Delightful Confirmation Bias

[populistindependent]

I happen to think the opposite ; Namely that the first thing people would do, were they to realise that we are all essentially one, would be to stop blowing the crap out of each other.

This is the dream and hope of all religions. It is a noble sentiment, but has little if any bearing on political reality.

People are not "blowing the crap out of each other" and only those who are protected and secure, in our case by being at the heart of the empire surrounded by massive armaments, and snug and cozy and complacent as a result, who can afford to see things this way. In all conflicts the people on both sides believe they are acting in self-defense, and almost always one of the two parties is correct in that assessment.

Politics is about resolving disputes that arise from power imbalances with the least amount of suffering and bloodshed. Certainly if we imagine that we could wave a magic wand and change human beings in some fundamental way, then perhaps we could avoid thinking about this reality.

Advocating that people be passive, to supposedly eliminate those "war-like" feelings, merely makes it more likely that they will be unable to protect themselves from aggression and will be distracted from the hard work of conflict resolution that is required for peace.

In a slave rebellion, is conflict caused by the action the slaves take for freedom, or is it the slavery? Advocating for peace without addressing self-defense, power imbalances, and people's drive for freedom and self-determination does the slave master's work for him - "we need peace" is preached to the slaves and subjects. The masters are not restrained by any such sentiment and will use whatever violence necessary to keep the subjects in slavery.

The opposite of war is not peace, it is slavery. Only those at the pinnacle of privilege and status in the power structure imagine violence as a cause rather than an effect.

I also believe this is one of the major reasons for the politically motivated creation of 'organised religion', which gives us the guy with the beard in the sky, and the fella with the catsuit and horns, and selling us the impression that these phenomena are somehow seperate entities from us.

One set of religious ideas is being replaced with another. A feature of the new religious ideas, as always, is the cavalier and pejorative dismissal of a simplistic caricature of the religion that is being replaced. It is more about destroying the old than building anything new, which is left to chance and feelings.

[slimmouse]

One set of religious ideas is being replaced with another. A feature of the new religious ideas, as always, is the cavalier and pejorative dismissal of a simplistic caricature of the religion that is being replaced. It is more about destroying the old than building anything new, which is left to chance and feelings.

Which I guess is the "intuition" part

Kudos to your personal rigour though

I like your posts PI

Oh and incidentally, if you dont believe that those who are making this life the challenge it is arent "religous" to some major degree, then I suggest you read some of the many excellent posts on here that examine the occult nature of Bushco and all the rest of them.

[populistindependent]

One set of religious ideas is being replaced with another. A feature of the new religious ideas, as always, is the cavalier and pejorative dismissal of a simplistic caricature of the religion that is being replaced. It is more about destroying the old than building anything new, which is left to chance and feelings.

Which I guess is the "intuition" part

Kudos to your personal rigour though

I like your posts PI

Oh and incidentally, if you don't believe that those who are making this life the challenge it is arent "religous" to some major degree, then I suggest you read some of the many excellent posts on here that examine the occult nature of Bushco and all the rest of them.

Thanks, slimmouse. I went back and added some thoughts to my post. You responded quickly!

I think that religion is inevitable. You can take the person out of the religion, but taking the religion out of the person is not so easy. New religions are never called "religions" - in fact believers will vehemently deny that they are - they are seen as "the truth." With the collapse of the traditional religion in our culture - the upsurge in whacky evangelical Christianity is more of a political movement than a religion - people are adhering to a wide variety of ideas and beliefs with religious fervor. So we are in an odd and unstable transitional stage where we a have a vicious reactionary political movement masquerading as religion - the "religious right" - and religion masquerading as politics - much of the doctrine and dogma of modern liberalism.

[slimmouse]

I happen to think the opposite ; Namely that the first thing people would do, were they to realise that we are all essentially one, would be to stop blowing the crap out of each other.


This is the dream and hope of all religions. It is a noble sentiment, but has little if any bearing on political reality.

And why, in your opinion, might that be ?

People are not "blowing the crap out of each other" and only those who are protected and secure, in our case by being at the heart of the empire surrounded by massive armaments, and snug and cozy and complacent as a result, who can afford to see things this way. In all conflicts the people on both sides believe they are acting in self-defense, and almost always one of the two parties is correct in that assessment.

Disagree. In any war, humanity is being attacked Goodness me, what would happen if humanity understood that ?

Politics is about resolving disputes that arise from power imbalances with the least amount of suffering and bloodshed.

That aint my definition of politics in this world.

Certainly if we imagine that we could wave a magic wand and change human beings in some fundamental way, then perhaps we could avoid thinking about this reality.

You mean, like if perhaps we all realised that we are ultimately all one ?

Advocating that people be passive, to supposedly eliminate those "war-like" feelings, merely makes it more likely that they will be unable to protect themselves from aggression and will be distracted from the hard work of conflict resolution that is required for peace.

The conflict resolution, is increasingly, to my mind at least, to be sought from within.

In a slave rebellion, is conflict caused by the action the slaves take for freedom, or is it the slavery? Advocating for peace without addressing self-defense, power imbalances, and people's drive for freedom and self-determination does the slave master's work for him - "we need peace" is preached to the slaves and subjects. The masters are not restrained by any such sentiment and will use whatever violence necessary to keep the subjects in slavery.

Well thats where it gets truly interesting on an esoteric level. In order to accept any argument I might propose WRT this however, one needs to understand that this mortal coil is simply a vessel for the soul, otherwise Im wasting my time typing.

The opposite of war is not peace, it is slavery. Only those at the pinnacle of privilege and status in the power structure imagine violence as a cause rather than an effect.

Heres a suggestion; "Imagine all the people, living life in peace"

Now then, imagine what would happen if the entire world fell for that "nonsense"?

Like a big war announcement, where no-one showed up to fight.

The pioneers of a warless world are the youth that refuse military service. Einstein - he wasnt simply a physicist you know

Whatever happened to John Lennon BTW ?

[populistindependent]

I happen to think the opposite ; Namely that the first thing people would do, were they to realise that we are all essentially one, would be to stop blowing the crap out of each other.


This is the dream and hope of all religions. It is a noble sentiment, but has little if any bearing on political reality.

And why, in your opinion, might that be ?

People are not "blowing the crap out of each other" and only those who are protected and secure, in our case by being at the heart of the empire surrounded by massive armaments, and snug and cozy and complacent as a result, who can afford to see things this way. In all conflicts the people on both sides believe they are acting in self-defense, and almost always one of the two parties is correct in that assessment.

Disagree. In any war, humanity is being attacked Goodness me, what would happen if humanity understood that ?

Politics is about resolving disputes that arise from power imbalances with the least amount of suffering and bloodshed.

That aint my definition of politics in this world.

Certainly if we imagine that we could wave a magic wand and change human beings in some fundamental way, then perhaps we could avoid thinking about this reality.

You mean, like if perhaps we all realised that we are ultimately all one ?

Advocating that people be passive, to supposedly eliminate those "war-like" feelings, merely makes it more likely that they will be unable to protect themselves from aggression and will be distracted from the hard work of conflict resolution that is required for peace.

The conflict resolution, is increasingly, to my mind at least, to be sought from within.

In a slave rebellion, is conflict caused by the action the slaves take for freedom, or is it the slavery? Advocating for peace without addressing self-defense, power imbalances, and people's drive for freedom and self-determination does the slave master's work for him - "we need peace" is preached to the slaves and subjects. The masters are not restrained by any such sentiment and will use whatever violence necessary to keep the subjects in slavery.

Well thats where it gets truly interesting on an esoteric level. In order to accept any argument I might propose WRT this however, one needs to understand that this mortal coil is simply a vessel for the soul, otherwise Im wasting my time typing.

The opposite of war is not peace, it is slavery. Only those at the pinnacle of privilege and status in the power structure imagine violence as a cause rather than an effect.

Heres a suggestion; "Imagine all the people, living life in peace"

Now then, imagine what would happen if the entire world fell for that "nonsense"?

Like a big war announcement, where no-one showed up to fight. Einstein wasnt simply a physicist you know

Whatever happened to John Lennon BTW ?

You are making what is fundamentally a religious argument. Nothing wrong with that, and it is noble as I said.

There are things that people value more highly than protecting their own life and comfort. Freedom and self-determination are valuable, and fighting for them is a morally good thing.

Saying that "conflict resolution, is increasingly sought from within" is fine for you and me as individuals. But it just takes one who does not agree with that, who attacks and threatens you or your loved ones, or attempts to enslave you, and no amount of personal spiritual growth will protect you.

I can imagine "all the people, living life in peace" but I can see most of humanity shackled and oppressed and exploited. Social justice is the solution to that, and peace without that is an illusion. Why should peace depend upon the few? Let's say 99% of us imagine peace, but the 1% who control the world's resources do not? Do we say to the exploited many, "too bad, but peace is more important than your survival?"

The opposite of peace is not war, it is injustice. So when I "imagine all the people, living life in peace" I imagine social justice as the essential and necessary first step, and I am thinking of reality there and I am willing to face the probability that this will need to be fought for, and not obsessing so much over what I might imagine as I sit safe and well-fed insulated from the disasters that most of the people in the world are living with. I think John Lennon would agree with me about that, since he was as acutely aware of the need for social injustice - if not more so - than he was about the need for the dream of peace.

Imagining something does not mean that imagination is the only thing needed to bring things into reality.

As for people realizing that humanity is all one, that can lead to some very dangerous things if we simply yearn for that without any discernment. Must all join this "one-ness?" What happens to those who resist?

...this mortal coil is simply a vessel for the soul, otherwise Im wasting my time typing

I agree with that, by the way.

[slimmouse]

You are making what is fundamentally a religious argument. Nothing wrong with that, and it is noble as I said.

There are things that people value more highly than protecting their own life and comfort. Freedom and self-determination are valuable, and fighting for them is a morally good thing.

Saying that "conflict resolution, is increasingly sought from within" is fine for you and me as individuals. But it just takes one who does not agree with that, who attacks and threatens you or your loved ones, or attempts to enslave you, and no amount of personal spiritual growth will protect you.

I can imagine "all the people, living life in peace" but I can see most of humanity shackled and oppressed and exploited. Social justice is the solution to that, and peace without that is an illusion. Why should peace depend upon the few? Let's say 99% of us imagine peace, but the 1% who control the world's resources do not? Do we say to the exploited many, "too bad, but peace is more important than your survival?"

The opposite of peace is not war, it is injustice. So when I "imagine all the people, living life in peace" I imagine social justice as the essential and necessary first step, and I am thinking of reality there and I am willing to face the probability that this will need to be fought for, and not obsessing so much over what I might imagine as I sit safe and well-fed insulated from the disasters that most of the people in the world are living with. I think John Lennon would agree with me about that, since he was as acutely aware of the need for social injustice - if not more so - than he was about the need for the dream of peace.

Imagining something does not mean that imagination is the only thing needed to bring things into reality.

As for people realizing that humanity is all one, that can lead to some very dangerous things if we simply yearn for that without any discernment. Must all join this "one-ness?" What happens to those who resist?

...this mortal coil is simply a vessel for the soul, otherwise Im wasting my time typing

I agree with that, by the way.

We sound like the same kinda folks. I spend 16 hours per week on less than the minimum wage, venting my spleen at the injustice that is prevalent within our society.

But what a privilege to be allowed to do so ! And I mean that most sincerely. Its the greatest paid job Ive ever had.

I, also like yourself, try to explain the history behind all of this. I guess what Im trying to say, is that I havent turned my back on the physical nature of this fight.

But AFAIAC it ultimately comes down to us

Or to we, or to I,

Or as the royal family might phrase it, to one

I wonder why they put it like that ?

[populistindependent]

No people ever imagined peace more fervently than did the people on the streets of Berlin on September 1st, 1939, according to the first hand observations of William Shirer. They wanted peace, but those Poles, they were told....

Imagining peace is insufficient.

And one-ness? The Germans yearned for that. Nature worship and a wide variety of spiritualized and individualized beliefs and pursuits were popular and encouraged in Germany in the 30's, including deep ecology. They had that same combination of individualized spiritualism and yearning for one-ness that we hear people expressing in the New Age movement here.

Seeing all people as one is a double-edged sword.

The Germans valued peace - and New Age spiritual principles - more than they valued justice and had long since sold out justice for the sake of the new thinking, the new relationship between individualism and collectivism, much of it very similar to the new spirituality we see here.

As a religious argument, I see much value in what you say and am in agreement. However, as a political argument I am diametrically opposed to it. When religious ideas begin to take the place of political ideas, that becomes very dangerous.

I will give you a couple of examples. I might believe as a religious precept that I am under the protection of a benevolent God, but when I see a rock flying at my head I don't rely solely on that and then fail to duck. I might believe as a religious precept that the rock thrower is my brother, but if the rocks continue to come my way and there is no escape, I may have to hurt my brother to protect myself.

These are moral dilemmas, and they are inevitable. The dilemmas do not disappear by virtue of perfecting myself spiritually nor by merely imagining peace. Disappearing or ignoring the moral dilemmas in life does not eliminate them, it merely makes us less competent at mastering them.

[slimmouse]

OK PI, lets cut to the quick here.

You believe in a soul, and that this body is a vessel.

The purpose of the soul as I see it , is to evolve, and to understand personal choices ?

In which case, how can a soul evolve, if it isn't offered the choice of right or wrong ?

If Bush, Blair and co werent lying to us, then how could the soul evolve ?

If the bad guys weren't doing these bad things, then how could we learn to differentiate ?

If the mainstream media were consistently telling us the truth, then we would never learn to think for ourselves, because we wouldnt need to

In other words, and strictly on the esoterical level, I say that I dont like what Bushco are doing, but nonetheless I respect them.

Why ?

Well, if they werent doing the shit that theyre doing, then how could I truly differentiate between wrong and right ?

If there's no wrong and deceit, and murder ,and lies, and theft and gross injustice going on in this world, then how is anyone gonna learn anything WRT the soul ?

And, it is my own' faith based' belief, that on an esoteric ( subconscious level ) that they understand this too.

Of course, I could be completely wrong about all of this.

Meanwhile of course, I continue to oppose these guys in my mortal coil.

Whether wrong or right about all of the above

[populistindependent]

OK PI, lets cut to the quick here.

You believe in a soul, and that this body is a vessel.

The purpose of the soul as I see it , is to evolve, and to understand personal choices ?

In which case, how can a soul evolve, if it isn't offered the choice of right or wrong ?

If Bush, Blair and co werent lying to us, then how could the soul evolve ?

If the bad guys weren't doing these bad things, then how could we learn to differentiate ?

If the mainstream media were consistently telling us the truth, then we would never learn to think for ourselves, because we wouldnt need to

In other words, and strictly on the esoterical level, I say that I dont like what Bushco are doing, but nonetheless I respect them.

Why ?

Well, if they werent doing the shit that theyre doing, then how could I truly differentiate between wrong and right ?

If there's no wrong and deceit, and murder ,and lies, and theft and gross injustice going on in this world, then how is anyone gonna learn anything WRT the soul ?

And, it is my own' faith based' belief, that on an esoteric ( subconscious level ) that they understand this too.

Of course, I could be completely wrong about all of this.

Meanwhile of course, I continue to oppose these guys in my mortal coil.

Whether wrong or right about all of the above

That's good slimmouse. I agree.

Now that we have that out of the way, we are free to fight for social justice.

[populistindependent]

If the mainstream media were consistently telling us the truth, then we would never learn to think for ourselves, because we wouldnt need to

We might have more to think about, and we might be doing more of it.

That brings up an interesting point. The goal of the corporate ruling class propaganda is not so much to get people to think a certain way as it is to get people to not think at all.

[theeKultleeder]

The unusual phenomenon of people pursuing highly individualistic spiritual beliefs combined with a vague sense of an amorphous one-ness or mass unity is distinctly symptomatic of a population that is ripe for the worse sort of tyranny. Feelings and intuitions, longings and yearnings, are seen as shared and universal, while principles, ideals, moral standards and objective reality are not. This makes for atomized, alienated and vulnerable individuals who are then easily coalesced and steered as a mob by emotional appeals.

I know for a dead fact that what you say here is not coming from an authentic place.

In other words, you are brainwashed, opaque, and not honest. (Not on purpose... I'm not accusing you of anything.)

Thee new grounds of communication give new opportunities for new thought and new ways to view the world.

Thee new way of viewing spirituality comes from the new grounds of communication; almost every damn teaching is available. A person could become a part of any religious or philosophical movement they want. This new opportunity abrogates all old ways of thinking, because "ways of thinking" are necessarily changing on an hourly basis.

The truly "independents" are the new vanguard. You are sadly primitive and behind the times in your way of viewing the world. You are conservative. 60 years ago, maybe your heroic delusion and revolutionary grandeur may have meant something; today, it is history.

You are dead wrong. The more people think for themselves, independently, the more different layers of actually real truth will become evident.

Like it or not, you are already a part of this organic dialectic.

[slimmouse]

Thee new way of viewing spirituality comes from the new grounds of communication; almost every damn teaching is available. A person could become a part of any religious or philosophical movement they want. This new opportunity abrogates all old ways of thinking, because "ways of thinking" are necessarily changing on an hourly basis.

What I have found from all of my recent reading courtesy of the internet is the epitome of this entire thread.

Organised religion is being exposed for the lie that it is.

Quantum physics meanwhile, is explaining how fucking clever those who brought us the "organised religion deal" are.

When you know who's ancestors brought you the "good book", you start to understand this, because, judging by many of the speeches of Jesus and his disciples, they apparently fully understood modern day Quantum physics !

Kudos to the scriptwriters is what I say


All the above said TKL, I think you are being a bit harsh on PI

[theeKultleeder]

My language is no more "harsh" than PI's dogma.

I'm glad to be in agreement with you, slimmouse, but why should I stand by and let people who are brainwashed by Marxism spew their destructive nonsense?

Marxism is really that insidious, and tends to become a religion unto itself.

Besides, I am attacking PI's "mental parasites." I am not attacking PI, who is a bright, compassionate, and good-hearted person.

[slimmouse]

My language is no more "harsh" than PI's dogma.

I'm glad to be in agreement with you, slimmouse, but why should I stand by and let people who are brainwashed by Marxism spew their destructive nonsense?

Marxism is really that insidious, and tends to become a religion unto itself.

Besides, I am attacking PI's "mental parasites." I am not attacking PI, who is a bright, compassionate, and good-hearted person.

"Forgive them 'father', for they know not what they do" ?

[ruprecht]

PopInd, that's the pure essence right there.