View Full Version : New Political Spectrum

07-14-2011, 11:38 PM
Below is the common political spectrum we have, and how it is presented in school and on TV:


Having been called both a capitalist and a communist I would like to propose the following instead:


Makes more sense... there is good in all things. Why box ourselves in... we have to start thinking in 3D!


07-15-2011, 12:21 AM
Old School:


New School:

http://cdn0.sbnation.com/fan_shot_images/7234/capt.270b41a9e043409e80b9259cffd4d8ad.hula_hoop_at _50_fx102.jpg

07-15-2011, 12:26 AM


07-15-2011, 03:56 PM
It can be highly enjoyable, and instructive to playfully, and respectfully engage,
and integrate one's hoop (mind) permutations (ideas), in a sort of oscillating
dialectic, with those of others - as occasion directs…

…unless, of course, the contextual framework is set at, or (by mutual consent)
eventually mutates/ossifies into, something eccentrically non-dialectic, like this:


Logo of the “Old Story” Political/Corporate/Religious/Esoteric Hierarchy
__________________________________________________ _______________

[Sorry, Dev, for the momentary conceptual drift, from your original, simple-yet-brilliant
illustration. Funny how we just accept premises that may inherently contribute to confusion
and (in this case) false duality without considering the possibility that they might not be
re-imaged to better effect. Great, thought-provoking drawing!]

07-15-2011, 07:20 PM
Funny how we just accept premises that may inherently contribute to confusion and (in this case) false duality without considering the possibility that they might not be
re-imaged to better effect.

Again exactly... I was guilty myself until I realized I had looked at it from the wrong perspective. This kind of technique can be applied to anything, and should be.


Donna Matrix
07-15-2011, 09:04 PM
I'm thinking that dot is actually an axis and is actually more dimensional. Let's face it, we're gonna need extradimensional help to get out of the mess we're in. I think it can be done. Ora et Labora!

07-16-2011, 03:31 AM
[Caveat: This is just my own playful spin-off. Insofar as any aspects of it are true, I don’t presume to be saying anything that most forum members don’t already know - in renditions, terms and shades of their own preference. Perhaps just a bit of self-indulgent rambling, painted with broad strokes, which you, dear reader, may do well to skip.]

__________________________________________________ ______________________

Let’s say that the spectrum-line was an idea introduced to Dev from others, and given strong reinforcement by generations of consensual agreement. We needn’t impute evil intent to it (as a self-proliferating meme) or to those who promulgated it. Perhaps it may seem to better serve the purposes of some to generate false dichotomies for a “divide & conquer” strategy, but would it be so successful if people, in general, weren’t already inclined towards such a mindset? I’d personally rather view it as being a development of the illusion to keep itself going. You had to have conflict, and an ongoing, ever-unbalanced drama, with opposing characters wildly jitterbugging through time, so that the illusion/game would last. No need to place blame, as such, if nearly everyone is buying into it, to varying degrees, for reasons of their own.

So, anyway, Dev (being the personal-premise-questioning individual that he is) one day slapped himself on the forehead and said: “Wait a minute. I’m tired of imposing this abstraction on myself. It doesn’t fit and I’m not going to try to fit into it. I may be very conservative in some respects, have what would be considered a moderate stance vis-à-vis some issues - while being very, so-called, liberal in others. I reject the notion that I personally have to identify with any particular portion of this spectrum, or that, in fact, my definition has to come from some external pre-packaged set of choices. I also reserve the right to “mix & match” ideas and decline all “package deals.” [Or something like that.]

This revelation came from a place of being “centered in self” [not to be confused with “self-centeredness”].

Let’s say the “dot” in the center simultaneously both “is” and “is not” the individual. The dot is where the core of the individual [heart-mind, will, personal vibe, etc] integrates/relates with the dynamics of the greater, infinite “Mind” [further explication of which being more than I care to attempt at the moment] which also intergears with all others who have the requisite internal components - as well as, generally speaking, all-that-is.

Without being sufficiently “centered in self” [not to be confused with “self-centeredness”] a person will tend to look outward for definitions of identity, and for direction. In the photo of the man jumping through a hoop, it might be said that he was willing to do so because he feared not being able to obtain what he needed on his own, or in more equitable collaboration with others, and so was willing to pay the price of jumping through an endless succession of hoops to secure either basic “needs” such as sex, food and shelter - or more abstract “needs” such as identity, direction, meaning, salvation, ascension, enlightenment.

Now, this isn’t to imply we cannot learn from others, or be involved in mutually beneficial enterprises. And there is certainly a place for the living teacher/student dynamic. The problem is when one capitulates to established systems which use fear to attempt to keep one perpetually off-balance and not operating from a place of being “centered in self” [not to be confused with “self-centeredness”]. And the responsibility to lay hold of one’s proper ground rests squarely on the shoulders of the individual. No one else. There is no one else to blame for one’s own neglect in this matter.

The one who has chosen hoop-jumping as a lifestyle finds a type of faux security by trading off the cultivation of his own link to the “voice within” for the mind-set offered by the hoop-holder [The Doctrines, The Salvation, The Program, The Political Platform, The Corporate/Esoteric ladder, etc.] as being more vital, real, and possible.

So instead of surrendering his mind/past to the Divine Mind, he surrenders to others who would offer him an ordered ladder-like-succession of ever higher hoops to jump through, an ossified framework of ideas, a “path” leading into mere form, into a past that is no more.

[On a personal note, Just recently, I’ve been dealt a severe, effectual hammer blow, and basically been given the message I need to “be my own man” and shit-can the searcher-stuff that was acting as a crutch I was using as my “false other” that I thought I needed to make myself complete [just like most men think they need a female, or a family, or children, or a career, or a church, or an ideology, or a war (or something) to complete them]. Of course, I’ll continue to learn from others, but the “searcher-drive” program seems to have been permanently (and happily) crippled. There are moments now when all my books seem transparent, with nothing to offer - as though all the verbal propositions are uncoiled and devoid of real content - except insofar as some phrase or idea here or there may serve the moment. It all seems like nothing now, a scaffolding that disappears and leads you to wonder why it ever entered your head to ever build it. Yet I believe (or would like to believe) it served a purpose. So - no regrets. The last week or so I‘ve gotten rid of around 60 books, and 6 trash bags full of print-outs. As for the remainder, a number of them likely contain concepts I‘m to keep in play, for some reason.]

As for the “extradimensional help” we need, I believe that, beyond our responsibility to lay hold of that internally, the old base of the illusion is currently being undone and forgotten by the primary real-dimensional Mind. As such, there is no more “business as usual” other than some residual flailing about as the old Powers That Were cough up the last of their secrets into daylight and play out their final scenes. I really don’t see any of that as a problem worth getting concerned over - especially as it was never all that real to begin with - now, even less so.

07-16-2011, 12:14 PM
I didn't skip and enjoyed the read.

Would like to add that the strength of the "system" or "matrix" is that it is not physical... there is no building standing somewhere in the world, and if blown up, the system goes away. This makes it difficult to "attack"... but most alchemically what is its strength is also its weakness because the "system" is illusionary and thus a simple thought can begin to tear it down or change it. It's all about perpectives...