Facilitating Drawing Water
By Cyrellys Geibhendach
July 14, 2011
Permission granted to copy & distribute intact without changes.
What do all of the following have in common? Social policy, living conditions conducive, intellectual exchange, research, facilitation, cultural policy, ecopsychology, dialogues, impact, competitiveness, development, secret history, extreme prejudice, global paradigm shift, beyond myth, interactive, balanced outcomes, ancient mysteries, quarantined planet, foresight effect, self-centered policy makers, discipline parallel, watching veneer, negative vs positive thinking, exercize unique collection, back-channeling, university ufology, extraterrestrial hypothesis, exopolitics definition, positive psychology, exopsychology, exopolitics and bioethics, and ET contact all have in common? Exopolitical Mediation.
Now that I have your attention...
I spend entirely too much time wondering why people do what they do. I wonder how much time they invest in their choices. I see only one crooked hitch with extraterrestrial contact cold-turkey method...the cat is out of the bag that some global leaders and various groups of insiders know all about it and have a long running history in Contact AND that the history of Contact runs the full extent of human existance on this planet.
Presenting a case for peace:
Too many people can't and won't be lied to any longer. That is becoming a growing phenomenon around the entire planet. It's not Contact that is the problem...it's the lies that have the leaders and managers and other peripheral personnel in hot water with the public sentiment; its the failure to maintain an open line of communication or lack of meaningful and truthful communication. And it is fueling other sentiments about all the secrecy, lack-of transparancy, behavior that is seen as over stepping authority or even illegal at times, and the lack-of acknowledgement and responsibility taken for the mind-games of the past etc. I'm not specifically pointing fingers here. I'm trying to make a point and suggest some solutions. I consider myself a third party observer in this conflict-paradigm that has formed between them and the aware public. If you need an example (small scale) just check out Larry W. Bryant, a journalist of renown in ufological research, who recently experienced a direct snubbing by NASA who is trying to foist $100 plus dollar fees upon him for information to which he is legally entitled as a journalist. NASA is intelligent enough to send aerospace contraptions beyond the atmosphere, so one would expect that they're intelligent enough to do a simple google search and discover his credentials. Of course they know who Mr. Bryant is but that is part of the silly, destructive game. Both the aware public and aware PTBs are mutually responsible for the creation of this conflict-paradigm through seemingly miniscule, incremental behaviors which is then mimic'd across the social spectrum of the planet. I haven't perceived this as a one-way street. There are social factions among the public which are equally responsible for perpetuating this situation and the problems it creates. In my opinion, it will take both broadly described groups to fix it.
Members of the public are currently having a grand time chasing after ET's COVERT CONTACT and swapping tales over it. It is interesting to listen to all the conversations among these people about the PTB (powers that be). According to them the PTB are either proverbial imbeciles or brain dead to not notice what the public observers have; to not hear their stories; to not take all the evidence seriously or at the very least with a little interest and non-comedic respect, etc. This too fuels the conflict-paradigm and continues the construction of moments subjected to rises of resentment, open hostility, aggression, malice, and the professed need for recompense. Exopolitical mediators experience first-hand this conflict-paradigm behavior when trying to make connections between the public and aware intermediaries with the contact control structure and the PTBs.
This symptomatic behavior oozing from this conflict-paradigm sometimes results in negative feeding-frenzies with communicators ending up as the victims. This is an example of an Old Irish concept of 'dire-price' or 'honor-price'. When a perceived crime was committed against a person or against personal or tribal property, a fine or consequence, sometime social and sometimes monetary or tangible, was exacted or assessed against the criminal and his tuath (clan/family and extended relatives or adopted members and associates). The dire price is often given a greater subconscious priority than communication or communicative interaction which is defined as dialogues without proof involved.
Those individuals or groups acting upon exacting the dire price see an opportunity to do so and victims often cannot not pay their way free of it with any form of proof having a discernable value high enough for the opportunists to cease their attack. What is even more interesting is that those bystanders who either know or suspect a communicator to be genuine will follow the collective and stand silent when they could stop this social punishment. They do so because of the history. Those PTB and their associates who know, are seen by the collective as having breached the social codes of conduct of the collective (aware public).
In Celtic tradition a person's honor had a specific monetary value (dire/honor-price). If one's honor was damaged, the person who had done the damage could be made to pay a price; dire-price or honor-price. One's honor was a kind of strength which was highly valued. If an enemy tried to harm a person, the enemy would likely lose body parts for the trouble. But on the opposing position the enemy's relatives were liable for his crimes and legally responsible to pay the 'honor-price'. For committing some crimes a person's honor-price was revoked, which meant that others could kill or wound them with impunity, and the victims family could not ask or require compensation.
There is a saying, "Without Trust between Individuals, there can be no Tribe." There can be no coherent collective public or quasi-public without it. A conflict-paradigm is the antithesis to a coherent and cooperative effort as a collective based on trust. Trust ALWAYS begins with communication and finishes with a relationship based on mutual positive experience. There is nothing positive in social conflict or personal greed for recompense or social status ill-applied. When initial attempts fail at connecting paradigm groups into cohesive collectives it is persistance and perseverance that salvages the situtation. These things may be generally deplored but without them fears, concerns, and objections become irrelevant and the cause of the objection is often lost in the ensuing muck-throwing contest. I'm not defending the rotten behavior of either party...just observing it and shaking my head because this situation should not be left as is...it's too destructive to both groups involved.
I have to ask, can this conflict-paradigm be surpassed? Can we as a specie escape this vicious circle, this rift, that has been created? Has there ever been a time when personal and often individualistic greed for recompense and personal social status, been relinquished in favor of choices which hold greater benefit and nurture for both individuals and the collective?
I suggest that the answer to these questions is yes. It can be done and has been done. I proffer to you an example out of ancient history: "Loyalty in the tuath was also important, for without this trust and cohesiveness it would be all too easy for any individual to perish, alone and without aid. The tuath depended upon mutual assistance and collective labor, for the survival tasks of herding, farming, and gathering were beyond the means of any one "nuclear" family. Truth was of utmost importance to the Celts, and the discernment of truth is a theme that is touched upon in many of the traditional tales. In "Cormac's Cup" for instance, the object of the tale was a cup which would shatter when three lies were told and mend again when three truths were uttered. This implies that some actions are not and can not be "relative", but instead are considered absolute and have value as being true. One either has or has not put water in the bucket. It cannot be both full and empty at the same time, at least within ordinary, mundane reality. The state of the bucket is a truth. Truth is one basis of proper judgment, and offering false judgment was believed to be one of the things that destroyed a tuath," Erinn Rowan Laurie. It is not the differences or the power that bind groups together into collectives, but rather the truths; those matters which groups hold in common relationships. It is their similarities on a social and spiritual level which bind the ties and support cohesion.
There was a time when we Old Irish seemed new to this world and generally practiced this aversion to greed; when the individual and the collective functioned for the most part, as a team....two well oiled interlinked cogs in the same wheel. I don't think it is that it didn't exist, or that it was always successful, or that myth paints pretty pictures for our time. Rather, I think compatibility and social cohesion existed in the collective of that time because there were clearly defined behavioral and ethical guidelines....boundaries of acceptable behavior, codes of conduct, that everyone understood clearly and agreed upon...making it possible for minor and major breaches of those codes to be pointed out and create a starting point for dealing with situations of breaching or transgression when they inevitably arose.
We don't seem to have any of that in this day and age. In mundane terms, we live in a socio-political free-for-all; laws are unclear, or hidden to all but a highly educated few because there are so many meaningless laws that law, itself, is a maze no one even cares to understand anymore unless greed is involved; philosophy is not taught as a required subject in schools; control of youth behavior by the family, for another example, is under severe attack to the point that many parents fear to do any firm disciplining without officials getting involved resulting in tribal-like social constructions among youth and general chaos in many communities. And two groups on Extraterrestrial Contact who have far more in common than they have in difference can't manage open and civilized communication events without alot of haggling over what constitutes a lie, or whether or not proof is actually proof or even necessary in the first place, and whether or not any act is ever legally or ethically actionable or of value. I think it is true that trust develops more easily and a community becomes more than a fractured group of people who claim they believe similar things when communication, honor, and truth are involved; when the parties concerned are at the very least willing to attempt it.
I do think is that individual and group greed is most often opportunistic behavior ill-applied. Sometimes that behavior is self-centered with altruistic results...and sometimes it is self-centered with destructive, disruptive, and incapacitating results. Like so many things on this world, I see it as a mixed bag of negatives and positives depending upon peoples choices. We don't teach about greed or how to manage or control it in this day and age. We don't respect inequities anymore so we pay for it day after day like gluttons for self-punishment, failing to understand how we got here and sometimes even missing where we are in the scheme of things.
I think we can figure this out. Basically, I don't so much think as I BELIEVE we can figure this out. No conflict-paradigm is healthy to leave intact. We have all the tools lying scattered across the ground around us. In order to use them effectively to solve our mutual problems and achieve mutually beneficial goals between paradigm groups, we need to learn to work together as a team once again...and that means going after the Unknown Country together -- including the PTBs, their people, and the full history of Contact too -- uniting a fractured and fearful world through our commonalities.
