Category: Teachings

May 25, 2014

Question Five

When seekers learn about the left hand path and the Dark Brothers they instinctively assume that they are not a part of that direction. And why do they assume this?

Because their intentions are good. Not only this but they want all kinds of good things – like world peace, eliminate poverty, equal rights, sharing wealth, do away with weapons of mass destruction, increase the level of education, increase human rights to name a few. Surely this seeker with such good values couldn’t be one the bad guys side, could he?

Don’t be so sure.

If a hundred randomly selected people were to meet a representative of a the Dark Brothers and talk with him over coffee, a good ninety of them would go away thinking the guy was a nice guy with good intentions and ideas. They wouldn’t have a clue as to what his true intentions were or where they would take us.

A small handful would sense that thee was something off in the guy and pay a lot of attention to the exact wording that comes out of his mouth. These would read between the lines and see that something was amiss.

If you meet a supporter of the dark side he is not going to stand out as some sinister figure who wants more crime, prostitution, slavery child abuse etc. Instead he will often come across as squeaky clean.

Take a look at that list of good intentions we made. He would be for all of them.

Let us pick just one – world peace.

The Dark Brothers and all their representatives want world peace and will openly call or it. The problem is that they want it on different terms than the Brotherhood of Light. They want to establish world peace by suppressing, by use of force, all dissent and points of view contrary to their thinking. Their idea of world peace is something like North Korea where there are no challenges to authority because all the people are controlled by fear.

Of course, they will not tell you this but they will tell you how much they are in favor of peace and such talk will sound benevolent to those who ignore their own souls.

The Brotherhood of Light will tell you what they want to accomplish and then proceed to do it. The Dark Brotherhood will pretend they want to do the same thing but then cleverly steer their acolytes toward a different end that was hidden from them.

The main dividing line between the two brotherhoods is the Principle of Freedom. This tells us that we should seek maximum freedom through the use of minimal force.

For more on this principle go here:

LINK

Now what creates a inroad for darkness is that it is necessary that those on the right hand path use some force. For instance, the threat of force must be used to prevent murder, rape theft etc. Unfortunately, this gives the Dark Brotherhood an inroad to use more force than necessary while claiming that they are no different than the good guys.

The Dark Brotherhood teaching on the use of force at first will seem reasonable, but then they will, inch by inch, turn it up a notch at a time until a bewildered following will discover that they are no longer free.

On hindsight the wrong use of force, which is in the direction of slavery, seems obvious. For instance, just about all people today see that the Southern States were wrong in using force to keep slaves. But it was different if you were back there. They saw the work the slaves did by force produced good results so this made it a good thing in their eyes.

For instance, maybe a community needed a new school built and several slave owners donated their slaves for labor. After the school was finished the people looked upon the structure and declared it “good” and thought to themselves how good it was that they had slaves to build this for them.

Most people today can look back on this and see the illusion the people were under.

But does the illusion still persist?

It does and only the circumstances have changed.

Today many slave away working hard hours to pay more taxes than they desire or think is just. The government takes the money from this slave labor and builds many government buildings and employs many bureaucrats to work therein and they stand back and say: “This is good. It is a good thing that we tax these people more than they want to pay so we can do all these good works.”

Question Five: If the slave labor doing good works in the first example is wrong then is the slave labor to pay the unwanted taxes for good works today wrong also?

Will a future generation look back on us as we look back on the illusion of the slave owners in the South?

Explain your thinking.

 

***

 

Dan

Being the “soul of the universe” just means the current focus of interplay between spirit and matter is on humanity – as it was on the quarks in their time and the atoms in theirs.

JJ

We are just getting started in our function of the soul of the universe. Our soul energy in our bodies use intelligence to give them their form from the cells to the whole body itself. The organization of the universe by humans hasn’t really began yet as you can tell by looking at the random forms out there organized mainly by gravity, inertia and other forces.

The imagination of man cannot fathom what will take place among the stars and galaxies when human beings throughout the universe assume their rightful place billions of years hence.

 

***

 

March 26, 2014

The Trap of Illusion

Duke:

I don’t consider myself a slave. I consider myself a free man with responsibilities and obligations, one of which involves paying taxes. I look around at the country I live in, and really don’t begrudge paying my fair share for its upkeep and support.

JJ

And neither do I begrudge paying a fair tax to support my country. That was not what I was referring to. I was talking about taxation that goes beyond fair and every person has a line where that may be, including yourself.

Apparently the taxes you now pay is an amount you consider just, so of course this doesn’t make you feel like a slave. But suppose you had to pay a 90% tax and your children were going hungry. Then how would you feel?

Actually, if we include all the hidden taxes the average person in the United States pays more than a 60% tax. Because much of it is hidden we tend to not feel so cheated. In ancient Rome it was common to have a slave run a business and the master took a third of the profits and allowed the slave to keep two thirds. This proved to be a good incentive to keep the slave working hard. Variations of this practice was carried on by some in the Old South. Some slaves actually made pretty good money and dressed quite flamboyantly. Others were not so lucky.

The point is that many pay more in taxes than slaves in times past and, unlike you, they feel they are paying more than their fair share and a good portion of their money is being wasted. This causes numerous people to work for many hours where they could be enjoying themselves instead. If you are contributing in a way that you consider fair then of course you would not feel like a slave, but if you have to give much more money to an all powerful government than you desire or think is fair then you are a slave to a powerful master.

What we have to look at here is not what certain individuals consider fair but what the taxpayers as a whole feel. I’m not in a high federal tax bracket so I would not grumble for myself there but I am just as outraged if my neighbor has to pay an unfair tax as if it were myself. As far as other taxes go I think the payroll tax is too high for what we get, our sales tax too high and property tax is too high. If the money were well spent and efficiently managed I would feel much better about it.

The Swiss have a lot fairer system than we do because the citizens prevent the federal government from getting out of control. The maximum federal tax there is 11.5% and if a married couple make less than $30,000 they pay nothing. The capital gains rate for individuals is zero and they pay about a third of the property tax of the United States. On top of this they have no national debt.

Now if our country were run like Switzerland there would be few who would feel like slaves to the system and people like me would be happy to pay their fair share – because it would actually be fair.

Switzerland, the most Democratic nation on earth, with a history of Democracy for 800 years does definitely not fit into the accused stereotype of an irresponsible people voting themselves free stuff to their ruin. On the other hand, we as a republic are following this path.

Duke:

I associate slavery with misery.

JJ

A slave isn’t necessarily miserable. Many slaves in the Old South, after they were emancipated, said they were happier as a slave than a free person. After the fall of the Soviet Union many didn’t know what to do with their new freedom and were said to be happier in their slave state until they adjusted. That, of course, doesn’t make it right, for maximum freedom of choice is the destiny and right of all humanity.

In addition, many can be happier in a bad situation because they have a good attitude than others in a good situation with a negative attitude.

Duke:

I would like to know whether you think I’m aligned with the Dark Brotherhood because of my current beliefs in this area.

JJ

I think you are one of the most honorable individuals I have met and you do your best to follow the highest you know. The world would be a much better place if there were more like you.

That said, all those who have not passed the Third Initiation are susceptible to the trap of illusion and even people with the best of intentions may find themselves throwing support behind an idea supported by the Dark Brotherhood now and then. Way over 99% of the population support some type of beastly authority for instance.

The key for seekers is to follow the highest they know. When they do this their illusions will eventually be revealed. When revealed the highest they know will move up a step and to stay on the right path they must then take that step.

Only when illusion is dispelled can the disciple make a conscious choice to follow the right or left hand path. Until that time he must follow the highest he knows.

 

***

 

May 28, 2014

Global Warming Logic

Here are some of the highlights of my posts to The Statesman on Tuesday.

The logic of the Left makes absolutely no sense. They want to place our top priority on dealing with the effects of an increase of CO2 while placing other probable disasters that would be much more catastrophic on the back burner.

This is comparable to a crazy guy heading full steam ahead over a cliff while putting all his attention on trying to correct bad radio reception.

For one thing, we have had about eight times the current CO2 in our atmosphere in the past and life continued to thrive. There are a number of threats many times more serious than an increase in the fairly harmless CO2.

Here are some.

(1) The threat of an asteroid. The question is not if but when this will happen. In the past an asteroid wiped out about 90% of life on earth and another hit could destroy the human race. We have more technology to deal with a threat like this than we do climate change, but we are at the mercy of chance if the threat comes.

(2) A solar flare. Again the question is not if but when. In 1859 we were hit by one that knocked out telegraph systems all over America and Europe. If one happened again and knocked out all our electrical systems chaos would be the result and some estimate that this would result in the deaths of the majority of Americans through starvation and mob rule.

For less than $79 billion we could take measures to protect our grid from this event, which is overdue.

(3) A magnetic pulse created by an atomic explosion in our atmosphere. This could be accomplished by even a rogue nation such as North Korea and the results would be similar to a solar flare.

(4) Nuclear missiles headed our way. This can be overcome by missile defense and if Reagan’s plan were carried out without Democrat protests we could be safe right now. Instead Obama has cut funding for missile defense and reduced support for our European allies.

This may be the greatest threat we face but we want to place many times the attention on human caused CO2 emissions instead.

Future generations will look back on our judgment and by comparison the flat earth people of the Middle ages will look pretty good.

What is amusing about comparing my approach and that of the Left to global warming is this.

I am about 10% as concerned over the danger from humanity as they claim to be but about ten times more willing to support projects that will actually reduce CO2 emissions. Go figure.

 

***

 

May 29, 2014

Question Six

We’ve established that we should only borrow money as a nation for national emergencies. Wouldn’t it be great if our leaders understood this simple idea?

The main source of revenue is our taxes and we are often hit up for tax increases nationally, state and locally.

What kind of situation or demand would justify a tax increase?

Here are some that are often put forward.

(1) Additional benefits for the poor, minorities, disabled, unemployed etc.

(2) More money for education

(3) Defense

(4) Healthcare

So, what do you think justifies a tax increase and who should bear the burden?

 

***

 

Fun Site

Check this site out. Enter your last name and it will search through 250,000,000 names in the United States and tell you what percentage of them voted Republican or Democrat.

LINK

 

***

 

May 30, 2014

WMD’s

Soryn:

It is interesting that JJ said that Saddam was a big threat to global freedom, but many people see America’s intervention in Iraq as abusive, politically and oil driven. It turns out, Saddam had no nuclear weapons after all. So unless you can foresee the future, you will be inclined to say that the US commit an abuse by invading Iraq and interfering with the freewill, the sovereignty and the maturity of Iraqi people.

Any opinions on this JJ? You did argue for the caterpillar principle and so on.

JJ

First, let me compliment you for standing your ground and taking the heat here while continuing to be polite. We have no problem with different opinions if they are presented respectfully. Unfortunately, on many forums, like the Statesman, this does not happen.

Just imagine what would have been the result if either the United States or England had decided to take Hitler out in 1938 just before the start of the war. They would have been subject to enormous criticism and attack. Many would have claimed that Hitler was not a real threat and we were just war mongers interfering with a sovereign state.

This would have been one of the most benevolent actions in the history of the world yet no one would have known. If something does not happen then it does not exist, even as a possibility in the minds of most people. Few would have believed that Hitler was going to unleash such mayhem on the world.

So it is with Saddam Hussein. Because he was stopped in his tracks it appears to many that he wasn’t much of a threat after all.

In truth there was a lot more evidence that Saddam was a threat than there was for Hitler in 1938. He attacked a free country. He invaded Kuwait and forcefully occupied it. Why did he do this? It was a first step for him in acquiring domination of the oil in the Middle East. He was going to continue his aggression until he had the power to control other nations that depended on middle eastern oil. At that point he could have merely bought nuclear weapons from several nations.

Fortunately, he was stopped by George H. W. Bush. That did not stop his desire for conquest, however. After Saddam was captured we learned quite a bit from him, thanks to the expert interrogation of George L. Piro, an FBI agent who was assigned to develop the former dictator’s cooperation. After creating a positive relationship and some trust Piro got quite a bit of information out of him. Saddam did say that he was successfully disarmed of his weapons of mass destruction after the first Gulf War and he created a great bluff to make the world think he had them. He said that his goal after the first war was to get sanctions removed and once this happened he would rebuild his arsenal and develop nuclear weapons.

He came close to getting the sanctions removed several times and if George W. Bush hadn’t taken him out then it would have only been a matter of time before this happened. France and Germany were already dealing with him on the black market and much of Europe was looking forward to buying his oil again.

Once the sanctions were removed and Saddam had lots of revenue he could have purchased nuclear technology from North Korea, as they had a close relationship.

We have plenty to worry about in the world at present, but I am convinced we would have a lot more to deal with if Saddam was not taken out. I felt this in the core of my being from the time of the first Gulf War and was very disappointed the Bush One did not finish the job and take him out then.

 

***

 

DK on socialism, capitalism and education

JJ places a fairly high credibility on AAB/DK. But quotes like the ones you gave point out to me a fairly common mentality of the time, one susceptible to the fallacies of the day, and not one inspired from a higher level. Just my view. I don’t place nearly as much value on the AAB/DB writings myself.

JJ

Even though he is a master he is not infallible. The Beaver Principle applies here. Even though the beaver is in a lower kingdom than ourselves he can still build a better beaver dam than a human can.

DK is far removed from human affairs, especially the business world. The principles he teaches in support of freedom apply well but sometimes he is way over idealistic about how supply and demand should be handled – and this is because is is not involved in the fire of human day to day living as we are.

I’ll comment more on this shortly.

 

***

 

May 31, 2014

DK Quotes

Soryn quotes DK;

The control of labour by capital or the control of capital by labour must also go.”

Soryn

The control of labor by capital: for instance, money driven corporations with no social awareness whatsoever.

JJ

I have never encountered a corporation with no social awareness. Can you name one for me? I’ve called on many thousands of business and corporations in my sales career and I never came across one without some social awareness. Most of them are very concerned about their community.

Actually, I think DK spoke correctly here but worded it in such a way that many wrong and damaging interpretations could apply. Some could use this teaching as an excuse to use force to implement this ideal and that would be contrary to his teachings about freedom.

If the Molecular Business were universally adopted then this statement would come true, but it would be accomplished through free will and not the use of force – which DK was against.

Soryn:

The control of capital by labour: freedom for science, art, education and spirit from dictators or from the private interest of big businesses and corporate powers that seek to commercialize everything.

JJ

That is a stretch to get all that out of DK’s statement. For instance, for science, education and art to prosper in today’s world capital is needed. Without it, not much research or education would get accomplished.

We cannot just snap our fingers and use force to accomplish DK’s idea but it will take some time to evolve through free will. In saying this I am not saying you believe in such force.

Let us examine the statement. He says two things must go:

(1) The control of labour by capital

Here is the negative part of the situation created by those in power over labor as related in my treatise on the Molecular Business:

Since the beginning of business history the basic mode of operation has been the same: the man with the bucks has power to initiate a commercial endeavor. If he has a degree of common sense he succeeds and makes it profitable. In the process he hires a number of employees to work for him. Because he is the initiator he has full life-and-death power over their jobs, of which there is always a scarcity. Because of the scarcity of employment the initiator (or “boss” as we will call him) assumes a position of tremendous power over the lives of these subordinates. Any hint that they may be terminated fills them with foreboding fear and distress. Thus the boss assumes life-and-death power (concerning career) over his subjects just as a king, or dictator, has life and death power over his people.

