It's Time for Change - Real Change

I went to a junior high school in America (that's the 7th through 9th grades) named after Benjamin Franklin; one of the Founding Fathers of the country, who, in his younger years, made a living by editing a farmer's almanac - with information about the moon phases, etc. - which also contained pithy sayings. 'A stitch in time saves nine.' 'It's the squeaky wheel that gets the oil.' 'A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush' - etc. etc. I think it was in my 8th grade year there that I entered a contest, held every other year (I think it was), with contestants, who had 'won through' from their Social Studies classes (or whatever it was called; general purpose classes, containing a range of subjects, Geography, History, English, etc etc),1 competing in front of an assembly of the whole school on questions regarding the life of Franklin, and particularly including all the sayings that he was known for including in his 'Poor Richard's Almanac'. I found this an interesting challenge, and studied up, from books in the local library, and the set of Encyclopedia Americana that a classmate of mine had, and was my class's representative in the Finals. I didn't win; but I have always enjoyed, in my life, being aware of the simple truths contained in those sayings, and have often employed them, in conversation, and thinking about things. One of his sayings - and by 'his', I think this is a direct quote from him, not from frontier America (& from before that, in 'homespun' England) in general - that I had not come across at that time, and only came across in the past week, was: 'The doorstep to the temple of wisdom is a knowledge of our own ignorance.' I would like to use that thought for the theme to this sharing.

That also has to do with another 'saying' that I came across, later in life - during my Junior year at university, in point of fact. I had had, in my Freshman year, a particularly inspiring English professor - well, 'professor' is undoubtedly not the precise word in this recounting. He would have been, at most, an associate professor, or Instructor. I don't know, never knew, the precise terms for those who were not full-blown, tenured professors. My English instructor, then; who gave me a solid grounding in the beauty of the English language, in its poetic, fictional and non-fictional forms.2 I lost contact with him through the next two years; but after I had my life-changing 'spiritual experience' in my Junior year, and realized that I was not going to go on into medical school, rather, needed to go looking for Truth, I felt drawn to let that man know about it.3 He had left the school by then, but I got hold of his address, through the English department, and wrote to him about my plans, though still as nebulous as they were. Though not so nebulous as not including my needing to drop out of school - out of formal schooling. He wrote back - before I had wrapped up my time there - and said something to the effect that he wasn't surprised; and then proffered me a bit of advice. He said it was from "Calgaron," I think was the name; some South American writer/thinker; and it was the following quote: "Of all sure things, the surest is to doubt."

And with that bit of advice ringing in my ears, off I set, in my search for capital-t Truth.

I took it to mean something similar to what my Philosophy 101 professor (yes, he was the real thing) had said once in class:4 that all we really know is what we have personally experienced. I thought about that, and went up to him afterwards, and asked him a for example: that I didn't know personally that there was a set of islands in the Pacific called Hawaii, but so many people had been there, and knew of their existence, that can't we also consider that a form of knowing?? He answered in the affirmative, and went on his way. But the issue stayed with me. Yes, that sort of thing was a form of knowing. But it wasn't really knowing in the sense that he, apparently, was talking about...

I have had occasion in my life, since, to 'get' what he was talking about; and this whole business, about 'the surest thing is to doubt', and such.

The doorstep to the temple of wisdom is a knowledge of our own ignorance...

I'll cut here to the chase of my thought; what I am getting at. What I am getting at is that we don't really know an awful lot. We have a lot of beliefs. And mere beliefs can get us into a lot of trouble.

Take the current day and age.

A lot of people - generally known as 'liberals' - are trying to break down the current level of 'certainties'. Particularly, but not exclusively, the religious ones. And in particular, in that subject area, Christianity. That mindset has ruled the Western roost for millenia; and though it has had some positive aspects, it has also had a lot of negatives attached to it. Bloodshed of 'pagans' and 'heretics'; etc. Trying to force people to bend their knees to 'the truth'.

Whose 'truth'??

That's just the point: Whose truth. Because who is to say what the truth is, if they haven't experienced it firsthand.

We take a lot for granted, in life. Which is particularly dangerous, because there are a lot of people who have reason to want to sell us a lot.

Take 'the moon landing', for example. It certainly looked real. There it was, on our tv screens. We all saw it. 'It': an image. The full answer here is - if one is interested in getting to the actual truth of things. Which I have indicated that I am, since relatively early on in my life - that we all saw an image. Images, later on. Is there any reason to doubt what we saw? What we were given to see??

