Perspectives on Human Rights

Posted on


Hi here again sharing some perspectives on human rights, since I read the blogs of Bernard Poolman and Ken Cousens it has made me reconsider my starting point in my research about human Rights, therefore, I will leave the work done here, and I would only like to ask to anyone interested in this subject that please, share comments and perspectives about it, because this is a big topic and I am sure that there are many points that require direction, so please, if anyone can share any perspectives or corrections it would be really nice, because it can give to everyone another starting point in the vision of Human Rights, thank you

Human Rights:


I will really try to make it as simple and practical as possible, because this is a big subject and it requires a lot of information for the understanding of how it works to get through it, so read it with patience please.


En the old times, when the human becomes sedentary, he discovers the feeling of ownness (fear of survival), noticing the magnitude of its territory (dominance and control = fear of loss), the amount of food (fear of survival = the beginning of the agriculture); their property and the family conformation (control and manipulation over the interests); conceiving, for the very first time, the idea of property with a sense of satisfaction (fulfillment of his necessities = The right to life as a polarity of the fear of death).

Private Revenge – This stage is known by the name of blood revenge or private revenge, against unjust attack, the individual protects himself, as the very act of doing justice by himself (what were they trying to protect? Was themselves or their interests, definitions, values, ideas?) The repressive function was in private hands, with the support and help of the community, which recognized the right to exercise the law of retaliation (eye for eye, tooth for a tooth). The group attached to the victim the right to cause harm of equal intensity to that which caused the situation. The first phase of the criminal law comes with this relationship, the relationship between the law of the strongest in defense of what I want, I desire, I need following this sense of the belonging.
When someone defends something, do not put it aside “much less shares it” it is took to oneself as close and near as possible = fear of loss, fear of survival, because the “quality of life” that gives such object is or has been defined as the ratio it is my right to have and preserve, as “my right to life,” what have we done over time?

I will take a fragment of a blog made by Gabriel Zamora Moreno

In the current system property rights have an interesting structure. In Dutch law property rights are sometimes even referred to as ‘three party rights’. The reason for this is that in such rights there are three elements/parties involved, namely: 1) The subject/owner 2) The object and 3) everyone else.

The reason why ‘everyone else’ is part of this equation, is because what a property right means, is that you as owner have a right to use or dispose of your property as you see fit – and, everyone else should guard themselves of infringing on your right to use or dispose of your property as you see fit. So a property right on the one hand gives someone permission, and on the other hand it gives everyone else an instruction. Obviously there are some restrictions to this right and this freedom is not unlimited, however the gist of the definition is clear: a property right is a protection mechanism to protect the owner against… everyone.

One might ask: protect against what?

Let’s again look at the EMS.

In an Equal Money System the resources of the earth are being managed and distributed based on deliberate planning and calculation of what is necessary to be produced and distributed. There will therefore exist a system of production and distribution that will ensure that everyone have what they need and even more – and this on an equal basis for everyone, making sure that not one single being has to exist in any form of lack. On a material level one could say that an Equal Money System will produce abundance on an Equal Level for everyone. This may seem outrageous, but it is really not when considering the actual available resources, and when taking into consideration how much is currently being wasted or withheld through greed – and what could therefore even within this current system potentially be done already.

Would you need protection against everyone in a world where everyone is equally receiving what you receive and where the common law is that whatever is given to you, you must make the best possible use of in the context of what is best for all? The answer is no, unless you are planning to abuse or deceive, because then you know that you are being greedy and are abusing everyone’s trust. In an Equal Money system it will be very easy to correct such behavior and there will be intervention possible through reeducation.

Let’s look at some outflows of property law: through property rights it has become possible to justify and protect the existence of planned obsolescence, which is the process of weakening (sabotaging) a line of products by the manufacturer himself so as to make the product fall apart in time to create a new demand. Property rights give the allowance for animal abuse and vivisection, as in most countries either by law or by custom animals are regarded as property. Property rights give the allowance for an elite minority to control the faith of all through ownership of the resources of the planet in the name of profit, where even the governments have little say. Strangely the law will also say that the ‘free use’ of one’s property should not infringe on the rights of others, however we have conveniently defined these rights of others (such as human rights) to be meaningless, as is shown by the fact that more than half the world exists in conditions poverty.

Property rights thus encourage irresponsible and psychotic behavior. The context for property law and property rights in the current system is the belief that we apparently exist in a reality of material lack, in other words: that there isn’t enough for everyone. This is however not true as is proven through the massive waste that is being produced by the system while on the other hand billions exist in conditions of poverty and deprivation – for nothing.

Therefore property rights are currently protecting those who have too much or who abuse what they have, and are preventing any kind of intervention to stop this greed as these laws (which are upheld under the banner of democracy yet at the cost of the majority) are protecting their right to abuse.

When through a system of decent administration resources are allocated so that everyone receive equally, then property as such will have no more function as the starting point of fear will be removed and there is no more need to protect ourselves against everyone else.

We have placed these values in useless objects we buy and which decompose in short periods of time, while that which has greater functionality or practicality, passed into the hands of more affluent classes = the best strategy to keep what is of them by law relationship (association of property) and through their own laws …example of this is the manifestation of the new wars unarmed, economic wars, where China “now by definition the first potency” for example can be built in another country, acquiring rights of property with the same laws of the country in which it is installed. Another interesting example is if you see how the government is able to take your belongings away through debt.

Mine (Dictionary definition) pronoun
A form of the possessive case of I used as a predicate adjective: The yellow sweater is mine.
Something that belongs to me: Mine is the red car.

The heritage of the previous generations as our vocabulary and the definitions that we place over this entire world, that definitions that apparently belong to us as that which can be seen by the EYE “I”.

Something interesting about the way in which one writes the I, is that is very similar to a line that points to oneself, this can be also be seen on the theory of the interpretation, in which the very act of naming things, of defining things, is a direct relation of one giving reason and purpose for the existence of one thing in a particular situation which makes you, the owner of that particular reason allowing you to move on the dimensions of the situation, of the equation that one creates accordingly to be able to give direction to oneself within that particular situation, what is interesting within this “logic” is that we have defined everything in proportion to our desires, giving value and reason to everything that is “worthy of appropriation accordingly to our interests” I mean the reason and purpose itself of each and every single things in this world can play accordingly to your desires, which apparently gives you the right to owning it because “the human was created to rule and control all the things in this world” (this is also in the bible) “the act of creation”, is properly an act that is not directed by the human, but that it is directed by the mind, you can see it quite clearly in the very relation of the Descartes when he makes the statement of “I think, therefore I am”, which would be also like saying, my mind created me, that is why I am.

Our names have meaning, in regards to a particular reason that plays out as our existence, defined by a name, given to you by your parents; your parents represent the basic formation of yourself within the structure of everything, society, religion, education, MORALS, and so on.

The purpose and reason placed on all things, were done to resolve a particular issue in a particular direction, that is possible through placing values on the things that would represent your direct relationship to this world (word), I mean, we deliberately disregard many things in this world and we only give purpose to particular points that would represent “the solution to our problem” for example, a key by definition is an object dependent of a door as the door is dependent of the key, the key is accessory of the door as the door would be useless without a key, completing the relationship of that logic, you will be able to get somewhere, for you to get somewhere, you need a key, for you to get to an answer you need a question, our entire existence is mold and shaped accordingly to this principles that are reflected on everything in our world (words), (fascinatingly everything placed on direction to our self-interests)

The life is given unconditionally, without keys or doors, therefore the search for reason and meaning on this existence through irrelevant questions of value and purpose, is only the result of the work of culture forming the civilization of the human, those “more civilized” apparently have the right to conquer and have dominion over other cultures that are inferior, because they don´t have all the definitions and values that we have as the greater culture, as the greater civilization, and within that, the “civil-lie” is imposed on each and every single human being from birth, something interesting within this entire point of the heritage, “which we are going to discuss later” is particularly interesting in regards to the “action of making a guaranty, that those things will remain on the position that they are, in the particular order that they have, in regards to “the blood line = family that they belong to”. Our fear of death represents also an absence of oneself as definition of its own existence, as the I (eye) = fear of that which we don´t know, what would happen to me when I die? You lose your definitions, values, purposes, everything is gone, because its irrelevant, I mean, all the relationships that we have molded and shaped in our life, were dependent of the particular relationship that we have within a physical human body and all that it implies, existing on the earth, gravity, survival, “energy”, I mean, if one don´t have a physical body, then most of our definitions and relationships become irrelevant, because our definitions are only able to play its position on the world (words) in which we exist, if one die and our relationships to everything ends. We end as minds, what remains is what one most create as self, if one self is not equal to everything that is here, one doesn´t exist.

Is fascinating that if you see in the very establishment of the jurisprudence, it depends of the act of specific people with specific knowledge and position in this system, solving one problem in one particular direction, 5 thesis solving in one particular direction, gives validity in proportionality of fact to a particular issue which have the same value that “a law”, this means, also the same in the very beginning of the creation of the society, a great council of old and wise people coming together for the definition and resolution of particular issues that would influence the entire system, why? Because they had “more experience and knowledge in regards to the functioning of the system itself” and something fascinating is that if you see within the development of the first cultures, the entire placement had its foundation on the religion, I mean the religion was in fact the government and only the pontiffs, knew each law…

All the religions are a matter of opinion, that is able to be mold, shaped, manipulated, with the course of time (an example of this, is how we have created an opinion “almost like a religion” about homosexuality, when this manifestation is something able to be seen on nature and it was also accepted on Greece) what is happening to the relationship of values today? We are seeing that our Economies are all falling, because all that has value in this world is not able to sustain the true interests behind those values, because we are speaking about the interests of “self” in matter of opinion, and you know, it is said that “No one thinks in the same way”, and what happened was that in the moment that we placed value of superiority and inferiority on something or someone, the interests became more and more reduced to satisfy the interests of a selected group of people, and all of those that didn´t aligned their interests with the interests of that selected group of people, were disregarded as everything else that don´t have value, that is apparently inferior, those that had “a conflict with such relationship of interests” became saves of the greater Nations. With every war that have taken place, the interests are modified, the values are place somewhere else, why? Because the points of control over the resources became more specific, the weapons became more specific, the tactics became more defined in one particular direction as the consequence of survival, fear of death, the promise of a heaven to the satisfaction of a capricious moral life for our own salvation…, I mean everything that is necessary to create conflict is a little bit of manipulation here and there over the values = interests, with propaganda, religion, politics, “sexuality”, and the best understanding of this, is to see how easily is for the people to react to “words”.

The justification of a divine order, a purpose for those remaining in positions of power, was very easy through the principle that the pontiffs played as the “only listeners and interpreters of the LAW OF GOD”, with the inquisition one is able to see the perfect example of what took place for those that “disagreed with the opinion of the church, the moral person, moral society, the corporation, the legal personality which is the state. Understand, the social reason for its existence, is the same that gives validity to its fiction, it’s the society itself; there are no governments (without the people, without the believe of the people in a government), its not real, it’s a fiction, the state it’s the representation of the collectivity of all Human beings, coming together on the basis of religion, morals, culture, psychosexual principles, interests, everything that the people accepts and allows is what makes possible the actual order of everything.

With all of this, is important to look at two words that have represented such “divine order”.

First of all: Justice

Justice – Definition from the Romans: The constant and perpetual will to give to each on his right.

One point that is constant and continuous within the statements of the ideology of the ius naturalists, is that over the assumption that the people possess things, there is a “right by attribution” of the owner which must be protected at all cost, and the effectiveness of the owner to be able to possess and enjoy that which he possess depends of “the society”, now here is where the law enters, because it is possible that another possesses that which “belongs to another by right” is so, that the law can exist, where there is no abuse, there is no law or right. (very interesting)

And this is the statement: The things “must go to the owner”, and get into the hands of the individual to whom they are attributed, because this NEED is the primary effect of things to be of someone, so that you can say “are yours”.

(Check how the word Need is used to describe an apparent “sense of meaning” to the existence itself of the human, as fear of loss)

And within this what is being said is: Giving each his own is a social need, now this is quite interesting from the perspective that the Capitalistic system focus all its attention into the need of fulfillment of desires, wants and needs, but nothing of this constitutes a practical requirement of the human physical body, or life itself.

Second statement: give each his own, requires, first to want to give it, if someone doesn’t want to give to another his right, is obvious that he will not, in any case, if he doesn’t want to give it, it will be applied pressure to make him to give it, and then he will give it, or by the social force, it will be snatch from him; but in this case, he didn’t gave it, it’s not enough that someone wants to give to another his possession, is not less important to know to who pertains the possession, or that it is fairly of the other, because, without knowing it, or he will not give it to its rightful owner, or he will not decide to give it, this knowing corresponds to the practical reason, which consist of knowing what to give, who to give it, when to give it, how to give it and where to give it.

If one analyze this, it is true that is actually not a matter of want to give…to give, but this is using an starting point based on survival, noticing also that by definition the application of “giving its subdued to the idea of giving it just to maintain the original order” what are the duties of this person that demands his right to have the thing returned to his original placement? I mean, it should be obvious that this person must ask the question: But, what if that person also needed it? What if that person took it to also fulfill his/her own need (right)? What if the rights of that person have been violated and when that person see his/her rights violated, it takes them to take from others because when the rights of everyone are not fulfill, no one has actually any right at all? in recognition of what is best for all, the principle here could be very easily changed to a matter of just giving what the other need and requires because you don’t need to survive cause you have been already provided with all your basic needs, therefore, what could you want or need or desire if everything is provided?

It is necessary to point it out, that the principle of authority here, functions as an act that is completely separated from the person doing it, because justice is considered the virtue of him who behaves and acts in a certain way, in this case those who are educated to be authorities. What is fascinating is that, if the principle itself, existed within the recognition of life as all as one as equals, I mean, the right then becomes something which is part of the life itself, and within this, the principle of authority becomes the same as the directive principle of self, where everyone knows what is best for all, and act in the benefit of all life, then, one can really say that justice exist. Isn´t it said that the principle of “ought” in the laws, should be that this are not only accomplished by fear of consequence, but that “they should be accomplished by duty of consciousness of each individual”? What could be better than to give, self-governance and self-authority to each individual standing on the same principles that makes us equals as life? Isn´t that our fucking democracy?

The current starting point: The things are spread, and attributed to different people, that is why we speak of what is mine, yours and yours. And it is pointed out, within the version of several ius (jurists) naturalists, that the justice does not give or attribute things, it follows the principle that these are already distributed, so it limits itself to only maintain a certain order within the system, and we must also consider that the way in which the law proceeds is that: there cannot be an act of justice, where there is not a title over one thing. because as we have already seen, a right is consider that which is taken as a value placed on wants, needs and desires, from the capitalism perspective.

