Are You Voluntarily Reducing Yourself?

Are you voluntarily reducing yourself?

Are YOU making yourself less than you actually are?

If you know something..you know it.
If you feel something…it is so.

In that moment it is irrelevant “how” you know/feel it, or “from what/which” source, “who else” does it and “what will they think”.

All of this is irrelevant, self-belittling, and requiring disciplining, ‘mind clutter’. ūüėČ It contradicts your inner wisdom, and is only programming absorbed since your birth, from the maintained and current ignorance around you.

It was seen as necessary to ridicule and ignore, to remove or reduce, our natural instincts and intuition, simply because they could not be understood within the ignorance of English.

As there was no means to understand these concepts when establishing society, they needed to be over-ruled, and the handy “nothing exists unless there is a tool by which it can be measured,” proclamation made in Victorian times, to quickly allow focus to be on economic development, served this purpose.

Of course they, and it, were WRONG, and your feelings and knowings are RIGHT for you, and have been all along. ūüôā

War And Peace? Isn’t It War OR Peace?

Assalamu alaikum and Shalom to all of us in the middle east area!

I saw another interesting documentary on events happening in your part of the world. ūüôā

Amazing beings kept ignorant to market weaponry is all I see, whenever I observe warring places now.
People maintained in their ignorance, to create a continued market for weapons.

Also, ridiculous borders that were never designed to work, but designed to allow continued success at further procurement, to add only to economic progress, under the guise of being helpful.

And don’t we all just want respect? ¬† It is a natural part of our design and our human need…of course we do.

Battles are never with each other, but only inside ourselves.

The only ‘battle’ we ever have is our own Self realization.
A completely internal ‘battle’ with our own inner realization of ourselves.

And then it is the realization and acceptance of this fact, that enables the spreading of real peace.
Weaponry only creates the need for weaponry. 

Are we brave enough?

Brave enough to realize and accept that all this fighting has been in ignorance?

And don’t many of us who haven’t compulsory military service, go into armies/war partly attracted by a need for courage, camaraderie, strengthening of sexually energy from segregation, and to do something for our country?
Leaving aside for the moment the attraction of having your children educated, a steady paycheck, guaranteed career advancement, respect gained from a ‘title’, all of which were an enormous draw card for developing Britain. ¬†My own British family all took this route.
Can you see how we were made dependent upon continued military actions being made necessary?

All of us wherever we are?  Our current societies DEPEND upon military involvement.

It takes much greater courage, camaraderie and all the above;) to stand on the edge of the unknown….

It is totally time we do something different, so we can do something appropriate!

We have been doing the same stupid thing for centuries, even though we have advanced our knowings/education/research in all other matters!
Can I remind you again that it is chimpanzees that need to have warring situations, as they do not have language? ¬†ūüėČ

We can now even speak the same language as the people we are in a confrontation with! ūüėÄ It is crazy not to just talk it out! ūüėÄ

No matter what your beliefs or lifestyle, if you are picking up, or holding an invention, created to harm another, all you are reduced to being IS A PAWN ON A CHESS GAME!

I know…..let’s play a better game that suits our design, and allows us to be the amazing creative beings we are!

Blessings ūüôā

What’s Up With The Economy?

  • 1. ‘Economy’ defined
  • 2. How did it start?
  • 3. The Four Big ¬†Mistakes made with money
  • 4. A historical overview in brief.
  • 5. Problems with perspective.
  • 6. Our solution- seeking creativity!
  • 7. No need to fear.

“Economy” is an invisible noun.¬† In language, when we find a noun that¬†is not a place, person or object, but the name of something invisible, we are made aware that it is a creative construct of human imagination.

 The economy is a fabulous example for an earlier writing, of our own creativity getting the better of us.  Definitely also an example of where we need to reign it in, and make the necessary adjustments to our own invention with our wiser and wider perspective.

A reminder of vocabulary, that¬† ‘nouns’ are places, people and things, and ‘proper nouns’ are names of these.