My second question gives away my basic take on the matter. For Yes, there is a reason to doubt. ('Of all sure things...') For it turns out that there was a major 'space race' going on at the time, between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, and the U.S. - well; both sides (a la the Potempkin Village scam on the Soviet side of these matters)- had reason to fake a landing. For prestige purposes, and hegemonic purposes, and such (like getting the Soviet Union to spend itself into trouble in trying to compete with the U.S.). And there has been a history of such political fakery for years, and years, and years.

The mysterious sinking of the USS Maine in Havana Harbor that occasioned what became known as the Spanish-American War. The sinking of the RMS Lusitania, under suspicious circumstances, that helped bring about public opinion in America to draw it into what became known as World War One. The attack on Pearl Harbor, which, it turned out afterwards, the Roosevelt administration not only knew about beforehand, but helped prime the pump for its happening, in order to bring America into what became known as World War Two (with both Hitler and the Soviet Union being financially supported by western bankers and industrialists). The announcement by the U.S. Secretary of State that Korea was outside the U.S. 'sphere of influence', which 'signal' was employed in order to draw North Korea and ultimately Red China into what became known as the Korean 'Police Action' (don't ask). The Gulf of Tonkin 'Incident', which was used to escalate the American role in what became known as the Vietnam War. Where American troops were fired on by weapons sold to North Vietnam by the Soviet Union, who had bought them from the West, because...well, because that is what this whole charade has been all about.

Making money.

Not just 'hegemony'.

But making money.

By the Powers That Be, behind the scenes, who have proceeded on their merry way, through administration after administration in the U.S., regardless of which political party was in power at any given time, up front.

Out where the public could see. Not what was really going on; but what they were being allowed to see.

A Kabuki theater play.

But - and speaking of: back to 'the moon landing'. Was it actually real??

I, personally, don't know. I know that the U.S. had a lot riding on its at least appearing to be real. And I know that there are serious questions regarding it, to do with photographic shadows, and such. And something to do with the Van Allen belt around the Earth being deadly. But, eg, that radiation, apparently, was not necessarily deadly per se, but could cause eye damage; and apparently, quite a few of the astronauts have had cataracts. So, there.

Apparently.

But the basic point I want to make, is that you can't really trust what you see, if someone has something to sell you; has something to gain from your believing what they want you to believe.

Edward Bernays, the father of 'Public Relations' - of advertising - has written on this subject. And things that have been sold to the public via his technique/these techniques are, eg, fluoridation of public water supplies. 'More doctors smoke Chesterfield cigarettes than any other brand.' The list goes on.

And on. And on...

So: (1) The only things that we can really believe are things that we have personally experienced.5 And (2): Religions are only beliefs. Simply that: beliefs.6

Unless there is some evidence for them. Which I will get into in a moment. But first, the specific point I want to make here:

which is that 'some people' - in this case, people who can, roughly, be called 'liberals' - have an axe to grind regarding Christianity. Two aspects of that axe (its two edges, so to speak) are (1): Christianity's attitude towards the Earth, in 'dominating' it (Genesis); and (2) its attitude towards homosexuality/out-of-norm gender identity.

I'm going to generalize here a bit, to make a point: 'Liberals' are trying to impose an agenda on America in particular and the world in general, in keeping with their own 'level of certainty' - their own belief system. They wouldn't call it that, because they are confronting what they feel is a cultural block to Reason, which they feel they are standing for; and that includes the likes of atheism and Darwinian evolution on one hand, and 'climate change' on another. So they want to break down the 'control mechanism' that has dominated the American culture from its beginnings, with two aspects in particular to it; (1) Christianity; and (2) the concept of private property, and rampant individualism.

They feel that they have a superior 'reality' that needs now to be imposed on humanity, in particular because of the damage to the Earth that is being engaged in by the dominant culture, composed primarily of capitalist Christians, who believe passionately in the rights and power of the individual over the collective. Because 'the individual' is responsible for his or her own 'salvation', ie, that 'religious conservatives' have a belief system based solely on their religion that is causing them to trample on the Earth, and that belief system has to go. Which leads 'liberals' to engage in such activities as undermining 'property rights' by imposing 'comprehensive development plans' and 'smart growth regulations' & such (a la Agenda 21), and trying to dilute the prominent culture by bringing in as many 'third world' potential voters as they can.

