Guest Post: Followers?

I received this email from one of my fellow bloggers, WaveRider1 at the blog On the Cusp of the Wave.  It is a comment on my post “Followers”, and I have to say it is spectacular.  The points made are exactly the things I am constantly battling with.  If anyone has read the book 1984, you know how important a word can be.  I have made many attempts to define certain words that I feel are key to moving forward in Love.  Alexander has done a great job pointing out the importance of a word and how it can totally frame your meaning, even if you are not intending it to.

 

Hi, Tristan –

Since the epoch of the leader-follower duality relationship is over – and also the requirement to define oneself as either a leader or a follower – I believe you may need a change of terms for your project. Also, since these terms, this relationship, has the tendency to trigger major emotional reactions on the part of most people, access deeply ingrained subconscious ‘programs’, I recommend ditching it as both an external and internal defining term. Besides, making simple black and white distinctions among people is not the most expansive, joyous, or empowering practice, is it? We are now leaving behind the world of limitation, so why give your ‘followers’ such an extremely limited (and polarized) choice to make? I mean, it brings to mind the old Shrub quote, ‘You’re either with us, or you are against us.’ Hmmm.

I suggest, Tristan, that you switch to the much less challenging (and emotionally explosive) term of ‘sovereign’. A sovereign human being is definitely not a follower, but does not necessarily have to then be a ‘leader’ either. Many people refuse to allow themselves to be defined by either term – which you have now witnessed first-hand. I myself have no problem being labeled as a leader – but my personal self-esteem, and the life I have lived, is light-years beyond most people’s, and can handle it. Most people have mid-to-low self-esteem, my friend, and so cannot abide being considered a ‘leader’, either by you or by themselves. The old religious programs (you are nothing, a sinner unworthy of anything good, only the very separate Old Guy With The White Beard On A Throne is anything, or the ‘Savior’, etc.) run deep, dude.

However, to be a Sovereign Being is generally viewed as something very positive and, more importantly for your purposes, does NOT intrinsically imply a set relationship to other people, you see. A sovereign being, though continually acquiring information and learning via various sources, does not ever give their power away to those external sources. Their ultimate decision-making is left to their Self, who they retain as their Final Counsel. This is the most evolved way to lead one’s life, as you know. Most sovereign people ARE leaders by virtue of their character – but are not required to be, either by others nor by themselves, as a way of defining – or limiting – their roles in social interactions. You see, by forcing your followers into an either/or decision on this matter, you have stirred up quite a lot of controversy – and many of those making comments are totally justified. It’s not really fair, you see. More importantly for your obviously erudite mind, it’s not really accurate either. By simply changing the terminology, you completely side-step (eliminate) the very disruptive and counterproductive emotional resistance/backlash that your leader/follower duality choice automatically triggers (in most people – you and I excepted, of course).

You do not really want 250,000 ‘leaders’, Tristan. What you want is to work with 250,000 SOVEREIGN, INDEPENDENT, SELF-ACTUALIZING SOULS who may or may not be ‘leaders’ of others (or even themselves). Your goal is worthy, my friend, and notable. But it IS your goal that is most important, and not the details or definitions involved, right? When engaged in a battle between Life and fear, we must be pragmatic, and use whatever tools that work, whether our petty little ego/personality/lower mind structures ‘like’ it or not. Right?

To give more credence to this term, it was actually used by the original founders of democracy in the USA. It’s in the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution. It has a very specific legal, as well as personal, meaning. A true democracy (not in existence now anywhere) is totally dependent upon educated sovereign people to function correctly. This is documented fact. That’s why the republic of the USA (it is actually NOT a democracy, not even legally speaking) no longer functions at all in reality.

Anyway, picture this: 250,000 INDEPENDENT-THINKING, SOVEREIGN BEINGS working harmoniously together in mutual respect towards the common purpose of the further rapid empowerment and advancement of all of Humanity. No ‘leaders’, no ‘followers’, just equally ranked, cooperative and supportive individuals banded together in synchronistic focused activity. Tristan, groups of less than a dozen of these ‘types’ of people have changed the world! The history books (albeit horribly twisted in their accounts) are replete with stories of these very small, but VERY pivotal groups of like-minded, well-focused people. The Illuminati is just one that comes to mind.

 

The Beginning Is Near HERE!

 

Alexander

 

“What the caterpillar calls the end of the world, the Master calls a butterfly.” ~ Richard Bach.

Advertisements