Anger, control and acceptance.

[Diana]

Thank you, Mr. Who, for bringing this up.

I agree that there are no right or wrong answers.

If one engage in a conspiracy theory or any subject that makes one angry and it enrages the one. If then this one seeks to use that anger to control the situation.

Then this one is decidedly negative.

Acceptance is key, infinite love and light.

There is another aspect of this regarding control. If a person does get angry, and in line with what Ra says, it is best to process that anger rather than put a coating of sugar over it and say "all is well"  I am not saying you do this Mr. Who, I'm just spring-boarding off your post.

Acceptance is indeed key for the STO path; but, acceptance doesn't mean you control your natural feelings. The way I see it, control is control whether it is control of self or others. Let me add that we are all who we are and that is fine; and within that concept the idea of self-honesty is valuable. Self-honesty would be acknowledging the truth about self—anger has surfaced—and then dealing with it. It is like the fight-or-flight response, wherein the body releases adrenaline for fighting or running, and if the adrenaline that has surged through the body isn't processed by one of these two actions, the result is some kind of toxicity. It's the same with mental states such as anger—it needs to be processed or it becomes toxic (stagnant waters become toxic). So some action—the mental processing Ra talks about—is what can move and transform the anger.

You can identify a conspiracy/wrongdoing (that still remains a theory, just like alot of mainstream concepts), and use it to make informed or more balanced decisions.

Yes, this is discernment.

You can also wish to share your presumed knowledge with others as a service. And even if it makes you upset, and you feel a friend is falling into a trap that you then plead with to not fall into, is that really control, or just an imbalance in attachments? Does that really make you "decidedly negative"? What kind of control are you referring to? An opposing position? How does one actually inflict control over another, or the situation, via emotion at a distance? Is there a particular example here?

I see no difference between attachment and control. If you substitute "control" for "attachment," you may get a clearer picture. Whatever information you relate, whether it be so-called fact or so-called conspiracy, just as you have used your discernment in the matter, allowing the other person discernment and not being attached to what they decide would be to let them choose for themselves—in other words, acceptance/detachment/respect for free will.

Take a fundamentalist Christian for example, who is mandated by their religion to "witness" to others. They likely do this out of desire to help others (but I also think they may do it to convince others in order to validate their own decisions). My point is that no matter how much a person thinks they are doing something from love and concern, if they have an attachment to the outcome rather than just relaying the information without expectation, then there is control involved.

... I think this message is helpful whether it concerns more debatable conspiracy theory type topics or more commonly accepted "facts" about the harshness of this world.

This is something that I have spent a great deal of time contemplating on. I spend most nights before I fall asleep thinking about the injustices in the world, and what I would do if I could choose to take control of the situation. What is right to do? To intervene and stop unquestionably evil acts, or does one accept the there is evil and do nothing. This does not seem right.

But to act out of anger is undoubtedly a path to the negative polarity. I think it is right that we do try and stand up and fight for those who cannot fight for themselves. But to try and do so out of love for those we defend and not anger against the abuser. Perhaps this mindset can be of aid when we face the dark realms of maciavellian conspiracy.

I think in some cases anger works as an instigator of change. I am thinking of activists. For example, eliminating slavery or the instituting women's vote. Changes of this kind require a massive reversal of inertia—movement where there was none. Anger being a chaotic energy still has a lot of energy. In the case of activism, it takes organization to channel the random quality of the energy for it to have a positive effect. I'm sure that people were angry about being slaves or about slavery, which was the impetus to bring about change, but it would not have happened without forming more detached and practical means to bring about change. When organization does not happen, you get something like the French Revolution where mass murdering happened, until the country organized into a more "democratic" system.

So, in the case of activism, there are uses for the initial phase of anger, but as Ra says about processing, and as the fight-or-flight response demonstrates, anger must be processed and become transformed into a more organized energy to bring about effective results.

So, in the case of worrying about the state of the world—and I get that—the randomness of the worry or anger is a dead end in my opinion (even though it is entirely understandable). Processing these feeling or taking action would transform them. Processing them is the harder of the two in my opinion, as it requires acceptance, or as I like to say, detachment. For those beings who care, such as yourself, it is difficult to witness the injustices and suffering in this world.

12.28 ▶ Questioner: Are most of these from the fourth density? What density do they come from?

Ra: I am Ra. Few there are of fourth density. The largest number of Wanderers, as you call them, are of the sixth density. The desire to serve must be distorted towards a great deal of purity of mind and what you may call foolhardiness or bravery, depending upon your distortion complex judgment. The challenge/danger of the Wanderer is that it will forget its mission, become karmically involved, and thus be swept into the maelstrom from which it had incarnated to aid the destruction.