The Tom Bearden

Help support the research


Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 5:06 PM
Subject: RE: National Style and socio-cultural aspects

Dear Jan,

Just a short response. Yes, I agree with you completely that the only way we will ever survive as a species, is to somehow attain the ability to live with mutual respect, love, and acceptance --- in short, to live in total peace.  With no police forces.  No armies.  Etc.

I was pointing out the problem that no solution to getting that to happen has yet been discovered by humanity.  All the things tried so far --- sweet reason, religion, philosophy, science, cultural, moral codes, laws, law enforcement, etc. --- have not done it.

Also,  I do have great sympathy for native American cultures.  I'm part Indian (my mother was 1/4 Indian).  The Indian tribes also had to handle immorality and crime problems occasionally, and they handled them with swift and severe methods.    As an example, there were rare rapes and murders, and most tribes handled such, once the perpetrator was known (and he usually was, pretty quickly) with very swift justice: Sentence and death on the spot.  Also, the various Indian tribes -- both east of the Mississippi and west of the Mississippi --  did war among each other, for thousands of years.  And they had slaves (of other Indians conquered in war), etc.

Probably more evil has been wrought on humans in the name of religion and good, than by any other notion.

The Indians -- at least for many hundreds of years before the Europeans came ---  had much fewer per capita crime problems than we do today in our society.  But still, they never found any way of achieving real peace without at least occasional harsh punishment and enforcement.

Basic problem is that any large group of humans seems to form a bell-shaped distribution curve.  9% are angelic.  9% are near-demonic.  The others in the middle try to get along as best they can, varying here and there.

The problem stems from the nature of a tool-using, intelligent species. Opting for intelligence (adaptability), the species of necessity gives up much of its "firm-ware" or "hardware" (genetic) control of behavior, in exchange for learned control of behavior.  This "software" control of behavior makes the species far more adaptable, but also removes much of its intra-species behavioral checks and balances.  In effect the species surrenders firmware for additional software.  It thus is its own predator.

Personally I see all the other measures -- laws, moral codes, religions, etc. -- as attempts to re-institute those missing intra-species genetic (programmed) control of behavior for intra-species conflict control and limitation.  So far, all these external measures have failed.  Even the very secret Russian/KGB psychoenergetics --- which eventually will be engineering Jung's collective conscious mind directly, and thus re-engineering the genetic controls of the entire species -- will fail.  Reason:  They seem to be planning on a sort of "ant" society, where each member has a decreed and assigned role and behavior. However, those "controller" members outside that enforced behavioral control,  and not subject to such controls, will eventually quarrel and split amongst themselves.  They will use the "ant" forces of one faction to make war on, and destroy, the other factions.  And with the ever-increasing power of the tools (the technology), each will be able to destroy the other in the conflict.  Or even destroy the biosphere itself.

The very notion of a genetically engineered "ant" society is repugnant to any person loving freedom.

Problem is, the notion and actual practice of personal freedom, depends on a concomitant actual practice of self-restraint by the free individuals.

It is in how we ever get a 100% effective and never-failing self-restraint in there in all humanity, so our personal freedom can be maintained while we are self-restrained when appropriate, that is the problem.

Because we adapt our technology into our intra-species conflict, then as our technology develops we get ever more hostile and damaging in our intra-species conflict.

Presently the technology --- particularly the superweapon technologies that are still successfully hidden from public view and knowledge -- is sufficiently powerful to destroy not only humanity, but all life on earth.

So our species  seems to have arrived at the final testing point of a technological species:  How do we re-institute intra-species conflict self-checks and self-balances, for our continued survival and real peace within the species, without losing our individual freedom and before we destroy the biosphere in our conflicts?

A solution to that problem -- other than the tired old isms proposed so often before and universally failed -- is probably the single most important requirement for the survival of humanity today.

Sadly, I don't expect to see any such solution implemented in my lifetime. And without it, I don't expect the species can survive 50 more years of steady increase in the power of our tools, without us just blowing ourselves up and destroying much or all of the biosphere in doing so.

Understand, I would be intensely happy if that expectation proved to be wrong, wrong, wrong!  It's simply the limit of what I can see coming down the pike at this time and from this view.  So I'm all for a peaceful solution!  I just have not seen one yet.  All those proposed, mostly consist of the statement that "If everyone would treat everyone else as his brother or sister, and as he would like to be treated himself, then we would have peace".  True!  But that's a mere tautology.  It merely says that, if everyone behaved perfectly, then there would be no imperfect behavior. That's like saying that, if everyone had legs 20 feet long, then everyone could run 50 miles per hour.  Might be true, but how does it happen?

Best wishes,

Tom Bearden

 Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 3:43 PM

 Subject: Re: National Style and socio-cultural aspects

Dear Tom,

A happy and healthy new year to you, to Tony, and to all that assist in disseminating the beautiful, all-important and still largely untold truth and insight into Nature's reality that we are becoming aware of.

On the one hand, it's hard to escape some feelings of sadness reading your extensive (Dec 14) "National Style" comment. Indeed, enemies of the U.S. and, especially, of its Freedom of Thought ideals, all too well seem to know (and be capitalizing on) the U.S. point of weakness that Americans do not react to slowly increasing threats. But the answer to the (September 11) 'rattlers strike' was massive and adequate. Not even so much in the call for retaliation and what followed, but more so as a profound realization of the need for soul-searching (theme parks closed, prolonged Central Park peace manifestations etc.) on questions like "Why would some from outside hate us so profoundly?". Let us hope that the momentum, thus generated by the tragedy, won't fade that quickly.

On the other hand, the science you share with humanity on is a real source of joy. Truly brilliant, to re-interpret the second Whittaker (1904) effect as the very cause of the entity we use(d) to call 'charge'! One cannot escape profound feelings of admiration and awe, visualizing the circulation in 4-space process that comprises the charge dipole. It certainly isn't blasphemy to call this a 'religious' experience, for the visualization of profound aspects of Reality may provide the observer with a deep sense of one-ness and resonation in unison with the All-Love-Power, restoring to him/her a (perhaps long-lost) sense of truly human dignity and more-than-average responsibility. The very ability to 'experience truth' may be the reason that Man has been called Microcosm: everything (s)he observes 'outside' is in one-to-one correspondence to a (largely forgotten and poorly known) 'inside' Cosmos. Of course, not everyone may share this view, nor share it instantaneously. Rather, it is proposed as a mind process that one may gradually become aware of.

I'm not sure I fully share your (Dec 14) view that ' "Peace" is constant warfare in the streets of [...] the U.S., and always has been', especially regarding the last part of it. Indeed, some tribal Native American traditions may still conserve clues to the ability to live in relative peace and stability on the American continent, as some have demonstrated for thousands of years. Reconciliation with Native American traditions may even turn out to be essential in questions of longer-term survival and sustainability.

Peace can never be "enforced". It never was, nor will it ever be secured that way. It rather results from a peaceful state of mind that every member of society is invited to try to realize and maintain. This 'invitation' should arise out of  'religious' experience in general, and especially could be the result of the very kind of 'experience' referred to above. Once man experiences a sense of one-ness in unison with the All-Love-Power, and once a truly human sense of dignity and responsibility is restored, the 'peaceful state of mind' building process will surely unfold. A profound analogy between this 'unfolding' and the working principle of the (also largely unknown) 'cellular control and regeneration system' of the human body (cf. e.g. the Dec 18 entry) might even be drawn, if one views Humanity as one entity, its members being its cells. Of course, the realization and maintenance of a peaceful state of mind is much easier if basic principles of 'justice' are adhered to by all members. But even justice cannot be "enforced" upon society. Rather, the need for it must arise, bottom-up, out of the very people that comprise it.

Should this process fail, then mercy be upon us, for indeed, the hidden savage underbelly of 'civilized' society is quickly revealed. Even more so, once the 'higher symmetry EM' knowledge would become part of it. Even Old Testament-style of  'eye for eye' justice won't help, because retaliation and escalation can go on without any limit. Only Sermon of the Mount-style of advice, accepted in loving thankfulness, can be of real help. Forgiving, on the basis of mutual understanding, will be essential. As a consequence, it may turn out that, subsequently, all of us will be forced to choose between one of the two extreme alternatives: complete mutual destruction, or complete mutual love and care.

Far from being meant as a threat, I fear the last statement to be basically true...

Thanks for all. Be well!

The Netherlands