Question about opportunities and solutions of the "Corona Pandemic" - Ideas on cause and effect
I would like to share some ideas about the causes of the circumstances in the world we live in today, which in my view are much deeper than current politics, media coverage or public discussion about Covid. A major problem, however, is that we often neither know the causes of our suffering nor where we actually want to go. Suffering can be understood on a personal as well as on a societal level, whether it is wars that are being waged, environmental pollution, illness, loneliness or lack of love. All that which disturbs us in our daily lives and which we do not consider to be good could be comprehensively described as suffering, since it inevitably leads to just that in one form or another. There is a nice article by Dr. Caroline Leaf on the effects of loneliness and isolation on our health, considering the current situation it shows how little understanding we have in general of cause and effect, especially in relation to our own health.
I would like to start with an insight that I believe is fundamental to everything else. Peace encompasses all people, all living beings and plants, our mother earth as well as the universe, but also ourselves. It is not possible to create peace if we exclude someone or something from it, all forms of life have their justification and their necessity. Life itself arises from a necessity, that can be a bee or a flower, the mother who breastfeeds her child but also the war that we lead against another country or even against a virus. There is of course no or better said no natural necessity to lead wars, it would be just as possible to lead a life in harmony and in peace with itself and its environment, but we create this necessity by creating (inner) enemy images. Our thoughts and actions always have consequences, these can be good or bad, but the negative consequences are just as relevant as the positive ones, because without possible consequences our life would disintegrate into meaninglessness.
Now why is this realization so important and what role does it play in the question of how to go on and where we want to go? We have to realize that there is a necessity for the things that are currently happening in the world and in our lives and that are causing a lot of suffering. By creating enemy images and fighting them, we do not solve these conflicts, much more we create new ones and intensify the conflict. Of course, this does not mean that we should close our eyes and consider everything good, but we should only condemn the acts and not the people behind them, the goal must always be to include all people. At the core, everyone is good and needs love, attention and recognition.
Here we can also draw a parallel with modern medicine, we see the disease, the virus, the cancer cell as an enemy to be fought. You should know only too well that fighting the disease, e.g. cancer, does not make much sense. Cancer arises out of necessity and ensures our viability with the aim of restoring a balance in the body. The causes lie much more in our thoughts and actions, a traumatic experience, stress, loneliness or lack of love. I think it was Socratis who said that he was possessed by a demon. This demon appeared whenever he did wrong, showed him his mistakes and helped him to lead a better life. Today we turn the whole thing upside down and blame the demon for our wrong actions, we refuse to change our wrong behavior and then accuse its consequences of being the cause, cancer is the consequence not the cause of our disease.
There are wonderful lectures and research by Dr Zach Bush on the causes and our understanding of disease e.g. the importance of viruses to our health. One very important point of his research from my point of view is that cancer cells, for example, are always isolated cells that no longer communicate with other cells. If we transfer this thought to the current situation, to our community with each other, then we must inevitably ask ourselves what we actually expect from social distancing, quarantine and isolation, compulsory masking and the associated concealment of all feelings and emotions ? If this behavior causes cancer in our body, what does this behavior cause in our society ?
Another central question that arises from the idea of the enemy image is that of good and evil. Why are there seemingly good and bad people, how is good and bad defined and who decides what is good and what is bad or is it just a natural polarity? Are there good and bad in nature e.g. medicinal plants and weeds, or do good and bad exist merely as a theoretical construct in our consciousness, which in its consequence manifests itself in physical "reality" through our (negative) thoughts and actions ?
In the Bible the history of mankind begins with Adam and Eve in paradise, both live in harmony with nature, they are only partly aware of their own physicality and mortality. There is only one commandment of God and that is not to eat from the tree of knowledge between good and evil. The temptation comes in the form of a snake, which embodies knowledge and insight. Now one can stand to the Bible as one wants, this history says nevertheless very much about the nature of humans. From my point of view, the Bible is written symbolically and unbound from any temporal context. It is not important whether this story is about the first two people, it is rather about the transformation that the two undergo.
In the beginning, the two do not see themselves separate from their environment, nor are they aware of their own physicality, they are pure in their consciousness (innocent) and live in the here and now, thoughts about the future or past do not matter. This is essentially the state after birth, a baby cannot distinguish between itself and its environment and lives alone in the moment. Now this baby develops and slowly becomes aware of itself. This step is very important, because only in this way we can learn to decide about our own actions and develop our own consciousness (self-awareness).
Now, one might think that this development naturally brings with it the knowledge between good and evil, but this is by no means the case. Children observe and learn from nature and their environment, they try out, fall down and get up again, but they do not judge, something works or not, they laugh or cry but they do not distinguish between good and evil. This separation between good and evil is taught and only possible if we agree on appropriate values, be it in the family, in the circle of friends, in society, politics or religion and create framework conditions in which good and evil can emerge.
The moment we start to judge, to separate between good and evil, we create this very opposition. In other words, good and evil can only exist in a society in which there is a distinction between good and bad, in which there is a concept of good and evil and a motivation to harm other people consciously or even unconsciously.
It is the same with smart and stupid, children do not distinguish between smart and stupid people, they do not judge themselves or others by their intellect, they ask questions and learn from mistakes, they observe and "copy" our behavior. It is neither good nor bad to know something or not, both contribute equally to becoming aware of oneself and one's environment.
This self-awareness is very important and is reflected in the bond between a baby and its mother, but also in our connection to nature, in the fact that we perceive ourselves as not separate from our environment and accordingly come to the realization that any damage we cause on the outside will inevitably have an impact on our inside. Every child can understand and feel these simple principles and thus develop a natural understanding of cause and effect and act accordingly.
Now we send our children to school and grade them on how well you can repeat given questions with given answers, "no one" is really interested in the children's questions and answers, at least not as part of the curriculum. The whole thing is based on the idea of knowledge or science, which is represented in the Bible but also in our society (medicine) by the snake. In the following I will distinguish between cognitions and knowledge, the separation is linguistically certainly not universally valid but it is very important for the understanding. Knowledge is based on experiences and observations, knowledge, however, documents these and is based on an abstraction of nature.
One insight could be that it is good for me to eat an apple in the morning, to meet with friends and to laugh a lot. In science, we now try to explain these findings/observations and begin to examine the apple chemically. This may work quite well with the apple, but it becomes more difficult with laughter and ultimately leads to the development of a health system in which humans are regarded as purely physical beings and can be treated accordingly only on this level. Important are only the chemical processes and elements and how these can be influenced in the form of drugs. Thus, an apple becomes a medicine and the realization that the apple is good for me is lost in the process.
Because of this paradox, we develop in such a way that we acquire more and more knowledge and at the same time can do less and less with this knowledge, we see ourselves as separate from our environment and therefore believe that we can control this very environment. We do not realize that we cause harm every time we act against the principles of nature. We understand neither cause nor effect and therefore treat only the symptoms and this not only in medicine, but in all areas of our society.
Our knowledge is almost always accompanied by a valuation, we consider something as good or bad and evaluate it accordingly. We do not recognize that there is a raison d'être for every living being and for every plant, and that this is neither good nor bad, but merely an image of external circumstances. A disease is for itself first of all neither good nor bad, it has a cause and serves the healing, it behaves likewise with the weeds on the fields, which are again the result of the one-sided agriculture, they provide in the long run for the fact that the soil is revived and a balance in nature is created.
God banished Adam and Eve from paradise after they ate from the tree of knowledge between good and evil. He punished Eve with toil to bear children and obedience to the man, Adam he cursed the field, with toil you shall feed on it all your life, until you become earth again. It concerns here the consequences and/or consequences of the disregard of God's commandments, these we could call also nature laws or principles, that does not play a role. This is not a punishment in the conventional sense, but cause and effect. If we live against these commandments, the laws of nature or separate the female from the male principle, then this has corresponding consequences.
With toil shalt thou bring forth children. Birth is probably one of the most important moments for the bond between mother and baby and accordingly this moment should be characterized by love, peace and security, the trust and certainty that everything will be fine. Instead, for many women, this moment is increasingly degenerating into an unnatural and traumatic experience. Women give birth to their children with difficulty, we have countless cesarean sections and endless births are induced, unnatural fears are created and accordingly the birth means a lot of stress for mother and also the baby.
Obedience to the Man. We have a male dominated society, not because the leading positions are occupied by men, but because our thinking is shaped by male characteristics. We use and promote almost exclusively our left brain, the logical, analytical, rational and abstract, losing the feminine, intuitive, emotional, compassionate and creative. This applies to women, especially women in positions of power, as well as men, our entire school and social system is designed for this. Obedience to man is obedience to authority, we subordinate ourselves and suppress our feelings and intuition.
Adam he cursed the field, with toil you shall feed on it. Our agriculture is perishing because we work against nature, we have no diversity and spray poisons on the fields, the soil dries up and only with great effort can we still cultivate it. In the sweat of your brow you shall eat your bread until you become earth again. We have become aware of our own mortality and since we are going to die, our life loses meaning, it has no deeper meaning, it is transient and so we try to preserve it as long as possible. Thereby we reduce life to the purely physical, after death we become earth again, thereby we should actually recognize that life is infinite and always takes place in the moment, in the here and now.
There is a highly recommended lecture by Mark Passio on Natural Law or Moral Law, the connection between our thoughts, feelings and actions, our understanding of right and wrong and its consequences.
The question now is, how do we get back to paradise, how do we create a world in which we help each other and do not harm each other, in which we do not poison our environment or our bodies and minds, in which we create peace and give our children space to develop, in which female characteristics again form a balance to the male ones and in which we live in harmony with nature ?
First of all, we have to realize that in many ways we are trapped in dogmas and beliefs and often do not even realize that they have no foundation nor are they helpful in our daily lives. A simple example is the idea of justice. Justice is merely a concept based on the idea of right. There is no natural right any more than there is equality in nature. Law essentially serves to place oneself or one group of people above another, injustice is the consequence that results, accordingly our legal system is a system that inevitably leads to injustice. As in medicine, we understand neither cause nor effect and end up merely reinforcing the injustice (symptoms).
It is similar with the idea of money. Money is a concept, it is fictitious and first of all neither good nor bad, we ourselves decide how we can use this idea, this concept for us, in its present form it ensures that we appropriate nature and give it a value. But we are not owners of nature but part of it, by giving nature a value, so we also give ourselves a value and measure ourselves from now on only on the basis of our labor. We believe money is real and create artificial scarcities to increase values that do not exist. We use money as an instrument of power and oppression, we allow ourselves to be corrupted and thus distance ourselves from nature and also from truth.
"Before our white brothers came to make civilized people out of us, we had no prisons. For this reason, we did not have criminals. Without a prison, there can be no criminals. We did not have locks or keys, and that is why we did not have thieves. If someone was so poor that he did not own a horse, a tent or a blanket, he was given all these as a gift. We were much too uncivilized to attach importance to personal possessions. We sought possessions only to be able to pass them on. We did not know money and therefore the value of a person was not measured by his wealth. We had no written laws, no lawyers, no politicians, so we could not cheat each other. Things were really bad for us before the whites came, and I can't explain how we got along without the basic things that we are told are so necessary to a civilized society." (Lame Deer)
In the end, the question always arises, are there concepts or frameworks in our society that inevitably lead us to harm nature and ourselves ? It is about the question of the direction in which we develop, about the ideologies that stand behind it and about the conditions that we create or have created within our society. What are the underlying concepts of our society that lead to racism, to environmental pollution, to poverty and hunger? Is it a coincidence that there is racism in our society, are we victims and the only justification is that there are some stupid Nazis and if we fight them then the problem is solved ? Will a CO2 tax solve our environmental problems and stop polluting and exploiting them ? Will hunger problems in our world be solved by donation organizations ? Of course not and it would be naive not to say stupid to believe that anything will change as long as we hold on to these ideas.
There was in the mirror an article in relation to racism that one should fight this with the same weapons, no step aside give way, no dialogue, no tolerance, no acceptance, the opposite as enemy image. Left is good and right is bad, however, left conditions right, left conditions a society that can be divided into left and right and ultimately left also always uses the same fascist methods, justified with the moral justification to stand up for the right, for the good and exposes itself to its own fascism, which in its essence is no different from racism. Antifa will never solve racism problems, because your ideology and essence is itself fascist in its core, however good the intentions may be, they testify to ignorance and naivety and will therefore never lead to success.
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. If we are to guard against ignorance and remain free, it is the responsibility of every American to be informed." - Thomas Jefferson
What are the concepts related to Covid ? What are the ideas behind the pandemic and what are the conditions ? All the measures that have been and are being taken are essentially based on fear, the fear of viruses, of disease, the fear of infecting someone and ultimately the fear of death. Underlying this is a material understanding of life and death, of nature, the idea of seeing matter as particles and not as a whole, of seeing nature as separate and consequently viruses isolated as the cause of a disease, in short a materialistic worldview.
At the same time, our science is subject to the idea of measurability and control over nature, regardless of the fact that an observation or measurement always affects the result. Since we assume that nature is only composed of particles, we can control them or create them ourselves, in the form of genetically modified plants, but of course the same applies to humans. If we try to change our genetics, then it is only logical that we also try to do the same with our consciousness and our thoughts, so for example Elon Musk promotes the development of chips in the brain to form an interface between artificial and natural intelligence, at the same time he brings enough satellites into orbit to link them together.
Technologies of this kind will logically lead to the fact that we will lose our own identity on the one hand, independent thinking will become more and more difficult due to the fusion with artificial intelligence, on the other hand they will be a prerequisite to be able to participate in a social life at all. We are building a matrix in which we monitor, test and measure ourselves continuously and evaluate our performance on the basis of this measurement data and make decisions accordingly or have them made. For example, Elon Musk says that at some point it will be impossible to distinguish reality from simulation, but you could also say we will be unable to distinguish between measured and experienced reality, between projection and self.
Bill Gates, besides all the vaccinations, also promotes the development of Gene Drive, a technology to artificially depopulate a species by inheriting a genetic footprint, technologies to control fertility, be it via vaccinations or implanted chips, or even the development of artificial breast milk. It promotes programs such as ID2020, Planned Parenthood or Gavi, holds shares in genetic engineering companies such as Monsanto and promotes programs such as the "green revolution" in Africa, which pretends to strengthen local agriculture, while it merely places it in the hands of genetic engineering companies and drives farmers into their dependence. Crops cultivated over generations are being replaced by GMOs, with the absurd idea that these might be better adapted to external conditions than crops cultivated naturally over thousands of years. It is not about pointing the finger at Bill Gates or Elon Musk, they follow an ideology of science, selection and selection, measurability and control over nature, possibly these people are simply afraid of death by your abstract worldview, see themselves separated from your environment and therefore try to control it. But we must be aware of this development to be able to decide whether this is the future, as we imagine it or not and to what extent we ourselves promote and drive this ideology.
Normally we speak of a natural selection or Auslese, now we have it however much more with an artificial selection by humans themselves to do, which must be regarded separately from the natural evolution, since it takes place on basis of an abstraction and contrary to nature, nature always creates a natural equilibrium, humans disturb evenly this equilibrium sensitively, sometimes because we confuse equilibrium and equality.
The idea or ideology of evolution and natural selection is widely accepted, but is based on false assumptions and observations, so nature develops only conditionally evolutionary, we humans develop evolutionary, but rather fluently adapts to external circumstances, it always arises from a necessity. The solution exists thereby already before the change or lies in the change, it becomes visible in this moment and is never faulty, is the appropriate answer to the external change. Thus there were experiments with pyramids, whose geometry produces an energy field, which can be measured and has influence on the immediate environment. This energy field can affect, for example, the flora and fauna of the immediate environment, already extinct plants begin to grow again, something similar can be observed, for example, in the research of the primeval code. Ultimately, matter is manifested energy, changes this energy, the frequencies of the environment, the matter also changes accordingly.
Likewise, the stronger one does not prevail in nature, this is also a wrong way of looking at things, which we transfer to our society and which is reflected in the opposition and competition. It may still be true in isolation and in a small way, but not in the whole picture. Nature functions only in the community, in the symbiosis of the different life forms, which form a closed ecosystem. Each life form has its right to exist and is neither above nor below nor next to another life form, the fox does not prevail over the hare, the owl, the tree or the river, together they form a natural balance.
Our wrong way of looking at nature leads us to try to select out the supposedly bad and defective. While the term eugenics is rightly very negatively loaded due to the past, many people advocate the science of genetics, in the end it is one and the same idea. While we at least pretend to want to help, promote and protect disabled people, we have surprisingly few problems with the idea of aborting an unborn life because of a possible disability or even for other reasons. Artificial insemination, cloning, designer babies, transgender and invented genders, all this is already more or less accepted without us actually being aware of the underlying ideology and its life-despising implications.For example, the origins of the Planned Parenthood organization can be traced back to the American Birth Control League founded by Margaret Sanger. She can be quoted as follows:
"The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it".
"No woman shall have the legal right to bear a child, and no man shall have the right to become a father, without a permit.
What would happen if we raised our children without the influence of all these concepts in love and security, in a functioning community ? Without the influence of Hollywood or a sexualized music industry, without artificial competition and the idea of giving value to everything, be it the grade in school or the price in the supermarket, without the idea of power, status and success. Without fear of strangers or judging them by their appearance or intellect, without fear of illness and death, without fear of change. Without advertising and the illusion of being able to buy happiness, without models who present us with false ideals of beauty, without politicians who continually lie to us, without actors who play our lives for us.
Would children also then grow up to be adults who consciously or unconsciously harm nature and your fellow human beings in order to gain an advantage from it, would there be a motivation for deceiving or exploiting other people ? Would there even be an understanding, a concept of good and evil, of power, status and success ? If we ask ourselves simple questions, without underlaying them with existing concepts, what answers do we get ?
Why do we need our own car ?
9 out of 10 cars could actually be eliminated without losing anything, especially since in most cases we only use them to go to work or to the supermarket. Our work would also be superfluous in 9 out of 10 cases without money, and we don't enjoy it in 9 out of 10 cases. We drive 500 meters to the next supermarket to buy something that we don't even need in 9 out of 10 cases and only buy because we don't know anything better to do with our time, ultimately it is much more a compensation of an unfulfilled life. So why not produce only the best cars and make them openly available to everyone ? Cars stand here only symbolically and must also not necessarily go over into a "common property", possibly is better solutions, in any case we need only a fraction.
Why do we need locks ?
A functioning community does not need locks, no protection of their own property, property would be respected of course by everyone in the community. The fact that we need to protect this very property in our society shows us that we do not have a functioning community. More protection does not lead to more security but the opposite is the case, the more we try to protect ourselves and our property, the less freedom and security we will have.
Why do we need different classes ?
Likewise, it is a sign of a non-functioning society if we divide goods and services into different classes, purely logically there should be no second or third class products or services, it would imply that we are also dealing with second and third class people. People are divided into classes of different value and thus also have different rights and privileges. Such a society can never function as a community.
We usually only become aware of this when we ourselves are affected by it, the arrogance we display towards so-called developing countries, for example, less so. Our arrogance when we decide in our prosperity about supposed development aid, about the access to water while we can buy their bottled water in our supermarket, our arrogance to consider ourselves as developed and the other as not developed. Donation organizations are a reflection of this misdevelopment and never lead to a significant improvement in the respective countries.
A proverb from Africa and the initiative of the same name by Michael Tellinger "Ubuntu" says as much as "I am who I am because of who we all are". I am because of who we (all) are. One is only well when all are well. Only if something is in the interest of the community and causes no harm, it is useful. This approach would, for example, completely exclude the use of pesticides or genetic engineering, the use of toxic drugs or animal testing.
"Ubuntu [...] speaks of the very essence of being human. [We say [...] "Hey, so-and-so has ubuntu." Then you are generous, you are hospitable, you are friendly and caring and compassionate. You share what you have. It is to say, "My humanity is caught up, is inextricably bound up, in yours." We belong in a bundle of life. We say, "A person is a person through other persons."
[...] A person with ubuntu is open and available to others, affirming of others, does not feel threatened that others are able and good, for he or she has a proper self-assurance that comes from knowing that he or she belongs in a greater whole and is diminished when others are humiliated or diminished, when others are tortured or oppressed, or treated as if they were less than who they are." - Desmond Tutu
There is the Venus Project by Jacque Fresco, the blueprint of a society based on needs and resources unbound by growth and money. The knowledge that we have the know how and the appropriate resources to provide a life worth living for every person on this planet without making it dependent on work, performance or money. Technology and knowledge should be used to enable a higher standard of living with less work. Why do we work 8 hours a day when 2 hours would be enough, the standard of living would still be higher and we would not burden nature to the same extent, with the difference of making decisions according to needs and not interests.
"The only limitations on the future of the humankind are those we impose upon ourselves" - Jacque Fresco
"We should do away with the absolutely specious notion that everybody has to earn a living. It is a fact today that one in ten thousand of us can make a technological breakthrough capable of supporting all the rest. The youth of today are absolutely right in recognizing this nonsense of earning a living. We keep inventing jobs because of this false idea that everybody has to be employed at some kind of drudgery because, according to Malthusian Darwinian theory he must justify his right to exist. So we have inspectors of inspectors and people making instruments for inspectors to inspect inspectors. The true business of people should be to go back to school and think about whatever it was they were thinking about before somebody came along and told them they had to earn a living." - Buckminster Fuller
Another example is Local Futures and the idea of Economics of Happiness by Helena Norberg-Hodge, the idea again of strengthening local communities and freeing them from dependence on global markets. Putting the community, local agriculture and people's needs first again and creating a foundation for their own independence. Poverty is a direct consequence of globalized markets, the profiteers of these markets are the big companies, not the simple population.
Where do we want to go ? The goal must always be to create a peaceful world, a world in which there is no incentive or motivation to harm, deceive or lie to another person ? A world in which we do not let ourselves be divided, but develop a common consciousness and a connection to nature, in which children can grow up and develop freely. Decisions must be made in the sense of the community, children must have the opportunity to develop a natural understanding of right and wrong, learn to be aware of the consequences of their actions, because only then can they later make good decisions and take responsibility for them.
How do we get there ? Is it helpful to hold acting persons responsible, if necessary to put them on trial and to condemn them ? Would these persons learn something from it, would our society become a better one ? Who decides what is right and what is wrong, where do we draw the line and what about the people who just play along with this game ? Do demonstrations help us, should we organize politically or just inform ourselves ? Which of these steps are compatible with the overall goals ?
The answers to these questions are not so simple, as some of them seem to contradict each other. We are in a situation where we are very far from even beginning to understand the causes of our problems, where it seems almost impossible to include all people, because we as a society seem to be very divided. So it can be quite right to call acting persons to account, to put them if necessary before court in order to avert so a larger damage or to protect for example our children from measures. However, these means may only be used to avert harm, not to retaliate or punish; the goal must continue to be to include all people.
"The big ones stop ruling when the little ones stop groveling".
The more important part of the change, however, is up to ourselves. We have to get away from the thought that the world outside has to change, to our own responsibility, change through a self-determined life, self-love, recognizing and valuing ourselves, because only then can we transfer feeling to our environment and our fellow human beings. We cannot change other people so easily and if we can, then mainly through manipulation, but manipulation should be neither the goal nor the means to an end. The possibility to make our own decisions and to take responsibility for them is a prerequisite for a self-determined and free life, if we are influenced or manipulated in this decision, we are no longer self-determined. However, we much prefer to relinquish responsibility, let decisions be made for us and consequently do not lead a self-determined life, thus we enable a handful of people to exercise power and restrict freedoms.
Now in a community it will always be the case that decisions and agreements have to be made, so it is inevitable that we also give up responsibility. There must be rules for a functioning coexistence, but these must be in the interest of the community and must not serve the interest of individuals. We are in a time in which we will transform ourselves as a society, the question will be what we will choose. Do we remain in fear and out of it try to control the world around us or do we break free from that fear. Only when we live in fear, we need control, are we not able to control the things around us, so we demand more control, security and surveillance. If we remain in this fear, then there is only one direction in which we can go, but if we detach ourselves from this fear, then the current situation offers a great opportunity for good. Something that should possibly also give us a little hope, the people who supposedly have the most power are at the same time the people who are also most afraid of losing it and accordingly have to hold on to their power and control. They are most afraid of death and probably also of life and therefore strive for control over it. If we as a society get rid of this fear, it would also and especially for these people a huge liberation, because especially for these people it is almost impossible to free yourself from your position.