The boss, therefore, establishes for himself a little kingdom, and for eight to ten hours a day he rules with supreme authority. Only after the workday ends do the subjects regain their freedom to run their lives, hobbies or additional work as they see fit.

As a kingdom grows, so grows the bureaucracy of the king. Alone he cannot control (or govern) the lives of all his subjects, so he selects others who agree with his philosophy and gives them power to be governors, or overlords, over the lives of the people. The people have no voice in the selection of these overlords but are chosen completely by the decree of the king. Each overlord has the same power as the king over the subjects, but controls a smaller group. The overlord is subject to the king just as the people are subject to him and he maintains his power as long as he pleases the king and stays within the guidelines of His Eminence’s philosophy. Thus, the overlords are not free, for they are also subjects, but they do have the advantage of power of dominion.

Correspondingly, we can easily see that as a business grows, it becomes a microcosmic kingdom. The boss cannot control the whole enterprise so he selects a bureaucracy of overlords. These overlords (executives, vice presidents, supervisors, foremen) direct the working lives of the employees and have the same power over their lives as the Number One Boss, except over a smaller number. The employees have no voice in the selection of these overlords but are chosen completely by the decree of the boss. The overlord is subject to the boss just as the employees are subject to him, and he maintains his power as long as he pleases the boss and stays within the guidelines of His Eminence’s philosophy. Thus, the overlords are not free, for they are also subjects, but they do have the advantage of power of dominion.

(2) The control of capital by labour must also go.”

And how does labor control capital? It does this through the unions and other means of making demands. I believe that what DK was looking for was the end of the unhealthy condition where the worker feels like a slave under his boss and company. Then because of dissatisfaction he seeks to control his destiny through unions and demands. Both sides of this coin hurt productivity, hinder happiness and peace of mind.

The coming cooperative society patterned after the molecular business will make these problems unnecessary for in this system the employees will own the company and have a say on wages received and how the company is run. The election principle will do away with the feeling that you are being suffocated by an unjust boss and ownership will do away with the need for unions.

Soryn quotes DK again:

“The new world order will not impose a uniform type of government, a synthetic religion and a system of standardisation upon the nations. The sovereign rights of each nation will be recognised and its peculiar genius, individual trends and racial qualities will be permitted full expression. In one particular only should there be an attempt to produce unity, and that will be in the field of education.

JJ

Notice he says “an attempt to produce unity I education. He does not mention the use of Big Brother type of force. Here is what he did say about unity from the same book – Externalization of the Hierarch

“Cooperative unity differs from an enforced unity in that the subjective spirit and the objective form are functioning towards one recognised end.”

Cooperative unity through free will is the goal. This is not something to be had with most governments today.

Soryn quotes D K again:

There must eventually be a closer tie-up between the educational system, the legal system and the government, but it will all be directed to an effort to work out the best ideals of the thinkers of the day.”

Sorin

Public education: free from the arbitrariness of private interest or from government abuse. Affordable for everyone, with no discrimination in the advantage of the rich and powerful.

JJ

He doesn’t say that private interest will be out of the equation. A private system can be as much or more cooperative than a public one. He’s also speaking of a future when there will be greater freedom and democracy. In a free world there will be nothing to stop the creation of a private educational system if desired. The point is that when a system is demonstrated that works well then others copy it and a cooperative union is the natural result.

Soryn quoting DK

“The new world order will recognise that the produce of the world, the natural resources of the planet and its riches, belong to no one nation but should be shared by all. There will be no nations under the category “haves” and others under the opposite category. A fair and properly organised distribution of the wheat, the oil and the mineral wealth of the world will be developed, based upon the needs of each nation, upon its own internal resources and the requirements of its people. All this will be worked out in relation to the whole.”

Sorin

Like those corporations and rich countries that exploit the resources and the labor of the 3rd world countries (via force and raw violations of the human rights).

JJ

He is talking about a system that will evolve in the future, perhaps hundreds of years in the making. Part of that evolution involves corporations helping third world countries by employing their masses so eventually they become wealthier and independent. There is no easy way to go from poverty to abundance in the world at this time, but it is slowly happening.

The above quote is one of the worst statements he has made and can be used to promote communism by force as Benjamin Crème does. DK is either just plain wrong or used bad wording to express his views.

Let us suppose that we adopt the idea that the “resources of the planet and its riches, belong to no one nation but should be shared by all.”

If we take this literally then we need to invade the oil rich middle eastern countries and force them to share their oil and riches.

I think that what he was getting at is that as the nations become more free and prosperous that they will develop a natural inclination to share. People will share with people and nations with nations through free will.

In your quote he said, “The new world order WILL NOT IMPOSE a uniform type of government, a synthetic religion and a system of standardisation upon the nations.”

Soryn quoting DK

“National material assets and the needed commodities will all be provided for under an entirely new system. – Private enterprise will still exist, but will be regulated; the great public utilities, the major material resources and the sources of planetary wealth – iron, steel, oil and wheat, for instance – will be owned in the first place by a governing, controlling international group; they will, however, be prepared for international consumption by national groups chosen by the people and under international direction.”

JJ

Again, this is poor wording or he is just plain wrong. For one thing it disagrees with the quote I just gave. Let me give it again:

“The new world order WILL NOT IMPOSE a uniform type of government, a synthetic religion and a system of standardisation upon the nations.”

In the quote you gave it sounds like the guy with a few acres raising some potatoes and wheat couldn’t do what he wants with the produce but would have to turn it over to an international organization for redistribution. If so, he would have no incentive to work as happens in communist countries like the old Soviet union.

That is crazy talk whether it comes from a master, angel or devil. It sounds like he is advocating a similar doctrine to Hitler and he despised Hitler and all he stood for. He is usually very encouraging of freedom. It makes me wonder if Alice A. Bailey got the transmission right on this.

If he envisioned a sharing through free will of the people and nations, fine I support that, but his wording could be interpreted in other directions where freedom is compromised.

Your comments have been in so many directions that I cannot possibly comment on all of them. Let us try and cover one subject at a time instead of the shotgun approach.

 

***

 

Soryn:

Another example: the majority in the US decided that the idea of Obamacare is best so they voted Obama. Do you have anything against this decision taken by the majority? I sure don’t. … Bottom line is: the majority must be respected.

JJ

Where do you get the idea that an elected president follows the will of the people??? Every president does a number of things that anger the majority. There has never been a proven majority in favor of Obamacare and if many lies had not been fostered on us a great majority would have opposed it from the beginning. There are still a lot of people uninformed about it.

As it is, the latest news from the Obama supporting Washington Post tells us that the majority, 55% presently disapprove of Obamacare. I personally think the number is higher than that. LINK

If we had a system where the people have the final say, as they have in Switzerland, Obamacare would have never passed. It is a nightmare in progress.

 

***

 

JJ

Where do you get the idea that an elected president follows the will of the people???

Sorin

I didn’t say that.

JJ

It sure sounds that way. Here are your actual words:

“Another example: the majority in the US decided that the idea of Obamacare is best so they voted Obama. Do you have anything against this decision taken by the majority? I sure don’t. You like it or not the majority decided FOR universal health care (and maybe for a good reason,”

It really sounds like you are saying that because the majority voted for Obama we voted for universal health care.

In voting for most of us it comes down to these choices for president.

(1) A candidate that rarely represents the voter’s will.

(2) A candidate who will sometimes represent his will.

Soryn:

It seemed reasonable to think that people voting for Obama also voted for Obamacare, as it was one of his main “selling points”.

JJ

There was somewhat true in 2008 but not so much in 2012. The main reason Obama won a second term was because he very successfully portrayed Romney as a mean, evil SOB that didn’t care a whit about the little guy. For many it was the choice between the corrupt guy they knew and the one who would be even worse.

 

***

 

JJ

I have never encountered a corporation with no social awareness. Can you name one for me?

Sorin

Well, that’s because you only look at what’s happening in the US.

JJ

You make a link that shows abuses made mostly by governments and people but no corporation is singled out as the bad guy. Let me repeat again:

Can you name one corporation for me that has no record of social awareness?

 

***

 

June 1, 2014

More on Floating Cities

LINK

 

***

 

Curiosity on JJ’s ethnicity

Sorin:

JJ, just a small curiosity.

I get this vibe from you that you are biased towards business, commerce, material abundance, individual freedom, capitalism and libertarian-ism. You also seem to side strongly with the right and oppose the left all the times. Dewey seems to be a Jewish name, so I would make a wild guess and say that you are probably 99% Jew. Am I right?

JJ

You’re picking up the wrong vibe on the Jewish blood. None that I know of. Most of my ancestors are from England. My consciousness is far removed from the typical religious or materialistic Jew. I have devoted my life to the spiritual path, often at the sacrifice of material things.

It is only the Left Hand Path that I am opposed to and that is the side that decides against the Principle of Freedom. With freedom comes free enterprise and abundance – and that is only a good thing from a higher point of view. Also workable social programs will emerge in a free atmosphere compared to those that do not work when forced upon us.

 

***

 

Keith

Creme’s comment that the ‘world is full of disciples’ is wrong. The world has only a handful of active disciples on the physical plane. The world has legions of aspirants and a small number of probationary disciples, but very few accepted disciples.

Sorin

That quote is actually from Alice Bailey and DK. 😀

Though is seems to be a description of what Creme is doing now.

JJ

DK said in one of his books that there were only a little 300 disciples on the whole planet so Keith is correct in his perception that the world is not “full” of them, at least as we understand the term.

 

***

 

Huge Mistake

Sorim:

Let me ask you something. If you were to vote for the ideas and the system proposed here by DK, based on your understanding of how economy and human coexisting work, would you vote Yes or No?

JJ

DK did not clarify exactly what the system was to be except to indicate the people and nations of the future will be more cooperative, more sharing and more benevolent and I vote yes in proceeding that direction.

There seems to be a point that you really misunderstand and that is this. All systems and enterprises and customs relating to the life of humanity do not function perfectly and many flaws are revealed on the road to relative perfection. This includes the gift of freedom as compared to a state of being controlled by the authority of the Beast – or outside source.

On hindsight we can see many flaws in the Old Soviet union where there was very little free market (mostly the black market) and the people were severely controlled.

After its fall and the people had a lot more freedom and some complained. Even though most liked the freedom others concentrated on the flaws revealed. People had to take more personal responsibility and if they did not then they seemed to suffer even more than before. Chaos seemed to reign for a while but after the people adjusted few now would want to return to the old system. The extra freedom revealed flaws that needed to be addressed but that didn’t mean freedom was evil.

Whenever you compare two systems you will almost always find that the one with the most freedom to act will be the one that is most successful and beneficial to the people.

This applies to endeavors to create abundance, choose your mate, your fiends, choose what you want to join, how much you want to participate in any legal interest, choose who to represent you, choose where you want to live and what kind of residence, chose the food you eat and what supplements you take, chose your doctor, healthcare plan etc.

Some would agree with all that except he free market. They think this must be controlled by force. In this attitude they are making a huge mistake.

Would you want someone stepping in after you fell in love and telling you that you must never see your true love again?

Of course not. Yet some would tell a person in love with his business, which provides much happiness to his customers that he has to change it into something he soon will not even recognize.

Maybe this same authority tells him that relationships has too many risks. Sometimes people even kill each other. Marriage is bad, therefore, for your own good, I am saving you, even if it is against your will.

Sounds ridiculous but this is what many try to do with free enterprise. Because everything does not turn out to be sunshine and roses some want to take away all (or a lot of) freedom in free enterprise.

The key piece of knowledge is this. In an atmosphere of freedom there will ALWAYS be more progress toward the desired goal than in an atmosphere of control by a self appointed elite.

Huge mistake.

Either a person believes in the Principle of Freedom or he does not. If he does then he can be of use to the Brotherhood of Light. If he does not then he will be of very limited value for they do all in their power to bring the desired results through the power of maximum free will.

 

***

 

June 2, 2014

Free Enterprise

JJ Quote

Either a person believes in the Principle of Freedom or he does not. If he does then he can be of use to the Brotherhood of Light. If he does not then he will be of very limited value for they do all in their power to bring the desired results through the power of maximum free will.

Sorin

So in the lack of a definite response from you concerning capitalism, I will assume that you recognize the obvious flaws of capitalism, contrary to what you previously believed.

JJ

Where do you get the idea I am changing my mind on capitalism or free enterprise? I believed in free enterprise yesterday and do today.

And what response do you want? No system is perfect but for our present consciousness it is the best we have. It certainly has proven more beneficial than communism and gives European countries the prosperity they have.

I think maybe Larry Woods had a good point in using a consistent name. Free enterprise encapsulates the Principle of Freedom as it applies to making our economic machinery work. Some crony capitalism is not so free, where the government decides the winners and losers. Free enterprise is more representative of those who can manage their business without undue interference or contributions from governments.

Just because we are not perfect human beings does not mean free enterprise is evil as you insinuate. It would make just as much sense to say that windmills are evil because they kill some birds.

Sorin:

Now, let’s get to your principle of freedom.

This is another case where you fail to see the forest because of the trees, because you fail to see how this principle is dependent upon other principles.

As I said, the maximum individual freedom exalted by capitalism and libertarianism will quickly shift toward maximum material individual freedom, which is exactly what is happening today

JJ

And freedom to pursue material things like a new car is a bad thing in your mind? Wow.

Sorin:

where you get a small minority of insanely rich people, that have tons of individual material freedom

JJ

And how does someone who works hard, creates jobs and produces products people like hurt you or me? I’d guess that any hurt to you is in your imagination because Bill Gates getting wildly rich has not hurt me or anyone I know in the least.

On the other hand, governments increasing our taxes or making a dumb regulation can instantly affect our lives for the worse.

Sorin:

but the freedom of the majority is severely affected

JJ

What have you been smoking? How does Bill Gates getting wildly rich take away from the freedom of the majority? The technology he developed has enhanced the freedom of the majority.

Sorin:

and the exalted individual freedom of that minority

JJ

Bill Gate’s wealth has given him some extra freedom. And my knowledge that I have gained has given me a lot of extra freedom also. Those who gain extra freedom through effort do not diminish the freedom of others. Just because I have some extra spiritual freedom takes away nothing from you and neither does Bill Gates with his material freedom.

Sorin

is corrupted by separation and materialism.

JJ

Some rich are corrupted but so are many of the poor. What else is new? Humans are not perfect.

Bill Gates is giving away billions of dollars to help the less fortunate. It sounds like he is trying to be a good guy.

Sorin

Applying the principle of freedom does not always entail pacifism. This is where you are confused.

JJ

I’m not confused on this at all.

Sorin

On the one hand, you agreed with FORCE, in the case of removing certain dictators – Saddam

JJ

Yes, Saddam invaded another country and tried to exterminate the Kurds, without provocation and needed to be removed to unsure maximum freedom for the whole.

Sorin:

but on the other hand you demand PACIFISM when it comes to SEVERE and DEMONSTRATED corporate abuses on 3rd world countries.

