I find myself a little unhappy with myself today for getting a little too carried away in my blog last night, and calling my imaginary 'enemies' on the Left outright swear-word names. I know that that's not the way to move forward. It's just that 'it' gets so frustrating, sometimes...
Let me try to clarify where I'm coming from. And that is, to put it succinctly: from the position of a pacifist - someone trying to rise above the old action-reaction game of Life; being on one side or other of the 'board'. But in doing so, I'm not a natural pacifist; to say, it doesn't come natural to me.
I was a conscientious objector during the time of the Draft, occasioned by the Korean War, aka a Police Action (another story; something to do with politics, an arcane mystery to me at the time). I had left university before completion of my studies (I was a pre-Med, and was set to go into Med School the following, what would have been my Senior, year) after having 'a spiritual experience' (another story as well) and deciding to go 'out' and find Truth - the big questions, of What is life all about, and Why am I here; that sort of coming-of-age thing; and then, being 'fair game' upon leaving my formal education status, was confronted with one of those mundane things of life, in this case, a decision about serving my two years in the Army or not. By then the Korean, er, Incident itself was 'over', in a time of an uneasy Armistice; but how did I feel about this business of 'war' after all my readings into the larger questions of life - having spent the better part of a year haunting the NewYork Public Library and reading everything I could get my hands on regarding 'The Big Ones'??? I decided to serve my two years of 'national service'1 by acknowledging the need for the country - my country - to defend itself, until we humans could get beyond that level of 'civilization', but I would not do it by bearing a weapon, rather, would consent to go and serve my time as a medic.2
I say all this as well to indicate that I didn't get to the 'pacifist' frame of mind by way of some sort of natural predilection of temperament. I got to it by way of a logical thought process - albeit its having been triggered by an 'illogical' incident - which all said to me: this 'antagonistic', 'adversarial' way won't work in the end. We humans have to learn to get along with each other.
My 'gut' feeling, in fact, is that I have led men in battle.3 My next 'gut' feeling is that I came to the point of awareness that we must now move beyond confrontation and get to cooperation (nuclear weaponry has 'taught' us that; or we are about to find out differently). Historical figures like Lao Tzu and Confucius have always interested me, and inspired me, by their wisdom: the sense that there is something more, something higher, to get to, behind the presenting conditions of life.4 It's as though, caught in the throes of some confrontation in a life, and having to deal with what was presented to me, 'situated' right in front of me, I knew that there had to be something more than just action and reaction; that if we in life could just get around to 'the other side', the side of our prospective enemy, and say, Look, there has to be a better way than this; can't we sit down and reason together??, that things could be different here.
The example of Charlemagne comes to mind. The Germanic tribes that he conquered (or attempted to; over and over again) of course would have their own take on his actions. But it would appear (at least) that he was trying to accomplish this same thing: to help the 'humanity' of his time get to a point of listening to one another, instead of fighting each other. And so he applied - let's call it what it was - he imposed a Pax Romana on as many warring tribes as he could. Came from an honorable place.5
And I'm sure that the potential Imposers of our day - maybe not the Illuminati itself (and the off-world entities behind even them), who are in 'it' for power for power's sake, and using the human 'herd' as a food stock; but the next level down, the Rothschilds and David Rockefeller and so forth - felt, and feel, the same way: that if they could just impose an international order, there would be no more wars. It's the same with the vision of the Founders of what has become the EU: If the warring nations of Europe could just be brought into a union, they could rise above their age-old animosities. Unfortunately, 'the devil is in the details': the way they chose to do it was the same old way that gets us humans into trouble in the first place: by the use of Force, rather than Reason.6 (And a larger vision of Life, and what it's all about, anyway.)
And I want to help stop that action-reaction game. And actually, I want to help stop the game itself. For that is all we are experiencing: a Game. The Game of Life. To learn lessons from. And then move on.
Back to Unity. With each other. And the Godhead.
But first things first: to 'get it'. To recognize it all, for what it is. And I think that is why I get so angry at what I take to be low-consciousness thinking and actions: It is all missing the point. Is all just part of The Game; when what we are supposed to be up to is moving beyond The Game.
Not getting caught up in the Drama as if it were the real thing.
And so, I don't want to get caught up back in the Drama; and thus resent 'it' - other people, and my own dance with the darkness, with the shadows on the wall - when I do succumb to the Drama.
And call others names. When our real name is I.
And our real mission is: seeking Itself.
And our real goal is: finding Itself.
The fractals - the adventurers; the explorers; the scouts - of God returning to their Source.
The Whole stronger - wiser - for the experience.
1 The choices were: go into the military branch of one's choice, or serve one's two years in the Army under the Draft, or apply for special dispensation for reasons of family obligations or disability, or apply for conscientious objection; the latter of which category entailed the choices of a) going to jail for the two years; b) serving two years of 'national service' time stateside as, e.g., a hospital orderly; or c) going into the Army as a medic, thus not required to bear weapons.
2 Which I ended up doing, over in Korea itself, rather than in the European theater of operations, which was also an 'option', although not left up to the person. The individual could indicate a preference; but the decision itself was left up to the bureaucracy.
As it turned out, I was in the Medical Battalion of the 7th Division, some miles north of Seoul, for only a short time, before I applied for, and went into, Special Services, running the Division's desk for producing our own soldier shows, for touring as well, and organizing the appearances in our area of other touring shows, including stateside troupes. Which was all great fun. But all of that is another story as well.
3 My main heroes in life have been military leaders. I have always looked up to the likes of Alexander the Great (who had a grand vision, of uniting peoples; keep reading), and Charlemagne (and the relatively unsung Charles Martel, who not only halted the Islamic advance into Western Europe, but by doing so, saved Western civilization from being inundated by a collectivist, as opposed to an individualist, vision), and Patton (who defeated his enemy in the place where it really mattered: their minds), and MacArthur (who kept his word).
But lurking in the background of my mind has also always been the sense that there is a better way. And it is our job to find it.
And get to it.
And establish it. For all Time.
4 For some reason, religious figures haven't done the same for me. There's such a bewildering array of such figures, and it all comes down to belief, rather than good 'common' sense. Besides, 'religion' has fostered bloodshed. Not a very intelligent state of affairs.
Any religion that purports to support the killing of 'unbelievers' is false, and should be rejected by all thinking persons.
5 And helped 'culture' thrive in its wake. Which was his main intent. Not power for power's sake.
6 And I'm sure that it's the same with many, if not most, of those erstwhile Controllers who want to corral the US into a union - the North American Union - with Mexico and Canada. For them, the purpose is mostly economic; but the intention is the same: 'Things will be better; if those damn American 'patriots' would just listen to reason.' Hey - how about listening to their points? Their legitimate, warning points, about your erstwhile 'greater union,' and the basis upon which is being founded?? To say: on deceit???
And hardly the fundamental principles of the American Republic, which it would supersede. For the wrong reasons.