Time for a re-think.

I remember getting to a time where I had my place in the world figured out, but now, through the foggy mist of change I notice that all is not as it once was. It is harder to think in the way I used to think because as the result of the changes, I have changed – as have we all. I have some confusion now whereas it was important for me not to be confused before: so with the outside-of-me changes and the inside-of-me changes how do I chart my route? Good job I have studied the stars. Also there are general standards of ‘being’ linked, in general, to one’s age. So, what I saw as a blinding revelation at age 38 may not be possible to experience in the same way at age 58 (even if I hadn’t experienced it before). Or, I might be wrong there – how is it possible to know.

I learned to think independently before. Now, having lived longer, the habit of not bothering to spend so much time thinking independently is kicking in. I am outnumbered by the mainstream. However I do notice that the world’s problems are still the same. There seems to have been no improvement in the big issues surrounding education, health care, employment, unemployment, homelessness, care of the elderly, the legal and penal systems and the inequalities that abound throughout the world. I mentioned this in the previous post and it made me think further. Not in a hands on, down to earth practical way but in a what is really behind this situation sort of way.

Is it practical to assume that more money injected into the areas of life mentioned above will solve the problems? It doesn’t work, or if it does, so far it is unperceivable. The rationale behind solving the current problems seems to be to raise awareness in order to raise money to pay more or better people - or more and better people to tackle the jobs. This is the political master plan. More people it is easy to visualise. What about better? What is a better person? More qualified for the job? More experienced? More caring? More not just in it for the money?

There are many implications in politics which politicians never address because it is outside the role of politician. Perhaps this is the primary reason why democracy hasn’t worked so far. The government is run by people who take an impersonal view of everything so what we have is an impersonal system which fails often to address individual needs. Paradoxically, by the time we have evolved enough to fix this problem people will not have so many needs to be met, if any at all. So, it seems to all be a part of the natural scheme of things, the chain of action and reaction. A quantum leap would be good at this point – it would save a lot of time. Time, that is, spent with people suffering.

We have the raw materials: people who can be good and decent given the right conditions. Advanced technology to address the problems of everyone on the face of the earth. But does it? If our technology is so advanced, why are there poor sick and hungry and miserable people all over the world? Again, technology is impersonal.

So, to sum up so far without thinking very hard, here on planet Earth with issues of perspective: how do we ‘govern’ or look after individuals while we are looking after ‘everyone’? I think the problem is an Aquarian one which perhaps exists as a result of shifting into the Age of Aquarius. The polar opposite sign of the zodiac is Leo which is as personal as Aquarius is impersonal. Leo is regal – the main fixed star in this sign is Regulus. So we have the king at one end of the pole and the common man, ‘everyman’ at the other. Right now in history the common man is trying to govern the king. We have greater freedom, there is less imposition. In 2000 years we will have evolved to a place where less freedom will be seen as better. We will be looking to a stronger focus for authority which in yet another 2000 years will evolve into a world of philosophers and travellers: we’ll be well into space at this time. At this point it requires much imagination to see how we might get there. If we spend the next 2000 years fine-tuning our capacity for the impersonal, that too could take us off into outer space.

I am thinking myself into a hypothesis where individuals are supposed to stop caring so much about themselves. I had not thought of this as being anything I wanted to consider. But I suppose if we individually stop suffering so much we will not need to be helped so much. If our focus is led elsewhere our personal needs will be less apparent.

Is this possible?