Actual Freedom – Mailing List ‘D’ Correspondence

Richard’s Correspondence On Mailing List ‘D’

with Srid


VINEETO: If you still agree to use your name ‘Srid’ instead of ‘Respondent No. 1’ (as verbally discussed on the last day of your visit), I would like to receive a short note from you giving your agreement which I can then stick at the top of your report and of your correspondence pages with Richard.

SRID: yes, i’m fine with using ‘srid’ instead of ‘respondent no. 1’ on the AF website. i understand that the name would be used in the following pages, http://www.actualfreedom.com.au/directorscorrespondence/02AMatterofStyle.html, http://www.actualfreedom.com.au/richard/listdcorrespondence/listsrid.htm in addition to that published trip summary (Srid to Vineeto 12.8.2013)


Dec 26 2015

Re: Goodbye

SRID (to Claudiu): [...] one has to wonder why are some folks here consistently opposed to Srid being engaged in this demonstrably successful route?

RESPONDENT No. 00: Speaking for myself, it just looks like a long detour. Why not start with figuring out harmlessness – the real deal, not as a moralistic injunction – right away? Wouldn’t that be fun to figure out?

SRID: As saying ‘not cool,’ while looking piercingly into his or her eyes, in response to a racist cop, living not in a country with less than lawful police-force and with no prior/ current crime committed on my part, who had just made a racist snide remark is not even remotely similar to ‘pursuing power [*with* people]’ (thus harming the said other) – rather it is all to do with both ceasing to wallow in social-identity reactions thereby buttressing the already existant victim-bully power-relations/ psychic-network (via standing up for oneself by ceasing to be a victim), thus ceasing to harm oneself (via ceasing to be a victim) and ceasing to indirectly harm the other (via facilitating the bully) and thereby getting back to feeling pleasant sooner than later – does it not make you wonder why you and some other folks get into the habit of immediately grasping onto the notion of harmlessness (as written in AFT) whenever reading what I have to report lately? Over at Gitter chat, I’ve had people to whom notions of ‘rebellion’ came to picture ... all from those two words ‘not cool’.

RICHARD: G’day Srid,

Just a quick note, whilst reading-through the latest posts in ‘Yahoo Groups’ online, so as to point out how those responses from your co-respondents are not necessarily [quote] ‘all’ [endquote] from those two words as the [quote] ‘power’ [endquote] you are self-evidently channelling – as per your ‘while looking piercingly into his or her eyes’ wording – is that of a police-force calibre (i.e., just one step below that of a military-force calibre).

Viz.:

Dec 08 03:46

[Srid]: Met a bunch of local police guys at a breakfast place. They give pretty solid vibes .. Could learn a lot from them.

And then I began getting some ‘power’ bank, followed by resurrection of positive hedone. The best of all power seems to be the power to remain unfazed at anything. There is a delicacy involved, that needs to be learned, in handling aggressors

Back not bank

Forget about feeling good without sufficient amount of this power. There is a reason the current actually free tend to be old farts (https://gitter.im/ActualFreedom/home?at=5665b7f4c15bca7e3c968053).

Those [quote] ‘pretty solid vibes’ [endquote] given forth at that breakfast place, stemming as they do from the arrogated right of ‘The State’ to act with lethal force, viscerally convey the undeniable fact that state-trained members of a police-force are officially licensed to kill, maim, or wound, in the course of duty (albeit not to the extent that members of a military-force are likewise licensed).

‘Tis no wonder they conveyed to you [quote] ‘the power to remain unfazed’ [endquote] at that breakfast place, eh?

*

Furthermore, you want to [quote] ‘grow and retain this power’ [endquote].

Viz.:

Dec 08 04:05

[Srid]: The ‘other’ would want ‘me’ never have this power as that would mean ‘they’ can no longer control ‘me’ ... Which is all the more reason to grow and retain this power (not unlike growing muscles). (https://gitter.im/ActualFreedom/home?at=5665bc4477d271e66db25e34).

*

Lastly, that [quote] ‘racist cop’ [endquote] scenario you have been liberally posting in various venues is purely hypothetical (i.e., an untested speculation).

Viz.:

Dec 10 05:23

[Claudiu]: Alright a specific example. Say you get pulled over by a cop, he asks you some questions. he says something insulting/snide, maybe even racist – it ‘hits’ you. now if your goal is to get power, you will feel powerless... you will want to lob another ‘hit’ to even it out and get back to being unfazed. i hope you realize what a terrible idea this would be to a cop who’s already aggressive. what he wants is submission – even something polite like ‘i’d appreciate it if you wouldn’t say that’, will likely only serve to rile him up more. [...].

