Do you prefer total collapse or a more gradual restructuring/rebuilding?

[OneGrassRoot]

Poll question: Do you prefer total collapse or a more gradual restructuring/rebuilding?

I ask this question based on my comment in another thread yesterday:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=245&topic_id=128282&mesg_id=128315

I guess it comes down to what we often part ways about here at ASAH periodically: do we subconsciously want or assume that the only way to move forward is through absolute destruction and devastation, in order to build anew, or can we fathom creating anew WITHOUT absolute destruction and devastation?

Can we even fathom it? If not, why? Is it a lack of faith in humanity...regardless of what has happened in the past and the cycles we've witnessed?

Can we not fathom visionaries coming up with solutions? Can we fathom supporting those visionaries, without tearing them down every step of the way as being delusional or not facing reality?

I know that in most people's heart of hearts, they don't want suffering, for themselves or other innocents caught in the web of others' greed. Yet it's hard not to sometimes feel as though there are many -- stemming from their own frustration and anger about situations that seem largely out of our control -- who WANT destruction in order to get to change. Lashing out in anger at TPTB, but with our own destruction as the result.

There is indeed a bloodlust there, imho, but I don't claim to understand it. It feels like a form of self-sabotage, to not be able to conceive of imagining a better world and instead conceding defeat, yet many see this "defeat" -- the destruction of everything -- as winning, even if there is much suffering involved.

I suppose it's just one of the many aspects of human nature.

To me, that is destructive. A very destructive aspect of human nature.

I'm not asking what you BELIEVE will happen or how it will happen; I'm asking you to look within and evaluate what it is you truly WANT to happen and how it shall happen, at this point in time.

There are probably many reasons I'm not aware of that people feel a total collapse of everything will, ultimately, be more humane and beneficial to all living creatures, Mother Earth and humanity. If you truly want a collapse, I'd be most grateful if you'd explain.

I understand many feel a collapse is not only imminent, but also necessary and unavoidable. I'd love to understand why there isn't more of a focus placed on avoiding this; perhaps it's because many wise souls believe it's best?

That's why I'm asking. :)

[Delphinus]

1. Excellent question ...

can't answer until I look inside a bit more.

[MorningGlow]

2. Definitely gradual

And not only is that what I want to happen, but also what I believe will happen. (Even though you said you don't want to know--sorry, OGR! :evilgrin:) Global apocalypse is the stuff of scary movies--what we love to watch to give ourselves a thrill, but NOT what should happen in real life. Nor will it--not if we're as protected from ourselves as many channelers have told us over the years. And I don't just mean offworld assistance--I mean our own higher selves preventing that from happening.

I completely agree with you that we should spend more time and energy working on effecting gradual change; it's almost like some of us WANT the drama and the horror. Yeah, well, young men and women enlist in the army for that particular brand of drama when there's a war on, and once they've experienced it for real, their opinions change quite drastically, to say the least, don't they? I don't want everyone to go through an apocalyptic scenario just for the drama, only to find themselves forever scarred by the experience. It's not worth the price.

Also, sometimes I wonder if the people who are fixated on an apocalyptic outcome are subconsciously reliving a scenario that they experienced in another lifetime. If so, I sympathize, but beg them to leave it in the past/other life and try to remove the desire to go through it again. Please.

[OneGrassRoot]

7. ...

:hug:

[Myrina]

3. ... it's hard to explain succinctly, but in my opinion ...

... when things change slowly or gradually, there's always a certain percentage of people who will try to 'get things back to how they used to be' (case in point: the GOP's fondness for "restoring America to how it used to be" - real or not) and will try (either actively or passively) to resist or subvert the change.

So the best thing to do, IMO, is completely take down the old structure and start from scratch with no flawed vestiges left on which to rebuild.

:shrug:

[OneGrassRoot]

6. Thanks, that perspective actually makes sense.

Thanks for putting it into words, Myrina!

:hug:

[Howler]

10. I Agree with Myrina.

Things have to change drastically to get people to change inside as well as outside.
Most people in this country are only programed by consumerism and social,political propaganda.
They don't read,meditate, think,investigate,or spend any time in self contemplation or even observe their connection with the planet,animals,plants,or even each other.
In my opinion it appears to be "Human nature" to resist change whether its gradual or drastic.So.....I feel drastic change is needed NOW.Drastic change is harder to resist then gradual change and all life on this planet is running out of time has we has a species mindlessly devour the world.

[bigmonkey]

16. "Emergence through emergency"

Bucky Fuller used that term, meaning that existing, working alternatives that you couldn't get people interested in under normal circumstances would be swiftly adopted if the situation became serious enough. This points to an intermediate pattern that we may be headed for: people need to create viable alternatives, and the situation in general has to be such that people will lose their conviction that the "same old same old" will continue. At least that's what I think. We don't need a complete collapse, we just need enough confidence-shaking with respect to the old patterns that new alternatives seem attractive and workable.

