The decline of entertainment media.

It's been six days since my last post. I used to post daily! I suppose from one perspective, it is good that because this is set out like it is. Like, it is not attached to any sort of revenue stream. When I don't have anything to say I don't speak. 

Recently, I have really enjoyed some of the older TV shows I have been watching. Star Trek Deep Space Nine. Watched the entire series. Now onto Star Trek Voyager. Watched a bit of Star Trek the Original Series which might be where I go next. Previously rewatched The Mentalist. Older series. 

I recall watching the first Scream and how good it was. For my birthday I watched Scream 7. It was OK. But I didn't really feel anything watching it.

It brings me to this tweet:

There has been a lot of discussion of this kind of thing. There was a paid article by Adrian something or other. Perhaps Adrian Winters. That showed how this has happened. How a lot of Hollywood writing rooms have gone from 80% to 10% white males. 

It makes it harder to find things to watch on TV because a lot of these things are written by women. And women, as leaders of these kinds of things. Have never produced anything that is obviously interesting to me. These women are likely all liberal as well. Recently, as well, even things made by men, such as 'The Boys'. Is so infected with woke, it is unwatchable. 

Scarpetta is a good example. It has a good vibe of a female investigator going for a serial killer and a serial killer from thirty years ago also used the same tactics. There is a LOT of soap opera kind of stuff in this show. Which, might be OK. I watched it thinking perhaps there would be a payoff. Perhaps really engaging with the characters would be relevant as the plot unfolds. 

But, as it ended. As the plot solved. I realised that the soap opera element of the show was really all it had to offer. The serial killer element was clearly an after thought and even though the show was set up to imply that there would be some great relevance to the thirty year gap and the memories. There was not. It was literally a soap opera with a bit of serial killer stuff involved to engage people. The main character for the Mentalist was in this show to further imply an interesting detective angle. 

Another with a similar issue I just started watching yesterday. But have realised now is also terrible in the same way. I watched either one or two episodes of "Walker". I started watching it and there was again, a subtle serial killer plot happening and an emotional angle that might be interesting, provided it is not the only draw of the show. 

So I look up the reviews on youtube. Universally bad and I found just a single guy with low production quality. A source I can trust. Just a guy. Who literally labelled it "Woker". Then I look up who is running it. A woman named Anna. It will be the same thing. So I am not watching it. 

I think this is the problem that has infected basically all of modern screenwriting. I have watched a bit of Walker, and what is it missing? Being that I am in the category of the kind of person banned from the modern writing rooms? Well, it misses a strong male antagonist. Walker, Jared Padalecki, needs someone that could possibly beat him. It would immediately add that adrenalised, distinctly non soap opera like energy. 

But it is written by a woman, so it will just be an ongoing soap opera. Even shows with a lot of emotional stuff in them. Like Star Trek Voyager, that I am now watching. Produced by Rick Berman. But with a female captain. There is a lot of fairly deep emotional themes. But they don't make the show completely lose direction. 

What this has all added up to is that all modern TV is just kind of dull. Wokeness; liberal, female heavy writer rooms are just filled with a kind of directionlessness. It is hard to describe quite what has gone wrong with modern TV. But it is like the life has somehow been taken out of it.

Scream 1 had a very nail biting tension to it. Scream 7 just... didn't. It had all the pieces technically in place. But it just didn't really grab attention.  

In corners of the internet. Various male personalities have carved out a space for themselves best they can by doing things like writing science fiction ebooks. But none of that creative energy can find expression in the actual media that is available for casual viewing. None of it has any support. I also suspect this same problem is the reason why a lot of fields have a similar 'dullness' to them. That until 'God makes his will known' in a sense. Until there are consequences to the liberals for their many crimes. Things will carry on just as they are. 

Insights into a changing world.

This is an important post to me. But a personal one. I am doing what I often do on this blog. I am using introspection to gain insight into what are effective methods to move forward and improve ones life. 

Recently, I have noted a few times. A strong sensation that something has just "worked out" recently. Just flowed. Things just fit. There is a sense of treading water that I had for a long time that is gone.

Now, there are a lot of physical things that could be. I will likely go into these. But the thing that made the most sense was when I looked into the astrology at the moment. We have been undergoing, in mid - late July; this is the Jupiter - Pluto opposition. 

There are a few more specific transits. Jupiter is very soon to cross my natal Sun. From 4th of August it is in the same hexagram as my natal Sun. When this happened before, sometime in or after August 2014. Was when I had a strong schizophrenic episode. So it feels like this time I have navigated that energy properly. In that, I am not a raving madman on this pass. 

The physical reasons I am better. Well it could be one of many, many things. It could be that I had a surgery (biopsy) and got a result that was an OK one, considering how bad it could have been. Maybe that was hanging over me. It could be that I had a few weeks off jobseeking to recover from it. And jobseeking causes a lot of stress. And it never stops. There are no holidays from jobseeking. Every week you do it. I have been unemployed for more than three years. 

It could be that I met up with friends recently. It could be that I have reached a good point in health things like drinking water and going to the gym. It could be that I have properly stayed away from 'transcient' material and I have got the benefit. As my dreams indicated. It could be that some of the things I have talked about here I have properly applied. I am thinking of the first archetype. The Matrix of the Mind. 

Nevertheless, the transit is very compelling. Between dreams and transits of both astrology and human design. It provides a lot of good insight and direction into things. I have not had a great deal of insights outside those resources.  

Reflections on mental health issues and IQ.

Video for today:

Youtube: Shelby Exists and Makes Stuff: My IQ is 135 and I hate it. July 29th 2026:

https://youtu.be/Zk0Zeqy7q1w?si=jhsYb-omKzhxTelh

OK, so what is my IQ firstly? I don't want to reveal it. But I will say two things. One is that when I did take an IQ test, I have only taken one. In person, with Mensa. I was quite ill at the time and I remember intentionally throwing one of the questions because I thought if I answered it correctly the intelligence services might "get me". The second is that, vaguely, my IQ is somewhere between the top of 'average' IQ. So what is thought of as about 110. And the Mensa level. Which is 130 or 150 depending on the test.  

I have kept that vague enough I think to not claim the status of high IQ in this blog entry.  

Idiot in the comments saying that his IQ is 160. It is mid wits that say this kind of thing. Because mid wits keep saying they have 170 something IQ. People think that 130's is not high. But it is in fact, very high. 

The point of this video I think is not IQ though. Two things I have found recently, one of which is shown in this video. Firstly, there is a kind of myth around that mental health disorders like autism are not a real thing. This woman shows that very strongly. I have known people personally that are well acquainted with therapy culture. That also claim these kinds of mental health disorders, suggesting they are a real thing. I do not take the argument, I can see no evidence of. The idea that mental health disorders are the side effects of evil doing. Whose source is being concealed by the person with the disorder.  

Also, not mentioned at all in the video. But I have been told before by such people that marijuana was the only thing to have solved their autism (or similar). I used to not believe that. Partly this was because of my ongoing experience with passive aggressive stoners. But it is something that I have come to accept as... they tell me that's what their experience is. So I am not going to argue with it. 

I got those two viewpoints partly from Stefan Molyneux. Or I had them anyway and his podcasts confirmed what I thought to me. It is really not consistent with the Law of One to be so resistant of what is obviously infront of a person. To assume that amount of lying. Of course there are things that a lot of people lie about. But there is not enough personal information to oppose the idea that these mental health disorders are simply, as the people that claim them, claim them to be. 

I should not continue to think through if the themes of this girls video are relevant to me. I played it through in my mind but I do not think it is interesting for a blog. One small thing that I have noticed about high IQ people that this woman has mentioned. An incredible speed of motion. I knew one guy who was Mensa level IQ at a fast food place. And he was just so incredibly fast.  

Transits of the day.

It took me a little time to get to what I am going to talk about today. Recently, I have seemed to have gotten things right in relation to spirituality and such. Have been having amazing dreams. Part of the dream guidance I interpreted, at least I think, is that a big part of why I am getting this positive increase in energy and 'flow' is because I have genuinely come away from "transcient" material. 

Which makes it annoying then that the main thing I am thinking about today is doing a run down of the Human Design transits which does link to politics. Links to politics more than I want to. Perhaps I am doing it wrong. Or perhaps that is just part of the great unpredictability of life. 

To begin with. In my personal life, as I just alluded to. I struggled for a long time, when I was less well. In bringing up all sorts of things into my conversations with others that would alienate me from them. Politics was chief among these. I do need to still write up on how David Wilcock types of information perverts the desire towards the sublime that would normally be satisfied by the Law of One. 

I used to bring up all the stuff. To do with Islam, immigration etc. In my conversations with people. Had I not found a reason not to, a practical technical reason, I would probably still be doing it. But since then I have really taken more seriously my study of the Law of One, which talks about avoiding 'transcient' information. 

So, not only am I avoiding getting in discussions and conflicts with people. But I am avoiding even looking into those matters. Even where it is just basically news that I would be looking at. This means, that there is no emotion connected to politics so when I talk to people. Rather than wanting to talk about that stuff but not saying it and having that emotion. Having that need to withdraw to conceal. I can actually not be thinking about it. 

Because I know that eventually, this stuff will come to people via the mainstream media. It does not need to come from me. If it is not in the mainstream media, it doesn't exist for a large part of the population. To the extent these people have to deal with you they will have a great deal of emotion about it that will connect to you. Telling them you were right really just sets them through an unproductive loop. 

The post below reminds me of how I have to act. It feels very comfortable to see it this way:

For optics. We need to just not engage with this kind of thing. Even intellectually. 

Anyway, having said that, I am going to go a bit into politics now:

Human Design Transits:

 

North Node gate 30. 

Recently, I said directly to someone I am close to that is very much someone that will never consider anything non mainstream legitimate. That there was a transit coming soon and that it would bring politically relevant information. Specifically, it will reveal something emotionally relevant, and that has been a pattern for a long time (connection to Pluto in the gate 41). From Saturday 27th of July. But a long ish transit so not necessarily perfectly timed. 

That would be, the North Node in the gate 30. The gate 30 is one that I have found correlated very strongly with left wing beliefs. While the left wing is the homogenised reality. I have found that people with the gate 30 have a deep, powerful emotional core that won't compromise and is attached to leftism. (I theorise the strong emotion can go the other way!) It is the kind of intensity where if peoples feelings get railroaded over, if they are won against. It turns to gossip. I have found people without the gate 30 but that are still left wing; mostly I think for social acceptance. They tend to say things about it but just not care about politics. Over time they forget about it. 

Confusingly. The ones that end up talking about it have a different gate. Usually gate 25. The way the body graph works is we are all really meant to get on and so these things get discussed. But the world being sprawled out and disconnected. This doesn't always happen. 

Anyway, as predicted, but unfortunately not publicly before it happened. The North Node went into gate 30 and we have all this Fauci diary stuff. Fauci before some sort of committee etc. It is potentially the beginning of a serious inroad against the left. There have not been any serious inroads against the left. There have been things happening with Trump. Things that go against the left wing agenda on the global level. But not anything that says that they themselves were wrong. That they may have to admit wrongdoing and that goes against one of the lefts deeply held beliefs. Which is that they are morally perfect, beyond reproach, and everyone else. Trump, Charlie Kirk, Ann Widdecombe. Are the bad ones. 

Uranus in gate 20.

Much of what I am talking about here is altogether too vague. Although personally, astrological transits are fairly unequivocable in my life. (I have daily spent time recently wondering what has changed and I have found it to be the Jupiter Pluto opposition. A strong emotional experience!) When I talk about them in the more general sense. A lot of what can be said and reflected on it is just kind of annoyingly vague. A lot of these thoughts on it will be too. 

Uranus is an interesting transit. I have shown it before to correlate with right wing politics in general. When Trump and UKIP suddenly came on the scene originally in 2012 ish when Uranus entered Aries. Then when Uranus entered Taurus, in the same month. Brexit was officially triggered. 

I think it does correlate with a kind of free market style of inventiveness. Of using a lot of intelligence and details to arrive at a positive conclusion as with music. 

When Uranus was in the gate 8. I got huge insights as to what some of my 'conditioning' was, and how it linked to a schizophrenic episode I once had. To general conclusion. (This links to a sense of homogenisation in the new age world!)

Transiting Uranus in gate 20. I have wondered about this transit for a while. Since gate 20 is the beginning of Gemini. It follows on from gate 8 where I had the insight. These things usually do link in a kind of story. So what happens earlier on with an outer planet links to the story of it's later hexagrams. But, for me personally. I have not found any personal attachment to gate 20. Because I do not have it in my chart. I have gate 1 in my chart linking to the gate 8. But I do not have any of the connections to the gate 20:

This is the human design mandala again. As I mentioned Uranus is a planet of impact. It tends to arrive with right wing politics as one example which sets a neat knife through what a lot of people thought reality was. On the integration circuit it links to gate 35, gate 57 and gate 10. It is a generally very animalistic circuit that is a lot of societies animalism and work ethic, through the 34 - 20. 

So I thought as this impacts so many people. And so many animalistic people. Perhaps the type more inclined to working than thinking about stuff. That there would be a huge impact from this transit.

I have not found that. The only thing I think this could correlate to is Andrew Tate going to jail. Whichever way someone sees it. Whether he is guilty and is carrying the energy of the sexuality of the cam girl business and such. Or whether it comes from the energy of false accusations. Which is a place of female sexual power. Him going to jail. With his following being fairly animalistic. Definitely brings these themes to the forefront. 

Jupiter in gate 31, Neptune in gate 17.

These two I have only experienced personally. I do not have a good idea of how they have shown up collectively.  

I am a manifestor in the human design with the gate 7 hanging. Linking to the gate 31. What I have realised about Jupiter in this gate 31, is that when I talked to a friend recently, he said that when we were young, sometimes because of the way I was, if I wanted to talk about something everyone had to talk about it. That is the kind of insight I might get from the conditioning of the gate 31. Because of the manifestor being like they are. There is a natural sense of leadership that does follow from them. But it is subtle. Or at least it can be and probably should be a lot of the time. 

Neptune in gate 17. Neptune is an extremely subtle abstract energy. It is just for me at the moment in the general conversation points and thoughts. The really far out planets Neptune and Pluto tend to effect everyone I think even if you have no connections. Gate 17 I have been talking and thinking about things like first principles way more. And making quite a bit of headway actually. It is not yet applicable enough to put into the blog. But it is something that is relevant to me. 

Conclusion.

Anyway, that's all I have for today.  

Aaron Abke and Paul.

The amount of energy to just get to this point feels huge. The point of finishing up the last of the three posts I set myself.

I did the Ryan Gable one. Then the Stefan Molyneux one. Now I want to write on Aaron Abke. 

Youtube: dallas: Aaron Abke is wrong about Paul: October 17th 2025:

https://youtu.be/ik9JSnS7D60?si=xYe1uEQVLRg20nY0

I realise as I mention this that it might be better for the readers to have knowledge of where I have been with this. The questions I have had about Christianity and what my faith kind of is. But I am not going to go through that now. So when I talk about this it might seem as though there is something missing. 

This video from dallas. Is covering a previous video by Aaron Abke which I watched and enjoyed and still remember. Not just the factual information but the emotional connection to the information. 

Aaron explained by going through some bible quotes this story of how Paul talks about the disciples. That he called them out infront of each other which is not what you are meant to do. That the story Paul puts forward is a certain one but reading between the lines. This might not be what the situation being described is. It might be in fact that Paul is being unpleasant and the other people in the room are responding as though that is the case.

BUT, as dallas points out. Aaron has strategically quoted here. Not strategically quoted in a way that doesn't matter. Strategically quoted in a way that really changes the story.

What Paul actually says is that he had a disagreement with Peter in Jerusalem. Then he doesn't handle it at the time. He handles it later when Peter comes to Antioch. 

This COMPLETELY changes the story. The narrative that Aaron is putting forward.

Also, looking more at what is being said. Before I was under the impression that it was just a conversation and disagreement between peers of a sort. But the actual text when fully quoted is to do with the disciples having a kind of in group preference for those whom are "circumcised". Whereas Paul wants to make clear that even those uncircumcised are 'worthy of Christs love in a sense'. 

This, along with things I have found from other more pro Paul perspectives. Definitely adds a positive dimension to Pauls teachings. 

Take away:

When you are involved in this much abstraction. Which is inevitable with any serious look at biblical sources because there is a LOT of history and context in a lot of the literature. I often find I have to come back to what I know. That I cannot gain any kind of clarity in the mess of such things. Christianity was kind of secondary in my life. It feels like I am trying to get a foothold in it. It is very relevant, and very powerful. But it doesn't quite make sense at the same time. 

What I have valued then, what I fall back on. Is that logically makes sense to me and the Law of One. 

Listening to an Aaron Abke video recently. I decided to stop doing Communion and immediately felt absolutely awful. Like, I just didn't love a lot of the things in life that I know are good for me. I was unmotivated. It was a little bit of a 'death'. 

And Aaron Abke might have been right. It is not clear where the idea of Communion came from but Pauls letters said it before the gospel. Plus, the taking in, drinking, of "holy" material is very much a pagan thing. 

I don't know why it is good though. But I know it is. I do it because it is talked about in the Law of One. Perhaps that is all I need to do. My spirituality is just a trial and error of what works for me. It is also a following of the Law of One. I pray; when I don't, I get ill. So I pray.

This is the same way I feel about most of Christianity. So much of it is just lost and does not make a great deal of sense. I still feel that people that legitimately follow Jesus should be able to energy heal. He told his disciples to do that. They should be able to do it. 

Norse mythology actually satisfies a lot of these same requirements. It has prayer, it has a kind of communion that is done very frequently I think. It does not have Monotheism. Which is heavy in the Law of One. And kind of non negotiable I think. But it does have other things. For instance, it has a list of nine nobel virtues instead of the commandments:

Courage, Truth, Honour, Fidelity, Discipline, Hospitality, Industriousness, Self Reliance, Perseverence.

It has far less emphasis, perhaps no emphasis. On the pacifist and non violent ways of Jesus. This is a big plus to me. 

Not that this is a serious idea. But it is something worth thinking about I think. 

The Philosophy of Mysticism

In relation to a blog I did recently, of the three things I wanted to address. The first was the Ryan Gable video, which I handled yesterday. Today I wanted to talk about the Stefan Molyneux podcast I mentioned:

Free Domain Podcasts, 6451: Do Not Fuck With Mysticism, X/ Twitter Space: July 16th 2026:

https://fdpodcasts.com/6451/do-not-f-with-mysticism-xtwitter-space

Here we are starting to get to the meat of philosophical and mystical concepts. Stefans points here are very good and they are ones I share. While I am a person who does have mystical beliefs. Which I am willing to defend and probably will in this blog. Through trial and error, I have found that I have had to disbelieve and discard a lot of mystical concepts. I also got taken in by David Wilcock. 

Recently, this might be only a "me" thing. But I have found that I am simply unable to engage in a lot of visualisation. Which I have tried various times. Law of Attraction, energy work (which I do believe in), and even, I think, 'Internal Family Systems' does not work for me. 

Have you ever had an experience where you have tried to tell someone something and they have just ignored you and given you the most basic instruction on how to do that thing. This is what happens when you tell anyone new age that visualisation doesn't work for you. They give you the most basic instructions. Insulting your intelligence as though you had not tried that before. I have tried energy work on myself many times, it has never worked. The other day I was visualising and talked to people within that visualisation and a bit later. I just knew it was wrong. It does not work. It is maddening for me specifically as many of my forays into energy healing have been. 

What works for me internally is a kind of reliance on sound. I feel like I process a lot internally by sound more than images. 

Anyway, down to this podcast by Stefan. The caller he is talking to, started first off with strange troll questions, this moved onto the caller talking about being in a mental institution and infering that he believed his mother could cast magic spells on him when he ran away, then it became a discussion on God. Which the caller kind of said was an Infinite Mind, I believe. The caller said something like if you don't believe in God, you don't exist. Then Stefan asked the caller to prove his belief in God. He did not say 'via first principles', but that was, in practice, what was required. The caller was unable to do so. He just kept on making statements that God is this or that. 

In one way I very much agree with Stefan. In another way I do not. Firstly, he states outrightly that a lot of things that people believe have no proof so they don't exist. Things like ghosts. I think this is reasonable and it is a good standard that I have not applied previously in my life with people like David Wilcock. He had no proof, and none of his sources existed - or they did exist but they were con men. Believing in that kind of thing is indeed very destructive. 

Nevertheless, I want to make a point about skepticism, "doubt" in general. It just generally seems to me that if someone decides to. They can poke holes in literally anything. No matter how legitimate it is. If someone really wants to doubt something then they can do it. I might say this is a feature of free will.

For instance, the caller made general statements about collective hallucinations actually being unacknowledged supernatural events. To which Stefan made the point that a lot of our memories are subject to modification. If you return to somewhere that you knew as a child, the proportions are different, as an example. 

For proof to stand up to this standard, i.e. the claimed fallibility of memory. Does not seem like something that any situation can stand up to in my view. What did you have for breakfast this morning? Was it porridge? Are you sure it was porridge? You know, a lot of people have faulty memories? You could have had porridge yesterday and not recalled it accurately? 

How do we know that we are not having supernatural experiences every day and forgetting them under this standard? These examples are silly. They have escalated the example to prove a point. But I think it makes the point. 

A few further things to say. 

One is that, there is philosophical subtext that was missing here due to Stefans focus on mysticism. One of the things Stefan says is 'the root of evil is the desire for the unearned'. I would say there is different shades and flavours of mysticism. Meditation is a form of mysticism, or at least it can be - it is strongly linked to pretty much every new age belief system there is. But meditation, is proven as positive and effective in multiple scientific studies. 

Meditation is work though. It requires discipline. I would say that one of the issues that characterises the more negative forms of delusional mysticism. Is that it confers onto the "experiencer" a great deal of status. The only benefit from meditation we tend to get is how it actually improves our lives. Say, our intuition is 10% more effective. A largely, outwardly invisible change. (There are some people that try to make it into something supernatural and run classes on it but they are a fringe). An example with witchcraft or ghosts is that the person talking about it gains status through that manner. 

I actually had a mystical experience when I was younger. I thought again and again, wondering if psychic abilities existed. Then I got a strong precognitive experience in dreams. I did not follow up with the whole precognitive experiences interest. I did not try and become a psychic. But that experience did mature into what I experience today. Partly from reading the Law of One I now do prayer, meditation and affirmations etc. 

For me though, what is my justification for my belief in God? The person phoning into Stefans show had to justify them because it is a philosophy show. I do not have to technically. But I still will explain my perspective. 

For me, it is not from an objective, first principles place that I believe that. it is from my everyday experience and trial and error. The Law of One has made a case. It is an intellectually satisfying set of books. I believe what it says on archetypes and various other things. I am willing to take it on faith that a claimed channeled source was in fact telling the truth on such matters including God. I also, have tended to have health complications when I have not kept up with these spiritual practices. 

Another point: Stefan says that mystical beliefs isolate us from others. I will have more to say on this at a later date. When I talk about how destructive David Wilcocks narrative was. I am starting to see there are kind of two sides to mysticism. A kind of positive and a negative and I think the positive things. Meditation, prayer etc. Do not effect other people in a negative way. Whereas the negative things. The evangelical beliefs in ghosts or conspiracy types of things which also includes with it an evangelism about a lot of different things. This does isolate people I think. Like I say I have more to say on this. It is kind of like when you practice the negative version you become unrefined and less respecting of free will. 

I do have more points on all of this but for the moment I will leave it here.  

A quick look at a Law of One criticism.

So, I am, as I stated in the last article. Going to look at this video:

Youtube: Ryan Gable: Live, Law of One: RA, Love, Light and Litigation:

https://www.youtube.com/live/-zGwBzFPDnA?si=FYBw7odBi0N7tGb4

I must admit, that I started off really excited about this video. I wanted him to bring some sort of philosophical/ theological "meat" to the discussion. And me, being extremely well acquainted with the Law of One. Would be able to do that if I so chose.

I was disappointed though. Ryan gets hung up on something he reads in the Law of One session one with the contacts signature of "We are not of the love, we are not of the light, we are of the Law of One". 

Understanding the material: 

I know... EXACTLY what that means. David Wilcock once discussed it. It was taken out of the early books I believe. The three who were involved in it. Don, Carla and Jim, knew that this line could be incendiary. 

I won't go into what that means. It is kind of nuanced. It requires an explanation of their paradigm. I will say that my "signature" if I were to speak like this, in my view, would be "I am not of the Love, I am of the Light, I am not of the Law of One". People can only be one of the three. 

I went up to 56 minutes. But it just got too whiny for me to continue. And it seems like the entire foundation of his argument is built on this single, incorrect, point. (Although, as the Law of One says, there are no mistakes!)

I have several points here. One is that, yes, the people that follow the Law of One in a lot of cases cannot have these discussions. They cannot discuss or defend their points. It is apparently human nature that people have a kind of... I don't quite know how to describe it... Passivity. An inflexibility to even follow the guidance they have, in some cases, devoted their life to,  When I was trying to talk on the Law of One forums a few times in the last year. I wanted to make a passionate case against forgiveness without contrition. Making the case it is against free will. The Law of One's most prized law. And that the Law of One discussed the process including "Understanding, acceptance and forgiveness". That understanding alone can take more than a decade. Loads of specific arguments on this point. Some I have made elsewhere on this blog. 

I have also made arguments against leftism being legitimate under the Law of One. The idea of funding infinite migrants, which one of the women was putting to me as the more 'compassionate' choice. Is against the Law of One to not consider the places the taxes are coming from. Because are they also not 'One'?

Regardless of what you think about my specific arguments. My overall point is that the people in the Law of One forums and communities. Very rarely have any awareness of... well, any of it really. As far as I can tell. I posted about Law of One quotes all the time and people would argue against them. On reddit of course. The god is whatever that particular redditor feels is "fair". 

There are of course some people there that can quote the Law of One. Some that are following it in some small way and whose opinion I sometimes respect. But to make the argument that these followers are an indictment of the material does not track for me. Most Christians do not even slightly follow their own teachings and would be shocked by them. Very few atheists follow evolutionary psychology to any of it's natural conclusions. That are all opposite most of the leftist tenets. 

Most people, I would argue. Are just trying to find the best excuse for their own emotional preference. It's a kind of 'narcissism' to not have any values above oneself and ones own emotional preference. 

There are other points here I could make. I did go through making detailed notes on Ryans video. I could, I suppose, if I desired, attack his points more. But he wasn't really making strong points to my mind. Even though I don't like arguments along the lines of "Their heart was in the right place". I don't feel a bad intention here from Ryan. Even though I am very pro Law of One, I feel a little that Ryan is closer to my viewpoint on reality than a lot of people that investigate these things less. That ask no questions and have no skepticism. 

Final points: 

I will end on some final points though.

One: Many, many, many of Ryans repeated points seems to have come from David Wilcock. I might do additional blogs about how this one person has had a destructive effect by so brazenly attempting to take the Law of One for his own ends. While in practice ignoring it's teachings (like those on "transcience").

Two: One of these points is that at the end of book 5. The source is very specific that even people we are opposed to and might be negative in some manner. We are to see them in a compassionate light. Even sending love to such beings. This is very specifically stated at a few different points. Namely, session 67 and one of the last few fragments in book 5. But at many other points as well (once when Don asked where negative ET's came from the source answered "They come from the Creator, in the more shallow sense that you mean... ). It is something I have recently realised I need to learn because it is not something I have previously committed to. Despite familiarity with this material. 

I suppose I am happy that this post turned out less attacking than I had originally planned it!  

Three: I have some very practical benefits from the Law of One I wanted to highlight. Prayer, meditation, dream interpretation and affirmations are all things I use. All practical real world things. That massively improve my life. There are additional things as well.  

I don't intend to look any further into this guy.