Dec 10 06:15

[Srid]: [...]. If the cop example were to happen to me, my response would depend on various factors. If this was happening in India, or if I had commited a valid crime, then I would fake submission and try to bow out as early as possible. But otherwise (like here in Canada, and without any crime committed or violation of rules), I would respond to him – while piercingly looking straight in his eyes – with anything that directly communicates my not feeling cool about his behaviour (it may even manifest in returning sarcasm if that is his mode of operandi). Of course, he will have no choice but to leave me alone. [...]. (https://gitter.im/ActualFreedom/home?at=566871abb692dc8f48f52cf5).

That last sentence of yours is a doozie ... do you really think, upon a sober reassessment, that your unbacked-by-lethal-force affective vibes/psychic currents will gain dominion over the backed-by-lethal-force affective vibes/psychic currents of an [quote] ‘already aggressive’ [endquote] officer of a police-force?

Regards,
Richard.

Dec 27 2015

Re: Goodbye

SRID: G’day Richard, Good to be chatting with you!

RICHARD: G’day Srid, Ha ... I am aware you wrote of a ‘cunning plan’ you had to get me writing but it did not occur to me it would be as vulpecular as this.

*

RICHARD: That last sentence of yours is a doozie [viz.: ‘Of course, he will have no choice but to leave me alone’] ... do you really think, upon a sober reassessment, that your unbacked-by-lethal-force affective vibes/ psychic currents will gain dominion over the backed-by-lethal-force affective vibes/ psychic currents of an [quote] ‘already aggressive’ [endquote] officer of a police-force?

SRID: The affective vibes/ psychic currents I would give off, in that hypothetical scenario, would be different in nature to that of the racist/ aggressive police officer (backed by lethal force or not) ...

RICHARD: First of all, it is rather telling that out of the entirety of my previous note – written online whilst reading-through the latest posts on the ‘Yahoo Groups’ web-page solely to point out how the ‘power’ you are self-evidently channelling is that of a police-force calibre/ just one step below that of a military-force calibre – the portion you chose to address above (with further similarly untested speculations) is the hypothetical section.

Rather than wander down ‘Speculation Lane’ with you here again is your own account of whence the affective vibes/ psychic currents are derived which you have, consequentially, been channelling for nigh-on three weeks now.

Viz.:

[Srid]: ‘Met a bunch of local police guys at a breakfast place. They give pretty solid vibes .. Could learn a lot from them. And then I began getting some ‘power’ bank, followed by resurrection of positive hedone. The best of all power seems to be the power to remain unfazed at anything. There is a delicacy involved, that needs to be learned, in handling aggressors. Back not bank. Forget about feeling good without sufficient amount of this power. There is a reason the current actually free tend to be old farts’. (Dec 08, 2015, 03:46).

Those [quote] ‘pretty solid vibes’ [endquote] you felt when given forth by [quote] ‘a bunch of local police guys’ [endquote] whom you met at that breakfast place – specifically noted by you at the time as being [quote] ‘the power to remain unfazed’ [endquote] as you then [quote] ‘began getting some ‘power’’ [endquote] yourself along with its evidentially confirmative hedonic-tone (‘evidentially’ as per your ‘best of all power’ wording – cannot be markedly [quote] ‘different in nature’ [endquote] unless you did not [quote] ‘learn a lot from them’ [endquote] after all.

(And if you did not then why even mention it or refer to them – let alone in such complimentary and/or affirmative detail – in the first place).

This is the advantage of the written and date-stamped word over a (potentially) faulty memory and/or a (potentially) selective recall.

Regards,
Richard.

Dec 28 2015

Re: Goodbye

SRID: Good to be chatting with you!

RICHARD: Ha ... I am aware you wrote of a ‘cunning plan’ you had to get me writing but it did not occur to me it would be as vulpecular as this.

SRID: Ha ... you must be referring to: https://gitter.im/ActualFreedom/home?at=56438d99bf9b7d0c39874bb4 ... my intention was to get you or Vineeto or Peter to participate in the Gitter chat room than merely have you resume writing to the list.

RICHARD: G’day Srid,

Yes, the actual exchange (on Nov 12 , 2015) is as follows.

