Society as a giant

The whole human organization is:
Giants standing on top of shoulders of giants, standing on top of shoulders of giants…and so on.
Differences are obvious —- Similarities/connection/unity are non-obvious.
The process of “enculturation/socialization” is the programming that initiates a child into the mega-giant of society/culture.
All the smaller giants stand on the shoulder of this giant, and the fractal goes on getting more and more refined.

There is a difference between:
INTERNALIZATION/IDENTIFICATION —and—– CONFORMITY
They both may look the same from the outside in actions/behavior.
But they are coming from vastly different places.
Identity is the passport to get into anything in society.
There are doors and doors everywhere.
You are let in, if you conform.

But without identification/internalization = there is no actual deep investment.
All investment in society then is only out of “VESTED-INTEREST”.
And it is difficult then to take on too much.
Because heart of hearts you would want to return to your identification.
Society in such a case, is not perceived as a HOME w/ BELONGING,
Rather it is perceived as a place you have to conform to get certain needs met for your real identity which lies elsewhere.

There is a difference between:
INSECURE SOCIETIES —and—- SECURE SOCIETIES.
When insecure, societies impose that all its denizens cooperate. It is forced to a much higher degree.
While secure, societies include people who do their own thing also, as long as they do not disturb the working of the societal machine much.

In the light of all this:
Deep mental illness is an ALIENATION of COLOSSAL PROPORTIONS,
Because you are literally disconnected from the largest giant itself (that of
Humanity),
And are dehumanized and sent to the mental asylums,
And other such quarantine-institutions etc.

All qualities simultaneously exist

Sometimes, I keep taking the opposite position and arguing with people.
Many a time, I feel compelled to take the opposing position.
Then I contemplated, and wondered about ‘why do I do that’.

One of the reasons I felt was,
To attain independence from people.
To test whether I could hold the opposite view vs. the person in front of me,
Instead of always getting absorbed into their point of view.
But this would often be really difficult for me.
Because I would end up seeing their point of view too,
Which would not only dilute my position,
But often even completely overshadow it.

Also, I realize that this does not give me any real independence,
Because this is still based on the other’s position only,
It is a reaction and not a true action.
I allow the other’s position to completely fill my inner space because:
# I want to maintain harmony with them.
# Because if I don’t then it will lead to vain/futile resistance and may be a threat to my well-being.
But within me, my inner space is so mercurial that it is quite hard to see what I want or feel about anything.
Everything could substantially dramatically shift in a dime.
Everything is so mutable and changeable, it’s hard for me to access my foundation.

This inability to ground into or take/maintain/forward a position/perspective,
Makes me feel quite powerless.
Because conventionally power is associated with force.
And unless you structure yourself into some position, no force can be created.
“Identity structures/foundation” are what generate force.
For instance, a tiger is completely grounded in its instinctual structures.
So the tiger carries enormous force in its very being.
You cannot talk it out of being a tiger.

Maybe I am somewhat disconnected from my animal nature and instincts,
Which is what makes me feel like I’m living in an “imaginative field”.
(This could have been a dissociation survival adaptation to high levels of childhood neglect/abuse/violation from others.)
I am profoundly confused as to what is my relationship with others or with the world/society itself.
On the plus side, since I can see all perspectives/points of view,
In the simulator function of my brain or imagination,
I gain a systems/ecological vision of things.
An impersonal w-holistic vision which is not about any particular thing or particular identity.
And it is easy for me to see that the only doer is god/field/consciousness,
And that everything is a temporal appearance.

After constantly living in a soup of all superimposed positionalities,
I realized that trying to polarize myself,
To any one extreme polarity,
In any of the dimensions,
With my efforts,
Has been the cause for a lot of strife within me.
I realized that I can:
# Neither be not affected, nor can I be affected completely.
# Neither be totally powerful, nor can I be totally powerless.
# Neither be completely good, nor can I be completely bad.
# Neither be completely with, nor can I completely avoid.
# Neither be completely clear, nor can I be completely unclear.
# Neither be completely truthful, nor can I be completely false.
# Neither be fully right, nor can I be fully wrong.
# Neither be completely loving, nor can I be completely hateful.

So this kind of throws light on my fundamental resistance to life.
Because life happens on its terms, while I am struggling against it.

Disharmony or harmony among humans is relative to the collective

Health = Harmony.
Disease = Disharmony.
Harmony or disharmony, health or disease, is wrt. the collective.
Being under or over the collective is going to create:
isolation, alienation, separation, disease, disharmony, pain, suffering etc.

# If you are a hellish creature in hell = You are in harmony.
# If you are a heavenly creature in heaven = You are in harmony.
# If you are a heavenly creature in hell = You are in disharmony.
# If you are a hellish creature in heaven = You are in disharmony.

That is why the regressives and progressives hang out together sometimes.
That is because they both have the commonality of being outcasts and out of tune with the collective.

Also there is social harmony vs. existential harmony.
Society may not be in harmony with existence.
That would create the collective suffering.
But you may be in harmony within society.

Conversely, you may be in existential harmony if you are enlightened, but be in disharmony with society.
If you are stronger than society, you will transform it.
If you are weaker than society, it will oppress you.

Gurus are like mountains, Society is like the plain settlements

mountains

Every guru is like a mountain.
The seeker is the adventurer,
Who ascends the mountain,
To reach its peak,
To the shrine of light.
He may then choose.
To bring the light down to the plains.

General society/civilization on the other hand,
Are like the settlements at the plains.
Society is a combination of maintenance and inspiration,
The inspiration/evolution/change/renaissance,
Is brought about by the seekers who ascend the mountains,
And bring down their light.

On Social dynamics

Let’s take 2 cases:
1. When you are in your own space.
2. When you are in a shared space with others.

When you are in your own space,
Various interests bubble up into your mind,
And the strongest one usually gets your attention/focus/investment/energy.

When you are in a shared group-space with others,
Then the different people are in a relationship with each other.
The following questions come up:
# Who is going to set the frame?
Will there be multiple smaller frames between the people?
Will the frame organically emerge or will it be a chaos?
# Who is naturally receiving? Who is naturally emitting?
# Who is open/malleable? Who is rigid/closed?
# What are the intentions/expectations of the various people around?
# Where are each of these people coming from?
# What is the common larger frame? What are the expectations? cultural structs? societal structs? governing that.
# What can I say, what can I not say?
# What are the set of possible topics I can speak about?
All this can be sensed.
All of these come under “social dynamics”.
This invariably happens when a group of people get together and create a group space.

Why is motherhood worshipped but sexuality demonized?

A deep trend I observe in society is:
Maternal instinct is deified —while— Sexual instinct is demonized.
Are they not the 2 sides of the same coin?
Ultimately isn’t the sexual instinct prior to the maternal instinct itself?
How would the children even happen without sex?
The mother’s urge to play and protect the child, is it not the same as the male’s urge to protect and play with the opposite-sex?
Why is the sexual instinct and mothering instinct treated like they belong to 2 different levels of reality?
Aren’t both of them part of the same nature?
And it is totally prevalent across the entire animal kingdom.
What gives the mothering instinct is also driven by hormones only, just as all of sex-instinct too is driven by hormones.
Why is the mothering instinct elevated to a different level of reality?
It is considered a blasphemy even to think about it.
This is a vast topic, but just wanted to share this as food for thought.

A single evil entity by itself is powerless

A singular evil entity by itself is fairly powerless.
It has to tap into the evil in others to really work.
So evil exists everywhere.
The entity you cleanly identify as evil is only the top of the iceberg.
It appeals and brings out the unconscious and shadow of society and humanity itself, which is carried in everyone.
On the surface, only the perpetrator of evil is clearly visible.
But it cannot really work unless the entire system supports it.