What an amazing post! I have yet to finish reading it, but wanted to discuss this bit without delay.
"...there is much disagreement over what the proper solutions to these many obvious problems actually are, how it is that humanity should collectively proceed, and what the proper way forward should be in order to realize the brighter future the vast majority of us seek."
First, each and every one of us must themselves determine what is right for them. There is no collective truth. There is only individual understanding, even if someone believes they know what is 'The Truth' they have no right nor ability to compel anyone else to believe what they do. Second, this absolutely means that there are many different ways forward that are right - as many as there are people. No two people share an identical view of the world. What each of us views as 'problems' others will view as solutions, and vice versa. There is no one proper way forward, and whatever future you view as bright will be someone else's hellish dystopia.
Humanity will NOT collectively proceed, or it will do so over my dead body. I bet anyone that tries to force you into a collective progression will meet with that same dissent and opposition from you. This is going to be true no matter how much concordance you may have with whatever collective is being imposed, because you will have divergent beliefs you have a perfect right to, and no one has any right to force you to believe any specific thing. Any specific collective progress is the tyrannical totalitarian hellish dystopia each and everyone of us will fight to the death to prevent.
I dare anyone to try to disprove this statement, because no matter what is proposed as THE way for everyone by anyone, everyone else will dissent from some specific details. There may be general agreement as to broad directions by certain demographics, but they will not be universal, and anyone that tried to force everyone to accept any beliefs will be rightfully opposed, and I bet you'd be first on the hill to defend your specific freedom to believe what you believe.
Thanks!
I very much agree that we humans will never see truth in an identical matter to others, and also that the globalist plan for the collective is antithetical to truth, freedom and love, and that we must resist this plan. However, I also believe we can most certainly collectively move forward in a positive direction, if we do so voluntarily, and not by means of force or coercion. In fact, much power is derived by humans working together voluntarily as a collective, and this power is only diminished when so-called collective progress is brought about through force as opposed to voluntarily by humans coming together in unity out of love and appreciation for one another.
As long as we seek to enable very broad values we can agree. It is blatantly obvious that with increasing specificity of goals, increasing sectarianism, dissent, and the spectre of force inevitably rears it's ugly head. We can work together to enable freedom, but we are not all going to work together to enable freedom to consume what we choose, or to publish the speech we choose. Even at this extremely broad level of detail violent opposition arises, and instead of working together to achieve those things, we will devolve into violent opposition.
At least, this is what I see in the annals of history, as impacted by populist leaders, politicians, and powerful overlords.
The annals of history are relevant in this respect if we use the same methods used at that time, i think (as well as being relevant so we know what not to do).
We'll be using the same people, and that's the real issue.
We can collectively proceed without force can we not? Those who freely choose to can anyway.
Sure! I'm sure you're aware that the further we proceed on a specific path, the more individuals diverge. As long as the direction folks proceed in doesn't prescribe specifics, then such individual divergence won't disrupt the procession - but the further folks proceed the more specifics they proceed to encounter. Whatever process you choose, this will be nature of it's procession. When we're talking about global direction, do you really expect the pathological narcissists running things to decline to force compliance? I don't. I am sure as shootin' we'll be forced to comply with the Great Reset of our money into their pockets.
So, we can collectively agree to head in the opposite direction. We certainly do agree that our money should stay in our wallets, right? So, then that's not going to do much, though. We need to take actual action in response to policies that take our money, such as carbon taxes, which are being imposed already. Now we get to specifics. This is where we can't proceed as a collective anymore, because some people are going to advocate going all Luigi Mangione, some people are going to advocate lying on tax forms, some people are going to decline to do either of those things, and that's just the beginning. The divergence of individuals from collectives only increases as collectives implement specific actions, as the specificity of action increases.
I would very much like to have a voice, or preferably a video call with you brother, to discuss this matter. For me to attempt to explain and answer questions in writing is challenging for me.
Posted via blog.d.buzz
I don't even have a device with a camera that can connect to the internet, because that is the only way I can be certain my camera can't be used by creepy stalkers to spy on me. Nothing I can connect to the internet has a microphone either, for the same reason.
I also find that putting my thoughts into writing forces me to refine them, to, in fact, fully understand what I actually think about things. Speaking allows me to glibly prattle, and all too often I say things I really don't believe or support, because I am not forced to carefully express things in writing.
Anyway, this appears to be the best way we're going to have anytime soon to communicate, although we are able to write back and forth on other venues, if you'd prefer.
Maybe i'll record voice message then & send to you on the other side & you can write back.
Have you thought about transcribing such recordings? Referring to text to ensure accuracy and relevance of reply is, for me at least, probably quicker and easier than replaying audio or video. Whatever works best for you is probably fine for me, however. I deeply appreciate your beneficial intentions I find practically inspired. Such dedication to benevolence is certainly inspiring, anyway.
@topcomment