Revised question: Your country in 3D no longer exists when Earth goes 4D ?

[unity100]

but i did propose already !!!!!


i dont have anything against splitting of the thread. like a 'harvest'.

[Ali Quadir]

in my opinion, slavery, is slavery.

I agree of course, my point is only that many people will not trade luxury for freedom. We can declare ourselves freemen, I believe there's law allowing that. But it does not make our lives easier.

but there is a more important catch in this - the wealth of those wealthy in those countries are made a reality by exploitation of the countries they are taking immigrants from, both in the near history of a few centuries earlier, but also throughout this century by use of capitalist domination tools like conglomerates, monopolies, treaties. in the last few decades, exploitation of cheap manpower was also added in the form of outsourcing work to those countries.

All true..

naturally some slave who has a big tv is better off than some slave in another country who does not. however, that tv, comes through a chain of slavery and exploitation.

Yes.. It's the old, all animals are equal, yet some animals are more equal than others story... It was originally a critique on communism. But by now it goes everywhere.

Socialism usually entered those countries after this flow of wealth had started. It should be seen as an attempt by the people to get some of the wealth back...

left wing ideas have been able to stage revolutions in countries which have been exploited to extreme, like eastern europe (thousand year of worse than slavery feudal serfdom, contrary to rest of europe), or colonies, or autocratic cultures like china. even china suffered a lot at the hands of japanese invaders.

all these situations bred grudges and (rather righteous) anger in these societies. the perfect way to create psychopaths.

And these.. Kids really, while growing up decide to make a statement against society, by killing a few other slaves whom no one will ever miss... Well, no one important anyway...

there hasnt been such a major situation in the west, because, the system there offered token upwards mobility. despite the ones moving upward has been low at all times (even in modern age), the system and established elite makes these an example, and if anyone questions it, they are shown the examples of those 'who made it'. for everyone that 'makes' it, however, there are thousands who 'cant make it'. and it is also a matter of interest that, the ones who 'make it', can never make it to the very top or the top 5%, able to take their supper in paris and dinner in bahamas. actually the ones who are going upper than upper middle class are very very rare, and being let to even do it requires acceptance and acknowledgment of existing
power structure and elite already.

Yes. Symbolic politics, give people the idea they can get ahead and they'll run the treadmill so much harder. I see it in my friends. A close one, a really nice guy, who joined a major international with dreams of making it to the top is working 60 hour weeks, he doesn't make more money than I do.. The difference is they hold promotion before his eyes. And you ain't gettin' it if you don't excel... If you do excel there's just a tiny chance of moving up.. He's got good university grades too, but it's not actually buying him much.. He makes less than a self employed plumber would. That is if the plumber can work 60 hour weeks. Which they can but burnout is very real there.

And in spite of the corruption in those countries typical socialist dictators like Chavez and Castro are actually chosen again and again because they do invest in free medicine and education to the ridiculously low level that they can (or want to) afford.

chavez cannot be equated with castro at any point. in his presidency, persecution didnt happen. if im not mistaken, even the right wing part of army which staged the coup against him was not persecuted.

In those politics I agree they're different. But I was referring to broken promises....

I have a colleague who actually fled that country though. The trouble there isn't that the government is intrinsically bad, it's just very corrupt.

currently, with the 59% in favor referendum he had the last time, (authenticated by international observers), and the situation above, i dont believe there is any other government that is more democratic on the face of the planet. especially when some of the g5 member countries' elections have been under scrutiny for fraud.

Well, that colleague of mine would disagree. There's more to living in a country than having a democratically chosen leader. As I said, a lot of broken promises...

Which tends to be a great step up from the former dictators who only invested in themselves. These people don't actually have much choices politics are usually ruled by socialist rhetoric and just a little actual socialism. And you can choose from your little hut between people who basically go yachting together.

what chavez is currently doing, is beyond 'some socialism'. they are actually going on the path of northern european countries.

It's what I said, the socialist promises that are kept have significantly improved life.

unfortunately judging from the bay of pigs incident, various other attempts in cuba, and the cia-instigated coup by the now-ousted elite in venezueal, that 'may end up wanting to take it back' never fails to come to fruition.

They've become efficient at it indeed..

it is appalling that the very people who have been sucking the blood dry out of masses just 10 years ago, have gone on 'protests' against 'dictatorship', giving statements to reporters about 'freedom', just because they werent able to make money that easily anymore, and being taxed of their huge income.