JJ

I do not know of any corporation that has invaded a country and enslaved them. Show me such a thing and I’ll definitely support a change of leadership by any means possible.

Paying low wages in the third world where such wages still improve the quality of the people’s lives is not a bad thing for it gives the people more freedom That is why they take the jobs.

Sorin:

As a matter of fact, the US invading Saddam was a clear violation of both your principle of freedom and caterpillar principle.

JJ

Wrong wrong wrong. It enhances freedom to remove a dictator who invades other countries to enslave them and seeks to exterminate a people, just as removing Hitler enhanced freedom. If you don’t think removing a Hitler type of aggressor enhances freedom then you have a problem.

Sorin:

Second, because the US imposed their political ideal – democracy – to Iraq, thus violating their freewill and the caterpillar principle.

JJ

You can’t really impose freedom or democracy. You can only offer a people a chance at it which we did. Whether or not they are successful is now up to them.

You do not seem to understand the Caterpillar Principle. The principle is you do not interfere with a circumstance where the life is moving forward on it’s own struggle. Suppose some stupid kid took the cocoon and buried it in some dirt where it had no chance to survive? If I saw such a thing I would remove he dirt to help it where it could not help itself, but then leave it to grow through its natural struggle.

Similarly we had to help the Jews during World War II because they were in a circumstance where they could not liberate themselves. We also had to help the Kurds to save them from extermination from Saddam.

Sorin:

While, my idea of enforcing human rights respects BOTH principles:

JJ

How about the right to operate your business as one sees fit? That is a pretty huge human right you seem to oppose.

Sorin:

First, the imbalance created by the big businesses (that rule America and the civilized world) are a sure threat to world peace, justice and FREEDOM.

JJ

Are you living in the Twilight Zone or what? Where are these businesses that are so threatening? No business is forcing me to pay them anything. None of them are taxing me, regulating me or making me buy anything I do not want. All they do is offer me products and services I can take or leave. None of them force anyone to work for them. Why you think this threatens world peace is an amazing thought.

It is the leaders of governments who threaten world peace. An argument can be made that the bankers sometimes assist but they are intertwined with governments and heavily regulated.

Sorin

So enforcing human rights acts purely on the basis of the principle of freewill.

JJ

It depends on the situation. Most human rights abuses are caused by the governments of the planet and it is those entities that you need to target.

Just because you accuse a business of human rights violations does not make it so. I haven’t seen you give one clear cut example yet. You throw out all kinds of nebulous stuff but never come up with one good example to support your accusations. Platitudes and talking points are not convincing.

Sorin:

Bottom line: I recognize that we have an issue. That issue is world imbalance created by big businesses that threaten the stability of both developed and developing nations and ultimately the peace and freedom of the world. What should we do? Let’s start with those human rights that everybody accepts but nobody respects, shall we?

JJ

I do not see any major human rights denied because of free enterprise but see many that are greatly enhanced. On the other hand, there are many human rights violations caused by governments. We could start by doing something to give females in the Middle Eastern countries basic human rights and to be free from female mutilation. Then in some places Christians are being persecuted or exterminated because they will not convert. I do not know of any business that comes close to a human rights violation like these.

 

***

 

Sorin:

The dark brothers are having a good laugh at you for supporting GW Bush invading Iraq.

JJ

You have strange logic indeed. You think the Dark Brothers are happy when a tyrant they support is overthrown but are gleeful when a private enterprise employs people in a Third world giving them an opportunity for a better life. Your reasoning is upside down just like Benjamin Crème who you seem to idolize.

Sorin

I just demonstrated you in plain simple logic and factual evidence that Bush committed an abuse of power. He even regrets it himself as stated below!

JJ

Cutting and pasting does not make your case which is extremely weak with an appeal to the low information crowd.

Sorin:

He disrespected the UN security council, and quickly started the war preventing the ongoing diplomatic approach that was preferred by the UN security council (Saddam already did what the UN asked of him in 1990-1991). US then proceeded to impose their political ideal to Iraq by MILITARY FORCE (while they made use of Saddam before when they supported him invading Iran and ignored his usage of chemical weapons).

JJ

You obviously haven’t studied the history but are merely repeating talking points. Instead of dealing with the actual principles of freedom you are creating a diversion into a topic that we have already spent a book’s work of discussion about. If you really want to find the truth of the matter go to the archives and read the many thousands of words covering this subject. We have covered this so much most are weary of I and do not want to go all over the arguments again. I’ll just sum it up with these words:

According to UN Resolution 687 authority was granted to resume the war in Iraq at any time.

The fact is that the first war with Iraq began because it attacked Kuwait with the intention of further expansion. The world community justly responded to stop this Nazi-type aggression and made war against Saddam and drove him out of Kuwait. After this the war was not declared over but a cease fire was arranged through U.N. resolution 687. The deal that Saddam signed on to in order to enact a cease fire and save his skin was that he would destroy all his weapons of mass destruction and not build any more. He also agreed to honor the civil rights of his people.

The deal was that if Saddam did not live up to his agreement (WMD and civil rights) then the cease-fire could end and the war would resume. No time limit was placed on this.

Bush and Blair enforced resolution 687 as well as the new one (resolution 1441) that was unanimously passed November 2003. Bush is accused of initiating a new war. It is not a new war, but an old one that was legally resumed. Bush and Blair merely enforced UN resolutions that others dragged their feet on because of their own oil contracts with the tyrant, Saddam Hussein. After 1441 Bush did not need a new resolution saying basically the same thing all over again.

Sorin:

By supporting Bush’s intervention in Iraq you advocate for a violation of the principle of freedom

JJ

I haven’t seen such upside down thinking since reading Benjamin Crème.

You think that removing a tyrant who seeks to exterminate a people (Kurds) is contrary to freedom yet a company giving people jobs is against freedom. You are a piece of work.

 

***

 

June 3, 2014

The Blur Factor

Even though there have been some excellent comments it is useless to drag on this conversation on the Gulf Wars any further. We covered this ad nauseum years ago to the point where members complained and now we are doing it again. Sorim has his mind made up and we are not going to change him.

This argument illustrates just how difficult it is for many seekers to see and understand the Principle of Freedom. Both sides are intelligent but see things in a totally different light. Part of it lies in degrees of discernment but that is not all. Another big part concerns the values held by the individuals in this and other debates. I’m not just talking about this group but people throughout the world.

Group one places a high value on group and/or individual freedom believing that being able to pursue goals with a minimal hindrance and control will bring the greatest possible happiness and prosperity.

Group two believes that too much freedom is reckless and leads to abuse and must be regulated and controlled for the greater good. If it so happens that the greater good does not materialize then they do not retreat but want more controls.

The interesting thing is that both groups will say they support the idea of freedom. It is easy to see why group one believes this but how does group two justify believing this?

It amounts to basically this. Too much freedom brings abuse, which they see as interfering with the greater good and reducing freedom in the end. Therefore, freedom must be regulated and controlled so we can have even more freedom. That may sound strange, but it is basically their mindset.

Here is where the blur factor comes in. Group one does support some control for obvious reasons. They support laws that suppress the actions of the thief, the murderer, rapist and the general harmful lawbreakers.

Group two will take these controls with which all agree and say, “A certain amount of control is a good thing and actually enhances freedom. We propose a few more that will be for our own good.”

The problem with group two is when they get their additional controls they are never satisfied but always want more and if they are unchecked tyranny will be the end result.

The difference between the two approaches is group one will specify the controls they want and that will be it. Very seldom do more controls need to be added.

Group two cannot specify how much they want to control us for our own good for they do not even know themselves. They merely watch for unseemly results they see from human nature and when it occurs their solution will be more control. The problem is that even when they manage to secure their controls humans will still misbehave and then still more controls will be needed. When group two gets involved in this vicious cycle and is not checked the freedom of the masses becomes suffocated until the time comes that they can’t even celebrate a touchdown because Big Brother will not approve.

The Principle of Freedom is what separates the two brotherhoods. The Brotherhood of Light supports progress in the arena of maximum human freedom and the Dark Brotherhood see humans as too stupid to have such freedom and that they need to be controlled and told what to do for their own good. The leaders are highly motivated because they see themselves as deserving power over the many but will have the freedom that they will deny to others.

The freedom they think they are obtaining is an illusion because they are slaves to their own selfish desires which will eventually become their undoing.

 

***

 

June 4, 2014

Re: The Blur Factor

My reply to Keith had so many typos I deleted it and am herewith posting a corrected copy.

Keith;

As long as we continue to view all ideas as coming from either the left or the right, we are never going to evaluate the merits of the ideas themselves.

JJ

We must also consider that there is a difference between the right and left hand path and the political left and right.

The main difference between the two paths is the Principle of Freedom, and we do not want to synthesis the two paths here at all. Do we want a combination of 50% maximum slavery with 50% maximum freedom or do we want 100% maximum freedom?

I, for one, want 100% maximum freedom and will struggle for this as long as I have breath.

Actually a permanent synthesis is close to impossible, as the two sides will always struggle until one prevails so you will end up with the people in a state of freedom or slavery.

The political Right is appropriately named because it supports the Principle of Freedom from the spiritual Right more than does the Left but has far from a perfect record. When dogma is at stake they will often be on the side of the Beast and the political Left will be on the side of freedom. As far as sex, drugs and rock and roll, the political Left has the Right beat in the freedom area. In areas where religion does not have a strong influence the political right usually has an edge in the freedom department.

So, yes a synthesis of the two political views would be good, but a synthesis of the right and left hand path would mean a victory for the Dark Brotherhood.

“I am a point of light within a greater Light.

I am a strand of loving energy within the stream of love divine.

I am a point of sacrificial Fire, focussed within the fiery Will of God.

And thus I stand.

I am a way by which men may achieve.

I am a source of strength, enabling them to stand.

I am a beam of light, shining upon their way.

And thus I stand.

And standing thus revolve

And tread this way the ways of men,

And know the ways of God.

And thus I stand.”

DK

Those who seek the right hand path must stand and stand firmly.

Copyright 2014 by J J Dewey

Easy Access to all the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

Check out JJ’s Political Blog HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE

 

May 17, 2014

Freedom Dialog

Soryn:

One of the issues with capitalism is that everything’s for sale. Capitalism is like a spoiled child completely out of parental control. It gave people all the freedom in the world (to buy guns and cars and houses and airplanes and lands and people and even countries), but at the same time people ended up having no ethical limits to guide their “freedom”.

JJ

You’re not making any sense here. Are you saying that in a capitalistic country you can buy guns and cars and houses and airplanes and lands etc but in socialist France or Denmark you cannot? Last time I checked you could buy stuff in socialist countries just like you can here. Even in communist Cuba you can buy stuff for money. Some would almost sell their kids for a good internet connection there, or a T-bone steak.

And why is capitalism any more like a spoiled brat than a socialist country? There are spoiled brats in both locations. A spoiled child though is one who will abuse others for his own selfish will and I think you’ll find this type of individual in a lot larger numbers in socialist bureaucracies than in capitalist businesses. I don’t recall ever meeting a free market individual that was as spoiled as the average government bureaucrat.

Soryan

This poses a particular problem when it comes to food, because it is one of the prime necessities for survival. Survival – this is a good criterion to distinguish between capitalism and socialism. When it comes to basic needs of survival, socialism should kick in.

JJ

Does not compute.

North Korea and Cuba are as socialist as you can get and their people are starving. The only thing keeping Cuba afloat all these years is an underground economy using U.S, dollars. In North Korea the people have to eat tree bark and grass to survive.

In history we find that the greater the enforcement of socialism is the less fresh food is available.

In the last 100 years American has fed the world more than any country in history thanks to freedom and capitalism. That may be coming to an end as we are selling our freedoms down the river (not rover – typo in the last post)

Soryin;

Basic needs are a general good and a human right.

JJ

And who decided this? If a guy wants to cease all work and just play and have fun does he have the right to be supported by the rest of us? I think not.

In a free society do we have an obligation to help those in need who cannot help themselves? Yes. And in a free society this will happen.

Let’s go back to my youth when free enterprise flourished much more than today. When I had the accident in 1958 I spent over a month in the hospital and had two operations. Health care was so cheap that we paid it all off in the worst of circumstances. My mom and Dad just divorced and my Dad took off to Central America. We had no child support, no food stamps, no welfare and we had to pick fruit to survive in the summer or my mom worked for a minimum wage at other times.

Then I needed some reconstructive surgery that called for an expensive specialist. We couldn’t afford it so my mom found a private charity that helped and they paid for two more months in the hospital and four more operations.

We received all this help from these spoiled capitalists. Thanks to government attempts to help us and the restrictions of freedom imposed on the medical system today a fruit picker could never pay for a month in the hospital today nor could he find a charity with deep enough pockets for an additional two months and four special surgeries. The best hope today would be to get help through Medicaid, but that is not free. Every taxpayer pays through the nose for Medicare and Medicaid whether he uses it or not. The charities that helped me cost the taxpayer NOTHING. Everything was given entirely through free will.

Soryn:

Let’s make sure we live in a just world by allowing people to get on their feet where it is required. Let’s allow them, at least, to be able to make a failure or a success of their lives.)

JJ

And that is what happens in a free society.

After my accident at the age of 13 the only job I could get was orchard work – mostly fruit picking. I usually worked with my friend Wayne who was very competitive and if he picked more than me he would brag about it and rub it in. I decided I couldn’t let that happen so I increased my skills. Wayne and I were generally he fastest pickers in the orchard. We made around $20-$40 an hour in today’s money.

I bought all my school supplies and clothes. And I bought the finest clothes money could buy at the time, thinking that would impress the girls. Then I went in with my mom and we bought a car together.

I helped out with the food budget. If there was something I wanted to eat that my mom thought was too expensive I would buy it myself. Then I hunted a lot and brought home pheasants and ducks on a regular basis. I also fished a lot and brought home bass, bluegill, crappie and catfish – more than we could eat. In addition I raised pigs and chickens.

My mom was thrifty and industrious and her winter work at the potato plant later turned to full time and overall we had pretty good life by standing on our own two feet. I didn’t know anyone who was doing without food or going hungry. A lot of people thought our little family was the worst off they knew, but we didn’t see it that way.

Everything seemed to just work a lot better economically in those days. If we had the technology of today and the freedom of the past era we would have more abundance than we would know what to do with.

Soryn

Food. Something needs to change here. Raj Patel offers some insights on the matter. I would say that competition is overall bad when it comes to food. Investors trying to sell their products invest more on advertising (package), on durability and grow through unhealthy chemicals.

JJ

Reality does not bear out your competition idea. Countries with little competition like North Korea, Cuba, the Old Soviet Union have shortages whereas the U.S, has always had abundance.

Advertising is the necessary fuel to make the market and distribution system work. Countries than ban advertising unusually suffer food shortages or starvation.

I’m with you with the unhealthy chemicals. As people get educated they are buying more organic foods of their own free will, forcing many large companies to change their ways.

Soryn:

You see products imported from the other side of the planet because they are cheaper.

JJ

And why is that a bad thing? It allows many poor people to earn a living.

Soryn:

Most of the food supply should be localized – this creates less competition.

JJ

Where do you get that idea? We rarely imported food when I was a kid and everything seemed as competitive or moreso at that time. I think that growing our own food for health purposes and self sufficiency is good but it doesn’t eliminate competition.

Soryn;

The principle at stake here will be a socialist one. My grandfather had a piece of land that he harvested with some shared technological means. They were using some big machines to fertilize and to harvest the lands. At the end, they would split the production. Everyone got his share of food. And boy that farmer food was delicious, as opposed to the garbage that you find now in the supermarket.

JJ

Shared gardens are popular here in the United States and this idea can flourish in a free society.

Soryan

Private versus public property is another good criterion. Investors trying to buy the park where I go each day to take a breath of fresh air and replace it with a massive complex of skyscrapers of steel and glass should be restricted to a public decision.

JJ

Private parks are run much better than public ones and the visitors are much happier. Check out these videos.

VIDEO 1

VIDEO 2

Soryn:

The actual people that live in that place should decide whether or not it is in the public’s interest to allow the investor to swipe the park.

JJ

This can happen with a private park. Again, check out the video.

Soryn:

False advertising needs to be regulated (I’m tired of products being advertised in the falsest way possible). Also, safety and health measures (socialism) need to be in place.

JJ

These things can be controlled through the threat of legal action in a free society.

Soryn:

I just wanted to add that I think we have the technological means to greatly reduce the food problem across the globe.

JJ

Here we agree, but this cannot be accomplished by a dictator giving out orders. The second video link gives an example of how the pilgrims solved the food problem.

Soryn:

Reducing corporate exploitation and pollution can greatly improve the lives of those people that provide food to rich countries.

JJ

There are areas where people do complain of corporations who overreach, but these are often in countries that are highly regulated wit little free enterprise for the individual.

Abuse is not limited to corporations. Communist China makes U.S., corporations look like Mother Teresa. Here are two examples from Wikipedia:

From 1993 to 2003, 2.5 million people were evicted in the city of Shanghai. In preparation for the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing, many of Beijing’s densely populated neighborhoods were torn down in order to make way for new developments and infrastructure projects. The Center on Housing Rights and Evictions estimated that 1.5 million people in and around Beijing were forced from their homes, often with inadequate compensation. Chinese authorities maintained only 6,000 families were relocated, and that all received proper compensation.

From 1995 to 2005, an average of 86,754 people were evicted annually in connection to the Three Gorges Dam, totaling an estimated 1.4 million people. Recalcitrant residents in the city of Chongqing had their water and electricity turned off in order to force them to move; the residents said they had not yet left because proper resettlement hadn’t been arranged.

Soryn

Let me give you another example of what socialism can mean nowadays.

In Paris you are not allowed to build anything that is not compatible with the esthetic and architectural design of the city. You cannot build buildings higher than a couple of stores, and you cannot build ugly glass and steel skyscrapers nonsense. Amazing isn’t it? That’s called urban planning and design. Or the taste of a community for beauty and living conditions.

JJ

Communities in the United States do the same thing without government involvement. Each community has their privately written covenants and restrictions that people agree to when they move in or build. If they do not like them they can purchase elsewhere.

Well, this is not the simple one piece at a time approach I was talking about. I’ll try to get back in that direction shortly.

More Freedom Dialog

Here’s the question I was trying to steer us toward:

“Some of the ideals of socialism are in a good direction such as relief from hunger, poverty, discrimination etc.

“The question is – how many freedoms are we willing to sell down the river to accomplish these things and can they be accomplished in a state of maximum freedom (which has never existed in modern civilization).”

Okay, time to get more specific. There are some types of force that is accepted by most citizens on both sides of the equation. It is accepted by the vast majority that there should be police power to restrict obvious criminal activity such as murder, rape, theft, etc. A handful of criminals may not agree with this but most would not think the criminals are subject to a tyranny of the majority because of the high degree of agreement of the people.

Taxes, or the increase that a government takes from citizens through the threat of force is the biggest source of disagreement. But even here way over 90% of the population support some sort of taxes for essentials such as defense, roads, police, fire etc. Few would consider taxes collected and spent for purposes on which almost all agree as a tyranny of the majority, or a minority.

The problem enters in when a minority begins demanding an increase in taxes for a social program that is not essential and could be accomplished by citizens through free will.

Notice, that I said, “minority.” That is because these type of movements are always started by a minority and then when they are implemented, and people become dependent on them, a majority often end up supporting such things, even if they lead to ruin.

The point is if the use of force is restricted to things that has a large majority of support (such as keeping criminals off the street) we will stay on the path of safety.

That said, the majority of the taxpayers are reluctant to support government force in taking more money out of their pockets to give to someone else who did not work for it.

Now the people, as a whole, feel it is morally all right to tax the people to support true essentials, so the question is this. What percentage of the people who have to pay should agree to an increase in taxes to support a social program that is for a good cause such as giving the poor some extra support in food stamps and welfare?

Suppose 70% of the taxpayers are against it but the 30% are in power. Are the 30% justified in for forcefully taking money out of the pockets of the 70% for something they do not support and feel is theft?

Reply

Soryn:

Scandinavia is the best example of creating successful models of democratic socialism countries.

According to the following index: The Human Development Index (HDI) is a composite statistic of life expectancy, education, and income indices used to rank countries into four tiers of human …

they all rate higher than US in terms of inequality adjusted indexes. They are on par when it comes to abundance.

JJ

And why is that a good thing? North Korea has the most equal bunch of robotic government controlled people in the world and I certainly would not want to live there. Equality for the sake of equality is meaningless.

Soryn:

Are higher taxes a sure way to disaster? Well check this out:

LINK

Denmark taxes its people with a whooping 46% per revenue, almost half goes to the state! They have abundance and they obviously rate higher than US when it comes to social inequality. And according to that site “Small businesses thrive, with over 70 percent of companies having 50 employees or less”.

JJ

Demark has it good. We pay close to 70% here when all taxes are added up.

In 2006 a family with a median income of $48,201 paid the following to Uncle Sam.

Federal – 19.14%

Payroll – 7.65%

15.3% if self employed in 2008

State & Local – 11%

Corporate taxes which are passed on as higher prices – 6.68%

Excise and other taxes – 3.24%

Cost of compliances to regulations and taxes – 11.33%

Inflation due to government overspending – 3.2% (going up soon)

Total taxes

If self-employed 69.89%.

If working for someone else it would be 62.64% plus another 7.65% your employer pays on payroll tax that he could give to you in a raise if Uncle Sam did not take it.

You can’t really use the United States as an example of results from low taxation.

Soryn

Those countries are also healthier. More social awareness means less commercialization and less food market nonsense competition.

JJ

And that can be due to a number of things. Diabetes has risen dramatically in the past couple decades in the United States because we have switched from regular sugar to fructose?

And why did we do that? Again because of government meddling. Price supports for beet and cane sugar raised its prices and forced business to switch to the cheaper fructose and the switch has caused a plague of diabetes.

Almost every problem we have can be traced to some type of government action aimed at helping the poor unwashed.

May 18, 2014

 

The Molecular Business

Larry Woods and Duke want to know why a molecular business can’t start small and grow big. After all, Apple computer started out with a couple guys working in a garage.

A product or service central to a business is a lot different animal than the business enterprise that manufactures, sells and distributes the products. Apple itself has changed its business model a number of times while seeking the highest profit possible. For instance, they have gone from doing all their manufacturing here in the United States to doing most of it in China.

To think the Molecular Business wouldn’t be viable if it can’t be started successfully with three or four employees is like saying a car is not a good idea if all you have in your possession are the tires. To create a successful car you need all the ingredients, not just part.

If one starts a business with a few dedicated people you’d have to start it the normal way. Why?

Because the key ingredient to the Molecular Business is equality of pay and the guy who starts a business on a shoestring generally has to be motivated by making enough profit to feed his family. In addition to this when you have a handful of people in a small business the labor intensity is so different that similar pay could cause some problems. Also, a small business is often very sales intensive and salespeople, especially in a small business, need to be motivated by some type of commission or bonus for their skill and hard work.

Any business that starts with a handful of people needs to be started pretty much the way people do it now.

I have a small business and there is no way I could make it molecular unless I expanded to the point where I could hire 20-30 employees. We’ve had employees in the past but for now it is just my wife and I and we’ve had to scale it down since we’ve been taking care of her elderly mother.

Larry says: “Many here are perfectly willing and able to act on faith. We can begin with volunteer labor.”

JJ

That’s news to me. You really think that many from the group would be willing to quit their jobs, leave their families and move to a central location to start a business on faith with no guarantee of success?

On the other hand, if I had the funds to set up such a business and offered a reasonable salary I’d have no problem filling it with local people and some keys members may even move here to help.

And, by the way, the Molecular Business is not meant to just be for the enlightened but it would attract a wide variety of people.

Duke:

Is there any reason why a non-molecular business couldn’t choose to transition to a molecular model?

JJ

Yes. In a regular business there are many pay grades and those making the most money, which are also those with the most power, would not want to give up half or more of their salaries. Making the switch with a regular business would be almost impossible at this time. Starting fresh would be quite easy if one had the money because it is easy to hire an unlimited number of people if you offer a reasonable base salary. Then the management could be drawn from the entry-level people.

Duke:

Why 24 people?   I understand where that number comes from (the Molecular Relationship), but why would it also apply to a business?

JJ

I didn’t pick 24 because that is some absolute number for the business. You’d just need a business organization with 20-30, or more people to implement the principles.

I’ve got plenty on my plate now trying to make my publishing business take off while still taking care of old customers from my sign business. If I wanted to expand the sign business from scratch in an attempt to make it molecular then I’d have to take my attention off writing and some other important things I am pursuing and put it all on the business. It takes close to 100% attention and effort to get a business off the ground when you are limited with capital.

I’ve put the Molecular Business ideas out there and anyone who is enterprising can attempt to run with them. Unfortunately, I am limited in what I can do and have to put my attention where I deem it to be most important and at the moment that is getting a book before the public that will catch their attention.

It is interesting that since I first came up with the Molecular Business idea around 30 years ago that many businesses have moved much closer to the model. The most successful grocery store in this area is WINCO, which is employee owned, and workers are treated much more equally than the regular business model.

I do not know of any business following the full molecular model, but the day will come whether by my hand or another, whether this life or another. It is just a matter of time.

 

May 18, 2014

The Question

Dan;

Thought I would point out to future answerers that JJ’s question is NOT “what % of people should agree to an increase in taxes …” but “what % of people THAT HAVE TO PAY should agree to an increase in taxes …” – which is an entirely different animal.

JJ

Good perception Dan – applying the Third Key here.

Dan:

IMO, in the perfect community/society, force would never be used in such a way (take from one to give to another) period.

JJ

In the eventual Zion society that will be established all group financing will be accomplished through free will donations o some type of free market endeavor. Unfortunately, the general consciousness of the people is not there yet. This is one reason there has to be a gathering of the pure in heart who are willing to give what is necessary to make things work. When a significant number prove it can be done then others will follow.

By the way, you gave a good selection of quotes on freedom. I enjoyed reading them even though I wrote them. i forget a lot of what i have written so sometimes my quotes seem new to me, but still familiar and in line with my current thinking.

Duke:

In the hypothetical, I don’t know how dire the need is.

JJ

The need would be what it is now. Note the wording of the question:

“…such as giving the poor some extra support in food stamps and welfare?”

This does not involve a choice as to whether the poor receive any help at all, but “extra” help.

Basically though the principle of force applies to all situations. The point is though that 70% would not resist helping others if they thought they could afford it ad the request was reasonable.

Duke:

But a lot of very good ideas (like abolishing slavery) started out as a minority position. Did their minority status make them any less the “right thing to do” at the time?

JJ

A lot of people think this but it is not quite true. A majority of the states before the civil war were against slavery and did not allow it and the majority of the people in the country were against slavery.

The majority usually make the right decision and the top 70% just about always do.

Duke:

The abolitionist movement began many generations before the Civil War, and it’s unlikely that it was a majority position from the beginning, considering how long it was before the Emancipation Proclamation. I’m talking about those early days, before it was the majority position – was it right?   Or did it not become right until it became the majority position?

JJ

The majority were definitely against slavery in the years leading up to the Civil War. There is no way of knowing if this was true at the founding of this country. I would guess that it was close to fifty-fifty. A lot of the Founders were against slavery but allowed it in the Costitution in order to create the new nation, which would not have happened if they would have opposed it. Some figured they could abolish it later which is what happened.

In ancient times, slavery was so common among all races that the people just accepted it. From my study of history I don’t think a lot of them questioned whether it was right or wrong but was just something that had to be. Most of the slaves didn’t even see slavery as evil unless they were mistreated by their masters. Even Jesus said nothing about it. Hypocrisy was the evil that bothered him the most in that age. Everywhere you see the word “servant’ in the New testament it comes from the Greek word for slave.

The bottom line is consciousness has to change before customs will change.

JJ

The majority usually make the right decision and the top 70% just about always do.

Duke

Then perhaps we should just watch the polls and side with the majority, especially if it’s a large majority. That would be much easier than making up our own minds. Let some outside authority (in this case the majority) make up our minds for us.

JJ

I have never ever given the slightest indication that the majority view should be used to make up our minds as to what is true or right. What I have said is the majority, when presented with the facts, will usually head in a common sense direction and if 70% or more choose a particular side of a debate, it is usually correct. For instance, close to 70% of the people want more investigation to find out the truth about the Benghazi attacks and that certainly sounds like a common sense direction to me. It is difficult to find an area where 70% of the people want to go in a totally illogical direction.

The majority is not that great at seeking subtle truth though and one certainly wants to use his own soul to discern that rather than following the majority. Just over 70% believe that reincarnation is a bunch of mumbo jumbo, for instance, but this does not effect the quality of my life.

Some of the things the majority supported 1000 years ago as being good are seen as evil today and some of the things the majority support today will be seen as evil 1000 years hence. Even so, the teachers of the race must work with majority will to move our spiritual evolution forward and little by little the next correct step is seen.

 

May 19, 2014

The Second Question

Here was the last question:

Now the people, as a whole, feel it is morally all right to tax the people to support true essentials, so the question is this. What percentage of the people who have to pay should agree to an increase in taxes to support a social program that is for a good cause, such as giving the poor some extra support in food stamps and welfare?

We received quite a bit of comment on this but not many specific answers of which there were only three:

Keith 51%

Dan 60%, or what people agree upon.

Johann 75%

Ruth kinda said 100% and Matthew kinda said 51%. Soryn is mysteriously silent on this.

So far the group believes that the taxpayers should not endure a tax increased unless a majority or more agree. And, as Dan noticed, I specified the will of those who are affected. If non taxpayers get a benefit by raising the taxes of those who pay then close to 100% of them will think it is a great idea because they will not be negatively affected. If the majority will of those who actually contribute is considered then the taxes will never reach an unreasonable level.

The figure arrived at here has nothing to do with the cause, whether it be food stamps or defense or research the sex lives of bugs. We must realize that if the cause is really just or important that an informed majority will generally support it no matter what it is. If it is completely unnecessary or frivolous then they will not.

True, the majority is not always right, but it has been coming much closer to the correct path than the President or Congress. No human system will be right all the time so we must seek to implement the highest that the consciousness of the people can accept.

Next question.

Suppose 70% of the taxpayers are against it but the 30% are in power. Are the 30% justified in forcefully taking money out of the pockets of the 70% for something they do not support and feel is theft?

Everyone who answered this agreed that the 30% would not be justified. What many do not realize is this is pretty close to what is happening today. The will of about 30% of the taxpayers are forcing increases on the 70%.

Next Question; Many social programs, such as Obamacare have to be mostly financed, not with taxes, but borrowed money that our children must pay interest on. How urgent must the need be before we borrow more money to help certain citizens? Give examples.

Duke:

Personally, I am much more comfortable with the idea of using good judgment to the best of one’s ability in whatever the circumstances may be, and that may or may not include giving weight to the majority opinion.

JJ

But my good judgement has no weight with Congress or the President. The best we can do is take our good judgment and attempt to educate and change the future direction.

Duke:

Getting back to your first question: “What percentage of the people who have to pay should agree to an increase in taxes to support a social program that is for a good cause, such as giving the poor some extra support in food stamps and welfare?”

In a democracy that does not distinguish between those who pay taxes and those who do not, if the majority will (as expressed through the elected representatives in our case) is to raise taxes, then that is the will of the people.

JJ

It doesn’t matter whether or not taxpayers are distinguished the question can still be answered.

The representatives often do not represent the will of the people just because we elect them. We generally have the choice between two establishment candidates out of touch with the people. When they raise our taxes and then give themselves as much as a 25% pay increase so they will be insulated from their actions this does not represent the will of the people.

Duke:

If you are advocating a democracy that allocates voting power according to taxes paid, then that’s a different form of government, and in that case presumably the consent of a majority of the taxpayers is required. To what extent should voting power be proportional to taxes paid?

JJ

I never said anything about the amount of taxes paid, but about half the people do not pay any federal taxes at all and they are getting more and more power to influence representatives to “tax the rich” which winds up being an increase on all taxpayers. Our representatives should give high consideration to the will of the taxpayer since he is impacted by federal taxes where the non taxpayers are not. The payroll tax would have a much wider net. In a direct democracy (which we do not have) only the taxpayers should be able to vote on a tax increase.

Duke:

However if the 30% came to power in a fair election, then I have little pity on the 70%. They chose to be divided, and so they have been conquered. But hopefully only until the next election.

JJ

Well I certainly have not chosen the current outcomes of legislation. We often have the choice between two people who will take us the same direction so that is no choice at all. That is why I have proposed the system of Molecular Politics outlined in themajorityspeaks.com. This will give much more power to the peopl

“Here was the last question:

Now the people, as a whole, feel it is morally all right to tax the people to support true essentials, so the question is this. What percentage of the people who have to pay should agree to an increase in taxes to support a social program that is for a good cause, such as giving the poor some extra support in food stamps and welfare? Soryn is mysteriously silent on this.”

Sorin

Well, majority means 51%, don’t know what else to comment.

JJ

We know what majority means but you still did not answer the question. I am curious what your answer would be.

 

May 20, 2014

The Swiss System

I made a delightful discovery today. I found that the government of Switzerland operates very close to what I have presented in my treatise Molecular Politics.

I have known for some time that the people there voted on various referendums there, but I always assumed their referendums worked something like our system.

I was wrong.

What kind of piqued my interest was hearing the news story that the Swiss had rejected a $25 minimum wage, and before and after this vote they have had no minimum wage. Actually in U.S. dollars the amount was $17.60, not $25.

In an application of direct democracy 76% of the people voted no on the measure.

I read up on the Swiss form of government and here are several areas where their democracy works better than ours.

Here if Congress passes a bad law or the Supreme Court interprets it in a certain way we are stuck. Changing it is almost impossible.

In Switzerland, if the people think the law is bad they can call for a vote of the people and throw the bill out the window.

We do not have national referendums here but many states have them. The trouble in the U.S. is that even after the will of the people express themselves in a majority vote the legislators will often go to court to overturn it. This happens a large percentage of the time here.

Not in Switzerland. There the will of the people is the ultimate power. This is what our Founders wanted to happen through establishing a jury system that could throw out bad law but it has been corrupted.

Citizens can also initiate measures. All one has to do is collect 100,000 signatures and then it will be presented to the people for a vote.

They still have a representative government that handles all the mundane legislation, but when something comes up that is considered important the people step in and make the decision.

The fact that the people are the final power that can trash bad legislation keeps the legislators in check. It stops them from funding a Bridge to Nowhere.

The fact that they have one of the most vital economies in the world is a testament that their democratic system works. Their GDP is steadily rising, their unemployment rate is around 3%, they export more than they import, they have no national debt, citizens can openly carry arms on buses yet the crime rate is very low, they have strict control over their borders, no minimum wage, fewer regulations, employers are free to fire anyone, but if you want to work you can usually get a job. They have a welfare system that is not needed that often but works on a local rather than national level – a little like charities used to be here.

And they have achieved this high economic standing without the benefit of oil, as is the case in Norway, Sweden and the UK.

One may wonder why such a high minimum wage of $17.60 got on the ballot to begin with – which would have made it the highest in the world. The reason is that 90% of the people make more than that. The average wage there is $37.00 an hour and only 10% of the people would be effected by the minimum wage and of those the effect would have been small because most of that 10% made close to $17.60 an hour already. Even so, 76% of the people thought it was not necessary and rejected it.

I’m going to look deeper into the Swiss system but so far it seems to provide a lot of evidence that a direct democracy where the real ultimate power lies in the hands of the people is indeed workable. I’m mystified that I haven’t heard more about it.

Sorin

This form of direct democracy (which is binding) exists in some other countries, like Croatia, Italy, or Hungary.

See this for a list: 

Also, in some countries the constitution can be modified only by referendum (binding).

In Romania, the president can call for a referendum on any subject, which has binding power. Same in France. Also, in Romania any modification of the constitution is approved through referendum. There is no institution that can cancel the will of the people.

JJ

The referendums in those countries have a lot more restrictions than the Swiss. For instance, of Hungary it says:

The Constitution imposes a number of prohibitions on matters on which a referendum can be held, including amending Constitution, budget, taxing, obligations from international agreements, military operations, etc. Required voter turnout for the referendum to be valid is 50%. The decision made by a referendum is binding on the Parliament.

A Swiss referendum usually gets a little less than 50% turnout so by Hungary’s guidelines it would be negated right there.

Sounds like some of the countries have referendums on the books to give the illusion of participation by the people. The Swiss seem to be the only country that has democratic participation with real teeth.

 

May 20, 2014

Jefferson & Democracy

Good comments on juries lwk. You say:

As to what the Founders wanted, there is considerable documentation of their distrust of direct democracy as practiced in Switzerland.

JJ

They were divided over that. Jefferson, for instance, was a big supporter of the will of the people being supreme.

Here’s some quotes:

Where the law of the majority ceases to be acknowledged, there government ends; the law of the strongest takes its place, and life and property are his who can take them. (Quote from Thomas Jefferson to Annapolis Citizens, 1809)

“Laws made by common consent must not be trampled on by individuals” –Thomas Jefferson to Garret Vanmeter, 1781 ME 4:417, Papers 5:566

“If we are faithful to our country, IF WE ACQUIESCE, WITH GOOD WILL, IN THE DECISIONS OF THE MAJORITY, AND THE NATION MOVES IN MASS IN THE SAME DIRECTION, ALTHOUGH IT MAY NOT BE THAT WHICH EVERY INDIVIDUAL THINKS BEST, we have nothing to fear from any quarter” –Thomas Jefferson to Virginia Baptists, 1808 ME 16:321

“THE FIRST PRINCIPLE OF REPUBLICANISM IS THAT THE LEX MAJORIS PARTIS (THE LAW OF THE MAJORITY) IS THE FUNDAMENTAL LAW OF EVERY SOCIETY OF INDIVIDUALS OF EQUAL RIGHTS; to consider the will of the society enounced by the majority of a single vote as sacred as if unanimous is the first of all lessons in importance, yet the last which is thoroughly learnt .” –Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, 1817 ME 15:127

“[Bear] always in mind that a nation ceases to be republican only when the will of the majority ceases to be the law” –Thomas Jefferson: Reply to the Citizens of Adams County, Pa, 1808 ME 12:18

“The will of the people is the only legitimate foundation of any government, and to protect its free expression should be our first object” –Thomas Jefferson to Benjamin Waring, 1801 ME 10:236

“The measures of the fair majority ought always to be respected” –Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1792 ME 8:397

“I subscribe to the principle, that the will of the majority honestly expressed should give law” –Thomas Jefferson: The Anas, 1793 ME 1:332

“All being equally free, no one has a right to say what shall be law for the others. Our way is to put these questions to the vote, and to consider that as law for which the majority votes” –Thomas Jefferson: Address to the Cherokee Nation, 1809 ME 16:456

“[We acknowledge] the principle that the majority must give the law” –Thomas Jefferson to William Carmichael, 1788 ME 7:28

“This [is] a country where the will of the majority is the law, and ought to be the law” –Thomas Jefferson: Answers to de Meusnier Questions, 1786 ME 17:85

“Civil government being the sole object of forming societies, its administration must be conducted by common consent” –Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia QVIII, 1782 ME 2:120

“The fundamental principle of [a common government of associated States] is that the will of the majority is to prevail” –Thomas Jefferson to William Eustis, 1809

“The voice of the majority decides. For the lex majoris partis is the law of all councils, elections, etc, where not otherwise expressly provided” –Thomas Jefferson: Parliamentary Manual, 1800 ME 2:420

“It is the multitude which possess force, and wisdom must yield to that” –Thomas Jefferson to Pierre Samuel Dupont de Nemours, 1816 ME 14:492

“The Lex majoris partis, founded in common law as well as common right, [is] the natural law of every assembly of men whose numbers are not fixed by any other law” –Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia QXIII, 1782 ME 2:172

“Every man, and every body of men on earth, possesses the right of self-government. They receive it with their being from the hand of nature. Individuals exercise it by their single will; collections of men by that of their majority; for the law of the majority is the natural law of every society of men” –Thomas Jefferson: Opinion on Residence Bill, 1790 ME 3:60

 

May 20, 2014

The Teachings

Sarah:

I have always resonated with www.freeread.com since the day I found it, however no matter who I tell or in which way I convey tid bits of knowledge about JJ’s books to….no one I have shown them to in 4.5 years has grabbed hold of it the way I did. I have run the gamut of approaches and I pretty much now am very non-schalant about it and wait for anyone to ask first….but people never do.

Just seems odd, like why do I clearly see these teachings as being so profound….but others I show do not delve into them?

JJ

Yes, this seems odd even for me. It seems that te majority cannot see the difference between mumbo jumbo and teachings that speak to the soul.

I am in good company for DK’s teachings still are not widely read though he is becoming widely recognized. Here is something interesting he said:

Each generation should produce those able to ascertain subjective fact for themselves; they will utilize that which is exoteric and known as stepping stones on the path to perfect knowledge. They will know, and they will give out, and only the next cycle of fifty years after their work is accomplished will see the recognition by the many of the truth revealed by the few. TCF, Page 707

 

May 20, 2014

What or Who is the 144,000 exactly?

JJ quoting DK

Each generation should produce those able to ascertain subjective fact for themselves; they will utilize that which is exoteric and known as stepping stones on the path to perfect knowledge. They will know, and they will give out, and only the next cycle of fifty years after their work is accomplished will see the recognition by the many of the truth revealed by the few. TCF, Page 707

May 20, 2014

Jefferson on “Republic”

View Source

As for an example of the tyranny of the majority goes – I cannot find one example in history. The best example the quoted author comes up with is:

Great Britain, the state of New York enacted harsh measures against Loyalists and British subjects. These included the Confiscation Act (1779), the Citation Act (1782) and the Trespass Act (1783). All involved the taking of property.

In Hamilton’s view, these Acts illustrated the inherent difference between democracy and the law.

JJ

What he forgets to note is is that those acts were not passed by a democratic vote but by Representative governments. Where there is tyranny it is almost always the tyranny of the minority. A majority may get a little out of hand once in a while. For example right after 9/11 the majority wanted revenge any way they could get it but that didn’t last for long. On the other hand, a minority like Castro will suppress his people as long as he has breath.

 

May 21, 2014

Direct Democracy

Duke:

Regarding the National Referendum system embraced in various forms by Switzerland and several other European nations, would it make any sense to draft a proposed Constitutional Amendment?

JJ

Getting a Constitutional Amendment through is extremely difficult. That is why I created a system that would create even more Democracy than Switzerland has with no changes to the Constitution necessary. Once I get the public’s attention through one of my works I will plan on promoting it.

Those who have not read the plan can check it out here.

 

May 21, 2014

 

The Caterpillar Principle

Soryn:

While I advocate for pressure (international applicable regulations) from the international community to regulate the exchange of natural resources and services between poor and rich countries, I am curious to see what is your position on this?

JJ

The articles you referenced point out that the countries who won the lottery of natural resources generally wind up as much poorer than nations that have to rely heavily on the ingenuity to thrive. This if often blamed on the greed of the corporations that supposedly exploit them which silly.

The principle behind this could be called the Caterpillar Principle. The saying goes that a caterpillar needs the struggle of breaking out of its prison cocoon to gain the strength to survive and if you help it that it will die. The same goes with a chicken breaking out of its egg. You could kill it by helping it too much.

The truth of this principle is illustrated not only by nations who win a lottery by discovering oil or some other commodity, but by lottery winners themselves. I have followed the stories of many lottery winners and almost all of them, after a couple years of winning the lottery, curse the day they won for they wind up broke and alienated from all their friends.

What happens is as soon as friends and family discover they won big money they start hitting them up for a piece of the winnings or for a loan or investment that is never paid back. Then as soon as the winner starts running short and cuts off the funds his friends become angry and start hating his guts.

Now what is the core reason that the lottery winner winds up with such a problem? Do we blame it on his greedy friends and family?

As I said, that is silly. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have also encountered a lot of greedy people and they didn’t lose their wealth because of it?

If free stuff is there for the taking then self-serving people will come out of the woodwork. Bill Gates is just smart enough to know how to handle them.

What is the solution to the lottery problem? Should we establish regulations to control how the winner spends his money and how his friends can approach him for loans?

Of course not. That would be interfering with free will. Even though most winners will use bad judgment with their wealth we must let them learn by their own experiences. Believe me, the lottery winner who has lost everything has learned some important initial lessons about human nature and the misuse of money.

Even so goes it with nations that win the lottery. Some may want to exploit them or even help them by getting them to invest in a good cause but the fact that most such nations wind up poor is not their fault. It is the fault of the nation itself just as it is the fault of the lottery winner if he gives away all his winnings or invests the money in some well-meaning scheme.

Just like it is not a good idea to regulate lottery winners and their friends, it is not a good idea to regulate the wealth of a nation or the greed of the people dealing with it. If some entity attempts to take the resources by force then that is another matter.

Just like there are some lottery winners with enough common sense to use their money wisely even so, some oil rich countries do also. Two examples are Qatar and Kuwait.

