posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 09:24 PM
I must post once again that the Republicans and the Democrats are the two sides of a two-headed counterfeit coin, thrust into our collective palm by a
puppet media, the only purchase of which is NWO.
Any change either might bring relative to the other will not change the endgame. If we continue to be badgered into this circus that is thrown to us
by our Neros, we will remain enslaved.
In fact, far fewer of us will be far more enslaved. Chipped, monitored, mind-controlled, there will be our human future entities emerging from the
grounds with a new "religion," mind-wiped like our ancestors before us (*see The Terra Papers), understanding that their only purpose is to serve
the "God Elite."
Ok. That sounds a bit far-fetched. I agree... But I wonder sometimes just how far-fetched that idea really is.
Point is, any coming from these two "teams" at that level, have passed "the test." Else they would have had issues at a much lower level.
And let's face it, even some republicans are insisting the Neocon direction is not where they want to go.
So what do we do? Shuffle along on that "vote for the lesser" track? Really?
How about shifting paradigms - one that espouses a resource based economy:
For the first time in our history we have an option, as a race, where the jobs no one wants to do can be made to be done by computer/robot effort.
For the first time, "slaves" will be mechanized, and as the "slaves" proliferate, they will farm organic plots, with little bitty robots to hunt
and remove all incest infestation. Somewhat bigger ones can go around and remove weeds.
The plants can grow with no insecticide, pesticide, or other soil-depleting chemicals - fertilizer included, because knowledge of what to rotate when
and with which crops is programmed into the plan of the robots and this promotes soil health.
And with this much care, vast plains of healthy food could be produced - that if you used nanobots wouldn't need any cleaning and have had a
virtually bug-free growth.
Land that is currently marginal could be planted and harvested despite being rather remote...
There IS an opportunity of abundance, where each of us can live like the Elite, and unlike them, we have love.
So we have to shift the paradigm, now, before they kill most and chip the rest. We have to promote and do whatever it takes to move us to that goal,
and if there is a candidate who runs with the platform of promoting this goal of living with everything we want to do without the need to pay for
it... Not like the Communist "Your Share" paradigm, but an abundance one. One where if you need or want it, it's pretty much yours for the
Robots will build in abundance - and the cost would not be what counts...but the quality.
Farm animals could be rotated in pasture, by robots, that promoted healthy critters, eating what they naturally do in methods that leave them
unstressed - much like nature (seek a book called "The Omnivore's Dilemma").
Health would improve, and with money looking for patentable substances, we would instead look for cures.
We would not be limited by how much we had in our pockets as to what we could learn about this Universe.
I do agree with some that the whole shift would be easier if we could also stop allowing them to divide us with religion. People are so passionate
about their gods, like one city cheers on one city and another cheers on another at a baseball game, and I look at it and think if we all understood
that we humans DO have Godhead within ourselves/ourself, then the dickering about how to restrict that paradigm (religion, monetary) loses power...
And I think it's pretty clear that having people divided into religions is a good way to predict their reaction to a stimulus. As is parties,
If we cast off our slavehood to the robots, we, too, will all be elites on a planet upon which technology freed its inhabitants to follow their
Things WOULD get gone, but not for money. For the love of it. Things done because one HAS to would die out mostly as every single human on this
planet did not HAVE to do anything, but could do anything they wanted to - Just like those who would call themselves "Elite," are no more and no
less deserving of that lifestyle, care, access to anything we want, as they are. I am neither more of an entity than they are or less, though I have
love and sadly they lack it.
Through love I bring a message. Through love bring it to others.
And for heaven's sake, don't let your excitement of seeing the advantages of the abundance paradigm lead you to start with the abolishment of money;
too many people will jump to the "Your Share" paradigm and think "Communism."
Start with pointing out all the things YOU can find that might be handled by a robot and you don't like to do. What would life be like if you had
SOOOO much money that you didn't have to worry about it and could do what you wanted, with robots that protect children (transparently coded - oh
yeah, only transparent code would be allowed on anything municipal, for sure, and others could go about their public and private...and I could go on
in that direction).
Get them excited about being truly free.
Then explain that money in an abundance paradigm does not survive. And truly, the root of all evil is the love of money, and if we find a way to
remove it from our interactions, people who enjoy others' company can gravitate, live near to one another (if tech keeps going - if we are not John
Barleycorn, cut in our prime - we will have anti-grav and cities in the sky. In fact much suggests that some already have this. Meaning the
antigrav) and congregations of like-minded people will spring up.
If you love to live on a farm you may farm along side the robots: they will move out of as much way as you a-feel like messin' with. I doubt there
are many of you who would choose farming, faced with being able to choose what you want to do when you want it. With the Golden Rule as measure, who
would long be unhappy? Because there is not a one of us wage-slaves that would not find people we love, people we enjoy being with, with common
interests, love the people we are with, want to spend our lives with. Not one of us would spend time with people because we HAVE to.
The emotion-poor may choose: accept that we are equals, or move to another planet (which I think they can do).
Again I say, point is, never should it be Us and Them.
Oh, I was going to mention the fact that greed springs only in the fertilizer of scarcity; it has no meaning in abundance.
But I am tired, and this is dragging long...
EDITED after sleep helped.
[edit on 10/20/2008 by Amaterasu]