BEHOLD THE GLOBAL ROUNDUP

We've come a long way from the hunter-gatherers we used to be—at least that's what we're told. 

We've formed ourselves into groups, and groups of groups, so we live in a complex society now.  We've achieved a sometimes inspiring level of culture in the arts, uncovered some intriguing technologies through science, and are in the process of initiating a spiritual synthesis that may hold great promise, depending on how we handle it. 

That's the good news.

INFOMANIA

We've also collected a mass of externalized information and experience (for what it's worth empirically) particularly over the last century or so and most notably in the past few years.  But with this veritable Everest of data now online and at our fingertips we should pause for a moment to think about what we're going to do with it.  There are repercussions to blindly assimilating raw data. 

First, if we trust the sources outright and either don't bother or can't do the research and analysis ourselves we can be as easily misled as a cow up the slaughterhouse ramp. 

Both of these aspects of assimilating information are important.  The basic research for more obvious reasons, and analysis because this is what we make of the data, how we assess it and to what outcome or finding it leads.  This is what we inevitably take away with us and it's often never challenged again.  Instead it gets repeated over and over until it attains a validity and life of its own, whether it was originally accurate or not.  Clearly, mass media of all kinds are guilty of this intellectual infraction.  Repeaters abound.  But there are a couple more specimens that might surprise.

Two significant examples of this phenomenon in action are the establishment of legal precedent and the use of citation in academic literature.  Both of these 'repeat,' and this factor alone lends a legitimacy to their respective endeavors that bolsters their standing in the public mind, even though what's cited or repeated may have been specious or ill-considered in the first place.  The simple act of repetition works as a form of programming to substantiate the insubstantial.  This is an important point to consider.

Now, mistakes can obviously occur at the primary research level where details or 'facts' are gathered together in the first place—errors made in transcription of the data or even in observation itself, for example.  These mistakes are generally weeded out at some point and so the system is re-glorified: "See, the system works!"  But even this stage contains a certain bias that usually goes unchecked.  We're talking about what's included and what's left out.  Clearly this single decision has enormous repercussions that affect the veracity of the entire process from then on.  So the parameters themselves need to be scrutinized very carefully. 

Although compelling and even fun to work with, the highly mooted scientific method is hardly foolproof despite persistent claims to the contrary.  It's a great tool in its place when used correctly, but it's subject to stupendous abuse. 

Even within a perfectly constructed experiment or study (whatever that might be), the findings themselves are always subject to the bias of the finder.  In other words, we see what we want to see, what we expect to see or what we're able to see, and no more. 

When we engage in a study or experiment the hypothesis itself is a natural and appropriate delimiter of a bigger picture within which the issue under investigation exists.  This presents a momentous problem if we forget the rest of the universe is 'summed over' from the very beginning and insist the findings stand alone as they are—which is never the case.  After we've completed our study or experiment we always need to re-member what we've left out whenever we examine anything in detail.  As a result of not doing this one thing, attributions of causality are frequently erroneous, even downright fraudulent.

We also need to ask about the questions themselves, why they're being asked, how they're framed and tested, and also how findings are determined.  We just can't afford to be naive about agendas anymore.  More than a mere opinion, agendas are like the proverbial, everybody's got one.  Or else they have a boss or source of revenue that does—an agenda, that is.

But there's yet another element we need to look at carefully too.  The deluge of information itself can become a problem.  For one thing, it's hard not to get lost in a maze of seemingly infinite detail.  We can easily feel swamped.  And it's a no-brainer that we're often blinded by jargon as well. 

Of course, jargon is a powerful means of dividing people—it promotes elitism more efficiently than the color of a collar, our skin or our religious and political beliefs.  While these are often obvious, jargon works at a much more subtle level.  It also serves to bury any BS behind our so-called 'empirical' scientific method.  In this case it's the empire of the process we experience and it's allowed full reign.

Once things get past a certain point of complexity 'regular folk' are just not up to assessing the truth about what's being said, particularly if we don't understand the language.  Some are already aware of just how important this is in terms of claiming 'professional' status; those who don't would be well served spending some time to figure it out.  Why?  Because it's done with great deliberation. 

Believe it or not, the phrase "blind 'em with science" is commonly used in the academic world.  The success of the strategy has given rise to a certain condescension toward the masses, and it's often the source of great glee too.  In certain circles the phrase has morphed rather appropriately into "blind 'em with bullshit," and it's interesting to note that this technique is just as prevalent between academic fields, and industries too, as it is toward the generally 'unwashed' population.

Of course we're fed the party line that new ideas require new terms and this argument has some validity, but usually what we find is that what we're really looking at is a version of the same-old same-old, just with a different label. 

Reference the debacle in the financial system and you get an idea of how the old rigged game is handily repackaged.  Almost half a decade after the so-called global financial crisis, many are only just beginning to comprehend the practical meanings of terms coined by defrauders to deceive.  These 'authoritative' labels fooled even those in the banking and investment industries who ought to have known better but clearly didn't.  Thus do magicians manifest something from nothing—something for the perps and nothing for the rest of us that is.

It's a great lesson if we're willing to see it for what it is.  Luckily enough folks are cottoning on to the scam and realizing how these same parties are trying the same-old same-old using the fictional notion that taxing carbon and trading credits is going to somehow save the global environment—but all we seem to be able to do with this little shard of wisdom is argue about whether the problem is man-made or not.  And that's where the opportunity to see behind the facade is lost.

So all we're left with is more divide and rule to distract us from the real issue which, specifically, is an intent to keep us from realizing just how powerful we actually are.  It really is a great trick and sadly it's still working.  We'd save ourselves a great deal of trauma if we'd only get this one point.

Now, these two are by no means the only examples of linguistic deception we can find.  Here's a small sampling just so we can begin to comprehend what's really at stake:

• The so-called 'News,' which is neither new nor unbiased.  In other words it's more like the 'Olds.'  So we're given the same old story, rehashed for the gazillionth time but with new faces, and to tell the story we're generously provided with "all the facts none of the time," by someone who's already decided for us what to think, how to think it, and even how to feel about it—just trust us., right? "What do you know?" is the implication; and the answer is, "only what we tell you;"
• 'Peace-keeping' missions that massacre thousands of peaceful civilians so they can round up the nation's resources and take out the independent leader who won't suck up to the globalist agenda; 
• The US 'Patriot' Act which is clearly unconstitutional and therefore not in the least bit or by any definition patriotic; 
• The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that authorizes the oligarchy to defend itself from a nation that supports it and serves not to defend the nation in any way, shape or form; 
• The War on Terror that uses and promotes the very kind of behavior it purports to be fighting in ways beyond the scope of any manufactured ne'er-do-well in a cave out back of beyond your wildest imagination; 
• The War on Drugs that would be better defined by at least adding the words "... we don't profit from or control;" 
• The War on Poverty that's better termed a "War on the Poor;" 
• The Federal Reserve banking system whose only legitimate federal relationship is that it reserves federal resources and profits for the select few at the expense of those it pretends to represent; 
• Environmental protection legislation worldwide that inevitably protects multinational corporate interests from their environmental responsibilities while sticking it to the little guy who just wants to feed his family with fish or game he catches himself or plants provided by the cosmos that grow in the wild on 'public' land; 
• Public Land, which really means Land to be withheld from the Public, for your own good, of course... not; 
• In the Public Trust, that really means trust the public won't catch on, because we're obviously gullible for thinking we can trust the psychopathic administration of our affairs in any form whatsoever—an illness those who champion the viability of such a notion clearly must be suffering from or they wouldn't be so 'good' at what they do when they elect to deceive us;
• Representative Democracy where those we think we elect are hardly representative of our wishes once they park their titanic asses in the seat on the hill.  Nor is the process democratic either for that matter since those we actually want in the halls of power are first sidelined, then marginalized and ignored, bought out, blackmailed or just plain shot (before or after their election), if they aren't authorized by the megalomaniacs that is.  Or else the polling process is manipulated via satellites and software that can theoretically infect any interconnected computer system in the world since we've become so damned chatty online everywhere we go, and for all we know we already installed it on our laptops and eye-phones the last time we updated our operating system—which is just about every other day now in case you haven't noticed, what with how they so handily provide us with auto-update so we don't have to bother keeping up with the more deeply encoded spyware they might fancy installing at the same time.  (Of course, with that kind of potential, worrying about the legitimacy of our democracies is pretty much a moot point anyway);
• Patent protection laws that patently protect established power-mongers from innovative and humanitarian urges to help our fellow man and the planet while they reserve such things as our own DNA for trans-human and eugenics 'experiments,' or sue us maliciously when their genetic mutant seed contaminates our organic farms despite our fervent desire that it never would make it over the line in the first place;
• The so-called 'health-care' systems we embrace because they sound like a perfectly rational idea until we belatedly realize they're more appropriately termed 'wealth-care' (not ours) or 'health-impeding' instead;
• Child protective services around the world that prey on our young and make very certain they protect the pedophiles who use these young souls in ways the rest of us can scarcely fathom.

And the list goes on and on and on.

Really, it's almost amusing how easy it is to wave a label at us from one hand while doing the complete opposite with the other, because of course we're not looking that way anymore are we?  Of course we don't see it.  We trust the untrustworthy and are blinded by the BS—along with the fakery of manufactured debates about issues that have already been decided by puppet masters behind their screens, along with the actors and shills sent out to sell it all to us.  There's plenty to choose from because both sides are sewn up: we got the ones we love and the ones we love to hate on.

Well, it might be funny if the consequences weren't such an utter nightmare.

So we have two key elements here in terms of information and the language we all use to talk about it.  First there's a deliberate clouding of the waters (also resulting in an 'us-and-them' mentality, giving rise to the notorious 'they' who always know better than we do, or so they keep telling us), and then we have a deluge of data to wade through, none of which we can trust right off the bat.  Things become very complex very quickly and that means the playground sandbox starts looking like a great place to hang out.

The problem is that if we leave the adult world in our quest for innocence and distance from all that's wrong with our world—or simply because we can't figure out how to understand it—we might be very tempted to bury our heads in the sand while we're there.  And that results in a mass of extremely vulnerable rear ends poking out of the sandlot.  Visualize that then.  It ain't a pretty picture.

Assume the Position?

Now, regardless of whether we head back to the kiddie playground individually or collectively, all this stuff, all this overt information is going to get organized and analyzed one way or another—by someone or other, or something (AI anybody?) in what we might call an information roundup.  Order forming out of chaos and all that.  There are those who maintain this is merely a prelude to a more physical version involving bodies and carcasses (ours) and they very well may have a point.

In any case, since it's our information we're talking about here, we're included in the gig either way.  So let's ask another question: what exactly don't 'they' know about us at this stage?

They watch us make an inevitable run on their sales items at the grocery store, flock for the latest fashions despite a closetful of scarcely worn gear, consume noxious foods touted by the latest 'scientific' findings as healthy, run not walk from foods, behaviors and ideas they suddenly say are bad for us, fight with each other over manufactured divides, fear our diversity and all the rest, all the while laughing at our gullibility and ignorance.

They know what brands we like and when we buy them.  We fill in their frequent shopper forms truthfully, even agonizing over surveys for ratings companies and advertising boffins.  No wonder they can reliably predict what we're going to do because we give them all the information they need to assure we're entirely predictable.

At the end of the day we have to admit we've willingly and freely given ourselves up to the sexiest technological wizards around.  We lionize those who conspire to data mine, track and entrap us with their 'magical' gadgets.  And who is it that hasn't become enamored by at least some of their gizmos?  Too few.  

We even mock the technology of yesterday like it was so much twaffle and vie to be the first with the latest generation that does all of the above even better for them than before for the cheap price of some slick screen gimmick and a new version number to show off, then pay through the nose for the privilege.  Of course six month's later it's old hat, half the price, and the process begins all over again.  No wonder they call us sheeple.

But as advanced as it all appears to be, and despite the quantum gains we think we've made in the last couple of decades or so, we really need to understand just how far behind the times we actually are.  Think about it.  What kind of an idiot would give his cutting-edge technology away to the enemy?  In their minds that's us by the way, in case you missed it. 

We can't assume those that pull the strings behind the curtain are not intellectual midgets just because their hearts appear to have been concreted over.  Some claim they know us better than we know ourselves and this might very well be true too.  Let's face it, they've spent a great deal of time, focus and money (ours) gathering information about us, and who's really going to believe it's all about fine-tuning marketing campaigns to sell us more junk we don't need or is downright bad for us.  Still, we keep on buying it.

But what they're really trying to sell is a lot more powerful than that.  We're talking rubbish ideas about disempowerment and victimhood that lead us inexorably on the lookout for saviors—some external authority, all-powerful and benevolent (yeah, right), some divine being they want us all to believe will just magically appear on our behalf.  Of course the date of arrival is ever imminent because it keeps getting pushed back for one reason or another.  Well, at least there's always something to look forward to.  So how's that working out for you so far?

Do you really think it's gonna happen?  I mean, really?  Given all the propaganda we've been asked to swallow up till now and looking logically at how 'well' that's going, what are the odds this one's gonna work out for us either?

In any case, by one measure we're only about 25 years behind the times technologically (some say at least twice that) and maybe that's not so bad, you might be thinking, but that's only if you're talking in linear time.  In technological time it's more like an exponential advancement with an order of magnitude that results in hundreds or even possibly a thousand years difference.  That's not chump change people, that's trillionaire change! 

Among other things, there's a lot of buzz going round about the possibility of time travel too, and who really knows if it's true or not?  But just for the sake of argument let's assume it might be.  So let's think about the consequences of such a discovery for a moment, just in case.

If you could travel through time, how tempted would you be to go back through the ages to further your own personal agenda by planting some little trinket or enigmatic code that would weather very nicely thank you very much in the intervening centuries or millennia?   Cool.  How impressive would that be?

Then, ages later, carbon dating would 'prove' its authenticity to everyone, especially if you market that procedure as reliable too and then hype up the so-called scientific method you manufactured at the same time.  Can we prove this?  No.  It's merely a thought, that's all.  So I guess we should just trust them then.  Sure, that'll work out well.  Just like everything else.

In any case, with all this potentiality it's no wonder 'the infamous they' seem to have an answer for everything before we even notice the problem.  Well, that and the old problem-reaction-solution game they've been running us around with for who knows how long now.

So that's the bad news.

THE DIRECTION

OK, so we have a past, and we have what we've learned—such as it is—and that's what we bring to the present.  Now let's take a look at the future.  To do that we'll need to think in nonlinear terms.

First we should acknowledge that our present intent—whether conscious or not—is our future.  Consider the term we use in English to talk about what's coming up.  It's an important clue about what's really going on here.  And the word is: will.  For example, "I will believe everything the authorities tell me because they can be trusted."  Or, "I will not be safe so I will need you to look out for me."  So we draw our future into the present by using our intent and will.

Next, let's notice that the way our information gets organized and how it works, whether for or against us, becomes the new 'present' we'll be dealing with tomorrow.  In that case, whatever future we experience is entirely of our own making, and we determine what that will be right now.  We have the power when we will, but what future world will we give ourselves?

On any journey the direction we face is where we end up going.  Well then, are we looking forward, or backwards?  Or are we not much bothering to look at all?

As a sentient species we like to think we're in the avant-garde, but really we're just scanning the immensity of the appreciable universe with what amounts to little more than a cheap flashlight.

Here we are, exploring this vast expanse constituted of we-know-not-what, intrigued by the mechanics of intelligence and life, and we can scarcely form a coherent idea of where we came from.  Still, the intrigues of space beckon, and since we've become used to looking outside ourselves for answers, for signs of 'other' intelligent life and terrain to invade, I guess that's only natural.

Yet as we focus increasingly on outer space or other dimensions and what may be out there, we might also continue to ask ourselves what manner of intelligent life is here at home—and I'm not just talking about what might be still undiscovered in the deeps of ocean and earth.

A far better question to ask at this point then is, exactly how smart are we?

THE ABYSS

There comes a certain time when chased by rogues across a desert to the edge of a yawning canyon—well, there comes a time to choose.

On this side of the void is the same old pattern we know so well: the hunger, the disharmony and the fighting, the hard work and then generally doing without, all the rules and regulations—it's not much of a life.  On the other side is something else.

We're faced with one of two choices as we approach that cliff edge: we either make a courageous quantum leap across the abyss—manifesting a sort of Hail Mary pass of ourselves—or we chicken out and remain on the side we think we know to face the yawning void at our feet, our challengers, or both.  Now is such a time.

The more momentum we gather at a critical time like this, the more important it is to be sure we're facing the right way.  Obviously we're not going to make much of a go of it shuffling backwards towards the cliff edge at the last minute no matter how determined we are to fend off what's pushing us that way, and even whether we act as individuals or all together.  So we need to figure it out now, before we even see it clearly.  Those last few measures correspond to being placed on life support.  Let's not wait for the final attack.

Now then, because there are 7 billion of us, the issue becomes a matter of numbers—pure and simple.  The way 'the masses' go, so goes Earth and all that dwell here, so it's been said.  Fair enough, that makes sense.  Ever try to swim up rapids?  Or fight your way back through the door at a day-after-Thanksgiving sale?  You get the idea.

THE ROUNDUP

But whether we're a species of dictators and predators helping to herd the masses toward the edge of that cliff (and then of course subject to predators and dictators ourselves since that's the company we keep) or whether we're guardian caretakers of a harmonious world—well, that's entirely up to us too.

One thing's for sure, the global herd is being rounded up and something's gonna happen.  Let's be very clear about that.

Containment pens have already been constructed within the containment pens of nations, and we're not talking about the regular system of docks, jails and prisons here.  Under the guise of  various 'camps' and government installation refurbs our nations have quietly at first, and doggedly all along, been building up an infrastructure "to make sure we're all safe" in case of an emergency.  And of course we can trust them, this time.  Why would we question their integrity?  They've done such a great job of absolutely everything so far, haven't they?  I just knew they had my best interests in mind all along.  Bless their hearts.

Well, if you believe that run along and enjoy your vacation at the holiday camp.  Who get's the holiday though might not be as clear in the end as you first suppose.  If you're ready and willing to trek across the prairie to the slaughterhouse steps I guess you should go for it.  Just don't think that if you don't notice it's happening that it's going to go away.  Forget the Alamo, remember the hind end of an ostrich.

But if you're unwittingly rounded up and not especially willing to be served as steak on the plate of some dubious connoisseur, also remember this: muster always holds a certain risk for the cowboys.

Isolated, a single cow is easily dealt with especially when it's already contained.  Watch any rodeo and you can see how it fares.  But all together the herd has enormous strength even if it's contained. It has the power to change direction, overwhelm barricades and even annihilate the cowboys altogether.

Of course it can only succeed at this if the herd stampedes as one.

THE STAKE

So what on Earth can unite such a vast number of humans being herded toward the cliff edge (or slaughterhouse), each with their unique personality, opinions and heritage—all living in cultures historically and handily separated, and now mired in the tricky hands of a smattering of psychopathic spaced-out cowboys?  (for more ideas see: How to Invent our own World Order)

Divided by our differences we've been played as slaves, or cattle, or sheep,  up till now. But united we can be masters of our own destiny.  And who never dreamed of being a cowboy at some time or another?  We're talking about a big difference here.  What to choose?  Hmm….

Once we make that choice—one of two, and therefore a perfect symbol of the dualistic journey we've shared so far—then we take a stand on one side or the other.  That's just the way of things in a world defined by duality.

In the multi-dimensional world we actually inhabit though, this must appear as a great irony: that the defining choice of our time and the path to mastery is this or that.  I can almost hear the gods laughing, can't you?

But the dualistic choice we face might not be the one you're thinking of, because to solve this mess we can't use the same kind of thinking that got us into it.

See, it's not a question of picking sides as 'us' or 'them.'  To discover the truth of the choice we need to make to transcend our impending nightmare we need to dig deeper than such a tired old idea, one that only serves to perpetuate the fundamental problem of dualism in its most primitive state.

No, instead our choice can be summed up better this way:

On the one hand we have 'me versus you' or 'us versus them.'  This is the choice of a slave.

On the other hand we have 'me and you,' 'us and them' or just plain 'us all together.'  And with the realization of this choice we accept the role of master—self-master that is.  It's the path to mastery because it transcends duality entirely.

Isn't that simple?

THE CHOICE

Despite the irony it's appropriate that duality breaks down to this particular choice: to realize our essential unity in a world where duality appears to reign.

So on one side of the metaphorical chasm stands duality and on the 'other,' is unity.  Although we'd better understand what we're looking to do if we imagine the unity we're contemplating in terms of including the chasm and duality within the whole as well.

That's quite simple too.  It's as simple as the numbers one and two appear to be. 

Now the paradigm of two is set in place all around us and it has been for a very long time.  Let's hope we don't need to know more about that.  But what exactly do we mean by 'one'?

Is it one of many forced to be the same?

Or a great variety of ones united in some simple way?

The first example results in a monolithic culture embodied in the rigid form of a pyramid.  Here we're all just cattle herded into and therefore consumed by the form itself.  This of course is our historical paradigm.  We can see the endgame of this model in our lives right now as we head toward a global fascist regime under the 'benign' dictatorship of the so-called United Nations.  (But who controls the UN?  How exactly do they represent us?  Do we even know?)  This is what we might call 'an unknown quantity.'

The second example is an entirely new paradigm, one we've not experienced in the historical age.  So this would also appear to be an unknown quantity.  But luckily we can see how it works in smaller systems. 

Just take a look at the human body: many distinct cells and groups—one greater body working to do more than the cells can ever hope to accomplish on their own.

This form of unity celebrates diversity so all enjoy the benefit variety brings—as well as the power of being one.  It's what we call a win-win situation all round. 

In this case each one of many unites to form a 'greater' one and that's where the greater power comes from.  This greater one is, in fact, one human species living on one Earth: the family of man.  Which of course we already are, if only we'd notice what that really means.

THE SYNTHESIS

When we function in that relative truth, as the family of man on Earth, secure and healthy and free to be what we naturally are and knowing better who we are as well, we finally mature to adulthood with our awareness commensurately greater: of being one part of humanity living all together on this one Earth.

Again, because this bears repeating, we're talking about the Greater One Being: the Family of Man, on Earth.  Let's capitalize that now, so maybe we can see how important it is.

I wonder whether we can imagine what living that realization might really be like.

THE REALIZATION

In this one greater vibration we just have to find something valuable.  Why?  It's a simple function of psychology and physics. 

First of all, what's outside will accurately reflect what's deep inside all of us both psychologically and genetically: we fully realize that we are family.  And there goes the cognitive dissonance we've been wrestling with for who knows how long now.  That's a valuable realization right there.

Second, we'll reach a state of phase shift where the vibratory realm of the entire world changes, and since the world we have right now generally ain't right in the head, or heart, then change is valuable here too. 

This is a change to celebrate not fear.  All we need to do is join our individualized conscious life 'forces' together.

Then, as the ecstatic hum of humanity fills the unseen 'vacuum' of space with a radiating throb of unified intent to live freely, with integrity and  joy, dare we wonder what might happen?  What sort of harmonious vibratory realm might we find then, waiting for us when we become 'as One?'

Is it really possible though?  Well, let's see… which way are we facing?

So do we want to remain toddlers whinging for ice-cream at the mercy of some detached adult figure—or maybe if we're a little older, as rebellious teenagers groaning endlessly about being grounded on Saturday night? 

Or are we ready to become youthful, fun-loving adults who are free to explore a world of our own making?  Because this is the true promise of growing up.  It's our final realization of the fantasy we imagined the grownup world was when we were children, before we discovered it was all just a pack of lies to suck us in to the clutches of some corporate-political monster.

Sure, with this realization comes responsibility, but it's our response ability we finally realize—and that's the will, talent and means we use to shape our world.  This, in fact, is our true power.  Will we own it?

THE WEIGHT

Some of our 'best and brightest' have discovered the power to annihilate form and matter, or create it; even altering the form of life itself whether us 'dummies' think it's a good idea or not.

As a species we can do this now, from the planetary scale all the way 'down' to the very codes of life in the DNA of plants and animals, and even ourselves.  We can influence the invisible spectrum too: x-rays, gamma rays, microwaves and who-knows-what rays, as well as other vibrations from extremely low to ultra-high frequencies, to change the very field we live in with our 'brilliant' technology—although we might not understand what we're really messing with there either.

And just in case some of us missed it, this package represents the entirety of the realm we inhabit here. 

The choice we make determines the burden of our lifetimes—or the joy.  It determines both the caliber of our individual lives and our weight upon the universe.

So what will we be?  Dense and heavy; an uneasy blend of masters and slaves?  Or dancing light?

From a human perspective, this is a question of the utmost gravity.  And that's why our individual and collective response ability is involved.

Alright then, what exactly are we capable of?  Well we don't really know, do we?  How can we if we don't try something new?  Or maybe we should just leave all that up to the scientists and the politicians—whether we think we can trust them or not.

Sure, we can continue in fear to contract into some kind of dense black hole (sounds like hell).  Or we can radiate the stellar light of our world to share our experience here and all we've learned with All That Is.

So who wants to be a star now?  If you look at it in this light, dancing with the stars takes on a whole new meaning.

THE CHALLENGE

Let's face it: I want to shape my world and you want to shape yours.  We can.  We do, separately and all together anyway.  We always have.

What's been missing, historically speaking, is simply an adult awareness of the fact—and then of course the will and determination to do it consciously.

This issue is our rite of passage: it concerns the quality of our dominion and whether we're subjected to it or enjoy our own as self-controlled humans.  We can be merely divided—an insignificant one of 7 billion—a whole slashed irreverently into submissive and disempowered parts; or distinct and together, where each plays a unique and valued part of the Greater One.

We're with each other, whether we like it or not.  But the quality of that 'with' is not monolithic.  We're physically here together, obviously—that's the whether-we-like-it-or-not part (for as long as we're alive anyway).  But after that we have a choice.

Do we stand with each other, together, side by side and arm in arm, supporting each other as we explore the front line of god knows what; or do we fight with each other—meaning against?

Relationship is the fundamental building block of all that is.  Our realization of this idea of one being, and then two being, and finally all being together as well, this is what lies at the heart of the challenge of duality.  The realization of what this sequence means is tantamount to experiencing knowledge into wisdom.

So let's ask the same question in another way.  Shall we be a diverse and rich group of individuals greatly unified, and so rise greatly altogether; or remain greatly divided and subject ourselves to another great fall?

Either way—with 7 billion of us—it's going to be 'great.'  But think about this: we can forget the crummy flashlight if we figure out how we're allied, because together we could make one hell of a high beam!

Once we realize the wisdom; then we enact it; then we share the power.  In that order.

THE CONCLUSION

In conclusion, we have another matter to sort out before we wind this up.

1. Shall we wait to see what the determination of some 'unknown quantity' brings us?; or

2. Are we better served figuring it out for ourselves while we still have the opportunity?

We each need to answer for ourselves, of course.  If we don't bother the default is set on the first option—where there are no more options, except whatever some unknown quantity deigns to 'offer' us.

Now, if you chose that second option, more power to you.  Literally.

But if you opted for the first instead be aware you're giving your power away.  And in that case, here are five more questions you might want to think about before you settle on your final choice:

If not us, who?
If not this, what?
If not here, where?
If not now, when?
And if not me, why?