Viz.:

• [Respondent No. 38]: ‘It would be interesting if Richard or Vineeto came to the chat someday, haha’.
• [Srid]: ‘I have a cunning plan for that. Periodically refer to this chat room when posting to lists. eg: ‘as Claudiu discussed about this moment in the Gitter chat room, I ...’. Then RPV, who lurk the list, will be left wondering what those chat contents are. And they will have no choice but to join the chat room (although the chat log is public, so they may just read it without joining)’. (https://gitter.im/ActualFreedom/home?at=56438d7dbf9b7d0c39874bac).

Of course, the above was written when that venue was still new – a bare six days after reopening it (on Nov 06, 2015) – because thirty-two days later (on Dec 14, 2015) you were making the following observation on the ‘Yahoo Groups’ forum.

Viz.:

• [Srid]: ‘The chat medium, while suitable for casual conversations, is not in and of itself sufficient for clear communication of one’s practice (it is also not reasonable to have others read through the entire exchange)’. (Message № 21387).

Given you were dismissive of Alan’s explanation (in your message № 21338) in regards him changing his mind (in his message № 21332) vis-à-vis a video link-up – a link-up with the clearly-expressed aim of such being more conducive to the development of *an intimate ambience* than via the written word – for the very reason he had not [quote] ‘read through the entire exchange’ [endquote] in question, for himself, it bodes well you now see such a requirement as being ‘not reasonable’.

Also, a day later (Dec 15, 2015) you made the following observation.

Viz.:

• [Srid]: ‘I find it difficult to search for something in Gitter. After reading your email, I was reminded of and tried to find our conversation around race, the other day ...’. (Message № 21393).

The way I solved that short-coming was to copy-paste the entire ‘Gitter Chat’, from Nov 06, 2015, all the way through to Dec 25, 2015, into a long text file and save it to my hard drive so as to be able to have both instant search results and full-scale scrolling at will.

As the copy-paste process took several hours – only the chat-sequence which appears on-screen, plus a similar amount immediately above and immediately below, is available for selection at any one time (before its software loads the next short section and unloads the previous section) – it is highly unlikely your ‘cunning plan’ to have me ‘join the chat room’ will ever come to fruition.

As your ‘...than *merely* have you resume writing to the list’ put-down of the ‘Yahoo Groups’ forum belies your very valid observations from 11-12 days ago (as in Message № 21387 and Message № 21393 further above) I will leave you with another observation you posted back then when you were not quite so disdainful of the only venue I write to (on occasion).

Viz.:

• [Srid]: ‘I now see the value of having mailing lists (and writing to it) in addition to chat’. (Message № 21387].

*

SRID (to Claudiu): [...] one has to wonder why are some folks here consistently opposed to Srid being engaged in this demonstrably successful route?

RESPONDENT No. 00: Speaking for myself, it just looks like a long detour. Why not start with figuring out harmlessness – the real deal, not as a moralistic injunction – right away? Wouldn’t that be fun to figure out?

SRID: As saying ‘not cool,’ while looking piercingly into his or her eyes, in response to a racist cop, living not in a country with less than lawful police-force and with no prior/ current crime committed on my part, who had just made a racist snide remark is not even remotely similar to ‘pursuing power [*with* people]’ (thus harming the said other) – rather it is all to do with both ceasing to wallow in social-identity reactions thereby buttressing the already existant victim-bully power-relations/ psychic-network (via standing up for oneself by ceasing to be a victim), thus ceasing to harm oneself (via ceasing to be a victim) and ceasing to indirectly harm the other (via facilitating the bully) and thereby getting back to feeling pleasant sooner than later – does it not make you wonder why you and some other folks get into the habit of immediately grasping onto the notion of harmlessness (as written in AFT) whenever reading what I have to report lately? Over at Gitter chat, I’ve had people to whom notions of ‘rebellion’ came to picture ... all from those two words ‘not cool’.

RICHARD: Just a quick note, whilst reading-through the latest posts in ‘Yahoo Groups’ online, so as to point out how those responses from your co-respondents are not necessarily [quote] ‘all’ [endquote] from those two words as the [quote] ‘power’ [endquote] you are self-evidently channelling – as per your ‘while looking piercingly into his or her eyes’ wording – is that of a police-force calibre (i.e., just one step below that of a military-force calibre).

Viz.:

• [Srid]: Met a bunch of local police guys at a breakfast place. They give pretty solid vibes .. Could learn a lot from them.
And then I began getting some ‘power’ bank, followed by resurrection of positive hedone. The best of all power seems to be the power to remain unfazed at anything. There is a delicacy involved, that needs to be learned, in handling aggressors
Back not bank
Forget about feeling good without sufficient amount of this power. There is a reason the current actually free tend to be old farts (https://gitter.im/ActualFreedom/home?at=5665b7f4c15bca7e3c968053, Dec 08 2015, 03:46).

Those [quote] ‘pretty solid vibes’ [endquote] given forth at that breakfast place, stemming as they do from the arrogated right of ‘The State’ to act with lethal force, viscerally convey the undeniable fact that state-trained members of a police-force are officially licensed to kill, maim, or wound, in the course of duty (albeit not to the extent that members of a military-force are likewise licensed).

‘Tis no wonder they conveyed to you [quote] ‘the power to remain unfazed’ [endquote] at that breakfast place, eh?

*

Furthermore, you want to [quote] ‘grow and retain this power’ [endquote].

Viz.:

• [Srid]: ‘The ‘other’ would want ‘me’ never have this power as that would mean ‘they’ can no longer control ‘me’ ... Which is all the more reason to grow and retain this power (not unlike growing muscles)’. (https://gitter.im/ActualFreedom/home?at=5665bc4477d271e66db25e340, Dec 08 2015, 04:05).

SRID: For the record, I do not disagree that my power of being unfazed – that I’m channeling towards the purpose of not habitually feeling powerless anymore, via standing up for myself and not letting the bullies have their way once again (keeping me down) – *is* that of (and *derived from*) a police-force calibre (the ‘pretty solid vibes’ felt from the breakfast place).

RICHARD: I have reinserted the sequence of my initial note (Message № 21441) so that you may, perhaps, begin to see for yourself just why your co-respondents have been responding the way they have.

Do you, perchance, now see that their responses have not necessarily been [quote] ‘all from those two words ‘not cool’’ [endquote] after all?

*

Of course, you also may not be able to see it because in your eyes your co-respondents are the [quote] ‘other’ [endquote] who, you all-inclusively declare, would want you never to have that police-force calibre power as that would mean [quote] ‘they’ [endquote] can no longer control you.

Indeed, the legal entity officially known as ‘The Actual Freedom Trust’ – which you choose to characterise as [quote] ‘the AFT’ [endquote] for some unknown reason – is also the [quote] ‘other’ [endquote], in your eyes, and thus out to control you as well.

Furthermore, those fellow human beings Richard, Vineeto and Peter – whose names you reduct, amalgamate/ homogenise and thus deindividualise as [quote] ‘RPV’ [endquote] and who otherwise feature as [quote] ‘old farts’ [endquote] in your mind – also constitute the [quote] ‘other’ [endquote] who are out to control you.

Moreover, what is known in actualism lingo as the psychic network (a.k.a. the psychic web) – and nowhere else, as such, because actualism is entirely new to human history – has morphed into being the [quote] ‘colonial psychic network’ [endquote] in your by-now beleaguered mind.

Viz.:

• [Srid; Dec 11 16:01]: ‘... feeling powerful (as in, having control, not letting others bring me down – and, especially, keep me down – which is what that *colonial psychic network* is all about) is the only known way to ‘launch’ myself up to a platform from where I can do all of this. #PoBULog ...’. [emphasis added].

*

• [Srid; Dec 11 16:17]: ‘When I proactively utilize power to launch myself out of the *colonial psychic network*, such things (‘talking back to someone in power’) may be bound to happen ...’. [emphasis added].

*

• [Srid; Dec 11 16:23]: ‘... unfazed is a quality I use to launch myself out of *the colonial network* ...’. [emphasis added].

*

• [Srid; Dec 12 13:33]: ‘Yup. There are a couple of things you are missing. One, the visceral experience of *colonial psychic network* (which you may not experience) ...’. [emphasis added].

• [Respondent No. 44; Dec 12 13:34]: ‘I guess i am not familiar with the term colonial psychich network’.

• [Srid; Dec 12 14:05]: ‘And since you may not be viscerally familiar with it either, maybe consider any other context where you would normally feel anxious/ powerless, and that which affects the majority of your waking moment. And substitute the cop scenario with something suitable (to that context). An example context (not sure if it applies to you) is relationships with women’.

• [Respondent No. 44; Dec 12 14:09]: ‘I’ll read up on colonial psychic network later’.

• [Srid; Dec 12 14:10]: ‘‘Colonial psychic network’ is new phrase of mine to refer to the White colonization effects *on the psyche of everyone* (the ‘minority’ and ‘majority’) ...’. [emphasis added].

Given that colonisation is not peculiar to those peoples whom you characterise as [quote] ‘White’ [endquote] – the Moguls, for just one example out of multitudinous instances throughout history, colonised most of the hundreds of states recurrently at war with each other on the Indian Subcontinent long before the Portuguese, Dutch, British and French traders ventured thus far from home circa the 15th-16th Centuries (and yet to you it is only the ‘colonization effects’ stemming from those of a European nationality which hold ‘the psyche of everyone’ on the planet in thrall) – then here is a word-of-the-day for your consideration.

Viz.:

• paranoid (adj.): 1. relating to, characteristic of, or affected with paranoia; 2. exhibiting or characterised by extreme and irrational fear or distrust of others; [e.g.]: ‘paranoid suspicion that the phone might be bugged’; (n.): one affected with paranoia. [Greek, from paranoos: para-, ‘beyond’ + nous, noos, ‘mind’]. ~ (American Heritage Dictionary).

*

For further consideration: in effect you are currently at war with every man, woman and child on the planet still hosting a feeling-being – affectively/ psychically at war, that is, with your police-force calibre affective/ psychic ‘power’ transmitted instantaneously via the psychic network (i.e., the psychic web connecting all feeling beings globally) irrespective of spatial extension – as per your [quote] ‘everyone (the ‘minority’ and ‘majority’)’ [endquote] wording.

Lastly, do you now comprehend why Alan changed his mind about a video link-up (a link-up with the clearly-expressed aim of such being more conducive to the development of *an intimate ambience* than via the written word)?

Regards,
Richard.

P.S.: Incidentally, your police-force calibre affective/ psychic ‘power’ is impotent when it comes to dealing with the handful of flesh-and-blood bodies populating Terra Actualis.

Dec 29 2015

Re: Goodbye

RICHARD: I have reinserted the sequence of my initial note (Message № 21441) so that you may, perhaps, begin to see for yourself just why your co-respondents have been responding the way they have.

SRID: I re-read your reinserted sequence and I noticed something I never totally observed before. Effectively you said the ‘pretty solid vibes’ of the police officers *stem* from the license to kill, maim or wound in the course of duty. In other words, those police officers remain unfazed simply because they *can* (unlike the civilians) kill, maim or wound any offending civilian. Thus their power is not merely self-generated, but *stems* from such an actual license to kill. In my case, however, this power would have to be self-generated as there is no such license provided. Yes, it is no wonder they conveyed to me [quote] ‘the power to remain unfazed’ [endquote] at that breakfast place.

RICHARD: G’day Srid,

Now you have ‘totally observed’ the salient point which prompted me to post that quick note to you in the first place a sober reassessment of your hypothetical scenario, as per the latter portion of that note of mine, will surely be conducive to such salience bearing its fruit.

Viz.:

• [Claudiu]: ‘Alright a specific example. Say you get pulled over by a cop, he asks you some questions. he says something insulting/snide, maybe even racist - it ‘hits’ you. now if your goal is to get power, you will feel powerless... you will want to lob another ‘hit’ to even it out and get back to being unfazed. i hope you realize what a terrible idea this would be to a cop who’s already aggressive. what he wants is submission – even something polite like ‘i’d appreciate it if you wouldn’t say that’, will likely only serve to rile him up more ...’. (Dec 10 05:23).

• [Srid]. ‘If the cop example were to happen to me, my response would depend on various factors. If this was happening in India, or if I had commited a valid crime, then I would fake submission and try to bow out as early as possible. But otherwise (like here in Canada, and without any crime committed or violation of rules), I would respond to him – while piercingly looking straight in his eyes – with anything that directly communicates my not feeling cool about his behaviour (it may even manifest in returning sarcasm if that is his mode of operandi). Of course, he will have no choice but to leave me alone ...’. (Dec 10 06:15).

• [Richard]: ‘That last sentence of yours is a doozie [viz.: ‘Of course, he will have no choice but to leave me alone’] ... do you really think, upon a sober reassessment, that your unbacked-by-lethal-force affective vibes/ psychic currents will gain dominion over the backed-by-lethal-force affective vibes/ psychic currents of an [quote] ‘already aggressive’ [endquote] officer of a police-force?’ (Message № 21441).

