Tag Archives: social interaction

Border-crossing – the mental divide of real space and illusion

Ancient Map of Telnor

Whenever we travel outside of our habitual or cultural environment, we cross borders – mostly in the confines of an airport. In spite of our ability to instantly travel between countries and continents on the internet, where we call this digital ‘nearness’ the global village,  the physical reality reflects the reverse situation.  The core of physical border crossing is identity control.  The individual crossing the border must obtain permission to do so. Since the beginning of recorded history, the acquiring of territory and maintaining of borders has been the primary source of war, conflict and abuse, and this situation has not changed up until today.  Yet, there is no reality to the idea of borders and border-crossing because it is a conceptualisation of the mind that is imposed in a top-down manner onto physical space. Borders are an accepted illusion, there is no tangible equivalent from which borders spring forth and manifest in the world.  In other words, borders are not real, they shift and change depending on who is in charge and has the power to rule over others in form of states, nations, and countries.

When travelling between claimed territory by plane, airport border controls are laced with a thick procedure of security checks that encompass the inspection of luggage and physical bodies with the aim to minimise potential security risks for the country that is opening its gates for us. In my experience, all border crossing check points look the same with only one changing variable, which is the language spoken because it changes from border to border.  The agents in charge of checking travellers wear uniforms, they sit behind computers, scanning devices, and other machines which process information about each person who crosses the border.  Fascinatingly enough, the border-crossing personnel assesses each person not as the physical person that stands right in front of them. No, the assessment is done based on a proxy, the conceptualised idea about a person which is displayed in form of an image on a computer screen. We, the travellers, are not privy to this information, we can assume that a part of it contains our personal details such as name and address, yet the remainder, of what lurks on these screens and refers to us, is shrouded in mystery.

There is a sense of togetherness when going through the long haul of border-crossing and security check points.  Frequently a conversation pops up between fellow passengers. At the end of the conversation everyone participating is reassured that we are united in this ‘humiliating situation’, when we are stripped of shoes, belts, jackets and hats because our potential is perceived as threat to the world. Even when queuing with a more reserved crowd that not easily engages conversationally, the sight of a little child or an elderly person having to submit to the procedures will prompt us to verbally point out the ridiculousness of these controls. But how ridiculous are they really when we bring the point home to self and see what it is that we don’t want to see about who we are? We unite in complaining about check-point procedures because we don’t want to see beyond, what underlies this situation and how it unanimously implicates each one of us.

 When we realise that what is happening in real-time is equal to the inner reality that we carry around in our minds, we can start to investigate and step beyond the accepted self-victimisation.  We stop to believe that submitting to a ‘humiliating situation’ is engineered by an evil government that blindly enforces its laws and we realise that the powerlessness we experience is the perception of the mind as we allow and accept it.  We are the borders, the territory, the security checks, and we victimise ourselves daily.  Our own borders are just as imaginary as the borders we create in physical space to divide the world into countries and nations.  Our claim to territory is to prevent us from self-change.  What we defend are our limitations and how we have programmed ourselves in separation and division from others at every opportunity where our self-interest is threatened.  We use self-talk to validate the behaviors we enact to keep our borders intact. But here it is not about others being admitted inside, it is about us preventing ourselves from stepping outside our habitual territory so that we move ourselves into a new space where we can decide freely who we want to be in this moment, in this context, with these people.

This self-talk is our security check point, it is powerful beyond recognition. It contains every justification we launch in our minds to remain where we are – trapped and limited.  On an individual level, we deploy a personal arsenal of justifications that we can tailor to each situation. These mental security measures are extremely well-placed and they make so much sense that when we are in a given situation, where we have the opportunity to trespass our limitations, we are unable to recognise what we are doing to ourselves. We may have a glimpse in hindsight of what could have been, who we could have been, but the situation is gone and we will have to wait until next time…

In the meantime, there are reassuring conversation with fellow minds to be had – somewhere – on the internet, in the streets, at the airport,  where we reassure ourselves that change seems so impossible with the ultimate justification: because we are a victim of human nature.

Don’t wait till next time, dismantle your mental security check-point and walk out of your justifications.

Join us, and set yourself free

Advertisements

2 Comments

Filed under All

2012 – Time to get off the drug!