Japan is an example of a country with few resources that overcame the handicap through their ingenuity and became prosperous. Sixteenth Century Spain is an example of a prosperous country that became poor by discovering or stealing the riches of gold and silver from the New World. As soon as they started relying on all that gold they became lazy and went dramatically downhill economically and as a world power.

Soryn asks me about charities such as such as the Bill Gates’ foundation.

If anyone wants to start a charity or donate money to help the disadvantaged that is fine with me and is usually about 500% better spent than government money which is generally just thrown at problems.

If we really wanted to help the Third World the first thing we would do for them is make sure all people on the planet have clean drinking water. We now have the technology to take clean water right out of the air.

Check this out:

Ruth W:

I can tell you from experience that child labor was a very good thing for me. After the great depression our family struggled to survive. By the time I was 13 I was delighted to get a job on a farm working 10 hour days and feeling happy about it.

JJ

Yes, child labor not taken to excess is a good thing. I did lots of work for money from the time I was four and it was good for my soul and work ethic.

From the ages of 4-13 I did things such as pick fruit, manage lemonade stands, pick up bottles for recycling, sell seeds and cards door to door, thin apples, various orchard work such as dig around trees fertilize and pick up brush, worked in a packing shed, danced for money in bars, and even sold some beer.

I never felt abused in the least and was thrilled to make some money.

To Soryn:

Can you point to one country where the standards of living were made worse by corporations coming in and hiring people?

Look at the two countries where this does not happen at all: Cuba – where they are now having toilet paper shortages and North Korea where the people eat grass to survive.

JJ wrote:

From the ages of 4-13 I did things such as …. danced for money in bars …

Dan:

You’ll have to forgive me if I just not only CANNOT but WILLNOT picture you as a pole dancer 🙂

JJ

I thought that should get a rise from someone out there. Here’s the story. When I was a kid my parents spent most nights out in bars and if they were not home when they said I took my younger sister, walked uptown, and found them in one of the bars. Once there they usually were not in the mood to come home. The patrons would offer me and my sister money to dance for them so we thought, “What the heck?” and did our best. It earned us some money to buy candy.

 

May 22, 2014

Third Question

The Last Question:

Many social programs, such as Obamacare have to be mostly financed, not with taxes, but borrowed money that our children must pay interest on. How urgent must the need be before we borrow more money to help certain citizens? Give examples.

JJ

Good common sense answers on this.

The government borrowing money and accumulating higher and higher interest payments that must be met is much more serious than the average person realizes. Those who do the math realize that if we do not curtail this borrowing the day will come that the amount of the payment will exceed all other spending and lead to insolvency.

And how do you think the Chinese will respond if we tell them, “Sorry. We just don’t have the money to pay you this month or year?”

We shouldn’t be borrowing a dime to expand any social program. The only thing that would justify more borrowing would be a war for self preservation or some type of disaster where people need relief.

Everyone in the group who commented agreed that 50% or more should agree to spending on a good cause if an increase in taxes would result. They were even stricter when the money would be borrowed.

Question:

Either everyone here is an extreme right-winger or we are just smarter than the average voter. Every year we borrow more money, not for emergencies, but to expand government and social programs. Why do people put up with this? Are they mentally challenged, just not paying attention or what? Why can they not do the simple math that would tell them that we will have a day of reckoning if we continue this borrowing madness?

 

May 22, 2014

Correct Translation

Soryn giving a quote:

“I believe that the free enterprise system is the greatest engine of prosperity the world’s ever know, I believe in self reliance and individual initiative but I also believe that everybody should have a fair shot” says Obama.

JJ

You have to translate what Obama says to get the truth because he says what people want to hear instead of giving his true intentions – such as “If you like your insurance you can keep your insurance” a total lie.

Translation:

“You’ve had your free enterprise and used initiative and self reliance in the past and this has resulted in an unfair division of the rich and poor which I will correct with a master plan of forced redistribution.”

Soryn:

Forced redistribution is currently a reality. People pay taxes and the money is redistributed by the government.

JJ

If the taxes due are a fair amount that the taxpayers support and those who contribute actually get benefits in return then it is not considered forced redistribution. It is considered forced redistribution when those who have worked hard for their money are ordered to pay more than they consider fair.

This has happened with Obamacare. Here is an example from a letter published in my local paper this morning:

“Liberals lied about Obamacare, saying that we could keep our plans and doctors. Liberals told us our premiums would be $2,500 less. My premiums have risen 400 percent so I can pay for liberal freeloaders.”

You can’t blame this guy for feeling he was not treated fairly.

Soryn:

Not trying to defend Obamacare or anything, we can read the following on the official site:

“ObamaCare’s cost is estimated at up to net cost of $1.36 trillion dollars by 2023.”

“Obamacare is projected to cut the national deficit by over $200 billion during its first 10 years and over $1 trillion over the next two decades. This helps offset the up-front cost of ObamaCare.”

So it seems like in the short-term it creates a great deficit, but in the long run it brings a benefit.

JJ

Wow.. I am amazed at the depth of your self-deception if you believe that propaganda from Obama sites. The costs estimated by those who actually do the math are to be three times as much as this estimate and I’d be willing to bet that is a low figure. If you think Obamacare will reduce the deficit then I have a great bridge I’ll sell you cheap.

Every cost estimate the government gives us on a social program is always way way off. Medicare costs more than ten times the estimated amount.

If you want to know Obama’s thinking look at his past and his actions rather than his words. Take a look.

LINK

 

May 23, 2014

Ratio of Men to Women among spiritual seekers

Larry W

If you go among any Church or spiritual seekers, this is the trend. I mentioned this recently when I attended an esoteric group of seekers in Oklahoma City. 40 women, four men. So tonight I got the idea to go look at pics from Keysters. Every year we pose outside a restaurant or someplace or two for group pics. You don’t always get ALL attendees in such pics, but it gives you a pretty good idea who attended. I looked at several group pics from KOK (Keys of Knowledge) Gatherings. In each one I count equal number of men and of women. Interesting.

What does that imply? I don’t know. But it shows SOMETHING is different about the Keysters compared to most other seeker groups.

JJ

Interesting point Larry. I have heard a number of comments over the years about the fact that we seem to draw an even number of male and females at various meetings whereas other spiritual groups, especially new age and metaphysical ones draw mostly females.

In each gathering we have had we always do something in a circle where we arrange them male/female and in each gsathering they have been very close to even. This also happens in various classes I give.

I think the reason I draw a fairly even number is that I am one of the few spiritual teachers who puts emphasis on logic that appeals to males as well as the mystical which appeals to the female side.

Ruth:

Don’t forget that the Keysters also include all those members who do not attend the mini gathering every year, so the ratio of men and women might be a bit different to just a group picture of a few of the members.

JJ

Good point. It is interesting that even a greater percentage of the Keys are male than happens at the gatherings – at least among those who participate. This is also highly unusual amoung spiritual metaphysical or New Age groups.

LWK

If and when government forces higher wages than are economically justified the end result is always fewer jobs, and/or higher prices for goods.

JJ

Good point Larry. Switzerland is one of the few countries that refuses to pass a minimum wage and the average wage there is $37/hr. and unemployment is about 3%. Few people make less than $20/hr.

The Left does not seem to realize that reality is not what they feel but what actually happens.

Larry W

I find myself extremely tempted right now to come up with The Pole Dancer Principle.

JJ

Actually the pole dancing idea came entirely from Dan’s fertile imagination. When my sister and I danced for the drunken crowd we kind of copied what we had seen in the movies which was a little swing type stuff. We made it up as we went. Sometimes I also got free beer out of the deal. It was a lot different world back then.

 

May 23, 2014

Question Four

It is interesting to contemplate the difference between the political Left and Right. The Right just cannot understand why the Left cannot add 2+2 and support a balanced budget and the Left see the Right as heartless beasts who refuse to help the poor and disadvantaged.

Question: What is the real difference between the two sides and why do they not understand each other – or do they?

 

Copyright 2014 by J J Dewey

Easy Access to all the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

Check out JJ’s Political Blog HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE

April 8, 2014

Lights on Mars

This is pretty mysterious.

LINK1

Also this:

LINK2

 

 

April 9, 2014

Mars, Sound etc.

Tom:

Could their be intelligence life on Mars…what do you think JJ?

JJ

There is life on all the major planets, but not always on the physical surface. There are many other places to look. Most planets have some type of life form under their surface. Just as there are many complex parts within our physical bodies even so, a planet has a complex interior with a number of functioning life forms. I believe the gas giants such as Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune have a number of gaseous life forms within their thick atmospheres.

I would also expect to find some type of life form under the surface in water in places such as Jupiter’s moon, Europa or Enceladus which orbits Saturn.

As far as intelligent life goes, scientists can’t find evidence that any exists in the solar system, but they do not realize that each planet has many more components than the dense physical plane. There are the higher ethers and the astral and mental planes with their divisions. Most of the planets and even the Sun has intelligent life on some plane of its existence.

That light on Mars captured by the Rover is quite intriguing. If there is a natural explanation I’m not sure what it could be. It could be an outpost left by an ancient civilization or interplanetary visitor. Then it could be from inhabitants of the etheric world who descended to the physical to check out the Rover.

There are some other interesting pictures indicating that life has been or is there. Check these out:

LINK1

LINK2

LINK3

 

Tom

I’m doing Seti@home which uses users computers to try to find radio signals from outer space. Have you done any citizen science projects.

JJ

No, I have my hands full at the present but that sounds right up your alley.

Jarek

I have a question for You (and the other keysters):

When being in silence with a silent and still mind (like in meditation), do You hear a constant high pitched sound/noise (quite similar to the noise the old CRT TV’s had back in the days, but even a higher pitch, so high that it seems to be on the edge of perception of the real and imagination)?

The reason I asked You about the high pitch sound is that from all the people I personally know, those few who are fairly enlightened and are seekers of truth on the Path, hear it also, so I thought You might too 🙂

JJ

Yeah, I hear a number of background sounds and see a number of lights. Just you bringing up the subject drew my attention to the sound. Unless there is some message involved I just usually tune them out as they can be a distraction.

As to what your purpose in life is that is for you to figure out. Your purpose or mission is decided by you before you were born and when you find it, it will just feel right. Keep in mind that one life out of seven is a Sabbath and your main purpose in that life is to rest, recharge and just take things in.

 

April 11, 2014

Cosmos Again

I’m continuing to watch the Cosmos series hosted by Neil deGrasse Tyson. I was glad to see that in the last episode, the fifth, that he stuck to science and didn’t insult the intelligence of those who believe a Higher Intelligence is behind creation.

One interesting thing I learned which I didn’t know was the first institutionalized book burning took place a couple centuries before Christ and was ordered by Qin Shi Huang, the first emperor, and unifier of China.

Tyson tells us that he took a continent and turned it into a nation that now bears his name China.

Most of us know Emperor Qin for the army of 7,000 terra cotta warriors that guard his tomb.

In Emperor Qin’s drive to consolidate his far-flung empire, he took drastic measures to standardize everything within it.

This included mandating a single coinage, making uniform all weights and measures, the widths of carts and roads, as well as the precise way the Chinese language was to be written, including what you were allowed to write and think.

Emperor Qin’s philosophy– the only one permitted– was called “legalism,” which is just what it sounded like, do as the law says or else.

It’s a philosophy that’s not highly conducive to questioning authority.

that all the books of the hundred schools of thought shall be be burned, that anyone who uses history to criticize the present shall have his family executed.

The works of MoTze and Confucius and other philosophers were destroyed in the world’s first book burning.

Hundreds of scholars bravely resisted by trying to preserve the forbidden books.

They were buried alive in the capitol.

Science needs the light of free expression to flourish.

It depends on the fearless questioning of authority, the open exchange of ideas. (End quote)

On the other hand in other episodes he took off the hat of a true scientists and resorted to dogma and distortion.

Concerning Newton, he said,

When Isaac Newton was born in this house in 1642, the world was very different.

Everyone looked at the perfection of the clockwork motions of the planets in the sky and could only understand it as the work of a master clock maker.

How else to explain it? There was only one way such a thing could come about in their imagination; only one answer for them– God.

For reasons beyond our understanding, God just created the solar system that way.

But this explanation is the closing of a door.

It doesn’t lead to other questions.

Along came Newton, a God-loving man who’s also a genius.

He could write the laws of nature in perfect mathematical sentences– formulas that applied universally to apples, moons, planets and so much more.

With one foot still in the Middle Ages, Isaac Newton imagined the whole solar system.

Newton’s laws of gravity and motion revealed how the Sun held distant worlds captive.

His laws swept away the need for a master clock maker to explain the precision and beauty of the solar system.

Gravity is the clock maker. (end quote)

This is an absurd conclusion. This is like saying that the hands of my watch move with precision because it has a battery and this means there is no watchmaker. Or for that matter, no one made the battery either. It just exists.

Newton, who is considered the greatest scientist of all time, certainly came to a different conclusion from his work than Tyson did. He was a huge believer in Intelligent Design as well as a seeker of truth from the Bible. He credited many of his discoveries to his reflections on the scriptures and the Great Clockmaker who made the universe. His discovery of the law of gravity strengthened his belief in a Creator. It didn’t cause him to dismiss God in the least as Tyson thinks should happen.

Then in the second episode he projects the idea that because of powerful evidence that evolution exists that the idea of Intelligent Design is negated. This is nonsense as many supporters of the concept of Intelligent design believe in evolution.

Tyson males a big mistake in his presentation of evolution by telling us that Dogs with the help of man evolved from wolves. Recent research proves pretty conclusively this is not the case. Here is a link to the story.

What evolutionists overlook is that the evidence indicates that it has not been a gradual process, but has occurred in leaps. These giant leaps have occurred after each great extinction. Between extinctions many of the species continue their lives with little or no change for millions of years. Great leaps in creation cannot be explained away by natural selection.

 

April 12, 2014

Evolutionary Leaps

I just finished reading Robert Felix’s book called Magnetic Reversals for the second time and found it quite interesting. He basically makes the interesting claim that historical evidence suggests that giant atomic explosions were triggered in our atmosphere after magnetic reversals occurred. This has been responsible for various mass extinctions. These explosions, which occurred in our atmosphere, were triggered by tremendous currents of electrical force interacting with elements in the atmosphere which created an atomic reaction, creating destruction and new elements raining down on the earth.

Then, after the partial extinction of life on the planet new species seemed to magically appear. He attributes this to increased mutation from radiation, God, or both. He also says we are overdue for another magnetic reversal.

I found this particularly interesting, but even more so when I reread a profound statement by DK concerning what was behind the evolutionary leap that produced the first self conscious humans. He says:

“At human individualisation in the middle of the third rootrace. This was produced by a vast destruction of the forms we call animal-man. This point has seldom been brought out in teaching. The advent of the Lords of the Flame, the electrical storm which ushered in the period of man, was distinguished by disaster, chaos, and the destruction of many in the third kingdom of nature. The spark of mind was implanted and the strength of its vibration, and the immediate effect of its presence caused the death of the animal form, thus producing the immediate possibility of the newly vitalised causal bodies vibrating to such purpose that new physical vehicles were taken. That was the Will aspect manifesting in the fourth round in connection with the human family.” Treatise on Cosmic Fire, Page 425

Note that, in harmony with Felix, he says that an “electrical storm which ushered in the period of man, was distinguished by disaster, chaos, and the destruction of many in the third kingdom of nature.”

Notice that he says the electrical storm followed by great destruction created the “possibility of the newly vitalized causal bodies vibrating to such purpose that new physical vehicles were taken.”

Where did these new physical bodies come from? According Felix the evidence suggests that they just seem to magically appear. It may well be the perfect storm of creation comes together after such electrical phenomena causes great destruction. These ingredients include:

(1) Powerful electrical forces unleashed.

(2) Increased radioactivity.

(3) Being visited by beings of great intelligence.

These three ingredients seem to work together to create new and better species to replace the old.

For those interested in Felix’s book here is the LINK

LWK (Quoting Peter)

in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

JJ

That is an amazing close to what Felix says happens after a natural nuclear explosion caused by a magnetic reversal causing past extinctions. He thinks the explosion in Siberia in 1909 could have been a foreshadoeing and a natural cause rather than a meteorite.

 

April 13, 2014

Heavens Melting

Adam:

Are you now endorsing some type of “rapture,”

JJ

No, not by any means. There may be some great cataclysms but the earth will not be destroyed in any near future – unless we blow ourselves up. Felix presents evidence that a magnetic reversal could trigger some explosions in the atmosphere similar to what happened in Siberia in 1909.

Here is what DK says:

When man has found out how to contact and utilise positive solar electricity in combination with negative planetary electricity, we shall have a very dangerous condition brought about, and one of the factors which will eventually manifest in the destruction of the fifth root race by fire. At that great cataclysmas the Bible says “the Heavens will melt with fervent heat.” This will be seen in a still greater degree in the next round, and will cause that destruction by fire of the forms of the men who have failed, which will liberate the lives on a stupendous scale, and thus temporarily ‘purify’ the Earth from elements which would tend to hinder the evolutionary process. As the cycles pass away, the balancing of these fiery currents will be gradually brought about, and will result in a planetary condition of harmony, and of esoteric equality, which will provide ideal environment for harmonious man. Treatise on Cosmic Fire, Page 524

He points out in another place that this destruction will take place quite a few years down the road.

 

April 16, 2014

Darker Picture?

LWK

So my question was to JJ really. Is he seeing a darker picture now?

JJ

Not really. I believe as before that there will be some catastrophic events in the next 150-200 years but I do not see an extinction coming for some time to come – that is unless humanity gets out of control and blows itself up. That is, I would guess, a 15% probability.

The probability is much higher that some type of a more limited nuclear or WMD exchange will happen in the near future and will serve as a wakeup call.

 

April 17, 2014

Nuclear Problem

Marriage Vows

Tom

What about the vow one makes in life………

But I believe marriage can continue after death no matter what. I hope my G-parants are still married where ever they are at?

JJ

Any vow that you take here on earth only applies to physical plane life. You are not held to it in the next world. Scientologists who make a billion year commitment to L Ron Hubbard will be relieved to discover this. If your grandparents want to hang out together in the next world there will be nothing stopping them except their own decisions. After death you link up with a lot of old friends and past lovers so you have a whole new prespective on relationships. If you love someone here you will continue to love them after death. Love continues, but earthly vows are temporary. For one thing, we often do not know what we are doing when taking long term vows.

 

Apr 18, 2014

Re: Being God

I stirred Dan’s curiosity when I talked about the corruption of the Atlanteans in mixing the species.

He says:

I just read some information about how such “chimeric” organisms have been created in the lab and are currently being used for all kinds of things from converting plant sugars into plastics to treating wastewater to create electricity.

The traditional religious “party line” is, essentially, that bio-engineering, genetic manipulation, cloning, gene-splicing and etc is “playing god” and that puny humans should keep their grubby little mitts out of it.

I am not aware of any current attempts to mix animal and human genes but I was wondering, JJ, what your take is on THIS sort of biological experimentation? Specifically the genetic mixing of lower life forms such as bacteria, fungi, etc in order use them as biological machines to churn out products.

JJ

Whenever the power of humanity is enhanced the possibility of good is increased, but also the possibility of evil and destruction.

Perhaps the best example of this so far is atomic energy. We have unleashed a power that can either destroy the world or save the world. It all depends on the intentions of those with the power.

If we could derive some benefit through the mixing of the species that would help mankind and bring us greater happiness then that would be well and good. But if we wanted to create hybrids for amusement or to be slaves, or for sexual pleasure at their expense then that would indeed be a corruption. Indeed in ancient times and on some other planets there are corruptions that would boggle the mind.

These type of corruptions would draw down some unfortunate entities with bad karma but they would much prefer paying it off in regular human bodies.

We are entering some dangerous territory when we start mixing the species because sooner or later scientists will forget about doing something that will benefit us and do crazy Stephen King type of experiments just to see what they can do. We could wind up with some real out of control monsters on our hands like in Alien, starring Sigourney Weaver, or maybe a rise of the Planet of the Apes.

The next couple hundred years is going to test our common sense in a number of different ways. Let us hope we can navigate through these times successfully until we mature a bit.

Ruth:

In fact, if Sanat incarnated into animal man or an animal body, then surely he would blow that body to pieces,

JJ

If he would have incarnated in his full consciousness and glory then the primitive body could not have handled it, but even us regular folk are not incarnated in our full consciousness and neither was Sanat. He allocated what was necessary to make the incarnation work.

 

April 20, 2014

Phillip Lindsay

Larry W

What do you think, Keysters, Is Phillip Lindsay worth reading?

JJ

I read some of his material and he is pretty well versed on AAB and HBP and does some of his own thinking. He is better than most theosophists and if you read by the light of the soul you can benefit.

He did say one thing that comes to mind that didn’t sound right. He believes the dinosaurs went extinct when the hierarchy came here 23 million years ago which was followed by great destruction. DK says nothing that indicates this is the case and I see no reason to revise the regular timeline of around 65 million years ago for their demise.

 

April 21, 2014

Transcendence

Since we’ve been talking about evolution and technology it is very timely indeed that my wife and I went to see the new movie, Transcendence, the other day.

We read a review of it in the paper and it rated it quite low and we almost went to something else instead. I’m glad we stayed the course and went for we found it quite enjoyable and couldn’t understand why some critics were so down on the movie. Not only that but the ticket sales were very low as it only grossed about $11 million the first week. Maybe part of the reason is that Johnny Depp is the highest paid actor in the world and when you are at the top there’s a lot of people who want to see you fail. Personally, I like the guy as an actor.

My favorite movie with him in was The Ninth Gate. It wasn’t a big success but was quite interesting to watch.

Anyway back to Transcendence. To save me time typing here is the plot I lifted from what others have said:

Dr Will Caster (Johnny Depp) develops a sentient computer device with unsurpassed processing power. When fatally poisoned by a radical techno-terrorist organization he and his wife (Rebecca Hall) upload his consciousness into his invention to preserve his life, but the now unrestrained supercomputer soon develops a frightening ambition that blurs the line between humanity and technology.

At the heart, it’s a story about a woman, Evelyn, who loves her husband, Will, so much she tries to hold onto him by helping him save his consciousness. She begins to wrestle with whether this being is really Will or is something new. It’s also about evolution and the line between humanity and evolving into something more. This movie might be a turn off for religious people but it does make you think of what humanity could become whether you’re religious or not. (End quote)

One of the criticisms of the movie is that there has already been a lot of them about the dangers of technology run amuck, but this one was different enough that this did not spoil the movie for us. We live in an age where scientists really think they will soon be able to digitize the human brain and all its memories so the question does arise as to whether actual consciousness will be reproduced. And when Depp comes online in a computer system that is the main question his associates want to know. Is this computerized version really him or something else?

They can only take the nuances so far as they have to create a big problem to solve to make the movie interesting and of course Depp enters the internet and seeks to control the world and those who once loved him now must stop him.

Anyway, this is an interesting movie to watch when contemplating the prospect of playing God with technology. I’d rate it three stars out of four.

 

April 21, 2014

The Etheric Web

Ruth:

Does an atomic bomb have an etheric equivalent or etheric double? If so, does this etheric equivalent equal an atomic explosion in the physical atmosphere? DK said something about the atomic explosions attributing something to the etheric web around Earth.

JJ

Everything has an etheric double. As the organism becomes more complex so is the etheric makeup more complex. For instance the etheric composition or a human or animal is much more complex than a rock. On the other hand, the planet itself is a living entity, of which we are all a part, and, as a whole, has a very complex web.

Here is what DK said in connection to the effect of the atomic bomb on it.

“Is the etheric web of the planet sufficiently stable and balanced so that it can adequately respond to the new and potent forces which could and will pour through it into objective expression? I would remind you that the release of atomic energy has had a far more potent effect in the etheric web than in the dense physical vehicle of the planet. Three times the atomic bomb was used, and that fact is itself significant. It was used twice in Japan, thereby disrupting the etheric web in what you erroneously call the Far East; it was used once in what is also universally called the Far West, and each time a great area of disruption was formed which will have future potent, and at present unsuspected, results.”

Discipleship In The New Age – Volume II, Page 61

Most DK students interpret this to mean that these explosions along with all the more powerful ones that followed will create disastrous results.

There are three points to consider.

(1) DK supported the use of the atomic bomb to end the war. He said that the bomb represented an initiation of matter itself.

(2) He did not say the results would be bad or all bad. He said there would be “unsuspected, results.”

(3) It’s been 69 years since the explosions that he mentioned and there have been no disastrous results that can be attributed to etheric disturbance.

So, what have been the unexpected results of the etheric web disturbance? DK gives a hint:

“As each unit of consciousness, through self-induced effort, achieves the goal and crosses the ‘burning-ground,’ a microscopic portion of the etheric web of the planetary etheric body is consumed by fire; this results in a definite gain for that great Entity, the planetary Logos, through the relatively unimportant liberation of the force of one cell in His body.

Treatise on Cosmic Fire, Page 509

So, fire in the etheric web aids in the liberation of the life of the planet. When we look at the human web we learn that dissolving the web is good as long as it is not done too quickly and the consciousness is ready for the results. Even so, it would be with the planet. Some destruction of the web would release spiritual energy and light and that is what has happened since 1945. The intelligent life on the planet has made progress in both spiritual and material science. The trick is to not advance so fast that we destroy ourselves, and that is the negative danger of disturbing the etheric web.

Ruth

Question two: When one passes over and the solar Angel shows one their life lessons on Earth etc, does one then pass over into the astral emotional realm and emotionally try to fix their physical life lessons or mistakes made once one has been shown their progression from their Solar Angel, or does one forget this brief encounter, and passes over into the astral still playing out life emotional experiences etc depending on one’s evolved consciousness and the state of their evolution.

JJ

We can’t fix our physical plane mistakes when out of the body. What we can do is learn from them and prepare for the next life where we can fix them, or rise above them.

DK says we take three things with us into the astral from the life review. I personally do not think this applies all the time and, of course, the higher Self, or the soul is aware of all of the life review. It’s rather ignorant reflection often runs quite blindly in the astral between lives.

Johann: The initiation that matter underwent when the atomic bombs were detonated, it does correspond with the third degree initiation for humans right?

JJ

Good question. DK merely said the atomic bomb represented an initiation for matter but didn’t give any details. If we consider the development of higher atoms than hydrogen, then molecules and later organic life as initiations then it could be a rather high one. On the other hand, from another angle it could be the first.

The initiating of something that most consider not living is a mysterious subject.

 

April 27, 2014

More on After Death

Ruth quotes this verse:

“Or ever the silver cord be loosed, or the golden bowl be broken, or the pitcher be broken at the fountain, or the wheel broken at the cistern. Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.” Eccl 12:6-7

If the silver cord is the spiritual thread, and the golden bowl is the etheric web, then what is the pitcher being broken at the fountain? And what is the wheel broken at the cistern?

JJ

“Fountain” comes from the Hebrew MABBUWA which means “a spring of water” and a cistern is a well. Those two phrases are describing the source of water being dried up. Water here is symbolic of life so he is merely saying that when the silver cord is loosed, the etheric body broken, and the source of physical life is no more that “the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.”

Ruth again:

You say this:

“During this merging they will be aware of several advanced beings guiding the process while they see their life from beginning to end. As it passes like a holographic movie at great speed he will be aware of the effect of every action, thought and word that came from him. If he hurt people, even unknowingly, he will be aware of that. If he helped others or made them happy he will be aware of that. After reviewing his life he will be aware of how successful his life was but most have a lot of disappointments over missed opportunities and harm that was caused.

”

I already have worked out and also understand all the words, actions, thoughts and deeds that hurt other people and also myself, so when I pass over, will I still have to go through that life review again, when I have already done a life review on myself so far in this physical life?

JJ

Everyone does a life review and just about all are in store for a lot of surprises, positive and negative. Most of those who think they have it all figured out of how all their thoughts and actions have influenced others and what they should have done differently are fooling themselves.

Us humans often see ourselves doing the best we can and our problems, our pain and our troubles just seem to arrive through no fault of our own. In the life review we will see that we were largely responsible for making our own reality and that there were things we could have done that would have made our lives, and that of others, much easier.

Ruth

Does that mean that I can go straight to my mental body, rather than have more emotional experiences etc in the astral realm?

JJ

You will go to a place where there are people with a similar vibration to your own. If you are mentally polarized you would go with that group and if you are astrally polarized, those are the type of people you will be with. So, in a way, we make our own heaven or hell. If one is hard to get along with, and not very loving, he will mix with similar individuals, but if he is loving and friendly he will live with these type of persons. The company he will keep will make for a heaven or hell.

Ruth

I would prefer to pass over and study massive amounts of teachings from DK etc, than play around in the astral realm and hang with people. Although it would be good to catch up with some of my pets who have passed over.

JJ

There are plenty of students of all kinds in both the astral and mental realms. A studious person isn’t necessarily mentally polarized and a strong people person isn’t necessarily astral. The main point of differentiation is the process by which decisions are made. Are the person’s decisions based on how he feels or thinks? Which dominates in the decision making process? There are other factors but that is a big part of it.

Ruth:

Your writings have evolved out of The Immortal Series, and have become something more, so I really hope that this book gets circulated out there into humanity’s consciousness, because it is so well worth reading and learning from.

JJ

Glad you like the book. Unlike many of my other writings my objective is not to introduce new material but to take the best of my teachings and distill them into a book the average person will enjoy. In the process there may be some good insights even for the old timers here.

I am hoping that this may be the book that catches the public’s attention. If not, I’ll keep on trying as long as I am able. Hopefully, we can get this work off the ground in my lifetime. It would be nice to have the means to effectively prepare for difficult times ahead.

 

April 29, 2014

Questions

Ruth:

When you say this :”it would be nice to have the means to effectively prepare for difficult times ahead”…..do you mean that you need to stockpile up food and water etc? and is a Great, Great, Great Depression coming, like what was foretold in the White Horse Prophecy?

JJ

Stockpiling some things on an individual basis is always a wise thing to do, but that was not what I was talking about. If there is a breakdown of society, much more than that would be needed. It is important that the lights have a place to gather so they will be able to have the extra protection of the group as well as raise food. If there were a breakdown, roaming mobs would be a major concern of which a gathering would provide some protection.

Ruth asked my views concerning euthanasia.

Under normal circumstances taking your own life is a major mistake. Most suicides are prompted by some difficult situation in life, but usually his situation was designed by the soul as a means to inspire growth and evolution for the pilgrim. If he takes his life he will have to come back and face a similar situation all over again, causing him to waste a lifetime of time.

A person who is in a no win situation is another matter. If one has a terminal illness and is suffering major pain with no hope for recovery then there normally wouldn’t be much negative karma. But even here the seeker must check with his soul for facing such a dead end may be something he needs to do to achieve all possible growth for that particular lifetime.

When in doubt, always check with the inner voice for one size never fits all.

Thanks for catching those typos. You got a few that I hadn’t caught yet.

 

May 1, 2014

Climbing the Mountain

That’s quite the post Larry. Thanks for your effort in writing and sharing.

Your post reminds me that many true seekers desire with earnestness to make the world a better place, move forward the next step in human evolution, secure the safety of the planet for generations to come and much more. Many have tried to initiate something to move us forward and seemed to have been met with a brick wall. I have been trying for many years and the only thing of substance I have accomplished is to get some foundation writings in print that is available for the public.

That said, I thought I would say a few words about the difficulty in initiating any work that moves people ahead spiritually. Allow me to start with this statement.

Advancing the next spiritual step is the most difficult of all things there are to initiate.

Let us look at some initiates who created things that merely made our lives better on the physical plane. There’s Edison and the light bulb, Tesla and the alternating current, Bell and the telephone, Philo Farnsworth and the television, Steve Jobs and the personal computer and many more that could be listed. To initiate their ideas required a lot of thought and effort and such innovators deserve a lot of credit.

They had a great advantage over a spiritual initiator in that when they presented their product to the world people could see with their own eyes that that it could enhance their lives. Sure they all encountered some resistance at first, but once the product was out there it was only a matter of time before it would be embraced.

On the other hand, an idea or concept that moves consciousness forward is another matter. One of the difficulties is that you just can’t show them a physical object and say, “See, this is how this works and it is going to make life a lot better.” I can write a treatise on The Molecular Relationship, for example, but I can’t build a model in my garage and show it to people and demonstrate how it will make life better.

To illustrate how difficult it is to move humanity forward in spiritual evolution let us look at two of the great initiates in our history.

Moses made a super human effort to gather together the best of humanity in his day with the idea that a gathered people being fed with enlightened ideas could become an “ensign to the nations” and could set an example of a quality of life that many would want to emulate.

Fortunately for Moses, he had a lot of help. Great miracles were shown to the people ending with the parting of the Red Sea to make their escape from the Pharaoh. After this the people saw many more miracles. The people even saw the presence of God in a pillar of light and Moses descending from the mountain shining as the sun.

Moses descended with enlightened writings designed to move the people forward in the spiritual evolution, but after all the signs and wonders they witnessed they reverted back to their old ways and worshipped the golden calf.

Moses then destroyed the great revelation and went back up the mountain and returned with tablets of stone and taught them a lesser law. Without the application of the greater revelation Israel did not accomplish their mission. They wandered in the dessert for 40 years. Anyone who had a consciousness deserving of a greater light would live through this time period and enter the promised land. As it turned out there was only one who qualified and that was Joshua , who later was born as Jesus.

Joshua then led the children of the unfaithful (who had all died) in establishing a nation – a nation several steps down from what was hoped to be.

The interesting thing is that great miracles were shown to the people so they could know with a surety that God was with Moses, but still only one of the whole lot saw the vision of what was supposed to be.

Then when the people were given crude laws, rules and regulations to strictly control their lives – this they gladly accepted – while rejecting the greater light that had the potential for such great joy.

Another great initiate was Jesus. Like Moses he showed the people miracles, the like of which they had never seen before. His work was consummated with the greatest miracle of all when he rose from the dead. All this should have convinced the people that he had something special that would take them closer to the spirit, right?

Not quite. After his great life and even after demonstrating the greatest miracle of all time, the resurrection, you would think that believers would have been rushing to join the disciples. Peter and the group gathered together all the believers they could find and guess what the number was?

One hundred and twenty. (Acts 1:15)

Then, after Pentecost, more great miracles were manifest and some were converted but the church struggled along attempting to teach the pure message of Jesus.

Then came a profound turning point through the work of the apostle Paul. Paul was not much for miracles but he did present a twist on the teachings that the people loved. “Believe on Jesus and be saved.”

That sounded a lot better and easier than the more difficult message of Peter and the apostles who were stressing the message from the Master of doing good works and gaining higher knowledge and furthering the creation of human groups who see eye to eye – like the Twelve.

Just believe and be saved was simple and easy to understand and this, not the teachings of Christ, caused the church to grow and prosper.

Paul initiated a great movement, but at the cost of taking the people away from the core teachings of the Christ.

So we have two great examples of the failure of great signs and wonders in producing good results. Moses was only able to leave a legacy of a nation that was just another nation and Jesus was only able to leave behind a church that was just another church, not much more enlightened than the Romans already had.

Is it any wonder then that the Hierarchy is reluctant today to establish another work through the power of signs, wonders and miracles?

What do you think they would rather have to work with: Millions of people mesmerized over an initiate who seems to have the power of God, or a dozen people who can look within, feel the soul and see truth as it really is?

I will tell you that the latter is true at this point. That is not to say that great miracles will not happen again, but the Brotherhood has come to the realization that they are not that useful in moving people ahead spiritually. Putting out the pure teachings and letting them foment in the minds of the seekers may not produce immediate or spectacular effects among the masses, but for those who are ready they will work inner wonders greater than would be produced if an initiate should be raised from the dead.

So, I your teacher move forward, giving out what light I can that will speak to your inner core. A person here and another there feels the power of the principles speaking to their souls. Not much is happening in the outer world, but because a few of us persist and will not cease from our labors, success is only a matter of time.

And this time the success will not be in numbers alone, such as great numbers of people who do not want to climb the mountain, but just want to bask in an outer light. No. This time a people will gather within whom shines an inner light set on fire through inner struggle and motivated by faith in the triumph of all that is good, beautiful and true.

Let not your faith and hope falter my friends. We only fail if we quit the journey. I am moving forward in this life and however many it takes until the goal is achieved. I hope to see you at the journey’s end.

 

May 3, 2014

What Can I Do?

I regularly get questions of what can be done to get things off the ground. Here I gathered some old and added some new.

As far as practicality goes there is nothing more practical than the understanding of a principle, especially if seen through the light of the soul on an intuitive level. This will often be accompanied by a flash of internal light that multiplies the understanding. Such an instantaneous flash can be worth a year’s worth of study. Actually, it is more valuable than that because the flash will reveal reliable truth whereas a year’s worth of study may fill the mind with many illusions.

Those who do not see or appreciate the principles I teach will be more drawn to information only that gives various step-by-step process to accomplish improvement of some kind. Each person should go where his needs are best met. One size does not fit all.

My teachings then bring additional light on principles from the past and present, and new ones that have never been expanded on.

And for what purpose?

Am I seeking to help you enter the now and stop worrying about the non essentials?

No. That may be a side benefit to some of my teachings, but if the seeker needs help in this area then he should find other help than myself.

Do I just want to get famous, sell a lot of books and then get a large adoring base of fans?

Some think they see a huge ego in me wanting this, but it is not so. If this was all I accomplished I would consider my life a failure.

Do I intend to help students become more successful in life, obtain peace of mind and find meaning for themselves?

No. It’s up to each seeker to take care of these personality needs. This is not my responsibility, but your own.

The only area of self-improvement that I seek to make available is through the stimulation of the intuition through the understanding of true principles. This will also stimulate soul contact.

Any self improvement seekers achieve here is a side benefit. The main purpose here is not to improve various seekers, but to FIND them. I seek to find those who are already sensitive to the whisperings of the soul, and eventually gather them.

I seek to be an element in fulfilling this scripture:

11   “And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.

12   “And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.”

(Isa 11:11-12)

Look at The Archives [at FreeRead.Com] and the millions of words there that lift the reader into the realm of intuitive principles and you will see a seed that will blossom into the ensign to the nations around which many lights will eventually gather.

It is true that right now we are only reaching a few but the time will come that we will reach the many. When the many are reached then power will be given to gather and build anew cities that set a true ensign for the new age.

The end of my work is to gather and build anew on the physical plane. Even though many inner teachings are presented the end goal lies in this physical reality, not in entering into a void or withdrawing into peaceful meditations.

Each must pick the directions impressed upon him through his soul and I do not fault anyone who is led in a different direction than presented here. Those who are to be on the same path as myself will feel thus truth internally. They will sense the principle and the need for the gathering. They are willing to take as long as it takes to accomplish this even if it requires a series of lives.

So what is a seeker to do who feels in harmony with me? Is there any call for action?

Yes there is and I will repeat the call here. If you believe in the gathering you can assist by forming a study group in your area. There are many seekers in every area of the world who have not been exposed to the Keys or my books. Anyone who wants to help can teach others. This takes effort but it can be done and the reward will be great as well as helpful.

Several have tried this with limited success. All who do this must realize that forming a successful group takes a long sustained effort.

If anyone wants action then create a local group. There is no more powerful action you can take than that.

Here is some advice in that direction:

Start with your friends. Most of us know at least a couple people with a metaphysical bent. Call them and tell them you are going to form a study group and study some new teachings you discovered on the Internet and see if they are interested. If you do not know anyone interested in metaphysics you probably need to get out more, but all is not lost. I am always here to support you with ideas.

First, select a place that will accommodate at least a dozen people. There is nothing wrong with starting with a home or apartment.

If your place is small it is quite possible that one of your first students will have a large comfortable home that they would be happy to share.

There are also some places that may allow you to meet on a free basis. Some libraries have rooms for meetings that are either free or very inexpensive. Also check with your bookstores. Some of them will let you have meetings there in hope of selling your group some books. Many restaurants have meeting rooms they will give groups for free if they buy $50 or more worth of food.

If you have a little money to work with you could find a meeting room connected with a local Motel, YMCA, New Age Center, martial arts club or some other organization and rent it on a weekly basis. If you do this you will need to collect some dues from members so you will not have to bear the whole burden. Once you get ten people or so the expense will not be much of a burden on any one individual.

Once you select a definite meeting place then you must do some promotion.

First let’s cover what you can do for free.

Many newspapers and the local Craig’s List have sections that are totally free where you can announce on a weekly basis details about any weekly meetings your group may have. Call them up and see what they have available. You can also advertise local classes on Cragslist.org.

Local TV and Cable channels also have places for free announcements. Check them out.

Print up flyers (or I’ll print them for you) announcing your project and circulate them in book stores, metaphysical centers, health food stores and so on.

Newspapers love doing features that have something to do with the Internet. Call the features editor and tell him or her that you have been participating with a study group on the Internet and are going to extend it to the local people. Chat a while with this person and he may want to write about you.

Now you have exhausted the free methods you should spend a few dollars in regular advertising. Check around and see if there are any metaphysical or alternative health newsletters in your area and run a small ad there.

If you are bold enough to do public speaking then work one up around the Molecular Relationship, the Gathering of Lights or some other topic that interests you.

You’ll need a name for the physical group. May I suggest “The Synthesis Group.”

To synthesize means to gather together various unrelated parts and to put them together into a working whole which wholeness is greater than the sum of the parts.

For instance our discussion group is a synthesis of some of the best people on the Internet.

When your group gets started and you do your part it will take on a life of its own and grow by word of mouth.

On the internet we are gathered as a group and know a few things the average people do not know, but we have little voice except to preach to the choir of like-minded believers.

The first thing each servant of humanity needs to assess is his own limitations – what he can and cannot do. One of the biggest mistakes made by an individual who sees a little light is to sacrifice career, job and family to start some movement that goes nowhere. Many such individuals are lucky to have three followers.

Others go the other extreme and do nothing. This is even worse because they also learn nothing.

What then should the true seeker do to make a difference?

Jesus gave the example in the parable of building a tower. He said that if a person wants to build a tower he must assess the amount of effort and ingredients it will take to finish the project. If he begins and does not have the power to finish then everyone will laugh at him for being so foolish. The wise builder will assess correctly and will not start the tower until he has the power to finish.

Some have questioned me as to why I am not proceeding with zeal to create Molecules, build cities, reform civilization, etc. Yes, there are towers to build, but until we gain the power to finish what we begin – the time to begin has not yet arrived. If we have not power to finish the tower then the thing to do is to gather the materials and resources to prepare for a beginning so we can have a finish.

Right now I have power to do one thing well and that is to write foundation materials and circulate them to a small group of people. If I should die tomorrow, however, all is not lost for many of the concepts contain eternal words that shall not pass away and would be taken up by others who are in a position to build towers.

My astrological chart tells me that I will be subject to strong discipline from Saturn until I get everything in place for my main work. When everything is in place and my will and abilities are sufficiently fine-tuned then a reservoir of power will be released to allow for a major accomplishment. I believe this time is soon, but cannot predict the exact date.

Here is what must happen to open the door for me to begin work on the tower.

One of my works must permeate public consciousness on a fairly wide scale. This could be one of my present or future books, an idea or me in person when I am free to travel and give seminars.

Sufficient finances to sustain the effort.

That’s well and good one may think, but I’d like to do something more in the present than just sit around and wait for the true beginning of the work.

There is always something more the true initiate can find to do.

Here are a few things:

An idea I do not think I have suggested before, but a very powerful one is to write letters to your local paper. Letters to the editor are often the most popular part of the paper and many thousands read them.

If you write a letter to your local paper and manage to make a reference to freeread.com or themajorityspeaks.com a lot of hits could come from it. I have covered a large variety of subjects at these sites so there is something of interest to almost everyone.

Global warming, nuclear energy, world peace, the economy, religion etc are popular in letters to the editor and writers can reference links to these subjects in my writings. This would certainly press some buttons.

Keep this in mind. A letter to the editor in a major paper that gives our web page is worth 500 dollars or more in advertising.

Many of the group are members of other forums. When appropriate you can post something from the archives there and give the reference with the suggestion to the group that many writings are available.

You can run a classified ad in a local thrifty paper – or free on your local Craig’s List.

The ad could read something like this:

Out Of The Thousands Of Free Books On The Web There Is Not One That Will Hold Your Attention Like This One!

THE IMMORTAL

By

J. J. Dewey

The Immortal is the story of an average truth seeker who stumbles across a fascinating teacher, only to discover that the man is John the Revelator of Apocalypse fame, who has been wandering the earth incognito for the past 2000 years. John begins the task of teaching his new student the first of the Twelve Keys of Knowledge.

The first question addressed in Book I is WHO OR WHAT AM I? The student gives all the standard answers…and they are all wrong. The lead character then realizes he is under the tutorage of no ordinary teacher and must apply himself in a quest for knowledge.

Top get the first book free go to:

Freeread

There are also thousands of articles at the site available free.

You can get copies of Book One in audio or hard copy and give them away. We will send them to you free of charge.

Members can also buy books and give them away.

Participate in the keys forum. Posting there helps keep me stimulated and helps others.

Copyright 2014 by J J Dewey

Easy Access to all the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

Check out JJ’s Political Blog HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE