People in general are moved by desires and react through sensations – of pleasure or rejection, anger, despair… etc. – in essence: each one moves towards the pleasure they long for and reacts with “pleasure” or in a good way when they obtain it, and reacts “badly” – or with anger and rejection – when he does not get what he wants – towards whoever or those he considers “preventing” him from getting what he wants.
In each person, both desires and the way of seeking to obtain them develop in the most diverse ways. At first in a somewhat “reduced” and “controlled” “family” circle – even in “extreme” cases, the first environment is more “controlled” compared to the “expanded” environment that a person finds when surviving and arriving at some “adult” age.
This determines our relationships, the “decisions” we make, our personality and the “personalities” we “follow” or “despise” and the automatic calculations we make when relating to others – the instinctive way of measuring “hierarchies” or positions and knowing from whom we can “extract” the image of ourselves that we are looking for – “affiliations” and “phobias”.
In this way, a person “learns” to “measure” certain qualities around him and how to “accommodate” and fit into it and usually expands into various circles where he compensates for his desires – for example, someone humiliates himself before another person to obtain a salary, but at “home” or a weekend club you meet someone who cannot “defend himself” or have treated them a certain way and they or he did not “respond” and it compensates your search for “power” and “dignity” treating him in a certain way – perhaps “humiliating”, perhaps “condescending”.
Obviously, all types of exchange between people are evolving and this means conflicts. Let’s say that a person somehow “exploits” another to obtain from him a feeling of “importance” by treating him in a certain way and he can do it through a “payment” or a position or narrative that makes the other not “respond” to him in the same terms. Can this happen “forever”? No, that is why there are several circles to which a person has access and their desires and circumstances develop and at some point they will “modify” their attitude, the other party is used to it and already considers it a “right” to “exploit” the other and will “respond” and a conflict will arise that will “modify” that exchange.
In reality, there will not be a “victor” and a “winner”, but rather a “rearrangement” – another type of exchange – always evolving.
It happens with all exchanges at all scales. Armed revolutions are this type of mechanism, only between “strata” of societies. And from that process, laws and ways of applying them have emerged so that people can survive and “defend” from each other using tools other than brute force. Naturally, after an explosion of violence and suffering, people “instinctively” understand that we need other motivations and tools – such as lawsuits and public shame – to live together in a certain way without each one “forcing” the others to respond “blow by blow” or “exploitation for exploitation” – after a war, in a certain way everyone understands that even by “killing” the other, the behaviours that condemn us to a life of constant “struggle” do not “disappear.”
A body of laws and a certain way of enforcing them is the basis of any society and determines what type of society it is – if compliance is “poor” the society will have deficiencies and problems of violence that will become increasingly intolerable and where its members will not realise the consequences of “getting their way” until an explosion, and maybe not even then.
A society where the majority of its members only restrict or modify their inclinations through “physical pain or loss” will be a society by definition condemned to explosions of “violence” – internal wars such as “drug trafficking” or high “criminality” outbreaks in cities…etc.
But even in the more developed legislations and police apparatuses and societies – let’s say the Western ones – it could be said that everything actually develops in an “unconscious” way.
We are always faced with the need to relate to others and make decisions and etc. But at its root, does anyone know exactly where our desires come from and where they are headed and what they will be like in the future?
Furthermore, does anyone know exactly where an individual’s experiences or degree of development place them within the human network?
Even in places considered developed you can see people who occupy “high” positions and have managed to be an “important” or “accepted” part of a society and whose reactions seem “basic”: “tantrums” at not getting what they want-with the same facial expressions and “screams” and justifications of someone who is “five years old” who “cries” until his “mom” gives him what he wants – and yet many are respected and listened to. In a crisis it would be a disaster as we have already seen in wars, but for a few decades, “it works.”
There are entire corporations based on the inclination that people have towards defaming behind backs and assigning themselves “achievements” or positions that perhaps do not belong to them from those whom they can “deceive” or calculate that they will not respond or cannot respond to them. And we have already witnessed how in a crisis when information should seek to be “useful”, this attitude is disastrous and stupid – but just about two years later, we have already “forgotten” it and the “networks” continue to “thrive”, “joyfully” gossiping and throwing shite.
It seems like a process in which each and every person would acquire experiences in which they will reveal the impulses that truly move us to their roots: each one will know that they must respond to the first “tantrum” directed towards them because if not it will grow in intensity, perhaps even forcing him to physically defend himself. Everyone will know that most people only close their mouths behind their backs and in the presence of others if they slam it shut – and there are cases in which that doesn’t work either, and there are lawsuits and public shame – but to “survive” ” you have to “react”.
We can continue with the experiences and details of the way in which people operate in all their ramifications and “tricks” and “drama”… until we reach an extreme where you prefer not to respond, “not decide”… even thinking about “not surviving” in the face of the most “outrageous” revelation: the fact that you can’t even be outraged. What you see around you is acting on “automatic” – and you do not have to be “present” to “hear” the shouts and insults, anger, contempt… and all the expressions of dissatisfaction that the world utters on “automatic” from morning to night – is the “background noise” of this “life”…
But there is something else: what you “see” around you is the root that makes you act… -yourself – and it is where all the “nausea” you feel sometimes comes from.
To address not the “staging” but towards what truly “directs”. With the need to “reveal” what His purpose is.
All teaching mechanisms are based on experiences that are transmitted in some way. This revelation has already been rehearsed in all its variants and what follows after it has already been exhaustively explored.
The system we are in is such that one person potentially contains everything that exists, and exchanges between “a few” people can “explore” all possible types of exchange – if they are directed or evolving towards the purpose.
It is the root of all forms of “education” that we know. It is the education that we must reveal along with the mechanism that truly “moves” us.
Along with those who – really – discovered it.
Snakeeskin 