That latter is a bit of a tricky tactic for them, because many of those potentially 'liberal' voters are also very religious, and very family oriented; both aspects of a culture which is anathema to the liberals' desired culture, of the breakdown of the family unit (a 'mom and dad' culture), and of religion in people's consciousness. But tactics are tactics, to fulfil a strategy; in this case, of cultural breakdown. And the only way they are going to be able to accomplish their long-term goal in the U.S. is to flood the country with people who are more inclined to vote their way, and thus leave the old order to disappear into the wake of history.7 Their take on history. On a desired history.

Which is only a take on it. And not necessarily the best take on it.

Things are relative, yes. But the position of the 'liberals' is only that: a position. Not the position, that they seem to think it is. For the breakdown of the old - which has, indeed, elements of needing to be broken down - is merely being replaced with a new 'consensus reality' - a new set of relative certainties. A new 'normal'.

The collective is no more 'right' than the individual. Homosexuality, and other out-of-current-norm gender identities, are no more 'right' than the old, 'straight' path.8 The Earth needs better taken care of, yes; but 'climate change' - global warming - is going on throughout the solar system, has the Sun as its driver (and whatever else is behind the Sun that causes it to go through changes). AGM - Anthropogenic Global Warming - is a tool more than a truism. The 'Earth-firsters' are brainwashing school children on the issue just as much as the oil industry is shading the truth to their side of the equation.

Both sides of this current equation are but parts of a process. Which is working its way out to a conclusion - in our day - which will encompass elements of truth in both aspects of the process. For they are but stages in the development of a Synthesis. And, since things are now 'soul size' - since the historical process has now reached a global stage of development - this Synthesis has all the earmarks of being THE Synthesis. Of the entire process, of the unfolding of human consciousness.

We now need to recognise that neither side of this current cultural 'battle' has the full truth with them, for the simple reason that they are still parts of the process; the historical process, well spotted by Hegel, as to how social living unfolds. We are now at a major Crisis point in that unfolding process, precisely because the process has been brought up to the global level. We can now unfold all the inherent contradictions on either side of the thesis-antithesis 'divide', and bring the process to a state of totality.

And that is NOT the 'totality' envisioned by the New World Order crowd; who are the prime movers driving this process - because they think they are bringing in the Synthesis stage of the process. They just happen to have missed a part of the process. A vital part of the process. The most vital part of the process. Nicely described in the words of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, when he described humans as "spiritual beings having a human experience'.

The NWO crowd are intent on moving humanity beyond the control of their religions; but theirs is merely a secular version of the same thing: a belief system.

They are mistakenly throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Thus: An historical error reacted to by the Church of Liberalism/Secularism has come up with a similar outcome, where Man is God, and all is relative.

'There is no right or wrong but thinking makes it so.'

So someone can vote themselves money out of your pocket, and they are as 'right' in the matter as you are, because all is relative. So the American Constitution doesn't actually mean anything, because what matters is what we make of things. So property rights need to give way to the collective rights, because those who are working for Gaia are now in control, and what they say goes, because Might is Right...

'Christmas' has given way, in this context, to 'Winter-Fest', So that's part of the New Order of Things. But in point of fact, it is a point: because the 25th of December was originally a pagan festival, celebrating the Winter Solstice, that the Christian church co-opted into its belief system, in trying to win over peoples 'where they were', in their pagan rituals. The Christian Church simply gave it a churchy veneer. December 25th has nothing to do with the birth of their god. The Church of Liberalism-Secularism will simply try to return that celebration to its pagan roots. And so forth. We're talking about a process, unfolding, with elements of Truth on both sides of the equation.

But a particular point is the need to keep some semblance of Order in the transition to the New. And that means the importance of maintaining the rule of law.

This is a crucial point. Until we can all move into a new and better era for humanity - not just 'a' new one, but the culmination of the entire historical process, from individuals to clans to nations - we need to live by the rule of law. There are people, particularly in America, who want that chain of control broken, so that they can create Chaos, and then provide the solution: a New World Order, corralling all of humanity into one giant police state. (And thus the 'opening to the East' under Kissinger and Nixon.)9 Deprived of our constitutional rights and liberties under their absolute control. Where the mass of humanity - those allowed to live- will exist just to provide the very Elite with the superior standard of living that they protect from those poor deluded serfs who, not richly bought off enough, might try to overthrow them. An impossible dream by then, with the surveillance state firmly in place.

All brought about by the American public having, step by step, been brainwashed into thinking, about the Constitution, 'It doesn't matter what the law is, or what the 'original intent' was, but what we say it is; a 'living document', adapted to our day.' And who, pray tell, is 'we'? You and Humpty Dumpty, and who else??10

Certainly not me.

The country needs to hold fast to its founding principles. If, for example, the current occupant of the office of the presidency, who in terms of the Constitution is there illegally, was allowed to get away with that usurpation; or, for example, if the NWO crowd on the Left of politics were allowed to get away with the flooding of the American citizenry with illegal aliens and such, diluting the 'established order' and taking over the country, for their 'new look', it would all be happening for the wrong reasons. For unhealthy reasons. For illegal, and yes, immoral, reasons. Not just for the sake of 'a new, better state of being' coming into being.

There are people on both the Left and the Right of American and international politics who are trying to take over the world. I don't really care which side of that divide they are on. Both camps are coming from a sense of totalitarianism - of running human society to within an inch of its life, and that of the individuals. Don't have it. Either of it.

There is a better world waiting to be born. And it doesn't belong to either side of the current process. It belongs to our common Source.

And it will come about when we awaken to the fact that we have been involved in a play, of our making; with an Author behind it all; to test us, and prove ourselves. In order for us to go home again; more whole for the experience. In ourselves. And together. As sons and daughters of our Creator. On our way - beyond the pageantry on the stage, the illusory reality of life, of multiple, sequential lives, driven by the law of karma - to becoming One.

Again.

And to get there, we would do well to mind another bit of advice of old Dead White Male, old Founding Father figure, old stuffy historical character, not really having anything of any great importance to say to our day and age; who nevertheless said:

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

And I say: Amen to that.

And as for getting to that sense of Oneness - which, in our psyches, is behind the liberals' push for 'equality': it will come about, not only when we fully 'get' that We Are One Another, and further into that dynamic, that We Are One; but when we release money. Interest-bearing money, that is; which separates us - into lenders and borrowers and in oneupmanship/competitive dynamics - and creates debt, and the untold misery resulting therefrom. Putting a damper on the abundance of the universe. To be experienced when we make that move out of the old paradigm, and live as one big Family on Mother Earth.

Just waiting for us to join Her in Her Ascension to a higher level of reality.

Because it's time.

And right on time.


P.S. Oh, and as for "some evidence for" some religious beliefs; which I said i would get to: My spiritual journey in life has led me to some deep reservations about the Christian story as it has been passed down since its initial historical time period. (Interesting recent books on the subject are the trilogy by Tony Bushbv; some books by Ralph Ellis, in particular his 'King Jesus'; and the books by a woman who calls herself Acharya S, aka D.M. Murdock.) But I have read considerable research on the subject of reincarnation; and that phenomenon has all the appearance of being a given. Which is strong evidence for there being 'something more than Man' - a greater reality than just the material one that we experience; that leads to the inexorable conclusion that there is Plan in and Purpose to 'the universe' - to life. So we should really stop blindly playing parts, and tune more into our Oneness beneath our perceived separatenesses - separatenesses, in order to learn lessons. But such lessons, in order to move on. Not stay stuck on the level of the phenomenal reality. In the Matrix, as it were.
Life is a school. The purpose is to graduate. And we can demonstrate that we are close to graduation, by the quality of the civilization that we raise up. In honor to our Source; for giving us the opportunity to prove our worth.


---


1 part of the 'adventures in education' that TPTB had started to engage in at that time. This was shortly after the Second World War. It was also to include finagling first with the teaching of reading, and then something called 'New Math', with similar, devastating effects. But read on...


2 At the end of the year, he asked me to stay on for a moment after our closing class, and gifted me with a copy of John Donne's selected writings. I was - have been - particularly struck by his 17th Meditation. Not, actually, for the 'For Whom the Bell Tolls' part; although that is powerful stuff, and obviously what it is best known for - and arguably what John Donne's complete oeuvre is best known for. (Yes yes, I know: a redundancy there. But the word is not so common that many people - and especially in this day and age, after the New Reading has taken hold in the culture - would be that familiar with it.) But with some lines further up in the meditation. I still remember them: 'The bell doth toll for him that thinks it doth; and though it intermit againe, yet from that minute that that occasion wrought upon him, he is united to God.'
And I won't even Google this to check it out. I'll stay with my memory of it.
(The book itself has disappeared in the mists of time, at some point in my periodic releasing of libraries that I have collected and then either sold or passed on over the years, as my life took various turns, and I needed to 'lighten up', as it were. I do know that I had kept that particular book through a number of such life turnings. Some rich stuff in there; not to be taken lightly. Speaking of.)