And that's the bottom line, if Venezuela could get it's act together it could end up being the new Sweden. But they're not there yet. Partly because the elected are basically all the same.

They are using socialism to buy votes. You can't blame the voters. They essentially get the choice between health food and education or none of the above.

People don't tend to think long term on an empty stomach.

[unity100]

Yes. Symbolic politics, give people the idea they can get ahead and they'll run the treadmill so much harder. I see it in my friends. A close one, a really nice guy, who joined a major international with dreams of making it to the top is working 60 hour weeks, he doesn't make more money than I do.. The difference is they hold promotion before his eyes. And you ain't gettin' it if you don't excel... If you do excel there's just a tiny chance of moving up.. He's got good university grades too, but it's not actually buying him much.. He makes less than a self employed plumber would. That is if the plumber can work 60 hour weeks. Which they can but burnout is very real there.

leave that aside, my classmates have 'got to the top', getting into 10 top people in various global megacorporations, this and that, with grand figures as salaries and proably stocks, options.

what happened in the end ? they are basically now just henchmen, who has been allowed to sniff some out of the huge stash. their fate still hangs in their overlords' hands.

even when you supposedly achieve the thing the system advertises, its nowhere near being an equal with the power-holding.

In those politics I agree they're different. But I was referring to broken promises....

I have a colleague who actually fled that country though. The trouble there isn't that the government is intrinsically bad, it's just very corrupt.

Well, that colleague of mine would disagree. There's more to living in a country than having a democratically chosen leader. As I said, a lot of broken promises...

broken promises also hang around the reach a leader can afford. as i learned, he was intending to do MUCH more, yet, the intervention of usa, and the stirrings of the elite that lost the power had prevented a lot of these, and he had to - for now at least - settle with a mixed market economy, albeit much more equalized for the masses. the coup attempt against him showed how far those external sources could go.

in regard to corruption .... leave aside corruption being anywhere, due to their elitist, post-colonial governments, corruption in south american countries is beyond scale, from what i understand. chaves has been trying to handle the corruption and laggardness in police force, by instigating various measures and incentives to make them actually work and not get bribed. they say he has been successful in reducing crime.

And that's the bottom line, if Venezuela could get it's act together it could end up being the new Sweden. But they're not there yet. Partly because the elected are basically all the same.

venezuela doesnt enjoy the position of being a remote, uninteresting place for international private interests. therefore anything that has been done there, has been harder ...

[thefool]

before all of these, i believe an entity going on positive path should sit and think, that can there be 'private property' in a positive society. can there be 'profit'. can there be anything other than equal rights, sharing, equal distribution ....

Of course there will be private property on positive path. Positive path is full of riches and abundance that you share with each other but how do you share something if you don't own it. The concept of ownership may not be as tight as in 3D. Entities would be more open to let go of their stuff but yes they will possess stuff. Entities would be surely more giving of their possessions but they will surely have possessions. Do you think there would be community wardrobes if people chose to wear clothes? If nothing else you own your own body, do you think someone will come up and say I want to now use that body? What is so wrong about owning stuff that you have earned?

---

I would add that it is really a choice of the society and individual. There may be some society who completely operate with the communal principle and you will share a lot of stuff. But this is not a requirement for the positive. You may be join a society that owns stuff...

Entities in higher densities will also have different skills and specializations so are not all going to look and act the same. They will be unique in their own ways, how do you apply socialism to that?

it wont return to you. it will stop at whatever boundary universe has. universe, has a boundary.

http://www.google.com/search?q=universe+...=firefox-a

I think you are applying 3D thinking to higher dimensions. You are thinkign 4D or higher is just going to be bigger and better version of today. I am saying that it is qualitatively different.

---

that is why comparison is incorrect and irrelevant - sun can channel a limited amount of energy, but, if you give it infinite time, the energy it channels will amount to unlimited.

This is a S/T example.
I thought we were talkign about T/S being unlimited. Time/Space should have unlimited time as well. That is what concept of eternity is all about.

[unity100]

Of course there will be private property on positive path. Positive path is full of riches and abundance that you share with each other but how do you share something if you don't own it. The concept of ownership may not be as tight as in 3D. Entities would be more open to let go of their stuff but yes they will possess stuff. Entities would be surely more giving of their possessions but they will surely have possessions. Do you think there would be community wardrobes if people chose to wear clothes?

---

wow. you even use 'of course'.

so, a manifestation of orange ray blockage, the concept of 'owning' something, 'possessing' something, will be on positive path ?

it is wrong to possess people, but, it is ok to possess anything else than people, as a manifestation of orange ray blockage then ? hold on to them, be their fate's sole decider ?

yes, i actually do think that there will be community wardrobes if people chose to wear clothes. actually what is being relayed from close encounters suggest that, everyone wearing same outfits.

If nothing else you own your own body, do you think someone will come up and say I want to now use that body?

noone 'owns' their body. its an attachment until a defined time, and that body is a part of the infinite intelligence manifesting in 1-2 d on this planet. you cannot 'own' any part of intelligent infinity. leave that aside, even that attachment can be shared, and is shared, as can be seen from channeling work and similar transient spiritual phenomenon.

What is so wrong about owning stuff that you have earned?

technically everything. first, one doesnt 'earn' things. actions that change, shape the intelligent infinity manifesting as infinite energy, are just what they are - actions that change, shape infinite energy. it doesnt confer any 'rights' to anyone (it is also arguable that there is any 'right' concept existing) over them. we are just focuses, causing change in intelligent energy, just like everything else that exists.

this may be rather a higher vibration concern, however there is a much more immediate and important one :

'own'ing concept, 'mine' concept, is a apparently manifestation of orange ray. orange ray identification. a blockage. it has the same mechanic of identifying with nations, groups, concepts, but has a more negative tone. the entity 'own'ing something, brings superiority and overlordship of the owned to the manifestation of orange ray blockage.

in short it is a blockage that needs to be opened.

I would add that it is really a choice of the society and individual. There may be some society who completely operate with the communal principle and you will share a lot of stuff. But this is not a requirement for the positive. You may be join a society that owns stuff...

this may only pass as valid for early stages of 4d positive. as it progresses, and entities go towards 99% polarity - not to prepare for their harvest, but as a natural consequence of that density's nature -, they will have to get rid of all such 'own'ing concepts.

that is, if they have sufficiently cleared any kind of orange ray blockages to be able to get into 4d and evolve in 4d to that point.

Entities in higher densities will also have different skills and specializations so are not all going to look and act the same. They will be unique in their own ways, how do you apply socialism to that?

that seems to be misinformation that says socialism means 'identical'.

no such thing exists. different skills and specializations coexist, cooperating. competing instead of cooperating. that is the logic of positive multi-beingness in the first place.

only that, all the skills and specializations, will be equal, and their manifestors will have equal rights to whatever community creates, including their own creations. just like how in a group of people, maybe a tribe with no orange ray or yellow ray power and ownership distortions.

I think you are applying 3D thinking to higher dimensions. You are thinkign 4D or higher is just going to be bigger and better version of today. I am saying that it is qualitatively different.

---

i want to refer you to the point that Ra mentions existence (leave aside this octave, or its universes) have been created hierarchical, in discrete organization.

it requires limitations to be in place to manifest any kind of organization. universe, as you see, has its limits. its time/space counterpart may be much more larger, but it will also have its boundary, limit. it wont change with dimension. even if a dimension is phenomenally larger, it will still be limited with its manifestation. and that depends a lot on the central sun of that universe, i might add, as an opinion of mine.

btw, i dont even get what this '3d thinking' means. 3d of this octave is just another density, and it is bound by the same laws that govern the existence of multiple-beingness that govern it in other densities. only rations, proportions may differ.

This is a S/T example.
I thought we were talkign about T/S being unlimited. Time/Space should have unlimited time as well. That is what concept of eternity is all about.

what im saying is space/time, and time/space of this universe are limited, and proportional to each other. otherwise there would be no balance, and a single universe would exist instead of infinite universes. hence, the concepts of parallel existences, and all parallel existences of an entity merging into totality in 7d would go to dustbin, because, one universe would be infinite and encompass everything. but, there are many universes, even in this octave, according to what Ra says in the topic about multiple existences of an entity and their unification in 7d into totality.

i have at no point said that t/s was unlimited. any existing manifestation has to be limited. else, it wouldnt be able to manifest. this also includes time/space.

---

i think this 'owning' concept should be taken this way :

it is a manifestation of orange ray identification, in a negative manner. ie, 'i own this', means, you have the 'rights' to be the decided of what the fate of that object is going to be, who can do what with it, even what it can do on its own (for living entities), in short, what happens to it. so much that, it is basically like an extension of you, instead of an entity, existing. this can be smoothened by positive approaches, ie, like love, or abiding by certain rules, regulations, understandings and whatnot, but, it wont change the basic 'own'ing concept that underlies deep down.

it is a manifestation of orange ray identification, rather negatively.

lets think of an entity who is ok with 'own'ing property, things, money, even animals. but, - according to himself/herself - doesnt have such possessive problems with people. all fine and dandy ...

not.

an entity is basically a lightbulb. it will radiate the amount, nature and frequency of the energy it radiates outward, modified by its various mental biases and bodily situations. (at least for the manifesting part).

so, one entity who is acting with orange ray blockage against objects, 'own'ing them, reveling in the fact of that ownership or finding it normal a moment ago, will be the same person, radiating the same mixture of energy, when put against an individual. (3rd density entity).

only, the mental conditioning that such blockages should not be manifested against people will modify the situation somewhat. but, if this is not a mental conditioning, but a real spiritual bias, then the modification of mental conditioning will be only as effective as the strength of the conditioning.

even if the bias is not spiritual, but, a mental conditioning that is a result of this society, ie 'you need to own things', it will still cause an effect on the resulting end manifestation of entity in regard to orange ray.

ie, in short, the entity will be possessive in various degrees. this, may not surface as 'own'ing, or being possessive, but may come to surface as behavior like quarreling, arguing, dominating, this or that, depending on the general formation and emotions of the individual.

long story short, orange ray blockage is not good, and it will affect the behavior negatively, unharmoniously.

now, lets take this entity and assume he died, and going to another planet to live. either as a graduate from 3d, or, as an entity repeating it, or as a wanderer who came here and going back.

if, the orange ray blockage manifestations were induced by mental conditioning, due to this society's negative structure, when the societal biases are ripped off from the entity's mind, the entity will probably revert back to its natural spiritual stance on this, whatever it is. but, it is possible that, long durations or strong level of mental conditioning probably can affect spiritual bias, and create bias whereas there wasnt a particular one. ie, the entity may be more possessive now.

if, the orange ray blockage was stemming from entity's spiritual bias, then even if ripped off from this society's mental biases, entity will remain with that orange ray situation. actually, depending on its life experience, we can say that living on this planet may even further that bias.

so, in either case, i think this is not something good, and all entities who can, should work on those blockages in order not to keep any spiritual biases, which will follow an entity until they are balanced, wherever it goes.

[Poffo]

I wonder if it might be worthwhile to split this discussion into two threads.

carrie's original question: do you believe your country will no longer exist when Earth goes 4D?
My response is that I believe nationalism will not be relevant in 4D+.
We then got onto quite a long discussion about whether government can be a positive force, with unity100 carrying the flag for socialism as a force for good.

Looking back, I think that both my responses and u100's responses might be increasingly irrelevant to carrie's original question. Perhaps a new thread might be in order about government, nations, or economic systems as related to the Law of One.

I agree. I've seen many interesting side discussions come out of threads, but in most cases I don't feel right participating because I would be helping to deraill a thread from it's original topic.

/:idea:

[thefool]

only that, all the skills and specializations, will be equal, and their manifestors will have equal rights to whatever community creates, including their own creations. just like how in a group of people, maybe a tribe with no orange ray or yellow ray power and ownership distortions.

So are you saying that when one entity works towards getting harvested to the next density, they don't add any special abilities to themselves. It all belongs to the collective and the whole planet will harvest along with them. That does not make too much sense.

---

wow. you even use 'of course'.

Of course I do

---

noone 'owns' their body. its an attachment until a defined time, and that body is a part of the infinite intelligence manifesting in 1-2 d on this planet. you cannot 'own' any part of intelligent infinity. leave that aside, even that attachment can be shared, and is shared, as can be seen from channeling work and similar transient spiritual phenomenon.

Oh! I see. Now we are using a term called attachment instead of owning. What is the difference other than the word game? Same with ownership, you don't own things from eternity to eternity as life is fluid and changing all the time, you are only "attached" to them for a time being... There is no difference in using either word.

---

that seems to be misinformation that says socialism means 'identical'.

no such thing exists. different skills and specializations coexist, cooperating. competing instead of cooperating. that is the logic of positive multi-beingness in the first place.

only that, all the skills and specializations, will be equal, and their manifestors will have equal rights to whatever community creates, including their own creations. just like how in a group of people, maybe a tribe with no orange ray or yellow ray power and ownership distortions.

somewhere in the same thread you were saying about wearing the same uniform (gosh that would look ugly, very military like don't you think) and now here you are suggesting it does not mean identical. Wearing the same uniform is very identical to me.

Again here you are saying all the skills will be equal. That is just the value system. You will consider them as equal. So a plumber would be considered equal to the painter. But that still implies different skill sets.

So is it identical or equal? Equal I can buy but identical like in the same uniform or everybody living in the same house or same height is not very ...unique like a snoflake is...

[unity100]

So are you saying that when one entity works towards getting harvested to the next density, they don't add any special abilities to themselves. It all belongs to the collective and the whole planet will harvest along with them. That does not make too much sense.

---

what even does 'special ability' mean. in 6th density, even the male/female distinction goes away.

however lets say they do. then what ?

will some entities be allowed to have 'more', because they have 'more' special abilities than others ? or, their 'special ability' is in more demand ?

what relevance does special ability have to equality. leave aside the orange ray blockage of 'ownership' ?

Oh! I see. Now we are using a term called attachment instead of owning. What is the difference other than the word game? Same with ownership, you don't own things from eternity to eternity as life is fluid and changing all the time, you are only "attached" to them for a time being... There is no difference in using either word.

---

those two differ.

attaching a spirit to a body with a silver cord is a different matter, an entity attaching oneself to something else with an orange ray blockage is another.

its not just a 'word' play.

somewhere in the same thread you were saying about wearing the same uniform (gosh that would look ugly, very military like don't you think) and now here you are suggesting it does not mean identical. Wearing the same uniform is very identical to me.

if you are equating wearing the same uniform with entities being with identical skills, i cant even respond to that.

if you think wearing different clothes differentiates entities, i would say comment that that would be a very shallow approach to differentiation.

what matters is the entities themselves. what's expected to be beautiful than ugly, are the entities' souls.

Again here you are saying all the skills will be equal. That is just the value system. You will consider them as equal. So a plumber would be considered equal to the painter. But that still implies different skill sets.

So is it identical or equal? Equal I can buy but identical like in the same uniform or everybody living in the same house or same height is not very ...unique like a snoflake is...

two doesnt differ at all.

equal means equal in rights and amenities in the context we are discussing. NOT the differentiation of 'skill sets' (Whatever relevance that does have to this).

im under the impression that, you are trying to bring the subject to 'because everyone doesnt have different 'skill sets', the amenities/opportunities they should have should differ according to their 'skill sets'. is that correct ?

let me put it in the 'uniqueness' context :

regardless of how different you are like a snowflake, than another person in your society, you would get exactly the same salary in a positive society. (if we put it in crude terms of this planet).

[thefool]

im under the impression that, you are trying to bring the subject to 'because everyone doesnt have different 'skill sets', the amenities/opportunities they should have should differ according to their 'skill sets'. is that correct ?

You are partially right. I am trying to boil the subject down to a few key differences. As now we seem to start to recycle previously discussed stuff.

But you did not get the question correct.

First of all there is no 'should' here. Who is to decide what they should and what they should not. That is again a government mentality, that someone higher than you will write the rules and tell you what you should an should not do.

I am trying to point is that you are painting a world where all are equal and same. I am showing that they can be different but still considered equal. You seem to using equal and same interchangeably, highlighted by the example of everyone wearing the same clothes. And may be they will live in the similar looking houses. They will receive exactly the same things in order to be equal in your definition. There is so much emphasis to be equal. But entities are already equal, it is your judgment that makes then unequal. They are on an evolution path and differentiating themselves by their biases. So someone may have to bias to live in a big house and another wants to experience being poor. But your socialist system would decide for them and give them all same sized houses. The choice is taken away from the people and a ruling group takes over. Now you say everyone will rule equally and but I say yea, they might and due to their differences in their nature and biases they will come up with different ideas. For your socialist system to work they all need to come up with exactly the same thing to do. They need to live exactly the same way.

---

let me put it in the 'uniqueness' context :

regardless of how different you are like a snowflake, than another person in your society, you would get exactly the same salary in a positive society. (if we put it in crude terms of this planet).

I thought in your system money would not (or rather should not) exist. So what salary you are talking about even if speaking crudely. Why should they receive same salary anyway? what if they have different needs? One person has 5 kids and another is just a bachelor. One person wears same clothes everyday and another wants to wear different clothes everyday. Will you stop them from being who they want to be, stop them from working harder and earn more if they want to live differently. And create extensive regulatory framework to stop people from doing things differently. Who will decide what and how much they should consume. Why can not we leave the decision with them and let them decide how much they want to earn. Your system will take choices away from the people (intentionally or unintentionally) and we have seen this over and over again in various practical situations on planet earth.

[Questioner]

Would it be acceptable for me to start a new thread called "Socialism of 4D," so we can migrate the discussion there?

[unity100]

You are partially right. I am trying to boil the subject down to a few key differences. As now we seem to start to recycle previously discussed stuff.

But you did not get the question correct.

First of all there is no 'should' here. Who is to decide what they should and what they should not. That is again a government mentality, that someone higher than you will write the rules and tell you what you should an should not do.

there are 'should's here, actually, and everywhere.

there is the 51% positive emission requirement for harvest to 4d for example. it doesnt matter what do you think about 'should's and 'should not's, one wont be able to graduate into 4d unless s/he fulfills that condition.

and this is not just something that flies in the air, like 'oh, i love you all, 51% !!!'. actions need to follow the intent.

this is precisely a 'government' mentality, albeit the government is all of the people in the society at all times, directly. after all, it is going to be a society complex in which even memories are shared, leave aside current emotions and energies.

what you call 'government' is just a social construct made up of people. its demonization, abstractization, is a product of the ideology that sees it as a threat to its aims. ironically, the same ideology that does that, doesnt at all villify the concept of a corporation, a social construct in which no trace of free will or democracy exists, except outside totally leaving it, and even despite many corporations are much larger than sizeable countries, and powerful.

that example detail aside, there will be organization and decision making anytime, anywhere there is more than one entity. its inevitable.

I am trying to point is that you are painting a world where all are equal and same. I am showing that they can be different but still considered equal. You seem to using equal and same interchangeably, highlighted by the example of everyone wearing the same clothes. And may be they will live in the similar looking houses. They will receive exactly the same things in order to be equal in your definition. There is so much emphasis to be equal.

first of all, it is your own conclusion that i am advocating for everything being the same. there is no relevance in between 'same' and 'equal' in socialism. or, positive societal complexes.

wearing same clothes is interchangeable with equal indeed. for some reason, you seem to lack the approach to differentiate in between spirit, and possessions. basically, you think wearing different clothes, makes people different ? or, living in different houses ?

its the spirit that matters. not the rag of cloth you are wearing on top of your hominoid body. the moment a truck hits someone, the rag stays behind, and what is left is the spirit, own self. one carries its difference, uniqueness in the only indispensable thing there is in his being ; soul. not the cloth.

and if an entity is not radiating its own character, its own uniqueness enough without the help of clothes, house, hats, this, and that, it very probably means, that entity is not even ready for harvest.

But entities are already equal, it is your judgment that makes then unequal. They are on an evolution path and differentiating themselves by their biases. So someone may have to bias to live in a big house and another wants to experience being poor. But your socialist system would decide for them and give them all same sized houses. The choice is taken away from the people and a ruling group takes over. Now you say everyone will rule equally and but I say yea, they might and due to their differences in their nature and biases they will come up with different ideas. For your socialist system to work they all need to come up with exactly the same thing to do. They need to live exactly the same way.

polarity biases are created in 3rd d.

aggrandizement of self, possessing, possessions, power, being elite, separate, higher than others, materialism, all the accompanying things are of negative polarization.

compassion, sharing, cooperating, being-together, spirituality and similar are of the path of positive.

all the experiences of being rich, poor, this that and such, pertain to 3d, and its catalysts for choosing a polarity. once the polarity is chosen and harvest is done, 4d work starts.

it is appalling that, you are thinking that these possessive, 'worldly' concerns of 'being different' and possessions and whatnot would be carried into 4d positive.

an entity which is harvestable to 4d positive, would probably care less about being 'different' or living the same way without others or not. it would be positivity, being of service to others that would matter, to the point of even being too impatient during meals because of stopping service during meal, (and therefore meals, intake of foods being a catalyst, a lesson for patience, according to what Ra tells us) leave aside concerning about whether they are different, or they wear different clothing, or how big is their house that they live in.

But your socialist system would decide for them and give them all same sized houses. The choice is taken away from the people and a ruling group takes over. Now you say everyone will rule equally and but I say yea, they might and due to their differences in their nature and biases they will come up with different ideas. For your socialist system to work they all need to come up with exactly the same thing to do. They need to live exactly the same way.

choice of bells and whistles ? jewelry, possessions, houses, like in 3d ?

the concerns of a positive 4d society would be how could they be of service to each other, and other planets, before anything else. i very much think that, these concerns about 'personal preferences of possessions and houses and clothes' would even rank in their agenda, or they would care.

after all, the very requirement for graduation into 4th is 51% minimum positive polarity. one's thoughts, should be concerned with others more than they are concerned with self.

yet, all the arguments you are making here, is about one's own self. its not even about wisdom, ie, youre not saying that someone may be claustrophobic, and therefore needing a bigger house, and such and such. you are saying that they may be 'preferring' to live in a big house.

I thought in your system money would not (or rather should not) exist. So what salary you are talking about even if speaking crudely. Why should they receive same salary anyway? what if they have different needs? One person has 5 kids and another is just a bachelor.

i have given salary as a parallel example to this world.

one person having '5 kids' and other being a bachelor would change what ? all the entities that exist in the society, would be taken care of equally. entity with 5 kids doesnt need to 'earn' money to feed his kids.

One person wears same clothes everyday and another wants to wear different clothes everyday. Will you stop them from being who they want to be, stop them from working harder and earn more if they want to live differently.

if that person wants to wear different clothes everyday, and this is how he wants to be, if this is how he can be, you can be sure that he wont be in 4d positive for a long time yet. so, this is a non-point.

And create extensive regulatory framework to stop people from doing things differently. Who will decide what and how much they should consume. Why can not we leave the decision with them and let them decide how much they want to earn. Your system will take choices away from the people (intentionally or unintentionally) and we have seen this over and over again in various practical situations on planet earth.

i dont think you still grasped the implications of 51% positive polarity, 51% thinking others than self concept. you are talking as if these are things hanging in air, abstract, something in thought world, ie, far away.

a person who has 51% positive polarity, would be harmonizing with all the other 51%+ positive polarity entities in its society. what we discuss here, doesnt even apply in their cases. they would come to a consensus and start abiding by the rules they collectively created more than we could say 'regulation'. this is what positive polarity means. caring more about others, and harmony.

'i want to have a big house', 'i want to wear different clothes everyday', 'i want to earn this much', with all due respect, are things that belong to those who havent grown over those concerns yet, spiritually.

a path that has 99% or more radiation of one's OWN SELF without expecting anything in return, regardless of what happens, and you are incorporating these possessive concepts into it ....

---

as i said before, i have no objection to that.

Would it be acceptable for me to start a new thread called "Socialism of 4D," so we can migrate the discussion there?

[Crimson]

It seems to me that what we should be aware that we will be dealing with a very fresh and the very beginning of 4th +. That entails probably not a extreme difference from very late 3d in terms of technology. But since the negative influences and entities would be gone a this point, it enables the 4th + to build a real "socialism".

Many times I thought that Marx in the very beginning and other thinkers/revolutionaries in the late 20th century, laid a foundation for things to come. I understand that many of these ideas/ideals were corrupted and connotations and denotations perverted by the never ending "controlled opposition" which like racism for example, can be conscious/aware or not so aware and that it includes certain elites on the so called "communist" countries/former.

Look what happened to Yugoslavia. Very sad case for trying to be out of the elite "matrix".

At least in this planet under current circumstances you cannot have a "socialist" society. We'll have to wait for 4d+. And at the beginning, it would be hard...But let's not be afraid.

[unity100]

there is very important, another point in regard to what you mentioned, crimson.

socialism and its ideals were brought at a time of extensive class society, and extreme elitism, and exploitation. not only that, but all that even spoke about it were repressed so brutally, just as the people being exploited were repressed and were expected to always remain subdued for thousands of years. (ideals took hold in those parts of the society, naturally anyways).

leaving aside the grudge, anger that thousands of years old repression left in place, there was also the new repression due to they daring demand equality and equal rights. more salt to the wound.

it is only natural that, in such a negative environment of repression, there was lack of emotion, compassion, leave aside love.

these were what was lacking in early socialism. there was no place for emotion. in addition, emotions were being exploited by various religious organizations, and, the romantic era literature, which was being strongly supported by the re-instituted monarchies of europe to direct nationalist sentiments to support monarchies anyway. so, there was no room for emotion.

had the repression and elite not been there, this world would be quite a different place by now.

[Crimson]

there is very important, another point in regard to what you mentioned, crimson.

socialism and its ideals were brought at a time of extensive class society, and extreme elitism, and exploitation. not only that, but all that even spoke about it were repressed so brutally, just as the people being exploited were repressed and were expected to always remain subdued for thousands of years. (ideals took hold in those parts of the society, naturally anyways).

leaving aside the grudge, anger that thousands of years old repression left in place, there was also the new repression due to they daring demand equality and equal rights. more salt to the wound.

it is only natural that, in such a negative environment of repression, there was lack of emotion, compassion, leave aside love.

these were what was lacking in early socialism. there was no place for emotion. in addition, emotions were being exploited by various religious organizations, and, the romantic era literature, which was being strongly supported by the re-instituted monarchies of europe to direct nationalist sentiments to support monarchies anyway. so, there was no room for emotion.

had the repression and elite not been there, this world would be quite a different place by now.

Yes very insightful..
If you please take a look at this quote form Ra:

65.7 Questioner: How would conventional warfare offer the opportunities for seeking and service?

Ra: I am Ra. The possibility/probabilities exist for situations in which great portions of your continent and the globe in general might be involved in the type of warfare which you might liken to guerrilla warfare. The ideal of freedom from the so-called invading force of either the controlled fascism or the equally controlled social common ownership of all things would stimulate great quantities of contemplation upon the great polarization implicit in the contrast between freedom and control. In this scenario which is being considered at this time/space nexus the idea of obliterating valuable sites and personnel would not be considered an useful one. Other weapons would be used which do not destroy as your nuclear arms would. In this on-going struggle the light of freedom would burn within the mind/body/spirit complexes capable of such polarization. Lacking the opportunity for overt expression of the love of freedom, the seeking for inner knowledge would take root aided by those of the Brothers and Sisters of Sorrow which remember their calling upon this sphere.

If my interpretation is correct it goes with what you said. But these could also be taking out of context because it does not mean that this will occur, so I recommend to read this section from The Ra Material to minimize the out of context possibility.

[Questioner]

May I invite the socialism discussion to move to the thread "Socialism of 4D?"

[thefool]

At least in this planet under current circumstances you cannot have a "socialist" society.

I am fine with that. That is what I believe as well. It is not practical due to distortions toward power on 3D Earth.

To add to it- I think it will be more like entities freely sharing their fruits of labor just like a tree shares it fruits. But before anyone partake of it, tree owns the fruits (rather a caretaker of it in the meanwhile if someone does not like the connotations with owning)...

We also have to look at the natural world to see how they use the resources. In a forest there are many different tree and each have their own unique flavors and abilities. In order for them to be their best Mango tree or an apple tree they need different resources and may consume differently. Some will grow to be really tall and some would grow to be very short. This is just the order of the things. They will have their fruits and share them freely. But you can not expect them all to be the same size and shape and neither expect them to consume the same resources...

Also we know that there is an individual component in all this. If someone does the right thing and get aligned etc they get harvested on an individual level. It is not like their whole society gets harvested due to their efforts. it is not collective harvesting, it is individual harvesting and we know that.

That is just my opinion... (I will go more on a listening mode now as I have expressed what needed to be expressed)

---

if that person wants to wear different clothes everyday, and this is how he wants to be, if this is how he can be, you can be sure that he wont be in 4d positive for a long time yet. so, this is a non-point.

I thought we had already settled this. We had already said that 4D socialism is possible with service oriented people becoming part of the government and hence no corruption.

This whole discussion is for 3D socialism which I said is impractical and you said quite possible.

So please do not muddle up the discussion by mixing these streams. Please go back and read again what we have already covered.

Besides If we really are not concerend about what people wear then why are we trying to make them wear the same thing. Let them BE. It really does not matter...Even looking at abundance negatively is an attachment no less...

[unity100]

i replied in the other thread.

[Namaste]

Nationalism/patriotism is founded upon separation (and hence fear); a product of the 3rd density veil. Those caught in these ways of thinking are usually unknowingly offering considerable judgement of other selves.

Post veil, the location of incarnation will be of negligible import, as all are seen as one.

Those with an open heart are (usually unknowingly) piercing the veil and already seeing all as our brothers and sisters.

[irpsit]

I don't think nations matter that much in 4D
Individuals probably value diversity, sharing and unity.

We can also start doing that in our multi-ethnic societies and groups :-)