)
Another excellent article, Tessa. I agree with Mr. Steven’s recommendation regarding McGilchrist. He is a sage with an incredible breadth of knowledge and wisdom. You two talking in an interview would not trigger me. 😉
I am on the last chapter of The Matter with Things, having made it through 1400 pages, though only over a year lol. Intuitively I feel his ideas are a crucial part of the earth's possible transformation. Here's the playlist on youtube in which he and this very cool Spanish physicist/biologist go over the book chapter by chapter https://www.youtube.com/@DrIainMcGilchrist/playlists and here are free Zoom discussions with him and other sort of future oriented writers and scholars at Perspectiva press https://systems-souls-society.com/iain-mcgilchrist-attention-as-a-moral-act/ All of this junctures with much of what you are writing about Tessa Thank you for thinking about everything so deeply.
Thanks, I hear you. I call it, originally, 'the black box model'. We see the inputs and the outputs but don't really know what goes on in the black box, but spend all our time and energy arguing over that. But from the output, which is always us getting F*cked in the arse, we should all agree it is bad, and work together to stop the perpetrators. Or just say no out of free will.
I also use black box science for insider elitism that sets definitions, parameters and modelling as if to have found or discovered from a position of assigned or asserted authority, such as to frame what can be said, seen ,funded, studied, and used as a framework of meaning ofr significance to life defined in such terms.
So the predictive mathematical modelling extended to computer processing is the usurp of science as Natural Philosophy to a proprietary technologism masking in a scientism that is operating a sealed unit - with no user access - as the determiner or enforced ruleset of what life can be or become and how it can move or relate.
Our error is in attacking a false premise as means to claim right. or to reverse that, ITS persistence depends on our attacking a false premise to protect the error against correction.
The understanding or our world is reflecting within. When Jesus said 'as ye do unto (not just the least) ye do unto Me' - that Me is the witness to true Self.
Our consciousness is split as if running from a black box with no user access (the mortal conditioning) to act out core beliefs and definitions running in dark mode.
What we give out sets the measure of what we get back for this is abundance in life. But if we want to F*ck or some equivalent 'hit' of possession or control by using a living relationship for gratifying a private mind set for getting, we are already invested in forgetting and wont recognise our feedback or learn from it, while the mind can compartmentalise or mask and hide anything to keep a bit on the side out of sight - excepting in social agreement to mutual 'getting' as a socially masking blind eye to the movement of the Soul.
Uncovering integrity is the capacity to stop the inner or outer gaslight of open or masked guilting, to be the unavailability to what has no belonging. If we think to stop 'Them' we will find we have a sympathetic resonance with 'Them' that operates like a back door for we will be triggered no matter how we double down in masking over as rationally or justifiably provoked.
This level of consideration runs beneath what we actually are moved to do. The release of an 'enemy projection' from another is not a blank cheque to treat us or others as a doormat!
Turning the cheek is to not meet in ego, but in equity of Spirit.
This is such a despicable piece of propaganda!! And it also shows that all the "anti-racism" talking points of the alphabets are extremely insincere. They attack truth seekers of every ancestry and every creed whenever it is convenient for the establishment to do so!
The lie is a lie no less for being presented in less despicable forms.
Learning to not engage with or look for truth or meaning in lies is a healthy disregard.
'Many people' is often used to generalise as an expression of a relative exceptionalism. Inferring 'not me'. Without demonising speech, it is always fruitful to pause from stepping back from owning our current sense of self integrity
I don't really know 'many people'.
(I nearly wrote without wishing to demonise speech - but immediately noticed an apologetic deference to stating an intent directly).
I didn't click on the link, I have looked on horror, I am free to look past it.
And grow freedom by living it without apology or justification.
It says "LOOK AT ME!!!" (A sort of 'Stop sign)
Guardians become guards, when we do not live who we are, the unfolding expression of.
At risk of rambling on - swearing on oath was an invocation of a delayed negative penalty or sacrifice to be meted to oneself and family if that word was broken. That was survival in times more starkly set in fear pain sickness and death.
Jesus admonished to take no oath - for this sets up a god of vengeance, instead of giving or yielding up vengeance to a Lord of love - that lords it not over any living one, & that's how we recognise truth. Absent of conflict or coercion.
Conspiracy therapy - the self administered therapy of those affected by various combinations of abuse, fear, cognitive dissonance, Stockholm syndrome , intentional misinformation, censorship, and mass formation psychosis, consisting of the patient accusing anyone who mentions an uncomfortable truth of being a conspiracy theorist, thus creating a powerful Dunning-Kruger effect, an illusion of competence and control.
This is such an incredibly complex chemistry. Conspiracies exist without a doubt, but then making up one mind about the "realness" or at least probability of any given conspiracy is a separate issue from how we treat those who view the world differently, etc. etc.
We need to be clear about use of the word "conspiracy" and "conspiracy theory". Conspiracies exist. They are everywhere and range from trivial to deadly.
The word "conspiracy theory" has two clear meanings.
Conspiracy theory 1 - a theory that a specific conspiracy exits. This is the legitimate meaning of conspiracy theory. Unfortunately, it is often confused with the second meaning, which sounds exactly that same, but has taken over as the "true meaning".
Conspiracy theory 2 - a suggestion that someone is "making up" conspiracy theories that do not exits.
When someone says "that's just a conspiracy theory," or "you're just a conspiracy theorist" they are using option 2 and an appropriate response would be "you are just practicing conspiracy therapy."
My take on the "realness" of someone's conspiracy theory is simply to listen with an open mind, and if I have doubts to check who else is supporting the theory. I also prefer simple explanations, like simple profit or commercial goals to complex accusations like "global control of everyone." I generally discount anyone who makes a "conspiracy theory" accusation. I totally dismiss any who makes a "all those conspiracy theories" accusation. They are defining themselves as "not open to any realities that create conflicts within their world view."
I look to original roots beneath the gorgon heads!
Hiding or masking intent or purpose is a private mind set by defences that support a continuity or persistence of a wish to follow or experience and explore what its offers.
This is the same as taking self-imaged reality in place of Self and hiding or masking it from truth feared as adversary or unsupport or rejection of a 'self' that is then 'naked' to disclosure and self-dissociating from its own inherent Communication.
"and WHO told you you were naked?" - said the Lord - is not about sex-shame so much as miscreative fear set in its own 'thinking'.