[OneGrassRoot]

17. Love this and agree. :)

Is Bucky Fuller Buckminster (sp?) Fuller? I seem to recall reading this books early on, too, along with Napolean Hill.

:hi:

[bigmonkey]

23. Yup. I refer to him as Bucky because that's how he asked to be called.

Amazing man, and his wife should get half-credit for everything he did, if you ask me. Incredible achievements, and I'd call him a very spiritual guy. One of my biggest heroes.

[Sanity Claws]

4. None of the above

I believe that people left out of the existing systems are in the process of building alternate systems. These alternate systems are gradually growing and will take energy from the existing systems. The existing systems will continue to exist for quite a bit longer but will no longer be the only game in town. Part of the existing system will dwindle and may disappear but part will live on but with greatly diminished power.

Edited to add:
This is what I believe will happen and also what I'd like to happen. It will be less painful than a complete collapse. It also gives people a decision point: do I want to be part of the anonymous corporate culture or do I want to be part of a community to which I am connected through work, family, and home?

[OneGrassRoot]

5. I should have added that option....

as creating alternate systems -- and not necessarily restructuring existing systems -- was also in my mind when I simply used the verbiage to restructure existing systems.

A gradual change, not total destruction of the existing, just in different ways.

Thanks! :hi:

[Myrina]

8. That's an excellent observation!!

:applause:

[rosesaylavee]

15. Agreed...

The oxygen is currently getting sucked away from those old structures. People are seeing them as personally not sustainable. Survival is kicking in and many are looking to do something that will make them happy and not necessarily the way they used to think of happy. Being out of work and reviewing one's life to this point, having TIME to review one's life has changed a lot of friends/family members lives. Many are working differently or a few part time jobs to make ends meet but a lot of stuff they used to think they need, they are realizing they really don't need.

Stuff not accumulating and people not working to accumulate stuff is a big deal. I think we'll look back in a decade and be amazed at the revolution we are currently experiencing.

[OneGrassRoot]

18. I agree with this, too, roseaylavee...

I do believe we're in the midst of a revolution, even if not the kind we're used to seeing.

:hug:

[OneGrassRoot]

9. TO CLARIFY:

Sanity Claws raised an excellent point that I should have considered in the wording of my post.

To make it simple, can we assume the third option of gradually changing existing systems also INCLUDES creating alternate systems and structures?

The gist of my question is to choose between a total collapse and rebuilding versus creating anew more gradually, in alternate ways -- either via remodeling existing systems and/or creating brand new alternate systems altogether.

I personally lean toward both of the gradual approaches: I try to work to change existing systems when possible, but I'm also HUGELY in favor of creating new, alternate ways of being and doing that we've never experienced before.

My goal is to do both in order to avoid a complete collapse and destruction, and the chaos that would ensue from the same.

I'm curious why others lean toward total destruction in order to build anew, and Myrina kindly enlightened me regarding her perspective in this regard. :)

:grouphug:

[BlueIris]

11. Civilization? Gradual. Government? Uh...

I've got very little sympathy left for some of these power abusers.

[OneGrassRoot]

20. I don't have sympathy for power abusers...

And any desire for a gradual shift -- rather than apocalyptic shift -- is for the masses of humanity. And it's also not due to any great love for current systems. I long for something brand new...something we've never seen before, but manifested in a way that is more rooted in love, not fear.

To me, the systems that manifest as a result of apocalyptic occurrences are often rooted in fear and necessity, rather than love and choice.

As much as people bug the living shit out of me, perhaps the different views about this subject lie in how we view humanity as a whole.

I have tremendous confidence in humanity, as a whole, and believe they/we CAN make the choice.

It sounds like many others don't have that same confidence and feel the change must be forced. This is obviously a valid viewpoint, with plenty of reason to feel that way.

I think there's an Einstein quote which says something to the effect, "I love humanity; it's people I can't stand."

;)

[Fire Walk With Me]

12. People are going to have to truly choose positive answers in order for them to be manifest.

It is beginning to become obvious that something in the world has changed, to most people, at the subconscious level. Keep bringing as much light and Divine Guidance to Earth and Mankind as you are capable.

We missed a very big opportunity in this last election, to stay on the path of hope and positive change. It was possible, and now it's gone, replaced by some ugly polarity swings. It is imperative to generate as much positive energy as we know how in order to bring about something better.

Obama is not kidding about the "we" in "Yes, We Can". He's not going to spoon-feed us. We have to get it together to WANT the positive, en mass.

[OneGrassRoot]

19. That sounds so simple: "We have to get it together to WANT the positive..."

I would have assumed everyone wants a positive "better" world.

But I'm seeing that, at some level, many don't. I believe most here do, and what I interpret as negativity or pessimism may not be the case, which is why I've asked the question and have already gained some insight.

(Thanks, all...:hug:)

But, all in all, I'm observing people don't seem to understand that they have a choice. I grew up with that attitude and rebelled against it my entire life. Even as young as 10, when my parents and their friends would be commiserating about their life situation and "the system," I remember yelling, "Just because things ARE the way they are, doesn't mean they have to stay that way!!!"

It seems to REALLY have come full circle in my life now, and I feel like I'm 10 all over again, yelling...

Thanks, FWWM. :hug:

[Fire Walk With Me]

24. Keep yelling. Always yell.

It is possible to create what we want, within the boundaries of national and personal karma (which are also possible to clear).

=It is possible=. WE are the ones reminding others that there is now a choice.

Keep yelling. :hug:

[PhillyGurl]

13. Well, if my own life experience

can serve as a learning point, I guess prior to now I would have said total destruction, begin anew. Out with old, forget about the past, ditch it all. Yet I look back on what happened to me over the past two years and wish that I had done some things differently. I imploded everything in my life, and it caused me a LOAD of heartache, uncertainty and tremendous grief. I did some things that I regret, but I learned from it. There have been days when my memories and dreams were so strong and real that I wished I could lobotomize myself to get away from the pain. I did not run from it or seek satisfaction in escapist ways, I let it plow me head on, and I really feel the change deeply, I am still changing daily.

In many ways I think this is what our crazy society is doing now, to escape from the pain of the negativity that is so pervasive in our world, those who haven't or don't wish to evolve spiritually: consume to the point of unsustainability, live in narcissicistic bubbles, raise children just like themselves, push said children to be rats on a wheel, care not for other beings, human, animal or otherwise on the planet. This will change, it has to...

Which leads me back to your original question, would my change have been so drastic if I hadn't proverbially "exploded my world?" I doubt it. BUT, I don't like the idea of total mass destruction, perhaps we need to look at it in a wholistic way, not destruction in a linear fashion. As a student of Asian philosophy, I meditate on the image of the yin/yang, part is white (yang/light) but contains a drop of black (yin/darkness) in half of the symbol, the other half is a mirror image, black (yin/darkness) with a drop of white (yang/light) held within. So to me, everything contains the seeds of its own destruction and renewal, nature first and foremost. There is no way we can stop this process, it happens whether we want it to or not. Everytime I go out for a walk, I am amazed to see that the trees have beautiful buds ready for spring, the leaves have fallen away, but the promise of renewal is there for all to see, if they take the time to look at it.

Instead of fearing this, perhaps we should embrace it, the chance for change and evolution through destruction/renewal is a necessary part of life.

[OneGrassRoot]

21. Please see my post #20; I think we have a similar outlook...

:hug:

Change can be good, if it is viewed as a positive...as progress...rather than fear-based.

Yet I hear others when they say change won't happen unless people are forced -- based on fear of annihilation.

As I said, I think it may come down to how much confidence we have in humanity as a whole.

:shrug:

[Oak2004]

14. I picked "gradual" to minimise suffering, but in reality we don't get to make such a choice directly

It's a lot of other choices, made collectively, that will add up to one or the other. And also, in reality, what I might think causes less suffering might well be the way that maximizes suffering. There would be no plausible benefit to dragging out the fall of an ever more brutal "shock doctrine" policy, nor any gradual way to transition from such a policy towards healthy, sustainable, and just policies.

The end of things as they are now is absolutely inevitable. There's nothing sustainable about them on any level. Those that have gained the most from them (the plutocracy and those who immediately serve them, including most of the world's "leaders") are, not surprisingly, dedicated to keeping things as they are, and are increasingly out of touch with reality. I suspect Wall Street and Washington will be discussing monetary policy and the stock market even after 99% of the real economy is local barter and nothing remains of the American empire but small enclaves carved out of Washington DC and lower Manhattan (with moats around them to protect the enclosed climate-change denialists).

To me the end of things as they are now is less interesting than building the things that are to come. Over that, we have more direct choices.

[OneGrassRoot]

22. I agree with your last sentence wholeheartedly, Oak2004.

As with so many discussions, it gets complicated because our perceptions and perspectives color how we interpret words. Even the word "destruction" may be viewed differently by everyone contributing here.

I think one thing we all agree upon is that we're anxious to building anew. Brand new systems, a brand new world.

How we get there...that's a very individual opinion.

:hug: