"Bringing the planet back to a state of love and peace?"

[seeker5]

But, when was the planet ever in a state of love and peace?

Wasn't there always war before - except that those wars hit everyone at at peoples home, unlike now where wars only hit a small portion of the planet.

For example, in the middle ages wars between the smallest kingdom against another one. The 100 Year war between France and England. Brutal Viking Raids. The Roman Empire with slavery and gladiators and fighting the barbarian and conquest. Before that the barbarian nature of society, small tribes fighting eah other - all over. Even the Greeks city states kept fighting each other all the time except when faced by a huge invader like the Persians. Even the Native Americans small tribes constantly fought each other, although they were probably better align with nature then their European counterpart.

Furthermore, in addition to wars, there was slavery all over the world, brutal rapes, women were pretty much treated as property to their husbands and their family, etc.

So, what I'm curious, what do we mean when we say we want to bring the planet back to a state of love and peace. When was the planet ever in a state of love and peace?

[Ceros]

I don't think there was ever one. Unless you mean "bringing the planet towards a state of love and peace" in which case I support you wholly.

[Elrond]

Perhaps when there was predominantly hunter-gatherer cultures. Then they shifted to agriculture, because there was too many people for hunting-gathering communities to be sustainable. That built the foundation for civilisations to be made, and the rest is history.

But why must you model the future after the past? Can't you learn from the past and create something even better? A lot of the human race would have to die if you would want to build societies like that.

And maby the planet is in a state of love and peace, just not for us humans.

[Brutha]

Perhaps when there was predominantly hunter-gatherer cultures. Then they shifted to agriculture, because there was too many people for hunting-gathering communities to be sustainable

Hunter gatherers often attack neighboring tribes.

There wasn't a time like that. We should work to create one regardless.

[Angela]

I'm not interested in restoring a prior "lost" state of being, either for myself or for the world. But to generate a brand new state -- one of free-flowing love, peacefulness in hearts and in connections, joy, and freedom -- well, that inspires me.

I think when people year to get back to a previous time and they way it felt, just the thought itself is a stressful one. We can't really go back, I don't think. But we can powerfully be what we want to be, as a brand-new way of being, right now.

Why waste this wonderful illusionary concept of linear time by not being present and filled with awe in the brilliant newness of now?

[Dannyboy1]

is through self enlightenment. We need to evolve to an enlightened state and others will evolve around us, but we cannot teach what we don't know ourselves. We all cause little problems around us, we annoy someone, we overreact, etc. These emotional reactions are the low level cause that brings about all the problems in the world. We need to evolve, not fight to change.

[seeker5]

Heh, you guys aren't helping me by agreeing with me! (or maybe you guys really are!) I was kind of hoping someone could argue that I was wrong, and that there was indeed a time when the planet was align with love and peace for humans

Although, now that I think of it, maybe it means "Align humanity all across the planet back to a state of love and peace", and in that sense, align humanity with the love and peace they had before they were incarnated...?

[Angela]

Nope, seeker5, it's all up to you. You are The One. The future is in your hands!

[seeker5]

Originally Posted by Angela

Nope, seeker5, it's all up to you. You are The One. The future is in your hands!

Hehe bahhhh, The One liked to fight and jump tall buildings and while I don't mind jumping tall buildings, I don't like to fight

[Angela]

Originally Posted by seeker5

Hehe bahhhh, The One liked to fight and jump tall buildings and while I don't mind jumping tall buildings, I don't like to fight

More proof that you are The One. The One is resistant to believing he is The One.

[Cantando]

Originally Posted by seeker5

Heh, you guys aren't helping me by agreeing with me! (or maybe you guys really are!) I was kind of hoping someone could argue that I was wrong, and that there was indeed a time when the planet was align with love and peace for humans

Oh, alright then, if you insist!
Once upon a time, everything was lovely and perfect. Human beings lazed around by streams and ate the fruit that fell from the trees. There was no killing or fighting, even in the animal kingdom. The lion lay down with the lamb. There was no disease and everyone looked young and happy. Everyone had perfect teeth and flawless skin (acne hadn't been invented). When a person or animal wanted to leave, they just left. The earth just kept regenerating itself, producing more and more for everyone. Everything was in balance and harmony. This was a long, long time ago, before “THEY” came.

[seeker5]

Angela and Cantando:

[ar81]

Nowadays peace is in danger more than ever.
There is a strong economical incentive for weapon manufacturers to fund attacks on a country to convince taxpayers of that country about the need to buying their products go to war.

Barbarians exist today.
Darfur ranges between 200k and 400k innocents dead. Far worst than war in Iraq.
1990s witnessed a 10 year war in Sierra Leona where all human rights were systematically violated, and they created a new one.

[amixa]

i do recall reading a text (i forget where, perhaps eckhart tolle) that spoke about how early civilizations spoke of a golden age and how we had 'fallen' from it...its not soley an adam and eve concept.
however i don't think we should be aiming to 'go back'. angela's post seems to be the best expressed.. as usual
it is never possible to 'go back'. screw the whole concept of 'the good ol' days' that just creates misery. every day is a good day
perhaps there is more to see in the lion and the lamb symbol that someone brought up.. compassion towards each other perhaps?
enlightenment in one self is the best approach.. as mentioned above. perhaps we need to learn to have compassion for both murderer and victim in iraq and darfur? (darfur is quite ugly i know)
bringing up eckhart tolle i might as well put forth the question that he does discuss this idea of resisitance and the longer we resist the more the issue pursues. once you accept the issue.. the issue recedes in our lives. i've seen this happen actually.. the results are amazing. do you think, that perhaps once people stop resisting the ugly sides of our species that we can move forward?

[Poiesis Hagakure]

Originally Posted by amixa

bringing up eckhart tolle i might as well put forth the question that he does discuss this idea of resisitance and the longer we resist the more the issue pursues. once you accept the issue.. the issue recedes in our lives. i've seen this happen actually.. the results are amazing. do you think, that perhaps once people stop resisting the ugly sides of our species that we can move forward?

i think eastern ideas definitely would help the entire world move toward a more peaceful, loving world. everything is interconnected, more so than we emphasize. your body and mine are made up of elements that formed in other solar systems!! whatever culture you're born into you will copy over and over. everyone copies each other in order to put forth their own personal identity. and i think that--- personal identity--- is a major problem as concerning our world becoming more peaceful, loving.
i like reading about the colonists in america and the founding of our democracy. consider that--- the colonists considered themselves british citizens. they tried to mimic british society. british social hierarchy (simply put) was held together by a few key items: lack of new land, and the vast majority of land being owned by a small percentage, the elite, the gentry. most people were tenant farmers, working someone else's land in order to live and having to pay them for that capability. people didn't have other options. this allowed the elite, the gentry, to have 'virtue' which meant for them that they were uninvolved in business matters. it was seen as .... dirty? .... as something you should not involve yourself with. you had virtue if you were rich enough to not have to involve yourself with the affair of the money coming in... which they, as landlords to so many, could afford to do. in the colonies people tried to mimic british social life! but there were a few problems with this. even though people tied to the government were privileged enough to receive huge land grants or by other means secured huge areas of land to then rent out to people, in the colonies you could move west or just squat and shoot the messenger who came around to collect rent. there wasn't enough of a disparity between the richer and the poorer in budding america to hold the social classes together, and there was more free land so people always had the option to escape their current situation easily. everyone mimicked the gentry's tastes, the current fashions, and your family's wealth could be seen by the size of your carraige, etc. people could display their wealth and imitate wealthier trends however they saw fit. my point with all this, why this is pertinent, is because i think social identity by definition sets you apart. you consider yourself separate from others based on your hobbies, your likes and dislikes, your past experiences, where you've been, where you want to go, the car you drive, the friends you keep, etc. they are all filters. we all create an image daily and people hold onto-- or mentally consider these things real--- in varying strengths. they're all filters of what i accept and do not accept. they make you more or less likely to talk to a particular person depending on how you size them up in two seconds. they make you more or less likely to respect this person, or go out on a limb for them, after your initial judgement of them. [i'm not saying these filters are all bad, but just playing the thought out]

i don't know how to get my point out necessarily. i guess it's the point that, incongruities between people abound ... and we encourage them. people need to feel more of a tie to each other despite our different ideologies and life styles before they can understand why a single death in war is too many.