WIN

WIN 220
WIN 220 150 150 Ben Coker Strategies


The Power of Money

“Money makes the world go around” sang Liza Minelli and Joel Grey in the 1972 film ‘Cabaret’- from a musical play written in 1960 set in pre-war Germany.

The musical has a ‘dark side’ set against a background of the recovery from the dire financial straits of the country and the Nazi takeover and in a way is a warning.

A warning about the connection between money and power.

In David Hawkins paradigm ‘Levels of Consciousness’ (‘Power vs Force’, 1985) money is more an instrument governing the lower (Force) levels of energetic vibration.

Once you or I achieve the higher Power level, money just becomes a lubricant rather than our primary concern, simply, as Peter Thomson would put it, “the silent applause for a job well done”.

For most people though, money, or the lack of it, is a major preoccupation, maintaining a certain level of income, or increasing it, is a key driver in their lives and a benchmark for their lifestyle.

How does this ‘work’ and what does money have to do with truth as I alluded to last time?

Money is an instrument of control, control by the state and control by corporate business – and control is a key component of force.

We are constantly controlled, unless we have reached our own level of power over ourselves, to do what ‘society’ desires or requires us to do.

This is often expressed as being ‘normal’, and allowing our freedoms of time, thought and movement to be controlled by others.

Those who don’t ‘fit’ into the ‘normal’ schedule are seen as rebels, non-conformists, misguided or in some way ‘mentally ill’ and the rest of the population is encouraged to see them as ‘different’ or ‘unwanted’ and a ‘threat’ to be sidelined or ‘removed’ from society.

What has this to do with money?

The ‘world economy’ is fuelled by money, the movement of it from one organisation to another and their respective control of it.

On the one hand the states and corporations are concerned with maximising their ‘supply’ of money and on the other the ‘people’ are encouraged to be ‘economic’ and not spend or have too much.

The result is that most of the world’s money supply is in he hands of a few states and corporations.

Not all states have a lot of money and not all corporations – just the big global ones, and they compete with each other for ultimate control – or in other words ultimate power over the rest of us.

States levy taxes, ostensibly to pay for improvements in the life of their citizens, but some citizens are more important than others, and they are often allied with global corporate business in this context.

This is where manipulation of the ‘truth’ comes in.

These days there is very little difference between propaganda and advertising, both are instruments of manipulation.

Manipulation of the ‘people’ to go along with the ambitions of the global states and corporations.

The human mind is highly suggestible and so the constant repetition of certain ideas and the depiction of certain lifestyles (through popular drama, advertising and ‘reality TV’) encourages an image of normality that those who wish to control people, desire them to become ‘familiar’ with.

The mind always moves towards the familiar and away from the unfamiliar and so depicting a lifestyle that people should ‘want’ and feel ‘normal’ about, if done over and over again, is a means of conditioning people to a state where money becomes the key driver.

I know this is getting a bit ‘deep’ but the whole ‘money-power-truth’ conundrum is so subtle and insidious that it becomes very difficult to explain – but that’s the whole point isn’t it?

Let’s just lift into the ‘Power’ dimension on the Hawkins scale or as Esther Hicks would put it the ‘high flying disc’ (‘Co-Creating at its Best’ – Wayne Dyer & Esther Hicks).

At this level the things we do and the services we provide are more important that the money we receive in return.

They and their quality both for the provider and the recipient are our driver, not the money we may receive in return.

But at the ‘lower level’ it’s all about the money. The amount people receive is more important to them than what they do or how they do it.

‘Shareholders’ profits’ are more important to the big corporation than the quality or efficacy of the products and services they provide. ‘Customers’ are simply income streams.

It’s the same with the ‘World Power’ states and some of the others as well, when taxpayers’ money is used for grandiose schemes that make the state ‘look good’ rather than health care or education.

Lip service is paid, but when it comes to the crunch it always seems that budgets are cut rather then increased.

People are fed the ideas about ‘the way things are supposed to be’ and how this might be achieved to have them in a mindset that accepts the movement of the incomes they receive towards the global organisations and states.

’Making America (or Britain) Great Again’ and the money spent on doing that doesn’t help the citizenry – and neither does it achieve that object, except in the eyes of those who are making money out of it.

The way money is managed through the banking system obfuscates everything as well. It’s difficult to follow what money goes where and this is exacerbated by so called ‘data protection’ which is all about preventing people from seeing what is going on.

Currently this ‘system’ is under threat from the ‘blockchain’ idea where every step in a chain of transactions is recorded. Crypto currency or alternative money is a big threat to the existing ‘system’ whereby money concentrates with a small number of people, replacing it with the idea of community money or as Ed Ludbrook would put it ‘Crowd Finance’.

You and I should consider, when we see any ‘truth’ promoted on the media and elsewhere, who exactly is benefiting from this?

Who benefits if I accept and conform to these ‘truths’?

To retain our power to make our own decisions and make our own freedoms, you and I need to be fully aware of what is going on.

Listen to Audio
Watch Video
Back to Wednesday Insight

WIN 219
WIN 219 150 150 Ben Coker Strategies


Proof of the Pudding

“The proof of the pudding is in the eating” so they say.

From a culinary point of view this is about how the ‘pudding’ was prepared and although it might ‘look good’ it may not necessarily be so good when it comes to eating it.

‘Proving’ in this case has a somewhat different meaning to ‘proving’ or ‘proof’ in the legal, scientific, or academic world but there does seem to be, throughout society, an obsession with this idea of ‘proof’.

‘Proof’ of something is seen as an indicator of ‘truth’ – if something is ‘proven’ then it must be ‘true’

Then again ‘truth’ is not necessarily ‘true’ – Ruth Hubbard in 1988 coined the phrase “Truth is in the eye of the beholder” and the same thing is true of proof.

The ‘truth’ of something and the ‘proof’ of it are very strongly influenced by what you or I believe. We ‘choose’ what we believe to be true and the ‘proof’ of that truth has a great deal to do with it.

The thing is, that anything, anything at all, can be ‘proved’.

To prove something, you gather evidence in favour of a certain hypothesis.

That may be evidence of guilt in a court case, it may be evidence supporting a certain economic or scientific theory, it may be evidence of how certain artificial or natural processes ‘work’.

Proof relies on ‘evidence’, but you will have noticed that I said ‘evidence in favour’.

I was originally trained as a scientist, taught to set up a hypothesis and then to conduct experiments to gather evidence in its favour. The idea is that if you can’t get enough favourable evidence or you get too much evidence against the idea then the hypothesis falls.

This is, or should be, the basis of all scientific, academic, business and political research and discovery of ‘the truth’ about any particular proposition.

The trouble is that we, as a society and culture, have corrupted this process and now use it to prove anything we wish to be ‘proved’ and to be ‘true’.

Josef Goebbels said that if you repeat a statement that has no foundation (a lie) enough times it transforms into a truth. This of course can be backed up or accelerated by the provision of manufactured or false evidence – propaganda – that appears real.

As you and I know this leads to fear (false evidence appearing real) and is the basis of fake news, misinformation, disinformation and (a new term) malinformation.

The more this stuff is repeated the sooner it becomes ‘true’ and feeds both away and towards motivation.

Fear of something happening (away) and fear of missing out (towards).

Because it works both ways, fear is an extremely powerful motivator that is used extensively by states and organisations for two purposes.

One is to force people to take a particular line and adopt a way of thinking, as Nazi Germany succeeded in doing in the 1930s, and the second is to go on to control people, quite often in a way they didn’t expect, as with the Communist Regimes of the 20th century.

Although I’ve given historical examples, manipulation of populations through fear, to force them on to a certain path or attitude and then control them, is still happening in the 21st century and even more so because now it’s much easier, in the ‘information age’, to ‘get’ to the people.

The idea of ‘proof’ is at the centre of it.

If you can ‘prove’ something to the ‘masses’ then they will believe it and hold it to be ‘true’. Anything that has not been ‘scientifically proven’ either doesn’t exist, doesn’t work, or will ‘never happen’.

But its so easy to manipulate the ‘proof’ – all you do is simply ignore any evidence, however much there is, that is against your proposition or hypothesis and if there is no evidence (or you can’t find any) to support your policy you simply make it up – together with some sort of ‘proof’.

In most mathematical, scientific and especially economic arguments this is a little phrase that covers any disconnect in the logic or evidence.

“Given that . . .” always means that an assumption is being made for which there is no evidence whatsoever.

You’ll find it somewhere in most ‘papers’ written about a subject and you may even remember it from some mathematical ‘proofs’ at school.

Which brings me to the first level of control that’s exercised throughout most of the world – school and so-called ‘education’.

Children are fed from an early age with ideas that have been ‘proven’ and taught to learn this ‘knowledge’. They are then tested on their memory of it rather than being encouraged or even allowed to probe these ‘facts’.

Those who question this approach like A.S. Neill who founded Summerhill School in 1921 and more recently Bob Proctor and Vishen Lakhiani (Mind Valley) are generally side-lined although there are now some interesting developments in South America spearheaded by Natalie Ledwell (Mind Movies) where the school curriculum is being radically changed.

But in most cases children are taught what the state wants them to be taught – pay attention, get good qualifications and get a job. “We prepare children for the world of work” was a statement made by a National Union of Teachers spokesperson just a few years ago.

Of course, once you have control of peoples’ minds than they will do whatever you feel is necessary to support the state. It has happened so many times in so many countries – and no-one notices.

They don’t notice because as Bob Proctor points out they don’t understand, really understand what they’ve been taught. They simply take on board two fundamentals.

To be true something must be proven and for proof there must be evidence – and evidence, as Goebbels said is simply a mater of repetition, it doesn’t need to be ‘true’.

The second level of control comes throughout life, through the media, advertising and from the state machine, and it’s all about money.

Money makes the world go around – but more on that next time.

Meanwhile, think about what you believe to be true.

Is it? – Is it really?

Or is it what you’ve been ‘taught’ is true? – Taste the pudding and see . . .

Listen to Audio
Watch Video
Back to Wednesday Insight

WIN 218
WIN 218 150 150 Ben Coker Strategies


“The 7 Big Mistakes . . .”

You may have noticed that there are always ‘7 Big Mistakes’ – whatever it is you or I are embarked on someone will offer a ‘free report’ describing them and of course leading up to a sales pitch.

We have our ‘Seagulls’ and we may have broken down what we need to do into B goals and A goals or tasks. We will have made a plan of some sort as well.

When we have something to achieve you and I do this as a matter of course and if anyone doesn’t do this at the start they haven’t ‘made a mistake’, they just haven’t started.

They haven’t reached the ‘mistake making’ stage. They’ve ‘chosen’ their vision or target and ‘decided’ to go for it completing the first stage of creation.

It has been created in the mind.

But then we have to take action by first deconstructing our goals into plans and specific activities and this is where the ‘mistakes’ start.

What I’ve found is that there are quite a few more than just seven and it will take too long to describe them all so here are four things you must not do, and four things you must not neglect to do, if you’re going to have any prospect of success.

  1. We have to let go of any form of expectation that our desired outcome will be achieved within a certain timescale, in a certain place, in a certain way or whatever.

We have to let go of the desired outcome once we have defined it and instead of trying to figure out how it can be achieved remain focussed on our intention for that outcome. The Universe will take care of the ‘how’ – the ‘how’ will come to us – out of the ‘blue’ as the saying goes

As long as we hold true to our intention.

And, unless we have a prior agreement, contract or promise we must not expect anything from other people. They have their own intentions which may or may not be in alignment with ours.

So if you and I wish to work in harmony with the Universe and make the ‘Law of Attraction’ work then as well as applying the full set of Laws we have to let go of our ego, our belief that we (our human entities) are ‘in control’ and let the Universe do its thing.

  1. You and I need to ignore or dispose of any limiting beliefs and paradigms about ‘how the world works’

This includes what we think we ‘can’ or ‘cannot’ do and to an extent what we think we are ‘allowed’ (or not) to do.

Sometimes this isn’t easy and we get dragged back into these ways of thinking which leads me to the first thing that you and I must not neglect or ‘forget’!

  1. To achieve and bring into reality what we wish for you and I must manage our ‘mindset’.

What this really means is that we must nurture our Belief in ourselves and our Faith in the Universe to deliver whatever it is we are ‘asking for’.

This is another big topic and can just about be covered in a three day event or a three month coaching programme. The thing is that we have to be constantly aware of our Beliefs, our Faith and our Paradigms if we are to achieve what we wish to achieve.

  1. Remember to work with the Laws, all of them together, if we wish to succeed

Working with the Law is essential, and in any form of manifestation, wish, meditation, or ‘prayer’ you may have noticed a key formula.

‘Prayers’ in the religious sense, always start with ‘thanks’ or gratitude, followed by ‘forgiveness’ or a request for it. Then they move into whatever is being ‘requested’.

The thing to remember is that this is the formula of the Universe. The Law of Attraction must be preceded by use of the Laws of Gratitude and Forgiveness, otherwise it ‘doesn’t work’.

  1. Get into the right ‘vibration’ or frame of mind, be on the ‘wavelength’ or ‘frequency’ of whatever it is we are seeking.

The Law of Vibration is the counterpart of the Law of Attraction and Bob Proctor majors on this in his coaching.

Everything is energy and different things, thoughts and events have a unique ‘frequency’ – just like a radio or TV you have to ‘tune in’ to that frequency in order to receive whatever it is you are looking for.

How you and I do this requires understanding and training – and usually some help.

  1. Make sure we don’t become ‘obsessed’ with our vision or our plan

Many people make a strong point of advising us to remain ‘focussed’ on what we are doing (often because what we are doing is a contributor to their plan) but ‘over-focus’ on one thing is dangerous because it can severely damage our lifestyle, health and relationships.

You and I need a ‘Do List’ (not a ‘To Do List’ because that means it will always be ‘to’ do!) and it should be reprioritised every time we complete whatever is at the top of the list.

How this works is a longer story than we have time for here.

  1. We must watch what we are doing, measure our achievement and effectiveness, and use this feedback.

If you and I don’t measure the effect of the tasks we complete we won’t know where we are in the overall plan and we won’t be able to modify what we do to make things better or easier.

If we’re not aware of what’s happening everything will take longer and/or we’ll find ourselves going the wrong way.

  1. Perhaps the biggest mistake is what many people do – attempting to go it alone, without help.

It’s a bit like DIY without the instructions or using a new piece of software without the user guide. When we set off on our own, we do go the wrong way and we do make mistakes, sometimes big ones.

I know this from personal experience because I didn’t start taking advice until quite late in my career/life (and there are probably one or two people around who would say I still don’t take advice!).

It’s essential to work with coaches and mentors and teachers, and that is deliberately in the plural. You don’t need a vast number, just a few, but they are absolutely essential to you achieving your vision.

It’s one of the ways in which the Universe helps you to bring about whatever it is you wish for, and helps you grow into whoever, whatever or wherever that is.

Listen to Audio
Watch Video
Back to Wednesday Insight

WIN 217
WIN 217 150 150 Ben Coker Strategies


The Rule of Law

“Ye cannae break the Laws of Physics Cap’n” said Scotty in Star Trek – frequently!

Physics is all about energy and the Universe consists only of energy and space.

The ‘Laws of Physics’ are the Laws of the Universe expressed from a ‘scientific’ point of view and are sometimes also described as the Laws of Nature.

Variously described by different authors there are eleven or twelve ‘Laws of the Universe’ and there are two things to keep in mind:

They cannot be broken – if they were then the Universe would cease to exist.

They work together at all times and cannot be applied separately.

For a better understanding of what they all are there is a book by Raymond Holliwell ‘Working with the Law’ and an audio programme ‘The 11 Universal Laws of Success’ by Mary Morrissey and Bob Proctor.

One of the better known is the Law of Attraction, popularised by Rhonda Byrne’s book ‘The Secret’  but she didn’t make it clear that the Law of Attraction doesn’t work by itself, you have to fully understand and deploy all the other Laws as well – hence the opinion of many people that ‘it doesn’t work’.

But what’s the difference between these Laws and laws in the legal sense?

The Laws of Nature/the Universe/Physics are outside human control, immutable – they are about how the Universe works and what ‘holds it together’.

The ‘laws’ that we make as humans are not really laws at all.

They can be broken, and often are, they can be repealed or discarded, they can be applied or not applied depending on circumstances and they are open to ‘interpretation’ by the judiciary.

We call them ‘laws’ to make them sound more important or grand than they really are.

These ‘man made’ laws are, in reality ‘rules’ that we have made up to govern and manage how we live and co-exist in society.

The ‘law of the land’ or more exactly the set of laws, are the ‘written down’ rules that we have made and, generally, agreed to and in addition there are many unwritten rules that we also tend, most of the time, to follow.

But none of it has much to do with the real Laws of the Universe.

You see, these are based first on the truth that energy can neither be created or destroyed, second on the truth that ‘time’ is not linear and third that energy is constantly in motion (in vibration) and that everything consists only of energy and space.

Which means? (as Allan Pease would say)

The Universe doesn’t deal in time, it only deals with now – but ‘now’ can be any ‘time’ so if there is something that you wish to achieve in the ‘future’ you have to deal with it in a certain way.

The Gregorian calendar we currently use is (and always was) completely out of synch with the Universe so putting a ‘date’ on a goal is meaningless.

That’s not to say that you shouldn’t put dates on ‘tasks’ (or A-goals), that’s an entirely different matter.

You can however use years, months or days. Kennedy’s vision of putting men on the moon and bringing them back was expressed as within a decade not as by 31st December 1969.

So you can envision who you wish to be, be doing or having in three years’ time, or three months’ time, or even three days’ time only if you use ‘real’ years (365+ days) real (lunar) months and real 24 hour days.

Next you must ‘travel in time’ to visualise exactly what will be going on when you’ve achieved your vision – what you will be feeling, who you will be talking to, where you will be? and so on and then bring it back.

Describe in writing and in words – explaining it to someone else what is going on in your ‘time machine’ vision in the present tense.

It takes a bit of getting used to but that’s the way it works.

Then you must have clarity.

Many of the authors in this field say that you should specify your vision in minute detail, but you don’t really need to specify the design of the door hinges in your dream home – unless that’s particularly important to you.

On the other hand, remember the Universe, and your mind as its agent, only ever does what it ‘thinks’ you want it to do, so you have to be clear. Lack of clarity will create resistance and delay in your achieving whatever it is you wish for.

