Tag: good will

Supporting Goodwill

As we announced few days ago we have launched a new group to promote the Declaration of Goodwill.

Here are the words from the master teacher Djwhal Khul that inspired this document:

“The main hierarchical need today (apart from its need for workers) is the forming everywhere of such groups as yours, the relating of group with group within the range of influence of that super group, the Hierarchy. Such groups are forming now in their thousands and are to be found in every land, and they will eventually blend and fuse together into one great movement of goodwill, which is spirit in actual expression. Aspirants everywhere, Arcane School students the world over, and my group of special workers such as yourself, must contact these groups, bringing them together on one point only, and that is Goodwill. Each group must necessarily be left free to proceed with its own destiny and mode of work. Unity is a necessary ideal and is the reverse side of Goodwill. Unitedly, when the right time comes, these groups must issue a great manifesto to the world – identical manifestos being issued in each country by all the groups who stand for world unity and goodwill. Thus they will make the word “goodwill” carry power throughout the planet, whilst the disciples and aspirants will, through their thought, make the word “unity” carry hidden power. Thus a vast band of men of goodwill will be working unitedly, yet independently, and there will be made available – in moments of world crisis – an organised, ready and world-wide public opinion of such strength and organisation that it cannot be ignored.” Discipleship in the New Age, Vol 2, Page 457

The plan is to first introduce the idea here and encourage all to endorse the Declaration by joining the Declaration of Goodwill group. Unlike creating some petition that you sign all you do to support the Declaration is to join the group. Your name on the membership means you support there basic idea of promoting goodwill to all in an attempt to be a healing force for the planet .

The second thing is to invite your friends of goodwill to support the Declaration by becoming a member. These can be people of any belief system

The third thing we will do is reach out to all other groups of goodwill and invite them to either join with us or issue a declaration of their own with a wording that is agreeable to them.

Then after enough momentum is gained we can unitedly influence public opinion and those in power in a positive rather than the current negative direction.

What is true goodwill? The answer should be obvious, but to many it is not.

Goodwill is not something limited to being friendly to those with whom you agree. That takes no power of “will.” It is easy to be friendly to those of your inner circle of friendly faces. The “will” part of goodwill is engaged when one extends the hand of friendship to those who are not in agreement and may even seem to be an enemy.

To extend goodwill one does not have to compromise beliefs or agree with those who oppose you. Instead, the greater the opposition to what you think is good the greater is the need for goodwill. If your neighbor has some political or religious beliefs you think are crazy, destructive or just plain wrong then that is where the opportunity resides.

Consider this. How much will the guy change if you approach him or her and let him know in no uncertain words that you think he is crazy? This will merely have the effect of him standing more firmly on his beliefs while dismissing yours.

But suppose you invite your neighbor over for a barbeque and instead of attacking his beliefs you seek for something in common first. Maybe you both like the same movies or football team and start talking about that.

Consider this: Now you have reached points of agreement in a spirit of goodwill do you think he will be more open to other things you might say that may differ from his beliefs?

Yes. Instead if picking your beliefs apart he will be more likely to seek points of agreement or at worst agree to disagree, but maintain a spirit of friendship. In other words, because of your goodwill he will not feel like throwing rocks through your windows.

Going to extremes is generally a destructive approach and this applies to goodwill. It would be an extreme to accuse others of violating the principle of goodwill merely because they disagree with us, but this is the area where goodwill needs to be applied. Where goodwill will be especially helpful will be in obvious infractions where such perpetrators need to be reminded of accomplishing their goals in constructive rather than destructive ways. Some actions that violate goodwill and need to be pointed out as such are:

(1) Any physical violence of one person or group against another that is not an act of self defense.

This is listed as number one for this is the most obvious act that violates goodwill

(2) Any statement that calls for physical violence against another human being.

(3) Name calling using words that are obviously negative and attacking. Examples of such words are hypocrite, liar, hater, bigot, stupid, racial and religious slurs and others.

The key is to not stereotype a person’s identity with an accusation. If you think the guy is lying, for instance, instead of just calling him a liar, as if that is all he is, instead, state back to him the words you think are not true and say something like:

“You said this (quote statement) but here is why I think this is not true.”

This approach does not create ill will as when you just categorize the guy as a “liar.”

