09-25-2010, 10:53 AM
Does anyone have this feeling where the country you live in, or concept of country, no longer exists anymore in forth density?
As of Friday, August 5th, 2022, the Bring4th forums on this page have been converted to a permanent read-only archive. If you would like to continue your journey with Bring4th, the new forums are now at https://discourse.bring4th.org.
You are invited to enjoy many years worth of forum messages brought forth by our community of seekers. The site search feature remains available to discover topics of interest. (July 22, 2022)
x
09-25-2010, 10:53 AM
Does anyone have this feeling where the country you live in, or concept of country, no longer exists anymore in forth density?
09-25-2010, 11:00 AM
For what its worth, I don't think the concept of a country or a nation is needed or used in 4th density. So, in my opinion, I don't think the country I live in ever existed in 4th density. Or maybe it exists in a way compatible with 4th density in that it's no longer what we think of now as a country.
You pose a very interesting question though!
09-25-2010, 11:36 AM
These are my own personal opinions. There's no channeled divine source for my interpretations. I hope you enjoy them and find them useful. If not, just replace them with whatever ideas you like better.
I think most national concepts will be irrelevant in a positive 4D world. Let me make a comparison to technology. Centuries ago, a blacksmith could make horseshoes. A navigator could use an astrolabe. To move the most cargo you raise the sails. Today it is still possible to get horseshoes, astrolabes, and sails. But they are mostly irrelevant for those original purposes. Today humanity is more likely to move cargo in container ships or railroads, to find a position using GPS, to cross town in a car or subway. Some people use antique craftsmanship of blacksmithing and sailing ships. It is just for the joy of working with their hands. The traditions are carried on. Today's transportation economy no longer depends on the supply of horseshoes. But you can become an apprentice blacksmith and learn to make horseshoes by hand, if you like. I think a 4D world will see today's nations in the same way. A few valuable antiques, some very nice traditions, and a lot of old junk. The modern nation-state is a human invention of the last few hundred years. Look at what it is supposed to do, that justifies its existence. Protect people from outside aggression. Maintain safety and order. Establish rules and standards. Take away from those who have too much and give to those who need more. A positive 4D world of ascended humans would not need to rely on the old institutions for these purposes. Just like we still need to move cargo, but have more efficient systems than sailing ships. Meanwhile the hidden purposes of nations, to serve bankers, royal families, hidden elites, to put arrogant self-serving vicious manipulators on top of the pyramid, will collapse. These also have no value in a positive 4D world. I think we will still enjoy some of the traditions, history and positive ideas associated with nations. The Library of Congress might remain the world's best depository of ideas, by voluntary agreement of people around the world. Geneva might still be a center for independent federations to agree on diplomacy and store gold. People still might like to visit Peru to visit the Incas. People who live in Perus may still want to call the place Peru and continue their excellent food, music, clothes, dances etc. under their own self-direction. Will they still want all their same government institutions they have today? Maybe not. Since "national security" concepts won't matter any more, regions, states and cities might split off to a size that is more manageable. Boundaries might get redrawn based on shared geography or culture, not on what invaders and colonizers decided abstractly a century ago. Hawaii might choose to be its own nation again. Same with Quebec. Tibet and Taiwan would definitely choose to have their own leadership. There might also be mergers. Perhaps people in Australia and New Zealand would prefer a unified nation that includes a continent and several islands. All of these choices will be local, not coerced with any more sanctions or "peacekeeping" violence. The U.N. as an institution will become irrelevant, its NYC headquarters subdivided for condos.
09-26-2010, 12:25 PM
09-26-2010, 05:26 PM
Thanks for the one line summary of my whole essay, Fool. I should hire you as my editor.
09-26-2010, 11:12 PM
I think the system in positive 4d (And onwards) societies will be socialist, or socialist like. with, direct democracy instead of representative democracy.
09-27-2010, 12:43 AM
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind.~Albert Einstein
There is no need for countries now. I am considering getting a "Citizen of the World" passport. Google it; it is real. Democracy? Two wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner.. is a democracy. 4D will most definitely not be that.
09-27-2010, 02:33 PM
positive path, is democracy.
where everyone respects each others' feelings and desires and opinions, and everyone has a voice, an equal voice. if everyone is acting as such, then anything that is decided as a result of such a situation, becomes a vote, even if done psychically. the difference is, this planet's democracies are 'representative'. and up until recently, the size of the society was too big to have direct democracy, in which everyone participated in each decision that is made. internet, is changing that, despite resistance. if one looks from the perspective of telephatic, no secrets 4d positive society, s/he can easily notice that this situation would surpass even the effect of internet in regard to direct participation, even to the point of making even everyday acts a collective, participative process. if, you subtract the concepts of 'ownership, competition, profit' etc from the picture, which are the results of orange ray blockages and negative societal patterns, you end up with socialism.
09-27-2010, 07:26 PM
I would argue that the positive path would look more like anarchy than democracy. By anarchy I do not mean the usual negative version of "every man for himself" but rather the pure form of anarchy where everyone is of the same mind and every action is naturally harmonious. A vote is not necessary. This decentralized approach solves the problem of determining how to come up with a proposal that needs to be voted on. Here there is no voting, any idea or proposal that someone decides is worth doing will by definition meet the acceptance of the whole.
Now, it may be that this idea is still a bad one, and perhaps a higher-D council like the Council of Guardians may oversee or impose constraints to protect a society from itself.
09-27-2010, 08:39 PM
A lot to think about here.
-First you have to imagine a planet wherein everybody thinks about others more than self. -Second, you have to imagine no veil. -Third, you have to imagine a different physical body makeup. I think you could live off the fruit that falls from the trees. I think there could be rainbow bridges. Definitly no borders, only bridges. What do you (we) want it to be?
09-28-2010, 02:36 AM
(09-27-2010, 07:26 PM)Etude in B Minor Wrote: I would argue that the positive path would look more like anarchy than democracy. By anarchy I do not mean the usual negative version of "every man for himself" but rather the pure form of anarchy where everyone is of the same mind and every action is naturally harmonious. A vote is not necessary. This decentralized approach solves the problem of determining how to come up with a proposal that needs to be voted on. Here there is no voting, any idea or proposal that someone decides is worth doing will by definition meet the acceptance of the whole. decentralization would be the opposite of what would happen in a society that is melding their minds and experiences. it would be more like a hive mind, constituted by all the entities which make up the hive. especially when entities are aware of others' thoughts and feelings and are sensitive and respectful to them. that's totally the opposite of 'decentralization'. which, naturally ends up as a democracy inside, since everyone's opinion will have direct effect on what the hive thinks, and any decision undertaken by hive would be result of everyone's opinion, directly.
09-28-2010, 10:45 AM
u100 may I introduce a word that I feel more accurately symbolizes what you describe? I feel that consensus, rather than democracy, may be a better word for the harmony of a positive-path social memory complex.
Democracy involves no action without majority agreement. It does insist on representation. But it also involves enforcement of majority choices on dissenting minorities. Consensus means that ALL agree to proceed together, free of reservations. A minority who are not entirely comfortable and harmonious are respected in consensus. They have the right to prevent the group action. In democracy, a minority's concerns are forced aside. I like the question that is asked by every Quaker clerk before officially documenting their group's decision: "Are all hearts clear?" If there is even ONE "no" then there is no consensus, and the majority does not rule over the dissenter.
09-28-2010, 11:36 AM
This is the revised question:
Does anyone have that feeling that the country you live in, will no longer exist when Earth turns 4th Density?
09-28-2010, 11:52 AM
The experiences I had were not anything like voting, there was no process. I remember the decision to come here, it was made for me. It did not feel like others making decisions for me... It just felt like the best idea we had.
It simply feels like your own intention and desire, your own decision making process. You do not disagree with it. If there is disagreement this is felt as doubt in the whole organism. I would not call this centralization or decentralization, both words don't apply.. From my experience the hive mind is a correct analogy. Humans are a little different though. They have a very strong sense of self. I doubt that will just cease to be. I'd consider that a waste. I don't quite understand how that sense of self will interact with the "hive mind" or 4d brain... Perhaps it'll be completely synchronized. But 4d and individual sound like a paradox to me.
09-28-2010, 12:30 PM
I believe it will no longer exist as a country.
09-28-2010, 05:08 PM
I'd say no as well. If we're ever going to get past the illusion of separation, surely the old ideas of nations (which inevitably turns to nation against nation) must be abandoned to 3D where it makes some kind of sense.
09-28-2010, 06:55 PM
I don't like the idea of a hive mind. I don't see the point of such.
I have often thought about what it would be to merge one's consciousness with others, and I realized that it might be better to turn it around. Instead you could think about what it would be like if YOU could be in many places at once, and conscious of everything. That would be cool, and I don't think it would be like a hive mind. I guess I just wasn't an ant during early 2D...
09-28-2010, 06:59 PM
As I understand it there is a 3D Earth and a 4D Earth. Why would they be the same at all, let alone have the same countries? Even 3D Earth doesn't have the same countries as it did just 10,000 years ago (or even 100 years ago in some cases). I recall that Ra said that 4D Earth would have rivers and mountains, but that's about all he said from what I remember. Other sources suggest that 4D Earth will be much larger than 3D Earth, and I would expect that it would have additional features due to the higher complexity of the light energy available.
09-29-2010, 09:22 AM
Plus the ability to manfiest things such as our own perfect bodies and what we want/need around us in order to help us in STO activities, will be infinitely more pronounced.
09-29-2010, 06:21 PM
(09-28-2010, 10:45 AM)Questioner Wrote: u100 may I introduce a word that I feel more accurately symbolizes what you describe? I feel that consensus, rather than democracy, may be a better word for the harmony of a positive-path social memory complex. this brings up an interesting point. as per Ra, society complexes/totalities may decide that a wanderer has to go and complete a lesson that is not well learned. it is not only the entity itself that is taking this decision, society complex, totality comes into play. it implies majority will over individual in a sense. the choices for the entity that is not comfortable with such a situation would be to either accept the outcome as a part of the complex, or, get separated from the complex as an individual, and join another one, or go along alone (if 5d). i think the latter doesnt happen much.
09-29-2010, 08:51 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-29-2010, 08:52 PM by Questioner.)
I admit my response is just speculation and inference. I don't have any conscious memories of communicating with other merged social memory complex members, and there's not much information about SMC mechanics from Ra.
With those disclaimers said, everything I have read about spiritual unity in higher STO dimensions/densities and SMC's leads me to suspect that there is no need for the group to force the issue, in the way human teams have to "lay down the law." I have seen other channeled sources claim that even with universal telepathy between members, there is always mutual respect and the ability to have one's own pondering or experience that is not ready to be shared. I've also seen discussions of soul groups that work together between incarnations to assist in each other's life reviews and plans, with some members incarnate and others as spirit guides for those members. It feels right to me that higher unity of love and harmony would not require any kind of begruding or enforced acceptance of group will. Nor can I say that the idea of "conform or be exiled" resonates with me as a likely technique beyond our human limitations. All of this is just my own opinion, of course. It's the best I've been able to come up with so far, based on what I've learned thus far. I believe that some human groups, such as the Quakers, are spiritually inspired by higher levels of guidance about how people can work together, even in 3D limitations. The Clerk's question is based on this promise: if members of the group are connected to the same Divine Inner Light, then that light will not lead them into conflict with each other.
09-29-2010, 09:41 PM
the mere 'service to others' or 'positive path' concept, ie, minding others more than yourself, itself alone creates the hive mind. there wouldnt be the need to 'lay down the law' because the entity would be accepting the overall thought/emotion judgment of the complex it belongs to, automatically. therefore, individual accepting the collective consensus would be automatic.
this is probably the underlying reason that there isnt conflict in positive oriented groups. this is much more democratic and acceptable than an 'divine inner light' 'guiding' them not to conflict with each other. everything aside an 'inner divine light' preventing conflicts sounds more like 'laying down the law' than anything else itself.
09-30-2010, 01:10 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-30-2010, 01:15 AM by Questioner.)
I agree entirely with what you say here, up until the reservations about Quaker spirituality.
Perhaps you might not be familiar with Quaker sources such as George Fox, William Penn, Elias Hicks, and John Punshon. If not, I would invite you to explore what they have to say. I have found much of their material speaks to my condition. I believe it would be a disservice to them, if my abbreviated mention in passing led to negative conclusions not warranted by the source material. Perhaps you are already familiar with what they have to say. If so, perhaps you might like to help me compare Quaker traditions to the Law of One. I would find it quite interesting and valuable in my own spiritual journey to make such a comparison. I imagine that your incisive capacity to note contrasts might bring them to the surface for further reflection.
10-01-2010, 10:32 AM
I find it a little hard to visualize 4D entities stuffing the ballot boxes exercising democracy...( you have to have winners and losers in any race)
I also find it a little hard to visualize God as a socialist. if that were the case then all the flowers would be of the same color. There would not be any high mountains. All the birds would also look the same. But we see that no two trees are alike and no two leaves are the same not even two snow flakes are ever the same. The uniqueness and individuality is just built into the very core of this octave... I find it more like entities living what comes to them as their highest joy in the moment and the collective just makes sense due to the inherent synchronicity in the universe. I would not call it anarchy but there is essentially no external entity(ies) governing others. The entities are self governing. There may be support roles available to people but they are done in the spirit of service and not in the sense of directing others...
10-01-2010, 10:55 AM
(10-01-2010, 10:32 AM)thefool Wrote: I find it a little hard to visualize 4D entities stuffing the ballot boxes exercising democracy...( you have to have winners and losers in any race) you are forgetting the concepts of direct democracy, and telepathy then. every action regarding the society being decided directly by participation of all members of the society. direct democracy. the tool for that being telepathy, and there being no 'ballot boxes' or propaganda or candidates or winners. Quote:I also find it a little hard to visualize God as a socialist. if that were the case then all the flowers would be of the same color. There would not be any high mountains. All the birds would also look the same. equality != indifference. all flowers that are manifesting in the same vibration are of equal status. they are not slighted in any way. all have access to same amount of energy if they are submitted to the same amount of sun. the logos doesnt discriminate. similarly all humans that are manifesting in the same vibration should have been of equal status and equal rights to everything. actually, from the perspective of logos, they do. if they are submitted to the same sun, they get the same amount of spiritual inflows, only modified by their own preferences and prejudices. yes, 'god', aka logos, is beyond socialist indeed. you cant get anything more, or anything less than those of your level, and you have rights to everything that everyone else has, in the same manner and amount. you may or may not use them, you may condition yourself with dogmas and shun them etc etc. these are choices. Quote:I find it more like entities living what comes to them as their highest joy in the moment and the collective just makes sense due to the inherent synchronicity in the universe. I would not call it anarchy but there is essentially no external entity(ies) governing others. The entities are self governing. There may be support roles available to people but they are done in the spirit of service and not in the sense of directing others... entities making their decisions in the highest joy of the moment due to 'synchronicity' in the universe ? well, you have put synchronicity there, and therefore, you made it a collective decision, a process in the first place. one can self govern, only when there are no other entities that it has to exist with, or in relation with.
10-01-2010, 11:36 AM
(10-01-2010, 10:55 AM)unity100 Wrote: entities making their decisions in the highest joy of the moment due to 'synchronicity' in the universe ? Not due to Synchronicity. But the individual actions of each just come together making sense when viewed in totality. for ex: Each tree grows on its own, using the resources available to it (BTW these resources like sun light and water may not be available to them equally). A bunch of trees, shrubs and other natural entities just growing on their own following the rules of the nature and a beautiful forest emerges and sustained...I find it hard to visualize that they are congregating and talking telepathically to make this happen. (hey let's vote on who would grow in the rough area of the forest!!!) This just happens without any planning or direct democracy. Direct democracy sound more like a 3D Utopian concept to me...
10-01-2010, 12:05 PM
(10-01-2010, 10:32 AM)thefool Wrote: I would not call it anarchy but there is essentially no external entity(ies) governing others. The entities are self governing. There may be support roles available to people but they are done in the spirit of service and not in the sense of directing others... I really like your picturesque comments about ballots and birds. Your comments perfectly match my own understanding of 4D+ and beyond. I don't think I have a Law of One citation available here. It simply feels right to me that our human concepts of "begrudging acceptance of one's duty" or "abiding by the majority vote" will have no relevance on the other side of the veil.
10-01-2010, 12:32 PM
(10-01-2010, 11:36 AM)thefool Wrote: Not due to Synchronicity. But the individual actions of each just come together making sense when viewed in totality. and what is 'synchronicity' ... tree grows on its own ? using 'resources' available to it ? are you forgeting that the 'resources' it is using, are also intelligent energy, in 1d, and they all contain and maintain the biases, preferences, characters, nature that they are going to eventually start manifesting and discovering starting from 2d ? are you aware that the sun which shines to give the catalyzing energy, is a local node of intelligent logos that sends intelligent energy towards that tree ? are you forgetting that the amount of carbon dioxide that that tree takes in, depends on innumerable factors from outside, to the extent that if for any reason, co2 producing species feel less reproductive, and do not reproduce as much, there wont be as many co2 abundant in atmosphere ? or, if another species chooses to kill another species for any purpose, and therefore changes the composition of atmosphere, biosphere through that or their other actions, inclinations, preferences ? with all those actions being a cumulative result of their collective ? ................. when put in the same conditions, all trees receive the same amount of resources. that is, unless trees invent a conditioning/bias that says some of them are elite or have more rights to receiving more of those resources. moreover, the resource inflow would automatically be divided equally. therefore, mechanics of nature, are, apparently socialist. ............ direct democracy is a 3d utopia indeed. an 3d utopia, because, it is an utopia in 3d, hard to attain with high numbers of people. yet, advent of internet and electronics seems to say that even in 3d utopia, direct democracy would be possible, leave aside a telephatic 4d society. (10-01-2010, 12:32 PM)unity100 Wrote: when put in the same conditions, all trees receive the same amount of resources. that is, unless trees invent a conditioning/bias that says some of them are elite or have more rights to receiving more of those resources. moreover, the resource inflow would automatically be divided equally. therefore, mechanics of nature, are, apparently socialist.Really!!! Lots of 'when' and 'unless'; similar to lot to ifs and buts... (10-01-2010, 12:32 PM)unity100 Wrote: it is an utopia in 3d, hard to attain with high numbers of people.That we can agree upon...
10-01-2010, 01:33 PM
(10-01-2010, 01:11 PM)thefool Wrote:(10-01-2010, 12:32 PM)unity100 Wrote: when put in the same conditions, all trees receive the same amount of resources. that is, unless trees invent a conditioning/bias that says some of them are elite or have more rights to receiving more of those resources. moreover, the resource inflow would automatically be divided equally. therefore, mechanics of nature, are, apparently socialist.Really!!! all of them being valid .... just transplant 'trees' with 'hominoid monkeys', and then you can see what creates the difference in between an equal society, and an elitist one - 3d conditionings and biases. the 'unless' there, was meant to signify the differentiation in between 2d entities and above that do not have societal conditionings to inequality, and those who do. actually such biases and behavior forms exist even in 2d. starting with herd hierarchies, only the conditionings/biases, societal values of any given society, herd change the equality situation into one of inequality. so much that, behavior differences (ie, some of which can be called primitive, basic societal values) can be observed among different groups of advanced 2d species, living isolated, separate from each other. |
|