Usually, whatever that is, will be delivered ‘as soon as possible’ and if you’re not clear the Universe will also be unclear about what it is supposed to be providing.

Which leads to unexpected results. In my case I was ‘thinking’ of changing my car, so I was rear-ended and the car written off, so I changed my car before I had planned.

Be careful what you wish for, or more to the point be clear about it. Don’t be too specific and always add Mary Morrissey’s phrase – “This or something better”

Finally, we come to Napoleon Hill’s statement “Whatever the mind of a man (sic) can conceive and believe it can achieve”, a variation on “Everything is created twice” derived from Thoreau and Wattles.

Thought is energy and thought creates things. Thought also gives rise to events where different ‘things’, thoughts and feelings come together.

Every ‘thing’ or ‘event’ or ‘thought’ or ‘feeling’ has its own vibrational state, frequency or resonance.

Just because the chair you are sitting on appears to be stationery that doesn’t mean to say that the elements that make it up are not moving. All is energy and all is in a constant state of movement.

Why does this matter? (no pun intended)

To achieve something, to manifest something, to make something ‘come true’ you have to vibrate at the same frequency as whatever it is you wish to bring about.

This of course is the ‘hard part’ How do you or I do that?

Well, we don’t. It’s not so much what we do that matters it’s what we don’t do, and I’ll discuss that next time.

Listen to Audio
Watch Video
Back to Wednesday Insight

WIN 216
WIN 216 150 150 Ben Coker Strategies


Seagulls

There were about a hundred of us sitting in a conference room with Bob Proctor and he suddenly started talking about ‘identifying your seagulls’.

What? What is he talking about?

Then the slide came up and we realised he was talking about goals – C-Goals.

But let me go back a step or two. This was day three of the 6-day Matrixx event that Bob runs a few times each year usually in Toronto where he lives.

We’d spent a couple of days discussing success and how the mind works and one of the key things to come out of this was the difference between knowledge and understanding.

You see, at school we get ‘taught’ a lot of ‘knowledge’ – facts and figures and how to do things, and then we’re tested (‘examined’) on our ability to recall what we’ve been ‘taught’. If we ‘pass’ we are deemed to be educated and maybe ‘qualified’ in a particular subject area.

Bob’s take on this, which reflects the writings of Napoleon Hill in ‘Think and Grow Rich’, is that it’s all very well if you are then going on to ‘work’ for someone else and basically continue to do what you are told.

But if you want to create your own way in life, do your own thing, then you need to understand the true meaning of all the stuff you’ve been fed with at school and probably learn some more useful ‘knowledge’ as well.

Bob spends a great deal of time and effort in careful study of the key personal growth authors like Hill and Thomas Troward (among others) to understand the true meaning of what they are saying and how he can apply it to his life and business.

Because that’s what success in life is all about – applying knowledge.

Knowledge that arises from learning and experience plus a significant amount of astute ‘awareness’ of what s really going on around us.

Given that you and I have a good level of understanding of the field we wish to operate in (and we don’t have to understand ‘everything’!) the next step is to find a way of putting this understanding into practice – and that’s where goals come in.

But maybe not quite in the way you’ve been used to it.

You see most ‘goal setting’ particularly some of that carried out in medium and large businesses is, not a waste of time, but not very effective.

There is strong element of compromise in ‘corporate’ and ‘business coach’ goal setting which unfortunately creeps into personal goals.

Bob teaches that there are three levels of goal, A, B and C.

An ‘A’ goal is something that you are comfortable with, you know what to do to achieve it, you know exactly how to do it and you know who you need to help you. It’s a ‘SMART’ type goal – and the A and R are where this type of goal falls down – ‘achievable’ and ‘realistic’.

Setting a goal to increase your turnover by 5% or even 10% is straightforward, it’s a task – you just do more of what you are doing now or do it more efficiently.

If you can’t achieve a ‘smart’ goal, you’re just not working hard enough or ‘smart’ enough!

A ‘B’ goal is the next level up, it’s the type of goal that my friend Phil Olley would call an Awesome Special Mission, but it’s still a fairly low-level mission compared with the ‘C’goal.

When you set a ‘B’ goal you have a rough idea of what you need to do, an outline idea of how it might be done and some idea of the resources you might need.

It’s usually something you haven’t done before (if you have it’s probably an A goal), have a passion or need to do, and requires you to stretch.

While the A goal is well inside your comfort zone, the B goal is on the edge or just outside. It’s extending your boundaries but you can ‘see’ it.

B goals take more effort and more thought and more understanding that A goals and they also take something that you really do need before you attempt a C goal.

A ‘C’ goal is what some Americans might refer to as your ‘Dream’, in the UK we might call it a big ‘Vision’. It’s something you have absolutely no idea (or very little idea) how to set about, let alone achieve.

You don’t know what to do, how to do it, or who to ask for help.

What you do need as Von Braun said to Kennedy about the Moon mission is “the will to do it”

The task Bob gave us after he’d explained all this was to identify our C goal – and by the way, you can only have one at any particular time, if you have more they are probably B goals.

Re-enter the seagull.

The seagull’s eye view of your goal/dream/vision, the ‘big picture’ – what it ‘looks’ and ‘feels’ like, the visualisation – what Sandy Gallagher, Bob’s business partner in the Proctor Gallagher Institute calls ‘visioneering’.

We worked on our C goals in groups helping each other to refine those big pictures and come up with a coherent description of ‘brief’ we could use to explain it to others in a couple of sentences.

But identifying the C goal is one thing, getting there is another – we need to deploy both internal and external resources.

Very few really successful people have achieved what they did on their own, in fact I can’t think of any, there were always other people supporting them in one way or another.

Bob Proctor wouldn’t have reached where he is now without Earl Nightingale and Vic Conant and later Sandy Gallagher and all the other people in his organisation.

But it’s not just other people, the primary drive comes from within your Self.

It starts with understanding – understanding your Self and your ‘Dream’ and that comes from learning, experience and awareness. But that alone is not enough.

You need to have the will to do it, the desire to do it, the ache inside that drives you on, and you also need three other things which ‘glue’ it all together: Confidence, Trust and Belief – all in your Self and others – that it WILL happen and that you CAN do it.

Then there are the ‘Laws’ – the Laws of the Universe that you and I need to understand and have Faith that they exist and are true. Because it’s the Laws that govern when your goal will be achieved and how it will actually turn out.

Bob spent quite some time at Matrixx discussing how these work in achieving your goals and I’ll take you there next week.

Listen to Audio
Watch Video
Back to Wednesday Insight

WIN 215
WIN 215 150 150 Ben Coker Strategies


Taking Sides

“Whose side are you on?”

It might be worth applying the Steve Shapiro (‘Listening for Success’) formula to this sentence – repeat it five times with the emphasis on a different word each time – you get five different meanings.

Not only is this question – whichever way you say it – aggressive, but it has implications.

The first being that you and I are supposed to be ‘on’ a ‘side’, and the second that we don’t happen to be on the ‘side’ of whoever is asking.

We are constantly being encouraged, strongly or gently, to support one alternative or another, to align with one side or another, to pick one option or another – and whatever the situation, it always seems to get boiled down to you and I being given a choice between two ‘sides’.

Of course, in the vast majority of cases we don’t have to make a choice – but if we don’t, this is seen as weakness or ‘weird’ or in some other way ‘unacceptable’.

“But you must be on somebody’s side!” – being neutral is just ‘wrong’!

And, if you are ‘neutral’ you’re usually seen as being on the ‘other’ side, because if you’re not our friend, on ‘our’ side, you must be on ‘their’ side and an enemy.

Sadly, this is becoming the norm in many spheres of life.

Some sporting events (not all) are descending into this, and in so-called ‘light entertainment’ people are continually encouraged to ‘take sides’.

In academia there are often ‘two schools of thought’ where the adherents to each opinion end up on one ‘side’ or the other.

This seems to be especially true in Economics, and there is also a saying that History (his-story or her-story) is written by the ‘winning side’, putting many Historians at odds about what is true and what is not; and as for Religion, well, I need say no more.

But the area that seems to consume people on a daily basis is of course Politics.

Are you ‘for’ or ‘against’, ‘stay as we’ are or ‘change’, ‘left’ or ‘right’, ‘blue’ or ‘red’?

The problem with this of course is that it has degraded, well pretty much destroyed, the concept of Democracy which was never about universal franchise but about informed people reaching a consensus about what to do rather than leaving it to an autocrat (usually a monarch) to decide.

Modern democracy has descended to a situation where if ‘we’ win, then the ‘others’ have to do what ‘we’ say, and the process of ‘winning’ has been engineered in so-called ‘democracies’ in such a way that in the majority of cases the ‘winners’ are actually a minority of the popular vote.

‘One person one vote’ sounds good, but it doesn’t work like that due to the constituency or electoral college systems that have been put in place.

This is where the problem with ‘neutrals’ is most acute. The two sides vote, but no account is taken of those who don’t like or understand the solutions offered by either side – and this can be a significantly substantial number of people – often over a third of the population.

If you or I don’t take sides in these situations, we don’t have a say, and then we have to submit to the decisions made by the minority ‘majority’!

The problem with those of us who tend towards neutrality is that we think too much.

You and I tend to look at situations and questions and consider them, study them, research them, and, having taken into account all the (real) evidence that we have available, come up with a ‘considered decision’.

We have developed by now a ‘nose’ for the fake news, propaganda, and manipulation that goes on around us attempting to influence our decisions and are able to make up our own minds.

We employ various paradigms, frameworks and algorithms that relate to the topic or topics under consideration to reach a conclusion and maybe a decision.

But we do more than that.

The ‘set’ of paradigms, algorithms and frameworks that we use make up a ‘Thoughtform’ – a way of thinking about things that is unique to us.

No two people will have the same array of Thoughtforms; they may share paradigms and so on, but they’ll not be assembled or applied in exactly the same way by two individuals, and they’ll probably not be deployed in the same way when it comes to living our lives.

We are unique because we create different Thoughtforms.

Everyone does this, and we ‘take sides’ when our Thoughtforms are in alignment with those of others; when they aren’t we remain ‘neutral unless and until such time as we find a ‘fit’ with someone else – whatever ‘side’ they are on.

A Thoughtform is perhaps more nebulous than the individual frameworks and so on but is perhaps rather more encompassing than all of them put together.

As I’ve said previously, you and I have complete freedom to think and to create our Thoughtforms and we create them about all sorts of things.

An invention, a work of art, a project, a dream or vision, a ‘point of view’ and so on

Mary Morrissey has a saying ‘Everything is created twice’, first as a thought and then as the result of action. (I believe, although this has been attributed to several people, it first appeared in the writings of Wallace Wattles or Henry David Thoreau) But in fact this is not true, because many things are only created once – they don’t get past the thought stage.

They don’t get past the thought stage for many reasons.

Expressing the thought may be suppressed by a regime, discouraged by others (“You can’t do that”), suppressed by ourselves through lack of confidence or self-belief, or just ‘lost’ in the mass of other stuff that’s going on in our lives.

If you or I are for some reason unable to outwardly express our thoughts by broadcast or implementation as soon as we have formulated them we can at least take the first step and write them down – and people have been able to do this in the most extreme situations of oppression, so there’s no excuse not to!

Expressing that which arises from our Thoughtforms will result in one of two outcomes.

Either it will strengthen the ‘side’ we are on, or it will establish the option of an alternative or ‘third way’ in the situation in which sides are being taken.

If we say nothing, write nothing, do nothing with our Thoughtforms then there is very little point to our existence!

Listen to Audio
Watch Video
Back to Wednesday Insight

WIN 214
WIN 214 150 150 Ben Coker Strategies


Wasted Effort?

There are three key things or concepts on which most people spend a great deal of time, effort and energy which are, in fact, a complete waste of that time, effort and energy.

You may be surprised to know what they are:

Money is worthless.

I have said this before, but I reiterate that money is absolutely useless unless you circulate it.

I suppose you could melt it down and turn it into something else, light fires with it or perhaps, as during the Weimar Republic in Germany, paper the walls with it.

Many people spend their lives in pursuit of the accumulation of money. Sometimes they call it wealth, but money itself has little to do with wealth.

Wealth is the result of using, circulating or deploying money – it only becomes useful when you and I use it – or circulate it.

Just hold that thought of ‘circulation’ – I’ll come back to it.

You and I know that keeping money ‘in the bank’ or a savings scheme is not really that good an idea.

While we get paid ‘interest’ on our money the amount we get is usually less than the rate of inflation so despite the seeming increase in the amount of money we have, it’s value, its purchasing power falls.

The amount of money increases, but our ‘wealth’ or the usability of our money decreases.

Yes, it’s a good idea to keep enough money readily available to meet the needs of our ‘cashflow’ or ‘working capital’ but no more.

Most people like to have a ‘cushion’ but often the cushions are too plump and deteriorate in value over time, defeating the object of the exercise.

Money needs to flow or circulate in order to do its ‘job’ and unless it is moving then it actually begins to become a burden.

If we accumulate a surplus of money, more coming in than is going out, we either need to put the money to ‘work’ by investing in something or someone that will provide a return of additional money or ‘spend’ it on something or someone.

This of course goes against the grain of sayings that encourage people to save and not spend but if we stopped spending then everything would grind to a halt, but let’s move on.

Knowledge is a waste

This may be surprising, but knowledge is completely useless without two further things.

Understanding and Action.

Some people ‘know’ an awful lot but sadly the only time they seem to use it is in a quiz or game show – ‘general knowledge’

You and I may, and probably do, know a lot of stuff between us, much of which was fed to us during our ‘education’, but there is much of it we don’t need or really understand, or don’t understand enough to be able to apply it or put it into practice.

You see, the only purpose of knowledge is to stimulate and facilitate action of some kind – otherwise what’s the point?

It’s just like having shelves of books that you’ve never read, or only read once rather than studying their contents and understanding how the knowledge being put across can be employed to your or others’ advantage.

If we, as a society, don’t use the knowledge we have in this way then why bother in the first place.

There is of course a difference between knowledge and basic skills. We need to be taught how to read and write and so on, but rather than giving children bookfulls of ‘facts’ they should be taught how to discover knowledge, how to understand it and how to use it – the ‘subject’ doesn’t really matter.

When working with master’s degree level students I was amazed that they had (in most cases) no idea about how to apply their extensive knowledge to a simple problem.

There really is little point in accumulation knowledge unless you’re going to fully understand it and take some action on that understanding.

The third ‘thing’ I want to consider is thought.

Thinking is useless.

Unless you do something with it.

Viktor Frankl said from his experience in the concentration camps that the oppressors could take everything away from a person except their ability to think – all they could do with that was to prevent anyone from expressing their thought, and that’s what it’s all about.

You and I think all the time. Thought processes are going on even while we sleep. We know this because many people keep a pad by the bed and when they wake up in the middle of the night, they’ll write a note about something that has just come into their mind.

There are generally two purposes of thinking, which are closely related, one is problem solving and the other is philosophy. These encompass pretty much everything; activities, feelings, ambitions and so on including the ‘what if’ type of thoughts that can go either way on the energy scale into what some people might call positive and negative or good and pad.

But the ‘thinking’ is all very well – you and I have to take action on it if it’s not just going to be a waste of time.

We have to go ahead and do what needs to be done to solve the problem or we have to take action to broadcast our philosophy or our ‘take’ on things to others – which of course is what I’m doing now.

Circulation is key

To make them useful all three of these have something in common – circulation, movement, flow.

Without it they just ‘stop’ – they don’t go anywhere.

Money sits in a bank and decays in value, Knowledge fades and eventually expires in its usefulness and Thought just becomes mindless. You and I must circulate our money, our knowledge and our thoughts to make them vital and useful to ourselves and others.

Otherwise we’re just wasting our time effort and energy and really need to rethink our lives and make a new start.

The Law of Circulation is very interesting. It’s not just ‘what goes around comes around’ because it ties up with the Law of Increase.

Whatever circulates properly also increases.

You circulate money, you get more money, you use your knowledge, you gain more knowledge, you express your thoughts, you get feedback and think better.

The opposite of circulation is stagnation – and unless that’s where you want to go, keep circulating!

Listen to Audio
Watch Video
Back to Wednesday Insight

WIN 213
WIN 213 150 150 Ben Coker Strategies


Singularity?

Don’t worry, this isn’t about Quantum Physics, although I might get into that someday.

I’ve discussed before the idea, as put forward by Neale Donald Walsch, that, as Souls, we are all individuated fragments of the Universe.

The result is that you and I see ourselves as individual beings, which means as individuated Souls inhabiting and supported by an individual physical host, which in our case is human.

Other Souls inhabit other sentient physical hosts, you can’t persuade me that dogs, for example, don’t possess Souls!

As a rule, only one Soul inhabits any one body although there is evidence that some bodies have been and are ‘possessed’ by more than one Soul, which inevitably leads to significant problems.

So as symbiotic beings we are ‘single’ individuals, which brings me to my point.

Walsch explains that our ‘purpose’ in life, in any incarnation, is simply to ‘experience’ the ‘life’ we’ve chosen as individuated Souls. We don’t have a ‘mission’ other than that which is part of this Soul-Experience.

(To fully understand this, refer to Walsch’s ‘Conversations With God’ trilogy.)

One of the experiences for all life forms on this planet is procreation, and for that, in most cases, two individuals are required. With some life forms the offspring can immediately fend for themselves with little or no aftercare, but with the ‘higher’ forms of life such as humans, a significant amount of time and nurture is required before new individuals are able to ‘look after’ themselves.

Keeping in mind that this is all part of the Soul-Experience, a culture has developed in most countries of one-to-one partnerships between individuals, the purpose of which is the ‘bringing-up’ of children.

On top of that, again in most parts of the world these partnerships have been institutionalised into what is generally known as ‘marriage’ and again in most cases, is highly regulated y the State and/or the ‘Church’ or other religious organisation acting on behalf of the State.

Our human side has a strong drive to form such a partnership lasting for several years according to the number and ‘spacing’ of children they have.

‘Finding a partner’ is a key driver for young adults and not having such a partner is seen as in some way a ‘failure’.

Our physical host’s ‘prime directive’ is to procreate, so this is understandable, but in many cases it is at odds with the ‘Soul-Experience’ being sought in this life and this can can lead to the formation of same-sex partnerships and multiple-partner arrangements.

Now though, there is a ‘new kid on the block’ – the idea of ‘Self-Partnering’, spearheaded by the ‘millennial’ generation, but beginning to ‘catch on’ with people who have passed the childbearing age of their human existence.

Self-Partnering is quite different from just being ‘Single’.

Those who describe themselves as ‘single’ are usually in a state of ‘looking’ (to some level at least) for a partner. Age here is immaterial, the desire for a partner is driven by cultural norms as well as the need to procreate.

People who have lost or separated from their procreational partner or same-sex ‘life partner’ for whatever reason still feel ‘left out’ or in someway inferior if they aren’t part of a ‘couple’.

That’s simply the pressure of ‘society’ but it makes many people feel in some way outcast from society and maybe in some cases even a threat to the established order of things.

Self -Partnership is different and operates on a much higher level in the Soul-Body relationship.

You and I have unique interfaces or relationships within us between our Soul and the physical entity, or body, we inhabit, and which is essential to our survival in this life.

That relationship, and our understanding of it, can be envisaged as our ‘Self’.

But how can you or I have a relationship with our Selves?

It’s all about knowing and understanding who you really are; which part of you, Soul or Human is ‘in charge’, whether you follow your human instincts or your Soul intuition?

Whether you give in to ‘society’ or follow your own path.

Is your life in balance? In terms of life energy how much is coming in and how much is going out, and like your financial accounts what are your Soul’s ‘assets’ and ‘liabilities?

It’s also about being ‘at one’ with your Self, being comfortable in your Self, and knowing and understanding that whatever your current experience, whatever is happening, your Self can deal with it.

It’s about knowing, understanding and fully believing the ‘You’ are Enough. Being ‘enough’ is not about being complacent about where you are now it means that you know where you are and ready, but not desperate or under any obligation, to move forward.

(More on being ‘Enough’ in Marisa Peer’s book or Mind Valley programme.)

Above all it’s about having love for your Self and not being in need of love from someone else.

Being in love with your self in this way is not narcissism, that is always at the expense of others in some way. Self-Partnership is about you and you only.

One of the surprising things about self-partnership (although it’s not really surprising) is that self-partnered people are often in the best relationships with others.

They often have another person as their ‘life-partner’ (formal or informal) and these relationships are extremely good. Some people refer to these others as their Soul Mate because the partnership, the relationship, is at that level, above the purely human level.

All the people I know who have wonderful relationships with their life partner first had that relationship with their Selves. That Self-Partnership. That’s how it works.

Anyone ‘looking’ for their ‘Soul Mate’ will never find them. Only when a person has self-partnered first will that higher-level relationship be possible.

Sadly, the truth is that not many people know this or have reached this level, most people are still struggling with ‘singularity’ – and will probably need coaching to help to ‘raise their game’.

Anyone ‘looking’ should just forget about ‘finding a partner’ – they already have one. They just have to start building that relationship, the relationship they always wished for, with their Self.

It’s never too late to partner with your Self, even if you are in a ‘relationship’ already, things can only get better.

And if you know anyone who this message might help, please do pass it on.

Listen to Audio
Watch Video
Back to Wednesday Insight

WIN 212
WIN 212 150 150 Ben Coker Strategies


Multiple Choice?

It sometimes seems that one of the hardest things you and I are called upon to do, by ourselves or others, is to ‘choose’ between ‘alternatives’.

It has been said many times by many people that whatever we do or say we are in some way ‘selling’ something and if you choose to look at it in a certain way that’s true.

You could say that I am ‘selling’ right now, ‘selling’ my ideas and insights to those who are interested in what I have to say.

There’s no need for money to change hands – that is not part of a ‘sales’ process, and neither is anything else that you see, hear or read unless it is done as part of that money exchange process.

You or I can easily ‘buy in’ to an idea, concept or proposition without money being involved.

I said, ‘buy in’, and that’s the converse of the ‘selling’ idea because when you and I ‘buy’ we are also ‘selling’ something to ourselves.

The buying decision is really a ‘sale’. When we make that decision, we, not the salesperson ((if there is one) are ‘closing the sale’!

What’s important – despite what people deeply embedded in ‘sales’ and ‘selling’ might think, is not the ‘seller’ but the buyer because that’s where the decision is made.

The buyer is also engaged in selling, as the buyer will often sell the sales person on the idea that they are not going to purchase whatever is being offered!

It’s not so much ‘caveat emptor’ but ‘caveat venditor’ – let the seller beware – because in these days of ‘rich information’ it’s the buyer who always has control.

And that applies to everything from deciding on a political representative to purchasing a bag of potatoes (it’s up to you to decide whether there is actually much difference between the two!)

However, the fact that we have control presents you and I as buyers with a problem.

‘Back in the day’ things were different.

There wasn’t a great deal of choice.

We were given information through advertising in newspapers and magazines, on billboards, and maybe during the ‘intermission’ in the cinema, about what was ‘on offer’ for us to buy.

Life was much simpler, and the sellers were in control because information was limited, and different sources of information were cumbersome.

Buyers had less choice.

But now, now there is a plethora of information, it’s everywhere, we cannot get away from it.

It’s pushed at us through our phones, through the internet, through the broadcast media and through the print media.

And people discuss things more widely because there is more to discuss about any particular subject, simply because there is so much more information available.

And along with more information there is more ‘choice’.

There are hundreds of different views on any topic you care to name.

There are hundreds of different product or service ‘solutions’ to any problem or need you care to mention.

Every different product, service or opinion has it own ‘unique selling point’ and very often each is promoted at THE solution or THE answer to the requirement needing to be met.

And they will all be promoted as the ‘only’ or ‘best’ or ‘true’ or ‘real’ answer to what you are looking for, even though they aren’t.

Each one of them is put forward as the ‘best’ answer for you.

But that’s not true, and you and I know that, and here’s where making a choice between all the possible ‘solutions’ we might wish to ‘buy’ to meet our particular requirement gets difficult.

First, each product, opinion or service is presented as the ‘only’ one you’ll need when you really require a combination or parts of one and elements of another to meet your particular requirement. There are multiple ‘treatments’ or ‘solution’ to any particular problem or requirement and different people need different or multiple ‘solutions’ according to their specific needs

Second, the information you and I get about each alternative is presented (in most cases) from the point of view of whoever is promoting it – what ‘it’ (the product, service or opinion) does or means, rather than focussing on the benefit it will provide for you, the buyer.

Third, product, service and opinion marketing attempts to develop a ‘loyalty’ factor, sometimes justified, often not, towards the source of that provision. The object of which is to make you and I feel some sort of ‘guilt’ for not going along with a particular offering. This creates the illusion that ‘brand loyalty’ is something to be applauded.

It’s all designed to make it difficult for you and me as ‘buyers’ to make a considered decision, to consider different options, or all the options, or to choose a combination of ‘solutions’ from different sources to more closely match our requirement.

To reduce our power to control the relationship or the transaction, to promote the idea of the need to get a good ‘deal’, to do ‘better’ than our peers – other buyers.

To make us think we’ve ‘won’ when we haven’t.

You see, buying is not a competition. You and I are not competing with other buyers – even though those who are ‘selling’ would like us t think we are.

You and I are buying for ourselves. We really don’t care what the next man or woman is buying. Or we shouldn’t because if we do then those who are doing the selling to us have ‘won’ the game by manipulating us into that state.

For any given situation and for any individual there are multiple solutions, therapies or treatments.

The ‘right’ answer to this ‘multiple choice question’ – “How do I meet my requirement or fix my problem” – is different for every individual.

You and I will choose different combinations of opinion, product and service to meet our needs, our requirements, our philosophies, so don’t be pressured into anything before you’ve gone through the process of properly selling it to yourself.

That’s what effective buying is all about – multiple choice.

Listen to Audio
Watch Video
Back to Wednesday Insight

WIN 211
WIN 211 150 150 Ben Coker Strategies


A Rock and a Hard Place

Sometimes you and I find ourselves in the position where we have to make a difficult decision.

Where none of the alternatives are particularly appetising.

So, what do we do – well, we usually succeed in finding a compromise that tempers the effect expected from any of the alternatives we originally perceived?

Now this is all very well if it’s just you or I making the decision and it primarily affects ourselves although others for whom we may have some form of responsibility may be involved.

And – if it is you or I who will be responsible for putting that decision, or compromise, into effect.

It may be to do with our family, our business or just ourselves, the point is that we have control.

But what if it’s not?

What of it’s a decision that affects us but neither we nor anyone else making the decision has any effective control over the outcome?

And what if ‘everyone’ is involved in making this decision?

How much influence do you or I have on the outcome, and, even though the result is likely to have a radical effect on our lives, our families, and our business, is it really worth taking part?

Many people think not. They perceive themselves as ‘only one in millions’ or believe that it doesn’t really concern them.

In fact, we are all part of a ‘whole’, you and I and everyone else.

Imagine we are a shoal of fish or a flock of starlings. The decision on which way to go is taken by all.

There is no group that remains behind or goes a different way – the whole doesn’t split up. It may weave about and go in different directions from time to time, but it still remains as one and that’s our situation as well.

Even if you or I disagree with the outcome of the ‘mass’ decision, we are still bound by it.

Granted there are ways an means by which we can separate ourselves from the whole by opting out of ‘society’ altogether or moving to a different society, but these are radical and difficult decisions to make because by doing that we cut ourselves off from the whole.

From who we really are ‘part’ of even though we remain individuals.

You and I are spiritual beings inhabiting physical hosts and although the universal Spirit is individuated you and I are still part of it, and it cannot exist as it is without ‘us’.

As spirit there is only one of us, as symbiotic physical-spirit beings we exist as individuals but the ‘link’ is always there.

Over the years our ancestors have fought for the right to be involved in these ‘mass’ decisions and in some cases terminated their individual existence for the sake of it.

These rights have been handed down through generations and it is sad to see that many people fail the expectations of their ancestors that the hard-fought right to be involved would be exercised, disrespecting their endeavours and failing, sometimes refusing, to do so.

‘The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few – or the One’ a famous line from the Star Trek film ‘The Wrath of Khan’ also has a reverse logic used in later films that ‘the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many’.

Both statements are true, but they have to be applied to different situations. It is selfish in a ‘mass decision’ situation to take the ‘its nothing to do with me’ stance.

Having the right to participate carries a responsibility to do so and abstention or not taking part is not an option.

Unless, ‘abstain’ or ‘don’t know’ or ‘don’t care’ is actually one of the formal choices available in the decision.

The trouble is that this form of mass decision making is flawed by the actuality that taking part is optional, there is no requirement to be involved and in a sense, this undermines the whole process.

If we are attempting to determine how ‘the people’ think about a particular topic then the result cannot be clear when a large proportion of the ‘people’ don’t tell us.

And there is no understanding of why they wouldn’t, couldn’t or just didn’t take part.

The result of the decision is usually represented as ‘the will of the people’ – those who didn’t take part and those who wished for a different outcome being ignored.

This ‘will’ is then applied to everyone so quite often the will of a minority is forced on a majority – because not ‘everyone’ took part.

Any decision-making process, whether it be a mass decision, or an individual decision, requires energy, spiritual energy, and not only that, implementation of the outcome also requires spiritual energy,

We put energy in to making the decision and take energy out when it is implemented – the energetic vibration always remains in balance.

Not putting the energy into the ‘pot’ by not participating in the process will inevitably result in the energy available to implement the result being diminished – whatever the outcome of the decision may be.

Thus, it becomes more difficult to ‘go forward’ with the implementation of the decision when less ‘fuel’ is available.

This could of course be a reason not to take part when none of the options are to your liking or resonate with your personal energetic vibration.

In some cases that may be the right thing to do, especially where there is a ‘do nothing’ or ‘status quo’ option sitting between the ‘rock’ and the ‘hard place’.

But when there isn’t, there is a different choice to be made.

Participate in the process or simply accept the consequences of the result, knowing that had you participated you might have made a difference, even though it didn’t seem like it at the time.

The more people who participate, the more likely the ‘best’ result will be achieved – again, even though it might not seem like it at the time!

Listen to Audio
Watch Video
Back to Wednesday Insight
Enter your
text here