Lindsay's Blogs

User avatar
Lindsay
Posts: 1670
Joined: 13 Jun 2011, 19:50

Re: Lindsay's Blogs

Postby Lindsay » 08 May 2013, 08:04

389: The Policeman in the Head that Raises our Children --> http://journey-of-lindsay.blogspot.com/ ... s-our.html


This post is part of a series which can be accessed here.

For the purpose of context suggest reading the previous posts within this series, if you haven’t already, before proceeding.

*******************************

We are now continuing on with the next segment of the passage shared on Day 387, specifically going into a bit more depth with regards to coercive control in relation to the various ‘tactics’ that are utilized when teaching children to build a conscience and thus ‘behave properly’ according to an arbitrary standard of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ laid down mainly by the parents; which is also reinforced and eventually becomes generalized across and within all of our relationships and interactions with ourselves and the various social systems and institutions we move ourselves within throughout our life as a whole.

I will be taking this particular passage quite slowly, in small segments, so as to really open up and explore what is being expressed, as this passage is specifically revealing some very fundamental points that seem to have completely evaded us when it comes to understanding the story of our indoctrination and the birth of the voices in our head; more specifically what is referred to as the policeman in our head.

Reference these particular posts that have been walked thus far for further context and support:

Day 387: Is our Conscience just a CON?
Day 388: How to Teach your Children to Behave Properly

“As we shall see in a later chapter, such training gives rise to what we like to call our conscience. Supposedly our sense of right and wrong, our conscience is really only a sense of wrong; it develops initially, directly from coercive control.

Like the various freedoms, which signify the absence of related forms of coercion, ‘right’ can be defined only in contrast with ‘wrong.’ We first learn that we can do wrong when, as children, we experience punishment for some of our actions. If we were never punished, all of our conduct would be right, but because wrong would then be an unnecessary concept, the contrasting notion of right would also never arise. Nor would the notion of conscience.” (43) ~ [*] Murray Sidman, excerpt from his book Coercion and Its Fallout


This ‘training’ that Sidman is referring to, which gives rise to our conscience – this is the policeman in our head. The policeman essentially dictates ‘the law’ that has been laid down primarily by our parents when we are children, which is ‘the law of right and wrong.’ It is here that we begin to develop our own personal, internal self-punishment system; it is here that we begin developing the framework which will soon become our multiple personalities/characters, and it is here that we separate ourselves from our direct relationship with this physical reality to instead cater our behavior to these simulated internal voices of right and wrong thus creating a veneer over reality and in effect shut out our actual, commonsensical self-expression as who we are as a physical, living being – equal and one to all life that is here – not a programmed robot geared for a system of enslavement far removed from reality as what we have allowed ourselves to become.

As Siman states, our conscience is birthed directly from coercive control - and, as I mentioned in my previous post, this coercive control can also be found in what Sidman attempts to offer as a solution as well, which is paying children to behave themselves instead of expecting children to be good because ‘it’s the right thing to do’ as was the argument by religious leaders that Sidman made reference to.

In the context of paying children to behave themselves, the child develops their conscience primarily through reinforcement/reward thus, just like the opposite of right is wrong, the opposite of reinforcement/reward is punishment. Sidman states that right can only exist when contrasted with wrong, yet this is also the case with reinforcement as it can only exist when contrasted with punishment. If we were never punished, our conduct would not require to be reinforced, it would simply stand as a complete expression without contingency, which would then make punishment an unnecessary concept and by default reinforcement would also cease to arise, along with the notion of conscience and so the policeman in the head would be no more.

With Sidman’s proposed method the child learns that they are doing right when they get a reward, when they get paid, when they get stuff like toys and candy and treats, when they are given the 'freedom to consume.' They then come to believe they are doing wrong when they do not get these things, or when these things get taken away. Thus again, the behavior is conditionally contingent on a reward, not on an actual understanding of the behavior, on the nature of consequence and thus it is a form of coercion as it is essentially forcing the child to do something that the parent deems as right in order to get something else and so the internal friction starts to arise. Sometimes the parent themselves will then turn into an aversive stimulus to be avoided unless a reward is secured and if this pairing happens on enough occasions it can indeed serve to destroy any real relationship between parent and child.

Now, to be clear, this is not to state that it is wrong to give our children things, but what must be investigated is the starting point. We must be clear that our starting point is an expression of unconditional giving in recognition of our child’s expression, and thus our own expression, a giving that is not contingent on a point of attempting to manipulate our children to act and behave in certain ways that we want, that we desire, because then it’s not about our children anymore, it’s about our own self-interest and the consequences of this type of interaction are destructive to say the least. If self-interest is the relationship dynamic that we promote with our children in an attempt to get our children to conform to ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ as we see fit so that we can try to avoid ‘looking bad’ and so ‘fit in’ to this perfect mold of fakery…because that’s what it’s all about: what will the neighbors think?! We teach this to our children - we were taught this as children. We teach them to conform to the morals of a fucked up system because we’re too afraid of what the neighbors might think to question the reality of what we are doing. We let the policeman in our own head raise our children, thus we squander our opportunity to develop a real relationship. Thus through this we are holding ourselves, our children, our neighbors, all of life in enslavement to a moral system of dishonorable lies, deceit and deception. It simply doesn't have to be this way.

So much of what is here will cease to exist when we make the decision to create a self and a world that is best for all, where we do not require to rely on such ‘tactics’ of coercive control, but can instead teach ourselves and thus our children and thus our neighbors what it is to truly be here with integrity as a an integral part of ALL THINGS. The world is as it is now because we have denied ourselves and thus our children the right to be educated without coercive methods, and we can only change this by changing ourselves through a process of self-education to no longer allow the self-coercion as the policeman in the head, the CONscience of CONsciousness. We will stop conning our children when we stop conning ourselves, until then, it’s indeed a bleak future for all, especially those yet to be born into this world.

I refuse to end on a happy note just to ease your conscience. This is the reality we are in, and it’s not pretty. The time for responsibility for what we have create is here.

More to come…



User avatar
Lindsay
Posts: 1670
Joined: 13 Jun 2011, 19:50

Re: Lindsay's Blogs

Postby Lindsay » 09 May 2013, 07:12

Day 390: Why don't we Teach this to our Children? --> http://journey-of-lindsay.blogspot.com/ ... o-our.html


This post is part of a series which can be accessed here.

For the purpose of context suggest reading the previous posts within this series, if you haven’t already, before proceeding.