Regards,
Richard.

January 14 2016

Re: Goodbye

RICHARD: I have reinserted the sequence of my initial note (Message № 21441) so that you may, perhaps, begin to see for yourself just why your co-respondents have been responding the way they have.

SRID: I re-read your reinserted sequence and I noticed something I never totally observed before. Effectively you said the ‘pretty solid vibes’ of the police officers *stem* from the license to kill, maim or wound in the course of duty. In other words, those police officers remain unfazed simply because they *can* (unlike the civilians) kill, maim or wound any offending civilian. Thus their power is not merely self-generated, but *stems* from such an actual license to kill. In my case, however, this power would have to be self-generated as there is no such license provided. Yes, it is no wonder they conveyed to me [quote] ‘the power to remain unfazed’ [endquote] at that breakfast place.

RICHARD: Now you have ‘totally observed’ the salient point which prompted me to post that quick note to you in the first place a sober reassessment of your hypothetical scenario, as per the latter portion of that note of mine, will surely be conducive to such salience bearing its fruit. Viz.:

• [Claudiu]: ‘Alright a specific example. Say you get pulled over by a cop, he asks you some questions. he says something insulting/snide, maybe even racist - it ‘hits’ you. now if your goal is to get power, you will feel powerless... you will want to lob another ‘hit’ to even it out and get back to being unfazed. i hope you realize what a terrible idea this would be to a cop who’s already aggressive. what he wants is submission - even something polite like ‘i’d appreciate it if you wouldn’t say that’, will likely only serve to rile him up more ...’. (Dec 10 05:23).
• [Srid]. ‘If the cop example were to happen to me, my response would depend on various factors. If this was happening in India, or if I had commited a valid crime, then I would fake submission and try to bow out as early as possible. But otherwise (like here in Canada, and without any crime committed or violation of rules), I would respond to him – while piercingly looking straight in his eyes – with anything that directly communicates my not feeling cool about his behaviour (it may even manifest in returning sarcasm if that is his mode of operandi). Of course, he will have no choice but to leave me alone ... (Dec 10 06:15).
• [Richard]: ‘That last sentence of yours is a doozie [viz.: ‘Of course, he will have no choice but to leave me alone’] ... do you really think, upon a sober reassessment, that your unbacked-by-lethal-force affective vibes/ psychic currents will gain dominion over the backed-by-lethal-force affective vibes/ psychic currents of an [quote] ‘already aggressive’ [endquote] officer of a police-force?’ (Message № 21441).

SRID: The reassessment is that I’d shrug it off and move on, as that is the best course of action in this particular context, while remaining as unfazed as I can while remembering the fact that such incidents with officers of police-force are very rare anyway (I recall just one incident in last few years) ...

RICHARD: G’day Srid,

Ahh ... good (I was primarily concerned about how that ill-considered attitude/ approach would get you into unnecessary strife, in those once-every-few-years incidents, over the next 50+ years you have remaining on this planet).

SRID: ... whereas it is the run-of-the-mill civilians/colleagues/etc that one come in contact with on daily basis that are known to give everyday troubles - which situations still warrant an appropriate response à la ‘piercingly looking into his/her eyes’ (if necessary) ...

RICHARD: I have, of course, read carefully through your reply (Message № 21451), to my third email in this sequence (Message № 21450), regarding just whom it is that the term [quote] ‘other’ [endquote] means to you and, despite your protestations to the contrary contained therein, your above wording confirms that your usage of that term does indeed refer, potentially, to every man, woman and child on the planet still hosting a feeling-being ... albeit now modified, via your DhO-style ‘run-of-the-mill’ elitist terminology, so as to not include ‘ariyan’ buddhistic practitioners.

In effect, you are telling me how you now intend to discriminate (as per your ‘still warrant’ wording) between police-force officers and what would otherwise be, were it not for your elitist worldview, your fellow citizens, colleagues, and etcetera – on the basis of those ‘run-of-the-mill’ citizens, colleagues, and etcetera, being not sanctioned by the state to resort to lethal force if required – so as to project police-force calibre affective vibes and psychic currents into their affective-psychic world-space.

It appears that it has not occurred to you how this aggressive attitude/ approach of yours – your tit-for-tat modus vivendi – is in lieu of dissolving those childhood hurts you stubbornly nurse in your adult bosom.

Viz.:

• [Srid]: ‘Being now in a collectivistic culture [...] I noticed that deeply entrenched collectivistic identity (of 23 yrs) resurfacing where a bored withdrawal has been commonplace. This is but reflective of how I grew up from childhood – having been bullied, both in overt and covert ways, both by some relatives (extended family members) during formative years and fellow students (both male and female) from formative school years up till high-school years – the result of which is that I had been withdrawing from people from as early as about 5 years old. When for example an extended relative comes to visit us – or, for another example, when the students of my father’s home-tuition come in for the evening – the young Srid would impulsively lock himself inside his room until they leave, for the fear that they would ‘judge’ him negatively in a way those relatives/peers did during his formative years. While as an adult I no longer lock myself up, *the feeling is more or less the same*’. [emphasis added]. (Message № 21438; Dec 21, 2015; Re: Goodbye).

Look, bullying in childhood is all-too-common – the identity inhabiting this flesh-and-blood body all those years ago fell victim to that very syndrome due in no small degree to being a particularly sensitive feeling-being (the perpetrators are referred to on my portion of The Actual Freedom Trust web site as ‘bully-boys and feisty-femmes’) – incurring all manner of childhood hurts. Even so, the ‘grown-up’ who carries those hurt feelings, no matter how deeply felt, over into adulthood (as in my ‘stubbornly nurse in your adult bosom’ wording further above) is surely yet to have earned the title ‘mature adult’.

Speaking personally, the feeling-being inhabiting this flesh-and-blood body all those years ago instantaneously rid ‘himself’ of the bulk of those school-age hurts and slights – whilst sitting out in the sunshine one fine morning, putting pencil to paper in order to record those dastardly events for posterity, via seeing-in-a-flash that, as it was simply not possible to ever physically be a child again (and thus juvenilely susceptible to not only those bully-boys and feisty-femmes but any enabling teachers and principals as well), there was absolutely no need whatsoever to continue carrying them – which childhood hurts were so vital, as it soon became increasingly apparent thereafter, to the maintenance of the righteous indignation which fuelled ‘his’ plaints of injustice (a.k.a. ‘unfairness’) and, thus, ‘his’ mission to bring justice (a.k.a. ‘fairness’) to the world.

In other words, with the dissolution of those childhood hurts the (deeply felt) need for your aggressive tit-for-tat modus vivendi will also vanish ... leaving you free to treat ...um... the ‘other’ as a fellow human being (rather than as an adversary to gain dominion over).

SRID: ... for already stated reasons (how it being, overall, conductive to feeling good/pleasant sooner than later).

RICHARD: First and foremost, you are conflating the (affective) feeling known as ‘feeling good’ with the (hedonic) feeling you call ‘feeling pleasant’ as if they were one-and-the-same-thing when they are not.

For instance (Message № 21385):

• [Srid]: ‘I appreciate you posting this quote, as it demonstrates the notion of doing all that one can, with the full effect of ‘my’ being, in order to consistently feel pleasant[1] instead of bowing out of such a boots-and-all approach via falling for such moralistic injunctions as ‘No need to invent fancy schemes and methods’.

Footnote [1]: If you have been following the Gitter chat you would know I prefer ‘feel pleasant’ to ‘feel good’ *(although they are the same)* as the word ‘pleasant’ has a strong referent (‘the thing that a word or phrase denotes or stands for’) to vedana (hedonic tone) than the word ‘good’, and also because the words ‘feeling good’ have weak referent (in my mind) to its intended meaning. Consistently feeling good, in and of itself, excludes the ‘good feelings’ – as the good feelings are highly dependent’. [emphasis added].

Essentially, hedonic-tone has three characteristics: pleasure, displeasure and neither-pleasure-nor-displeasure. Thus, affectively ‘feeling good’ has a corresponding pleasurable hedonic-tone whereas affectively ‘feeling bad’ has, as an accompaniment, a displeasureable hedonic-tone (as in, speaking colloquially, it does not feel good, hedonically, to be affectively feeling bad).

Now, whilst anger (for an obvious instance) has a displeasureable hedonic-tone, typically, under certain circumstances – and for a certain type of person – a pleasurable hedonic-tone can ensue. The English word ‘glee’ (when commensurate with the German ‘schadenfreude’) is a classic example of this.

Viz.:

• glee (n.): great merriment or delight, often caused by someone else’s misfortune; (adj.): gleeful; (adv.): gleefully; (n.): gleefulnesss. ~ (Collins English Dictionary).
• glee (n.): malicious satisfaction. ~ (Princeton’s WordNet 3.0).
• glee (n.): great delight, especially from one’s own good fortune or another’s misfortune; [e.g.]: ‘his face lit up with impish glee’; ‘Too often their misfortunes are met with glee, a schadenfreude [i.e., ‘pleasure derived by someone from another person’s misfortune’] that is quite horrifying’. ~ (Oxford English Dictionary).

It is no wonder you (hedonically) feel pleasant – as per your footnoted ‘in order to consistently feel pleasant’ words as quoted further above – upon channelling that police-force calibre ‘power’ (so as to obtain dominion over those ‘run-of-the-mill’ citizens, colleagues, and etcetera), eh?

‘Tis nothing but old-fashioned gleefulness (obtained at another’s expense) under the guise of [quote] ‘standing up for oneself’ [endquote].

Viz.:

• [Srid]: ‘Devika’s advice of ‘standing up for oneself’ (although misplaced to a flesh and blood body) is eminently sensible for a feeling being’.
(Message № 21438; Re: Goodbye; Dec 21, 2015).

Incidentally, and in regards to taking ‘Devika’s advice’, I cannot put it any more succinctly than Claudiu did recently.

Viz.:

• [Claudiu]: ‘All that is irrevocable in her [Devika’s] case is that she died without ever having become actually free...’.
(Mesage № 21535; Re: Another plug for the actualism method; Jan 11 9:12 PM).

As for your ‘is eminently sensible for a feeling being’ observation: please be advised that it was the feeling-being inhabiting this flesh-and-blood body all those years ago who successfully put into effect the third alternative to either feeling powerful (as in ‘standing up for oneself’ for instance) or feeling powerless (as in being ‘bullied, both in overt and covert ways’ for example) – to wit: feeling harmless/ innocuous (which not only dynamically defuses that entire power-structure/ power-battle way of life, so endemic in the animal realm, but thereby actively enables intimacy as well) – and not this flesh-and-blood body typing these words.

Further to that point: as I have written before on this forum (in Message № 19576 and Message № 19928) how the reports/ descriptions/ explanations I share with my fellow human beings are, typically, field-tested accounts of that which has worked to deliver the goods, it is quite absurd to even think for a moment I would give advice applicable only for an actually free person to a feeling-being.

*

In case that is still not clear: the counsel I consistently offered to Devika – vis-à-vis her insistence on ‘standing up for oneself’ to all and sundry – came from feeling-being ‘Richard’ (i.e., from ‘his’ success) and not from this flesh-and-blood body typing these words.

Moreover, during the last 13 years of her life (after transmogrifying from ‘Devika’ into ‘Irene’) she alienated almost everyone she came in contact with – of particular note her neighbours to the left; her neighbours to the right; her neighbours across the street – such that a characterisation I made en passant, over six years ago, is particularly apt in regards to my ‘thereby actively enables intimacy as well’ remark further above.

Viz.:

[Respondent № 14]: (...). Quote of the day: ‘A little sincerity is a dangerous thing, and a great deal of it is absolutely fatal’. ~ Oscar Wilde.
[Richard]: Ha ... my second wife, *who died a lonesome spinster*, would often quote his ‘not getting what one wants/ getting what one wants’ quip (...). [emphasis added]. (Richard, List D No.14a, 25 November 2009).

The terminology for anyone of the other sex is *who died a lonesome bachelor*, of course, as any such self-induced lack of intimacy is not a gendered matter.

Regards,
Richard.


RETURN TO MAILING LIST ‘D’ INDEX

SRID’S REPORT OF VISITING RICHARD AND VINEETO

RICHARD’S HOME PAGE

The Third Alternative

(Peace On Earth In This Life Time As This Flesh And Blood Body)

Here is an actual freedom from the Human Condition, surpassing Spiritual Enlightenment and any other Altered State Of Consciousness, and challenging all philosophy, psychiatry, metaphysics (including quantum physics with its mystic cosmogony), anthropology, sociology ... and any religion along with its paranormal theology. Discarding all of the beliefs that have held humankind in thralldom for aeons, the way has now been discovered that cuts through the ‘Tried and True’ and enables anyone to be, for the first time, a fully free and autonomous individual living in utter peace and tranquillity, beholden to no-one.

Richard’s Text ©The Actual Freedom Trust: 1997-.  All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer and Use Restrictions and Guarantee of Authenticity