Saturday, September 14, 2019
4:30 a.m. When I watch shows with particularly evil or arrogant villains, my response to them is – as the writers have intended it to be – “Kill them; they have no place in the world.” It would be useless, of course; new villains spring up all the time. Worse than useless, because you become like the worst in those you fight. The only practical plan I have ever read was Anselmo’s in For Whom the Bell Tolls: Make the miscreants work until they come to realize the error of their ways. Educate, that is. This might or might not reform the villains, but at least it would not destroy those who confronted them.
The key here, as you well know, is that your emotional reaction to anything may be as powerful as anything you do or say. It is your second-tier and third-tier reaction that counts, and this is one reason people of ill will do such damage in the world: They rouse righteous indignation that outdoes them in turn.
It’s clear enough, looking at warfare. By the end of a war, people are enthusiastically doing things to others that they would have been horrified to consider at the beginning. We’ve talked about it. Saturation bombing, atomic bombs – both concepts that make no distinction between combatant and civilian, both concepts that would have been rightly considered to be war crimes before the war, or if only the enemy had engaged in them – by war’s end are accepted as defensible and even reasonable.
It is an odd – sequence? Psychological consequence? Characteristic? – that
Looking for the right word, I lost the idea entirely.
It is strange, put it that way, how one-eyed pursuit of a good tends to lead to means identical to those being countered.
Fight fire with fire, is the saying.
Yes. That works out better in forestry than in human relations. In human relations, it is merely arson, and at that, arson that incinerates friend and foe and self alike.
And why does it have to be this way? I don’t pretend that there was ever a paradise on Earth, but does it always have to be this stew of hatreds and fears and self-righteous seeking of vengeance?
You must bear in mind, always, that your entire era is created in the aftermath of World War I. Or, to put it another way, that war exploded the stockpiled ammunition, and the explosions continue to set off further explosions a full century on.
Hemingway saw that. He saw that the war had destroyed peace in his time and for the foreseeable future. He predicted another 50 years of wars after World War II, and you can’t say he was wrong.
And the question remains: Why? I don’t believe that humans are doomed by genetics or psychological factors to be always attacking each other like this. It seems closer to what they observe of rats when they are overcrowded in their cages.
Yet you don’t subscribe to the theory that it is due to overpopulation.
No, I don’t. I think it’s closer to starvation of resources. If the world’s resources and production were meted out more fairly, I think that it would be as if we had fewer people per square mile, because we would have fewer people being squeezed. Why should slums exist? There was a time, early on in America’s life, when there were no slums in the North. Only after the Civil War destroyed the prewar world did the existence of super-concentration of capital and of accumulated wealth create a corresponding mass of people with access to little or nothing of the wealth being created by machines and inventions and organizations. By indirection and lack of attention, a situation was allowed to come into existence and be considered normal, in which the wealth that was created was deemed to belong only to those who furnished the money, rather than also to those who furnished the labor. But this is a sad topic not really central to my question, is it?
Not if your question is why human life is prey to evil.
I hadn’t put it quite that way, but all right, let’s look at it that way. I understand that life in duality must include both ends of every stick. Somehow, though, that isn’t terribly comforting.
It will be less disturbing if you remember that 3D is a part of a greater life, and that every life has purpose.
I think I missed something just there, a thought that flew by too fast to be grasped, a direction you might have pursued.
Remember, really specifics matter very little. What is missed one time will be grasped another time, provided persistence and
I’m missing more and more, it seems, and we’re only 35 minutes in.
Don’t worry about it. The point is that evil is good balanced. We know you don’t like it, but it may become more understandable if you look at it as a question of extremes. The longer the stick, the shorter, still the center is where it will balance, nowhere else.
If I just heard you right, you are saying too much goodness creates or anyway constellates too much badness.
Well – almost. Another analogy would be intensity. A black-and-white negative may be muted or may be vivid. It may consist of highly contrasted lights and darks, or tones that are much more in the center scale.
We don’t have the terminology right, but get the idea. It may be intense or muted.
It’s only an analogy, remember.
But this lifetime does not seem to me to have any particular excess of goodness. What I see chiefly is excess of violence.
Yes, that’s what you see. That’s what is pictured. There is no entertainment value in portraying goodness, except occasionally as a change of pace. You know how it is.
The news media used to have a saying, “If it bleeds, it leads.”
Precisely. Plus, people want to feel alive, and if their ordinary lives offer too little, you will find young men running to get into a war, as in 1914, for the sake of smashing things – they having no idea why they feel that way, having no idea how intolerable their lives were that they are fleeing. And of course long after the enthusiasts volunteer, men are unwillingly conscripted to continue what was begun and cannot now be allowed to fail.
So why the impulse in the first place? And why are we led by sociopaths?
You aren’t led by sociopaths, you are led astray by them. But most of your leaders are themselves bewildered, short-sighted, inconstant, often well-meaning but without vision and under continuous pressure to go along.
Yes, and it is the sociopaths who know how to keep them in the fold. But the question remains: Why? Why is 3D life made into such an endurance test?
It needn’t be. It could be a life lived more at the mercy of what are called natural forces. [I realized, though they did not spell out, that they were saying what Edgar Cayce implied, that forces will express either as human actions or as natural events such as storms, earthquakes, etc.] But one way or another, 3D life is going to express duality in full, not only the half you prefer. (And of course not everybody agrees on what is desirable or not.)
Couldn’t we modulate the evil that has to manifest?
You could, but it involves wholeness in place of goodness, as you have been told.
I can’t remember who said it, but I remember writing it down. More or less, “When a man realizes that it is better to be whole than to be good, he enters upon a harder life that makes his previous goodness seem like flowery license.”
It is true, and there’s a reason for it. It involves bearing your own share of the world’s evil., and thereby helping to corral it, to curb it from wild manifestation.
I don’t know. Jesus said it is inevitable that evil comes into the world, but woe unto him by whom it comes.
Yes, but that refers to ushering it into the world, not holding a piece of it that already exists and has manifested.
I really don’t understand, but it has been an hour.
No harm in pondering until we can resume.
All right, well, thanks for this and I hope it clears up next time.