| | |
 | "Background to the Fore" | |
| Page | 1 | 2 | 4 | 5 |
| From our earliest recorded history, mankind has been intrigued, even obsessed with the purpose of life. The meaning of our existence and the reason for it, and how one can change themselves and thereby change their lot for the better. As humankind's knowledge grew, it became obvious that if we were ever to know what we are and of what we are capable of, then we must have a clearer picture of reality and the manner by which we arrived here. Using the tools of observation, humanity turned its gaze outward to the stars and inwards to the psyche. But this in itself was insufficient upon which to base a true knowledge. Observing something can allow one to predict what comes next, but not necessarily understand the cause that produced the result. They recognised that a discharge of lightning would be followed by a clap of thunder but it is only quite recently in our history that we gave up the misconception that the effect was caused by the gods hurling spears of light. Before the scientific method of logical deduction, it was assumed that we were the constructs of an unknowable alien who had created reality and brought us to life for the sole purpose of worshipping it. The truth only being learned by total obedience. Rather like a box of wind up toys. Unfortunately, that method of discovering ourselves was doomed to failure, giving rise to an unending succession of mountebanks and power brokers, all claiming to be the intermediary between the alien being and the rest. Each claiming to be the ultimate authority on what we should be permitted to know. A truer picture of where we came from only began to emerge with the study of our antecedents, palaeontology. The uncovering of humanity's back trail revealed the absurdity of the Bishop who claimed that we were brought into being at 09.00 hours on Sunday, October 3rd. 4004 BC. Gregor Mendel and Charles Darwin were the prophets of a new belief system more in accord with a true reality. Archaeology had shown us the rise and fall of past civilisations, and palaeontology extended our knowledge back into the mists of time, but neither of these disciplines gave us any meaningful clues as to the inner workings of the human mind. We have the inestimable good fortune to live in a time when neurobiology and genetic research are finally giving us the tools to form a clear picture of why we are as we are, and how we can put that knowledge to practical use in our daily lives. |
| It is for these reasons that several chapters of the Charisma Files concern themselves with evolution, bio-neurology, and genetics. It is a foolhardy quest if we attempt to change something without understanding the nature of what it is that we are dealing with. Rather like hacking your computer's registry in ignorance of its workings. When one seeks an expansion of awareness, they rapidly find that awareness is not a neat, self-contained package. It is inevitable that one finds they very quickly becoming politically aware in its widest sense. All human intercourse is a matter of politics; from the treaties between nations, the agreements between multinational corporations and governments, and the relationships with one's partner and family. Everyone has their own agenda. Strange as it may seem, any attempt by an individual to try to understand themselves and take control of their own mind, is a political act. To understand your own mind is to want to control your own actions. This does not imply that one immediately becomes a terrorist, but it is a statement that the individual recognises their right to control their own life. A measure of the way in which thoughts are moulded can be seen by the way in which power-constructs pervert the language. The basic tenet of democracy is that it is a means of limiting the powers of those we elect to serve us. We elect them to positions of responsibility, yet they claim that they have been voted into power; adopting the cloak of medieval barons. Not a week passes without there being drafted new measures to control and circumscribe not only our actions but also our thoughts. They work to condition us to comply with their own, self-serving, concepts of right and wrong. In March 02, the British Prime Minister announced that he was offering a partnership to the British people. What presumptuous arrogance! When you pay someone to do a job, the relationship between you and them is that of employer and employee. Employees are not in the position to offer partnerships to their employers; equal or otherwise. Yet, his proclamation went unchallenged by the news media. A self-endowed expansion of power by one faction extends the powers of all subsidiary power factions. Make no mistake about the fact the news media is a power faction with its own agenda and vested interests. So are our thoughts guided into the desired channels. |
| In a previous paragraph, I had first intended using the word 'anarchist'. Anarchism is a very old political belief system. The Oxford English Dictionary states, 'a doctrine advocating the abolition of government and its replacement by a social system based on voluntary co-operation'. Look up the same word in the Thesaurus supplied with Microsoft Office 2000, and one is told that an anarchist is a rebel/mutineer, a revolutionary, is disloyal, seditious, insubordinate, a radical/extremist. In short, anyone who disagrees with the powers that be. Strangely enough, multinational corporations are themselves strong advocates of non-intervention by governments, claiming that they, the corporations, can be trusted to adopt a policy based on voluntary co-operation. The 'code' of laissez faire. It is the way of authority to be conservative. In a prison, the guards are the only ones who resist dramatic changes to the status quo. When new knowledge can no longer be suppressed, authority invariably seeks to control its use. Generally shaping public opinion as to the dangers inherent in it; fostering illusion and manipulating the consent of an uninformed majority to achieve this. A prime example of this is the official propaganda concerning the Internet. By overemphasising any possible menace to the public good, our governments, who have exhibited an alarming ignorance of the technology involved, have willingly allowed themselves to be railroaded into a whole set of badly thought out legislation to control it. This legislation is ostensibly for the protection of the individual. Lies, all lies. The act does absolutely nothing to protect us from would-be wrongdoers. What it does do is to allow our servants total freedom to spy on any one of us in order that a perpetrator may be caught AFTER THE DAMAGE IS DONE. It offers no protection whatsoever. Despite its claims to the contrary, science is often the tool of power and the bedmate of superstition. "The fuel on which science runs is ignorance. Science is like a hungry furnace that must be fed from the forest of ignorance that surrounds us. In the process, the clearing we call knowledge expands, but the more it expands, the longer its perimeter and the more ignorance comes into view." Matt Ridley, "Genome" So often does the smoke of superstition and/or politics obfuscate the flames of knowledge. One example among many comes to mind. This is the appalling record of both Germany and the United States in their misuse of biology for the purpose of political gain. |
| I refer to the legislation enacted and carried out in the involuntary sterilisation of 'inferior peoples' in order to maintain the purity of the 'better' Anglo-Saxon stock. America, between 1910 and 1935, used a collection of State and Federal laws to sterilise more than 100,000 people. Germany 'excelled' America in that it first sterilised 400,000 human beings, then, in one 18-month period, murdered 70,000 of them in the gas chambers. It was the horrors of World War 2 that led the American government to conclude that all people were capable of such atrocities. Ostensibly, it was with this in mind that they employed the family of Sigmund Freud for the purpose of achieving means whereby they could control the thoughts of the American people. Many other governments, closely followed by large corporations, were not slow in putting their findings to work for their own purposes. When we set out on the quest for expanded awareness, we must do so with the basic awareness that it is a largely solitary journey. One that is beset with pitfalls and obstacles. All change is a threat to the status quo. We are enmeshed in a net of habits, not only our own but also the habitual expectations of those around us. The closer that other people are to us, the greater the degree of uneasiness will they feel as a result in changes in our behaviour. Unless your changes are towards the direction in which they wish you to go. Possibly the greatest obstacle we face are ourselves. A lifetime's accretion of habitual thought and behaviour patterns will have to be dealt with. Ironically, a high percentage of things that we accept to be true are actually ideas that we have unquestioningly accepted as part of our inheritance from family and culture. There is an old story concerning the meeting of a fox with a bear that happened on the brow of a hill separating two valleys. The bear asks the fox where he is going to, and the fox tells him that he has had enough of being persecuted, so is moving to the other valley. The bear asks him if he is taking his teeth and appetites with him. The fox replies that it does not matter as, in the other valley, the farmers do not lock up their chickens nor do they carry guns. "They will," the bear tells him. "They will." The point of the story is that, to a very large extent, it is our own attitude that shapes the world in which each of us lives. Changes in attitude do not just solve problems; they create situations in which the problems cease to exist. Changing our attitudes, our mindset; changing our opinions about ourselves - and therefore our view of the world - is not the easiest thing to do, but far from impossible. The alternative, to try to change the attitudes of everybody else, isn't worth thinking about. Consider the lives of the great leaders of history, the shapers and changers; then consider the actions of their avowed followers. See what I mean? |