Special Case of Darkworkers Raising Others' Consciousness

[Corvette]

In the most recent lightworker article, Steve Pavlina states that lightworkers naturally aim to raise others' consciousness, as part of their effort to spread love.

Although not specifically stated, this implies that darkworkers do not seek to raise others' consciousness. In fact it is stated that darkworker employers seek to lower the consciousness of their employees to make them better slaves.

There's a special case however, and I think it deserves a mention if Steve plans to write another in-depth darkworker article:

I'm a darkworker, yet I actively encourage the growth of others around me. I point them to the resources I've had access to, and personally coach them in learning higher levels of consciousness. I do it so that I have a pool of allies who are indebted to me, so my resources grow. They also then consider me their spiritual leader, and are more likely to stay as my friend and ally - since they attribute their growth to me, they look to me for their next "hit".

The trick to being a darkworker is to give enough so you look like you're giving, while building a long-term strategy of personal gain.

[martin]

There's exceptions to everything... but it all boils down to the intention. So what Steve says about lightworkers/darkworkers may not always be 100% true for everybody but again, it's really the intention that matters. I wouldn't get hung up on the small details.

Interesting way of controlling others though.

[ahimel]

Originally Posted by Corvette

They also then consider me their spiritual leader, and are more likely to stay as my friend and ally - since they attribute their growth to me, they look to me for their next "hit".

Sounds like you're only interested in their development up to a certain point, though. Obviously you want your allies to be strong... but not stronger than you. Not strong enough to realize that they're strong and don't need you.

Not trying to criticize, just to clarify. Is that true? If so, it's a reasonable distinction between lightworker-raising-others'-consciousness and darkworker-raising-others'-consciousness. If not, tell me where I'm wrong. (I'm not a very good darkworker, so I'm always on the lookout for more explanation.)

[raja]

Originally Posted by ahimel

Sounds like you're only interested in their development up to a certain point, though. Obviously you want your allies to be strong... but not stronger than you. Not strong enough to realize that they're strong and don't need you.

Not trying to criticize, just to clarify. Is that true? If so, it's a reasonable distinction between lightworker-raising-others'-consciousness and darkworker-raising-others'-consciousness. If not, tell me where I'm wrong. (I'm not a very good darkworker, so I'm always on the lookout for more explanation.)

I, too, consider myself a darkworker so I'll try to answer from my own experience. I decide on a case-by-case basis, since I try to raise my own consciousness completely without regard from others'. Usually this is best accomplished by trying to keep other people's consciousness below mine, but sometimes I gain more by raising their consciousness as much as possible. I can think of two recent cases where I raised others' consciousness without regard for keeping them below mine. First was at the training for the IMO (mathematics competition) where establishing a healthy relationship with other high-consciousness people helps my own development and barely hurts me. Secondly, during some collaborative school work where equal grades where given to the whole group I benefited from raising my group's consciousness (I had to do group work with them for three years, so it was a long-term investment).

[Jamie]

Isn't it better to build up the people around you, empower them, and then be in a win-win symbiotic type relationship with them, where they're doing business with you because they want to, it benefits them to do so. A good effect of this is that you have less need to expend energy in controlling and manipulating other people.

EDIT: It also occurs to me, if you're going to invest yourself in raising the consciousness of specific individuals around you, it may be wise to consider their natures; are they the kind of person who's likely to be a friend to your face and then later, stab you in the back, or do they have more honor about them?

[Corvette]

Originally Posted by Jamie

Isn't it better to build up the people around you, empower them, and then be in a win-win symbiotic type relationship with them, where they're doing business with you because they want to, it benefits them to do so. A good effect of this is that you have less need to expend energy in controlling and manipulating other people.

Depends on your definition of "better." I only seek to control my environment. My only goal in life is to control my environment by increasing my influence over it. If raising others gives me more control, I do it. Otherwise I make no effort to improve them.

Originally Posted by Jamie

EDIT: It also occurs to me, if you're going to invest yourself in raising the consciousness of specific individuals around you, it may be wise to consider their natures; are they the kind of person who's likely to be a friend to your face and then later, stab you in the back, or do they have more honor about them?

I have been burned by this before. Now I am very careful to screen who I give power to, and how much. If I get burned I tend to let it go and not call them on it; I might be able to get something from them later by playing along. I will reduce relations with them almost to the bare social niceties however, only letting them come back when they have something new to offer me.

[nats7777]

"Depends on your definition of "better." I only seek to control my environment. My only goal in life is to control my environment by increasing my influence over it. If raising others gives me more control, I do it. Otherwise I make no effort to improve them."


I beleive assumptions have been made in the above quote and previous darkworker's statements. The assumptions imply that you have power to exert, that the consciousness of the people or systems around you is inferior to yours, that your environment is controllable, and that you possess all knowledge able to dispense approriately and at will what is required to "elevate" another.

All of the above would be impossible under Murphy's law and common sense. If one were all knowledgable and powerful, there would be no reason for another to affect your environment for such situations would have been planned for prevented. To lean on our own understanding solely as a basis for improving our situations, environment or worth, I believe is flawed.

We are all systems that interact to form our environment, each interacting with another to create and sustain the system. If information/ wisdom/ guidance is withheld for our benefit without consideration for the system we run the risk of creating an ineffective system which is unable to elevate its status, thus negatively impacting us.

P.s I am new to this site please excuse any visual or grammatical errors : )

[Ecce Homo]

Originally Posted by nats7777

I beleive assumptions have been made in the above quote and previous darkworker's statements. The assumptions imply that you have power to exert…

That’s the delicious irony of it. On one hand, it’s actually not possible to control another person. Power, in the context of this thread, is an illusion. On the other hand, many people truly believe they are in fact at the mercy of other people who are supposedly more powerful than they are all the time. So for all practical purposes, power and control do exist because people act as if they do, much to the delight and amusement of darkworkers everywhere.

[Corvette]

Originally Posted by nats7777

To lean on our own understanding solely as a basis for improving our situations, environment or worth, I believe is flawed.

Unfortunately Nats, your own understanding is all you've got.

[Corvette]

Originally Posted by Ecce Homo

On the other hand, many people truly believe they are in fact at the mercy of other people who are supposedly more powerful than they are all the time. So for all practical purposes, power and control do exist because people act as if they do, much to the delight and amusement of darkworkers everywhere.

Exactly. People buy into the strongest frame. If you happen to own the strongest frame, you have control until they either realize what's going on or someone takes the frame off you.

Very well put Ecce Homo!

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by Corvette

Exactly. People buy into the strongest frame. If you happen to own the strongest frame, you have control until they either realize what's going on or someone takes the frame off you.

Very well put Ecce Homo!

Yes, people buy into the subtlest frame.

[Ecce Homo]

Originally Posted by Jamie

Yes, people buy into the subtlest frame.

And they are perfectly free not to; it's just that they don't seem to know that.

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by Ecce Homo

And they are perfectly free not to; it's just that they don't seem to know that.

Exactly correct!

[Corvette]

Originally Posted by Jamie

Yes, people buy into the subtlest frame.

Subtlety is not a requisite of frame control.

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by Corvette

Subtlety is not a requisite of frame control.

What makes you think that?

[Corvette]

Originally Posted by Jamie

What makes you think that?

Because I do frame control everyday.

Frame control can be subtle or big and loud. Choose the tool that's right for the job.

If you are sat down at a café and you want everyone to leave, how would you do it?

Stand up, bang something on the table, and say "Let's go!"

That's not subtle, but everyone would definitely follow you out.