Saturday, January 18, 2014
The Ultimate Act of Freedom
The Ultimate Act of Freedom
01/17/2014 19:57 -0500
By Cognitive Dissonance
Which came first, the chicken or the egg? I ask not because I require an answer, but rather because I desire to ask better questions both of myself and of the world around me. Asking a question that seems to compel the questioner to chase his or her tail is not as pointless as it may seem if the query can be redirected to challenge ‘common’ knowledge or long standing beliefs.
So let me try again with a different question. Which came first, the sociopathic leadership or the seriously dysfunctional populace? I suspect the answer is both and neither.
As with most symbiotic codependent (dysfunctional) relationships, there is no Yes or No, Right or Wrong, Black or White answer. Asking which came first is missing the point since one component of the relationship cannot exist as it does now without the other, at least not for long. A better question might be…..why do we believe there is a defined cause and effect relationship that creates the present day insanity when the very nature of insanity itself requires none in order to exist?
As I have said several times before in my comments and contributing articles, insanity is the ultimate in perfection. It is self replicating, self sustaining and most importantly self affirming. Nearly all sane (or near sane) entities cease and desist wasting energy on useless or self destructive tasks once its futility or danger is obvious and affirmed, often by outside forces or authorities but occasionally by self examination which prompts self awareness.
Insanity on the other hand is its own sole and ultimate authority which in turn acts as the energy source to keep the perpetual motion insanity machine marching forward toward a parabolic blow off of self annihilation. The potentially lethal mistake we all tend to make is in believing that there is only one flavor of crazy. There are in fact seven billion variations of the base product, uniquely customized in cut, color and clarity to meet our own individual needs and perceptions. So in effect the problem is not they, those and them, but us, we and me.
A Mind of its Own
I’m certain you have seen any of a dozen variations of the comedy routine where out of the blue the comedian’s arm or hand becomes possessed and tries to choke the comedian or otherwise attack the body that the arm is attached to. Suddenly the appendage has a mind of its own and that mind is usually extremely self destructive. It can be hilarious stuff when performed well, with a classic example being Peter Sellers as Dr. Strangelove.
Of course we all know this can’t really happen. A person’s brain controls all the appendages via the central nervous system, aside from certain special conditions such as a disease of the body. So while the body’s ‘operating system’ pretty much functions independently of our conscious awareness, essentially utilizing its own firmware/software routines, we (as do all other animals) command our assorted joints and appendages with broad commands to suit our needs and wants.
For example we think ‘I want that over there’ or ‘I want to pick that up’ rather than thinking about moving individual muscles. Though I suppose it could be argued that we don’t even ‘think’ about these commands in the same way we think about those financial problems that have been bugging us. We just sort of see or perceive that we want to do something and the internal software routine figures out the details. Either way, the only (perceived) difference between ‘we’ and the flea is that ‘we’ are conscious, and we believe the flea is not.
Perhaps it is this ability to command our appendages that afford us our false sense of perceived independence from, and control of, the body. Yet in so many ways it is our body and not our mind/consciousness that actually controls the appendages, though not in the direct sense of the word ‘control’. We spend our entire life attending to the needs of the body; feeding, sheltering and tending to all its various needs whether physical, emotional or psychological. And yet we maintain to our dying days that ‘we’ are in control of the body, rather than at a minimum acknowledge the obvious codependency.
In so many ways the human mind and the body are engaged in a symbiotic codependent dysfunctional relationship. Dysfunctional because for as long as the conscious mind believes it is the master of its domain (when clearly it is not) the relationship is not a healthy one by any stretch of the imagination. This error of perception (actually a deliberately staged continuous deception perpetrated by external sources) is one of the reasons I often speak about looking within, of understanding our motives and dependencies in order to move deeper down the rabbit hole.
We carry this potentially fatal disconnect with us when thinking about and interacting with not just the physical world around us, but with the social order and the so called powers that be, aka ‘our’ leadership. We believe ourselves disconnected from the world around us; particularly from those who we believe ‘control’ us or who are ‘leaders’ in our world. We speak of this phenomenon by using distancing terms such as they, them and those. We consider ourselves divorced from the cause and only subject to the effect.
And yet all around us we see on a daily basis various examples of nature interconnected, of animals moving and acting as one even though they are seemingly as disconnected from each other as we perceive ourselves to be separated from one another. Watch carefully as birds flock, fish school and cattle herd. Even a stand of trees or a patch of wild flowers will communicate with each other either through interconnected root systems, pheromones or other (un)known methods or processes. But communicate they do and it is only our denial that prevents us from recognizing the same in ourselves and others in the human herd.
Choice and Free Will
That which we try to ignore, outright deny or reject out of fear controls us, oftentimes on a deeply subconscious level. This concept as it applies to ‘them’ is very difficult for most of ‘us’ to grasp, let alone accept, principally because we believe ourselves to be ‘in control’ of ourselves, but not at all in control of, or responsible for, ‘their’ actions other than possibly in the most indirect and inconsequential way. No one rain drop feels responsible for the flood, yet here comes the rain. Can you say hip waders?
Why is it that throughout history every so called leader has demanded consent (some demand more nicely than others) from the population, regardless of whether the consent is coerced, connived or freely given? Think about that carefully for a while rather than to just dismiss it off hand with any of a dozen rote responses. A symbiotic relationship, no matter how dysfunctional or self destructive, requires consent from all parties at some level to function as it does.
As ridiculous as this may sound nothing truly compels us to consent even when the ultimate violence is threatened if we do not comply, that of (extreme) distress and/or death. We can choose death, though many will argue that to choose death is irrational or insane. However as I said earlier, that which we try to ignore, outright deny or reject out of fear controls us, oftentimes on a deeply subconscious level. And the vast majority of ‘us’ ignore, deny or reject seriously contemplating ‘our’ own death, whether by natural causes or externally applied violence.
We wish to believe that we live in a cooperative society; that we participate of our own ‘free will’. And yet when we see those flashing lights in the rear view mirror or open that demand letter from the IRS or ‘Justice’ system we do not actually participate of our own ‘free will’, but simply because a threat of (ultimate) violence is implied if we do not.
Still, this is consent simply because there is/are alternative(s) available. We consistently take the softer easier way and comply, then rationalize and justify it as reasonable, rational and sane. It is important that we recognize the difference between ‘free will’ and ‘consent’ because in so many ways they are very different concepts.
Since we make the (un)(semi)(fully)conscious decision to comply in many ways we are ‘willingly’ part of the very system we rail against as predatory and abusive. While many might argue that this is all just semantics, I contend that the world would be a very different place if we had the courage to consider the always available alternative choices other than the softer easier way of complying. Please notice I said consider, not agree. One must always (seriously) consider everything even if one does not agree.
In most, but not all cases, our pain comes not in knowing what we should do, but in actually doing it. In fact most of our emotional/psychological pain springs from the cognitive dissonance of trying to ignore, deny or reject that which we know to be true and correct.
The ultimate act of freedom is to seriously consider breaking the chains that bind us. And those chains are not physical and won’t be found binding our wrists or ankles, but rather they are self imposed upon our own minds. Freedom, true freedom, can only begin when we willing choose to start down the path of personal sovereignty and total personal accountability.