That’s not how it got to me.
The judging factor is the labeling of something being Good or Bad or Whatever… and as such the outcome of the thinking process.
We have clarified that point. In my first post here:
I was expressing my views on the political movements. Are those views the outcome of the thinking process? Maybe, or maybe they could be just observations of facts. And let’s be honest, aren’t all our discussions an outcome of the thinking process? How can you distinguish in another, when it’s objective observation and when it’s a conjecture created by thought? Your judgement versus my judgement? It’s infantile.
But then Huguette introduced the issue of the reaction of the people to abusing and so on. We have agreed on that point.
I don’t see what you are doing NOW !
Is it that Huguette didn’t agree with you the whole way down ? Which is her right to do so !
Is it that I’m not fully understand the whole discussion or dialogue ? Which can be true or not !
Or is it that you contradict yourself by:
It’s not about you versus her or me versus you , if we truly listen something can come clear and if not one can still stay a fellow 
human being
1 Like
I’m sorry for not replying sooner but have been busy preparing for a trip amongst other things and will reply fully soon to you, voyager and natarajan. Thank you for the links to the talks which were very interesting.
I’m just trying to answer your questions and explain my answers.
Please follow me slowly.
You started asking:
“But is Fear the driving force?”
I answered to that and explained that I was speaking about fear beacause our discussion lead to fear.
Then you asked:
“do we see the posible power of one individual acting different,”
This deals with possibilities, does it not?
I agreed that there could be that possibility, but I wanted to introduce a different point of view about “possibilities”, that of Huguette. A discussion is after all a comparison of point of views, isn’t it?
Am I not allowed to express my thinking about her point of view?
Than you said:
“That’s not how it got to me.”
So I ought to explain to you again what I meant. The only way to clarify things in a debate is to proceed in this way, replying to the request of the other. You spoke about the judging factor, so I had to explain that I was judging the political movements. If you don’t agree with that then you should have debated that point.
It’s her right to do so and she did quite well. I don’t think she needs your help. And it’s my right (what a bad expression!) to disagree too, if you put it that way 
My sentence: “your judgement versus my judgement” referred to the question of mine:
"And let’s be honest, aren’t all our discussions an outcome of the thinking process? How can you distinguish in another, when it’s objective observation and when it’s a conjecture created by thought?
You had said:
“and as such the outcome of the thinking process.”
What I say can be the outcome of thinking process and so is what you say obviously!, so how can you distinguish when it’s the outcome of thought or not?
So what is the point of your post?
Watching a sad, for me, phenomena taking place in the US. Maybe similar to what took place in Germany as incredulous people watched Hitler’s rise to power and the subsequent activities of what were called ‘Hitler Youth’…A group of twelve or so young men and women all maskless, with a few small children in tow , many of them wearing the red Maga hats of Trump supporters marching through the aisles of a large department store, shouting, "Take off your masks! and “we’re not going to take it anymore!”…
1 Like
you obviously missed it.
Indeed a very sad event to see, and the outcome of a divided country.
Yes. and I don’t want to make conjectures.
True Wim and hopefully one day ‘countries ‘ will be a thing of the past!
1 Like
But why stay in the shit of today ?
Once someone explain it by answering: “Because shit sit soft.”
Hmmmm. Shit stinks…and that’s a fact!
Hi Dan,
Coincidence or not, but yesterday I came upon this text from K. hereby the start of it:
"The Urgency of Change
Questioner: Please, sir, could you tell me how I am to live in this world? I don’t want to be part of it yet I have to live in it, I have to have a house and earn my own living. And my neighbours are of this world; my children play with theirs, and so one becomes a part of this ugly mess, whether one wants to or not. I want to find out how to live in this world without escaping from it, without going into a monastery or around the world in a sailing boat. I want to educate my children differently, but first I want to know how to live surrounded by so much violence, greed, hypocrisy, competition and brutality.
Krishnamurti: Don’t let’s make a problem of it. When anything becomes a problem we are caught in the solution of it, and then the problem becomes a cage, a barrier to further exploration and understanding. So don’t let us reduce all life to a vast and complex problem. If the question is put in order to overcome the society in which we live, or to find a substitute for that society, or to try to escape from it though living in it, it must inevitably lead to a contradictory and hypocritical life. This question also implies, doesn’t it, the complete denial of ideology? If you are really enquiring you cannot start with a conclusion, and all ideologies are a conclusion. So we must begin by finding out what you mean by living."
1 Like
HOPE is a dangerous energy and an escape or distraction from what’s NOW !
It’s true Wim…but you don’t have Donald Trump running your country…
Is it really one person who is the problem here ???
what about all those individuals who voted or probably gone vote for him ?
what about the the vote system from centuries ago
what about the advantage for te republicans from this out of age system ?
What about parts of the black lives matter movement who gone ruin shops and steeling property and giving him the opputunity to score them as criminals ?
What about this supreme court judge ? Did she not better stepped out under obama ?
does it not all come down to to individuals doing the wrong thing ?
Donald Trump is the psyche, the brain of all mankind. For self to end, self has to end in Donald Trump. Self may end in Donald Trump ‘before’ myself, as he curiously is more open and frank about things than the average person. The psyche is dangerous, and Donald Trump is merely an expression of it like anyone else.
No I don’t have any great familiarity with eastern philosophies beyond having a copy of What the Buddha Taught by Walpola Rahula, who I recall held a conversation with Krishnamurti. Do you have a familiarity with Advaita Vedanta, and do you see a crossover between that and what Krishnamurti spoke about?
Yes I see your point. I sense the difficulty is that the brain has so much history with fear, which can intrude to such an extent, that it is difficult to see what there is to fear that is in fact necessary, and what there is which is reaction and memory. Might it be said that danger, and the sense of things it is, is the instinctual part which is not in conflict, and everything labelled fear is the corruption of that from memory?