The same applies to other attack words. The right approach can make the offender consider the error of his words where an attack approach will just cause him to plant his feet more firmly in his beliefs.

(4) Protesting or interrupting officials or people with who you disagree in their private homes, restaurants or places not designed for airing grievances.

(5) Anti protesting. This should be discouraged as when a group of protesters are met by anti protesters violence and increased ill will is often the result. Protesters should be encouraged to protest separately for their own cause and should be allowed to do so without interruption even though we may disagree. Protest later if you want but not the same time in the same place as your opposition. That’s just asking for trouble.

There is a large silent majority of people who favor good will over ill will and attack. Many feel their hands are tied and there is nothing they can do.

Perhaps there is something we can do if we gather together and let those who seek to disrupt the peace of society know that their approach is not acceptable, yet at the same time extending the hand of friendship to all.

Watch short  video on Goodwill HERE

Support goodwill by joining The Declaration of Goodwill:

Read the Declaration HERE

Dec 23, 2020

Copyright By J J Dewey

Index for Original Archives

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Gather with JJ on Facebook HERE

DECLARATION OF GOODWILL

We, the people of goodwill from all nations, who desire to see the people of this planet progress in a state of peace, safety, and friendship, find it necessary to act and issue this Declaration of Goodwill.

Polarizing rhetoric, accompanied with vitriol and name-calling, from leaders, celebrities and media spawns tension among the masses and undermines goodwill and cooperation. Therefore, we, the silent majority and people of goodwill on this planet, have decided to take action and issue a call to correction. Such a correction is essential, for our leaders have power to take us into wars and conflict that could destroy our civilization.

We do not expect our leaders to be perfect or agree with us or each other on all matters, for that is beyond the present ability of most individuals. But there is one thing all can do that will pave the way to quieting the present conflict and opening the door to peace on earth.

We can all be civil to each other and send goodwill rather than the prevailing ill will we currently witness. Loving our neighbor as ourselves is at the core of the teachings of every great messenger of the past and we need to be reminded of this now, perhaps more than any time in our history.

The great majority of us who are not in power do not hate those who vote or think differently than ourselves, nor do we care about their race, sex, or status; we are willing to extend a hand of friendship and goodwill to all who will accept it. We do not call others hateful names or desire to hurt them, but seek harmlessness in all discourse and interaction. Name calling is out of the question for us and it should be for our leaders as well.

Many leaders and media personalities seem to think that personal attacks are justified, as it highlights how bad the “other guy” is in order to affect change; but negative tactics often beget negative rather than positive change. Calling our neighbors “haters” when they see themselves as loving people results in resentment and often fuels the emotions of the projected name calling. The attack thus brings forth the hate that was not previously there. Many leaders and media personalities understand this principle and use it to polarize and create false animosity where none should exist.

So much grief in the world can be avoided if our leaders would embrace the spirit of goodwill, as it is longed for in so many of us who silently watch these reckless attacks.

Therefore, we the people of goodwill call on leaders and media who fail to embrace a higher path to match the positive spirit of goodwill that exists in most of humanity, the common people.

The day of watching leaders bring us to the brink of destruction is over. Sending peace and goodwill is our charge as we seek to transform our societies throughout the world.

It is true we have problems to solve which require rigorous debate and uncomfortable discussions, but we cannot solve them by demonizing each other. If we look for the best in one another and give our neighbors the benefit of the doubt, we have a much better chance of solving problems and reaching agreement.

Therefore, we the people of goodwill can no longer silently stand by and watch angry persons of power set the world aflame. All those with influence must be held accountable and shamed from hateful speech and emotion toward goodwill and friendship for all.

We, therefore, will watch our leaders and others with influence and call them out when they violate the principle of goodwill. When such a violation occurs, we will write them letters, emails, make posts on social media, and communicate our displeasure in every peaceful means possible to make them aware of their destructive behavior.

On the other hand, when people of influence perform positive acts of goodwill that deserve recognition, we will go out of our way to praise and recognize them.

Leaders and people of influence include:

• Political, spiritual and business leaders
• Celebrities of any kind
• Those in the media, especially writers
• People of influence in social media and on the internet

Last of all, there are those of lesser influence among family, friends and associates who need to be reminded to be and remain civil.

The simple fact is this. We need to start with ourselves. If each of us does our part to extend goodwill and friendship to all, and encourage others to do the same, the world will be healed and we can safely enter into a new era of peace and goodwill.