Making people reliant and subservient to money is something that was done historically by force.  It is something that was not planned in the long-term, with the long-term in mind, or with a picture of what the long-term may become.  It was done in a narrow and focussed way, in a way that would build a perceived strength of an individual country.  It was done without consideration of any consequences.

The largest sums/gold were mainly for exchange of arms.

To make people dependent on earning an income, they were forcibly evicted from their own homes and lands, unless they began to pay ‘taxes’ to the¬†‘crown’ or declared head of state/ruler,¬†equivalent to our ‘rent’ and ‘rates’ words used today.

Mistakes with the Invention we call money.

1. the first mistake made with the invention called money or currency, is that it was given no use-be date.¬† I consider it a brilliant idea, to have a convenient form of exchange or trade, if you did not want my oranges, or I your beans.¬† Then to be able to exchange this ‘token’ for goods, and with a use by date clearly indicated.

2. the second mistake¬†¬†made with money was when it was able to make its own money.¬† When it was given ‘interest’ making ability. This idea was a solution as it was wanted by¬†others – who didn’t ‘own it’ to be used, and to attract more others to let them use it also.

3. the third mistake¬† made with money, was when things were ‘floated’ and sold off or privatized.¬† As money was¬†wanted and needed even more so to be made available.

4. the fourth mistake made with money but linked to no. 3, is that money now makes money faster that a human can.

The economy was not designed  so that it could last as it is, and quite simply, it cannot.  It was designed without any forethought to consequence.   

It was designed and implemented by men, fully focussed on a project, and without an ability to ascertain consequence.  This is something someone in the form Man cannot actually do so well as  a Woman, and he is not designed to.   Man is the problem solver in the immediate here and now.  

Determining consequence is way easier for a woman to do, as her form enables her this. (See my series of writings on Men & Women Explained*.)

In some other cultures, such as Native American Indian tribes, those in the form of Woman decided/voted after the men, as it was considered that their job was to foresee and determine for the future generations.  

At this time historically, no women were involved in any of the decision processes in our predominantly English ruled society.  Or if there were, they were doing so more as a what I call a female- man*, or a woman figure-head only.

There was not the understanding of ourselves,as Human Beings and our abilities, as there is available today.  It was a society ruling and living in fear and suspicion and mistrust.  It was not a society capable of determining what was best all-round for all individuals and the organism earth as a whole.

There¬†was intention to take in the larger picture, and an awareness that it was a good idea, but it was not humanly possible for these men to do.¬† The ‘largest’ picture they were able to comprehend, was that of the state – their own ‘state’.¬† Legislation by these men clearly indicates they wished for this , as representative of the very largest consideration possible to these people.¬† At this time in history, it was still unimaginable what the scale of the world was and if it was flat or another shape altogether.

The way I see it, bringing the largest perspective into it, that is easier for me in my form as a Woman, and with my knowledge of all that we are as Humans, I say let’s declare there is a problem, so that we can involve our solution-seeking creativity to sort it out. ¬†While we are still fiddling around and trying to pretend to “balance” it, we can’t come to a real and proper solution.

There is nothing that we cannot do, to bring about a solution to something that came about, as a result of our own creativity.

To Be Human Is To Create.  It is where we are at our absolute best.  

As many of us already know, we attract things to us, as the vibrational energy beings that we are. ¬†Wealth and abundance are not limited to our money invention, and nor is a state of lack. ¬†Having the faith that we will attract to us, that which resonates with us, and keeping ourselves emotionally and energetically in good health, will see us through any perceived challenging time. ¬†It is only ignorance (without knowledge) that has some people assume ¬†the human invention ‘money’ is the only wealth there is!

¬†LET’S ¬†ENABLE ¬†OURSELVES ¬†TO ¬†USE ¬†OUR ¬†SOLUTION-SEEKING CREATIVITY. ¬†LET’S ¬†NAME ¬†THE ¬†PROBLEM ¬†TO ¬†BE ¬†SOLVED! ¬†: )

So How Did The Racism Concept Start? What Is It?

¬†In this writing I concentrate on British historical reasoning mostly, but¬† other countries and language groups have been involved in ‘racist’ perception and activities.¬†¬† Europe was very interconnected at this time¬†by a want for new lands and almost all are ‘cold country creativity’ creative-solutions, or done to out-do the British, so British historical focus is¬† applicable.

