How can we ever trust again?

#1

https://lockdownsceptics.org/2021/02/04/latest-news-275/#comments

 

Ed Phillips:

Did you know there are people out there who actually believe that the government are doing the right thing?

Did you know that there are people out there who have done no independent research and believe everything the government says?

I think that is one of the worst things about this. We have to live in a society with people who think this is all a reasonable response.

How can we trust anyone again?

 Did you know there are governments out there who trust that their people will not (can not) independently research?

Infantilism demands and parental prison provides.

This arrested development has deeper causes that rational thinking in either its fearful 'children' or controlling 'parents'. Fear and control are two sides of one coin or false currency.

That you cant join with lies is an honesty of being that is made clear to your awareness of such in others as a deeply disturbing experience.

Fear - if not faced and lived through - splits the mind.

I regard this observation as spiritual or integrative awareness - because it is not merely thinking about, but directly present as the willingness to be with what is to the recognition of what is true, rather than mask in 'protections' from what is truly going on under narrative illusion seeking reinforcement.

I hold that learning to trust ourselves, rather than think ourselves into narrative identity, is what spirituality is and does, and nothing to do with 'spouting beliefs' or wearing our heart on our sleeve as signalling for social virtue or indeed for anti-anything virtue.

The capacity to accept our self where we are now with what is here - is the natural extension of a like quality to another, regardless the mask of their appearances. For it does not demand or manipulate or seek for itself.

The world - our relationships - can be read as faithful feedback to where I am coming from. But not from a set of terms and conditions that demand it be something else. If others are not ready or willing to look where a mind set over fear denies, then there is no forcing of another that can do anything but set equal and opposite reaction.

But whatever willingness is here can be given freedom to be itself, if we are present, aware and open to the prompt of a recognition of a shared appreciation instead of a world set in grievance. For why should the fearful trust you or anyone but as fear dictates? You can witness to another basis for choice than as fear dictates without making it a matter of 'telling them they are wrong' or confirming them in their sense of self-lack.

Rationality divorced from the heart - by whatever name - is a dissociated machine thinking that trusts its own modelling above empirical facts revealed. Trust cannot be or become a set of rules, algorithm, or system. That is 'control' set as structure in place of trust in ongoing relational communication. Within the structure, whatever it determines can seem reasonable if the function of such a system is to keep you safe from overwhelm. But the word is 'seem' and the fear is operating as if FACT.

#2 (RE: Moral ethical dilemma).

The belief and perception that pushing the fat man to save others from the 'collective' or lesser evil, will operate as IF a quantitative easement of moral dilemma.

So abstracted 'what if' modelling can always generate scenarios where NOT doing as the framing of the model suggests can be itself framed as weak, wrong, impractical, ineffective and dangerous even heretical!

Mind-framing is something that 'normality' runs unaware of.

Beliefs and perceptions can run as if they are actually true.

Vicarious gratifications and mitigations or compensations can run as overlayering social masking realities that never were true - but for being mainstreamed as acceptable currency of exchange.

Nice illusions can mask over nightmare illusions. Seeking to save our self from our nightmares can sacrifice anything and everything in the framing of a refusal to see and know. In this sense a false sense of 'individuality' is asserted as a false context from which to relate to anyone and everyone.

That this false sense of self then develops a society of collective sacrifice is hardly surprising - and under the frame of sacrificing true individuality to a collective 'safety'.

The false sense of safety under a collectivism of cognitive dissonance is desperate to maintain the 'system' by which its persona-reinforcement is 'made safe' and delivers itself unto evil under the belief that the only life is within its protection.

For the reliving of the terror or pain of loss from which it flees is unthinkable, and always the greater evil. Until the willingness to question reality - our own thinking, moves within us and finds allowance instead of rejection and denial.

The fear of something can destroy us without ever actually finding out what it was or whether it was so, And fears can be set about us as fences against which change is denied to a locked down or petrified defence.The systemic operation of fear as control can hardly live! But will seem to have all the life we give it as our chosen way to limit, conflict and die.

The word individual was once like to indivisible. 'What If'...is the capacity to select out and give focus to a modelling of ideas based on rules established as past experience, running invisibly and operating as a matrix for virtual experience through which to persist the identity of the modelling or cultural parameters.

A true currency is truly current - not 'as if' or merely symbolic representation. When cultural constructs disintegrate, it reveals a loss of integrity in functional terms. to double down in further masking of derivatives of derivatives is the sacrifice of life known and lived for an illusion of control over it. What else is that but death?

#3

The mainstream version of anything is not the only account.
The generation of a false history is itself a history that repeats.
Mind control is the means, and the end.

But I recall Dubya Bush fluffing the quote:
“Fool me once, shame on you! Fool me twice, shame on me!”

But he got it backwards for the mainstreaming of a President everyone could feel superior to. Mind control, narrative control, take the ride while the music plays.
But every time it stops, there are less and less chairs to sit on.

#4

One of my favourite quotes with relation to microbiota:

“It may shock you to know that all the world’s bacteria have access to a single gene pool, which has provided an immense resource for adaptation, manifesting an array of breathtaking combinations and re-combinations for three billion years! Any bacterium—at any time—has the ability to use accessory genes, provided by other strains, which permits it to function in ways its own DNA may not cover. The global trading of genes through DNA re-combinations provides for almost endless adaptation possibilities.

Therefore, what has been done to one has been done to all. Widespread use of antibacterial agents is both futile and disastrous. Future life sciences and medicine will comprehend the more effective use of agents to stimulate positive adaptation of bacteria resulting in chains of supportive symbiosis. In the presence of love, these positive adaptations naturally occur. In the presence of hatred and fear, negative and resistant strains of bacteria are more likely.

Life forms are ever changing, and yet the basic chemistry of life remains the same. Do not cling to forms that are passing, but seek for an understanding of life that embraces and includes all possibilities. This is accomplished through integrating and expanding patterns and relationships. In this way, you will see God as the creative power of life. When I asked that you love one another, I was not just giving you a recipe for human fellowship. This is the doorway to life eternal.” (The Keys of Jeshua – Glenda Green)

I may add that the ‘Jeshua’ parts of the book offer a condensed wisdom and integrity of being that speak to the heart of our human condition but particularly to the underlying conditioning that plagues and bedevils our current sense of life, self and world. Regardless of the contextual framing of the author of the book. Whoever and whatever the messenger may be, coherence and integrity resonate. But will ‘intellectual’ snobbery ever allow looking where its sense of self-specialness over life is not supported?