Inadequacies in both 'Lightworker vs. Darkworker' & 'Left vs. Right Wing'

[spirit4711]

Originally Posted by Manomanman

...
That's what being a Darkworker means to me - taking advantage of the confused masses, giving them what they want rather than what they need.

To me that is not satisfying, as it isn't satisfying to me to give myself what I want instead of what I need. A short term pleasure maybe, but not sustainable.

Giving people what they need is a much more challenging and interesting game to play.

Of course it's up to them to accept or reject that.

If you truly are altruistic, then how do you approach the people who don't want to be helped? What is your attitude toward them?

I don't believe so much in true altruism as it is often used. I notice that when I focus on both my and others' needs, it works better. So I do that.

Be curious to what they want and why. Do not accept everything they say at face value. Show them other possibilities.

Again, up to them to do with that what they want.

[ar81]

Socialism is about people.
Capitalism is about market.

If you want a healthy market, you need people with a job and enough income to make a living. So capitalism and socialism are the same.

The only difference from an economic point of view between capitalism and socialism, is that capitalism is market based capitalism, and socialism is government based capitalism.
People killed each other during cold war because of this.

From my view I give a darn who does things.
If there is human welfare, that's Ok.
The problem comes when they tell you that people must serve the system and not the other way around.

[CroMagna]

Originally Posted by Manomanman

Because there would actually be competition for available mating. Watch Johnny's Worthy Player presentation.

Women can only have so many babies in their lifetime.

The whole REASON we're stuck in the current "AFC mess" is that Alpha males had to figure out a way to emasculate the Betas and enslave the women so they could own them as property.

If we returned to a state of cultural deprogramming, men would have to go back to competing for the available women. In our current situation, a Worthy Player can have a steady stream of as many women as he wants. He can have 1000's of lovers the way Johnny does.

In Cavemanworld, Johnny would have been kicking asses (i.e. competing) to get his hands on the women that in modern times he just has to talk to

If what I'm saying doesn't make sense, watch the Worthy Player videos. Johnny knows his **** through and through. He is not exaggerating
when he calls himself a guru.

Interesting. I think I'll add.

I have been under the impression that the sexual cartel is caused by women.

"Promiscuity in men may cheapen love but sharpen thought. Promiscuity in women is illness, a leakage of identity. The promiscuous woman is self-contaminated and incapable of clear ideas. She has ruptured the ritual integrity of her body." - Feminist Camille Paglia

Some women are invested in maintaining the cartel so that they can charge for sex. It gives them a sense of self-importance. They want their bodies to be "preserved". Camille Paglia supports prostitution and porn because the women are being paid. She feels the money establishes control. Women are afraid that if the cartel dies, they will become "cheap." They won't even get free dinners.

Their desire for control and power only enslaves them. It puts them in a position of having to be either a wife or a prostitute. Either situation is too drastic.

Another reason women are afraid of the sexual cartel is that they don't want men to become pickier about who they sleep with. So they would rather threaten good looking women than do what it takes to make themselves more desirable.

Some women just want love. When they have sex they become emotionally attached. I think 70% of women don't have orgasms during intercourse. So they feel threatened by women who do like sex. They feel that sluts are making it difficult for them to corral reluctant men into long term relationships by offering sex. They're afraid that men will never want to be in monogamous relationships if there's no double standard.

So while men may have established it, women have been enforcers too.

[Phil Watson]

Originally Posted by Manomanman

Most people would probably lounge around boinking all day, eating all manner of mind-altering plant substances, drinking wine, and making merry while playing games and listening to music.

This would eventually lead to a return to a simpler way of life, one filled with less hustle, fewer urban centers, a more agricultural way of life. Society would completely "break down"! Physical and material advantages would mean the difference between life and death, reproduction and sterility. "The powers that be" would STRONGLY oppose a return to feudalism. The only way we would get to the eat/drink/boink/open communication Utopia would be technological advancement.

I don't believe we will ever escape our current industrial nightmare until we have intelligent machines doing the manual labor. We have to enslave somebody to keep the global industrial machine pumping out cellphones and toys and garbage. Until robots are doing the work, we'll enslave people to do it.

I think the key lies in spiritual advancement, to the point of no longer needing technology to communicate, or perhaps even to travel. and of course that is at least as far in the future as the technological advancement you suggest. But there are those who enjoy creating and building those things that perpetuate our existence, and would by no means need to be enslaved to continue doing it. I believe we would see a refinement in material production, because people would be creating things out of passion and necessity, not merely out of lust for wealth and power. I realize you are speaking specifically in regards to this 'worthy player' paradigm (which I have no direct experience with), however, I belive you are overlooking the average level of consciousness that the modern world would have to reach in order to achieve free and open communication. such freedom and openness implies a certain level of fearlessness and compassion, which, in my experience, is only attained at a state of being where competition is largely unnecessary.

Originally Posted by Manomanman

I've stuggled with how I feel about "those who don't want to help themselves" as you describe them. A Lightworker might try to "help them help themselves". I say **** 'em. And do your part to enslave them. If they're willing to throw their time (=money) away, far be it from me to stop them.

I can't help but agree with this, although I'm still in the 'struggling' stage. It certainly would seem that trying to help people improve their existence, when they are so stubbornly resistant to help themselves, is a complete waste of time. I often consider wholly adopting your mindset towards such people...but I'm always restrained by the possibility that the difficulty I percieve in helping those people arises solely from my lack of understanding and tactful expression. for example, a year ago, I would have experienced great difficulty convincing someone of the significance of purpose in one's life, but now it would be trivial. I cannot currently convince someone of the importance of living consciously without going out of my way, and so I only give help when it is asked for, but in a couple more years that may also be a trivial matter, simple enough to accomplish in a few short minutes. Actually, I don't think any effective person goes out of their way to help unconscious people wake up. I think they do their good simply by living in a way that inspires others to do the same. inspiration....that theme seems to be running all through my life now...I sense a major ah-ha moment coming.

It seems to me that the distinction between lightworker and darkworker lies in the concept of scarcity vs. abundance. This is the only way I can make a clear distinction anymore, because ever since I started wrapping my mind around the concept of non-duality, the matter good and evil has become academic. I get the impression that you are a firm believer in scarcity, and thus competition, and everything else that those things entail. But unless you intend to throw the possibility of subjective reality (and thus the law of attraction) out the window, there is no need for the world to be a place of scarcity and competition...unless you enjoy those things, which I suppose truly would make you a darkworker.

That being said, I did read 'the mind of a darkworker', but perhaps I misunderstand you still. Your paradigm is very interesting and I intend to explore more of your site.

[YourHumbleNarrator]

Originally Posted by Manomanman

This would eventually lead to a return to a simpler way of life, one filled with less hustle, fewer urban centers, a more agricultural way of life. Society would completely "break down"! Physical and material advantages would mean the difference between life and death, reproduction and sterility. "The powers that be" would STRONGLY oppose a return to feudalism. The only way we would get to the eat/drink/boink/open communication Utopia would be technological advancement.

Really, widespread adoption of Johnny's paradigm would lead us into new territory. As far as I'm aware, there have been no societies in history which have had completely honest communication, nor has any society advanced as far technologically as we have. If open communication were in vogue, all assumptions would have to be cast aside.

I don't believe we will ever escape our current industrial nightmare until we have intelligent machines doing the manual labor. We have to enslave somebody to keep the global industrial machine pumping out cellphones and toys and garbage. Until robots are doing the work, we'll enslave people to do it.

Slaves think slaves' thoughts. I don't believe there is an objective case for -needing- people to be slaves at any given point, however it is clear that many people want to be slaves. You cannot free people who loathe freedom. They're great for mindless tasks so anyone seeking to run a company (or a government) has a lot of potential employees. Say what you like, they're good at what they do, and they're the only ones willing to do it.

Of course, part of the issue is that society trains its children to become slaves. It's that cultural indoctrination you were talking about. In America, a free culture existed for a hundred years and gradually waned starting with Lincoln's presidency. Perhaps freedom, real freedom, would have endured had the south won and the union had been broken, but I care little for what-ifs in this context. What I know is that if people had wanted to retain what this country had given them, slavery of the mind would never have become the-way-of-things. That paradigm can be broken, but will it? Doesn't matter; you (the general you) have to work with the world as it is and as it will be.

Myself, I have no interest in freeing people who do not want to be freed. Like a prisoner used to life on the inside, they'd just go running headlong into another cage. I treat them well nevertheless. Catch more flies with honey and all that. But, truth be told... They're a lot like pets. Unconscious people are only different from animals in the way that they speak my language and share my form. That makes them relatable but expendable. If a dog won't quit yapping, you trade it for one that will.

As for the people who want to wake up, I wouldn't do anything to stop that. Life is always more interesting when I'm around people who can understand the things I talk about and contribute something to the conversation. On the flipside, a bit of competition is necessary to keep me from going soft. If I could ever control the world I wouldn't rule with an iron fist. It'd just make me weak.

So until then, I feel like we're left with a empty philosophical conundrum - we're "trapped" in a world where most people are enslaved culturally. Somehow, a few of us escape the mass indoctrination and emotionally emancipate ourselves. We become freelancing consultants, rock stars, internet entrepreneurs, etc. We have guilt-free sex with 1000's of partners. We can lead a truly fulfilling life based solely on our intellectual capacity.

With a free mind there are no set limitations. What other people do is only of interest to the extent that it helps or hinders what you want to do.

I've stuggled with how I feel about "those who don't want to help themselves" as you describe them. A Lightworker might try to "help them help themselves". I say **** 'em. And do your part to enslave them. If they're willing to throw their time (=money) away, far be it from me to stop them.

Thing is, even lightworkers have to step out of the way. It would be a waste of their time and effort to "help" people who don't want it. Best case scenario, they butt heads with whoever they're trying to reach and it goes nowhere. Worst case scenario, their pet project leeches off of them like a vampire sucks the blood of a teenage virgin. If there's no demand, there's no supply.

Internal differences matter when it comes to lightworkers and darkworkers. Makes it hard to judge who's what from the outside, but you've got a lot of knowledge of psychology-it's not impossible to read somebody if you know what you're looking for. In this case a lightworker would show compassion, if only subtly, whereas a darkworker would shrug and say, "Suit yourself." In the real world, it might only be possible to tell once you're alone with somebody and they feel safe sharing their honest opinions.

That's what being a Darkworker means to me - taking advantage of the confused masses, giving them what they want rather than what they need.

"Do as thou wilt." I would note that there's often no disparity between what people need and what you're willing to give. Win-win scenarios are great for building influence; they win people over and have little backlash under normal circumstances. It's even better when you can give someone else their comeuppance by providing an enemy of theirs with something they want. It's all in how the deck is stacked.

[YourHumbleNarrator]

Originally Posted by Phil Watson

It seems to me that the distinction between lightworker and darkworker lies in the concept of scarcity vs. abundance. This is the only way I can make a clear distinction anymore, because ever since I started wrapping my mind around the concept of non-duality, the matter good and evil has become academic. I get the impression that you are a firm believer in scarcity, and thus competition, and everything else that those things entail. But unless you intend to throw the possibility of subjective reality (and thus the law of attraction) out the window, there is no need for the world to be a place of scarcity and competition...unless you enjoy those things, which I suppose truly would make you a darkworker.

The thing is that there are many ways to look at this, and the people talking about polarity are coming at it from many different perspectives and at different points in their journey. I can't say exactly where I am, but I identify more with the darkworker paradigm. However, I'm also spiritually oriented, which means I contradict your current understanding.

The way I see it, it doesn't really matter whether or not there's plenty to go around. There is-we've got the means to feed and clothe everybody on the planet. But, hearkening back to what I said in my last post, you can't make somebody rich if they've chosen to be poor, and if you feed a guy that wants to stay hungry you're just gonna work against yourself.

I also think this world is imperfect because it's meant to be that way. There's no fixing it because it's not a problem. Ideals exist 'above'. Here, we make due, though the conscious people among us are free to manifest whatever ideals they choose, albeit in a limited space. It's unlikely that someone would ever be able to create freedom for all but freedom for himself? That's pretty easy.

Defining polarity by the traits lightworkers and darkworkers possess is difficult because it isn't something readily identified looking in from the outside. In many cases the only person who will know someone's alignment is the individual in question. Lightworkers are focused on helping people, giving over receiving, expressing love and compassion toward all, and so on. As Steve said, they're the out-breath of creation. Darkworkers are selective in who they love* and when they love it's largely because they have found a reflection of themselves. They are willing to hate and channel that energy, which isn't something a serious lightworker would do (if they felt hatred, they'd move past it ASAP). If they're spiritually minded, they will make demons serve them rather than communicate with angels. Whatever their opinion of the ego, everything centers around them.

Some agree, some disagree, there's plenty of forum discussions on that. Just remember it's not about good vs. evil or what have you, and that one way or another they do lead to the same place. Despite being so simple it can be hard to understand, but seeking understanding will enhance your growth in itself.

--

*Many darkworkers would say "loving everybody" is impossible because it dilutes love to the point that it's meaningless. Lightworkers would respond in kind by saying selective love isn't love at all and darkworkers who think they love are deluding themselves.

As an aside, I think it's accurate to say that darkworkers like struggle and scarcity. Anything that doesn't require a lot of effort to attain, or anything which is common, holds little value to those seeking excellence. Darkworkers cannot stomach mediocrity, especially in themselves, but you can't have mediocrity unless some people are indeed above other people. I imagine in a world where the necessities of life are a given and everyone has a chance to develop their talents, darkworkers would strive for excellence by doing things nobody else could replicate. Indeed, if there were no scarcity they would create it, albeit to a less dire degree than it exists today. (Assuming that world's paradigm were a stable one.)

[Manomanman]

Originally Posted by YourHumbleNarrator

Really, widespread adoption of Johnny's paradigm would lead us into new territory. As far as I'm aware, there have been no societies in history which have had completely honest communication, nor has any society advanced as far technologically as we have. If open communication were in vogue, all assumptions would have to be cast aside.

Excellent point. While we can "guess" as to what the future would look like, the implications are so far-reaching that it's impossible to predict it with any certainty.

I lean more toward utopia than dystopia, because what Johnny proposes is conscious behavior.

Steve Pavlina has thoroughly demonstrated that living consciously has positive repercussions (i.e. veganism is good for the planet, etc. etc. etc.).

[Phil Watson]

Originally Posted by YourHumbleNarrator

I also think this world is imperfect because it's meant to be that way. There's no fixing it because it's not a problem. Ideals exist 'above'. Here, we make due, though the conscious people among us are free to manifest whatever ideals they choose, albeit in a limited space. It's unlikely that someone would ever be able to create freedom for all but freedom for himself? That's pretty easy.

True. I've came to that conclusion before as well. I prefer to believe that by working with other conscious people, we can work towards and eventually achieve freedom for all, but perhaps I'm just being naive.

Originally Posted by YourHumbleNarrator

Darkworkers are selective in who they love* and when they love it's largely because they have found a reflection of themselves. They are willing to hate and channel that energy, which isn't something a serious lightworker would do (if they felt hatred, they'd move past it ASAP).

*Many darkworkers would say "loving everybody" is impossible because it dilutes love to the point that it's meaningless. Lightworkers would respond in kind by saying selective love isn't love at all and darkworkers who think they love are deluding themselves.

As an aside, I think it's accurate to say that darkworkers like struggle and scarcity. Anything that doesn't require a lot of effort to attain, or anything which is common, holds little value to those seeking excellence. Darkworkers cannot stomach mediocrity, especially in themselves, but you can't have mediocrity unless some people are indeed above other people. I imagine in a world where the necessities of life are a given and everyone has a chance to develop their talents, darkworkers would strive for excellence by doing things nobody else could replicate. Indeed, if there were no scarcity they would create it, albeit to a less dire degree than it exists today. (Assuming that world's paradigm were a stable one.)

considering how strongly that resonates with me, perhaps I was meant to be a darkworker. my idea of striving for excellence is to attempt to create that ideal world, where such dualities cease to exist. that goal is lofty to the point of being arrogant, but it's been my dream for as long as I can remember. I suppose scarcity is inevitable though, because the more one grows, the more unique they become, until reaching the ultimate scarcity: there's only one of them to share with the entire world, and so the concept becomes them. in a twist of irony, hypothetically, if everyone became wholly individual and unique, that 'ultimate scarcity' of being a unique person would become mediocrity. damn, I went in a circle. although, I've heard it said that one should seek to be ordinary, because being ordinary is in and of itself an expression of divinity. perhaps the answer lies somewere in that.

Originally Posted by YourHumbleNarrator

Despite being so simple it can be hard to understand, but seeking understanding will enhance your growth in itself.

thats why I'm here! And that's what I love about personal developement, how everything worth knowing is so decievingly simple on the surface, frustratingly complex underneath, and embarassingly obvious once fully understood. I caught that theme again when I first opened 'power vs. force' yesterday:

"the skillful are not obvious. they appear to be simple-minded. those who know this know the patterns of the Absolute. to know the patterns is the Subtle Power. the Subtle Power moves all things and has no name."

Thank you for the insight you have provided. I feel that I understand the paradigm of the darkworker, and its relation to me, much better now. I'm so grateful to have a place like this to discuss the things that interest me most.

[YourHumbleNarrator]

Originally Posted by Phil Watson

True. I've came to that conclusion before as well. I prefer to believe that by working with other conscious people, we can work towards and eventually achieve freedom for all, but perhaps I'm just being naive.

Roll with the times. If a large number of people want to wake up, freedom will become the norm. If they don't, do whatever you want-your actions will disturb their slumber. People are so down on those they consider "evil" but the truth is every powerful person contributes to someone else's awakening, it's only a matter of how they do it. "Evil" darkworkers give you a means by which to test your strength. Enlightened darkworkers will wear you out just as well, if not better, than their psychopathic counterparts. "Evil" lightworkers give you ideals to struggle against. If you overcome them, you gain the will to stare right into the face of a god and assert truth over external authority. Enlightened lightworkers inspire people to live in accordance with the best of their nature.

considering how strongly that resonates with me, perhaps I was meant to be a darkworker. my idea of striving for excellence is to attempt to create that ideal world, where such dualities cease to exist.

Duality is intrinsic to our existence here, but the end result of the lightworker/darkworker path is to transcend duality. What that really means I can't say; I doubt I could comprehend it.

that goal is lofty to the point of being arrogant, but it's been my dream for as long as I can remember. I suppose scarcity is inevitable though, because the more one grows, the more unique they become, until reaching the ultimate scarcity: there's only one of them to share with the entire world, and so the concept becomes them. in a twist of irony, hypothetically, if everyone became wholly individual and unique, that 'ultimate scarcity' of being a unique person would become mediocrity. damn, I went in a circle. although, I've heard it said that one should seek to be ordinary, because being ordinary is in and of itself an expression of divinity. perhaps the answer lies somewere in that.

If everyone were polarized and followed their path to completion, that world would be so different from what we know words like "mediocre" would cease to be relevant. In my experience, it's quicker to try and understand the things we can grasp and save what we can't for later. Polarity, in its most basic form, is fairly simple. It's an intuitive philosophy you may construct within your own thoughts well before you come across any literature which speaks of it. Post polarity, or non-duality, is referred to time and time again as something which is unspeakable, not because it is forbidden, but because there are no words for it. Trying to think your way through it only sets you back because every time you gain a genuine insight you'll pervert it by translating it into words borne of duality.

I'll give you a little hint concerning mundane: I've often been told that when I meditate I should focus my eyes on something innocuous, like a stone, while breathing rhythmically. In the moments when I've been able to focus intently, I've heard things I'd never heard and seen things I'd never seen. It is by focusing on the mundane that you learn to pay attention. You can't expand beyond your sensory perception if you only give your attention to what's interesting.

Thank you for the insight you have provided. I feel that I understand the paradigm of the darkworker, and its relation to me, much better now. I'm so grateful to have a place like this to discuss the things that interest me most.

It's how I gain my understanding. Best of luck to you.

[missbhaven]

I can say this article really struck me
A good chunk how I feel is in directly linked to darkworkers.
Years ago on another message board I got into a huge disagreement with other posters because my feeling was there was nothing as selfless love. In the end we all do it for some selfish desire of which we have on ourselves. This is why when we do certain things and often get no response we get upset. e.g. a small task like holding open the door for someone, many of us would logic we do this because it's common courtesy and we have manners (the right thing to do), yet a series of no acknowledgement will have many of us blasting about how sooo many people have no manners. If we were doing this for the overall sense rightness.... why should it matter if it is acknowledged? Why even get angry and frustrated at the lack of it? Even at the mundane tasks we seek some sort of gratification.
I've always be described as a giving person but in the end most of gifts were self-interest. A ticket to a concert was really my desire not to be alone. It was often a game as if I knew instinctively that we can not enter any type of contract (relationship, ect.) without it benefiting both parties. Hence Steve saying that a darkworker eventually learns that his interests are best served but serving others. But somewhere else I read (I think) that dark workers direct their energy their root chakra and lightworkers threw their crown. Since I’ve been having issues with root chakra (coming threw as health issues and all). I think I need to get back to that frame of mind because well life was much better when I had that mindset.
Looks like I'll have to focus myself at polarizing my energy flow thanks guys

[Thomas H]

Ultimately, I feel like this is just a game of semantic masturbation. Polarity is important but only internally (I think Jesse mentioned something similar to this in one of the earlier posts, forgive me for not quoting). As long as you have a good handle on why you do what you do and you're really in touch with that there's no need to put a label on it.

[missbhaven]

Also this makes me feel a bit better
I have been putting off Steve’s 20 min task to finding my purpose because everything that almost moves to tears has a sort of negative impact in my eyes (e.g. one was to enslave humanity) and then I am further compounded by it with a stabbing of sorrow (almost like how you would feel if you heard that you have to put down your dog or cat and they can't until you say ok, and you have to do something that hurts you to) I feel like screaming and hiding when I feel like I should be accepting it because these items move me more greatly than anything else I’ve written. But that acceptance is also companied with fear, fear that knowing deep down this isn't right, and fear that I am really the type of person to do something like that?
I can say that that task alone has upset me more than other in my life. Just because the things that I have absolute smack of feelings I get from those random thoughts I jotted down trying to explore all my limits when feeling no response otherwise. When I look and elaborate other things that feel is more positive it doesn't give me half the raw power as I get from those guys... seems I gotta suck it up and elaborate my negative feeling items.