Watch short video presentation HERE

Instead of signing some endorsement we invite you to endorse the idea by joining the Goodwill group. By joining you are saying you support the  Declaration of Goodwill. After joining you  are under no obligation for further participation though we hope  all members will support Goodwill at every opportunity.

Support goodwill now by joining The Declaration of Goodwill

Copyright By J J Dewey

Index for Original Archives

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Gather with JJ on Facebook HERE

Nov 20, 2019

The Missing Goodwill

A reader asks a question worthy of attention. He references a post I made way back in March 1999 wherein I addressed concerns of predictions of the end of the world in the year 2000 as well as Y2K. I stated:

“The end of the world will not come around the year 2000. Y2K may create some problems but they will be solved and we will move on. The time of great opportunity is upon the disciples of light from this point on for the next thirty years.”

I also said that, “Providing that alternative two is successful it will still take about 150 years to successfully usher in the age of peace. But the main period of tension will be the next 30 years.”

To this Blayne asks where we are now in relation to my comments.

In that post I stated that we face two alternatives for our future:

(1) There can be great destruction which will “destroy them which destroy the earth.” Rev 11:18. Thus with all the destructive people out of the way the earth can rest from the mischief man creates.

(2) Some destruction will occur but mankind will basically institute the just laws and actions necessary to create world stability so humankind can join in with the earth in the period of great rest.

I stated that the forces of light are trying to implement the second alternative whereas the dark ones are working on the first. At that time the chances looked good or a peaceful transition to the new age but the dark forces have been more successful than anticipated in applying the principle of “divide and conquer.” The great division among us is now obvious in that all over the world we see a heightened political divide between the left and the right. Few years ago religious differences were of much more concern than political, but that has changed. Now politics has become the new religion and many who in the past that were fairly indifferent now passionately take a side with loathing and hatred toward the other.

The only other time in history that corresponds to this is the atmosphere in the United States just before the Civil War. There is a significant difference, however. Back then the fight was over a definite point of good and evil, which was slavery. Yes, there were other problems, but this was the main dividing point.

In this age, the points causing the division are much more ambiguous. The strange thing is that both the left and the right pretty much agree with what the main problems are. Unlike the Civil War period where slavery was the defining issue supported by one side and attacked by the other, there is no one main issue that divides us. Instead, the division comes from how serious these problems are and how we are to go about solving them.

The right wants to solve our problems through maximum free enterprise and minimal government and the left wants minimal free enterprise and maximum government intervention creating regulations and charging whatever taxes necessary to make things happen.

Instead of focusing on points of agreement, of which there are many, they focus on disagreements and if they are not strong enough then the other side is demonized by distorting their view into something almost satanic, beyond reconition.

The plan of the Hierarchy was to smoothly move us into the new age through the promotion of good will promoted by the disciples throughout the world.

Instead, this division tactic is working so well that many disciples have abandoned goodwill and joined in with the division and hate and loath all who disagree with them as being enemies of humanity. The efforts of seeking union through goodwill has been neutralized to a high degree.

There are a few working through goodwill but a much smaller number than is needed. Many of those who incarnated with the idea of assisting in moving this goodwill forward have failed in their mission, given impetus to the dark side and will be greatly disappointed when they have their life review.

Because of a failure to raise goodwill to the needed level our fate is in the hands of a humanity’s ability to observe the results of their policies and behavior and to deal with it in a positive rather than negative way.

After World War II there was strong optimism that we could safely transition to the new age, but now I’d say that we are down to close to a 50/50 chance. I’m still leaning a little in favor of things tending to no great Armageddon situation, but the lights of the world definitely need to become more proactive. A few generalized meditations will not do the trick. There must be more actual positive activity on the physical plane.

Back in 2004 I was contemplating the great division that was beginning to manifest and wrote the Principles of Political Unification in an attempt to bring the two sides together. Unfortunately, it has gained little traction, but the hope is still there.

Principles of Political Unification

(1) I seek that which is good for my country and the world above that which is good for my party.

(2) I support the principle of free speech. I shall be allowed to express my political and spiritual views, however repulsive, without legal restrictions and allow all people the same privilege.

(3) I support the principle of freedom and work toward securing the greatest possible freedom for individuals and groups in every situation. I accept the principles of freedom enunciated in the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.

(4) I commit myself to sending goodwill and the spirit of friendship to all involved in the political process, especially those with differing political views.

(5) Even though the majority may not always support my views I realize that the majority view, when properly informed, rarely will lead us on a dangerous path. I therefore seek to honor the will of the people. When I disagree with the will of the people I will not seek to forcefully control them or change them but will use peaceful means to inform and educate them.

(6) There are a number of issues that cause division, heated debate and anger. Examples are abortion, gun control, social programs, drug legalization, military activities and others. Most cannot be resolved in the near future through the conversion of one side to another. I support this unifying approach: To support the principle of fairness on controversial issues both sides must be heard even though the other side may be repulsive to me, for free speech and thought is the most important principle and the prime directive of unification and ultimate peace. I therefore commit to the principle of fair play realizing that both sides deserve to be heard and have their representatives in positions of power.

(7) I believe in integrity and honesty and will seek to be truthful no matter what the opponents do. I seek not to distort or lie for the benefit of my party or for personal gain.

(8) I accept that we must be fiscally responsible and will do all in my power to create a balanced budget, except in times of national crisis. I will only support programs that can be funded or continued without increasing the burden on the taxpayer.

(9) I agree that the people are taxed enough and seek to keep the budget within the range of current tax revenues (or preferably lower) and to not raise the percentage of taxes on anyone.

(10) I agree to put the security of my country and the world above the views or actions of my own political party. If others of my party sabotage national security or undermine a just effort toward the elimination of threats I will be just as critical of them as the opposing party.

(11) I accept the fact that there is great waste and inefficiency in government spending and commit myself to eliminate waste and increase efficiency wherever and whenever possible.

(12) I accept and support the idea that we can save ourselves much grief by learning from the mistakes of history so we do not repeat them. It is therefore of extreme importance that the youth be accurately taught, without censorship, national and world history in a way that is of interest and will be absorbed by them. I will oppose all those who revise history in distorted fashion for political gain.

(13) I agree that extremism has been and is the cause of many problems in the world and seek to not impose extreme views on the people. If I happen to have extreme views which I believe to be of value to will seek to persuade by education rather than by law or force. It is also a problem when political opponents are called extremists when over a third of the public support them. Such accusations are extremism in disguise. I seek to not be extreme myself in distorting the image of opponents by calling them extremists when such is not true. For instance, it is not extremism to be simply for or against abortion as there are many on both sides of the equation.

(14) I support the elimination of poverty but realize there are two approaches to this. The first is to give a helping handout and the second is to provide circumstances so the person may help himself. Extremists on this issue have warred against each other and have been the cause of much division. I reject extremism on both sides and seek to recognize the value of both sides. There are times of helplessness when people need direct assistance and times when they need encouraged to stand on their own feet. I do not support handouts to those who are capable of helping themselves and refuse to do so.

(15) I support the separation of church and state, but reject extremism on both sides. I reject the extreme that the government should endorse any specific religious influence on public policy even though all religions have the freedom to express their views. I also reject the other extreme that any mention of God, religious values, or the public display of religious symbols is to not be tolerated.

(16) I support equal rights for all races, both sexes and members of all religions and ideologies. I recognize that the large majority both sides of the political spectrum seek what is best for all races and minorities (even though the opposition has a different approach) and refuse to manufacture accusations for political gain.

(17) I recognize that the large majority both sides of the political spectrum seek what is best for the environment but again both sides have a different approach. Two extremes causing division are: First aiding then environment even if there is strong economic and job loss. The second is seeking profits at the expense of the environment. The truth is the two are interdependent. A strong economy can provide funds to help the environment and a healthy environment provides for a good long term good economy. I seek therefore to work with both sides of this issue and will seek cooperation rather than assigning blame. I seek to aid the environment without harming the economic structure.

(18) I recognize we are a nation of laws and will not support the subversion of law for political gain. I will condemn such subversion of those who share my views as well as those who do not.

(19) I will only support the establishment of necessary law as well as the elimination of bad, as well as useless laws that clutter the system.

(20) In the end, I support the example of John Kennedy who, while campaigning, found good things to say about his opposition and instead of tearing down he said “we can do better.” I support the idea of converting by good works and ideas rather than tearing down the opposition.

Copyright by J J Dewey

Index for Older Archives

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE