Selected Correspondence Peter

Peace-on-Earth

PETER to Alan: I was watching a BBC program on ‘the troubles’ in Northern Ireland where a journalist who had been raised and schooled there went back for a reminisce and re-look. He talked about the history of the war that has raged for hundreds of years and noted that he had been taught at school what he termed the ‘safe’ version of history. He had been taught that the British were the enemy and the British were at fault, but no mention was made of the on-going civil war where Irish have slaughtered Irish for centuries. Fellow country-man against fellow country-man.

Another news clip mentioned the ambivalence of the Spanish people towards the bitter civil war fought only 60 years ago where country-man fought country-man in a ferocious war that left a half million people dead. The American Civil War is yet another of these civil-wars that get scant consideration in the chronicles of man’s inhumanity to man, yet 600,000 died in a fight over ‘principles’. How many Russians killed their own countrymen, how many Chinese died fighting Chinese, how many neighbours slaughtered neighbours?

Man’s ‘inhumanity’ to man is legendary and now that it is increasingly well documented as endemic on the planet, it will be increasingly difficult to deny. The Holocaust conveniently gets most of the press – it’s the classic opportunity to put the blame on one evil man as being the sole cause of the genocides.

The Oxford Dictionary defines genocide as ‘The deliberate and systematic extermination of an ethnic or national group’ . The words ‘deliberate and systematic’ are what distinguish human animal violence from the violence exhibited by the rest of the animals on the planet – we think and plan our violence, adding a ruthless efficiency to the business of killing our fellow human beings. So it was that during World War 2, some 300 U.S. planes incinerated 120,000 civilians in the Tokyo firestorm raid, and only months later it needed just 2 planes to obliterate 105,000 people in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Within a few short years the development of the hydrogen bomb was to bring a 700-fold increase in destructive force compared to these first crude atom bombs. And since then developments is such that a man can push a button and fire an ‘arrow’ with many such bombs on board and hit multiple ‘bulls-eyes’ anywhere on the planet. A ruthless efficiency.

PETER: Hi Alan,

I always like the way that a situation, a meeting with someone or some words will twig a particular understanding of some part of the Human Condition. Each such understanding is invaluable, a gold nugget for an actualist, and needs not to be glossed over or fritted away. It is only by musing over these discoveries, contemplating upon them and milking them for all they are worth that one can ‘re-wire’ the brain, reprogram it to delete its instinctual and social programming. It is this very programming that has ensured, until now, only two options for every human being – either a real life of malice and sorrow or a spiritual life of malice and sorrow with the additional programming of denial and transcendence.

The other day I was watching a news report of the current peace talks between Israel and Syria and an Israeli expert was being interviewed. He said peace with Syria was difficult because ‘we don’t know and trust the Syrians’. He said, ‘peace with the Palestinians was easier because we have conquered the Palestinians’. A brief scan through my knowledge of history suggested that his observation could be applied to all peace deals and peace treaties. For peace to reign, one side must be victorious over the other and, as such, these peace deals are in fact surrender deals. These treaties set out the terms of surrender and the other side ‘naturally’ builds up resentment and anger in order to do battle again, be it overt or covert. The battle inevitably resumes, if not with guns then with words or feelings of resentment that are inbred as a social conditioning in each tribal member. Many current conflicts have their roots in conflicts that are hundreds or thousands of years old – so much for the promise to forgive and forget and the ideal that ‘we are all one’ and that one day there will be peace.

I further remembered how this exact same scenario forms the basis of all human relating – battle, victor / loser, surrender, withdrawal, ‘peace’ deal, resentment, plotting either overt or covert revenge, picking a time when other is vulnerable, strike back, battle, victor / loser ... What Vineeto and I did was stop battling in our relationship and begin an investigation as to why the battle of the sexes exists in the first place. One can do this with every other relationship until the desire, the need and the will to battle withers and eventually dies. It is only by stopping and changing that something else can happen, otherwise what is, and always has been, will continue.

Every discovery and insight into the Human Condition is useless unless one applies it with honesty and sincerity to how one is living one’s own life, for unless one is actually free of the Human Condition, one is not exempt. As we know, one can easily feel free but it is in the ‘push comes to shove’ moments that one is tested. It is in these moments that the instinctual passions will always over-ride the good, the well-meaning and the rational. It is when jealousy rages to violence that the sexual instinct and associated nurture – the emotion that humans fondly call love – is shown as nothing other than a powerful and blind animal instinctual passion. It is when one’s spiritual beliefs are questioned that the raw instinctual fear of death will arise and cause one to act in ways that are both desperate and insane. When one is threatened with ostracism or isolation from the security of whatever group or relationship one feels one belongs to, that one literally will do anything to avoid being an outsider or on one’s own.

The chemical surges that cause us to automatically feel and act fearful, nurturing, aggressive and desirous are primary, ‘quick and dirty’, thoughtless and instinctual-emotional and, as such, ultimately uncontrollable by moral and ethical training or by denial and imaginary transcendence. These chemical surges that arise from the instinctual passions are most definitely not an illusion that one can deny or pretend that one has overcome them – they are very real – readily measurable in response times, sourced from a particular location in the physical brain and empirically observable in action. It was only when this chemical flow ceased that Richard became actually free of the Human Condition. To quote Richard from the ‘Introduction to Actual Freedom’ –

Richard: ‘My’ demise was as fictitious as ‘my’ apparent presence. I have always been here, I realize, it was that ‘I’ only imagined that ‘I’ existed. It was all an emotional play in a fertile imagination ... which was, however, fuelled by an actual hormonal substance triggered off from within the brain-stem because of the instinctual passions bestowed by blind nature. Richard’s Journal, ‘Article 18’

An actualist will not skip over the ‘however’, for in that one word is the key to the difference between an actual freedom and an illusionary freedom from the Human Condition.

In the past, the feeling of freedom was the best on offer – feeling ‘above it all’ was better than feeling ‘part of the rest’ – but it did nothing to stop anyone from being driven by the instinctual passions. In fact, to follow the spiritual path was but to jump out of the frying pan into the fire. The religious wars, the spiritual perversions of celibacy and Tantric teachings, the teachings of suffering, doom, evil and fear, the battle of the religions and God-men for ever more numbers and ever more power, the ongoing humiliation of human beings prostrating themselves before mythical Gods and humbug God-men – all this attest to the institutionalized insanity of any and all spiritual belief-systems.

