Fukusjima

[Monica]

law of responsibility, acts in blacks or whites. it is not 'my' world.

Once it's clear what one's responsibility is, then yes.

What's not black-and-white is defining that responsibility. Real-life situations aren't black-and-white. They're complex.

law of responsibility is exactly what it is - responsibility. your actions, have consequences, and these consequences hold power over your fate. in short, you are responsible with your own fate to a great extent.

I agree with this. We are each responsible for our choices.

That's not to say anyone should judge anyone else. We might think another person made a poor choice, but we cannot really know, without being in that situation ourselves. For example, it would be wrong for me, who has a husband, to judge the choices of a poor, single mother. I can't know how her struggles might be different from my own. Or someone with no children to support, to judge someone with children. The game changes when one is responsible for others. It's much more complex, when children are involved.

"Are you completely sure that all the corporate heads are STS? " -> let me answer that :

yes.

a negative social construct or society is something that does not let anything else than entities negative enough to undo others to get to the top. this is the nature of that route.

In the conventional corporate structure, you're probably right. However, new companies are being formed, with new structures, that empower their distributors, rather than feeding the shareholders. Network marketing and direct sales companies utilize a new, cutting-edge marketing structure that largely eliminates the dog-eat-dog, back-stabbing aspect. They are based on the concept of cooperation instead of competition.

Some STS entities sometimes infiltrate these STO structures. Likewise, I'd surmise that sometimes, occasionally, some STO entities somehow manage to infiltrate the STS structures.

Hence, I'd agree that it's very difficult, and maybe even nearly impossible, but I wouldn't say it's impossible. There are exceptions.

it is impossible for any decent, honest person without any stains in his/her past, to rise in political ranks.

Rare, but not impossible.

it is a danger, a liability. a person who is clean enough can cleanse/remove most of those with shady past. such people are not supported if they attempt to rise to power, and if they succeed in it in any way, they are removed through any means possible,

Very true! Which is exactly what they tried to do with Ron Paul. He was censored.

ranging from mild measures to fake scandals or character assassinations.

Or actual bodily assassinations!

it is not too different in corporate world. you cant rise to top, if you are not reliably controllable. vice versa also holds - if you are reliably controllable, you are expected to control others reliably. so the cycle reinforces itself.

Yes, that is probably true most of the time.

In truth there is no right or wrong. There is no polarity for all will be, as you would say, reconciled at some point in your dance through the mind/body/spirit complex which you amuse yourself by distorting in various ways at this time.

that point, is not this point.

Agreed. That quote is taken out of context. In this context, this is the density of Choice. Maybe appropriate is a better term than right. What is appropriate for an STS entity, isn't appropriate for an STO entity.

long story short - attribution and references to future states and situations, does not make current situation those situations.

True. Although, having the vision of that future state, can help us draw that reality to us.