Sunday, August 17, 2008
love not who, or what, but _that_you_are
love not who, or what, but _that_you_are. who or what, are nothing compared with that. easier to see who, easier to see what, both finite, both developing, both within, but _that_you_are is infinitely larger than yourself, you can never encompass or fully appreciate _that_you_are, how many hours of work went into making you are innumerable, therefore, it has value beyond your comprehension. The level of detail that went into the choices that created you took infinite lifetimes of work. To appreciate this, is to exist, is to live up to your own expectations for yourself. the rest, the daunting who or what obsession is merely distraction from the only thing that matters, which is who you will become...
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Two Worlds - An Asside
After reading worlds 1 and 2, we shall see what happens next, yet I am already intrigued and full of rudimentary commentary:
though I'm sure some would foolishly dismiss, your are in fact quite clever, and its unfortunate people adopt impatience as their identities, though for anything I can accuse I am not completely immune, especially with traffic and or excessively law abiding drivers, people who slow down for me, ect, ect, i become impatient for them, the road is like a river to me, not some rigid system, the only rule is to not crash, or avoid the crash police who think you will crash when your not, but my theory is they just want to make money anyway, and that crashes keep them in business. Your concepts are intriguing, world 1 is fascinating in and of itself, and I expected more harsh of a contrast in world 2 (yet I have more to read). I feel as if I begin life in world 2 but somehow became slowly convinced world 1 was all that is real, though world 2 is still always there on command, its like a personal world with nobody else in it, its excellent, or at least peaceful and serene... but I am wondering if you mean for world 1 and world 2 to subsume all categories of light-workers and dark workers (i expected some more drastically alternate world), and if there is a preference or distinction for them between worlds or if there is a relatively even distribution between each. I like the idea that the borderlines blur in any case since if greater knowledge really leads to improved results in the 'real' world (or i suppose 'seemingly shared' is more accurate than real) then knowing each world would in fact help one succeed in world 1, bringing peace to those 'blindly trapped' or 'blissfully stuck' in world 2. Its too bad there are so many limitations I get so caught up in the fact that world 2 does not entirely appreciate world 1 and vice versa becomes quite disgusting to me the lapses that occur in communication but your certainly correct in that it doesn't trap itself between borders between cultures, no matter what group one might try to accuse, its always easy to find some world within their foreign world that seems utterly backwards to oneself unless truly experienced in the nature of existence, in which any and all worlds are equal and valid possessing truths of their own whether conscious or not realized, everything becomes useful in determining truth of existence, even terrorists hold some truth, or at least they are convinced of it is my opinion, and there must be some fragment of truth to what they believe, even if they were mislead. I'm sure this is all old news, and I've only began reading your material, but keep up the good work, it seems habit forming.
Wow now finally to the original intention, negative words having a negative impact and instilling fear, I think depends on ones ability to reshape and re-cast and or re-mold words as other things (yet you probably have more articles about this I haven't read which may or may not address this). I think society is too quick to dismiss words as "bad" or "politically incorrect" and that in fact there is much usefulness trapped behind the facade of maliciousness, all that is fought against in outlawing negative words to me is connotation, a 'war on poverty', a double negative, becomes a positive, in a sense, or at least logically ought to be positive, just like a 'victory of wealth' negates itself (at least eventually, through complacency, or by simply adding a 'y' to the end of wealth). Resources are forever finite (words may be finite resources for expressing reality to people living within that universe of words), and I think that avoiding negative explicitly, or based on because it 'feels' bad, separates oneself from truth (all good things come to an end, and that end must be mitigated or accounted for preemptively, but cannot be described without having a negative connotation, how can we have a concept of danger or warning without negatives?), but then again that may be in a more world1 oriented objective sense of a shared reality truth, as opposed to a personalized truth of oneness with world2, which to me is the only source of any real and lasting peace, even if its a personalized dream based fabrication, any one can only do so much in world1, and we all eventually go back to whence we came, to the warming or paralyzing abyss of world 2, the heavens or hells we imagine infinity to be, all of which are in some ways true, but luckily I believe not everlasting, though my physical body seems to like it here. There are infinities everywhere, and between these we are pulled, as if to settle on one for good would form a solution is an illusion of a short lifetime, while I know we live forever, through more than just our own experience. Between the infinitely short sighted, and the infinitely far sighted, must lie some optimal balance, but to be in an active state of balance seems necessary to distinguish from stagnation, though it may appear to the manic as if stationary, focus seems to me the unit of measurement.
though I'm sure some would foolishly dismiss, your are in fact quite clever, and its unfortunate people adopt impatience as their identities, though for anything I can accuse I am not completely immune, especially with traffic and or excessively law abiding drivers, people who slow down for me, ect, ect, i become impatient for them, the road is like a river to me, not some rigid system, the only rule is to not crash, or avoid the crash police who think you will crash when your not, but my theory is they just want to make money anyway, and that crashes keep them in business. Your concepts are intriguing, world 1 is fascinating in and of itself, and I expected more harsh of a contrast in world 2 (yet I have more to read). I feel as if I begin life in world 2 but somehow became slowly convinced world 1 was all that is real, though world 2 is still always there on command, its like a personal world with nobody else in it, its excellent, or at least peaceful and serene... but I am wondering if you mean for world 1 and world 2 to subsume all categories of light-workers and dark workers (i expected some more drastically alternate world), and if there is a preference or distinction for them between worlds or if there is a relatively even distribution between each. I like the idea that the borderlines blur in any case since if greater knowledge really leads to improved results in the 'real' world (or i suppose 'seemingly shared' is more accurate than real) then knowing each world would in fact help one succeed in world 1, bringing peace to those 'blindly trapped' or 'blissfully stuck' in world 2. Its too bad there are so many limitations I get so caught up in the fact that world 2 does not entirely appreciate world 1 and vice versa becomes quite disgusting to me the lapses that occur in communication but your certainly correct in that it doesn't trap itself between borders between cultures, no matter what group one might try to accuse, its always easy to find some world within their foreign world that seems utterly backwards to oneself unless truly experienced in the nature of existence, in which any and all worlds are equal and valid possessing truths of their own whether conscious or not realized, everything becomes useful in determining truth of existence, even terrorists hold some truth, or at least they are convinced of it is my opinion, and there must be some fragment of truth to what they believe, even if they were mislead. I'm sure this is all old news, and I've only began reading your material, but keep up the good work, it seems habit forming.
Wow now finally to the original intention, negative words having a negative impact and instilling fear, I think depends on ones ability to reshape and re-cast and or re-mold words as other things (yet you probably have more articles about this I haven't read which may or may not address this). I think society is too quick to dismiss words as "bad" or "politically incorrect" and that in fact there is much usefulness trapped behind the facade of maliciousness, all that is fought against in outlawing negative words to me is connotation, a 'war on poverty', a double negative, becomes a positive, in a sense, or at least logically ought to be positive, just like a 'victory of wealth' negates itself (at least eventually, through complacency, or by simply adding a 'y' to the end of wealth). Resources are forever finite (words may be finite resources for expressing reality to people living within that universe of words), and I think that avoiding negative explicitly, or based on because it 'feels' bad, separates oneself from truth (all good things come to an end, and that end must be mitigated or accounted for preemptively, but cannot be described without having a negative connotation, how can we have a concept of danger or warning without negatives?), but then again that may be in a more world1 oriented objective sense of a shared reality truth, as opposed to a personalized truth of oneness with world2, which to me is the only source of any real and lasting peace, even if its a personalized dream based fabrication, any one can only do so much in world1, and we all eventually go back to whence we came, to the warming or paralyzing abyss of world 2, the heavens or hells we imagine infinity to be, all of which are in some ways true, but luckily I believe not everlasting, though my physical body seems to like it here. There are infinities everywhere, and between these we are pulled, as if to settle on one for good would form a solution is an illusion of a short lifetime, while I know we live forever, through more than just our own experience. Between the infinitely short sighted, and the infinitely far sighted, must lie some optimal balance, but to be in an active state of balance seems necessary to distinguish from stagnation, though it may appear to the manic as if stationary, focus seems to me the unit of measurement.
Saturday, August 2, 2008
Without Hate, there is Trust
First I read this: Social Welfare Is A Red Herring: The Return Of Feudalism
The rich aren't always evil, though I would naturally suspect, if they manage to make that much money, chances are they are performing some evil. Tricking people to buy products they don't need, to get rich, is effectively evil, and the companies at fault owe the public for damages.
The issue being, our lifetimes aren't necessarily long enough to assess the exact source of the damages, with so many sources out there getting rich by killing us (via any undiscovered cancerous preservative agent, FDA approved after ~10 years hormonal treatment, or addictive dependency creating product (even taurine)). They are successful because they can always blame something else. The "you can't prove it was us alone" factor doesn't prove innocence yet its accepted as such... and so they all get away with it.
There is no rich entity worth trusting in the world (generally). There should be active forces that dismantle and destroy big powerful unstoppable companies, and they don't really exist. There is probably more money destroying them, but chances are, anyone influenced by money, will do the wrong thing, and get bought out.
Powerful companies can buy out the best of the poor's intentions, and not even feel it in their pockets. The big companies can always crush the little guy, when yearly income is upwards of 100x larger. There is no active cooperation, agreement on who has to go or what is worth saving, and big corporations thrive on public confusion, disharmony, disorganization.
Saying everything big has to go is crazy (they would say), but pretty much anything big that isn't digital can't be trusted, and even digital companies will sell you nothing for something.
The advertising alone is sickening, how stupid they must think we are to fall for this nonsense, yet we may find ourselves buying it anyway. Getting a good deal doesn't mean you have to say good things about it, unless the company is worth saving, yet casually we slip, mention a name, and the branding ensues.
They aren't paying you to advertise, and you say the name, or so much as think it, you are working for them. Is there anyone who isn't owned? To say this country operates in a state of psychological stability is an understatement. We are in a state of psychological manipulation and control. To watch commercials, is equivalent with being attacked, invaded, marginalized, and packaged with a product, of dubious value.
The rich are simply too good at it, and it's Convenience alone, (psychological or physical, whether healthy or not), that serves as the Achilles heel of the poor who are working all the time (and consequently, may not have time left to think for themselves). I don't think its unjustifiable to hate the excessively huge that lack social consciousnesses of their own, or regard for who they hurt, if all it takes a is another buck to get past their concern.
Whether its healthy to Hate or not, is questionable, but i don't think its healthy to love the ones that are out to get you, and if you can't love them, and you can't ignore them (because they will get you), then hate is all that's left. There is no peace until they are gone, but then only to get replaced by someone else, and so the cycle of corporate destruction must continue. If you think about it hard enough, the differences between a big company and a government are relatively non substantial. Are not all companies subsidiaries of the govt?
The rich aren't always evil, though I would naturally suspect, if they manage to make that much money, chances are they are performing some evil. Tricking people to buy products they don't need, to get rich, is effectively evil, and the companies at fault owe the public for damages.
The issue being, our lifetimes aren't necessarily long enough to assess the exact source of the damages, with so many sources out there getting rich by killing us (via any undiscovered cancerous preservative agent, FDA approved after ~10 years hormonal treatment, or addictive dependency creating product (even taurine)). They are successful because they can always blame something else. The "you can't prove it was us alone" factor doesn't prove innocence yet its accepted as such... and so they all get away with it.
There is no rich entity worth trusting in the world (generally). There should be active forces that dismantle and destroy big powerful unstoppable companies, and they don't really exist. There is probably more money destroying them, but chances are, anyone influenced by money, will do the wrong thing, and get bought out.
Powerful companies can buy out the best of the poor's intentions, and not even feel it in their pockets. The big companies can always crush the little guy, when yearly income is upwards of 100x larger. There is no active cooperation, agreement on who has to go or what is worth saving, and big corporations thrive on public confusion, disharmony, disorganization.
Saying everything big has to go is crazy (they would say), but pretty much anything big that isn't digital can't be trusted, and even digital companies will sell you nothing for something.
The advertising alone is sickening, how stupid they must think we are to fall for this nonsense, yet we may find ourselves buying it anyway. Getting a good deal doesn't mean you have to say good things about it, unless the company is worth saving, yet casually we slip, mention a name, and the branding ensues.
They aren't paying you to advertise, and you say the name, or so much as think it, you are working for them. Is there anyone who isn't owned? To say this country operates in a state of psychological stability is an understatement. We are in a state of psychological manipulation and control. To watch commercials, is equivalent with being attacked, invaded, marginalized, and packaged with a product, of dubious value.
The rich are simply too good at it, and it's Convenience alone, (psychological or physical, whether healthy or not), that serves as the Achilles heel of the poor who are working all the time (and consequently, may not have time left to think for themselves). I don't think its unjustifiable to hate the excessively huge that lack social consciousnesses of their own, or regard for who they hurt, if all it takes a is another buck to get past their concern.
Whether its healthy to Hate or not, is questionable, but i don't think its healthy to love the ones that are out to get you, and if you can't love them, and you can't ignore them (because they will get you), then hate is all that's left. There is no peace until they are gone, but then only to get replaced by someone else, and so the cycle of corporate destruction must continue. If you think about it hard enough, the differences between a big company and a government are relatively non substantial. Are not all companies subsidiaries of the govt?
Saturday, May 10, 2008
TOCix (toxic table of contents)
1)chlorine
2)calcium propionate
3)sodium nitrate
4)sodium nitrite
5)sulfites (sulfur dioxide, sodium bisulfite, potassium hydrogen sulfite, etc.)
6)disodium EDTA.
Antioxidants include BHA and BHT. Other preservatives include formaldehyde (usually in solution), glutaraldehyde (kills insects), ethanol and methylchloroisothiazolinone
2)calcium propionate
3)sodium nitrate
4)sodium nitrite
5)sulfites (sulfur dioxide, sodium bisulfite, potassium hydrogen sulfite, etc.)
6)disodium EDTA.
Antioxidants include BHA and BHT. Other preservatives include formaldehyde (usually in solution), glutaraldehyde (kills insects), ethanol and methylchloroisothiazolinone
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Hillary v Obama The Victorious
All I can say about this is something I heard on TV. If you have an election lasting more than 8 hours your suppose to call your doctor immediately. So whose gonna call? Someone has to fess up...
Monday, February 4, 2008
Type Blogs
I blog as I think as I type as I blog as I think as I type I blog as I think as I type I think as I type a Blog.... January is no December but then again its January. Readers will appreciate content therefore content must occur else no readers will exist..... hence content on my blog and then some additional content on my blog in the form of the words as you read them coming off the page and passing through your brain. Do these stick? Will you say? Do I have to ask? I can always wait. I like to just wait and mentate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