There was never any such thing as ‘Race’ or ‘Human Race’, this was just a new overused word that year in Victorian vocabulary deficient English.¬†Seriously.

The only race that was really on was the race for ‘new’ lands, albeit someone else’s;) between Britain and France mostly, as the solution-seeking creativity to assist poverty, misery, and ill-health problems. And it was on this desperate race, the word ‘race’ was then always referred to. : )

‘Race’ was a simplistic way of classifying human beings into four groups: ‘Caucasian’, ‘Negroid’, ‘Mongoloid’ and ‘Asian’, according to physical appearance.¬†

There are many variations within a ‘Race’,¬†and¬† I find that we are ‘Breeds’ rather than a race of four.¬†¬† Breeds¬†that are determined largely by language groups.

Certainly there are greater¬†physical similarities between humans breeds found within those¬†classification categories called ‘Race’, but on its own ‘Race’ is not adequate or sufficient.

To expand upon and improve the current classification order with Human Beings /Home Sapiens, I suggest in addition to the standard:

Kingdom; Phylum; Class; Order; Family; Genus; Species¬† we¬†add: Breed; Language.¬†¬†( I don’t feel it even necessary to include ‘race’¬† though it could fit between ‘species’ and ‘breed’.)

When I meet someone I like to know their blood lines (heritage) on both side and their ‘home’ language.¬†¬†¬†I¬†find this the most helpful information to know more of¬†someone,¬†and it has proven reliable and consistent.

I have known, dated or befriended, all races and many breeds of humans.  We Humans bond because of our vocabulary, not our language.   We are bonded by our energetic resonance, that governs our word choice Рor vocabulary Рwithin a language.  Just because two people speak the same language, this does not, at all, mean they use the same vocabulary.

I do not think a greater effort of classifying Human Beings was seriously entered into, as the motivation¬†for it, came from fear and insecurity, rather than a position of ‘loving curiosity’.;)¬†

Classification was carried out with the intent to make possible, the justification for theft, of land, inhabited by people already.  

An outcome was desired, and then a reality contrived to make it possible.  People were found to be not worthy of consideration, because of their appearance.

Historically and traditionally, the British used ridicule or derogatory language words to ‘bring down’ those they feared, or felt threatened by.

It is a known strategy also within the military.   It has been demonstrated that a ridiculing, rather than a respectful or honourable way of treating people, leads to a more successful occupation or victory.

We know now in science, how it is important to be impartial when conducting studies.  My own scientific background taught me that studies undertaken objectively and with no attachment to the result, makes for the better , more reliable, and trustworthy result.

The concept of ‘Race’ to describe other breeds of humans came about from a need, not an objective observation.

The use of judgement words, such as “superior” and “inferior”, that are¬†‘solution- seeking creations’, demonstrate a very strong attachment to the¬†result.

Definitely the ‘Race’ concept was brought into popularity at a time when another ‘race’ was on, the race to take over the rest of the lands on earth.¬†

To get the land that became ‘Australia’, Britain was in a competitive race by sea¬†with France in the 18th century, which Britain ‘won’.¬†

Was it with such a fixed determination, that the word ‘race’ was so impressed into the minds of these folk,¬†that they used the word¬†‘race’ here also?;)¬† Quite possibly.¬†¬†¬†

Maybe it was even a ‘slip of the tongue’ and they were referring¬†to the ‘race’ to obtain lands in competition with another language group/breed.¬†¬†Maybe it was from the British like, to ‘make life easier for yourself’, to use this new, common and frequently used word, ‘race’, to help name the other Peoples that had been discovered.

Historically, the English have always been, very fixated on physical appearance, how things look, and how things ‘appear to be’.

We must remember the “Might Is Right” British jargon of the time, to validate a situation taken by force.¬† We know now, that it isn’t necessarily right at all, or clever to think so.

Using the invader’s common strategy of ridicule, it would be far easier, and upon seeing the advantage¬†– coming quite naturally to them also, given their propensity for this, and also of ‘complaining’ – to discredit¬†an entire populus, than to do it one at a time.

Much easier to dis-empower a race of people, than to deal with these strapping, stronger, physically in better shape, ‘Equal Men’ one at a time!;)

How clever to then be able to make use of these people as a free¬†workforce, at a time when Britain was in such economic uncertainty.¬† They justified slavery, removing people to free up their land, then forced them to work¬†, all the while justifying how it was for “their own good to be fed and given a place to live out their days.”

With their academic ‘superiority’, British upper classes stated¬†that these native people were dying out anyway (argument used in Australia)¬†so it was only a matter of time before the land was available.

The English language is much more ‘word thick’ today than in the 18th century, and quite likely this is as complex a thinking process that occurred:

“Oooh golly…LOOK!!!.¬† Look at his spear… and he’s not wearing any clothes…”

Then:¬† “Spear?¬† No gun?¬†¬† Not very smart.¬†¬† He’s not wearing any clothes….must be a lesser man than we.”

This sight would have been an enormous shock, and enormously threatening.  Familiarity at this time was to react from a place of fear, as the Britain they had left behind was a cold, poverty-stricken, gruelling place of ill-health and misery. 

It would have been overwhelming for them to see such a healthy, naked man so comfortable in his own skin, with such blatant sexual acceptance, when they were not allowed to mention their own body parts in polite company.;)   

A more ‘conscious’¬†(and intelligent?;)) ¬†group, given the same sight may have gone “Wow, how beautiful..look at their comfort with themselves and natural living skills.¬† What fine specimens and how fortunate to be able to live so freely in such a climate…”

Many of the English words to describe other people of differing breeds and origins have been banned popularly as they were found Internationally, to be derogatory, insulting and nonsensical to use.   (The energetic injury we get from words I go into in another writing.)

My mother was Caucasian, the Race that classified the others, putting itself at the top.

At five years old I knew from my mother, that I was only half English, and that I was¬†half Caucasian,¬† and half Mongoloid race.”¬†¬† The tone of voice she used was derogatory, and in judgement.

She would look me over with narrowed eyes telling me my eyes were “too Chinesey”, my backside and face shape “too negro”, my head shape “too asian”.¬† She insinuated I was of lesser worth, because I had these ‘throwback’ characteristics.

Consequently I bonded with the world;) and I drew strength from all¬†Peoples¬†experiencing oppression, to add to my fairy tale and Dicken’s¬†characters.¬† I considered myself an Albino Negro and Nelson Mandela became my hero.;)

¬†My mother said¬† “the only thing you have going for you is the hair on your head”¬† referring to my blonde hair, while the rest of me she considered to be an evolutionary slip-up as I did not meet her specifics.

As we know more, other words have been introduced¬† in our categorising, such as¬†‘hispanic’, and we are such a mixture now, we naturally use other words as descriptions such as African-American.¬†

But still this is a physical description, without reference to language spoken.¬† I¬† describe myself as Anglo-Hungarian-Australian, which is far more useful than just ‘Australian’,¬†¬†in determining who I might be.;)

As breeds of humans Рas with breeds of dogs Рwe may have a propensity /natural aptitude/tendency, not occurring in other breeds of us,

 but,   

I find that starsigns/ natal data, and language group/home language spoken, far more helpful in determining someone than their ‘race’.

“Love the skin you ‘re in!”¬†¬†¬†Absolutely, and also love your home language!¬† : )

My comments on the ‘Race / Intelligence’ debate on TV.

I was at first extremely surprised that this topic could still be warranted TV show coverage, than realised “Of course!”

None of what I am sharing here is common enough knowledge yet, as there simply has been no further investigation into ourselves, to bring light to this matter for popular interest! 

I find the more complex a ‘home’ language, the more intelligent the people.¬†

Language, distinguishes us¬†as human beings, then the opposable thumb.¬† It is language ability that makes some humans more intelligent than others, not the concept of ‘race.’¬†

The more languages we know the smarter we get.  The more words we know, the larger capacity that we contain within. 