*******************************

Here I am continuing to share perspective on the passage shared on Day 387, which can be referenced below, along with the posts that have already been walked-through within this passage as well:

Day 387: Is our Conscience just a CON?
Day 388: How to Teach your Children to Behave Properly
389: The Policeman in the Head that Raises our Children

I will be walking a very short section for tonight as the section that precedes this ‘stands alone’ and so is best to be walked in a separate post yet I see that this single sentence requires direction first:

“For many – some would say for most – coercion generates and perpetuates the sense of wrong...” (43) ~ [*] Murray Sidman, excerpt from his book Coercion and Its Fallout

It’s not just the sense of wrong that generates and perpetuates coercion; it’s also the sense of right. Right and wrong are a package deal, thus if we see one is coercive, this must not forget that this is also to be applied to the other. We tend to overlook this though, because right just feels so…right. This simply shows how pervasive our programming and conditioning is, where we will immediately go to that which is so ‘obviously’ coercive and thus ignore the insidiousness of that which ‘feels’ like it’s not. Yet the actual coercion that is taking place is the internal friction that I mentioned in yesterday’s post in terms of this force that is created for the child to do ‘the right thing’ and through this they will get their reward, thus the child is essentially trained to forgo any perspective they may have on the matter to instead shut up and opt for the reward as this is what will deliver the highest payout.

This is the birth of the CONscience, this is the birth of the CONsumer, and it is also the beginnings of a life of energy addiction as we will spend the vast majority of our life just chasing after rewards; trying to get that same feeling, that same rush we got way back when we were children – this entire system is designed specifically to encourage the chase, while very very few ever see any real payout. It’s no surprise that it is set up this way as this world was built by parents – the government is run by parents, the corporations by parents, the education system by parents, the media by parents, the advertising industry by parents; our psychologists are parents, our law makers are parents, and so on. If parents have built this world that we are in which is clearly quite a mess, what does that have to say about our parenting skills as human beings? What does this have to say about our ability to raise effective human beings that care for both ourselves and each other is a measurable way that is reflected in our social systems?

To get a solid understanding of how ‘doing what is right’ has worked out for us as human beings simply take a look in the newspaper, take a look at the social systems around you, take a look at the education system, take a look at the debt piling up – we’re drowning in our own pool of smug, self-righteous morality: more-all-i-ty where we all want more more more for me me me because we feel we are somehow entitled to it. I’ve been a good person, I deserve this. I do no wrong, I earned it. I tried my best, I should get a reward. These are the voices that we have accepted from childhood. These are the voices that drive consumerism, coercion, inequality and an arrogant disregard for all life. Instead of living real morality, as the moral principle to ensure more for ALL, as the principle of give as you would like to receive, as a living understanding of equality and how when we ensure that all are cared for we will in turn be ensuring our own care - we deny our own care and thus we deny care for all.

Yet we do not teach this to our children.

We keep living out the same program because there’s this underlying ‘feeling’ that if we don’t, we are somehow wrong. We have been taught ‘the right thing to do’ and thus we shouldn’t do anything but this - to do otherwise would be going against our conscience. It would be going against what we were taught. Again, the policeman in the head – threatening us with punishment if we step out of line: a perfect way to keep consumerism and the status quo afloat while we continue to drown in our own self-denial.

To be continued…



User avatar
Lindsay
Posts: 1670
Joined: 13 Jun 2011, 19:50

Re: Lindsay's Blogs

Postby Lindsay » 10 May 2013, 06:52

Day 391: Coercion - The Misfortune of the Fortunate --> http://journey-of-lindsay.blogspot.com/ ... unate.html


This post is part of a series which can be accessed here.

For the purpose of context suggest reading the previous posts within this series, if you haven’t already, before proceeding.

*******************************
To reference the blogs that have been walked thus far in this portion of the series, follow the links below:

Day 387: Is our Conscience just a CON?
Day 388: How to Teach your Children to Behave Properly
Day 389: The Policeman in the Head that Raises our Children
Day 390: Why don't we Teach this to our Children?

“Still, the fortunate among us were not subject to much in the way of punishment when we were growing up, and yet we still have strong consciences. We did not have to be coerced into thinking it wrong to rob, lie or murder. Someone brought up in a loving way to be sensitive and compassionate to others and to admire models of virtue will probably live by a strong moral code. But although coercion need not be directly responsible for our sense that particular conduct is wrong, the very notion of wrong, itself, takes root when conduct is punished. Given the establishment of the general notion through coercion, the label ‘wrong’ can then be applied to particular cases without further coercion.” (43) ~ [*] Murray Sidman, excerpt from his book Coercion and Its Fallout


This is a very interesting paragraph.

Are we really ‘fortunate’ to apparently not have been subjected to punishment and yet still have a strong conscience? As has already been stated in various ways in previous posts, how can we actually be fortunate to have, without the ‘aid’ of punishment, developed a strong conscience when this supposed conscience is in fact the voices in our head that we were taught through repetition to create which we have allowed to separate and deter us from actually seeing reality direct? How can we actually be fortunate to have a strong conscience when the very voices in our head which dictate to us what is right and wrong are aligned to a completely coercive, abusive and punitive system in itself?

We have all been subject to MUCH in the way of punishment, no matter what family we were born into. We have all been forced to accept what is here whether we think it was somehow our ‘choice’ or not. We have all been punished for the sins of the fathers as we were all born into a world where not a single human being has ever taken responsibility and thus we were born into a mess of suffering and despair and told ‘this is just the way it is’ – and so we continue the cyclic chain of a broken world, unbroken.

Reality is easy to overlook when we focus on the extreme cases only; the extreme cases of parental neglect and the wicked acts of punishment that get sensationalized through the media to make our lives seem somehow ‘not so bad’ – then we don’t see how this same system has been inflicted onto us; we don’t see how this same system IS us. We are both the punished and the punishers as we allow the abuse to happen through our denial, through our ‘moral codes’ which allow us to turn a blind eye and act righteous, believing it to be ‘wrong’ to lie when we lie to ourselves every single day. This is what we have been taught, only from the other side of the same exact coercive coin: the ‘loving side.’

What is not being acknowledged here is that we actually DID have to be coerced into thinking it wrong to rob, lie or murder – it doesn’t matter if we were taught in a ‘loving way’ or not – in fact, this ‘loving way’ is oftentimes even more coercive than downright in-your-face coercion as this ‘loving way’ sugar coats reality with white lies and manipulates one’s child into seeing what is here in a particular way that is far, far from real. It is a fantasy. There is no such thing as ‘models of virtue.’ This is a joke. There has never existed in all of time a model of virtue. We have this world as proof of this. To attempt to teach one’s children otherwise could certainly be a form of child abuse as it is severely distorting a child’s outlook on this world such that they will be unable to see the actually problem that we are in as humanity and the fact that we each require to take responsibility for what is here and thus become the solution. To not teach our children to take responsibility, to not teach our children to practically-physically exist in equality with the life that is here without judgment but with an understanding as to how consequence works and how the world got to be the way it is, which would be the real living model of virtue, is to perpetuate the problem and thus further generations will be punished for our neglect as teachers.

Why are we teaching our children to ‘admire’ models of virtue? Why are WE not models of virtue for our children? Why are WE not standing as examples and teaching our children how to be LIVING models of virtue? Truth is, we don’t know how, because, like I stated – models of virtue have never existed. We don’t even know what ‘models of virtue’ means because all it is is a concept, an idea, a little picture in our head that goes along with our conscience that also isn’t real but is just a voice that comes and goes as it pleases in accordance to the situation we are in which dictates what is right and what is wrong – it’s a program, a nice little program that makes us feel good and honest and honorable, a program which piles on the pretty words while sweeping the dirty truth under the rug.

Instead of teaching our children that it is wrong to rob, lie and murder - why are we not teaching our children why these things even exist in this world in the first place? Why are we not aware of how a robber gets created as a product of this system? Not only that – why are we not teaching our children that WE have allowed robbers to exist? Why are we not teaching our children that we have robbed them of a life of dignity because we didn’t take the responsibility necessary to make sure that we created a world that is best for all BEFORE they were even born? Have we explored in detail all the relationships that we are actually a part of which creates robbers, liars and murders? Have we ever considered that we ourselves could be labeled as murderers for allowing tens of thousands of children to starve daily due to not having proper access to the very basic necessity of life: FOOD – and doing nothing to find a practical solution to end these crimes against life?

Why are we not teaching our children to take responsibility for what is here? Because we haven’t?

What’s fascinating is that, to tell one’s children that it’s ‘wrong’ to rob, lie and murder is a lie in itself, and not only that, it is neglect - so much for our strong moral code. We have lied to ourselves every single day. We lie to the children of this world every single day. Lying has become so much a part of who we are that we don’t even realize it is who we are and so we convince ourselves – aka lie to ourselves – that we are being loving to our children by teaching them that it is wrong to lie. We tell our children it is wrong to lie and then we lie in front of our children – what we refuse to realize is that our children are aware, children see through our bullshit – yet, through our ‘modeling’ we teach our children that it is okay to lie. This creates massive cognitive dissonance until the child finally cracks underneath the weight of deception and simply ‘follows suite’ parroting the same trite lines about ‘moral code’ while in the next breath lying through their teeth. We celebrate and gloat and rejoice – oh, look how our child is growing up! She’s got such a strong head on her shoulders!



User avatar
Lindsay
Posts: 1670
Joined: 13 Jun 2011, 19:50

Re: Lindsay's Blogs

Postby Lindsay » 11 May 2013, 05:42

Day 392: The Most Sophisticated Carrot-on-a-Stick Ploy that Ever Existed --> http://journey-of-lindsay.blogspot.com/ ... ot-on.html


This post is part of a series which can be accessed here.

To reference the specific blogs that have been walked thus far in this portion of the series, follow the links below:

Day 387: Is our Conscience just a CON?
Day 388: How to Teach your Children to Behave Properly
Day 389: The Policeman in the Head that Raises our Children
Day 390: Why don't we Teach this to our Children?
Day 391: Coercion - The Misfortune of the Fortunate

For the purpose of context suggest reading the previous posts within this series, if you haven’t already, before proceeding.

**************************************

This is the final segment within this particular passage:

“Although we can find many individual exceptions, society does, as a general rule, try to maintain our consciences through coercive means. Positive reinforcement as a tool of public policy is rare. Those to whom we entrust the tasks of monitoring and managing our behavior – our teachers, police, religious leaders, social agencies, and government officials – urge us to behave honestly and ethically, in conformity with the legal and moral principle that help ensure society’s survival. But only the naïve expect us actually to conform to those principles unless we are made to. Our inner consciences must be supported by external coercion, by punishment and threats of punishment from the outside. How often has each of us had the experience of being given or promised something only to find that we must then meet additional obligations if the gift is to be taken back or the promise broken? And so, we have become cynics. We are astonished if we are offered a carrot that is not back up by a stick.” (43) ~ [*] Murray Sidman, excerpt from his book Coercion and Its Fallout

Indeed, society does, as a general rule, try to maintain our conscience through coercive means – however, what is missed here, what is not being expressed nor recognized, is the fact that WE are society, obviously. WE are the coercive ones. Coercion doesn’t just ‘happen’ – like, whoops we are being coerced. It’s an equal and one representation and direct manifestation of who we are to the core of our very selves – each and every one of us. Therefore the first sentence of this passage is strung together in such a way to serve quite well at creating that buffer of separation necessary to encourage blame thus in effect opening the door for us to walk out on our responsibility to investigate WHO WE ARE within the manifestation of such coercion being in our world – and moreover, to correct ourselves.

We are the ones who are responsible for maintaining our conscience through coercive means; society is merely showing us externally who we are internally. Society is not some faceless entity, even when we try really hard to make it seem so because this way we can blame something else much easier – our accountability can then just fall through the cracks, whoops.

We are the faces of society. We would not accept and allow coercion to be in this world, this society, if we did not accept and allow coercion to be in ourselves FIRST. It is indeed no different from the Ouroboros – the snake eating its own tail – a vicious cycle we have created because we CONveniently fail time and time again to recognize ourselves in ALL things.

To reiterate the question I posed the day that I introduced this passage in reference to the sentence which discusses those whom we entrust the task of monitoring and managing our behavior and urge us to behave honestly and ethically… :

Why do we separate ourselves from trust through instead entrusting teachers, police, religious leaders, social agencies, and government officials to manage our behavior for us – and what has the consequence of this been?

If we each trusted ourselves FIRST - if we each trusted ourselves to, in our behavior, in all that we do, in all that we are, in every breath that we breathe, live honesty as a true expression: as SELF-honesty, not a façade of honesty built on the foundation of a corrupted moral code of dishonor where we all wear masks masking the truth of our self-deception – would we then require placing our trust in others to ‘monitor and manage our behavior’? Why do we not yet trust ourselves to be self-monitoring and self-managing in a way that takes ALL life into consideration? Why do we not yet trust ourselves to live what is best for ALL? Why do we not yet see nor understand what is commonsensically necessary to be a being of dignity and to thus love our neighbor as ourselves?

Teachers, police, religious leaders, social agencies, government officials and so on are merely titles that we give to human beings – they are not special – they are not to be trusted. We cannot have trust in this world when we lack trust in ourselves – this should be commonsense – like a mathematical equation, this way of attempting to ‘manage society’ cannot and will not solve the problem as the equation is not equalized in such a way that ensures equilibrium and stability. We do not love our neighbors because we do not love ourselves. We do not trust our neighbors because we do not trust ourselves.

We are urged to behave honestly and ethically, yet there is not a single human being in this world that is able to stand as true example of this. Thus we have discord. Just like we see in our parents who tell us not to lie and then in the next moment we hear tell a lie, through this we too learn how to be fake and ‘act the part’ that is expected of us while behind closed door we peel off our fake smiles and expose OUR lie-stained lips. We see all these apparently ‘trustworthy’ officials telling us to be honest yet in the next moment nothing but trickery streams from their mouths. This is the ‘honesty’ that we learn.

Sidman states that our inner consciences must be supported by external coercion, by punishment and threats of punishment from the outside - without realizing that our inner conscience ITSELF IS coercive in nature; the threats of punishment come from the inside, out then from the outside back in – it’s a self-regulating system that we have separated ourselves from thus the self that is regulating this system we don’t even recognize as ourselves. We support our own coercion through supporting a world of coercion…and so it goes.

We have indeed become cynics simply because we cannot even trust our own mind – as our mind as consciousness is actually the cleverest most sophisticated carrot-on-a-stick ploy that has ever existed…ever. It is our mind that doles out the promises only for us to find that we must meet additional obligations for these apparent ‘promises’ to be fulfilled. It is always something; it is never-ending - until we decide to put an end to the pro-misery that we inflict upon ourselves.



User avatar
Lindsay
Posts: 1670
Joined: 13 Jun 2011, 19:50

Re: Lindsay's Blogs

Postby Lindsay » 12 May 2013, 05:00

Day 393: Is Control Inherently Coercive? --> http://journey-of-lindsay.blogspot.com/ ... rcive.html


This post is part of a series which can be accessed here.

For the purpose of context suggest reading the previous posts within this series, if you haven’t already.

*******************************

Continuing on to investigate and share perspective on the next passage in Murray Sidman’s book – Coercion and Its Fallout:

“By setting an alarm clock, we arrange our environment to control our own behavior. We also control ourselves when we write reminder notes, remove certain foods from our refrigerator, purchase an exercycle, join a dating club, take a marketing course, get rid of our gun, turn out the lights at bed time, change a burned-out bulb in a reading lamp, turn a hearing aid on or off, or run through the alphabet to remember someone’s name.

In many aspects of our lives, therefore, we implicitly acknowledge that behavior is controllable. Does the control have to be coercive? Unfortunately, too many will answer, ‘What else is there?’ Their consequent distaste for the notion of control has prevented them from acquainting themselves with behavior analysis, the science that can help them understand the nature of behavioral control. Ignoring the realities of control has prevented them from taking advantage of noncoercive methods for bringing about a desired behavioral change.

A simple assertion that it would be advantageous to become acquainted with behavior analysis understates the case dangerously. Given the disasters our world is hurtling toward because of our failure to manage ourselves and others effectively, it is more than reasonable to assert that we cannot survive without such a science. This stronger assertion is to be taken literally: Without a science of behavior, we will not remain alive. There is, of course, no guarantee. We may not survive even with a science of behavior. But without one to show us how to change the ways we conduct our affairs, the world is goingt o die either from neglect or by suicide.

We are polluting our environment on a grand scale, burning fossil fuels, increasing the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and raising world temperatures to the point where the melting ice caps will flood our coastal civilizations into oblivion. Education has perhaps sharpened our awareness of the danger but has provided no solution. We will avert this global disaster only by learning to manage our own and others’ behavior – also on a global scale.

Modern technology has raised new problems. We are storing radioactive waste containers that are guaranteed, on a time scale of generations, to leak. Publicity has helped expose the problem, but righteous public indignation has not sufficed to solve it. A science of behavior analysis, considerably more advanced than it is currently, will have to find out how we can bring such remote consequence to bear on contemporary problem-solving behavior.

An increasing conflict between biological and economic constraints has intensified the environment’s coercive influence over the human condition. The world’s population is expanding at a rate far in excess of its productivity, causing a steady increase in the number of those we have nothing. Neither enlightened self-interest nor a sense of brotherhood has been able to ameliorate the resulting human misery. It will take a highly developed science of behavior analysis to show us how to help others apply the technical information we already possess to create living conditions supportive of population growth.

…Perhaps these problems are not solvable. The science of behavior analysis has shown that delayed consequences affect conduct weakly. A rigorous analysis may yield the conclusion that the laws of behavior make our disappearance as a species inevitable. Having the science provides no guarantee of survival. Et, failure to strengthen our understanding of our own conduct would surely deprive us of an effective resource in the search for ways to halt our headlong rush towards extinction.” *(45-47)


Again, a plethora of interesting matters to delve into and explore which I will begin to do so in the following posts.


For now, here are a few questions to consider with regards to this particular passage:

A point that has been addressed in several previous posts within this series but that will specifically be explored within the context of this passage, as already questioned by Sidman – does the control have to be coercive?

Meaning, through recognizing that our behavior is controllable, does this mean that it requires to be coercive?

And within this, why do we so readily and reactively believe that ALL control automatically equals coercion, perceiving there to be nothing else but coercive control?

How has this specific automated response deterred us as humanity from understanding the nature and true science of behavioral control in a way that is best for all life?

How are we, through not understating the science of behavioral control in a way that is best for all life, forcing ourselves and each other and thus ALL of life into an abusive system of separation and ultimate destruction?

How has education sharpened our awareness of the danger we are in while simultaneously stabbing us in the back by providing no practical solutions whatsoever?

How does ‘righteous public indignation’ create the perfect potion of coercive passivity to thus ensure our eventual demise?

What would ‘contemporary problem-solving behavior’ practically look like?

Why has ‘neither enlightened self-interest nor a sense of brotherhood been able to ameliorate the resulting human misery’ we find ourselves in?

Why does delayed consequence affect conduct weakly, and what is the consequence of this?

Why is it that when individuals decide to stand up from within this system of slavery that we have accepted to state: NO MORE WILL I ALLOW THIS! We can find another way! – is it taken as coercive, why does this stance produce conflict, resentment and disdain, and why is it in these such moments that it is all the more important to remain standing no matter what?

************************************

These questions and more will be explored in the posts to come, so stay tuned…



User avatar
Lindsay
Posts: 1670
Joined: 13 Jun 2011, 19:50

Re: Lindsay's Blogs

Postby Lindsay » 13 May 2013, 05:33

Day 394: Can you Answer Any of these Questions, Dear Reader? --> http://journey-of-lindsay.blogspot.com/ ... these.html


This post is part of a series which can be accessed here.

For the purpose of context suggest reading the previous posts within this series, if you haven’t already.

*******************************

“By setting an alarm clock, we arrange our environment to control our own behavior. We also control ourselves when we write reminder notes, remove certain foods from our refrigerator, purchase an exercycle, join a dating club, take a marketing course, get rid of our gun, turn out the lights at bed time, change a burned-out bulb in a reading lamp, turn a hearing aid on or off, or run through the alphabet to remember someone’s name.

In many aspects of our lives, therefore, we implicitly acknowledge that behavior is controllable. Does the control have to be coercive?” (45) ~ [*] Murray Sidman, excerpt from his book Coercion and Its Fallout

To ‘kick off’ the exploration into the passage I shared in yesterday’s post I will begin by looking at some interesting points in relation to this short section above. It may seem at first glance to be nothing of much concern, nothing much to be explored – yet, it is this specific list of behaviors that actually tells us a lot about how ‘in control’ we really are. Do we control our behavior, in fact, or does our behavior control us?

I will simply list here some questions and considerations that you, dear reader, can investigate and explore for yourself so as to begin to see how little actual control we currently have over our own behavior, even though we like to think otherwise, and thus how much of our self-control we have abdicated to our mind internally and to this money system externally - in separation from who we are as the self-directive principle of our life and living – and that, until this is sorted out, we will not be able to fully grasp nor hone the ‘essence’ of behavioral control in such a way that will prove beneficial for all life, as what is required to be done if we are interested in remaining here on this planet without destroying ourselves completely.

Before we even consider how we set an alarm clock to arrange our environment to control our own behavior, we must first ask – why do alarm clocks even exist in the first place? Could it have manifested as an extension of our ever-increasing lack of self-trust, wherein we became so separated from ourselves that we no longer trusted ourselves to be our own alarm clock?

And what do we have to wake up for anyway? Work - to make money, to survive? School - to get an education, to make money, to survive? Could alarm clocks be a symbol of how deeply in slumber we are? How deeply we have sunk into 'survival mode'? Where we hear this loud buzz or beep or song or whatever and we rise from our bed, but…do we ever really wake up? In the first moment we accepted that we required manufacturing a device that would alarm us awake, did we accept limitation? Did we in this moment accept coercive control? What were all the relationships that required existing FIRST before the accumulated acceptance that manifested an alarm clock in this world? And how have we continued this accumulated acceptance to such an extent that we don’t even consider the existence of an alarm clock and what it is showing us about who we have become?

The same goes with reminder notes – where is our self-trust? Why must we keep reMINDing ourselves? Have we accepted forgetting as who we are? Who did we have to accept ourselves to be to manifest reminder notes into this world? What were all the relationships that required being in place for ‘reminder notes’ to appear in this existence? Are reminder notes an external extension of our MIND, reMINDing us that we are enslaved, that our behavior is controlled by our accepted forgetfulness of what we have allowed ourselves to become? So that we must keep reMINDing ourselves to do this and do that and don’t forget you forget – don’t forget you cannot be trusted, you need me, I remind you that you are inadequate, I remind you that your behavior is controllable? Companies make profits, trees are cut down, sweatshops are erected so that we can remind ourselves to stay in our mind and keep forgetting what it is to be alive, what it is to be aware, what it is to care.

Is it ‘we’ who are controlling ourselves when we ‘decide’ to remove certain foods from our fridge? Have we ever considered the luxury that must first exist to even HAVE food in our fridge, let alone have the ‘choice’ to remove certain foods from our fridge? Have we ever considered not just the luxury that must exist, but the poverty and starvation and greed and death and torture that must exist for us to have, and to thus remove, food from our fridge? Is not then our behavior controlled by how much money we have? Who is it then that decided – ‘we’ – or MONEY?

Same goes with purchasing an ‘exercycle’ – money decides our behavior. Why do we want to get our body in shape in the first place? Why is it not in shape? What is it that we desire? What is it that we fear? Do we want to look like those ads we see endlessly streaming into our face at every turn? Do we not deem ourselves as good enough unless we have a ‘fit’ body? Will we not ‘fit in’ unless we are fit? Who is in control? Who is controlling who? What is controlling what? Why are we so oblivious?

Join a dating club? How much money does that require? How much money do you require to have in order to be an acceptable date? How much money do you require to have to even sign up for the service? How much money do you require to have to be ‘in the club’? Why do dating clubs even exist? Have we not yet learned to love ourselves? What is it that we’re looking for? What is controlling us?

We do not even know let alone love ourselves enough to stop and consider our starting point in ALL that we do to ensure that each decision that we make is made with full clarity, full integrity and full consideration with regards to ALL the relationships that are connected to our behavior – as we cannot separate ourselves from a single solitary point that is here, all that exists we are connected to, thus it is our responsibility to ensure that our connections are not CONnections where we con ourselves into beLIEving that our actions have no CONsquence.

Are you CONsidering taking a marketing course, perhaps you would like to get rid of your gun? Why? What brought you to this decision? Why do marketing courses exist? What are we peddling? Where are we going? Why do guns exist? What is our aim? When you get rid of your gun, where does it go? Does getting rid of your gun get rid of the consequences that have already manifested due to guns existing in this world? Where has our responsibility gone? Have we considered all the fighting, conflict, war, tension, hatred, possession, coercion that had to exist FIRST, within our OWN MIND, way BEFORE guns even were a thought in someone’s head to create? All the thoughts that had to shoot and kill before guns took over control to do our dirty work quicker.

As you turn out the lights at bedtime, do you consider how fortunate you are to have money to pay your electric bill? Do you consider how light bulbs are not made to last so that companies can ensure that they will keep having profit rolling in? Have you considered that these companies control your behavior? Are you aware of planned obsolescence? Are you aware that you are not exempt from this equation? Do you know all that you are surrounded by has a death date – including you? Who or what controls you behavior when you turn off that light at night? Do you have to get to bed because you have a long day of work tomorrow? Do you often just lie there thinking about all that you have to do, all that you haven’t done? Do you keep reMINDing yourself of your stresses, lying there is the dark, with your own thoughts shooting like guns, killing your expression? Do you lie there in the dark because your reading lamp has a burned-out bulb which you haven’t had time to change? Who is in control? Do you have control of your own behavior?

What is it that we are not hearing? Why do hearing aids exist? Do we deliberately over time drown out this world, shut ourselves down, damage our ability to respond effectively? When do we ‘decide’ to turn our hearing on, when do we ‘decide’ to turn our hearing off? Who is it that decides? Who is it that is in control?

Why have we created tricks in our head to remember names? Where is our self-trust? Where are our reMINDer notes? What are we forgetting? Why must we name and label everything? Why don’t we remember we are all members of this planet and thus responsible regardless if we forget the physical is proof that we have forgotten what is truth?

Did we lose control?

Where did it go?

Where did we go?

Where have we been?


To be continued…



User avatar
Lindsay
Posts: 1670
Joined: 13 Jun 2011, 19:50

Re: Lindsay's Blogs

Postby Lindsay » 14 May 2013, 05:58

Day 395: The Intricate Science of Self-Control --> http://journey-of-lindsay.blogspot.com/ ... -self.html


This post is part of a series which can be accessed here.

For the purpose of context suggest reading the previous posts within this series, if you haven’t already.

*******************************

Since I have placed the passage that I’ll be working with in this post in its entirety on Day 393: Is Control Inherently Coercive? – I will not be placing the passage within this post again but will simply be using it as a reference to glean from in this post as each paragraph in what is remaining of the passage is essentially expressed within the same or a similar topic. Thus, if you have not yet read the passage, or if you would like to reference it throughout reading this post, suggest doing so by utilizing the link placed above. I also suggest checking out - Day 394: Can you Answer Any of these Questions, Dear Reader? – as this post from yesterday is sharing perspective on the first segment of the passage that I will continue writing about here.

As was pointed out in the previous post (Day 394), we actually have little if any actual control of our behavior as so much of who we think we are is directly and inextricably influenced and thus skewed by our mind as consciousness within and money as this current capitalistic world system without. Yet what must be realized is that this is what we have accepted and allowed. We as humanity have given up our control as the self-director of our life and living and instead we each have, generation after generation, handed our control over to our mind as consciousness and to this world system as money to stand in our stead as the sole directors - where we haven’t a clue how our thoughts and internal experiences are created, nor how money and this external economic system is created. Yet both of these manifestations are ‘somehow’ here, and they are ‘somehow’ regulating and monitoring every single breath that we breathe.

However, again, this is what we have accepted and allowed – we did not just get to this point by ‘chance’ or by ‘accident’ or by ‘god’s will’ – not only did we agree, silently or otherwise, to everything that is here, we created it. Therefore, to answer the question that was posed as the title of Day 393: no, control is NOT inherently coercive. Why not? Because we are the ones that decide what control will be. It is not fixed. Currently, YES, we have decided for control to be coercive – through our very living actions we have made that decision, we have lived that agreement as who we are in our daily behavior.

‘Does the control have to be coercive?’ Sidman asks – and as he notes, too many cannot conceive there to be anything else but. We have grown to loathe control simply because it is easier to loathe than to understand – or is it, really? It takes quite a lot of energy to hold this reaction to control in place, to keep reMINDing ourselves that we are not in control and we hate it, to keep looping this experience over and over inside us as we are constantly retold by our environment both internally and externally that we are enslaved. To allow ourselves to react to control is direct proof of how controlled we really are. Therefore it is best to take great caution when we see ourselves in a position of reaction to this notion of control, as it is through such a reaction that we only further exalt our own enslavement in ignorance while simultaneously stamping out any opportunity that we may have in that moment to change ourselves, to understand ourselves and to thus make an agreement with ourselves and so with this world that we will no longer allow ourselves to be controlled by our own creation.

To control our behavior, to understand behavioral control, is to first walk a process of self-investigation in becoming unequivocally aware of ourselves as living beings living within and on a living planet in a living universe that is ALL of the same exact living substance. Through this process we come to realize the science of the self, the science of self-control, and the responsibility that is ours to discipline ourselves to change and so remain aligned to who we are as this living substance and to thus assert our self-control in such a way that will ensure that, no matter what, we act and so behave in the best interest of ALL because we now see that our life depends on it just as ALL life depends on it.

This is the fundamental point – we are at the critical juncture where we must decide whether we will stand within ourselves and together as the solution to make the changes that are required so that we can prevent further destruction and abuse from ravaging this environment – both internally and externally – or if we will continue as the problem and extinguish ourselves forevermore, completely squandering our opportunity to flourish; to develop ourselves as this life that we are that we have not even begun to appreciate nor comprehend as we have been too busy surviving and struggling and competing and daydreaming in our head to see what we are missing: EVERYTHING!

“The failure to strengthen our understanding of our own conduct would surely deprive us of an effective resource in the search for ways to halt our headlong rush toward extinction”

The search is over once we realize that we are here and there’s nowhere to search. There is nowhere but now-here and it is now-here that we require to be so that we can get to work creating a real life of dignity once and for ALL. When each part of the whole humbly realizes their place as part of the entirety is when we each can control our behavior to move as what is best for all as a living agreement of self-trust made measurably real as it is now, here reflected in all things: equal and one.



User avatar
Lindsay
Posts: 1670
Joined: 13 Jun 2011, 19:50

Re: Lindsay's Blogs

Postby Lindsay » 15 May 2013, 07:13

Day 394: Introduction to the Psychology of Tuning Out --> http://journey-of-lindsay.blogspot.com/ ... gy-of.html


This post is part of a series which can be accessed here.

For the purpose of context suggest reading the previous posts within this series, if you haven’t already.

*******************************

I have decided to skip ahead in the book a bit and will continue to do so throughout the remainder of the text as there are several sections that go into the nuances of behavior analysis with regards to such things as conducting experiments in a laboratory and specific terminology which I will not be covering within my posts. Thus here in this series I am mainly sharing perspective on the more general topics discussed throughout the book focusing primarily on the matter of coercive control in its various dimensions and the implications/consequences thereof.

We are now continuing on to the next point which is the notion of ‘Tuning Out’:

“We often tune out whatever displeases us. Unless bad news demands immediate action, we tend to escape by becoming deaf or blind to it. Sometimes we shut out the coercive environment by turning to ‘escape’ literature, drama, and films. Even mild but persistent negative reinforcers and punishers may make escape habitual. Having a parent or spouse who talks incessantly, we learn to ‘close our ears,’ occasionally nodding or assenting briefly, but hearing little. To some extent, we see and hear only what we want to see and hear, ignoring unpleasant realities until they become persistent or strong enough to pierce our shield of insensibility.

We might save a relationship by learning to ignore small annoyances, but turning out danger and danger signals is not adaptive…Why do we so often engage in such unreal escape? Why do we tune out reality? For an explanation, look first at the immediate rather than the eventual consequences. In the short run, tuning out does work. By displacing other reactions to an offending or offensive event, or to a perilous undertaking, tuning out causes the event or the danger to disappear from awareness: it really does seem to go away.

But does reality not prevail eventually? Can we survive by ignoring the disagreeable, the ugly, or the dangerous?

[…]But although we may escape life’s coercions for a while by tuning them out until they demand our attention, a career of crisis management is, paradoxically, a completely coercive existence. Each emergency keeps us in its grasp, holding our full attention and controlling our every action until we have resolved it. Then, the next crisis grabs us. Negative reinforcement – escape – dominates our lives…Ulcers, heart attacks, break downs, and other ailments in which coercion can play a role are frequent in the population, but rarely strike any particular individual. They therefore exert little influence until they actually happen to us.

Other reinforcers, too, can sustain tuning out as a way of handling problems, even though logic tells us that ignorance of reality cannot promote survival. We may ignore a dangerous situation because we are not ready to face it, but someone else, finding that same danger more compelling, may deal with it directly. And so we have the ‘Let John do it’ solution to disagreeable problems. When it works, we become even more likely to tune out the least pleasant demands of life. Out luck will eventually run out, but meanwhile, we have company; many escape by wearing ‘rose colored glasses’ or ‘playing Pollyanna,’ even though these adaptations eventually prove self-defeating.

In government, industry, and large institutions, ‘Let John do it’ has been formalized as ‘Delegation of Responsibility.’ We can often escape responsibility by passing it off to someone else. When decisions require knowledge we do not have, or will cause disagreeable consequences, we assign responsibility to John or Mary. In industry, this escape route has led to a proliferation of vice-presidents, managers, project leaders, and technical consultants; in government, to a tangled administrative structure or Departments, Bureaus, and Offices; the Universities and Hospitals to a ‘support structure’ that itself consumes considerably more resources than the educational or health mission it is supposed to sustain. Each new link in the ‘chain of command’ is supposed to remove some problem area from the immediate attention of the Chief. It is like a football play without end, each player deftly handing the ball off to another, hoping not to be the unfortunate recipient of a tackle.” (89-91) ~ [*] Murray Sidman, excerpt from his book Coercion and Its Fallout


Questions for consideration in addition to the questions that Sidman has posed within the passage itself which will also be addressed in the posts to follow:

How have we as humanity come to tune out whatever displeases us instead of facing what is here directly, and how has this conduct of escapism been reinforced in our social systems as a reflection of our propensity to evade responsibility at all cost?

Is having the ability to ‘tune out’ our reality actually a luxury that comes at the expense of those who are made to suffer just to survive?

How have we come to blame our external environment for the displeasure we experience within ourselves as a way to conveniently not take responsibility for the relationships we have created and subsequently neglected?

How is tuning out a method of coercive control that we strategically utilize to exert dominance and perceived superiority over others/our environment and ultimately ourselves to cover up the absolute inferiority and lack of control we experience within ourselves?

How have we become so indifferent, complacent and apathetic as human beings that we do not move ourselves unless we are moved by a consequential event so strong that we are forced, or coerced, into action; and within this how can we claim a single victory throughout history when this has always been the starting point of 'change'?

And how has the ‘Let John do it’ approach reinforced our complacency as humanity as a whole through passing off responsibility to others like a hot potato, spanning generations, not seeing how we cannot evade responsibility forever and that what we have done and what we have allowed to be here in our name will eventually catch up and burn us all?

Why it is that more often than not we opt for short-term relief that requires more energy over time than long-term solutions that would prevent energy expenditure indefinitely, but would take more time and effort initially to implement?

Do we really ‘save a relationship’ by learning to ignore our reactions to others which really have nothing to do with the other but what we have accepted and allowed within ourselves that the other is reflecting back to us? And why have we not yet developed practical assistance and support education on these very basic and fundamental points of developing effective relationships with others and most importantly: ourselves?

Why/how is ignorance of what is here celebrated in all facets of this system, especially entertainment as the ‘go to’ point when we desire to tune ourselves out?

How does tuning out support consumerism and thus inequality?



User avatar
Lindsay
Posts: 1670
Joined: 13 Jun 2011, 19:50

Re: Lindsay's Blogs

Postby Lindsay » 16 May 2013, 06:39

Day 397: Fixed Action Patterns and the Preprogrammed Human --> http://journey-of-lindsay.blogspot.com/ ... s-and.html


This post is part of a series which can be accessed here.

For the purpose of context suggest reading the previous posts within this series, if you haven’t already.

*******************************

To note: I have exams starting tomorrow until next Tuesday and thus during this period I will be minimizing my writing time so as to focus more on studying.


As I mentioned in a previous post, since I now share the passages from Sidman’s book in their entirety in one post, I will not necessarily place them again in subsequent posts – unless relevant – but will merely place the link where the entire passage can be accessed as a point of reference.

With that being stated, here is the link for the passage shared in yesterday’s post that I will be drawing from for this post - Day 396: Introduction to the Psychology of Tuning Out


Within facing what is here directly we are realizing and thus taking responsibility for the fact that the displeasure that we’re experiencing did not just happen ‘to us’ from ‘out there’ but that we created it, we programmed it, ‘in here’ right inside our very own selves - which means that when we tune out whatever we deem displeasing, we are actually tuning ourselves out.

Through this we squander any real opportunity for self-discovery; any opening to intimately getting to know ourselves in terms of exploring what it is that we had previously accepted and allowed to be imprinted into us that in turn activated the feeling of displeasure in a moment, as we would come to see that this experience of displeasure actually has nothing to do with our external world besides it being the trigger point that instigated the reaction that then lead us to, instead of facing that reaction directly – taking self-responsibility for our past to correct the moment we are faced with – attempt to escape that reaction by ‘tuning out.’

In most cases - what isn’t realized or even considered is that we do not exempt ourselves from responsibility or consequence when we allow this behavior of tuning out. We actually only give the displeasure more coercive power over us - we allow this self-created entity to define who we are in that moment: I am displeased! Thus through this we are deliberately denying the fact that we created displeasure as a characteristic or personality that we agreed to ‘become’ in the first place.

We cannot escape responsibility indefinitely and the same goes for consequence, absolutely. We can certainly put them off for a long time, to some extent, which is what we’ve done as humanity generation after generation after generation………but we are now at a point where responsibility and consequence have caught up. No more can we run. No more can we hide. No more can we tune out the blaringly obvious fact that we are at the precipice of a great calamity like never before, which means that we are simultaneously at the precipice of a great change that has the potential to usher in a magnificent transformation for this planet. Either way there is nowhere else for us to go - going further into our mind to escape reality is definitely not a solution, although we will still continue to try.

This brings me to recall what are termed ‘fixed action patterns’ or FAPS which are phylogenetic sequences of behavior that particular species engage in where, when the appropriate stimuli is present, they will ‘go through the motions’ of a very specific and hard-wired preprogrammed action that, once started, generally cannot be stopped until the motions are completed. For instance if a squirrel is burying a nut and while it is doing this fixed action pattern the nut is removed, the squirrel will continue to ‘bury’ this non-existent nut all the way until the end where it will pat the fresh earth with its forepaws.

So even though our ability to escape reality is being removed through our own actions of ignorance which are forcing us to deal with what we’ve done, we will still go through the preprogrammed, fixed action pattern of going into our mind and tuning out reality. And it seems AS IF we cannot stop this motion, this pattern, but that is merely an excuse, an acceptance, a justification within the limitation that ‘we cannot change’ this is our ‘human nature’ this is ‘just the way it is.’ Just like we believe that the squirrel cannot change this behavior. It is hard-wired. The squirrel will forever bury a illusory nut when the situation arises because the pattern if FIXED. Indeed, it has been fixed, yet the only reason that something can be fixed is through an acceptance of fixation. And this is the type of mentality that has weaved itself into our social systems – our education system, our family system, our political system, our criminal justice system, or health care system, our scientific system, and so on and so forth - we are fixated on destroying ourselves through our own ignorance.

This is how we justify coercion. This is how we justify limitation, enslavement, abuse and degradation. This is how we justify apathy and tuning out and giving up.

Our mind will not save us from what we have ignored as the mind is the very scheme that has allowed for such reckless and careless behavior to manifest – and to be clear, the mind is not some separate ‘thing’, we are IT.

We tend to also, within this behavior of ‘tuning out,’ arrogantly and erroneously deem ourselves to be immune to consequence, especially and specifically on the collective level, where we have a deeply ingrained habit of complaining about all the ills of the world as if they are someone else’s problem to correct, as if someone else WILL correct them and we’re just waiting for THEM to get their asses in gear.

Again this is the ‘Let John do it’ delegation of responsibility that was mentioned in the previous post.

I’ll delve into this further in the following posts, for now I must return to studying.



User avatar
Lindsay
Posts: 1670
Joined: 13 Jun 2011, 19:50

Re: Lindsay's Blogs

Postby Lindsay » 17 May 2013, 07:09

Day 398: How much does it Cost to Tune Out? --> http://journey-of-lindsay.blogspot.com/ ... -tune.html


This post is a continuation from:
Day 396: Introduction to the Psychology of Tuning Out
Day 397: Fixed Action Patterns and the Preprogrammed Human

Which is also part of a series that can be accessed here.

For the purpose of context suggest reading the previous posts within this series, if you haven’t already.

*******************************

Tonight we will briefly investigate the question that was posed in the introductory post to this section of Coercion and Its Fallout by Sidman:

Is having the ability to ‘tune out’ our reality actually a luxury that comes at the expense of those who are made to suffer just to survive?

This is certainly an important point to investigate for oneself in terms of observing one’s relationship to the behavior of ‘tuning out’ reality whenever we ‘feel like it’ and what we are in fact accepting and allowing in these moments of deliberate escapism.

Could it be that some having the ability to ignore reality simply because they have money in their pocket and don’t require to focus all their daily physical energy on acquiring the basic necessities for survival directly contributes to the struggle and strife of those who are not so FORTUNE-ate; those who are in fact UN-FORTUNATE-ate as they do not even have the fortune as the ability to feed themselves nor their family, as they have been ignored by a man-made system that has ignorance built into its very structure?

So little, if ever, do we stop to consider the implications of our actions on a multi-dimensional level in terms of EVERYTHING that is affected by each one of our decisions. Indeed it is a luxury to escape reality as there are sooo many who do not have this option whatsoever. When you are starving, beaten, war torn, broke and broken you are forced to face reality whether you ‘feel like it’ or not – that is the coercion that we who have the luxury of tuning out reality create for others in this world. We ignore what is here, thus the world’s screams fall on deaf ears. We cannot hear because we have yet to get ourselves HERE in THIS reality. We are too busy attempting to tune out whatever displeases us without even considering the oftentimes absolute superficiality of our so-called ‘problems.’

Could it be that we create these ‘problems’ deliberately so as to evade responsibility?

If we have nothing to ignore and we are thus HERE in this reality directly then there is nothing else to do but take responsibility for what we directly see is here, which is a world in absolute shambles – both internally and externally. How did it get to be this way? Generation, after generation, after generation: of tuning out – of ignoring consequence, of turning a blind eye, of escaping into entertainment, of celebrating our cruelty without shame. We teach this to our children – we sit them down, turn on the television and tell-a-vision of tuning out to cope with our experiences. We teach this in our living behavior which children, through extensive repetition, eventually imitate because they have never been shown any other example, thus to them this is ‘all there is’ – yet what is not seen is the ALL ‘on the other side’ of ignorance who have a much different vision, one that tells-a-vision of brutality in the most sober sense.

Have you ever considered what it would be like to live in this world and have your existence be completely ignored? You have no food, no shelter, no money, you lack practical clothing to suit the environment you are in, you have no water, no access, no toilet; your health is non-existent along with you education. And nobody cares. And nobodies comes. Because apparently, you are a nobody and so everybody would rather tune you out.

How much does it REALLY cost to tune out?

Consider this, until next time…




Return to “Members' Blog Links”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron