EsoQuest said:
I believe this is a very important and critical point. As above so below. And if one considers the level of overall ignorance ten years ago, compared to the state of awareness today (even though most people are still in paralytic confusion trying to digest it all), there has been a TREMENDOUS amount of progress.
I think many people are now waking up to the true nature of Bush and his cabinet, and are not buying it anymore. I will even dare say that this is the majority. I think the key now is to take that realisation of our government being corrupt and full of lies, and sort of gently "prod it" to the next level, which would include the realisation that this is not just an unlucky situation and we'll have better luck next time, but that the entire system is designed from the bottom up by psychopaths and FOR psychopaths and has ALWAYS been this way and will always be until it is drastically redesigned. So in a sense, the realisation of the immediate terror of the situation (the lying/murdering government leaders) can pave the way to realisation of a broader terror of the situation (the entire system as it's always been and what sort of people are always in charge). This way, people see all the Hitlers WAY before they ever get to become full-blown "Hitlers". In other words, it's not that we elect a good guy who suddenly goes evil and corrupt - he was never "good" to begin with, and the very fact that he was even elected is a testament to the system as a whole, its design, and its purpose.
And I think that understanding THAT is the key, and that the mistake (intentional of course) made after Nazi Germany is that history looks at Hitler as some anomaly, some evil genius that came out of nowhere, and so it focuses on him as "the evil one", not on the people and their ignorance/gullibility which allowed this to happen - because that same ignorance/gullibility has not changed one iota, and Hitler was never a threat, it was this ignorance/wishful thinking that is ever-present in the population that allows them to be herded at any time in the past and present using the same techniques. But of course it's "not nice" to blame the entire population for the atrocities, you'd have a lot of people complaining and suing left and right, so it's easier to just blame the whole thing on the evilness of Hitler and be done with it.
And that's why this time around, every time someone says "look at what Bush is doing", it's vital that someone else always adds "because WE let him - but here's what we all must realise if we want to stop it and prevent it from ever happening again". This second person is always missing from history, or he shows up but always after the fact, and only gets through to a tiny percentage of people (like Lobacewski). And I think that the best time to be that second person, is WHILE "poop is hitting the fan" and while people are being shocked and waking up to the immediate terror of the situation left and right. I think that this timing is essential because when it's just a history lesson that happens years after all the hitler-types have done their damage, at that time people are already too shielded by their comfort zones, they're just reading stories now, it's not really sinking in. But if they hear the message WHILE they are already, on their own, realising that their leaders are lying to them, they may be much more receptive and really think about the message and maybe something significant could change.
I think also that offering hope from a "future" perspective would be a kind of infringement on free will.
Well the C's did offer hyperdimentional hope - they did say that what the lizzies are trying to do will ultimately fail. Then again, it's a bit vague as to when is "ultimately", and just who and how many people will be able to escape this loop and when? I guess it's kinda like saying "Well we'll go get to 7th density eventually!" but that doesn't say much if that makes sense. I mean getting to 4th density STS and then disintegrating into nothingness about a million times before you finally make it to 7th is well within the bounds of "eventually".
The point, IMO, is to make choices in the face of no guarantees. To make self-generated choices in spite of the presentation instead of "assisted" choices that simply conform to external circumstances.
This reminds me of Gurdjieff's quote (I think it is Gurdjieff's), "Consciousness cannot evolve unconsciously". Or what the C's say, "If you play in the mud, you will get dirty!" - both of these saying something very similar, osit.
One such choice is the choice of what to believe. As this is something personal to each of us, signs of it on a collective scale will probably not be evident at first, especially with all the propaganda to the contrary. Yet, in my view, even this level of choice has profound effects.
This also reminds me of what Laura said about a potential model of the universe, where you make a quantum jump based on how objective your beliefs are. So if your beliefs conform to objective reality, you jump "up" towards a more conscious, less chaotic state. If your beliefs are contrary to objective reality, you can quantum jump "down". So perhaps that is one way that the general beliefs of the world's population will effect what happens to us.
I realise that this is probably more of an individual thing that happens, but if human experiencial cycle reflects the cataclysmic/catastrophic cycle, maybe beliefs are included in the word "experiencial" as well, as in, the more blind/ignorant, the harder the universe has to shock us to get through. Or maybe the problem won't be from any shocks the universe may or may not bring, but simply from the chaotic state that is created by being "out of tune" with objective reality. Oooh speaking of out of tune, I guess it's kinda like hitting random piano keys and wondering why there's no music..