The love and light community insists and persists in this year’s ascension. Well, for now. This is in spite of many overtly incongruent issues around this idea which point to a self-created belief system that is not based in reality but is entirely make-belief. A kind of drug of the mind induced through imagination, or also called visualisation, by those who are enamored with the idea of escape into ‘positive thinking’ to find relief from reality – similar to pharmaceutical drugs which give us relief from the symptoms of physical illness.

A powerful indicator that the mind will use make-belief in many circumstance of un-ease is the application of placebo therapy which has proven to treat a number of peripheral disease processes by making the patient feel better. What placebo therapy cannot do is treat actual physical illnesses such as venous leg ulcers, Crohn’s disease, urinary tract infection, or chronic heart failure. In other words, placebo only works when the mind is implicated but cannot produce any results when the physical reality of the body is at stake. The physical reality of the body is also the reality that we breath, move, and communicate in every day of our lives. Hence this is why starving people are not ‘cured’ by the ascension.

Consequently, what is real about this ascension graze is that it is a reaction to a dis-eased reality, one that desperately needs treatment from all of us to get any measurable results for betterment. To create viable self-change and therefore societal change, ascension is a haphazard to everyone’s health because like all drugs it promotes the continuation of our dis-eased reality. Ascension, or the relief-from-reality-drug is the placebo for perceived change which works by continuously strengthening the belief that one has indeed changed oneself, even though those who take this drug exhibit even more inertia and acceptance of all things abusive in our society – and all this while chanting the slogan: “we are all one”.

As time passes, one is increasingly exposed to others who disseminate the drug, and who will exert their power of persuasion over those who are just in the beginning stages.  Beginners might still be unsure because there are no physical signs of it working, except for the dedicated fashion style and paraphernalia, such as crystals, dream catchers, special beads, metals, oils and so forth – but will eventually let their skill of critical reflection wane into no-man’s land.

Critical reflection would indicate that one is skeptical about some of the ascension attributes, and ask a number of questions to outline for oneself a more accurate picture of what is going on here, instead of jumping on the band wagon just because other people have done the same. Not to mention that there are many historical examples where this kind of collective jumping was a fatal choice to make.

Indeed, this should be one’s first question:

Am I getting into ascension because all these other (nice) people are into it, and they must know what they are doing, even if I don’t know?

More questions that might put a person on their way to recovery and reinstate critical reflection are:

No other so-called spiritual departure has come to fruition why should this one be any different? One may recall 2011 judgement day where many were convinced that they would be leaving the world as we know it. No one left of course and judgement day was postponed – without any doubt the same thing will be happening on December 21, 2012.

How come Tibetan monks are not preparing us for ascension? Tibetan monks have been working in the spiritual realm for centuries and have sufficient spiritual mileage on the ascension meter. Recall that they are able to pick out the next Dalai Lama from hundreds of children, hence these monks would be able to pin-point all details involved in ascension. Instead, the love and light community has to rely on vague ancient Mayan scriptures for the interpretation of ascension details, such as the date.

Why is the vocabulary on ascension not consistent depending on who is talking about ascension? If I say table to anyone in the room here, or anywhere else in the world (in their respective language of course), everyone would immediately have the same reference. This is not so with the ascension community. Words like ego, soul, higher self and so forth are moving targets when it comes to a definition.

Get off the drug and roll up your physical sleeves – change yourself and change the world – because all are indeed one, which means all are free or none are free. Oneness and equality is the way forward. Question your perceived reality, and come and question us @ http://www.desteni.org –  join the forum.

Otherwise, find reading and listening pleasure on the topic of oneness and equality @ http://www.eqafe.com

2 Comments

Filed under Equal Money

Digital interfaces and the Equal Money System

The other day while listening to one of Bernard’s interviews I realised that my style of living together with other Destonians is much like people in the future will live when we have transitioned to an Equal Money System. We recently moved into a house and are now figuring out how to go about sharing responsibilities so that we optimise our free time.

While shopping together two days ago, as we were approaching the queue for check-out, we observed how different the check-out was organised then what we are used to from our respective countries – where cashiers typically sit behind computers next to a conveyor belt on which the customer deposits the goods she is about to purchase. It is a known fact that sitting on the computer is not ideal for the human body and that many suffer greatly from the effects upon their health.

When I was working at one of the big entertainment companies producing video games, I recall one day I was walking past a cubicle where I heard someone in an irritated voice shouting computer commands. Curious, I stuck my head around the wall of the cubicle and saw one of the programmers in my team desperately trying to use voice commands to program code – this was years ago when voice input was an immature technology. We started to talk and he told me that he was unable to use his hands because his wrists had incurred carpel tunnel syndrome. He continued to tell me that he had back problems as well but that he was lucky because he received worker’s compensation. Programmers are not the only ones affected by the ‘common’ digital interface. Many people who work the typical low-wage jobs, such as cashiers or bank tellers, or administrators spend their entire day sitting in stationary positions with only their fingers moving and without any significant ergonomic support.

What we saw in this grocery store here in Belgium was different. The cashier was active, standing and moving around constantly. The way this interface works is based on an appropriation of the self-scan mobile devices that some grocery stores have in place for their customers. This approach has never caught on among the shoppers because it involves too many steps as well as the cumbersome carrying around of the scanning device while shopping. Shoppers want in and out with minimal involvement concerning any aspect of the store’s procedure.

The Belgian corporation that runs this franchise was inventive enough to appropriate the mobile scanning device in the following manner. The cashier holds the device to scan the customer’s items while standing in front of two shopping carts that are placed side by side. One of the carts is full of the customer’s stuff and the next one is empty. As the cashier scans each item she places it into the cart that is initially empty.  In addition to this setup, there is an electronic scale nearby for items that have to be weight, and also every so often the cashier will stop and make adjustments on the keyboard of the scanning device she is holding in her hand.  Once all is scanned and has been transferred to the previously empty shopping cart, the customer walks with the cashier to another computer where the total cost is calculated and money or cards are exchanged. Then the cashier returns to her previous position where she finds the next customer waiting, who has already placed his full shopping cart next to the empty one.

With this interface the body is constantly in motion, walking around, while lifting and placing items into various locations, orchestrating many more movements than what would happen if the cashier sat stationary behind the machine. Granted, the walking around for hours can still be very tiring but it hardly matches the sitting-all-day-in-front-of-your-machine abuse on the body. This shows us that there is plenty of scope to find new ways of interfacing with digital technologies which can reduce the abuse on the physical body.

In sum, the digital interfaces to which we succumb are mostly abusive because they fail to respect the design of the body. To be sure, I am not endorsing the capitalistic system or perpetuating of exploitation and consumerism, what I am observing and communicating is the fact that we are making technologies that are used in every day life which are abusive towards the physical body and that these limitations are self-induced through our acceptance. The point that is being made here is that there are always options to create responsible interactions with technology. The reason why it is currently not possible is due to the nature of our economic system because overhead costs, such reducing abusive technologies for members of staff, is held at a minimum to maximise profit returns. The corruption of course goes much deeper because of the financial mechanism in how technological products are brought 0nto the market which is independent from the development of technologies. The make belief of a technological evolution is only due to the financial markets and is not a question of our ability to make better technologies. Even in this narrow perspective, the checkout service of a Belgian franchise, we can see the difference between one employer to the next, making it clearly an issue of investment when it comes to providing better working environments for employees.

Although in an Equal Money System the job of a cashier will be obsolete, because no one will have to pay for the goods and services produced, the role of the body in daily activities must be scrutinized for any possible abuse via tool use, as it is currently occurring across the various types of tool usage in human society, analogue or digital. This will be specifically addressed with digital technologies and other technical tools in-the-making, where we will conduct thorough research to assess how the body is functioning in conjunction with a particular tool before the tool goes into circulation.

This will prompt much redesign of the current technologies that are abusive to all, especially given the hours some people spend online. When we no longer put profit before life, we no longer have to make it a habit to sit bend over behind machines that cause harm to life.

For additional information on the topic of Equal Money and much more, visit http://www.equalmoney.org http://wiki.destonians.com/Equal_Money_System

Leave a comment

Filed under Equal Money

A threesome: Equal Money is the only solution!

In this post I am discussing three viewpoints of the Equal Money System in relation to anarchism, resource-based economy and gold standard.

Equal Money System is not Anarchism.
The word “anarchism” is an umbrella term which groups political and religious thought (such as Christian anarchism) in a number of traditions. These are underpinned by the basic idea that societal structuring of individual and collective human relations can function in the absence of a centralised authority.

In the last two hundred years, the various movements of social or collective anarchism have, in their essence, dealt with the distribution of labour and the role of property. This does not compare to an Equal Money System because the main focus here is neither material nor economical. Both of those aspects are merely necessary within the practical concerns of life. Equal Money’s main focus is on living beings with the central idea to uphold, support and assist all that is living, in equal ways through taking measures in the physical world that are born from self-responsibility.  Thus, how aspects such as labour, ownership, and property are dealt with from the social and collective stance is determined through the application of the principle of equality, to achieve the common goal in establishing what is best for all.

Historically, individual anarchism has strongly supported ego-based human relations (see Max Stirner). Here, individuals are encouraged to will themselves through their ego to form and cultivate a union in the interaction with others while freely following one’s desires. Supporters of this approach are convinced that conflicts and suffering can be tackled and resolved if this union is maintained. From the perspective of an Equal Money System, the human ego is not a viable path to be trusted in creating a better world that includes everyone. The reason being that the human ego operates on the basis of thoughts and the mind in general. Desteni research clearly shows that the mind works in ways that keeps people separated from each other through mechanisms of deception and abuse. This is done through feelings and emotions which trigger manipulation and sabotage of Self and others, always promoting only one thing: the perceived benefit through self-interest.

When tracing various developments of anarchistic thought and action, it becomes evident that these movements have acted through opposing established systems. As part of a reactive manner, the movements have utilised abuse, such as violent acts against those who do not support their ideas, and other ‘anti’ stance  activities such as general strikes.  In an Equal Money System, abuse, of which violence is one form, is eradicated through the elimination of ego-based interactions between people, animals and the environment. Abuse has no place in the principle of equality and the achievement of a society in which everyone acts in the best interest of all. This is accomplished through new forms of education and a life-coaching process that Destonians have taken on in self-responsibility to purify themselves from the ego-based mind. The DesteniIProcess forms the basis of this process through the practice of self-forgiveness.

Some traditions of social anarchism will form their ideas incorporating concepts of mutuality, reciprocity, and voluntary action, yet the basic notion of “earning a living” still holds true even in the face of proposed currency reforms. In an Equal Money system, money is not regarded to be on equal footing with life, it is purely seen as an organisational tool which cannot be used or abused to equate a person’s ability and capacity to perform work with their living requirements.  Thus, an Equal Money System spells the end of poverty because everyone is equal taken care of on the basis that they are a living being.

The Equal Money System is not a resource-based economy.

The concept of a resource-based economy is a recent development which looks at possibilities of getting around the use of money through declaring all resources of the planet as common heritage for all. Proponents of this approach are found in the Zeitgeist movement. Supporters state that besides money, credit, barter and any other system of debt or servitude would not exist in a resource-based economy. On the level of human relations this is achieved, according to Zeitgeist supporters, through more meaningful ways of relating to other people. From the Zeitgeist perspective this will emerge from the fact that the individual will no longer have to worry about keeping a job which greatly reduces mental and physical stress.

Several questions are prompted from this context. How will humans suddenly start to relate to and with each other in more meaningful ways when human nature has a track record that lays down centuries of abuse and self-interest, regardless of which economic system governs human relations? Without rigorous self-investigation and practise of self-honesty, how will those who form the government in a resource-based economy remain free from corruption? How will it be ensured that resources as common heritage stay common and are fairly distributed?

The resource-based economy, as proposed by Zeitgeist supporters, is strongly hinged on cutting-edge technologies produced in new and innovative ways. The idea is that through modern technology the environment can be better protected, the cities re-designed for improved living, and more effective transportation systems and industry plants can be build. However, technology is advocated without looking at the root of the current ways we apply and implement technology and what that means in the face of a new type of economy. It is unlikely that newly designed cities will get rid of abuse, that by living in these cities we suddenly know how to decide and act from the starting point of what is best for everyone.

Changing the way we interact in the world is not a material procedure, the process for a better world does not start with creating a better exterior but rather starts with us, and who we are as people, what we have allowed and accepted to exist in the world – it has to start with the realisation that we are all responsible, and that only if we take responsibility we can make changes. This is why the Equal Money System begins with the human and the process needed to transform human nature so that we can implement a system that supports everyone equally. All exterior and operational aspects are emergent from this process of transformation which is based on understanding how to decide and act from the starting point of what is best for all.

Why the gold standard will not work.
When humanity used gold as a standard for exchange of goods and services, as early as 600 B. C., the economic difference between people existed just the same as it does today. Poverty and fear of survival have underpinned our societies with or without gold standard. The change to gold standard from fiat currency does not change the fact that we put a price on life. It will not end abuse, nor will it stop corruption. Again, this is yet another approach where we look at the problem in separation of ourselves. The collective problem that we are faced with is not one that can be solved by making minor changes to the system we have created, which is what the return to a gold standard implies. To create a world where everyone is taken care of equally which is what Destonians are here to bring about, we must understand that the change begins with us, individually and collectively.

For additional information on the topic of Equal Money and much more, visit our store: http://store.desteni.org

Leave a comment

Filed under Equal Money

Creating my life through the DesteniIProcess

I have been asking myself if the agreement with Gabriel might have been a pre-programmed situation. The reason for asking myself this question has been twofold. First, we seem to be quite compatible in a basic way of being. Don’t get me wrong I can see that this agreement is taking me apart which is beyond what I was experiencing in my process when I was on my own. I can see that the perceived peaceful inner state I was experiencing then is now in chaos most of the time which means that it was not real, and this is requiring me to look at my issues in much more depth than before.

Second, the timing could not have been better to start an agreement. I had finished my studies and both Gabriel and I had to move from our old flats. In my case I had to move countries because of the enormous cost of living in the UK. It all fit just a tad too well for me not to be skeptical about it. Yet, in the beginning when he and I first met and an agreement was on the table, I dealt with much anxiety of fear of loss of my independence. I had not reckoned with an agreement any time soon and was quite satisfied with my ‘single’ status.

The other day, I mentioned the pre-programmed aspect to Gabriel, who said to me that it is a matter of ceasing one’s opportunity as these open up. After reflecting on this for some time now, I see what he means and found that “ceasing one’s opportunity” comes into play as part of the DesteniIprocess where we learn to make decisions on the basis of a non-energetic state.

I will explain this on a pertinent real-life example. In May of this year, when I was going through the last stages of examination regarding my studies, I was presented with a highly probable opportunity for a job, which entailed becoming part of a research team in a small town in France. At the time, when this opportunity presented itself I was having to cope with things on multiple fronts. I did not want to make a decision out of a situation where I had no clarity in terms of what I wanted to do after my studies once these had been entirely completed, meaning all the last examinations had been done and dusted, and I was free to review my situation. However, the deadline of applying for this job meant I had to furnish the research team with an immediate response. Granted that there were other issues with this job but this was the biggest one. Thus my answer to this opportunity was “no, thank you”.

Some of my colleagues did not understand how I could have let such an opportunity slip through my fingers. Given the economic situation and the overall factor of how interesting this post would have been, from the outside it certainly looked like I was being foolish to let it go. Had this been years ago, before I started the DesteniIprocess, I would have been probably too fearful to say ‘No’ even if I really wanted to. I would have been afraid of how difficult it would be to find a suitable job and would have convinced myself to take it because of my inferior position towards the point of being without work.

This is not to say that I am fearless when it comes to not having a job and making money, or that I do not long for security. What it says is that my starting point for making a decision has changed and that, in this instance, I did not operate from my typical pre-programmed way of acting in the world that I know has influenced my previous decisions on jobs and matters of having to do with being secure in the system.

If we look at the trajectory that follows, having not ceased this job opportunity, I was able to cease the agreement opportunity because I was still in the UK at the time when Gabriel came to participate in a business meeting. This enabled us to meet up and connect in physical space, which later prompted the agreement. Ceasing an opportunity from the starting point of self rather than from the starting point of pre-programmed reaction, then let me create my life where I was able to choose an agreement with another, and begin to investigate myself in relation to intimacy and shared living with other Destonians. Hence it was through the DesteniIprocess that I was able to change my life situation.

Since I started the DesteniIprocess I have understood that every breath is accumulative in the process of creating my life and that these decisions are really composed of minute moment-to-moment maneuvers in the world. Only if I understand who I am here in every moment can I become self-directive and stand as a self, as one and equal to all that is here.

2 Comments

Filed under agreement, self-forgiveness