Skip to main content

The Golden Rule for Planet Savers

Do I love the people I want to help or save? 

If I do not love them, how can I help them? I cannot help them if I don't love them. 

Because if I don't love them I won't be able to forgive them for taking the bread that I've given them.

So if I want to help people or save the world in any way whatsoever the first thing I have to be able to do, is to love them. 

And if I don't love them, there is no point in trying to help them because I will not be able to forgive them for taking the bread.

You see, I am in the habit of using wealth, as in 'bread', as a poor substitute for love. I will give wealth, imagining it is love.

So the tendency will be for me to resent them or worse, exploit them, without being consciously aware of that action. 

I will resent them taking the bread, because it is earned and owned. If I have not managed to love them, if they take it, I will resent them for it. Or I will find a way to exploit them to get payback. 

But love has no concept of ownership or earnings, that constitutes, economic wealth. I've created the illusion that wealth is love, as an escape so that I can Be Seen as loving, without having to actually love. I want to Be Seen, to help, more than I want to love.

And this cannot in this universe, work.It can only reinforce a pathology. It can only contribute to the gradual crushing of that society. If, my activity is the general case among the people on the whole.

Reams of ideologies will crop up, some of them becoming permanent, with fancy ways of solving this imaginary problem. The left and the right are two basket cases in totality.

Can I see how charity, empathy, human rights have never worked in a thousand years? It's a wonder that I've never looked into this more authentically. Maybe theres a resistance. Maybe my ignorance is deliberate. Maybe at the bottom of it all, I am simply too selfish.

So I ask myself when I'm trying to save the world or the planet in any way whatsoever, I ask myself, do I love the people or the thing I'm trying to save - do I love them?

There's no reward for loving others. It's expected of me, as a first duty. There is no payback for love. Do I seriously think I should get a reward for giving love? That sounds like a contract, an exchange for profit. Will I be able to do it though - will I be able to love them prior to their saving?

And if I can't do it, if I cannot love them then, then I cannot help them. I may try. It will fail and cause them more harm in the end through my subsequent resentment and exploitation of them, for taking the bread. 

Before any of this though, I must look in the mirror and ask "can I love myself?" If I cannot love myself, so that I'm able to help myself, how can I possibly in this universe love and then help others?

All of this does not mean to say that I should abandon trying to help people. What it means is that I should start trying to love people first.

It's possible I may never succeed. That is OK. That I have tried at all is what matters. That I have tried at all, to love those I wish to save, before I try to save them. 

Starting with me. This is the Golden Rule - to love others, as I do myself. It is not to love others before myself. It is to love myself and others before I try to save them. 

Some people say "even the sinner can enter the kingdom on the day they die, so long as they repent". This is the wrong meaning. It means I can repent IMMEDIATELY, and enter. I do not need to wait and if I do...that gives my thought the opportunity to 'escape' - the chance to help first and maybe love later, and probably neither at all. A terrible mistake.

So I know if I can love others immediately, I will be saved. 
Labels:

Popular Posts

A Dialogue on the UK's Accession to the United States (UKEXIT)

A Dialogue on the UK's Accession to the United States Executive Summary This initiative seeks to foster a formal dialogue regarding the potential accession of the countries of the United Kingdom , to the United States , as individual states.  Being English the main focus is for the country of England to accede. The original intent was to ask the government to lead on it through a petition leading to the question coming before the House of Commons. This was crushed out of hand by the committee leading petitions, which was not a surprise.  Simply put, this petition is asking the government to start a conversation about the benefits of leaving the UK and joining the United States. Let us call the initiative UKEXIT (yukezit) The objective is to evaluate the benefits to citizens and stakeholders, encouraging a constructive discourse on the political, economic, and social implications of such a union. If Wales , Northern Ireland , Scotland , or  England were to leave the Unit...
Read more

The 450 Volt Truth: From Orwell to Obedience

A Complete Thread on Dystopia, Milgram, and Breaking the Agentic State - Why People Act Irrationally and Often Violently When a Tribal Social Structure and Its Hierarchy Are Brought Under Serious Scrutiny This is a tricky topic. Please read the Obedience Glossary of Terms before proceeding Executive Summary This piece was written from a long conversation with Grok. I had to interrogate the AI quite a bit. And was astonished at how it produced such intelligence. I've included the most pertinent parts. Do not be fooled into thinking this is just another Orwell analysis. That is just setting the scene well. For what comes later on the agentic state and how power uses it to control the masses.  It may not have all the answers. It might wrong. A lot of it is very hard to believe is happening. But it still seems to fit the bizarre world of system wide dissonance we all live and partake in today, better than all the alternatives. So deserves your continued attention. By all means make yo...
Read more

Government & Tax Death Toll

I'm going to show you how government and taxation causes more excess death than any other factor, even global wars and pandemics. It is and always has been the biggest genocide of all. And its deliberate. Government doesn’t just fail to save lives — it takes them, at scale.  2–6 million globally 200K–400K in the U.S. 50K–80K in the UK Every year. Every tax. Every regulation. Cumulatively since 1970 government and tax killed between 160 and 300 million people across the globe  More than all 20th century wars and genocides combined (260M) In the U.S. ten times more than all U.S. combat deaths in history (10 * 1.2M) In the UK equivalent to 1 in 15 of all deaths And the nations with more regulations and a higher tax to GDP ratio such as the UK and US, tend to kill more of their own citizens per capita. The poorest nations have a better record than the richest. All this excess death is rooted in the institutions of taxation - the theft of private property, by force, against your fr...
Read more