Xi and Putin are some of the most loving human beings on the planet and the least controlling. Their eyes are huge and they have eternal mote immunity.
Let me get this straight. SOME rich people are okay and just who those okay rich people are is a matter of your mote-free subjectivity? Do I have that right?
I'm not ashamed to tell you how I feel about that. No rich people anywhere are okay. They are all evil. They should not exist and their sole purpose for existing is to make the remainder of the inhabitants of this planet miserable and ultimately I believe, their purpose and goal is to destroy this living planet entirely.
When will you stop preaching to the choir? What could go wrong has gone wrong and merely pointing out the psychological and political methods of control will not change anything. Start using your soapbox to organize events where celebrities and powerful people who agree with you can connect with those outside the choir you’ve already established credibility with.
Why are you trying to control Caitlin? Maybe she can't be everywhere at once organizing (controlling) events. Maybe she's happy doing what she's doing. I found it inspiring. I don't live in a community where attempts to organize would achieve much, but I can be more assertive and outspoken without trying to control others.
All I've seen of soap-boxing is that it makes the nightly news because it sells ads and looks good on TV screens. It hardly ever accomplishes anything real.(like the 'Nam protests of yore) All we can really control is our self and how we react to situations. Organization is a only a 1st step towards change, a small one at that. Being made aware is why I write and it so seems with Caitlin as well. Peace
The only victory is over self and that is only through Christ. Christ, properly understood, frees us from life's illusions through truth and being free eliminates fear and depression. Disengaging from the world is simple to understand and easy to do, but only if it is the only thing one focuses on.
Try it and like Nietzsche you'll go mad trying to bring something to people who have neither the desire nor the capability to accept it. Press hard enough, and long enough, and they'll crucify you. Get out of the cities and if you can surround yourself with like minded people.
Caitlin is doing her part - and doing it well. You pretend she is doing nothing at all, by so clearly expressing and pointing out just how bad the narrative we have in the world is right now. And given how hard the Establishment forces are trying to silence voices like hers - her role is indeed significant and important now.
Organizing and leading people is a different kind of talent and skill. And whether she wants to pursue that in lieu of the work she is doing, is her own choice. And in fact, the only social responsibility any of us have is becoming who we are meant to be. Using our in-born talents to go where we are meant to go.
I agree with you, but your tone is accusatory and ... CONTROLLING, lol. So, why don't YOU do it? Show us what you want, and if it works, it will catch on... and remember to show it to as many people as possible. I'm ready for action, and I suspect others are, too.
The choir amplifies and repeats Caitlin's sermons to spread Her Word. That's how it works.
Explaining the pathology does change things. Specifically, it changes the minds of people who still live in darkness, i.e. belief that liberal democracy can balance the material interests of people with those of capital. So I think her kind of writing is valuable and I support it. Just cos you've moved from darkness into light doesn't mean Caitlin should stop preaching.
So that she could set up her own system of control? The reason God gave us agency is so that we can choose things for ourselves. Any attempt to exercise compulsion over others will fail. That's why Christianity lost its true power to lift us when its hierarchy started to dictate to its members.
Yes, I share a somewhat similar view. Christianity for the most part lost its power because it became more of a creed than a religion. And Christian spirituality was weighed down by official doctrine that was manipulated by the church to maintain organizational power. And the God of Christianity became more one of the dead than the living.
Well, a lot of people don't understand the dynamics of power, so it bears repeating. It could be added that while individuals and countries are obsessed with power over individuals and countries, they miss out on everything else. That accounts for the crap marriages and the crap state of the US. They are as imprisoned as those they would imprison.
I think a quest for power is inevitable, because human beings are willful animals. When they come into the world they have no power and often find that this means they are going to suffer pain and fear, to say nothing of being able to work their will either in isolation of by gaining power or influence over others. Being sort of intelligent, many of them come to recognize that they can't get all that much power over others, but can either cooperate or submit to more powerful others. But some are not intelligent enough to recognize the problem, or can't bear the terror of the possibility that they may lose.
I don't think the problem has some kind of easy, simple solution because our will and our emotions of fear and greed are deeply ingrained and it takes a considerable effort to come to terms with them. Many never do. That is why our leaders and rulers are psychopaths.
I disagree that the will to dominate others is "natural" : It only occurs in dysfunctional , mediocre people, those with no great talent or creative intelligence, because it is not satisfying emotionally, but crippling rather. It is the mark in fact of a slave mentality, and ironically, many actual slaves didn't have it: they saw it for what it is, a character flaw. It is notable that many artists fall apart when they become famous, rich and influential. Also, in more equal societies, socialist, that is, it doesn't occur. Many scientists have been cheated out of due credit, but that didn't destroy them: they were more interested in creativity than credit. How do you explain that?
It seems logical to me. A willful being comes into the world and soon finds out that there are other beings in the world that also willful and have different wills. Obviously there is a conflict and a struggle is likely to ensue. That covers about 300,000 years of human history, although of course other things were going on as well, such as instinctual or rational communities of affection. Science, socialism, and creativity are rather recent arrivals on the scene and would be unlikely to occur to hunter-gatherers in the primordial forest -- although they might learn some basic cooperation if only in the harsh school of Evolution.
I believe the natural state of everything is cooperation, not competition. We haev been brain-washed into thinking otherwise - the divide and rule principle. Read naturalist Kropotkin, - Mutual Aid; it makes much more sense than brutality as a life principle. No one would have survived to tell the tale were both the natural and social environments hostile.
I agree. But much depends on the conditions involved. Some people will play off this idea, will try to use it to their advantage. That can completely exhaust you spiritually, physically and mentally - unless you're Mother Theresa, and I find her suspect. But one person you can love is yourself, and people generally. Always do the right thing, and try to correct mistakes, then let it go: that is the extent of it, as I see it. Trying to "luv" people into doing the right thing, is also a form of control.
Love is being present in a neutral nonjudgmental compassionate state with no expectations, assumptions, or projections. It creates a safe trustworthy space. Love is something one offers and is impersonal and even non-local.
Thank you for this, Caitlin. I'm reading this as I listen to a neighbor scream (at her partner? her daughter?) But the desire for power manifests in lots of ways more nuanced that that. In the end, there's only one thing you can change and one thing you need to change--yourself. None of us are done with that journey.
First of all, fantastic writing Caitlin. I agree with most of this, but I'm still not sure the end goal for humanity and life on Earth is entirely egoless, non-dual consciousness. The ego has to have evolved for a reason. I don't think it was a mistake, and I don't think it's only humans that have them. The issue is when it's out of balance: when our egos brought us to the point of feeling entirely separate from nature and other life. I think the only way to transcend the ego is to transcend *and* include it. One can view an organism as individuated and as part of a larger whole. Including both adds to the splendor and variety of creation, and I think there are important, adaptive reasons to see ourselves as individuals in addition to members of a larger planetary consciousness.
Beautifully said. The more I make peace with the unknown and uncertainty, the more calm and centered I feel, and the kinder and more compassionate I am towards myself and others. Trying to control everyone and everything is truly pathological.
Honestly, this piece is all you need to know. What we all have in common is the desire to feel OK: Buddhust Christian, fascist dictator. Some just need a joint or JD. Some prefer to invade Poland or fry Vietnam.
This piece is the kind that can lead you out of that mess
"Gaining control over others gives us the feeling that we are making ourselves more safe and secure..." speak for yourself, Caitlin! Or are you practicing your version of The Malcolm Gladwell Style?
And you know about the amount of Xi Jinping's control exertion from which sources exactly? And how do you factor the effect of those actions on people who are Chinese?
Too funny. From a thug who would cry like a baby if President Brandon made himself ruler of America for life until he died just as Xi has done in China and Putin in Russia. Zip it you contradictory shill.
"From a thug who would cry like a baby if President Brandon..." - what on earth are you blabbering about? Try addressing the point. Concentrate. Focus. Read my questions carefully, slowly, syllable by syllable.
BTW, your steamy sexcapade vignette re Stalin/Hitler is past due now. You're still obligated to submit it but you won't receive any points.
"Where love reigns, there is no will to power; and where the will to power is paramount, love is lacking."
~Carl Jung #CW7 #Para78
This is a paperweight on Putin's desk in the Kremlin believe it or not. I know. I've seen it.
I'm thinking it's on more desks than just Putin's. You know, the mote in thy eye ...
Xi and Putin are some of the most loving human beings on the planet and the least controlling. Their eyes are huge and they have eternal mote immunity.
Let me get this straight. SOME rich people are okay and just who those okay rich people are is a matter of your mote-free subjectivity? Do I have that right?
I'm not ashamed to tell you how I feel about that. No rich people anywhere are okay. They are all evil. They should not exist and their sole purpose for existing is to make the remainder of the inhabitants of this planet miserable and ultimately I believe, their purpose and goal is to destroy this living planet entirely.
When will you stop preaching to the choir? What could go wrong has gone wrong and merely pointing out the psychological and political methods of control will not change anything. Start using your soapbox to organize events where celebrities and powerful people who agree with you can connect with those outside the choir you’ve already established credibility with.
Why are you trying to control Caitlin? Maybe she can't be everywhere at once organizing (controlling) events. Maybe she's happy doing what she's doing. I found it inspiring. I don't live in a community where attempts to organize would achieve much, but I can be more assertive and outspoken without trying to control others.
All I've seen of soap-boxing is that it makes the nightly news because it sells ads and looks good on TV screens. It hardly ever accomplishes anything real.(like the 'Nam protests of yore) All we can really control is our self and how we react to situations. Organization is a only a 1st step towards change, a small one at that. Being made aware is why I write and it so seems with Caitlin as well. Peace
Interesting take on control if it were only that easy and your defeatism is rather depressing
The only victory is over self and that is only through Christ. Christ, properly understood, frees us from life's illusions through truth and being free eliminates fear and depression. Disengaging from the world is simple to understand and easy to do, but only if it is the only thing one focuses on.
Try it and like Nietzsche you'll go mad trying to bring something to people who have neither the desire nor the capability to accept it. Press hard enough, and long enough, and they'll crucify you. Get out of the cities and if you can surround yourself with like minded people.
Caitlin is doing her part - and doing it well. You pretend she is doing nothing at all, by so clearly expressing and pointing out just how bad the narrative we have in the world is right now. And given how hard the Establishment forces are trying to silence voices like hers - her role is indeed significant and important now.
Organizing and leading people is a different kind of talent and skill. And whether she wants to pursue that in lieu of the work she is doing, is her own choice. And in fact, the only social responsibility any of us have is becoming who we are meant to be. Using our in-born talents to go where we are meant to go.
Everyone has their own path, talents and energy. Telling others what they SHOULD do is controlling.
So much pain and anger in this message. You misinterpret the power of her brevity and accuracy.
I agree with you, but your tone is accusatory and ... CONTROLLING, lol. So, why don't YOU do it? Show us what you want, and if it works, it will catch on... and remember to show it to as many people as possible. I'm ready for action, and I suspect others are, too.
The choir amplifies and repeats Caitlin's sermons to spread Her Word. That's how it works.
Explaining the pathology does change things. Specifically, it changes the minds of people who still live in darkness, i.e. belief that liberal democracy can balance the material interests of people with those of capital. So I think her kind of writing is valuable and I support it. Just cos you've moved from darkness into light doesn't mean Caitlin should stop preaching.
So that she could set up her own system of control? The reason God gave us agency is so that we can choose things for ourselves. Any attempt to exercise compulsion over others will fail. That's why Christianity lost its true power to lift us when its hierarchy started to dictate to its members.
Yes, I share a somewhat similar view. Christianity for the most part lost its power because it became more of a creed than a religion. And Christian spirituality was weighed down by official doctrine that was manipulated by the church to maintain organizational power. And the God of Christianity became more one of the dead than the living.
so many good points that its redundant to comment. The bravest lady around. Thank you
This rotten world, I at every turn deride; Foolishly looking past, this stinking pile of pride.
Great comment!
Well, a lot of people don't understand the dynamics of power, so it bears repeating. It could be added that while individuals and countries are obsessed with power over individuals and countries, they miss out on everything else. That accounts for the crap marriages and the crap state of the US. They are as imprisoned as those they would imprison.
I think a quest for power is inevitable, because human beings are willful animals. When they come into the world they have no power and often find that this means they are going to suffer pain and fear, to say nothing of being able to work their will either in isolation of by gaining power or influence over others. Being sort of intelligent, many of them come to recognize that they can't get all that much power over others, but can either cooperate or submit to more powerful others. But some are not intelligent enough to recognize the problem, or can't bear the terror of the possibility that they may lose.
I don't think the problem has some kind of easy, simple solution because our will and our emotions of fear and greed are deeply ingrained and it takes a considerable effort to come to terms with them. Many never do. That is why our leaders and rulers are psychopaths.
I disagree that the will to dominate others is "natural" : It only occurs in dysfunctional , mediocre people, those with no great talent or creative intelligence, because it is not satisfying emotionally, but crippling rather. It is the mark in fact of a slave mentality, and ironically, many actual slaves didn't have it: they saw it for what it is, a character flaw. It is notable that many artists fall apart when they become famous, rich and influential. Also, in more equal societies, socialist, that is, it doesn't occur. Many scientists have been cheated out of due credit, but that didn't destroy them: they were more interested in creativity than credit. How do you explain that?
It seems logical to me. A willful being comes into the world and soon finds out that there are other beings in the world that also willful and have different wills. Obviously there is a conflict and a struggle is likely to ensue. That covers about 300,000 years of human history, although of course other things were going on as well, such as instinctual or rational communities of affection. Science, socialism, and creativity are rather recent arrivals on the scene and would be unlikely to occur to hunter-gatherers in the primordial forest -- although they might learn some basic cooperation if only in the harsh school of Evolution.
I believe the natural state of everything is cooperation, not competition. We haev been brain-washed into thinking otherwise - the divide and rule principle. Read naturalist Kropotkin, - Mutual Aid; it makes much more sense than brutality as a life principle. No one would have survived to tell the tale were both the natural and social environments hostile.
The answer is clear. Only love can melt hearts. Love is the opposite of control. Love spreads the most positive of vibes. Love heals division.
I agree. But much depends on the conditions involved. Some people will play off this idea, will try to use it to their advantage. That can completely exhaust you spiritually, physically and mentally - unless you're Mother Theresa, and I find her suspect. But one person you can love is yourself, and people generally. Always do the right thing, and try to correct mistakes, then let it go: that is the extent of it, as I see it. Trying to "luv" people into doing the right thing, is also a form of control.
Trying to get people to do the right thing is not love. Yes, it starts with learning to love and accept oneself. Know, be, love and trust yourself.
Don't you have to get to know them to love them? Which implies some other kind of engagement.
Love is being present in a neutral nonjudgmental compassionate state with no expectations, assumptions, or projections. It creates a safe trustworthy space. Love is something one offers and is impersonal and even non-local.
Thank you for this, Caitlin. I'm reading this as I listen to a neighbor scream (at her partner? her daughter?) But the desire for power manifests in lots of ways more nuanced that that. In the end, there's only one thing you can change and one thing you need to change--yourself. None of us are done with that journey.
You are well on the path, set forth by Laozi and expounded upon by Zhuang zi.
First of all, fantastic writing Caitlin. I agree with most of this, but I'm still not sure the end goal for humanity and life on Earth is entirely egoless, non-dual consciousness. The ego has to have evolved for a reason. I don't think it was a mistake, and I don't think it's only humans that have them. The issue is when it's out of balance: when our egos brought us to the point of feeling entirely separate from nature and other life. I think the only way to transcend the ego is to transcend *and* include it. One can view an organism as individuated and as part of a larger whole. Including both adds to the splendor and variety of creation, and I think there are important, adaptive reasons to see ourselves as individuals in addition to members of a larger planetary consciousness.
Beautifully said. The more I make peace with the unknown and uncertainty, the more calm and centered I feel, and the kinder and more compassionate I am towards myself and others. Trying to control everyone and everything is truly pathological.
Honestly, this piece is all you need to know. What we all have in common is the desire to feel OK: Buddhust Christian, fascist dictator. Some just need a joint or JD. Some prefer to invade Poland or fry Vietnam.
This piece is the kind that can lead you out of that mess
"Gaining control over others gives us the feeling that we are making ourselves more safe and secure..." speak for yourself, Caitlin! Or are you practicing your version of The Malcolm Gladwell Style?
Wow, thank you. Feeling my (controlling) shoulders relax as I read this.
Brilliant analysis, CJ.
Krishnamurti exemplified this very well with his teachings and his life.
Caitlin states: “The more control you exert over your citizenry, the more likely they are to put someone else in charge at the earliest opportunity.”
If that’s true, then how do you explain the apparently successful decade-long presidency of China by Xi Jinping?
And you know about the amount of Xi Jinping's control exertion from which sources exactly? And how do you factor the effect of those actions on people who are Chinese?
Too funny. From a thug who would cry like a baby if President Brandon made himself ruler of America for life until he died just as Xi has done in China and Putin in Russia. Zip it you contradictory shill.
"From a thug who would cry like a baby if President Brandon..." - what on earth are you blabbering about? Try addressing the point. Concentrate. Focus. Read my questions carefully, slowly, syllable by syllable.
BTW, your steamy sexcapade vignette re Stalin/Hitler is past due now. You're still obligated to submit it but you won't receive any points.
What a fantastic analysis. CarryOn!