3 Well; let me honour him fully, by saying out his name: Barney Childs. Who was a kind of Thorstein Veblen character. At a major, expensive university. A bit of an iconoclast, then. A hiker in the Sierras; and so forth. I wish I had gotten to know him better.
He invited some of us students to visit him and his wife down in San Jose, where they lived, some miles away from the campus; but, not having wheels, and not knowing anybody who did, I never made it. A friend of mine, from high school days, who was a year ahead of me at Stanford, and who knew Barney from his own Freshman year English class, and had stayed in touch with him - perhaps from similar appreciations as my own - told me towards the end of my year in his class that he had visited Barney at his home, and had had a beer with him and his wife. They had a rather alternative home, he reported. He also reported that Barney had told him that he was thinking of giving me "an Alpha" grade. Which had been nice to hear. Not just because I was striving to get good grades to make it into med school; and not just because I was attending the school on a scholarship, and needed to keep my grades up to keep qualifying for the financial assistance (or I would never have been able to afford to be there. This was/is a private school, not state funded). But because I considered it an honour to be so thought of by this man.
Thank you for the assistance in life, Barney. Wherever you are.
I am also reporting all this, and at this point in this blog, because I want You the Reader to know that I do appreciate individuals as individuals. Not just as players in a play, and so rather ephemeral in fundamental nature. As I am about to get to in this little essay, on where we are, and where we need to get to, on this beleaguered and lovely planet Earth, and how best to get there.


4 another class in which I got an 'A'. If I had been paying closer attention to my life and true interests, I might have seen a pattern developing...


5 And even then, you can't believe everything that you 'personally experience', because the technology of People Control has advanced to the point that people can be induced to feel certain things, and think certain things, that don't really come from themselves, but from outside of themselves, and entrained into their senses. But to continue, in speaking in general.


6 Another saying of Benjamin Franklin: 'The way to see by Faith is to shut the Eye of Reason.'
(Not that Ben Franklin was totally virtuous in his life. But truth is where you find it.)


7 That flood to include people having gotten used to relying on the State for their sustenance, in the form of the welfare mentality. Not only because the 'liberal' mindset wants a powerful State controlling the populace - so that they will 'do the right thing' - but because they want what they call 'social justice'; an innocuous-sounding term which appears to mean, in actual fact, redistribution of wealth, at the point of the political gun. So that labeling the very rich as 'mean-spirited' and such has a sinister aspect to it, is not just a commentary on the great and growing divide between the 'rich' and the 'poor'. The more radical elements of the Left are trying to create class warfare. That fits their mentality. They may justify their actions by pointing at all the poverty in the world. But their way to deal with perceived social injustices is, still, part of the problem. It is to use force - the force of 'democracy' - to accomplish their end. That is not the way out of the cycle.


8 There is very good reason to believe that homosexuality and such off-norm conditions are caused by an imbalance of hormones at a particular, early stage of pregnancy, when the fetal brain is being developed. That imbalance can be caused by a number of factors: a defect in the adrenal glands of either the pregnant female or the developing fetus; endocrine disrupters/estrogen mimics in the environment; stress (more homosexual babies are born in the wake of wars than in a 'normal' environment, eg). But perhaps biggest of all is the effect of drugs like barbiturates, prescribed to pregnant females without sufficient regard for their potential effect on the developing fetus. All of these conditions can cause male brains to be wired into genetically female bodies and vice versa and every abnormal stage on the spectrum in between, like trannies.
This is not a 'moral' issue per se; except the immorality of a culture that does not pay enough attention to the effects of its activities on its young. On themselves, too. But particularly on the children. They deserve the right to be born into as pristine an environment as possible. That is the responsibility of the living. It is a big one; and is a major marker of that culture's maturity.
(See the book 'BrainSex' by Anne Moir, Ph.D and David Jessel for an excellent summary of the research in this area.)


9 Henry Kissinger; he of the quote about the mass of mankind being 'Useless Eaters', and involved with the creation of the HIV, as a means of people control. And Richard Nixon: he of the having been brought back to political life by David Rockefeller - who in turn has admitted in his autobio his desire for a world governme;; "and proud of it".


10 If you have forgotten Humpty Dumpty's classic line - or don't even know about that classic story, by Lewis Carroll - this character, an Egg sitting on a wall, said: 'Words mean what I say they mean'. And, incidentally, had a great fall. And all the King's horses, and all the King's men, couldn't put poor Humpty Dumpty back together again...