As it is our very intent at thought, that creates the neuron synaptical pathways within our brain, the more we learn, the larger a framework Рor word map  or shelving unit for storage;) Р we create inside ourselves.

Our vocabulary becomes the roots of our created reality tree. : )

The more languages we know, we effectively magnify our total neuron capacity.¬† A language is so much more than words you see…¬†

A language is also the knowing of what to say and¬†when, customs, behaviours, culture, and so on.¬† Within the ‘shelving unit’ or ‘files’¬†inside our consciousness, we need make room, for the word of all those things, in another language.

I was very injured on time, which included a head injury resulting in a loss of consciousness.  The neurotest given me, by a specialist unknown to me, as the one that gave them the best idea of my pre-injury intellect, was one on pronunciation of words. 

I was told it did not matter whether I knew the word Рor not Рjust how I chose to pronounce it.  From this, I also gathered  that language ability is the most accurate determiner of intellect used today scientifically.

In Australia last¬† year after school results were known, it was documented how much better ‘immigrant’ – or children with English as a second language – performed in the results.¬† It was the subject of a¬†tv show also.

It was mistakenly believed that it was due to foreign children being better students, or having greater work ethics instilled in them, as to why they were smarter. 

Certainly these qualities assist, but they are simply smarter anyway¬†because they know more words, their neuron capacity fills a greater space, than their ‘English-¬†derivitive-no-other-language’¬†fellow students.¬†

Within the same language,  just say two people had the same vocabulary also, it becomes the greater creativity and other learnings undertaken, that then increase brain use and therefore capacity, leading to one being smarter than the other.

Before I studied us, I studied every animal I came across.  I noticed my pets, from mice to dogs, all became smarter the more I trained them.

‘Race’ was a simplistic way of classifying human beings into four groups: ‘Caucasian’, ‘Negroid’, ‘Mongoloid’ and ‘Asian’, according to physical appearance.¬†

There are many variations within a ‘Race’,¬†and¬† I find that we are ‘Breeds’ rather than a race of four.¬†¬† Breeds¬†that are determined largely by language groups.

Certainly there are greater¬†physical similarities between humans breeds found within those¬†classification categories called ‘Race’, but on its own ‘Race’ is not adequate or sufficient.

To expand upon and improve the current classification order with Human Beings /Home Sapiens, I suggest in addition to the standard:

Kingdom; Phylum; Class; Order; Family; Genus; Species¬† we¬†add: Breed; Language.¬†¬†( I don’t feel it even necessary to include ‘race’¬† though it could fit between ‘species’ and ‘breed’.)

When I meet someone I like to know their blood lines (heritage) on both side and their ‘home’ language.¬†¬†¬†I¬†find this the most helpful information to know more of¬†someone,¬†and it has proven reliable and consistent.¬†¬†¬†¬†

I have known, dated or befriended, all races and many breeds of humans.  It is their vocabulary and language quantity that makes them smarter than the rest.;)

I do not think a greater effort of classifying Human Beings was seriously entered into, as the motivation for it, came from fear and insecurity, rather than a position of loving curiosity.;) 

Classification was carried out with the intent to make possible, the justification for theft, of land, inhabited by people already.  

An outcome was desired, and then a reality contrived to make it possible.  People were found to be not worthy of consideration, because of their appearance.

Historically and traditionally, the British used ridicule or derogatory language words to ‘bring down’ those they feared, or felt threatened by.

It is a known strategy also within the military.   It has been demonstrated that a ridiculing, rather than a respectful or honourable way of treating people, leads to a more successful occupation or victory.

Soldiers are then assisted by a feeling of righteousness¬†or ‘good triumphing¬†over evil’ and these are helpful energies that can make light of hard work.

We know now in science, how it is important to be impartial when conducting studies.  My own scientific background taught me that studies undertaken objectively and with no attachment to the result, makes for the better , more reliable, and trustworthy result.

The concept of ‘Race’ to describe other breeds of humans came about from a need, not an objective observation.

The use of judgement words, such as “superior” and “inferior”, that are¬†‘solution- seeking creations’, demonstrate a very strong attachment to the¬†result.

