Divide and Conquer, Anger, and The Pandemic of Stupidity

The Buddha is quoted as saying, "Holding onto anger is like drinking poison and expecting the other person to die."



This is the situation of many in the face of the ongoing transgressions (misbehavior) of Donald Trump and the Republican Party, the stupidity and the cheap and mediocre tactics of the Democratic Party establishment, of unfair "neo-liberalism" in service to abusive Capitalism, and these days, of the governors of some states and the police departments of some cities.

Anger.

Well-deserved, well-warranted.

But also, serving a devilish, diabolical agenda.

You don't think they knew that their actions would provoke anger?

So, now, consider:

What happens when you get angry about something you can do nothing about?

It's the "do nothing about" part that really gets you, isn't it?

It's about, "the uncontrollable 'other'".

Eats you up, inside?

Makes you more adamant? More self-protective? More irritable? Less able to cooperate smoothly? Less intelligent?

"Divide and conquer".

Some people have recognized the "divide and conquer" strategy of the neo-"Conservatives" and neo-"Liberals". But they have misunderstood it.

They think it's about pitting people or groups or social movements against each other.

That's the weak form of, "divide and conquer".

The strong version is, pitting people against themselves.

Let me frame the situation a new way:

The Pandemic of Stupidity

There is a pandemic of a virus -- not the coronavirus, but of another virus, a kind of virus that infests people's intelligence.

This virus is contagious. This virus contaminates all thinking, feeling, and action. It impairs people's judgment. It makes people more emotionally reactive. It makes people more likely to act ineffectively, even foolishly, regrettably, even stupidly -- in areas of life entirely other than, "politics"; it adds to people's stress level, affecting ALL areas of life. It makes us more likely to "lose it" and less likely make "connections".

It's a contributor to the pandemic of stupidity we are reading about and seeing, in the news.

Trump, the political parties both here in the U.S.A. and elsewhere in the world, global corporations operating within a system of abusive Capitalism -- and everyone affected by the stupidities of these groups -- are contagious carriers.

That's the strong form of "divide and conquer". Very clever. Now, seen.

What to Do? What to Do?

I'm definitely not saying to let them get away with it. I'm not saying to suppress, deny, squelch, or control the anger. It can't be dealt with, that way.

It has to be done in a way that frees your intelligence, that does not use up more of it by attempting to oppose what is really justified anger. It has to be done in a way that actually heightens your intelligence, your freedom, your energy.

It has to be done in a way that results in your being wiser -- more savvy.

sav·vy
/ˈsavē/
INFORMAL
noun
  1. shrewdness and practical knowledge; the ability to make good judgments.
    "the political parties lacked the necessary political savvy"
    Similar:
    shrewdness
    astuteness
    sharp-wittedness
    sharpness
    acuteness
    acumen
    acuity
    intelligence
    wit
    canniness
    common sense
    discernment
    insight
    understanding
    penetration
    perception
    perceptiveness
    perspicacity
    perspicaciousness
    knowledge
    sagacity
    sageness
    nous
    horse sense
    sapience
    arguteness
    Opposite:
    inexperience
    ignorance
adjective
  1. shrewd and knowledgeable; having common sense and good judgment.


How can that be done?

It has to be done through, "release".

ON RELEASE

People commonly confuse release with catharsis -- acting out.

That's not release. It's mere fulfillment of the pattern.

It doesn't change the pattern. It doesn't even lead to lasting relief or improve our way of operating.

Release is, "dissolution".

To dissolve is to go into solution, to lose solidity, to be dispersed.

When anger (and stupid impulses) dissolve, they leave clarity in a more resourceful state.

Release clears your mind. It makes room for intelligence.

HOW TO RELEASE

How do you do that with an emotion? -- especially a justified emotion?

That seems like forgiving an unforgivable act, doesn't it?

It isn't. It's about reclaiming your faculties so that you can handle the unforgivable act in a way that rectifies (as in causing restitution of) the situation.

Steps of Release

The first step is to recognize that, by holding on to anger, you are poisoning yourself -- and hoping to make the other person(s) die.

You can't release anger, directly. Release occurs when you perceive both the situation and your own responses, comprehensively. Release is the product of direct self-perception of the whole sense of quandary in which you find yourself. 

Release is not the product of an intellectual, moral, rationalizing process or mental reasoning. It's not the result of ethical injunctions, psychological knowledge, or problem-solving of any kind.

Instead, it's the result of the second step:  recognizing the felt "structure" of the bind in which you find yourself. That recognition immediately prompts a spontaneous release and relief.

I'll explain the second step, briefly, and that's the last thing I'll say before I put before you a process that actually accomplishes that recognition and release.

Every experience consists of four component aspects:

ATTENTION:MEMORY:INTENTION: IMAGINATION 
DISTINCTNESS:RELATEDNESS:DIFFERENCE:OTHERNESS

I think you can tell, immediately, that each of these four is a "rabbit hole" with great depth. They add up to your feeling of any experience being "substantial" (or having a certain persistence, solidity, and effect upon you that makes you feel like you have to get involved with something you don't quite understand or perhaps can't affect).

Fortunately, you don't have to make mental sense of these component aspects to have this work. In fact, you have to let go of mental analysis or mere mental understanding -- to secure a direct perception of the feelings beneath the words. 

This is not something many people are equipped to do. People have been "educated" to do the opposite -- to think, to analyze, or else just to act on their impulses based upon what they think they know.

That all works about as well as the news portrays.

The contamination by that virus continues unabated and -- worse than uncontrolled -- abetted by its carriers. That means spread by everyone carrying that virus of anger and stupidity.

So, this is the missing part.

Here's where I put before you a "self-reconditioning" procedure that makes it all plain.

Once you have this procedure, you can apply it to anything that makes you angry.

Waste no time hesitating. Spend the time doing this procedure until you start getting intuitive insight into your part in this, "divide and conquer" scheme.

Wouldn't you like to "win" over "the stupids", to get yourself out from under their thumbs, and instead of experiencing being pitted against yourself, experience the recovery of your faculties of intelligence at a higher level?

I knew you would.

The Four Diamonds
(the preparatory, quick preview)

Note the link to the full-length procedure
in the upper right-hand corner "( i )".











The Pyramids of Ga, Introduction

FOREWORD

When we look back through the continuum of space-time memory, we may observe the transition of awakening undergone by humanity, at large. It was an awakening from domination by memory out-of-control to an opening to -- and a bringing into tangible forms -- the emergent developments of heightened and heightening intelligence.

We may look back to the time when commerce was the ruling paradigm shaping life. Strict rules governed exchange of goods -- an intermediary currency, the current value of products and services in terms of the unit of currency -- a currency, in a healthy economy, that circulated through all aspects of human society, but which did not always circulate sufficiently through some parts of society enough to keep it healthy and flourishing.

This circulation very much resembled the stop-and-go traffic seen in cities that developed in a gridwork of roadways, with traffic speeding up and slowing down in different ways in different places, with some accessways clogged and stagnant.

Such was the culture, at large: clogged and stagnant in some ways, and flowing more-or-less well, in some others, the whole being brought down by the problems of stagnation.

On Earth, those who had more than others sought to keep it and to enlarge their fortune, for themselves. It was the way, on Earth. Not so much the off-worlds, the landing places at the other sides of Zones of Incomprehensibility, where humanity grew colonies. For them the vulnerabilities of their situations, as colonists, brought a kind of sobriety, empathy and a kind of pragmatic helpfulness. But Earth was commercial, and commercial meant, "looks good enough to sell".

It's not that the system of commerce was bad, in itself, but that it was so badly carried out and misused. Persons transgressed in so many ways that the laws and bureaucratic red tape and regulations that ensued put a tax on everyone: a tax of energy and attention in the name of, "accountability and compliance". A whole section of the population rankled against it, but it was necessary.

It was necessary because people weren't "firing on all cylinders", ordinary business people sometimes didn't anticipate the adverse effects that would develop from their enterprises, and some who did anticipate them ignored that anticipation and did business in an antisocial or even criminal way that produced an onslaught of adverse conditions for the affected populace, about which they did little or nothing. A few exceptions existed, who sought to mitigate the adverse effects of their enterprises by means of counterbalancing, beneficial actions. "Not firing on all cylinders" also meant that they were slow to recognize opportunity, when confronted with one.

"Not firing on all cylinders" and loss of trust had caused the Earthly economy to stagnate, Earth, the mother-world.

THE EMERGENCE OF GA

The difference in how we operate now, with comparative intelligence, ingenuity, and grace, may easily be traced to a single man who served as a focal point for a convergence of forces and influences upon a life that had to change or be virtually intolerable.

He was known by name by those who lived in the township of Thurstbursh, of the metrozone, Capiziano, of the interzone, Capria, of the suntimeparse Ecumenis, of the planet, Eumectis.

He was known, simply, as Ga.

The inhabitants of Thurstbursh were a friendly lot who went about their business in a calm, if not cheerful way. Life was on an even keel, in Thurstbursh, despite the economic inequities in places that surrounded . Ga was the township furbish. Lucky town. In the interzone, Capria, townships had their own furbishes, "wise consultants" -- and Ga was a furbish of furbishes.

Let me describe him, to you.

He was a portly man, darker-skin of appearance with a darker beard around his mouth and chin. He wore vests, but often, no shirt, with loose trousers and occasionally a round cap secured to his head by an elastic band around the perimeter. He often went barefoot. He sat quietly at the open door of his dwelling as it faced the street, and took everything in, quietly. His eyes were alive, and his demeanor was peaceful and indifferent -- most of the time.

Ga had suffered greatly in his life. He had been born a cripple, with one leg bowed and an un-descended testicle, nearsighted and nearly blind. His parents rejected him, emotionally, even if they accepted him, in principle, and gave him food, shelter, brief attention, and more rarely, intellectual stimulation. For the most part, though, he was on his own. He took to the streets. He had no friends, having been rejected there, also, so he hung out in public places and he watched as people met with each other and passed each other without recognition. He listened. At last, he arrived before a library, and being curious, he went in. There, in a few days, he would be seen sitting with book at table bowed far forward for his eyes to be near the book, reading, poring over it.

He educated himself by following a pull of attraction he felt within the library. He would wander from section to section, gazing casually at the shelves, with their round books with titles set vertically along their upright edges, and occasionally a title would capture his attention. He knew the feeling, by now. He would take the book and begin to read, pivoting the pages. By this means of navigation and book-selection, he discovered books of ancient practices developed by sages for mental discipline and physical healing, books with many large pictures. He would study, and imagine remembering, and then go home or wander to the park or wander the streets for some more watching and listening.

At home, he began to practice. His first project was to straighten his bowed leg. Using and developing in the mental:physical integrated practices of the sages, he uncovered the hidden, underlying condition keeping his leg bowed. It wasn't anything wrong with his leg or his bones; it was something wrong in his brain, brain conditioning that kept his leg taut, in a certain way. The practices taught new brain conditioning and he learned and he practiced and became more and more proficient. In months, the tautness decreased. His leg straightened and he walked differently, straighter.

His parents never noticed.

Next, he went after his vision. Using the principles of the sages, he realized that his "nose-in-book" reading habit revealed a brain-held habit of being cross-eyed, and so, nearsighted. In some months, he had recovered enough control of his eye movements that his vision began to improve.

His mother couldn't account for it, but had no comment when she and the ten-year-old emerged from the eye-seer with a prescription for new, lower power lenses.

His undescended testicle was his final task. Breathing practices did the trick.

As a young man, he underwent many sorrows -- the sorrow of loneliness because he was so isolated, the sorrow of the loss of a promising love, the sorrows and frustrations of unfulfilled dreams, for the realization of which he felt fully capable and ready. Mostly it was the loneliness because he had grown up isolated and now, because few would understand him and could commune with his deeper sensibilities. It was "superficiality meets depth."

The practices of the sages had failed to heal his loneliness. Something more was needed. He wondered what it might be.

He studied. He didn't study for a cure for his loneliness. He studied by navigation, as before.

He had noticed certain similarities among the foundations of the many disciplines and traditions he had studied. Some cultivated memory. Some cultivated imagination. Some cultivated attention, and some cultivated will-power, or intention. But very often they cultivated only one or two of these powers of mind, and most rarely, all four.

He applied this observation to the practices of the sages and found a similar lack of balance.

So he began to modify the mental practices to include all four -- and lo! -- he underwent his first Wisdom-Transformation. First, he discovered features of his character and moods of his intelligence that were familiar, when "surfaced", but the existence of which, he had not suspected, beforehand. They would dissolve, leaving him with a feeling like scratching his head and wondering how he ever got that way. In the process, he uncovered the formless ground of being, his own origin and ground of being.

Each area of his character thus dissolved would undergo transformation of his behavior, in life. Without special effort, and with less effort than that with which he had lived his life, before, his responses were different, spontaneously more imbued with intelligence. The more he cleaned up, in himself, the wiser he seemed to become.

What he became was the township furbish.

Now, he lived in a dwelling out of town in an area of wild fields and dirt roads.

Ga.

What did he do for a living? Furbishes are sustained by their townships for benefit received from the their attentions.

I'll give you an example.

Krodinger owed Sapsinger money. Sapsinger felt that the loan had lived on for too long and wanted his money. Krodinger said he was glad to pay, but he didn't have enough money. They came to Ga.

Ga listened to one and Ga listened to the other.

He felt their moods within himself. They felt like places of heated intensity, one tainted with sorrow and fear and the other with frustration and indignation. He felt into them, both. He felt their shapes and their forces of truth, their locations both in space-time and in mind-space, their existence. He bore the full experience. He felt into the root of all that and felt an intertwined fixation in memory and two entangled locations in space-time. He felt into That-Which-Has-Always-Been and then, after he had taken that resort, ceased his effort to do so. That dissolved the fixation, in himself, as it fell away into the formless field. Then, he flashed his attention, with a movement like a whip, into their mind-fields, which were continuous with his own, and dissolved the vestiges of the trouble, in them.

The room felt peaceful.

Sapsinger said, "Good fortune, next time."

Krodinger said, "Much about little."

Krodinger ultimately did pay back the money.

Ga was furbish.

He was a precursor of what we have become. I say this, to you, because you haven't become so, yet.

Ga was discoverer, integrator, tangifier and teacher.

Ga was furbish of furbishes.

He sat in the opening of his dwelling looking out into the street with a peaceful, impassive look on his face.










Existence as a "Separate Individual" is a Fallacy based on Fixation of Attention

The term, "separate", means, "away from pairing" -- as if being a "single thing".


Ain't no such animal. We have no perception of anything that exists singly, but perceive only things with which we are in relationship. Things seem to exist separately only because of the perception of the apparent location of things in space-time, without a simultaneous perception of ourselves (our "Point of Viewing"), in a way that I will describe, in a bit.


The act of "locating" is the exact function of attention; attention ONLY locates and that's ALL that attention does. It creates an experience of position relative to our point of view.


That act of locating has a feel, to it -- the feel of, "something being THERE". That feeling of "something being THERE" isn't a property of the thing being perceived, but rather a property of embodied, personal existence -- the property of subject-object perception. It occurs when attention stays on something long enough for a memory of it to begin to form and for an intention toward it to be aroused (or reminded).


In other words, the feeling of "something being THERE" occurs within ourselves. It has a location, in us, a size of sensation, in us, a shape of sensation, in us, and an intensity, in us.


Those sensations are all tied to movement-memory -- our memories of how we move when "triggered" by those sensations -- toward, away, or around, handling or avoiding. They are how we interact in the world -- and also how we REACT to our own subjective experience (when we introspect) -- BOTH.


So, there exists, at minimum, TWO points of reference: self and other. There is NO experience of a single thing, but always the experience of the apparent thing (perception or conception) and of ourselves. Without BOTH, there is no sense of "something THERE in some position relative to ourselves".


Most of the time, one or the other dominates in perception and the other remains subconscious or submerged. That's the common of experience of "self" confronted by "other".


But the feeling of "self" is just that -- a feeling. It's not "self"; it's self-feeling within self, which is inherently formless Ground of Being. The self-feeling exists within Ground of Being the way fruit is suspended in jell-o.


When both are perceived, simultaneously, spontaneous intuition becomes apparent of being in NEITHER location. That's the Witness (or "witnessing") disposition. It is free consciousness, not bound attention.


So, the sense of separateness depends upon one of the two being overlooked. Separateness is a concept, only, resulting from the automatic operation of attention, intention, memory, and imagination -- with one or more operating "on automatic", below the threshold of recognition.


Therefore, "There is only RELATIONSHIP -- mutuality, interdependence. Wherever anything is arising, there is only RELATIONSHIP. But most of the time, you do not observe that fact. Most of the time, you are involved with, "me", with your separateness -- but of all the things that arise, IT is not true -- and it is the least significant."


("Walking the Dog" -- a talk by Bubba Free John, some time in the 70s, from memory)


The "cure": awaken and integrate -- master -- the four fundamental faculties of living existence -- attention, intention, memory, and imagination. Then, hidden subjectivity becomes part of the field of recognition and separateness is seen/felt to be a state of fixation, not a feature of actual existence. Relationship is restored to its unqualified (or without-quality) self-nature, self-source, and self-condition.


N'est pas?

The "Ultra-Liberal Left" is a MYTH, a FALLACY, a FABRICATION

I don't think there actually is an "Ultra-Liberal Left". I disbelieve that there actually is an "ultra Liberal freedom and rights" crowd. I think it's entirely a fabrication of the Ultra-Regressives (so-called, "conservatives") -- an imagining after their own (self-)image. I say why, next.

There is no "ultra Liberal freedom" without commensurate "ultra"-responsibility -- because freedom sets into motion effects that must then be responsibly handled, lest "the train of effects" get derailed, catastrophically -- with resultant loss of influence, credibility -- and freedom. Add to that the loss of freedom due to the necessity of handling those catastrophic effects.

That's why with all freedom must involve commensurate responsibility.

However, the Ultra-Regressives (a.k.a., "conservatives" and "right wing"), DO believe in freedom without responsibility.
As a handy example, take the "2nd Amendment 'guns'" crowd. They want the freedom to own guns (of all kinds) without having to assume commensurate responsibility for all of the effects of "gun culture" -- i.e., shootings by "crazies" who get their guns ... those guns ... from where? and how?
They irresponsibly invoke the 2nd Amendment, irresponsibly, because they misrepresent and distort the meaning of it to mean "anyone, anytime", rather than, as the written words state, "in a state militia". "In a state militia" is a statement of a necessary condition of responsibility. It doesn't imply ownership of guns in ones home or for sport. It doesn't imply ownership, at all; that's added, by unspoken pre-supposition. It just as likely could be interpreted to mean, "A gun will be issued to you while you're in the state militia," -- of a kind suitable for use by a state militia. You know. Standard issue, with standard training.
That's an example of wanting freedom without responsibility and the effects of wanting freedom without responsibility.
It is characteristic of "Ultra-Regressive Right" tactics to attribute to ones opposition, ones own faults. In this case, it's attributing the fault of being "a freedom and rights" crowd to centrist progressives, who call for, and take, responsibility commensurate with the freedoms they work for. Freedom and Responsibility. Freedom entailing responsibility.
So, it altogether seems to me that "the ultra-Liberal Left" -- as a "rights and freedom" political type and movement -- is a MYTH fabricated by the Ultra-Regressive Right. It is a fabrication "in their own image". "Liberals" and "the Ultra-Liberal Left" are an imaginary fabrication used to mischaracterize Centrist Progressives, to impede. The accusation of being "ultra-liberal freedom and rights"-oriented is false of the one and true of the other.

The demand for a free gun culture without it being a responsible gun culture is a demand for ultra-liberal freedom and rights, where guns are concerned.

SO, WHODUNNIT?

Ultra-Regressive Right persons are readily identifiable, by name.

What "Ultra-Liberal Left" persons can you identify, by name?

"Left" implies a position quite divergent from the most prevalent consensus values of society, at large. If it's in alignment with the most prevalent values, we should call it, "centrist". However, the word, "Left", is commonly used, instead.
Now, with that understanding, whom can we identify as "Ultra-Left"?? and what makes them, "Ultra"?