These ancient beliefs do nothing but cloud over, divert, deflect, distract, sidetrack, compound and ultimately cause one to turn away from the only sensible human freedom – a freedom for human beings to stop instinctually behaving like animals and treating each other like animals.

Well, all that came out of one little news report about a ‘peace’ negotiation to stop two groups of humans waging war against each other. Good to sheet it back home and see where one is ‘waging war’ oneself and to see what I can actually do about peace on earth.

No 13 wrote recently that ‘The actual revolutions start here as a matter of course each time a new wonder manifests itself into consciousness or a physical sensation. I can only help myself each moment again. I can only partake of all that is on offer.’ [endquote].

Being pragmatic I would say that ‘the actual re-programming of one’s brain – the deleting of one’s social and instinctual programming – can only start and continue by investigating each time that a new feeling manifests itself and prevents me from being happy and harmless.’

These thoughtful investigations can be so revealing, so insightful, so blindingly obvious that synapses in the brain can snap, clarity can result and behaviour can be changed and – provided ‘I’ don’t claim the credit – PCEs can result.

Ah well, Alan, this has turned into another of my raves, but life continually presents one with serendipitous opportunities to study the Human Condition, to see it in operation as one’s ‘self’ ... and countless reasons to be actually free of the lot.

And I do enjoy writing about the Human Condition.

PETER: Hi all,

I was doing a bit of editing in the Glossary the other day and came across some definitions that I thought was particularly pertinent to the discussions on the list. Most of the people I have talked to about Actual Freedom seem to have no idea what constitutes a belief and what constitutes a fact. Often I would enter into a conversation and find that the person had absolutely no idea of the difference between a belief and a fact. They would insist that something was true, the Truth, ‘my’ truth, they ‘felt’ it to be so, it was their understanding, they heard it was so, etc. and that was good enough for them. When I pointed out that other people of different cultures, spiritual or religious leanings, political or social views held differing views and these differences were the source of confusion, confrontation, conflict, persecution and warfare, I was met with bewilderment. Nobody was willing to admit that their own particular cherished views and understandings were beliefs. It is always the same – I’m right and the others are wrong, my God or Guru is the only God or Guru and everyone else has beliefs – not me!

According to the Red Cross over 1 billion people have been directly affected by war or armed conflicts in the last 20 years. ‘Affected by’ includes death, being maimed, tortured, raped, imprisoned, displaced, losing family members, possessions, homes, etc. The vast majority of these wars and armed conflicts are fought over religious, spiritual, tribal, ethical, moral and political beliefs – dearly held and dearly fought over beliefs!

Those people who have been, or continue to be, on the spiritual path are those least likely to actively challenge their beliefs for they have been indoctrinated and taught to value belief over fact and they further hobble themselves with faith, trust, hope and loyalty as well. A potent, and very often, lethal mix.

IRENE: Wow, some fire has erupted, I read in your e-mail! Despite your vitriolic confusion about me and my new(?), old(?), woman only(?) anti-man(?) philosophy, I couldn’t help chuckling about you here and there and saying ‘fair enough, Peter’.

PETER: So I guess if you regard my last letter as vitriolic we are coming to an end of our correspondence. We seem to ground on the major rock of feelings and emotions and we have wide philosophical differences on the matter. (...)

I have no wish to interfere with your happiness. I just want to make it clear why I am continuing with the findings of the ‘other 50% of the experimenters’ and that I have neither doubt nor fear of the consequences.

At the risk of again being seen as vitriolic, I will give you a quote from my journal that I wrote after an incident I witnessed where a group of people confronted Richard and accused him of being cold, uncaring and deceitful.

[Peter]: ‘I am no longer continually run by emotions or feelings like sympathy, empathy, love, compassion any more – they are a failed cop out, a film I used to put over things to avoid seeing the actuality of my behaviour, and of doing something about it. Now that I know that there is an alternative that works, and that malice and sorrow is optional for people, I regard those who reject this alternative as suffering needlessly and inflicting suffering on others needlessly. One of my prime motives has been that I saw my very interactions with other people as causing pain and suffering in them, even when I was being ‘good’ and ‘loving.’ To suffer myself is one thing – to inflict it on others is malice.

I care enough to eliminate my selfish malice and sorrow and I will stand no nonsense from others about not being ‘caring’; when what they really mean is not being ‘loving’. Like Richard, I’ll stick my head above the parapet and say, ‘All you have to do is get rid of your ‘self’ entirely, and then you will enjoy unparalleled actual peace for yourself twenty four hours a day, every day.’ And as more and more people care enough, peace will gradually spread through the world like a chain letter. However, I am under no illusion that most people will keep with the ‘tried and failed’, leading a dull second-rate life of trying to repress their emotions, of being as good as they can. And yet others will continue the futile aim of transcending their emotions with meditation, right thinking, and other ‘spirit’-ual devices. Most will indeed ‘turn away’ and peace may well take a few generations to establish but at last it is actually possible for those who want it.’ Peter’s Journal, ‘Peace’

I know it’s strong and leaves no room for compromises but that’s how I see the Human Condition. You may see it as vindictive but for some reason it seems appropriate again right now. I guess it is that I watched the black-humour film ‘Oh What a Lovely War’ on TV last night with its running score sheet of ‘losses’ in the ‘games’ that the generals played in the War to end all Wars. The losses after 2 years of playing one game at the Somme were 607,000 dead on the English side alone for a nil gain of ground.

I guess it is that I yet again understood Richard’s desire to find a way to actually end wars and his radical understanding that, for this to be possible, both the good and bad feelings and emotions and instincts have to be eliminated.

Those men, after all, died for love of god, country and family. Their pride eventually disintegrated to the point where they simply shivered in their mud filled trenches, ridden with lice and listening to the rats feeding on the dead and wounded, singing endless choruses of ‘we’re here because we’re here because we’re here because we’re here ... we’re here because we’re here...’

But then again you know all this and we have talked of this at length many times before so maybe just write me off as a hopeless case ...

IRENE: (...) I am so pleased with what I’ve done Peter, you have no idea... I couldn’t have envisaged this particular outcome ever. Wherever I am I am at peace and that’s all that I ever dreamed of anyway. I now find myself living what my very first peak-experience showed me to be my destiny. Its quality of atmosphere is here now, but according to the vision there is an abundant quantity to follow... and I am already so content with this abundance so far!!

PETER: Irene, I understand that you have given actual freedom your best shot and have found it wanting in the role you want to play in life. I keep going because I have a different (megalomaniacal, if you like) version of the whole scenario of the ‘play’. My play envisages humans playing in a world without wars, without domestic violence, rape and torture. With men and women living together in peace, harmony and equity. With sexual pleasure freed of guilt, shame, aggression and perversion. With no religious or territorial wars fought over right or might. With no police, no legal battles, no need for justice or retribution. Where everyone treats each other as fellow human beings and wishes well of each other. Where equanimity, co-operation, consensus and helpfulness are readily apparent in all interactions. Where the current money and effort used to fight wars and keep the ‘peace’ are used to bring the benefits, comforts and pleasures now possible for the few to all humans on the planet. Where care and consideration replace greed and avarice, ending pollution forever.

And it is not a dream, it is now possible for those who want to play the game of being a human being with a new script. All I have to do is become a new character and leave the old one behind. Or as Richard puts it

Richard: ‘Step out of the real world into the actual world and leave yourself behind.’ Richard, Poster

It is a brand new script and most will object and still play the game of malice and sorrow, but soon the other game will become more and more played. Seeing it as an obviously more sensible game people will eventually join with hardly a thought as to the old ‘survival’ script that they were wired to play. The game of survival is, at core, a grim game as I know it – like a ballet dancer with lead weights tied on the ankles, is how I described it in my journal.

So we differ still, but I did enjoyed the other evening in your little beach-side house, and your visit today. Hope your matchstick is holding in your computer and you get this note ....

*

PETER: I did enjoy hanging out with you the other day. Many laughs and a few reminiscences.

I liked it that we found so much in common in agreeing that any solution to the human dilemma must include an end to wars – peace on earth; that men and women have to live in peace and harmony, and we have to stop being ‘men’ and ‘women’ in separate camps.

You did strongly make the point that you felt that Richard, Vineeto and I (... to a lesser extent, you said) are confrontational in our writing to people. I did question whether it was not the content that people found offensive rather than the ‘style’.

Since you find what I write offensive to you I will stop. I learnt about 12 months ago that once someone says he or she is offended by what I say, then any further conversation on that particular subject is best avoided.

Then we can just hang out like the other day.

Now that the neuro-biological scientific evidence is becoming available, it will be up to each of us what we do with it – whether we continue to ignore or escape from it, or get up off our bums and do something.

PETER: You wrote to No 14 a note of such breathtaking duplicity that I am moved (as in ... up off the couch) to reply before all the spiritualists on this list start to declare Rajneesh and other similar God-men to be actually free from the Human Condition. Still people do believe that Jesus walked on water, that the planets influence their moods and the sun goes around the earth. It’s just that this list is about facts and actuality – and not fiction, hopeful imagination, wishful thinking, slippery re-interpretation, Ancient Wisdom or ‘Truth’.

RESPONDENT to No 14: I did not get this PCE stuff on this list in the beginning. I kept thinking about it for a while. For weeks I would get stuck on 2-3 experiences which stood out and seemed close to the way PCE was being described here. The first PCE happened to me after I did rigorous dynamic everyday for 2 months. This PCE happened 2 ½ years ago. I also noticed that for last 2 ½ years, I have always wanted to repeat that experience. I have had some much tinier ones but nothing compared to the first one.

Now I understand the whole thing about PCE. Osho created situations in which we could get PCEs and hence have a bench mark to work with. While Richard is asking us to remember a PCE, defined with a description, to take it as a bench mark.

PETER: It does seem a waste of all that thinking time to have come to the conclusion that there is a God after all, and that Rajneesh is your God. Still Humanity’s obsession with believing the fairy-tales of the God-men is both legendary and endemic and has been around for thousands of years. This is the very beginning of a new down-to-earth non-spiritual Actual Freedom and, as such, will not be for all. It does take a certain courage, tenacity, stubbornness and bloody-mindedness to strike off on one’s own to discover and investigate.

So, let’s look at your preposterous proposition that ‘Rajneesh created situations where we could get PCEs’. (...)

*

Let’s dig a little deeper and see the extent of his delusion. Again a quote from the man himself –

[Mohan Rajneesh]: ‘No-thinking is a must if you want to be completely freed from sin, freed from crime, freed from all that goes around you – and that is the meaning of a Buddha.

A Buddha is a person who lives without the mind; then he is not responsible. That’s why in the East we say that he never accumulates karma; he never accumulates any entanglements for the future. He lives, he walks, he moves, he eats, he talks, he is doing many things, so he must accumulate karma, because karma means activity. But in the East it is said even if a Buddha kills, he will not accumulate karma. Why? And you, even if you don’t kill, you will accumulate karma. Why? It is simple: whatsoever Buddha is doing, he is doing without any mind in it. He is spontaneous, it is not activity. He is not thinking about it, it happens. He is not the doer. He moves like an emptiness. He has no mind for it, he was not thinking to do it. But if the existence allows it to happen, he allows it to happen. He has no more the ego to resist; no more the ego to do. That is the meaning of being empty and a no-self: just being a non-being, anatta , no-selfness. Then you accumulate nothing; then you are not responsible for anything that goes on around you; then you transcend.’ Rajneesh, Tantra: The Supreme Understanding

Cute Hey. With a leap of imagination he is no longer responsible for his actions even to the point of killing. He becomes quite literally ‘above’ the mundane, the ordinary, the laws, the earthly, the sensate. One leaves the wheel of suffering, or earthly existence and transcends. This ‘lofty perch’ of the God-man has relevance in the Sannyas world as to his denial of any wrong doing in Rajneeshpuram – not that the American law courts believed him. No. 14 will recognize the dis-association of Rajneesh from any of his actions as identical to the position taken by Zen warriors in the ritual slaughter of 300,000 Chinese at Nanking – enthusiastically supported by the Buddhist Masters.

In case you are confused about the word ‘transcend’, Mr Oxford’s definition is –

transcend — climb over, surmount. Go beyond or exceed the limits of (something immaterial); esp. be beyond the range or grasp of (human experience, reason, belief, etc.). Be above and independent of; (esp. of God) exist apart from the limitations of (the material universe) Ascend, go up, rise. Oxford dictionary

Indeed Mr. Rajneesh has transcended the ego – he has clearly become an ego-maniac in that he thinks and feels himself to be God. An ego transcended gives full reign to the soul – the ‘feelings’ – and delusion is the obvious result.

*

RESPONDENT: As for facts. I was not asking for facts in the forms of Osho’s quotes.

PETER: You were not asking for facts at all. You were simply trying to fob me off and dismiss any further conversation on the matter. Personally I considered Rajneesh’s quote very relevant to our conversation as it points to his ‘unique’ contribution to Ancient Wisdom. His whole approach to the perennial problem of human instinctual passions was to summarily condemn those who attempted to suppress them and taught that to express them would enable a miraculous transcendence. Thus one was encouraged to indulge in sex in order to transcend sexual passion with the aim of becoming celibate. Similarly with anger, one was actively encouraged to express one’s anger in groups or dynamic meditation or in being ‘honest’ with others – all in order to achieve for oneself the blissful state of Enlightenment. Peace on earth was not, and is not, an issue – one’s own utterly selfish achievement of an Altered State of Consciousness was of singular importance. Hence peace on earth was readily sacrificed for a state of Enlightenment on earth and a mythical afterlife – after physical death. Which is the very point of this conversation.

No wonder you weren’t ‘asking for facts in the forms of Osho’s quotes’ on the topic.

The challenge of Actual Freedom was obvious – if I, an ordinary normal human being, could become actually harmless then peace on earth was possible. If I could totally eradicate all anger in me – that would be the proof, as simple as that. The situation that mostly brought up anger in me – in whatever form, and no matter how subtle – was in relationships with women; so I used that as my test of fire, so to speak. When that was successful, the ante was serendipitously upped by writing on the Sannyas list, and when that was successful – along came No 5. Which only goes to prove that Virtual Freedom is virtual as in 99.9%.

PETER to No 7: As a human on the planet, at this time, we clearly see that much of the essential explorations have been undertaken in order to provide comfort, shelter, food and safety from wild animals and that the next major exploration and effort will be to end ‘man’s inhumanity to man’. Many people are still seeking excitement, fame, meaning and a sense of purpose by physical exploring and adventure pursuits but it has got a bit ridiculous such that it comes as no surprise to hear of someone being the first to hop all the way to the north pole or being the first woman to circumnavigate the globe the wrong way in a bath tub. Many people are now devoting there lives to helping wild animals survive, having abandoned the post-WW2 hope of peace on earth for humans. The focus has shifted to the fashionable ‘saving the earth’ rather than saving the human species.

An actualist is one who devotes his or her life to actualizing peace on earth in the only way possible and gets to have the adventure of a lifetime on the way. It is the most significant thing one can do with one’s life – one’s ‘three score and ten’ of existence as a human being.

Then whatever goes ‘on and on’ is not of my concern, for I will have done my bit for peace on earth.

This whole business of becoming free of the Human Condition is to do with the doing of it. At present it still remains but a nice theory, proposed by someone who can still be rightly labelled as a freak of nature as in – ‘an abnormal or irregular occurrence, an abnormally developed person or thing’. It is now up to others to prove – for themselves – that it is possible for them to be free from the Human Condition.

T’is about quality not quantity, the individual not the group, facts not belief, actualization not theory.

Of course the process works, but it only works for those doing it. Even a Virtual Freedom is to live beyond normal human expectations and would be sufficient to bring peace to this fair planet. But to go all the way is always the only way – stopping at ‘base camp’ is not for the true adventurer.

Well, thanks again for your note. I do appreciate your interest in these matters and in taking the effort to write. For me, it is good opportunity to write more about the practical application of Actual Freedom and to put my experience and knowledge down in writing.

The Human Condition – the program in the brain that says this is how it is to be a human being – does take a lot of stubborn questioning, and a lot of deleting, in order to get one’s common sense or innate intelligence operating for the first time. But once it is fired up and begins to function the fun begins – it proves unstoppable, and then the sparks start flying and the fun begins as one becomes incrementally free of belief, superstition, morals, ethics, values and psittacisms. This incremental freedom from sorrow and malice results in increasing experiences of delight and peace, and one soon finds oneself willing raising the bar ...again ... and again.

There are no limits in Actual Freedom.

*

You could regard Actual Freedom as sensibly planning your exit from the world of fear and aggression for a spurt in the actual world of purity and perfection, before the final exit when your heart stops pumping blood and the brain dies.

*

RESPONDENT: For personal peace and world peace.

PETER: Now hang on. How can you be ‘for personal peace’, when you are on the spiritual path and aspire to Enlightenment? You do know that the Enlightened Ones are driven in their Divine mission to spread their message, that they are desperately trying to attract followers, that they often have weird bodily experiences, that they can’t have a normal down-to-earth companionship with anyone, that they are constantly adored, worshipped, coddled and feted, that they ‘suffer’ for Humanity and their disciples, and that they have a mentally-diagnosable massive delusion of self-aggrandizement whereby they are convinced that they are God and that they are Immortal. Doesn’t sound at all peaceful to me.

And as for ‘world peace’, you are a self-confessed, certified, name-carrying Sannyasin of a dead Master. That makes you a man of Religion, and a true and faithful man of Religion will always kill or die for his particular God. It is ‘par for the course’. As you yourself said on this list – ‘I am completely surrendered to him with my whole being’. People are always ready and willing to kill and die for their Faith, as hundreds and hundreds of millions have done already and are still doing so.

I noticed that you said to Alan that Japanese people are atheists, yet millions fought and died for their Emperor who, unless I am wrong, they regarded as a living God. These are facts that I am writing, this is not some belief of mine. This is all well documented, proudly trumpeted, written in books, recorded on film, video and tape. Historical archives, libraries all over the world, the Net, the Holy scriptures, the discourses, all attest to these facts. Given that you are a Sannyasin, and that you are for world peace, you obviously believe in Rajneesh’s ideal that world peace will come when everyone in the world becomes one of ‘his people’. Not Christians, not Buddhists, not Hindus, not Jains, but Sannyasins. This means that all the other religions will have to magically disappear somehow. To quote Rajneesh –

‘My Sannyasins, my people, are the first rays of that new man, of that homo novus. And it all depends on you. ... The new man will not be of the East or of the West; the new man will claim the whole earth as his home’.

So, I suggest you start recruiting and converting, if you really are for the Rajneesh version of world peace.

But should you want to be pragmatic, realistic, down-to-earth, astute, sensible, reasonable, informed and discerning instead of being spiritual then there is another alternative ...

I see that you are interested in the idea of peace and being happy and harmless yet you are not at all interested in Actual Freedom, the practical way to achieve both. I’ll try to explain again what we are on about, although it appears that I am ‘flogging a dead horse, as they say –

Maybe another way of looking at it is that all we humans are engaged in a big play called ‘being human beings on earth’. It’s our first time in the play, so we look to the others who are already playing to learn the rules and regulations.

Now when we enter the game we find the whole scenario of the play is already written and the name of the game is ‘It’s a dog eat dog world, life’s a bitch and then you die’. Given that it is a tough and miserable game, our main interest and constant obsession is self-preservation, survival, come what may. As such our underlying traits are that we are fearful and suspicious of all the other characters in the play and that we will fight for our rights and our life, come what may. We also find that we have to be members of a tribe to survive and, as such, we are taught the remainder of our script – the particular character role that we play within our tribe. We are further told that it is impossible to leave the protection of the tribe or you will die, and unless you constantly keep fighting for your survival you will die – no letting up, or letting your guard down. In a game like this ... no wonder we feel lost, lonely frightened and very, very cunning.

But what if you found some players who told you – you can play the game without having to be a tribe member, and without the constant fear of survival? What if you could re-write your particular script in the play? And it is not a dream, it is now possible for those who want to, to play the game of being a human being with a new script. All you have to do is to leave your old character behind. Or as Richard puts it ‘step out of the real world into the actual world and leave your ‘self’ behind’. It is a brand new script and most will object and still play the game of malice and sorrow, but soon the other game will become more and more played. Seeing it as an obviously more sensible game people will eventually join in with hardly a thought as to the old ‘survival’ script that they were wired to play. The game of survival is, at core, a grim game as we know it – 160,000,000 killed in wars this century alone, not to mention all the murders, rapes, ethnic cleansing, sectarian violence, tortures, domestic violence and suicides. The new play eventually would see humans playing in a world without wars, without domestic violence, rape and torture. With men and women living together in peace, harmony and equity. With sexual pleasure freed of guilt, shame, aggression and perversion. With no religious or territorial wars fought over right or might. With no police, no legal battles, no need for justice or retribution. Where everyone treats each other as fellow human beings and wishes well of each other. Where equanimity, co-operation, consensus and helpfulness are readily apparent in all interactions. Where the current money and effort used to fight wars and keep the ‘peace’ are used to bring the benefits, comforts and pleasures now possible for the few to all humans on the planet. Where care and consideration replace greed and avarice, ending pollution forever...

We actualists are simply saying – stop believing what the other players tell you is your fated script and stop believing that the rules of the game can never be changed. That it is possible for individual players to delete the old, ancient and decrepit, survival program in its entirety and to now run on the sensible and sensate, stripped-down version, free of malice and sorrow. One can now become free of the Human Condition of malice and sorrow, if you want to make the effort.

RESPONDENT: I have said that if the meaning of surrender is gratitude. And I will not kill or die for my Faith.

PETER: What you said was –

[Respondent]: If the meaning of surrender is deep gratitude to Osho, Yes, I am completely surrender to him with my whole being. [endquote].

So we can now add ‘but not enough to kill or die for Him’.

This is indicative of what happened to Sannyas and Sannyasins after the end of the Ranch. You may remember that Rajneesh was raging against the Christians at the time and to quote him –

[Rosemary Hamilton quoting M. Rajneesh]: ‘More blood has been shed by Christians than by anybody else; more wars have been shed by Christians than by anybody else. People have been massacred, butchered, burned alive by Christians!’ ‘Hellbent on Enlightenment’. Rosemary Hamilton. White Cloud Press. Oregon. 1998.

Outrages like these, combined with poisonings, buggings, arson, vote stacking, etc. caused a situation where armed conflict became a distinct and very real possibility. There were a number of police and FBI investigations under way and the National Guard was reportedly on stand-by. Both sides were armed and ready. Rajneeshees were armed and deliberately invited the press in to show off their weapons and training. In the end, Rajneesh flew the coup, so the situation was diffused, but it shook many people’s faith to the point that many dropped Sannyas, became disillusioned or ‘watered down’ their faith – exactly as you seem to have done. The end of the Ranch indeed ‘scared the shit’ out of many disciples.

*

PETER: I noticed that you said to Alan that Japanese people are atheists, yet millions fought and died for their Emperor who, unless I am wrong, they regarded as a living God. These are facts that I am writing, this is not some belief of mine.

RESPONDENT: I was born after the world war Second, and have learned the Emperor was a just fellow human being who was responsible for the War.

PETER: So, in the case of Japan in the war, it was the Emperor who was responsible. I take it that aspires to the popular theory that it is evil leaders who cause wars. It does seem a little simplistic to me and to directly fly in the face of many studies and many documented accounts of the apparent ‘delight’ in killing and blood-lust that happens in wars. The Buddhists at Nanking seemed not to have been forcibly driven to serve the Emperor. Were they not proud to kill and be killed? This is the whole point of surrender, love, gratitude, service, devotion, loyalty – and the supreme test (particularly for the male of the species) is his willingness to lay down his life for his beliefs, for his ideals.

On the Sannyas list I said I was probably willing to ‘defend’ the Ranch and Rajneesh to the point of killing, and I said ‘probably’, only because it is a hypothetical question. I got howled down for saying so, which I took as sheer hypocrisy on the part of most.

*

RESPONDENT: And I have said my disciplehood is different from your definition. (...) I wonder why you are so stick to your definition of it.

PETER: I am vitally concerned with peace on earth and see no sense at all in people sitting silently hoping it will happen by itself, or by some mythical Divine intervention. I see a great deal of sense in questioning and investigating the reasons that we humans live in misery and suffering and, despite our well-meaning efforts to date, continue to inflict misery and suffering on each other. For the discussion to be meaningful, a common agreed definition of words is essential and the vital interest of both parties is essential. A vital interest in peace on earth is necessary for anyone to at all consider an Actual Freedom rather than continuing on the selfish, self-centred and Self-gratifying spiritual path of denial and fantasy. One either stays in the Human Condition or actively and rigorously pursues an actual freedom from its insidious grip. There is now a choice, a third alternative, for those who want it.

The question is – are you, vitally concerned with peace-on-earth and do you want to become free of the Human Condition of malice and sorrow?

*

RESPONDENT: I just want to know how you think my disciple-hood is a blind belief and the hindrance to be happy and harmless in our communications in specific.

PETER: So according to your rules of discussion, I am not allowed to discuss disciple-hood, the spiritual path or religion in general but I have to answer your question ‘in specific’. You insist on either ignoring or avoiding any comment I have made specifically about Rajneesh and his ‘peace on earth’ dream which I thought was getting reasonably specific to your disciple-hood of ‘seeing the possibility in Rajneesh’.

Your style seems to be to tie both my hands behind my back, stuff a gag in my mouth and see if I can still type by banging my nose on the keyboard – and then declare I haven’t answered your question. As I said in my last post you have to have a problem, a doubt, a concern before you have a question, let alone be willing to listen or attempt to understand any answer given

I also said in my last post –

[Peter]: ‘I am vitally concerned with peace on earth and see no sense at all in people sitting silently hoping it will happen by itself, or by some mythical Divine intervention. I see a great deal of sense in questioning and investigating the reasons that we humans live in misery and suffering and, despite our well-meaning efforts to date, continue to inflict misery and suffering on each other.’ [endquote].

Being a disciple of a spiritual Master or God-man, as you have declared yourself to be, clearly puts you (specifically) in the group of ‘people sitting silently hoping it will happen by itself, or by some mythical Divine intervention’ – meaning Rajneesh’s intervention. How can I be more specific?

Millions of people are suffering the stupefying horrors and atrocities of wars this very moment and all they have been able to date is pray to imaginary Gods, or believe the fairy stories of demented God-men, that ‘one day’ there will be peace. It’s time to put our store in human intelligence, for there is obviously no such thing as Divine Intelligence – any sensible reading of the inane fairy-stories of the Sacred Texts will soon attest to that.

Of course, it means abandoning our belief in an after-life, but how else can one fully be here, doing what is happening.

100% committed to being here, in this very actual world, as a sensate, thinking and reflective, flesh and blood body – without any ‘self’ whatsoever.

RESPONDENT: What a puny price to pay for personal peace and peace on earth.

And as for your question, sure I want to become free of sorrow and malice. I am vitally concerned with my personal peace and peace on earth.

PETER: I don’t doubt your sincerity in wanting and being vitally concerned, many humans are. It is the source of our deepest sorrow when we become aware of our instinctual willingness to inflict suffering upon each other.

I’m just being busy trying to tell you that there is another alternative to blindly following what everyone has been trying for thousands of years and which obviously hasn’t worked, isn’t working, and never will work.

If you want to put your faith and trust in the past failed efforts, then fine. If you want to find out about an alternative, there is only one way – for you to find out for yourself. And there is only one way to do that – read about it.

Finding out for oneself makes much better sense than believing others.

PETER: Anyone can peddle a dream, an ideal, a possibility and people will flock and join in. Anyone, be it an Emperor, a Dictator, a Revolutionary, a Faith Healer, a scientist or a Guru. An excellent study known as the Milgram Experiments was conducted which documented this very willingness to believe, and willingness to follow, and I have written about it in the Peace chapter of my journal

It is fascinating that this particular line of study was stopped as being ‘unethical’! We either deny our instinctual malice (bury our heads in the sand) or seek refuge in fairy tales (stick our heads in the clouds). But everyone, be they ‘normal’ or ‘spiritual’, manages to shift doing something about peace on earth by blaming someone else. Looking forward to your comments...

RESPONDENT: I see. I think the only way to peace on earth is peace on person at first. But I don’t agree with that ‘everyone’, be they ‘normal’ or ‘spiritual’, manages to shift doing something about peace on earth by blaming someone else. I think not everyone.

PETER: Okay – tell me who. Even the pacifists run on the theory of ‘if only everyone stopped fighting ...’, and those who march and demonstrate for peace do so at angry rallies. There are curiously those like the Buddhists monks in Vietnam who will suicide for peace but few who are willing to change radically, completely and irrevocably to actually eliminate sorrow and malice within themselves.

Still it’s early years and this is new and radical.

But, you have found the very place, the very mailing list, at the right time, for we actualists recognize and acknowledge the factual source of fear and aggression – and we have a proven method for its eradication.

I couldn’t take it all in at the start – the enormity of being able to be free of the Human Condition and its radical consequences for the human species. I just figured someone has to do it – and why not me? Richard was just a normal human being, a boy from the farm, as he puts it, and I had the necessary qualifications – I was just a normal human being, a boy from the suburbs, I could say.

Good Hey...

RESPONDENT: I remember someone explaining that to save an endangered species one needed to exploit the species commercially, to ensure its survival. An unconvincing argument for anyone interested in the species’ quality of life, but it had a pragmatic kind of logic.

PETER: I think there is no doubt that the human species is an endangered species but not from external threat, nor from any ‘environmental’ disaster or earth resources’ depletion, but from the simple fact that human beings cannot live together in anything remotely resembling peace and harmony. As a practicalist, when I came across Richard, I chose to disprove the logic of Ancient Wisdom that you can’t change Human Nature. Otherwise a human existence of perpetual malice and sorrow is indeed a sick joke. I saw in a PCE that the universe is too magnificent, too grand, too perfect and too pure for me to continue to be sorrowful and malicious. So I set out to change the only thing that was wrong – as in silly and senseless – and that was a ‘me’ inside this flesh and blood body.

As for ‘endangered species’, I realized I was not alone in this exercise of seeking peace on earth. It is an almost universal hope and wish, but everyone looks to others to bring it about, to actualize it. Peace on earth is already here, of course, and only you can find it for yourself. A bit from my journal –

[Peter]: ... ‘When I was growing up, as a teenager, it seemed there was a revolution happening on the planet. My father had fought in the Second World War but didn’t talk about what had gone on at all. His sole piece of advice to me was, ‘It doesn’t matter what you do in life, what job you have – be happy.’ I guess he saw that the next war would be fought with Really Big Bombs – atomic bombs – so I might as well make happiness my goal in life, because the next world war would be the last one. In fact the world was facing global suicide, with two nations, each with tens of thousands of nuclear bombs, facing each other in a Mexican stand-off; a bit like two kids in the school ground saying, ‘Go on, I dare you.’ The Cold War was to prove a watershed; from then on world wars meant possible suicide for the species. I remained in childhood ignorance of the historical significance, but my father surreptitiously passed on his warning – a sort of a secret message against society’s values.’ Peter’s Journal, ‘Peace’

This is no small thing we do.

RESPONDENT: Benevolent living, concern for all and quality of life improves because of, and in spite of, Human Nature.

Warring, vicious and malicious behaviour is on the decline in this new millennium, in this perfectly improving perfect universe. Why? Because it doesn’t work as a life style in most cases. People eventually are learning.

PETER: There is a good deal of factual information and statistics available that document the fact that the last century was the bloodiest to date. Given the present millennium is only two months old, I think it is too early to document a decline and I see no reason to predict a decline, given the natural predilection of human beings to fight and feud with each other and their on-going blatant state of denial of their animal instinctual passions.

War deaths have risen dramatically in the 20th century.

There is no information available for number of deaths per 1,000 people in the 1st-15th centuries. 20th century data is up to 1995.

(Source: William Eckhardt, ‘War-Related Deaths Since 3000 BC,’ Bulletin of Peace Proposals, December 1991 and Ruth Leger Sivard, World Military and Social Expenditures 1996)

The universe is perfect, infinite and eternal – it is not ‘perfectly improving’, for it would have to be less than perfect in order to improve. What is less than perfect are human beings and this is only so because they insist that human nature is indeed Human Nature – a set-in-concrete inviolate condition epitomized by malice and sorrow.

In many places on the planet a degree of what is termed civilization is imposed by strict enforcement of a moral, ethical and legal code reinforced and maintained by police and armies, lawyers and judges, fines and jails, Gurus and priests, etc. In these places, war, rape, murder and torture is kept to a tolerable minimum and human malice and sorrow is evidenced in more cunning and subtle ways such as corruption, fighting for causes and rights, innuendo, gossip, sad and violent entertainment, etc.

All this is accepted as a life style – to be the best one can be within the Human Condition is a poor second-rate life whereby an actual freedom is sacrificed in order to remain part of Humanity, the fighting and feuding mob. To feel above it all, or to feel superior to others, is a poor substitute to stepping out of it all. The Human Condition has been on-going for thousands of years and there is no sign of any change eventuating. This is particularly so given the current fashion of denial and acceptance of ‘ Human Nature’ that masquerades as some sort of wisdom or means to cope with life as-it-is.

PETER: Hi everyone,

Another ‘new millennium’ message that is worth thinking about –

His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama’s (the incarnated Avalokitesvara, the Buddha of Compassion, the Holy Lord, the Gentle Glory, the Compassionate, the Defender of the Faith, the Ocean of Wisdom, the Wish-fulfilling Gem) New Millennium Message

[Tenzin Gyatso]: ‘This past century in some ways has been a century of war and bloodshed. ... If we are to change this trend we must seriously consider the concept of non-violence, which is a physical expression of compassion. In order to make non-violence a reality we must first work on internal disarmament and then proceed to work on external disarmament. By internal disarmament I mean ridding ourselves of all the negative emotions that result in violence.’ http://www.tibet.com/NewsRoom/millennium-message.html

With Wisdom like that, let’s not hold our breathe for peace on earth. I saw him on television recently saying the next century should be the ‘century of dialogue’. Fighting with words instead of guns is obviously regarded as the best Humanity can hope to achieve in the next century. The letters to the editor page of the local newspaper where I live are increasingly full of vitriol, and most often from the ‘really-aware’ crowd. More and more people are turning to lawyers, courts and tribunals to fight others or seek retribution so the fashion for standing up for oneself, defending one’s rights – or sharing one’s truth – represents an escalation in malice, not a diminishing.

What happened in Tibet is a classic case of the ideal of non-violence in action. The Good and Holy Leader and his lackeys took the money and fled in the face of aggression, abandoning the ordinary people to their fate. The D.L went to seek shelter behind the Indian army, leaving those behind with no means to defend themselves. Pacifism is like hanging up a sign at the border saying please invade or a sign on your front door saying the doors open, help yourself...

To put one’s faith in the ideal of non-violence is to stubbornly remain in ignorance of the source of violence within the Human Condition.

Contrast the above piece of wishful thinking with an item that cropped up recently –

[ABCnews.com]: CHAT: Is man hard-wired for war?

Violence – Part of Being Human

Deadly wars may be the result of modern technology blended with our Stone Age instincts.

Humankind has lived through a hideously violent century.

World War I, WW II, wars in Vietnam, Cambodia, China, Bangladesh, Korea, Nigeria and elsewhere have extinguished millions upon millions of lives. The killings continue today in Sierra Leone, East Timor and Sudan, to name a few.

Waging war is nothing new for us humans. Bloody conflicts from the Crusades to Kosovo have been a hallmark of our history. Which raises the questions: Is such behaviour simply part of human nature? Are we hard-wired for war?

There’s certainly no definitive answer. But enough scientists have looked into our past – and present – to shed a bit of light on why we do what we do.

New Environment, Old Brain

When interpreting human behaviour, it’s best to remember that the strongest human instincts are to survive and reproduce. What we need to satisfy those instincts hasn’t changed much since our primitive ancestors roamed the globe; it’s about getting enough food, water and mates.

Like it or not, write Leda Cosmides and John Tooby, co-directors of the Centre for Evolutionary Psychology at University of California, Santa Barbara, ‘our modern skulls house a Stone Age mind’.

Though modern-day aggressors may not be aware of it, those primitive instincts drive their behaviours too. A strong group benefits from attacking a weaker group if in the process the aggressors gain fertile lands, reliable water, greater market share – any resources that improve their collective livelihood.

There’s no denying that aggression has been a good survival strategy. Which is why we humans are genetically hard-wired to fight.

But what triggers that aggression and what can magnify it to the point of a Rwanda or a Kosovo?

Richard Wrangham of Harvard University sees two conditions necessary for what he calls ‘coalitional aggression’, or violence perpetrated by groups rather than individuals. One condition is hostility between neighbours.

Human aggression got more organized with the introduction of agriculture about 10,000 years ago, says J. William Gibson, author of Warrior Dreams: Violence and Manhood in Post-Vietnam America. With farming came the concept of land ownership – and defence – and the development of more complex and organized societies. Suddenly, there was more to covet, more to protect and more people around to help do both.

The other condition for group violence is an imbalance of power great enough that aggressors believe they can attack with virtually no risk to themselves. Majorities have persecuted minority groups, whether religious, ethnic or tribal, again and again, believing they’re immune from punishment. The tangled turmoil in the former Yugoslavia is only the most immediate example.

Animals Do it, Too

Humans aren’t the only ones who gang up. Chimpanzees, with whom we share 98.4 percent of our DNA, are another. Wrangham, who wrote Demonic Males: Apes and the Origins of Human Violence, describes five chimps attacking one. Four will hold the victim while the fifth breaks bones and rips out the victim’s throat or testicles.

Examples of taking such advantage of imbalances of power are rare in the animal kingdom because that kind of behaviour requires a sophisticated level of coordination and cooperation. However, both chimps and humans are certainly capable of it.

‘There’s always conflict in societies’, says Neil Wiener, an associate professor of psychology at York University. ‘The issue is, when do these conflicts erupt into violence?’ ABCNEWS.com

So, a bit of ancient spiritual denial and transcendence contrasted with the dawning of scientific recognition of the facts about the Human Condition. The psychologists all say the instincts are ‘hard-wired’, for to contemplate and investigate further to even consider that they are only software would be devastating to their professional pride and their very livelihood. A bit like the Dalai Lama saying we should stop believing in God because he doesn’t exist and stop attempting to embellish the ‘positive emotions’ because it won’t bring an end to malice and sorrow – not only livelihood threatening in his case but threatening his reincarnation as well.

The Dalai Lama often cites a favourite inspirational verse, found in the writings of the renowned 8^th century Buddhist saint Shantideva:

[Tenzin Gyatso]: ‘For as long as space endures

And for as long as living beings remain,

Until then may I too abide

To dispel the misery of the world’. [endquote].

Sounds as though he would be out of a job if human suffering came to an end. It’s called ‘having a vested interest’ in supporting and maintaining human misery. No misery – no need for the Buddha of Compassion. (...)

*

P.S. The leader of the strongest country in the world, Mr. Clinton, gave his ‘new millennium’ message saying that ‘we human beings need to have dreams that are stronger than our memories’. In other words, let us all try to forget the fact that the last century was the bloodiest to date and dream for some miraculous peace in the next century.

Yet, despite the religious prayers and unrealizable dreaming, the facts are –

(Source: William Eckhardt, ‘War-Related Deaths Since 3000 BC’, Bulletin of Peace Proposals , December 1991 and Ruth Leger Sivard, World Military and Social Expenditures 1996)

RESPONDENT: That’s one of the hard ones (for me), Peter. Throwing love away. That and two other aspects of human existence. The imagination of course, a concern I expressed in my first post to the List and the closing of the book on all other possibilities except actualism.

PETER: The only reason I dared to challenge the most sacred of all feelings was that I found it did not work, it always came hand-in-glove with its savage dark side and ... I wanted something better. I’ve found it.

RESPONDENT: Imagination, still reveals its actual effects to me in everything I do. It is how I make a living as a designer.

PETER: I came to realize how limited human imagination is when I began to look at the Human Condition from a wider perspective.

Most of what humans treasure as great literature, art, poetry, sacred texts, music, fables and legends has as their basis either malice or sorrow. Most of what we regard as entertainment is based on violence or sadness. The test of greatness of human imaginative stories is the extent that we are stirred to feel vengeful for the aggrieved, pity for the underdog, saddened at loss, moved by hardship, outraged by the offensive, angered at the hard done by, stimulated by violence, distressed by suffering, etc.

I also came to see that impassioned human imagination was so meagre and paltry when compared to inventiveness, resourcefulness and ingenuity of the electro-chemical brain that is the human body. One only needs to look out at the stars at night to know that what is actual far, far exceeds human impassioned imagination. And yet when cosmologists contemplate the universe they imagine black holes and dark matter – an escape portal to other worlds or some ‘other-universe’ within this universe. This planet is estimated to have between 2,000,000 and 4,500,00 plant and animal species, offering such a variety as to be mind-boggling when compared with the fantasy alien life-forms from outer space created by human imagination. The insect world has such a plethora of species that it may well be an impossible task to ever categorize them. The oceans provide such an amazing multiplicity of life forms that defy any limits of human imagination. Each day brings a new, fresh and unique combination of weather conditions, each moment animate life is arranging and rearranging itself into a myriad of new forms, and this occurs on a paradisiacal planet that is so huge that it is impossible for a single human being to see all of it in a lifetime. The fact that the astounding actuality of this infinite physical universe is beyond the comprehension of a ‘self’-centred human mind has lead to wonder and amazement which has traditionally lead to feelings of awe and reverence and humility – the seeds of the spiritual ‘Universe and I are One’ delusion.

Actuality is far, far bigger than mere feelings or impassioned imagination for it is actual, patently palpable, infinitely varied, observably tangible, manifestly obvious, always apparent, clearly evident, eternally existing and it is happening right here and right now, under our very noses as it were.

RESPONDENT: But to me peace on earth and actually being happy and harmless must take precedence in a human life if we are to live life fully and survive successfully as a species.

PETER: Yep. 160 million died in wars in the last century, an estimated 40 million committed suicide, not to mention all the murders, rapes, torture, corruption, despair, loneliness, domestic violence, child abuse ... and there is no end in sight. It’s clearly time for intelligence to be freed of its burden of the animal survival instincts so we humans can live in utter peace and harmony, perfection and purity. (...)

*

PETER: It is an instinct-fuelled emotion that only exists in the heads and hearts of human beings. There is no love or hate in a tree, a keyboard, a cloud, a coffee cup.

RESPONDENT: And of course when presenting this analogy to any human being, not only those relentlessly inquiring into the human condition, their first response is, but for heaven’s sake! A human being is not a tree, a keyboard, a cloud, a coffee cup! Most of us consider mental activity and emotions as a whole new dimension on earth that we have barely explored. There is so much to investigate, to reflect on, before the human psyche can come to the conclusion that there is no alternative, that its death and extinction is the only way to bring happiness and harmlessness to humanity.

PETER: Yep. Human mental activity and emotion has resulted in an estimated 160 million deaths in wars in the last century, over 40 million suicides, not to mention all the murders, rapes, torture, corruption, despair, loneliness, domestic violence, child abuse ... and there is no end in sight. It’s clearly time for intelligence to be freed of its burden of the animal survival instincts so we humans who want to can live in utter peace and harmony, perfection and purity. Only if you want to, of course, for there is no imperative in Actual Freedom. The universe, being infinite and eternal, has all the time in the world. It was only by abandoning any notion of a life after death, or there being a ‘somewhere else’, could I muster sufficient impatience and urgency to overcome my lethargy.

Actualism Homepage