But as Lord is Self or life - this question is eternally given us to undo the lie and the father of it - as we are willing to release a will that 'damns as we go' - that is - its penalty is exacted as the loss of sharing in a true appreciation now - by the attempt to become in our own right or judgement.
But the last judgement was in the first; "Who saw the light was verily Good" as in "This is my Beloved who is my delight" and extended as the recognition of another as our Self. This is the 'rock' or cornerstone of a truly consecrated relationship to life - across all time and space. True worth-ship shared in true with-ness.
How do we give love to haters or rather those we see hateful? We dont. We give willingness that our perception be corrected to reflect something recognisably true or whole, rather than persist the conditions of reactive defence.
Invested self illusion must seek mutual reinforcements that clique and can then become a basis for insider elitism to align from rules, systems, and controls set in the wish to unconscious autonomy - that would know not what it does, so as to persist an experience of self-illusion, that truly conscious awareness undoes.
I have no right to deny another their self illusion or choice. An appreciation of this would save much wasted effort. But I have the freedom to recognise another in their choices as a gift of life or as a call to remember a gift forgotten or denied. What I give to others is also given to myself, so here is the way to access and release what is unconscious or denied awareness in myself BY projection to 'other'. There is no "I' that can 'Do' this, but I can choose not to do the learned habit to let life move though me, and remind me of an Intimacy that cannot be stored in symbolic representations or biological modelling.
"Lots of widely accepted verbal structures of today are ancient psyops, subsequently re-appropriated and cleansed by sincere people through the purity of their hearts." I don't know if it works that way, Tessa. Do they purify or whitewash the psyops? I try to follow the first of the Four Agreements: be meticulous with your words. Don't use ones that have been appropriated and made to mean their opposite. The ancient psyops have become calcified and fossilized, metaphors that lead our thinking in particular ways, paradigms that we assume before we're conscious of thinking. As you know, my book goes back 3500 years into the ancient psyops and questions 28 of those paradigms. I recommend that, in any discussion, people define the question and what they mean by any of the important terms. That way we can get past 'trigger' points and instead do the important work of understanding what's happening, how it's being done, and form a strategy.
I love your idea of explaining personal definitions of shared terms. I've noticed that often time, same words mean different things inside different echo chambers. Something may sound very neutral and obvious in one echo chamber, and extremely abrasive in another.
As far as purifying the psyops, I think it happens, actually. I don't know how, it is a very mysterious thing. But people do reclaim the stolen words. The process is not without confusion, but I think it does happen. After all, words only mean what people feel they mean. And if they use former psyop terms while feeling something real, the word itself may change the meaning and be reclaimed. Perhaps. I doubt there are formulas, only concrete situations.
Exactly! My suspicion is that 70% of disagreement is over different meanings for the words used. But I also feel that the etymology of a word or term is important. When it was coined, it had a context. To pluck it from that context and give it a new meaning commits two wrongs--it loses the concept it used to signify and it replaces it with a falsehood.
So when I use the term 'anarchy', it originates from an- (without) archons (rulers). It's community sovereignty or rule by rule rather than rulers. Since it's been twisted by those same rulers to mean chaos and violence, two things happen. We have no way to talk about small scale sovereignty, because you can't think about a concept without the words for it, and history is rewritten with the new meaning, imputing chaos and violence to those who defended their communities. If you're going to reclaim the words, they have to respect what was meant by those who coined them.
Tessa - maybe this is the intro to the book you get out of all this. or the first volume. We get your view from 5K feet, and then you zoom in?
working hypothesis: your "tortured servants of the metaphorical vampires" are the ones we deal with on a daily basis - at least those of us who aren't "lucky" enough to bypass the foot soldiers and work with their twisted masters instead. and those tortured servants vent their pain and rage on the nearest available object. and that's usually us.
seems to me you found the ultimate source of all societal problems: when a mystery was reduced "to a “sampled” mechanical beast." the future is analog :)
Our technologies create the ‘viruses’ and our ignorance and not thinking spreads them. The one strong antidote that I know works well for ‘viruses’, ‘parasites’, ‘zombies’ , dark energy and the fake gods out there is LOVE. I use it every day, works miracles !
Of course, it is okay in itself that people’s opinion should be not be too easily shifted - the trouble if the BBC, CNN etc were suddenly to switch round people would follow the new line instantly. They get angry because what you say is discordant. One thing we do have to try and do is be accepting of people when they do change their mind, and this is sometimes difficult.
I hear you, John! People totally would change their tune on autopilot if their favorite program change theirs. :) And they did. Remember when they first told us that only bad people would want to wear mask, and then that only bad people would NOT want to wear one? Stunning.
On my end, when I see people opening their eyes, I usually feel sheer joy. Maybe I was born this way, I don't know. I just feel such joy when I look and see somebody waking up. I don't feel judgemental unless they remain arrogant, in which case, they are not really opening their eyes. :)
And yes, The Science is the new mask of the Machine, indeed! It kind of has been for a while, but it was sharing the role with institutional faith, and now it's just The Science.
You're correct. Nobody is going to convince you whether viruses exist or not.
Why? Because it's the same logic my girlfriend had about the vaccines in 2021. She didn't want to decide whether they were safe or dangerous. She never got the shot, BTW.
Despite the info about the trials and other things, a part of her didn't want to see that yes, they were bad and her family was hoodwinked.
Same goes for the virology debate. Believing in viruses is dogma that we're taught at a young age. It's no different than being indoctrinated into a religion and being told to fear the devil here and there.
My big issue with virology is that they're used to trick us. They covered up pesticide poisoning with polio virus. They push toxic vaccines to protect us from these things.
These days, they use this to push control on people, pandemic response.
Sasha Latypova and others who believe in viruses have repeated that the Spanish flu was caused by poisoning, not a virus.
Ebola happens in toxic areas of Africa where mining is unregulated. But they blamed a virus.
We got lucky with con-vid... It was not really deadly at all, whatever caused it.
If the next pandemic was really deadly, perhaps chemical... And they said it was ebola and it matches the symptoms, would you believe it's a virus?
I'm going to exercise free will and by default assume it's not a virus and look for other causes. If it turns out to be a virus, I can change my mind.
But I don't think sitting on the fence is wise during a time when the fascists are hungry to make people give up their freedom for safety.
I have my own theory about many of those things, maybe I will write about it one of these days. It sounds like we agree on many things. I am not sure from your comment if you think that the notion of viruses is critical to the justification of tyranny or not... on my end, I think that tyrants have found ways to push through propaganda and / or violence for centuries,and they don't depend on whether people believe in viruses or not, they depend on people being generally not free on the inside, for whatever reason. As far as sitting on the fence, I don't think many people on this Substack or any of the ones you listed are in that position :)
The underlying signature theme given representation in the pathogenic hacking hijacking disease contagion can be recognised as a mind-hack using trojan solutions. It can be traced to the tyrannies of thought that essentially marketise and weaponise life seeking control of narratives, currencies and necessities of common need.
The experiential Field of experience is never without our participation.
The word we give corrupts - but we may outsource to 'authority' of a presentation stamped by the past as being 'protected' and receive life through its control filters.
The demonising of life in any scapegoat - real or imagined is the basis to trigger or justify attack as 'righteous'. The modern way uses models that collectivise sacrifice as virtue according to the modelling of 'the science'.
The actual or real nature of resonant communications triggering all kinds of physical and mental response or disease is much richer than 'rogue code' that didn't exist so we had to invent it! (Transfecting mRNA) which Is but another mutation of the WISH to replicate live as an iDoll under Genetic Control. When that is revealed baseless - but not without a spanner in the works/wrench in the gears - we'll become aware if not already of the intent to hack the Biofield using nanoparticulate structures of bi-technical convergence. It is undeway - but is that 'true' just because billions are invested to tout PR to investors of all the wonderful applications?
Theramos is a rare example of losing face in the game.
Genetics is really inheritances assigned to proteins as 'controllers'. Living water folds and mediates structures of informing and energetic information. The Rockefeller 'science' is bent to reduce all to a binary of control under global monopoly. (yes control is running out of control!)
Elitist insiders of institutional or corporate management engage in risk management. But risk modelling soon became a means of predictive control working the mind of fear - set by falsified science into regulatory capture, and self sacrificing denial to a false sense of life, resilience, and adaptive growth - not just survival - but resolving and releasing of conflicted self manifesting toxic conflict (and cover stories)
I'd like to hear your theory. I'm open to new ideas.
I'm not open to doctors (McCullough, Malone, Nass) who keep going on about spike protein and so on, ignoring the elephant in the room: these people were poisoned, whether by medicines, food, or the LNPs in the jabs. (Or past shots like the illustrious flu shots which many seniors take, like my father got sick from years before convid with similar low oxygen symptoms etc).
Viruses are critical because they're one of the Boogeymen of the state religion of science. Carbon Climate change is another one that's powerful to make people afraid.
There's other Boogeymen like terrorism, communism, and so on.
Sure, there are other scams they can create, but I think these are the most effective. These are the established fears of most first world nations.
By sitting on the fence, I mean where it comes to looking into whether viruses are real or not by looking at the history and the huge flaws in how they "prove" then. I'm happy that many are learning that even the Spanish flu and polio had other causes, like Sasha Latypova and Mike Yeadon.
What I am hopeful about is that people are starting to question the priests of medicine more than those priests are questioning themselves.
A truly wonderful reflection put into words. It took me a while to get to it (so many prolific substack writers!), but I’m so glad I set aside a quiet moment to read this.
All true words and highly resonant. As we surf through comments on various stacks, everything you highlight here is evident, simultaneously both saddening and enlightening. Commenting has become nearly a bloodsport at times, and more often than not, pausing to reflect on various people’s perspectives yields more than engaging. Not that engaging is bad, per se…but I think too many engage for the sake of engagement rather than true dialogue and conversation.
Your stack is always a balm, and one that I appreciate deeply.
Yes I see the term as a CIA device to exclude and mark our for exclusion.
It's a characteristic reversal or inversion from an institutionalised conspiracy or masked agenda set in secrets and lies.
But I look at the roots of what conspiring together meant. (Breathing together is of a common spirit or purpose) but is associated with covert or concealed intent by which to escape unwanted attention or consequence to open or full disclosure.
Your 1. doesn't need 'theory', It is as assertion or claim of conspirational intent is active.
Such as the revolving door between government and corporate positions of influence.
They may claim no conflict of interest and frame the accusation of corruption as a theory, as their cover story. They might even 'believe it' on some level.
There is paranoia associated with loss of trust and relational connection that sees everyone and everything in the fame of "You Are Being Lied To!".
i see this as very destructive - and also as an intended result of stated CIA objectives of bringing people to a state of not being able to determine truth from illusion.
A true centre is fluid and living intelligence within a relational field.
If we assign intelligence to predictive modelling as a basis for agency, we can act from fear to manifest its effects as reinforcement to double down in the model - that is not a relational field (alive) but an input of defined parameters, (machine).
Secret thinking is posited as the result of Adam and Eve listening to the Serpent.
"And WHO told you you were naked?" relates to a masked identity.
Self-consciousness seeks concealment in socially coded behaviours.
Susceptibility is reinforced by attempt to boost its defences.
Forgive me if I am taking the theme out of one specific usage.
I see social masking as conspiracy to avoid intimacy of being associated with being put down, rejected or excluded. But when we know what we do - we can extend love in ways that are recognised or accepted without triggering defences.
Its interesting to see if we can hold a channel or thread of communication open when unsure of or meeting a sticking point in terms of how to articulate. What would come through if we trusted beyond our learned or current set of limits? (Music making is a good analogy for letting life express through us).
Being is given or already, but masked over by a 'self-consciousness' through the forms of life expressing. Our mind of learned adaptation to a world that partakes of meanings we (culturally and personally) give it. So methodologies is in the realm of strategies that are acquired or achieved from experience set in meanings that refer to qualities of being framed in conflict and limitation.
The identification with the toolset can then become an invested identity that cant or wont put it down to let in a field of information that is not just code-data but representing qualitative connection.
So yes native being is original 'language' because it is a felt participation of self and world of a common root, source, father, nature - through ALL of its expressions that on an outer level we might call biodiversity of forms and functions within the whole that is.... All That Is. What we give forth sets the measure of receiving, so our word is our bond or bondage accordingly.
The gift or experience is always given and received, but in giving cause to our world of effects, we learned to experience subjections that correspond to our a-tempt to judge over (as apart from).
So there is a deeper sense of a world we learn, make, inherit, and partake of that is already predicated on judgements that spiritually 'kill' our felt connection, to conflicts that shadow-project to our relationships as war that denies and kills on many levels resulting in existential guilt which is then socially masked in forms of denial such as blaming the dissonance on the Other or the Past, our parents or genes. Then normalising our narrative as a self justifying reinforcement that effectively locksdown to lockstep in groupthink or unconsciousness given power to a movie from which life drains away - for it holds no capacity to share and grow or create by giving and receiving life.
I was walking in nature in a very communioned quality of being once when a wasp alighted on my hand. I held it up before my face to gently say "I will not harm you" or words to that effect. It then nipped me with its pincers and flew away. I immediately understood 'koan' that I had introduced the concept of violence into a love as if to protect myself - while casting my words as caring for it - for while I don't swat wasps - I have in the past - and perhaps might under some situations.
So my sense of non violence is a linguistic oxymoron for native being. I do recognise force as part of communication of an integrity of presence but I don't see acting out of integrity as violence but that is a matter of discernment. We are not to be passive doormats to those who would undermine our integrity, but nor to react in the same 'coin'.
I bring commitment to the living one that you are as I am. A real relationship is the context of revealing truth as a felt and shared outcome. I may meet different facets of myself in different situations, but I stay vigilant against the habit or temptation to judge another living one wherever they are currently at. This is also a willingness to pause the mind that reacts as if it knows to listen in the heart and uncover whether or when or what to speak.
This also applies to the Big Screen of our world with its terror symbols set in news that does not give a true witness and has long been coopted to mask over protected narratives deemed too big to fail or under existential threat - which of course leaks into its themed feed in forms of displacement that can induce us to do unto ourself what an clearly seen enemy could never achieve.
So yes and yes to the ways of the heart of stillness that knows - without a word,
And vigilance for the habits of mind that run emotionally reactive sympathies as if to usurp the heart by framing life in lies given power.
I let myself ramble in the themes to a sense of shared learning.
If someone goes ahead it is to prepare a place of meeting.
Truth finds us where we are, but we then find ourselves in new ways.
Great distinctions Tessa. The language aspect is important - words are maps of the territory being discussed, not the territory itself. This itself is important to keep in mind.
It is further complicated by so many of our exchanges being written, and online, and thought out only in our own minds... whereas oral cultures created knowledge by way of negotiation - one person speakes and then the other feeds back their take, until common ground is found.
Further complicating matters still are the biases of particular languages, in particular English, which color our perceptions. This includes the syntax of sentences.
Your point is particularly well-taken that it is helpful to accept how much we don't really know, since so much of what is considered objective are models. Some would argue that objectivity itself is questionable, as it is all based on projections - I think this is one of the complexities humanity is dealing with in general right now.
What I find is that there are a precious few things I actually can know, and they are usually learned through suffering and compassion. When we get down to such root things, we can begin to rebuild a consensus reality. This is why TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION processes are so important, for they take into account the SUBJECTIVE experience of numerous parties, especially victims of violence or genocide. And from these perspectives, we can hone in on a common reality again. Indigneous perspectives are particularly important in so many ways including this one. As we strive to overcome the current push by bosses to colonize all of humanity and life, we can learn much from those who have been resisting this assault for 500+ years. Grateful to you <3
Thank you, Michael, this is a beautiful response!
"The language aspect is important - words are maps of the territory being discussed, not the territory itself. This itself is important to keep in mind.
It is further complicated by so many of our exchanges being written, and online, and thought out only in our own minds... whereas oral cultures created knowledge by way of negotiation - one person speakes and then the other feeds back their take, until common ground is found.
Further complicating matters still are the biases of particular languages, in particular English, which color our perceptions. This includes the syntax of sentences.
Your point is particularly well-taken that it is helpful to accept how much we don't really know, since so much of what is considered objective are models. Some would argue that objectivity itself is questionable, as it is all based on projections - I think this is one of the complexities humanity is dealing with in general right now.:
Yes, indeed!!
I agree as long as we don't sacrifice the Spirit of the movement of being to methodologies of applied insights.
Reintegration is a releasing of a revealed 'dis-integrity' energised by mutual patterns of reinforcement. No one comes home alone! Release and be released.
And yet the freedom to accept is a recognition of integrality not a requirement of moral guilting. I know there is no sense of this in what you say, apart from perhaps specially addressing victims - which is a primary vector for wielding power as morally proscribed correctness (gaslighting).
The more insightful the tools brought into our world the more insidious their misapplication.
True forgiveness of our sins in others releases both. This is not a double edged sword that turns against its user to trap them in their own making.
I appreciate the thoughtful comment, which offers a lot to consider. You seem to offer wisdom, so I am trying to grasp your precise meanings. You take a great deal of care in your winnowing through frameworks of understanding. (I can lose my own trajectory trying to find exact words, but that's just me. Hence, my preference to go with the emotive inspiration - hiopefully winnowed from reactivity - but still speaking as plainly as possible.)
What I receive in your comment, as I digest it, is a sincerity of purpose stemming from having found something true. It seems important to you to distinguish between beingness, which is mutually achieved, and attachment to method, which can lead one astray - is that right?
It is not up to me to speak for Indigenous cultures, except that anything I have found to be true has simultaneously proven to be a coming home to my natural Indigenous self. And this is a language and landscape that has been so systemically eliminated from the world as to be nearly unspeakable or unitelligible. I've heard it in Jesus's teachings and in zen koans, but also when talking plainly with numerous Native people across Turtle Island and beyond.
I am not into guilt at all. I am into awareness of reality, including that of genocide - and avoiding the many errors in volition (or its sacrifice) leading to its manifestation. This may seem 'negative' or paradoxical, but I have found this to be the essential boundary or law to be followed (generally received as the first or second commandment in most traditions: Ahimsa, Love Thy Neighbor, Do Not Kill, etc.)
In this commitment to nonviolence, I am far MORE free rather than less. Whether taught by Hebrew prophets, Jesus, Indigenous elders, or others, the direction of life energy to passionate beingness thus remains freely accessible, and on target. And sin, the missing of the target, is thus released.
If you can say more, lead the way. When we access the Reality beyond genocide, we will know we are making sense again. Until then, I'll go with compassionate communication, talking circles, seeking wise elders, active peacemaking, and other methods of mutual unfoldment as I can find. (Means and Ends in alignment.) And one day, recognizing each other as human, we will find more interesting things to do than blow up gas pipelines and firing missiles into nuclear plant zones.
All paths of the heart are worthy. Blessings!
I was triggered by vaccine mandates, and mandatory mask wearing.
I'm still triggered by loud people on the bus.
Tyrants don't trigger me, because I don't associate with them.
Not associating with unpleasant people is a good form of inoculation. But most regular people I encounter in public are far from being unpleasant. Maybe it's the rural character vs. uptight city folks.
Thanks Tessa! Always refreshing to read your writing. Your comment on “things” reminded me of a wonderful book by Iain McGilchrist called: “The Matter with Things: Our Brains, Our Delusions and the Unmaking of the World.” One of the arguments he makes is that there is a difference between the kind of attention favored by the left hemisphere of the brain with its emphasis on what is capable of being manipulated and controlled and the kind of attention favored by the right hemisphere of the brain that is more attuned to the presencing of the whole and of relationships. What you attend to shapes what you perceive. “Western civilization,” by focusing on domination has doubled down time and again on technology and so contributed to the “unmaking of the world” as while both hemispheres are needed, the perception of the right hemisphere is more accurate. Here’s a review of the work: https://channelmcgilchrist.com/the-matter-with-things-by-iain-mcgilchrist/. You might also be interested in this brief update of my old webpage from when I ran for Congress in 2018. I now have some difficulties with some of what I wrote back then, but the update still seems pretty good to me: https://www.schwartzbergforcongress.com
Thank you, Steven!!! All this is very interesting. I am unfamiliar with Iain McGilchrist's work, sounds very intriguing!! And of course, thank you for your own link, I love the visuals a whole lot! :)
Tessa, here is a good short intro animation to McGilchrist https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFs9WO2B8uI
Thank you, Gary!!
Another excellent article, Tessa. I agree with Mr. Steven’s recommendation regarding McGilchrist. He is a sage with an incredible breadth of knowledge and wisdom. You two talking in an interview would not trigger me. 😉
Nice to see a fellow aficionado of McGilchrist's work!
I am on the last chapter of The Matter with Things, having made it through 1400 pages, though only over a year lol. Intuitively I feel his ideas are a crucial part of the earth's possible transformation. Here's the playlist on youtube in which he and this very cool Spanish physicist/biologist go over the book chapter by chapter https://www.youtube.com/@DrIainMcGilchrist/playlists and here are free Zoom discussions with him and other sort of future oriented writers and scholars at Perspectiva press https://systems-souls-society.com/iain-mcgilchrist-attention-as-a-moral-act/ All of this junctures with much of what you are writing about Tessa Thank you for thinking about everything so deeply.
Thanks, I hear you. I call it, originally, 'the black box model'. We see the inputs and the outputs but don't really know what goes on in the black box, but spend all our time and energy arguing over that. But from the output, which is always us getting F*cked in the arse, we should all agree it is bad, and work together to stop the perpetrators. Or just say no out of free will.
Exactly, and thank you, Grant Piper!!
I also use black box science for insider elitism that sets definitions, parameters and modelling as if to have found or discovered from a position of assigned or asserted authority, such as to frame what can be said, seen ,funded, studied, and used as a framework of meaning ofr significance to life defined in such terms.
So the predictive mathematical modelling extended to computer processing is the usurp of science as Natural Philosophy to a proprietary technologism masking in a scientism that is operating a sealed unit - with no user access - as the determiner or enforced ruleset of what life can be or become and how it can move or relate.
Our error is in attacking a false premise as means to claim right. or to reverse that, ITS persistence depends on our attacking a false premise to protect the error against correction.
The understanding or our world is reflecting within. When Jesus said 'as ye do unto (not just the least) ye do unto Me' - that Me is the witness to true Self.
Our consciousness is split as if running from a black box with no user access (the mortal conditioning) to act out core beliefs and definitions running in dark mode.
What we give out sets the measure of what we get back for this is abundance in life. But if we want to F*ck or some equivalent 'hit' of possession or control by using a living relationship for gratifying a private mind set for getting, we are already invested in forgetting and wont recognise our feedback or learn from it, while the mind can compartmentalise or mask and hide anything to keep a bit on the side out of sight - excepting in social agreement to mutual 'getting' as a socially masking blind eye to the movement of the Soul.
Uncovering integrity is the capacity to stop the inner or outer gaslight of open or masked guilting, to be the unavailability to what has no belonging. If we think to stop 'Them' we will find we have a sympathetic resonance with 'Them' that operates like a back door for we will be triggered no matter how we double down in masking over as rationally or justifiably provoked.
This level of consideration runs beneath what we actually are moved to do. The release of an 'enemy projection' from another is not a blank cheque to treat us or others as a doormat!
Turning the cheek is to not meet in ego, but in equity of Spirit.
This little piece of propaganda made my hair stand on end and also made me want to send Stella Immanuel a big hug, or a medal!!
https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/103353?xid=nl_mostcommented_2023-03-10&mh=f2757356286f5efd74deade3d5c6b94d
This is such a despicable piece of propaganda!! And it also shows that all the "anti-racism" talking points of the alphabets are extremely insincere. They attack truth seekers of every ancestry and every creed whenever it is convenient for the establishment to do so!
but many people this propaganda is what they see and unfortunately believe!
oh yes.
I think we ALL know many many people.
I have learned, even harshly, that sometimes it is better for me to just step away
..... something like "arguing with idiots" or wrestling with pigs is another one.... on one level or another.
Yes - give it nothing.
The lie is a lie no less for being presented in less despicable forms.
Learning to not engage with or look for truth or meaning in lies is a healthy disregard.
'Many people' is often used to generalise as an expression of a relative exceptionalism. Inferring 'not me'. Without demonising speech, it is always fruitful to pause from stepping back from owning our current sense of self integrity
I don't really know 'many people'.
(I nearly wrote without wishing to demonise speech - but immediately noticed an apologetic deference to stating an intent directly).
I didn't click on the link, I have looked on horror, I am free to look past it.
And grow freedom by living it without apology or justification.
It says "LOOK AT ME!!!" (A sort of 'Stop sign)
Guardians become guards, when we do not live who we are, the unfolding expression of.
At risk of rambling on - swearing on oath was an invocation of a delayed negative penalty or sacrifice to be meted to oneself and family if that word was broken. That was survival in times more starkly set in fear pain sickness and death.
Jesus admonished to take no oath - for this sets up a god of vengeance, instead of giving or yielding up vengeance to a Lord of love - that lords it not over any living one, & that's how we recognise truth. Absent of conflict or coercion.
thank you for this.
Your very last paragraph is powerful.
"Sunday Sunday Medicine" ❤
Conspiracy therapy - the self administered therapy of those affected by various combinations of abuse, fear, cognitive dissonance, Stockholm syndrome , intentional misinformation, censorship, and mass formation psychosis, consisting of the patient accusing anyone who mentions an uncomfortable truth of being a conspiracy theorist, thus creating a powerful Dunning-Kruger effect, an illusion of competence and control.
This is such an incredibly complex chemistry. Conspiracies exist without a doubt, but then making up one mind about the "realness" or at least probability of any given conspiracy is a separate issue from how we treat those who view the world differently, etc. etc.
I think I have worn out my computer keys by writing stories about conspiracies :) Here is one take, a conversation with Charles Eisenstein https://tessa.substack.com/p/charles-eisenstein-amnesty
We need to be clear about use of the word "conspiracy" and "conspiracy theory". Conspiracies exist. They are everywhere and range from trivial to deadly.
The word "conspiracy theory" has two clear meanings.
Conspiracy theory 1 - a theory that a specific conspiracy exits. This is the legitimate meaning of conspiracy theory. Unfortunately, it is often confused with the second meaning, which sounds exactly that same, but has taken over as the "true meaning".
Conspiracy theory 2 - a suggestion that someone is "making up" conspiracy theories that do not exits.
When someone says "that's just a conspiracy theory," or "you're just a conspiracy theorist" they are using option 2 and an appropriate response would be "you are just practicing conspiracy therapy."
Yep, that's true! It was made into a slur by ... conspirators? :)
My take on the "realness" of someone's conspiracy theory is simply to listen with an open mind, and if I have doubts to check who else is supporting the theory. I also prefer simple explanations, like simple profit or commercial goals to complex accusations like "global control of everyone." I generally discount anyone who makes a "conspiracy theory" accusation. I totally dismiss any who makes a "all those conspiracy theories" accusation. They are defining themselves as "not open to any realities that create conflicts within their world view."
I look to original roots beneath the gorgon heads!
Hiding or masking intent or purpose is a private mind set by defences that support a continuity or persistence of a wish to follow or experience and explore what its offers.
This is the same as taking self-imaged reality in place of Self and hiding or masking it from truth feared as adversary or unsupport or rejection of a 'self' that is then 'naked' to disclosure and self-dissociating from its own inherent Communication.
"and WHO told you you were naked?" - said the Lord - is not about sex-shame so much as miscreative fear set in its own 'thinking'.
But as Lord is Self or life - this question is eternally given us to undo the lie and the father of it - as we are willing to release a will that 'damns as we go' - that is - its penalty is exacted as the loss of sharing in a true appreciation now - by the attempt to become in our own right or judgement.
But the last judgement was in the first; "Who saw the light was verily Good" as in "This is my Beloved who is my delight" and extended as the recognition of another as our Self. This is the 'rock' or cornerstone of a truly consecrated relationship to life - across all time and space. True worth-ship shared in true with-ness.
How do we give love to haters or rather those we see hateful? We dont. We give willingness that our perception be corrected to reflect something recognisably true or whole, rather than persist the conditions of reactive defence.
Invested self illusion must seek mutual reinforcements that clique and can then become a basis for insider elitism to align from rules, systems, and controls set in the wish to unconscious autonomy - that would know not what it does, so as to persist an experience of self-illusion, that truly conscious awareness undoes.
I have no right to deny another their self illusion or choice. An appreciation of this would save much wasted effort. But I have the freedom to recognise another in their choices as a gift of life or as a call to remember a gift forgotten or denied. What I give to others is also given to myself, so here is the way to access and release what is unconscious or denied awareness in myself BY projection to 'other'. There is no "I' that can 'Do' this, but I can choose not to do the learned habit to let life move though me, and remind me of an Intimacy that cannot be stored in symbolic representations or biological modelling.
Only - but always now.
"Lots of widely accepted verbal structures of today are ancient psyops, subsequently re-appropriated and cleansed by sincere people through the purity of their hearts." I don't know if it works that way, Tessa. Do they purify or whitewash the psyops? I try to follow the first of the Four Agreements: be meticulous with your words. Don't use ones that have been appropriated and made to mean their opposite. The ancient psyops have become calcified and fossilized, metaphors that lead our thinking in particular ways, paradigms that we assume before we're conscious of thinking. As you know, my book goes back 3500 years into the ancient psyops and questions 28 of those paradigms. I recommend that, in any discussion, people define the question and what they mean by any of the important terms. That way we can get past 'trigger' points and instead do the important work of understanding what's happening, how it's being done, and form a strategy.
I love your idea of explaining personal definitions of shared terms. I've noticed that often time, same words mean different things inside different echo chambers. Something may sound very neutral and obvious in one echo chamber, and extremely abrasive in another.
As far as purifying the psyops, I think it happens, actually. I don't know how, it is a very mysterious thing. But people do reclaim the stolen words. The process is not without confusion, but I think it does happen. After all, words only mean what people feel they mean. And if they use former psyop terms while feeling something real, the word itself may change the meaning and be reclaimed. Perhaps. I doubt there are formulas, only concrete situations.
Exactly! My suspicion is that 70% of disagreement is over different meanings for the words used. But I also feel that the etymology of a word or term is important. When it was coined, it had a context. To pluck it from that context and give it a new meaning commits two wrongs--it loses the concept it used to signify and it replaces it with a falsehood.
So when I use the term 'anarchy', it originates from an- (without) archons (rulers). It's community sovereignty or rule by rule rather than rulers. Since it's been twisted by those same rulers to mean chaos and violence, two things happen. We have no way to talk about small scale sovereignty, because you can't think about a concept without the words for it, and history is rewritten with the new meaning, imputing chaos and violence to those who defended their communities. If you're going to reclaim the words, they have to respect what was meant by those who coined them.
Tessa - maybe this is the intro to the book you get out of all this. or the first volume. We get your view from 5K feet, and then you zoom in?
working hypothesis: your "tortured servants of the metaphorical vampires" are the ones we deal with on a daily basis - at least those of us who aren't "lucky" enough to bypass the foot soldiers and work with their twisted masters instead. and those tortured servants vent their pain and rage on the nearest available object. and that's usually us.
seems to me you found the ultimate source of all societal problems: when a mystery was reduced "to a “sampled” mechanical beast." the future is analog :)
Thank you, and you noticed my reference to digital vs. analog, I am so happy!! :)
Thank you Tessa, your scenarios are intriguing :)
Our technologies create the ‘viruses’ and our ignorance and not thinking spreads them. The one strong antidote that I know works well for ‘viruses’, ‘parasites’, ‘zombies’ , dark energy and the fake gods out there is LOVE. I use it every day, works miracles !
Of course, it is okay in itself that people’s opinion should be not be too easily shifted - the trouble if the BBC, CNN etc were suddenly to switch round people would follow the new line instantly. They get angry because what you say is discordant. One thing we do have to try and do is be accepting of people when they do change their mind, and this is sometimes difficult.
I hear you, John! People totally would change their tune on autopilot if their favorite program change theirs. :) And they did. Remember when they first told us that only bad people would want to wear mask, and then that only bad people would NOT want to wear one? Stunning.
On my end, when I see people opening their eyes, I usually feel sheer joy. Maybe I was born this way, I don't know. I just feel such joy when I look and see somebody waking up. I don't feel judgemental unless they remain arrogant, in which case, they are not really opening their eyes. :)
lovely
impactful
probably not a lie
molecules, viruses, flat earth, aliens, bigfoot are independent of the models used to describe them
science, the useful spirit, doubts and checks
those checks yield evidence in support of or against a model
the model will always be an idea, a portrait
a portrait of a pipe is not a pipe
The Science is the new mask of the machine. A tired and used rag draped over unfeeling metal.
Discernment is difficult but essential.
Thank you, Alon!!
And yes, The Science is the new mask of the Machine, indeed! It kind of has been for a while, but it was sharing the role with institutional faith, and now it's just The Science.
Is a thought outside and independent of the mind that holds it?
Can living thought project a self out from love by loving images set in contradiction?
Such is a 'model' of a projective externalisations set over living thought which is living because it is one in all.
Symbols can be traced back to their resonance of origin as the preverbal activation of awareness to self-consciousness.
Mutating derivatives set a mind of shifting and conflicting 'meanings' that render meaningless by conflict they seem to mask over or escape.
Machine thinking must have been insanely difficult to learn, but became as if a second nature.
Now the difficult is to uncover a persistent and consistent willingness to unlearn - or be released of the purpose that made it.
I agree that our assence or core is a discernment within life and not a reaction to images that phish us into trigeroo!
You're correct. Nobody is going to convince you whether viruses exist or not.
Why? Because it's the same logic my girlfriend had about the vaccines in 2021. She didn't want to decide whether they were safe or dangerous. She never got the shot, BTW.
Despite the info about the trials and other things, a part of her didn't want to see that yes, they were bad and her family was hoodwinked.
Same goes for the virology debate. Believing in viruses is dogma that we're taught at a young age. It's no different than being indoctrinated into a religion and being told to fear the devil here and there.
My big issue with virology is that they're used to trick us. They covered up pesticide poisoning with polio virus. They push toxic vaccines to protect us from these things.
These days, they use this to push control on people, pandemic response.
Sasha Latypova and others who believe in viruses have repeated that the Spanish flu was caused by poisoning, not a virus.
Ebola happens in toxic areas of Africa where mining is unregulated. But they blamed a virus.
We got lucky with con-vid... It was not really deadly at all, whatever caused it.
If the next pandemic was really deadly, perhaps chemical... And they said it was ebola and it matches the symptoms, would you believe it's a virus?
I'm going to exercise free will and by default assume it's not a virus and look for other causes. If it turns out to be a virus, I can change my mind.
But I don't think sitting on the fence is wise during a time when the fascists are hungry to make people give up their freedom for safety.
I have my own theory about many of those things, maybe I will write about it one of these days. It sounds like we agree on many things. I am not sure from your comment if you think that the notion of viruses is critical to the justification of tyranny or not... on my end, I think that tyrants have found ways to push through propaganda and / or violence for centuries,and they don't depend on whether people believe in viruses or not, they depend on people being generally not free on the inside, for whatever reason. As far as sitting on the fence, I don't think many people on this Substack or any of the ones you listed are in that position :)
The underlying signature theme given representation in the pathogenic hacking hijacking disease contagion can be recognised as a mind-hack using trojan solutions. It can be traced to the tyrannies of thought that essentially marketise and weaponise life seeking control of narratives, currencies and necessities of common need.
The experiential Field of experience is never without our participation.
The word we give corrupts - but we may outsource to 'authority' of a presentation stamped by the past as being 'protected' and receive life through its control filters.
The demonising of life in any scapegoat - real or imagined is the basis to trigger or justify attack as 'righteous'. The modern way uses models that collectivise sacrifice as virtue according to the modelling of 'the science'.
The actual or real nature of resonant communications triggering all kinds of physical and mental response or disease is much richer than 'rogue code' that didn't exist so we had to invent it! (Transfecting mRNA) which Is but another mutation of the WISH to replicate live as an iDoll under Genetic Control. When that is revealed baseless - but not without a spanner in the works/wrench in the gears - we'll become aware if not already of the intent to hack the Biofield using nanoparticulate structures of bi-technical convergence. It is undeway - but is that 'true' just because billions are invested to tout PR to investors of all the wonderful applications?
Theramos is a rare example of losing face in the game.
Genetics is really inheritances assigned to proteins as 'controllers'. Living water folds and mediates structures of informing and energetic information. The Rockefeller 'science' is bent to reduce all to a binary of control under global monopoly. (yes control is running out of control!)
Elitist insiders of institutional or corporate management engage in risk management. But risk modelling soon became a means of predictive control working the mind of fear - set by falsified science into regulatory capture, and self sacrificing denial to a false sense of life, resilience, and adaptive growth - not just survival - but resolving and releasing of conflicted self manifesting toxic conflict (and cover stories)
I'd like to hear your theory. I'm open to new ideas.
I'm not open to doctors (McCullough, Malone, Nass) who keep going on about spike protein and so on, ignoring the elephant in the room: these people were poisoned, whether by medicines, food, or the LNPs in the jabs. (Or past shots like the illustrious flu shots which many seniors take, like my father got sick from years before convid with similar low oxygen symptoms etc).
https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/the-waiting-for-pandemic-cult-of
Viruses are critical because they're one of the Boogeymen of the state religion of science. Carbon Climate change is another one that's powerful to make people afraid.
There's other Boogeymen like terrorism, communism, and so on.
Sure, there are other scams they can create, but I think these are the most effective. These are the established fears of most first world nations.
By sitting on the fence, I mean where it comes to looking into whether viruses are real or not by looking at the history and the huge flaws in how they "prove" then. I'm happy that many are learning that even the Spanish flu and polio had other causes, like Sasha Latypova and Mike Yeadon.
What I am hopeful about is that people are starting to question the priests of medicine more than those priests are questioning themselves.
.
When You Ignite
A Genuine Emotional Response
You Are Capturing Territory.
.
A truly wonderful reflection put into words. It took me a while to get to it (so many prolific substack writers!), but I’m so glad I set aside a quiet moment to read this.
All true words and highly resonant. As we surf through comments on various stacks, everything you highlight here is evident, simultaneously both saddening and enlightening. Commenting has become nearly a bloodsport at times, and more often than not, pausing to reflect on various people’s perspectives yields more than engaging. Not that engaging is bad, per se…but I think too many engage for the sake of engagement rather than true dialogue and conversation.
Your stack is always a balm, and one that I appreciate deeply.
Thank you for this. 🙏🏽
Yes I see the term as a CIA device to exclude and mark our for exclusion.
It's a characteristic reversal or inversion from an institutionalised conspiracy or masked agenda set in secrets and lies.
But I look at the roots of what conspiring together meant. (Breathing together is of a common spirit or purpose) but is associated with covert or concealed intent by which to escape unwanted attention or consequence to open or full disclosure.
Your 1. doesn't need 'theory', It is as assertion or claim of conspirational intent is active.
Such as the revolving door between government and corporate positions of influence.
They may claim no conflict of interest and frame the accusation of corruption as a theory, as their cover story. They might even 'believe it' on some level.
There is paranoia associated with loss of trust and relational connection that sees everyone and everything in the fame of "You Are Being Lied To!".
i see this as very destructive - and also as an intended result of stated CIA objectives of bringing people to a state of not being able to determine truth from illusion.
A true centre is fluid and living intelligence within a relational field.
If we assign intelligence to predictive modelling as a basis for agency, we can act from fear to manifest its effects as reinforcement to double down in the model - that is not a relational field (alive) but an input of defined parameters, (machine).
Secret thinking is posited as the result of Adam and Eve listening to the Serpent.
"And WHO told you you were naked?" relates to a masked identity.
Self-consciousness seeks concealment in socially coded behaviours.
Susceptibility is reinforced by attempt to boost its defences.
Forgive me if I am taking the theme out of one specific usage.
I see social masking as conspiracy to avoid intimacy of being associated with being put down, rejected or excluded. But when we know what we do - we can extend love in ways that are recognised or accepted without triggering defences.
Its interesting to see if we can hold a channel or thread of communication open when unsure of or meeting a sticking point in terms of how to articulate. What would come through if we trusted beyond our learned or current set of limits? (Music making is a good analogy for letting life express through us).
Being is given or already, but masked over by a 'self-consciousness' through the forms of life expressing. Our mind of learned adaptation to a world that partakes of meanings we (culturally and personally) give it. So methodologies is in the realm of strategies that are acquired or achieved from experience set in meanings that refer to qualities of being framed in conflict and limitation.
The identification with the toolset can then become an invested identity that cant or wont put it down to let in a field of information that is not just code-data but representing qualitative connection.
So yes native being is original 'language' because it is a felt participation of self and world of a common root, source, father, nature - through ALL of its expressions that on an outer level we might call biodiversity of forms and functions within the whole that is.... All That Is. What we give forth sets the measure of receiving, so our word is our bond or bondage accordingly.
The gift or experience is always given and received, but in giving cause to our world of effects, we learned to experience subjections that correspond to our a-tempt to judge over (as apart from).
So there is a deeper sense of a world we learn, make, inherit, and partake of that is already predicated on judgements that spiritually 'kill' our felt connection, to conflicts that shadow-project to our relationships as war that denies and kills on many levels resulting in existential guilt which is then socially masked in forms of denial such as blaming the dissonance on the Other or the Past, our parents or genes. Then normalising our narrative as a self justifying reinforcement that effectively locksdown to lockstep in groupthink or unconsciousness given power to a movie from which life drains away - for it holds no capacity to share and grow or create by giving and receiving life.
I was walking in nature in a very communioned quality of being once when a wasp alighted on my hand. I held it up before my face to gently say "I will not harm you" or words to that effect. It then nipped me with its pincers and flew away. I immediately understood 'koan' that I had introduced the concept of violence into a love as if to protect myself - while casting my words as caring for it - for while I don't swat wasps - I have in the past - and perhaps might under some situations.
So my sense of non violence is a linguistic oxymoron for native being. I do recognise force as part of communication of an integrity of presence but I don't see acting out of integrity as violence but that is a matter of discernment. We are not to be passive doormats to those who would undermine our integrity, but nor to react in the same 'coin'.
I bring commitment to the living one that you are as I am. A real relationship is the context of revealing truth as a felt and shared outcome. I may meet different facets of myself in different situations, but I stay vigilant against the habit or temptation to judge another living one wherever they are currently at. This is also a willingness to pause the mind that reacts as if it knows to listen in the heart and uncover whether or when or what to speak.
This also applies to the Big Screen of our world with its terror symbols set in news that does not give a true witness and has long been coopted to mask over protected narratives deemed too big to fail or under existential threat - which of course leaks into its themed feed in forms of displacement that can induce us to do unto ourself what an clearly seen enemy could never achieve.
So yes and yes to the ways of the heart of stillness that knows - without a word,
And vigilance for the habits of mind that run emotionally reactive sympathies as if to usurp the heart by framing life in lies given power.
I let myself ramble in the themes to a sense of shared learning.
If someone goes ahead it is to prepare a place of meeting.
Truth finds us where we are, but we then find ourselves in new ways.