Definitely the ‘Race’ concept was brought into popularity at a time when another ‘race’ was on, the race to take over the rest of the lands on earth.¬†

To get the land that became ‘Australia’, Britain was in a competitive race by sea¬†with France in the 18th century, which Britain ‘won’.¬†

Was it with such a fixed determination, that the word ‘race’ was so impressed into the minds of these folk,¬†that they used the word¬†‘race’ here also?;)¬† Quite possibly.¬†¬†¬†

Maybe it was even a ‘slip of the tongue’ and they were referring¬†to the ‘race’ to obtain lands in competition with another language group/breed.¬†¬†Maybe it was from the British like, to ‘make life easier for yourself’, to use this new, common and frequently used word, ‘race’, to help name the other Peoples that had been discovered.

Historically, the English have always been, very fixated on physical appearance, how things look, and how things ‘appear to be’.

We must remember the “Might Is Right” jargon of the time, to validate a situation taken by force.¬† We know now, that it isn’t necessarily right at all, or clever to think so.

Using the invader’s common strategy of ridicule, it would be far easier, and upon seeing the advantage¬†– coming quite naturally to them also, given their propensity for this, and also of ‘complaining’ – to discredit¬†an entire populus, than to do it one at a time.¬†

Much easier to disempower a race of people, than to deal with these strapping, stronger, physically in better shape, ‘Equal Men’ one at a time!;)¬†

The English language is much more ‘word thick’ today than in the 18th century, and quite likely this is as complex a thinking process that occurred:

“Oooh golly…LOOK!!!.¬† Look at his spear… and he’s not wearing any clothes…”¬†¬†¬†

Then:¬† “Spear?¬† No gun?¬†¬† Not very smart.¬†¬† He’s not wearing any clothes….must be a lesser man than we.”

This sight would have been an enormous shock, and enormously threatening.  Familiarity at this time was to react from a place of fear, as the Britain they had left behind was a cold, poverty stricken, gruelling place of ill-health and misery. 

It would have been overwhelming for them to see such a healthy, naked man so comfortable in his own skin, with such blatant sexual acceptance, when they were not allowed to mention their own body parts in polite company.;)   

A more ‘conscious’¬†(and intelligent?;)) ¬†group, given the same sight may have gone “Wow, how beautiful..look at their comfort with themselves and natural living skills.¬† What fine specimens and how fortunate to be able to live so freely in such a climate…”

Many of the English words to describe other people of differing breeds and origins have been banned popularly as they were found Internationally, to be derogatory, insulting and nonsensical to use.   (The energetic injury we get from words I go into in another writing.)

The English language has always been short of words, in comparison with others and has needed to add to its stock of words as it went along through history. 

It needed to adopt words from other languages, as those words simply did not exist, within its own¬†language.¬† This made the people speaking it, therefore,¬†intellectually, not as capable as those who’s languages¬†had a greater-¬†or more extended- vocabulary.

English is one of the more simplistic of all the languages, and why as a second language it becomes easy, as it is so much easier than a ‘home’¬†language. It also does not fit in well with the other languages, and I go into more detail¬†in other writings.

My mother was Caucasian, the Race that classified the others, putting itself at the top.

My mother’s vocabulary was severely limited.¬† She operated in a very concrete fashion, fixated on what was in front of her.¬† She had trouble understanding much¬†that was not obvious to her way of thinking.¬† She had enormous difficulty with abstract thought, and, or perhaps because, she was so regimented.

By¬†this time language had been strictly controlled in English life.¬† Hard for other language groups to fathom – in English language society – the topics of sex, religion and politics, were not considered appropriate for social conversing: “There are three things you never talk about…” my mother told me.

Also, “social grooming & etiquette” had men and women, or ‘gentlemen and ladies’ given¬†advice of topics of conversation to learn, for society.¬† For example, a young woman undertaking ‘social grooming¬† advancement’, may learn a conversation topic such as flower arranging.¬†¬†¬†

Thanks to the above language control measures, speaking had all but been disconnected from any idea of creating a reality for a human existence…;)

My mother’s social life was practically non-existent, had always been limited, and her life very structured and rigid. Her own creativity was severely and chronically stifled.

