I am not sure we're in disagreement (yet) - so I'll try again.. :-)
1. I find it obvius that best government is the one that governs the
least. Just as obvious I find it that the higher states of
consciousness people have, the less they need to be wet nursed.
2. I find it a mistake to view the TMO as a template for how en
enlightened world would be regulated.
The TMO is a mirage; it does not exist; it's the battle field where
the forces of light find themselves involved in a struggle with the
forces of darkness.
--- In [email protected], "Irmeli Mattsson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "peterklutz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > 1. Critizing governments today is a no-brainer - everyone know's there
> > is something wrong.
> >
> > Still, when democracy is critized, it is done so less for past
> > services and the ideal it may still be (a terrible system, but the
> > best seen in Kali yuga), but for how it is practiced.
> >
> > I also think there is more embedded in the concept of 'democracy' in
> > this context; it is a keyword hinting i.a. at some of the roots of the
> > consciousness found on the British Isles - a trait I personally admire
> > (having enjoyed several incarnations in the place) but which in the
> > context of future levels of collective consciousness for the whole
> > world, may be less relevant.
> >
> > The roots of Magna Charta was perhaps not only a yearning for freedom,
> > but also inability to organize in a civil way except by acknowledging
> > a 'rule and divide' mentality.
> >
> > 2. Given that critizing democracy od today is a no-brainer, the way to
> > level criticism against 'anti-democracy' is to listen very
> > attentivelly to what the alternative to 'democracy' would be.
> >
> > When this alternative is hinted at it has been done with 'keywords'
> > like 'self-government'; 'parental role' (give people the tools and
> > knowledge and stand back and see how they exercize their free will);
> > and that countries with income taxes above 10% are disfunctional.
> >
> > In short, the alternative that emerges is that of a society where
> > individuals rule themselves to a far higher degree than is the case
> > today, even in USA. In fact, the vision is so radically anti-big
> > government that it may be described as the fullfillment of a
> > libertarian/Republican vision of a 'government' that in effect never
> > (needs to) interfere in peoples lives - because things just work
> anyway.
> >
> > This conculsion is,. in fact, a no-brainer, too.
> >
> > Who would seriously believe that a planet of people in CC, GC, UC, BC
> > would accept interference of 'governments' in their lives. People who
> > have experience of how the leadership of the TMO operates vis-a-vis
> > the governments of the world, cna hardly be under the impression that
> > what is suggested is anyhting but far more freedom to individuals
> > than waht is currently experienced.
> >
> > One can probably arrive at a similar conclusion by studying
> > descriptions of how societies worked in more enlightened times than
> > our own.
> >
> > Pew!
>
> ****
> . Critizing governments today is a no-brainer - everyone know's there
> is something wrong.
>
> Still, when democracy is critized, it is done so less for past
> services and the ideal it may still be (a terrible system, but the
> best seen in Kali yuga), but for how it is practiced.
>
> I also think there is more embedded in the concept of 'democracy' in
> this context; it is a keyword hinting i.a. at some of the roots of the
> consciousness found on the British Isles - a trait I personally admire
> (having enjoyed several incarnations in the place) but which in the
> context of future levels of collective consciousness for the whole
> world, may be less relevant.
>
> The roots of Magna Charta was perhaps not only a yearning for freedom,
> but also inability to organize in a civil way except by acknowledging
> a 'rule and divide' mentality.
>
> 2. Given that critizing democracy od today is a no-brainer, the way to
> level criticism against 'anti-democracy' is to listen very
> attentivelly to what the alternative to 'democracy' would be.
>
> When this alternative is hinted at it has been done with 'keywords'
> like 'self-government'; 'parental role' (give people the tools and
> knowledge and stand back and see how they exercize their free will);
> and that countries with income taxes above 10% are disfunctional.
>
> In short, the alternative that emerges is that of a society where
> individuals rule themselves to a far higher degree than is the case
> today, even in USA. In fact, the vision is so radically anti-big
> government that it may be described as the fullfillment of a
> libertarian/Republican vision of a 'government' that in effect never
> (needs to) interfere in peoples lives - because things just work anyway.
>
> This conculsion is,. in fact, a no-brainer, too.
>
> Who would seriously believe that a planet of people in CC, GC, UC, BC
> would accept interference of 'governments' in their lives. People who
> have experience of how the leadership of the TMO operates vis-a-vis
> the governments of the world, cna hardly be under the impression that
> what is suggested is anyhting but far more freedom to individuals
> than waht is currently experienced.
>
> One can probably arrive at a similar conclusion by studying
> descriptions of how societies worked in more enlightened times than
> our own.
>
> Pew!
>
>
> Maybe I'm rather dull, but I don't see the claimed issues above as
> no-brainers. For me these are rather complicated issues.
> Democracy is not perfect, it is clear to me. But when compared to the
> past monarchies and totalitarian regimes it is almost perfect. It is
> much better capable of respecting the individual's human rights.
>
> It is possible and even likely that when human beings collectively
> evolve further a form of governance that is more advanced than
> democracy will appear. But we are not yet there. Most of humanity is
> still approaching the level of awareness, which makes democracy
> possible to function properly.
>
> That means a capacity of respecting every individuals freedom of
thought.
> And it means also a capacity to think independently and not being that
> easily manipulated to group thinking in search for external enemies,
> when not being capable of containing and owning your own fears and
> fury. In other words you don't anymore need fundamentalist belief
> systems to give justification for your harming others.
>
> For me TMO doesn't represent a governance beyond democracy, rather
> beneath.
> TMO doesn't encourage one's self government: it doesn't even allow
> freedom of thought. I have been a target of fierce accusations each
> time I have inside that organization expressed some criticism of it. I
> have been blamed to be very negative. It is very odd that these people
> cannot see how negatively they have treated me. They say criticism is
> harmful to the purity of heart. And still these people are full of
> criticism and even irrational negativity of many things except TMO.
>
> Irmeli
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