The very existence of justice, depends in itself of the existence of the society, the laws are important, but not because they regulate a behavior in the people, but because the arguments in which they are founded should solve in the direction that is best for all, by preventing unnecessary consequences to manifest. We don´t see this things because, as I said before, if there is no abuse, there is no Justice, a lawyer doesn´t get paid if there is no abuse, a doctor doesn´t get paid if there are no diseases, a teacher doesn´t get paid if there is no ignorance…fascinating Justice we have created, because without anybody existing in survival, then there cannot be laws, there is no real research on prevention of crimes, because those trying to find out a fucking way to bring a change are simply “disregarded because they are not following the opinion of those that do earn money”. If one really considers our current situation, the only way in which Justice is able to exist, is to get sure get sure that everyone is provided with that which is essential for a dignified living, so that nobody steals, and everyone is able to enjoy their “goods”.

The titles of property must then be redefine in its very structure, because is like when you buy food on the market, and you get your buying ticket, which is the title attributing you as the owner of the food that you buy, yet, what can be said of our society today? We demand the fulfillment of that for which we are paying, but we don´t fulfill our duties, our duty is not only to pay with money; you can see this for instance in relationships, you can see the relationships as a business, you have contracts, agreements, and principally money…, if you don´t have money, your agreement is fucked, the situation here is that, we base our relationships on emotions and feelings; if the deal is made over the promise of love (law), what one is not considering is that the very existence of love (law), is dependent of a crisscrossing of emotions and feelings, that make possible the existence in itself of love, the problem with the agency (your partner) is that he/she, doesn´t want the “negative aspects of such relationships” which are the “skeletons on the closet”, so to speak…, we don´t want the negative energy, we just want the promise of the energy of love (law) fulfilled, and something interesting is that, if one see this directly, the agreement in itself cannot actually exist when the deal is made on the promise of love (law), because the person feels love one moment, at the other moment it is angry or maybe happy, if he is not in love all the time, how could such bullshit exist in the very first place? At the difference of one agreement in which one is essentially walking with one person knowing the total implications of how this person exists, and if this person is willing to walk in a process of self-correction, self-application, the agreement would be able to be grounded on a basis that is able to endure conflict and resistance, because the agreement exist on supporting each other to walk through the positive and negative aspects of each other in self-honesty to establish oneself as self-honesty.

I write the word law at one side of the word love, because it actually works exactly the same in regards to our current society, the agreement between the persons “that conform the society”, implies a tacit agreement of co-existing in the same conditions, in every possible way, the agreement is that if one have rights, one have duties, the very principle that makes this rights possible is that the social condition of each and every single person must follow and remain within certain conditions.

The question is: How can a society exist when the persons are completely isolated from each other in their personal interests with no consideration of someone else than themselves? If there is no consideration for each other, the fulfilling of our duties has not been fulfilled at all, and therefore we have no real rights.

What is fascinating is that the consequences of the agreement have been manipulated to place a very small group on the top of the pyramid while placing others out of the possibility of even have access to food; the perfect example of this, is the industrial revolution, that brought for the very first time the concept of unemployment, through the development of industrial machines that were able to make the work of 1 hundred persons, the implication wasn´t necessary a progress but the fact that 1 hundred persons lose their jobs, because the benefits were only able to be perceived by those who were able to pay for them, for those who were able to remain on the wheel of the system; the quality standards that we place on the food, determine how much will be paid to the farmer for his work, and the same could be said of what police should get, or how long will be the sentence that must endure the thief, yet, when we teach a human being to define himself accordingly to his job or profession, what happens is that we have left everyone who is not able to pay for an actualization (education) in his labor, out of the possibility of getting a job in the system, and what becomes important is the relationships that allows you to find a job, and with this we have enslaved ourselves to each other, because for the system to exist we must remain in our positions, someone has to be poor for someone else to be rich…, we have managed to get the balance out of proportion, taking the human being out of the balance of our so called justice, taking the life out of balance, this can be reflected in our entire world today, and the worst of everything is that we believe that there are no consequences, yet, what we don´t see is that this consequences are not something that just affect the human being, it affects everyone and everything, including nature, animals, weather, etc., which only demonstrates that the human being is not separated from what is here in anyway whatsoever.

How is currently defined “the own”, what is “mine”? what has come to my heritage by “need or want”.

The objective of justice is: to regulate how one person should treat another, or a person entitled to be treated in a particular way –John Finnis–

The problem is that the human being is considered to be a “person” – persona, that has a personality, this personality implies that the condition that follows what is defined as the human nature of this being, is entirely dependent of certain interests that make its existence possible, therefore, for it to be able to have rights within the society, he/she have to work to serve the interest of the Nation which is the colectivity of all the Human beings, following certain condition that makes possible the organization of the human resources and that should be distributed to all of those participating in this system, the way in which you demonstrate the value of your personality, the accountability of your personality, your person, persona, is through presenting the symbol that represents your number and value, which is money.

The main point of all of this remains the same, the value has been placed on interests that have been perceived as separated from the human, yet, it is the human himself who has made of his own existence what it is today, because we have also placed ourselves in separation of the very system that we created, denying our creation as if it was manipulated for someone else than ourselves, the perfect example of this, is how we tend to blame the governments for what we have created.

I am not saying that there has been no abuse, yet, it is important to understand that the very criteria that form our opinions, had its basis established on the value placed on those things in which we projected our self-interests, one can notice that what has become of our society today is that, we are coming more and more to the realization of how much we have define ourselves accordingly to what we possess and accordingly to the picture that we have, but this is not something that happened just the other day, this has been since the beginning of the human civilization.

The problem I see is that humanity today, really has no idea of his true identity, we work eight hours, we have the house, the kids, the bills, television, hobbies, and the errands we do every day, and finally begin to believe that that’s all we are. But we are more than our charges or work, beyond being the status of “mother” or “father” beyond being “theist”, “atheist”, “Republican” or “Democrat”, “black” or “white”, “man” or “woman”, what or who we are, after all? We do not know, because every time we hear something we do not want to hear about us, we deny it. We try to ignore it and we project it to someone else to judge them for that. –Anonymous-

At the individual level we know what happens, but what happens when everyone refuses to see what it really is?
“Mankind is trapped in a cycle of fear, hatred and apathy, these human instincts are reflected in political systems and bureaucracies, which very often limits basic rights as the pursuit of happiness. A society whose foundations fear, apathy and hatred, is organized into a system that fundamentally affects the happiness of all individuals. This society represses individual development and maintains a cyclical behavioral pattern of superiority and inferiority and a class society founded on misleading ideals”-Mark Zimmerman

However, even when we demonize our world leaders, we need to understand that they and we are part of the same unit, all governments, corporations, religions, all represent the ideals we have projected separation of ourselves, because they are the reflection of what we project as our desire to achieve a higher state of existence

One of the most important figures that had Rome, and “still preserved” is precisely the figure of inheritance, my heritage, what is mine happens to be yours, from generation to generation, those families that had a pretty generous heritage, they were in “the predicament of needing to justify the possession of the property of interest” through blood relationship, and the only way to achieve this was to let everyone else have the same definition and provide the same legal fiction, this to ensure that the goods that they had did not went to be of the state or some divinity, because both were justified as “mine, yours”, it creates this apparent relationship of respect for yours or mine, because within that relationship of respect, the goods remain in the name or definition of belonging of the person who possesses them, the patrimony that will be for the generations to come, life after life, after life, and one can see that this implies that the roles in our society have remained in exactly the same place, we have repeated the same life’s over and over again because we are following the values of our culture, religion, laws, politics, everything is just an accumulation of consequences that has lead us to change a little bit the picture here and there, but the essence of our values remains the same, because the interest behind those values has remained the same as fear of death and fear of survival.

In religion and politics, people beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second hand, and without examination, from authorities who have not themselves examined the questions at issue, but have taken them at second hand from other non-examiners, whose opinions about them were not worth a brass farthing – Mark Twain –

The concept of source comes from the words (in Latin) fons and fundo, which means: “the place from which something emanates to the outward”, our acts are consequence of our decisions and choices, and for this the point of self-honesty, in the case where a man steals food to feed the family, the man is self-honest, because following the principle that life exist in all things, can life choose to not be life? the man is only acting as a consequence of what his life requires, then if certain conditions must be fulfilled for life to exist, and if we have become so dependent of the properties, then this must be considered a natural right (not only for humans, I mean, this is something that any life form requires and have access to, just for being here, it is “a right” that is recognized by the Earth, why we humans don´t recognize it?) If that is not so in every single person, then the application of laws is impossible in itself and one could consider that the law in its very structure is broken, why? The justice is inherent to the Equality and vice versa , the conditions by which are determined the fulfillment of the positive orders, must not be just equals in regards to the acts of the individuals, first we must establish equal conditions in every aspect of the life of each individual to ensure the true justice.

So when it is spoken from the starting point of: give each his own, we can redefine this to: (tatarara) Justice is the principle of equal distribution.

The reality is that, there is no way, or possibility for the existence of “mine” to take place, in a field with first of all the Earth being that which existed before me, and being the Earth that which determined the very possibility of my existence only through the existence of everything else here, each plant, each animal, had to exist, to keep the balance of that which was unconditional for all of us, we cannot speak about a right to life for the human, without considering all the living beings in this reality, is not possible! The very existence of the human was only possible through the existence of a universe, a galaxy, Jesus Christ! Stars died so that we could live, we depend of the Earth and we also depend of the lowest point in this reality, all that is here is life, a right to life for the Human is only possible if our duties towards all life are fulfilled beginning with repairing the damage that we have done

The life as we know it, has come to an end, because the survival that we were trying to defend, the life that we have been trying to preserve is not sustainable without the consideration of all that is here, and the only solution to that, implies to give away our self-interest, because as long as we keep the same values and definitions over this entire world (words) the state of this world will become just worse and worse, why? Because everything is out of balance, our so called “justice” is out of proportion to our self-interests, it has existed like that since the very beginning of its existence, of its creation, this cannot continue, this values were never “evaluated” as the value of life, as self-honesty, as common sense, and the world as we understand it or perceived to be, accordingly to the sense that we have gave to it, the direction that we have given to it, cannot longer sustain the ideals that we have established as this Human CIVIL – LIE – NATION, we have tried to restore the values in the direction of “spiritualization” as we did in the beginning, but our believes will not feed us, that is obvious, we all know that…a belief is not able to feed you.

The right to life implies, to give the same life that we have received, considering that the Universe has placed himself here, and that the planet has been here unconditionally for the Human, then the human has a duty that most be fulfilled with the Earth and the Universe, it took billions of years for the Universe to create the Earth and it took millions of years to the Earth to establish all the necessary for the possibility of the existence of the human, it is interesting that everything has been given to us unconditionally yet, we demand more, we demand rights, our greed is consuming everything and we are not considering that our right to life implies a duty with life itself, this is why we are seeing the consequences of how many species are coming to an end, in the same way in which resources are being depleted, because we are not giving the same that has been gave to us, when one give to oneself that life, that consideration of what is here, one change, one is able to learn more from what is here, because you learn from everything from each and every single plant, animal, bacteria, to give them proper care, only when we give that life, that consideration of ourselves as life to everything and everyone else, we will be able to have real life, real right to life, what we are seeing with the (possible) end of the human specie? Is that we are losing our right to life

“Life is within the physical, as when we live we live here on earth, in the physical reality on the physical substance around, among, and within us allowing us to be here. The physical has laws that govern it, these laws are supportive and create life to continue and live on, it adapts and changes to create what will be best for all as we see within nature how it adapts and creates itself to live among all physical elements and conditions to eventual equilibrium and harmony. So life require a certain set of cooperation and understanding within following these laws of the physical as these are guides to live in the physical and continue to function as such as been proving in the physical in keeping life going and adapting to be best for all. Those who see aren’t going to make it in life in the physical, go into the death process to be rebirthed into another form of life where they will be again part of the change, there is no fear of this death, but a point of acceptance of self as change and the fruits are within the change that is accepted, which is new life, new creation, and growth and expansion”. -Gabrielle Goodrow-

Re-definiendo el concepto de familia pt2

Posted on

niño que sueña

(Esto es algo que recientemente estaba observando y solo es un publicación rápida, ire en mayor detalle en el tema en la próxima publicación)

El principio de la jerarquía en la familia, tiene por fin último el establecimiento de una autoridad, esta autoridad ha sido justificada como “las lecciones que debemos aprender de nuestros padres en torno al punto mismo de la supervivencia”, sin embargo, hay otro principio bastante interesante dentro de esa jerarquización y el principio de autoridad a través del miedo, esto es la supresión sexual a través del diseño de la culpa.

La culpa en su existencia misma maneja principios simples en realidad, si tomas tu más profundo temor, este siendo el temor a la muerte, te darás cuenta de que este miedo resuena en momentos específicos en los que percibes tu vida en peligro, esto es igual a ver un mecanismo de alarma que se activa frente a determinadas situaciones, el que va a determinar esas situaciones, dependerá mucho de la cultura, religión, país, etc., pero el principio se establece de la misma forma para todas las personas de todo el mundo.

La culpa funciona de forma muy similar al miedo, solo que esta se activa una vez que esa barrera ha sido cruzada, la barrera de miedos que podrían definirse como diminutos, en un principio uno puede pensar que todas las morales tienen un fin específico de llevar al individuo al perfeccionamiento individual, sin embargo esto no es necesariamente de esa forma, el establecimiento mismo del orden marca que solo “los mejores individuos” pueden encontrarse en la parte superior de la pirámide, estos individuos tendrían que haber aprendido todo el conocimiento e información necesarios que los establece en las posiciones en las que se encuentran como líderes o directores de los que ahora serán los aprendices (aunque de hecho no ocurra así en la realidad), así que esto establece que el resto de aquello que se encuentren por debajo de “los maestros ascendidos” tienen que aprenderlo. Una vez que lo aprenden, “la perfección de ello” es cuando simplemente se lleva por la vía más corta a la realización de una determinada acción, y esto implica = no cuestionar las ordenes, no cuestionar lo que sabes = funcionas solo como un sistema.

La supresión sexual, mantiene a los hijos ligados a los padres y de esa forma terminamos buscando a una persona con similaridades a nuestros padres o hermanos, de sa forma se mantiene la relación del sistema, por eso las personalidades son tan importantes para este, porque de ello depende su supervivencia, dicen que el dinero solo es el medio y no el fin, pues el sistema usa exactamente el mismo principio, la energía que busca tan desesperadamente, es solo el medio, no el fin de su existencia.

Relaciones Maritales: Historia del hombre #74

El origen del divorcio:Historia del Hombre #75

El sexo y la sexualidad: Historia del Hombre #79

Re-definiendo el concepto de familia pt1

Posted on Actualizado enn


No es posible comprender el funcionamiento del Estado sin antes comprender que lo conforma, la familia, el interés superior de la Nación, porque todas las familias en su participación colectiva sostienen a la Nación, crean a la sociedad misma. La responsabilidad por tanto de la actual condición de la sociedad depende de cada familia más allá de solo los individuos.

–          La familia constituye un fuerte consorcio, una fuerte corporación de naturaleza jurídica y extra jurídica.

–          Lo que definía a las familias en la antigüedad era el sometimiento de todos los miembros a la misma autoridad, la potestad de un jefe definido como “paterfamilias ” , que en realidad era más un señor o soberano de la familia que “un padre de familia”.

–          Se conoce como familia al conjunto de personas que “por naturaleza o derecho”, se encuentran bajo una misma potestad.

–          Esta unidad real de la familia fundada en la sujeción a la potestad de un paterfamilias viviente, se escinde en “época histórica”, dando lugar a la formación de otras tantas familias cuantos son los hijos varones.

Los vínculos que unen a la familia son 2 que pueden definirse como el vínculo agnaticio y cognaticio, estos son, el vínculo de los agnados (nacidos después del testamento o de la muerte del padre/ aquellos que entran a la familia por otras vías como la adopción, y no son hijos de sangre) y el vínculo cognaticio (vinculo por sangre), cabe suponer que la familia antigua, abrigase en su regazo a todos los agnados, y que por razones de orden y de defensa de razones superiores a las simplemente domésticas, impusieran a la que después se llamó familia communi iure, la conservación intacta de su propia unidad política a la muerte del jefe.

Asumidas luego por la civitas las fundamentales posiciones políticas de orden y defensa (razones superiores a las simplemente domesticas); la unidad compacta del grupo familiar entre en quiebra, la familia se escinde en tantos grupos cuantos son los hijos de familia inmediatamente sujetos a la potestad del pater muerto, si bien es otorgada a estos de conservar indiviso el patrimonio familiar en un régimen de consortium (consorcio)

Lo que es interesante acerca de “la diferencia” entre la familia moderna y la romana, es que la potestad antes solo recaía en el varón, ahora puede caer tanto en el hombre como en la mujer, sin embargo, esta siempre reside en aquella persona que tiene dinero, ser la persona que provee con el sustento económico, es definida como “la cabeza de la familia”, ahora bien hay familias en las que es tanto el hombre como la mujer los que apoyan con el sustento económico, eso los hace a ambos, “cabezas de familia”.

Otro punto interesante dentro de estas “consideraciones sobre la familia”, yace dentro de los vínculos que definían la familia porque, como ya se había compartido antes, la herencia, era un punto de atención bastante grande dentro de la Estado en aquel tiempo y aun hoy día (la forma única forma de permitir y aceptar la existencia de la relación jurídica de la herencia, es si la permito y acepto en otro, y eso se justifica a través de justificar “el linaje”), porque básicamente lo que ocurre con el derecho hoy día es que se limita a regular la relación entre las personas y sus bienes y las relaciones entre el Estado con los individuos, y estos vínculos, definen este punto de separación social, es decir, tal parece que el linaje del padre fue en realidad solo uno, y desde entonces hemos repetido la misma vida una y otra vez, la misma familia, la misma  cadena genética una y otra vez, heredando el mismo patrimonio con el cual la obsesión llega a tal grado de decir (dentro de los vínculos cognaticio y agnaticio) “si, somos iguales, somos familia, pero no somos “tan iguales”, porque no somos la misma sangre” y por la misma familia, la misma vida, me refiero al orden mismo del sistema, es decir, invariablemente de que se quiera o no, la posición de los miembros de la familia, los roles sociales, el orden psicológico, y demás, siempre está definido en categorías, y estas categorías dentro del programa individual de cada individuo, definen roles sociales, roles familiares, roles internos dentro del individuo como personalidades, las familias se repiten, los órdenes se repiten, sistemas vienen y van porque no hay una verdadera consideración de estos vínculos en un punto de honestidad con nosotros mismos a establecer responsabilidad por estos programas ya que esencialmente todo es realizado por nosotros, y para ello establecemos relaciones con la energía ¿Por qué? Porque  siempre buscamos dentro de esa relación energética el interés personal y me refiero al hecho de que nuestra relación con la madre, el padre, los hermanos, los primos, los tíos, los sobrinos, el primo del amigo, en base a nuestra conveniencia, nuestra supervivencia como sistemas, donde no tenemos que hacer algo más que limitarnos a conservar nuestras relaciones, mantenerlas y alimentarlas, porque de esa forma garantizamos cierta “herencia”, y esta no son necesariamente bienes materiales o genéticos, sino ordenes mentales.

Una vez que el cabeza de familia muere, se reparten todos los bienes en la herencia y entonces la familia entra en quiebra, porque lo que mantiene a la familia unida es el dinero, el vínculo familiar continúa generación tras generación, pero solo si hay dinero, de otra forma, los individuos se separan y ven por su supervivencia en la posibilidad de entrar en otra familia, y el linaje se olvida.

La creencia dentro de la familia se encuentra en el establecimiento del orden social mismo en torno a la división social, porque aparentemente, solo seres humanos específicos pueden hacerse cargo de “los suyos, su sangre”, en lugar de ver por la calidad de vida de todos los seres humanos, y todas las formas de vida en general.

En perspectiva con el Sistema Igualitario Capitalista, la diferencia recae en que la familia no estará definida u ordenada de acuerdo a un orden jerárquico susceptible de la persona que tenga dinero, ya que el valor se encontrara en la vida y no en el dinero, lo cual  implica la asistencia y apoyo de toda forma de vida incondicionalmente, pero ya llegare a eso.

Población: Se entiende el elemento humano que integra una unidad política, cuando nos referimos al pueblo en lo que toca a sus aspectos meramente cuantitativos, estamos hablando de la población.

Definición del Diccionario: La política, es la actividad del ciudadano cuando interviene en los asuntos públicos con su opinión, con su voto, o de cualquier otro modo; Arte o traza con que se conduce un asunto o se emplean los medios para alcanzar un fin determinado; orientaciones o directrices que rigen la actuación de una persona o entidad en un asunto o campo determinado.

La re-educación de cada individuo de este mundo es vital para levantar el elemento humano, porque solo individuos responsables (por otros seres humanos como por si mismos) establecerán familias responsables, de ahí cada ser humano en las generaciones por venir, tendrá una Nación nueva, aquella que hemos construido, porque la realidad es que no podemos ver por el futuro de nuestros hijos individualmente si no vemos por el futuro de todos los hijos de la Nación, porque en tanto haya una familia sin acceso a aquello que querríamos para nosotros mismos, como vivienda, alimentos, abrigo, servicios, salud; sus hijos y nuestros hijos pasaran a través de la misma Nación, la misma competencia y lucha por la supervivencia que hemos dejado como nuestro patrimonio para ellos, el patrimonio de la Nación, le pertenece a la Nación, no a un conjunto de individuos que hemos separado de nosotros como “aquellos, los responsables”, eso no es posible, ya que ellos son parte de la misma sociedad y son de hecho el reflejo de aquello que permitimos y aceptamos en nosotros mismos, ya que el requisito para ocupar posiciones de poder es primero que nada el de ser ciudadano de la Nación.

La identificación de la Nación con la población de un Estado, no solo posee un significado histórico, sino que se mantiene vigente. El gobierno “fue fundado en las bases de la democracia”, sin embargo, “¿Esto se ha mantenido vigente en forma alguna?” ¿Alguien te ha preguntado sobre reformas a la educación, el comercio, la industria, etc.? ¿Cuál es la opinión pública? Es aquella aceptada por consenso de los ciudadanos, podríamos decir que tal consenso toma lugar en el ritual cotidiano de ir a ver la televisión a escuchar las noticias, y crear opiniones al respecto de las noticias.

Hay muchas declaraciones sobre la manipulación de los medios de comunicación, sin embargo, el principio de manipulación implica la aceptación implícita de la persona a seguir un determinado patrón mental que es creado en consideración de esta persona de una determinada realidad, lo que hacen los medios es algo un poco distinto.

Los medios de comunicación presentan una información incompleta, lo que muestran son escenas de lo que  quieren que se vea y de lo cual se pretende que se forme una opinión al respecto, y entonces tu opinión esta dirigida y encausada en permiso y aceptación de ser orientada al punto de participación en la política que se requiere que participes, ¿por qué? Porque esa es la única forma en que el Estado pudo nacer, que la nación pudo crecer, orientada hacia “los intereses de la nación” (por favor, lean el post “los ideales del sistema” en este mismo blog, si aún no lo han hecho, links en la parte inferior) la información es cambiada respecto de la noticia, opiniones son creadas e inclusive hasta creencias (si se quiere), y en base a esa desinformación, hacemos un estadio político, una opinión respecto de la Nación y en ello, la Nación apoya o rechaza ciertos intereses, los cuales mantienen en posición aquellos que requieren ser mantenidos en posición para que el orden del sistema continúe, para que el linaje continúe, para que las familias sigan escondidas en sus casas protegiéndose de otros seres humanos ¿por qué otra razón se emplearía tanto tiempo y energía en la manipulación continua y constante de la completa sociedad cuando simplemente podrían tomarlo todo por la fuerza? Porque un individuo no puede construir un imperio solo, necesita de la completa participación social en los mismos ideales, el movimiento de varias personas encausadas por la misma idea, hace posible la creación del sistema.

Ahora, es necesario ver la realidad de “nuestra participación política”, nuestra verdadera ocupación por la “unidad política”, esta representa un porcentaje mínimo respecto de aquello para lo que es verdaderamente ocupada la televisión que es esencialmente entretenimiento, ¿por qué ocurre este “desinterés por la vida”? Nuestras noticias hoy día propagan miedo continuo y constante en las mentes de las personas, y de esto, las consecuencias son el constante temor de nuestra realidad y de otros seres humanos, lo que impide una verdadera sociedad, así que es difícil hablar de un individuo cuando no hay sociedad que lo defina, es difícil hablar de una sociedad cuando no hay individuos interesados en conformarla… ¿Dónde está el gobierno opresor o liberador sino en nosotros mismos?

La población en muchos estados se ha formado a partir de grandes inmigraciones como en Estados Unidos, Argentina, Uruguay y Chile.

–          Cuando hacemos alusión a una comunidad cultural de idioma, religión, sentimiento común de pertenencia, a la misma historia y al mismo origen, hablamos de una Nación.

El diseño, construcción o establecimiento mental de un gran conjunto de seres humanos en un área determinada pertenencia a una Nación depende de tu consideración respecto de otros seres humanos, porque es en base a nuestra participación en cualquier forma de comunicación, lo que nos hace participes, parte de la unidad política, en esto podría decirse que cualquier ser humano es parte de una misma Nación, el mundo.

Todos sabemos de un mismo punto de origen, ya sea por nuestras creencias, ideas o conocimientos, que apuntan en una misma dirección, la historia de la humanidad comienza en un punto donde todos provenimos del mismo origen, la misma historia, pertenecientes a la misma Tierra, un mismo SENTIDO COMÚN (invariablemente de si se utilice o no), una misma religión = el dinero, aunque no la misma comunidad cultural o de idioma, eso es de lo único que se podría hablar que varía de una expresión a otra, siendo ambas la misma vida de hecho, aquí como uno e iguales.

El gobierno se encuentra fundado en la democracia y la democracia son las personas.

Los países pueden bien no encontrarse de acuerdo con una misma unidad política, una misma economía, una misma sociedad. Sin embargo al mismo tiempo, invariablemente de que lo aceptemos o no, el capitalismo es un hecho mundial, que afecta a todos los países invariablemente de su política económica ya que se establecen tratados de entre naciones y se realizan movimientos de compra venta entre las mismas para la obtención de: materiales, conocimientos, alimentos. Y las reglas, las dictaminan las potencias mundiales del capitalismo, en aceptación y permiso del resto de los países que si bien, no ven o tal vez no comprenden su participación mundial, somos todos responsables del orden establecido en esta nación; el mundo y principalmente la familia.

Esto es todo por el momento, visiten los links sobre el Equal Money Capitalism, el DesteniiProcess, para más información sobre como levantarse como ese punto de responsabilidad en nosotros mismos y en este mundo.

Los ideales del sistema

Los intereses de la nación pt1

Los intereses de la Nación pt2

El derecho sobre las cosas propias, (La Corrupción en la Naturaleza Humana)

Posted on Actualizado enn


La Corrupción en la Naturaleza Humana

Este argumento de la teoría de Kelsen lo vimos en mi escuela hace algunos días, y la verdad está de miedo el argumento aun aceptado (y hasta deificado) por los positivistas, digo deificado por la continua y constante alusión que se hace de este filosofo en particular, ya había escrito un artículo anteriormente en el que hago una cita textual de él, pueden encontrarlo con el título: “El impacto de nuestro sistema legal en la Economía de la Sociedad con escasos recursos (Pobreza)” es extenso, sin embargo si realmente están interesados en una visión más completa de lo que ocurre en este mundo respecto de la situación de pobreza, sugiero a todos ir a ese blog. Dejare el link en la parte inferior de este

El derecho a disponer libremente sobre las cosas propias, lo mismo que el derecho a la conducta no prohibida no es otra cosa que el reflejo subalterno de las normas que estatuyen deberes jurídicos.

Puedo disponer libremente sobre mis cosas, pero solo si tengo dinero, si quiero una televisión, necesito dinero,  si quiero el servicio de cable, tengo que pagar por él y para eso necesito dinero, si se descompone la televisión: una de dos opciones = o pago un curso para aprender a reparar televisiones o le pago a la persona que sabe cómo hacerlo

El “derecho a trabajar” se vuelve una necesidad de supervivencia en cuanto a que requiero del dinero para poder pagar por la reparación, el alimento, el abrigo, la casa, “tengo que pagar por mis derechos fundamentales”.

La lucha por los Derechos Humanos no son otra cosa sino la lucha por el dinero –Marlen Vargas del Razo-

Hobbes: La ley fundamental es aquella cuya abolición traería consigo la ruina del cuerpo social y provocaría una anarquía completa. La individualidad, la abolición de la individualidad sería el fin del sistema como lo conocemos porque en tanto se desconsidere a otro ser humano en búsqueda del propio beneficio, no habrá consideración de otros para con uno mismo así como no ha habido consideración de uno para con otros, en ello cada quien se encarga de “sus problemas, sus cosas y la vida puede seguir”.

Art. 39 Constitucional: La Soberanía Nacional reside esencial y originalmente en el pueblo. Todo poder dimana del pueblo y se instituye para beneplácito de este. El pueblo tiene en todo tiempo el inalienable derecho de alterar o modificar la forma de su gobierno.

Entonces tengo derecho a la conducta no prohibida en tanto cumpla con mis deberes con el estado y otros seres humanos ¿Puedes estar cumpliendo con tus deberes si estas ocupado con tu supervivencia? ¿Por qué existe la corrupción? ¿Por qué se tolera la individualidad y la desconsideración de otros seres humanos donde uno tiene la responsabilidad y el deber para con otros, diciendo que “simplemente no somos iguales” porque esa persona no tiene el título, o las habilidades, o el dinero, o las cosas, o la personalidad que yo tengo y entonces llamo descaradamente “iguales” a las personas que se encuentran en las mismas condiciones que yo porque juntos podemos justificar el abuso de este mundo en tanto nuestra igualdad se pueda ver reflejada en nuestros recursos?

La respuesta a todas esas preguntas y la solución a todas ellas es el dinero. Puedo cumplir (siempre) con la conducta permitida si tengo dinero, puedo cumplir con mis deberes, si tengo dinero, puedo tener derecho a “la libertad” si tengo dinero, puedo ejercer mi derecho de “decidir sobre que producto comprar” solo si tengo dinero; es interesante, no hay un solo trabajo en este mundo en el que no abuses de otra persona, en el que no compitas con otra persona, en el que no dañes a otra persona, en el que no hagas sufrir y preocuparse a otra persona por su supervivencia.

La vergüenza como se ha establecido con respecto a este sistema, que no es la vergüenza que uno experimenta al ser honesto con uno mismo, sino la vergüenza consuetudinaria del complejo social; es fascinante en su diseño porque además de las consecuencias que acarrea en tu consciencia, te lleva a un estado de silencio, a alejarte de ver lo que realmente estas haciendo, es simplemente tanta que deliberadamente la escondemos de nosotros mismos en juicios que proyectamos hacia otras personas basados en aquello que no nos gusta ver de nosotros mismos, porque en tanto alguien más lo esté haciendo, se justifica la omisión de la responsabilidad, se justifica la negligencia de nuestro actuar, se justifica la existencia de un “Estado superior existente en la consciencia y simplemente lo llamamos Nación” en tanto podamos culpar al Dios Gobierno, por su corrupción y sus pecados, justificaremos las “pequeñas cosas, y los pequeños detalles” que constituyen colectivamente el reflejo de nuestra enfermedad = la individualidad

El derecho subjetivo se agota en el establecimiento del deber jurídico de otro de abstenerse de toda intervención en “mis cosas” las cuales se hacen mías precisamente en virtud de ese deber;  jurídicamente aparece un derecho frente a las cosas, un derecho de usar, abusar, etc., pero cuando se afirma que yo tengo derecho a respirar, a trabajar, a pasear, etc., no quiere decir sino que no hay y no existe ninguna norma jurídica que me obligue a lo contrario.

¿Qué hay de un sistema en el que se te pueden quitar tus cosas a través de la deuda? Te obligo o a devolverlas o a venderlas, entonces me quedo con tu dinero, tus cosas (por las que de todas formas tienes que pagar un impuesto proporcional), y esencialmente tu vida en lo que terminas de pagar la deuda; la libertad depende de la cantidad de dinero que tengas, si tienes un buen trabajo (esto tomando en consideración todas las condiciones como educación, contactos, dinero que inviertes en tu presentación personal, etc.) entonces puedes considerar el derecho de llamar a ciertas cosas “tus cosas”.

Ciertamente mi derecho a trabajar también tengo que pagarlo, con mi educación, mi tiempo, y es decir, no faltara la persona que diga “pero yo pienso que el trabajo lo puede hacer todo aquel que se encuentre motivado a hacerlo, y cualquier trabajo es digno”. COOL, Quiero un puesto en la presidencia de la empresa Pemex, ¿Qué onda, me lo dan?… ¿No? Pero tengo la disposición de trabajar, y es decir, quiero un trabajo digno, quiero el sueldo de $120.000.00 Ciento veinte mil pesos (equivalente al de un magistrado), me parece algo muy digno…muy humano a comparación del sueldo de un empleado de mantenimiento de limpieza que “sobrevive un mes” con el salario mínimo de $2.000.00 Dos mil pesos, suficiente para pagar los impuestos de la luz, el agua, la comida, la educación de los tres hijos en casa porque pues, se les rompió el condón y ya sabes, cosas que cuando nos pasan a los que tenemos dinero, pues es como “un pequeño desperfecto” en el cual nos podemos estabilizar y pues salimos adelante, ¿cómo lo logran ellos? La corrupción no es coincidencia es nuestra creación.

“Date cuenta que la pobreza existe porque lo que es dado libremente por el planeta ha sido comercializado y colocado bajo control sin el acceso LIBRE e igual, causando condiciones donde la caridad se organiza como agradecimiento engañoso, para que los ricos puedan compartir un poco de su codicia y justificar por qué son ricos” –Bernard Poolman


Posted on Actualizado enn

La Importancia de la comunicación efectiva

Me gustaría empezar esta breve comunicación desde su origen, el “silencio”; donde el orden es la base para el origen de todo movimiento como las palabras, ya que el fin de estas se encuentra en el orden de las palabras para que el mensaje pueda ser comprendido y escuchado, implica que ese silencio también exista en el oyente para que las palabras puedan pasar a través del oyente; la armonio es la base de todo el sonido y si este no tiene armonio simplemente no puede ser escuchado o comprendido con claridad lo cual da pie a interpretaciones que pueden variar dependiendo del contexto y de la persona lo cual implica que el mensaje por si mismo no fue claro y por consecuencia confusión. Por citar un ejemplo, hace poco que charlaba con un maestro comentándole lo frustrado que me encontraba por haber dejado de hacer las cosas que me gustaba y disfrutaba a cambio de una causa, una causa correcta por defender, una causa justa por defender, sin embargo añadí, que mi preocupación no se encontraba relacionada con esta causa, sino que mi preocupación y temor de hecho existen solo como ideas, que estas ideas son de hecho mi dolor de cabeza, donde de hecho deje de hacer lo que mas disfrutaba por dedicarme a construir una idea de mi mismo, una idea como este dolor en mi cabeza, donde estoy constantemente preocupado por cumplir y donde no puedo esperar para ver esto terminado y el me respondió que lo mas importante es lo que uno hace por si mismo para realizar lo que quiere ver realizado y que la forma en que realiza su quehacer día tras día por si mismo, lo cual ahora me hace preguntarme ¿es que la comunicación es hecha por uno mismo para uno mismo en el fin de compartirse?¿o es que estaba esperando ser comprendido cuando en realidad yo no me he dado la oportunidad de comprenderme a mi mismo?¿soy el significado de mis palabras y yo creo mi mundo en cada cosa cuanto defino y hago en cada palabra que hablo y expreso en y como yo?

La forma en que se ha abusado la comunicación y las palabras con fines manipulativos no tiene alcance en el abuso que de hecho ha venido a crear dentro de todas y cada una de las áreas de la ciencia y en todas y cada una de las personas de este mundo, vivimos de acuerdo a esas palabras y me pregunto ¿Cuántas veces estas palabras son de hecho nosotros? ¿Cuántas veces estas palabras son de hecho nuestra expresión y son un compromiso que será cumplido y expresado como nosotros? Yo no veo la Comunicación como algo que deba ser entendido sino expresado desde uno mismo, cuando las palabras son de hecho una e iguales a nuestras acciones y de hecho denotan lo que somos en verdad en y como las palabras, estas no siempre son de hecho comprendidas por todos los oyentes, en realidad estas llegan a ser consideradas locura, o peor aun…“religión”, porque no siempre estas palabras son los que nos gustaría que fueran y lo único que uno muestra con reacciones energéticas a las palabras, es no mas que el abuso a si mismo, es no mas que el abuso que se ha permitido a las palabras.

¿Las palabras como una expresión? ¿Cuándo las palabras provienen de uno mismo? Como he dicho, una reacción hacia una palabra denota una carga energética emocional, una carga energética emocional evidencia deshonestidad, deshonestidad es engaño y es manipulación, ¿entonces que son las palabras expresadas como uno mismo? Aquellas que son lo que ha sido vivido y aplicado, lo que ha sido vivido y comprendido en y como el quehacer que nos lleva a la comprensión de lo que implica de hecho vivir.

¿Qué es la vida entonces? La vida no es solo lo que hagas de esta ¿Cómo podrías llamar vida al abuso que es permitido y aceptado en este mundo con las palabras que hemos abusado en justificaciones y excusas? ¿Podrías decir que es valido esperar que las personas acepten tu pereza, tu desidia, tu irresponsabilidad porque es lo que aparentemente comprendes?¿Podrías decir que las personas deben comprender tu interés personal solo porque así lo prefieres? Si has respondido a cualquiera de estas preguntas que si entonces debes saber que estas en un verdadero problema ya que en realidad, jamás has de hecho vivido tus palabras, solo has vivido tus justificaciones, tus excusas, tu irresponsabilidad, tu desidia, tu pereza, tu desconsideración por otra persona y debes saber que es inaceptable; así es, no es aceptable negarle la mano a la persona que esta sufriendo abuso solo porque te repites a ti mismo en tuis pensamientos que “no es tu problema” intentando convencerte de que lo que dices es verdad cuando lo que de hecho ves es que esta persona esta siendo abusada, lo que ves es el sufrimiento y debo añadir que es fascinante que uno pueda ver el sufrimiento sin necesidad de haberlo experimentado, eso es sentido común, el sentido común que nos hace verdaderamente humanos, el sentido que compartimos no en una apariencia física o en un pensamiento que son solo dependientes de un código mental que es interpretado por nuestra mente, sino el sentido que de hecho existe en y como el respiro en y como lo físico.

Esto obviamente hace a uno preguntarse ¿es entonces que la vida también implica la dignidad de esta? Depende, solo la vida que estés dispuesto a vivir es la vida que querrías para todos por igual incondicionalmente si estos tienen o no “el valor de la comunicación” que esperarías comprender, ya que desafortunadamente la comunicación ha venido a crear mas separación que unión e igualdad entre las personas, donde la cantidad de dinero que tengas o tu apariencia física delimitan lo que comprendes y vives como tu existencia dentro de tu consideración o desconsideración de lo que existe aquí. La desconsideración de 2 billones de personas muriendo de hambre ciertamente es el reflejo de una comunicación carente de cuerpo, de mensaje y en general, de COMUNICACIÓN.

¿Cuál es la importancia de una comunicación efectiva en el ámbito personal y laboral? Depende, ¿Cuál es la vida que estas dispuesto a vivir? Porque es lo que reflejan tus palabras, ¿Eres tu quien se expresa o expresas una personalidad que usas abusando las palabras para obtener lo que quieres? Debo reconocer que quería disciplina para mi, que he querido que esa disciplina fuera yo para alcanzar algo que fuese superior a mi, en lugar de darme a mi mismo la oportunidad de expresarme a mi mismo como lo que soy en verdad, como las palabras que de hecho decido vivir, porque soy yo quien ve y se da cuenta que lo que vivo y lo que aplico no depende de llegar a algo a través del perdón, sino que me permito ser yo en y como el perdón, es decir, el perdón solo destapa lo que soy en verdad, no en lo que me estoy convirtiendo o en lo que debería aparentemente convertirme, soy las palabras, soy lo que soy, y lo que soy es lo que reflejan mis palabras, es lo que comunico con mis palabras. Esto no es amor, Esto es comunicación, ESTO ES IGUALDAD!!!!

The Image and Likeness of God

Posted on Actualizado enn

Within the Mathematics, I realized a fascinating point, I wasn´t able understand what Mathematics really are, therefore I tried to give it a way to understand them as myself, by placing them as the actual representation of movement that one makes in order to attain the specific result that is determined for “what is neccesary to be done until is done” by REMOVING THE POINT WHERE FREE WILL APPARENTLY EXISTS.

Ask yourself: ¿WHAT IS BEST FOR ALL? the equalization of everything as Self within the movement to “Perfection”

As you are and become the point of trust and value within yourself you actually become the value of Y as potential and X as direction, the man is X,Y chromosomes and the female is XX, but the female and the male are actually one and equal from the perspective that the chromosome Y is actually the result of the depletion of the chromosome X, that is in fact what we know as the Y

Then what you can actually see within these mathematical equations is that it gives an specific outcome accordingly to the application of this values X and Y within the equation that you apply as yourself being the value X and Y, therefore you have this diverse multiple points as each and every number in the specific placement that you can define as the situation within the equation that is the point that you are facing in order to attain the result that will equalize the equation as the order of the numbers that is the order of your words and your definitions and in every single number that represents the placement of a definition of something, a phrase or a word, for each point that is able to be related in the X and Y values that is yourself

In that you can see a pattern within your words, your thoughts, each and every single personality that is based and form with words placed in an specific way to form your personality in each and every moment, and when you look at the exponential numbers, is like the addition of a sound frequency (voice tonality and ideas that you use and speak about) that gives you like the “adding of ideas to an specific value X,Y” and from that you can see another point that is for example the cultural ideas in your society, morality, good and bad, etc…, the specific order of thoughts, feelings and emotions that you will order within your mind will equate yourself to the “accepted pattern personality that is expected from you to be and become”, from that this will be placed now under a constitution that will give rules and limitations to your personality so that it just develop itself to a certain specific point, that is and will be the result of a country that is in fact the reflection of a person ruled and directed by their laws that is the acceptances and allowances of all your states of personality and every single person representing the diverse thoughts and memories of who you are, apparently that represent at the same time the acceptance and allowance of yourself to remain within the actual experience of yourself as that “system” ruled and moving itself within the principle and basis of that equations, (PHI VALUE, FIBONACCI SEQUENCE) as the repetition of itself as the past repeating itself over and over again, same patterns, same history over and over again

If you look at the theory of Einstein: the universe formed by cords vibrating to an specific frequency that is in fact the sound frequency of the physical giving sound and movement to what you see as the picture reality and this as the result of the vibration and movement of the molecules in an specific pattern and this at the same time determined by the density of every single quimical substance that has its placement determined at the same time accordingly to a nomenclature and a value as X and Y values within the equation of the existence that is ourselves, being the mathematical equations the result of the movement of ourselves within an specific situation that establish, “A MAP” (the map of yourself)

The circle is the starting point of each and every single letter of the ABC(why the circle? it represents: expansion, expression, perfection), if you place your hands, forming a circle and from that starting point you move your thumbs until you form something similar like a Heart, you will see the A, and then if you form 2 circles you will have the B, and from that movements you can do every single letter, every single number, every single form, and pattern stretching the circle as the geometrical movements that forms a pattern, this geometrical patterns are the result of a frequency that you speak through words, the A sounds like an A because if you speak the letter A, you will feel that your throat vibrate accordingly to that sound and is like the circle that is your throat stretching itself to form an A.

We are the image and likeness of God as the reflection of what we really within this physical body formed by molecules moving accordingly to the frequency that is the sound expression of yourself, linking all those molecules in a specific mathematical equation that is yourself; the universe at the same time is Space, many many space, the 99% of it is space, but the mathematical equation is only giving the “result, the pattern” of your map that looks like coordinates and angles that represent the specific point that is occupied by the manifested atom, molecule, etc., around the real “thing” existing within the space, THAT IS NOT EMPTY BUT FULL OF ITSELF, as Self.

The idea of a God exist as words, as memory, but God at the same time is defined accordingly to judgments and ideas within your head forming the pattern “the spirit within yourself”, and if you look at the real purpose of God, like any other person when you believe that you have done something wrong, you have to “ask for forgiveness”, the real purpose of the God that you have “offended” by your sins that were given to you in the first place, lol, is to FORGIVE YOURSELF, therefore, the words that you speak as the actual words of the image and likeness of God become equal and one to the forgiveness that is in fact, SELF-Forgiveness, as the authority that you become when you take responsibility for yourself as the authority equal and one with God to forgive yourself.

The breath is in fact the reflection of a little Big Bang within yourself, because, everything of yourself, as the “decision, movement, and determination within the motivation to live, to exist, to be here”, what was in the beginning of the Universe? what has been always been here, Ourselves as the space, as infinite and undefined expression that is self.

Find more in