By contrast my father would take me as a baby to meet with his Hungarian friend.¬†¬† Conversation would roll, and was like a lullaby to me, and when he wasn’t speaking his home language or singing, he was whistling while he worked.;)

At five years old I knew from my mother, that I was only half English, and that I was¬†half Caucasian,¬† and half Mongoloid race.”¬†¬† The tone of voice she used was derogatory, and in judgement, and she went on to say I would always be heavier than her.;)

She would look me over with narrowed eyes telling me my eyes were “too Chinesey”, my backside and face shape “too negro”, my head shape “too asian”.¬† She insinuated I was of lesser worth, because I had these ‘throwback’ characteristics.

Consequently I bonded with the world;) and I drew strength from all¬†Peoples¬†experiencing oppression, to add to my fairy tale and Dicken’s¬†characters.¬† I considered myself an Albino Negro and Nelson Mandela became my hero.¬†¬†

¬†My mother said¬† “the only thing you have going for you is the hair on your head”¬† referring to my blonde hair, while the rest of me she considered to be an evolutionary slip-up as I did not meet her specifics.¬† She would say desperately, wrenching her head around from side to side in the air as she spoke¬†“Why is god punishing me, this way, to give me such a god-awful ugly child?”¬†

My mother struggled with her vocabulary.¬† Her conversation – and that is using the term generously – was limited to retelling of events in a listed way, retelling of a ‘story’, criticizing and using learned abusive words.¬† Some of these, most likely she had said to her as a child, and others were clearly military words and orders.

She absolutely was not able to use language to create her reality as she went along in a day, instead she relied upon using a set script, that she needed to fit to suit a circumstance.  This is very common, to what else I have noticed of the habit of the English language in England. 

Later in adulthood she learned to use the word ‘apparently’ and I noticed that it¬†gave her more to do with a sentence.;)

I find the motivation to want to know, to determine intelligence in relation to ‘Race’, indicative of a lesser intelligence than not needing to know, or not ever getting that thought.

As we know more, other words have been introduced¬† in our categorising, such as¬†‘hispanic’.

As breeds of humans Рas with breeds of dogs Рwe may have a propensity for something not occurring in other breeds of us, that is, a natural aptitude or tendency towards an activity or behaviour, or be more inclined to do things a certain way. 

Our language group gives us variation in our disposition also, and I go into more detail in ‘Living In Me. The Complete Guide to Being Human.’

The Law of Reincarnation, also enables us to be of different Race/Breed/Language, through our Soul’s evolution, when we manifest on earth, and of course we are still so much more, as I enter into in other writings.

In conclusion, whoever was being considered ‘less intelligent’ because of the way they appeared physically, was most likely more intelligent than the one deciding!;)¬†¬†¬† And many have needed to defend themselves in a second – if not a fifth language!

“Love the skin you ‘re in!”¬†¬†¬†Absolutely!¬†¬† But also love your home language!¬† : )

Contrived Belief Correction No. 1.

  • correcting an historical human error

The first contrived Belief that needs correcting within our selves so that it may lead to greater understanding and health awareness of all that we are, and of our planet is:

1.¬†the Victorian England era imposed “Nothing exists unless there is a tool by which it can be measured.”¬† A joint purpose¬†powerful economic raising tool and to dispell anything that may distract from hard work, so that it might be ridiculed and labelled “fandangle black magic”.

REMOVE AND REPLACE WITH

1. Much exists that is unable to be determined with the human eye.   Though there are tools that can now measure and determine subtle energies these days.  Specifically here I am speaking of electromagnetic rays; inner energy; auras; chi; ki; chuloquai; sexual energy.

We are an energetic organism.  It is these energies, that can not usually be seen with our eyes, that largely control the existence and health of the parts that we can see.

The planet earth is an energetic organism, that we are a part of.

These facts were not able to be observed, so that they may be included, historically, in any plans for, or in any structures of human society.  

 

%d bloggers like this: