I believe America should be less relatively important than the broader Earth context.  This is especially true for areas that need help the most.  Maybe we should share the best ideals America has to offer as everywhere else on Earth ought to share with us.  There should be no us and them because we are all the same and different.  We would be better off focusing on harmonizing similarities and working together on our differences that need further research.  Other than that, diversity is great because if we were all the same, we would be a mono-culture, which leaves us susceptible to perturbation from oversights or the unforeseen.  Unfortunately, sometimes those who speak the loudest are either those who have tried to buy or fight for freedom with just wealth when it should be earned with learning, love, living, and genuine holistic effort.  I am more the type of person who would fly an Earth flag above any other (but never at the top) as it should be of higher relative contextual priority to keep striving and never say we are perfectly at the top.

Perfection at one level may be an opposite disaster at another.  In the past, we have been functioning like the OK corral, where guns are always pointed in every direction when something goes wrong.  Even worse, we are planning through organizational chart positions to place blame instead of holistically solving problems.  In the broader context, human, societal, and environmental destruction occurs because we have conditioned ourselves to blame symptoms and signs instead of solving problems.  Because there is no direct person to blame, it goes on because we have somehow not considered this cumulative destruction as a direct correlation to our functioning.  It seems like this concept is the “perfection” fallacy, where many people focused so much on being “perfect” and caring about themselves and their families primarily in the former extreme competitive model that we created the opposite at another level.  Breaking the news to these people must be interesting to make them realize what has been happening.  It is even more interesting if some people have been extremely violent towards others, thinking they are perfect, but they were contributing to the exact opposite in significant ways.  The traditional cycle approach would be to fight the enlightenment with file stacking and searching, political attacks, firing, being violent, polluting people, creating controversy with the enlightened, hiring investigators, surveillance, criminalization attempts, scandal creation, media reputation assassinations, distractions, diversions, transference across a boundary, transference across a border, creation of confusion, complexity, more process, chaos, and blaming the fact that “we cannot afford to do that right now” approach on fiscal responsibility.  Fiscal responsibility is the most irrational concept because it is rarely rationally prioritized.  Likewise, budgetary responsibility is based on the traditional concept of money, which has become the most irrational concept.  Any anthropogenic boundary or border of any type has the potential to be a distraction, diversion, or a means of transference, which increases complexity somehow.  This complexity leads to more energy allocation on complex processes and functions, which leads to less allocation for creating relative rational freedom.  I believe America was loved too much in an irrational way.  Why not spread the love everywhere?

We should not give up the pursuit of, in context, more rational freedom.

America was loved too much in an irrational way, which led to too much focus on the anthropogenic process of freedom instead of genuine holistic natural freedom, which should be attained with sharing, living, learning, loving, and real holistic effort.  From a similarity equity perspective, let us transition to loving and liberty more rationally everywhere on Earth, including in America.

Here is an idea to consider:

Wouldn’t it be great if we all allocated our energy towards helping our world recover in every genuine holistic way that is rationally possible?I believe there may be various agendas to get people in a certain “status” or compartmentalized bubble so that they do not have to be communicated with in any constructive way.  In other words, even if you could help save the world, they do not have to talk to you because of the behind-the-scenes compulsion to create categorizations and characterizations.  The categorization process creates a rationale to transfer all the negative value and energy toward those most susceptible to perturbation.  In contrast, all the positive energy and value creation gets taken from the most creative and enlightened in an integrated, in-context way.  These categories result in opportunities to fight irrationally ultra-compete, resulting in the destructive and detrimentally impacting ways they treat people.  (This hypothesis creates one of the most significant sources of societal destruction on our planet).  It is also a transference way to take everything from an individual without ever acknowledging that the creativity or ideas came from them.  It seems a lot like a corporate type of functioning that business people have used for a long time to be able to take things from creative and often more enlightened, capable people who know more about more functional, genuine, holistic, positive energy allocation.  It seems as if a certain number of people have figured out that all they have to do is maintain their perception of perfect character because when Martin Luther King said to focus on “the content of their character,” they said, “Duh.  “However, their dogmatic and one-dimensional out-of-context focus has shown that they are merely trying to continually create the perception of having a better character.  Still, they also perform their roles to create perceptions that others are worse.  It makes sense that the most creative, hard-working, and capable people are more susceptible to perturbation because many are itinerantly being put into survival treadmill situations as the power forces proclaimed “perfect people” status have coincidentally minimal risk of perturbation.  It is my theory that, more presently, it may be the illusion that these people live lives of perfection and are so-called better.  Indirectly, they are not better because they create a huge amount of suffering and detrimental impacts as well as survival stress on those contributing far more in creative, emotional, physical, or mental energy towards solving problems or helping our world somehow.  It seems weird that we have created a world where many people expend a huge amount of energy on creating perceptions of perfection when they ought to be doing the right thing and expending their energy on helping the world and all of humanity recover from war and violence by focusing on restoration and genuine holistic positive energy progress.  Too many people in the perception perfect world might be paying too much attention to enhancing their own family’s ecological fitness or creating media-worthy snippets or snapshots that increase their own perceptively perfect politics and functioning, which in turn increases their potential for current “way things are world” traditional concepts of success.  Often, these people have learned these opportunistic snapshot activities from another person’s life and are using them to get an ultra-competitive advantage to create more power, wealth, dominance, and perception of perfection.  Many attend sports, operas, ballets, fancy dinners, elite cocktail parties, symphony orchestras, and other politically perfect perception ideals.  Most of the time, they calculatingly and opportunistically spend their time enhancing their ability to create perceptions of political correctness, power, profit, heroics, and plumage.  However, it seems that many people have missed the point about the broader context by devoting their energies to making themselves look better politically or other people look worse rather than helping someone improve their current condition towards their desired future condition.  Too often, many people are being put into their survival zones and treadmill lives so that the perception-perfect people can profit, get power, or be heroes when it comes time to convert ideas often taken from the people.  They usually have others do the dirty work for them and blame loved ones, family members, or friends, which is consistent with their overall transference functioning.  This, in turn, benefits the fitness of the people who may be contributing to destructive functioning instead of contributing to the fitness of people engaged in benevolent, genuine, positive energy holistic functioning.  In sum, perception-perfect people who lack the contextual motivations, foundational fundamentals, and effort to help one another improve their current condition are contributing more detrimental impacts to the big picture, thus rendering themselves extremely imperfect.  It is time to remove those suits and cuff-lings and do what you can to help one another, even if it means being a little imperfect.  Wouldn’t it be great if everyone in these roles started wearing jeans to work, signifying that we have much to do to help our world recover from the political perfection of races and ultra-competitiveness?  Maybe we could work in the office for a few hours and spend the rest of the day helping people in over-topped survival zones increase their survival comfort, joy, love, hope, and sustainable striving for happiness.  Maybe we could have these people organize building small homes for people without a comfortable home.  Maybe some of these people could allocate some of their energy to schools and help kids in schools figure out life more holistically instead of waiting for them to become survival zone statistics.  After thinking about it for a while, maybe wearing jeans to work signifies that we all ought to get off our high horse and get our hands a little dirty by spending energy and effort trying to help everyone, everything, everywhere possible recover.  It might mean having to be mentored by someone less perceptional and politically perfect.

I want to express the need to help all people, including those with these sorts of extreme functioning in the past.  I fear that some of these perceptively perfect political people could be capable of extreme violence if they are not helped in a genuinely holistic way.  Therefore, we need compassion and care toward them as they transition into getting help so they can contribute more accurately as soon as possible.

Wouldn’t it be great if we all allocated our energy towards helping our world recover in every genuine holistic way that is rationally possible?  It would mean that 7 billion people would be collaborating and contributing.  Imagine what we could do.  We need everyone to be healthy and contribute to a sustainable striving way while continuously adapting and striving towards our desired future conditions.

It seems that one of the problems may be the difference in understanding if you are in a position or a role.  A static position seems to imply that you will do what your position requires of you or how far your charisma takes you, no matter the detrimental impacts or consequences.  This concept means irrationality, unreasonableness, or disregard for such damaging implications on individuals.  A position seems to imply static political elitist political power usage no matter what the closer to reality functional impacts or in context rationality.  The position suggests status, stature, and top-down managerial directives of dominance and control.  A role, conversely, seems to indicate an actual function of importance and significance that is necessary as part of a system or broader context.  The word role implies working together, whereas the word position indicates loneliness and isolation.  I wonder if people in positions that are coincidentally lonely and isolated get increasingly lonely and isolated.  This feedback loop may create behaviors that may be highly irrational if the feelings of isolation result in the need to usurp the power, control, and dominance of an omnipotent position.  I wonder if it is sort of like the concept of firing people.  Is it why firings occur?  Do such positions decrease the proximity to the perspectives of those of higher relative functional significance?

I have learned that from a societal perspective, it is highly irrational to fire anyone.  It makes more sense to transition people to roles or educational learning that keeps them included in our society so they can contribute and collaborate towards a more genuine holistic and sustainable striving planet Earth.  Likewise, from an integrated health perspective, firing someone is highly detrimental in many ways.  I prefer the idea of Dynamic Continuous Transitioning.  If we transition to collaborative roles, we will function in a more collaborative, cohesive, systematic, and integrative way.  Operating in collaboratively contributing relatively responsible roles implies more constructive beneficial impacts throughout.  Niche roles suggest connectivity to broader functioning in the ecosystem.

The perception of perfect authority controlling people is out of balance with their natural equilibrium, which creates a tendency to become volatile or fight instead of solving problems.  These behaviors are often validated by traditional support from management or a dominating culture inside organizations that are complacent and resistant to change.  These cumulative validation energies, self-validation power, and control authority power tend to create people isolated in their dominant communities with the same philosophies and techniques for dealing with people.  In essence, it appears to me that the power derived from law, process, procedure, power positions, authority, and other extreme anthropogenic functioning has created a scenario where various organizations are out of balance with a closer to “homeostatic” balance or dynamic equilibrium with their surrounding natural communities.  This static functioning outside the dynamic equilibrium shifts the totality of functioning up above and beyond what is considered normal steady-state dynamic equilibrium (similar to war).  This is a potentially volatile situation every time.  My suggestion for police, law, justice, military, and other organizations that have evolved beyond a more natural dynamic equilibrium is to transition to Holistic Environmental Justice Health and Safety, Peace Corps, or some Ecological restoration organization.  Or we could prioritize functioning like genuine holistic individuals who love, care, are compassionate, and help one another strive to rise above their survival zones or difficult circumstances that they are going through in their lives.  I sometimes wonder if all organizations should function at variable epochs that allow continual change and adaptation.  This causes diversity and continual infusion of new ideas into organizations.  It also gives people the freedom to live and adapt at different times.  It makes sense because as people learn throughout life, they suddenly have other interests and passions and additional higher-value energy to allocate to various organizations at different times.  Static complacency, dogma, and individual survival keep people functioning in unhealthy ways.  This leads to harmful interactions and detrimental impacts on people and our society, eventually degrading ecosystems, our entire environment, and ultimately our whole Earth.  We must keep traditional business management or top-down control tendencies in check and balanced condition.  By eliminating the static organizational chart, we preferably return to the basics or foundational, fundamental similarities and respect for each person’s diverse contributions.  The more people derive power and authority from static laws, processes, and out-of-context procedures, the more the tendency to stay out of balance from functioning closer to nature and healthy communities.  It makes sense to me to help people learn, slow down, live closer to nature, and derive more enjoyment from the simpler living, learning, loving, and pleasures of exploring and experiencing life.  My theory is that if we strive to involve everyone inclusively and simultaneously get everyone out of their survival zones, the rest is relatively about simply living.  This is true whether they are survival zones of suffering or organizationally imposed survival zones to keep people striving for maximum profit, power, and heroics, or sometimes organizations keep people fighting to survive to keep their jobs.  Many of these imposed survival zones result in ultra-competitive means of exclusion instead of benign learning and creative competition, which is much healthier.  Flipping money and making money without adding value to competition creates the most contributory destruction.  It is best to strive to function closer to nature and stay close to dynamic equilibrium with a problem-solving and holistic prevention planning approach.

Part of the problem is that people who are doing violence do not want to get caught. I worry that children and kids are disappearing because people committing these acts will do anything not to get seen, or they want to protect themselves. Because sex is one of those issues that is a vital core concept, which means that it is an expression of who each person is as a person, the thought of being exposed is too painful for these people who are doing these behaviors or violence. Therefore, the law is a significant contributor to the problem because it is punitive and persecution behavior and embarrassing when they get their names in the papers. Being blamed for sexual behavior destroys reputation, impacts survival level, destroys all aspects of health, causes everyone to “hate” the person, creates homelessness, creates unemployment, creates killing level survival, and is similar to killing a person to the millionth power. Therefore, because law and law enforcement is a reactive concept, it is a repelling concept for people in their survival zones. In the survival zone, people do what they can to avoid it. If we had a genuine holistic system that allocated resources towards the holistic side of the spectrum earlier on in susceptible people’s lives, we could help people who need help.

More importantly, we should allocate resources to research these most critical problems. It seems weird to me that we would rather wait until someone gets killed to solve a reactionary problem rather than allocate the resources in a holistic sense to prevent such occurrences in the first place. It is a ridiculous concept. People need to feel loved and cared for by helping resources. If a child services organization is punitive or investigative, why would someone seek help? If child protection services have the power to take kids away from you, why would you seek help? It is irrational. It does not make sense. It almost seems like people are getting paid to contribute to creating more of a problem. The same is true for anything to do with law. The law is being used opportunistically as a tool to hurt people. It is being used to advance the people that “matter more.” Many times, if we research problems thoroughly, those that “matter more” contribute significantly to the problems in society in the first place. It is sort of like a poor mechanic and a rich mechanic. A rich mechanic has many tools, whereas a poor mechanic can only make do with what they have in their small toolbox. The tools in one’s toolbox are directly proportional to significance, importance, how much the people involved matter, the value of an issue, and the transference value. Everyone is critical. We ought to research, assess, problem-solve, and plan the future with significant resources and effort allocated toward these genuine holistic priorities. In summary, malicious systems and functioning create negative people, but it is less the people’s fault because they get impacted immensely. They are in their survival zones at the lowest in Maslow’s hierarchy of needs because of significant cumulative impacts.

I believe that self-validation is occurring today in various professions.  I think the self-validation effect leads to a cycle contributing to pollution, itinerant controversy creation, judging, and manipulative monkeywrenching.  In essence, it has a detrimental negative impact on our individuals, society, and world as it becomes desirable to have more and more problems in this world to increase self-validation, complacency, and resistance to change.  These cycles contribute to a corrupt society.  If we do not change, we will continue these behaviors and have a so-called economy based on problems, detrimental impacts, repairing damage, fighting, creating damage, taking care of sick people, taking care of mentally ill people, and creating transference for those that matter more in our world.  People will be born for transference potential only in the generations to follow.  They will be taken to be better.  As they live, they will be given a better life and a higher potential for transference because of the itinerant creation of “better.” I have written that better is a commodity and is an extremely valuable one.  But this perfection and violence have the compulsion to make others look worse if the distance between someone’s better and another’s better is not that far apart.  They may not even know about the itinerant creation of these circumstances, but I believe they do know, and it was why things happened the way they did in this world.  The self-validation cycle might work as follows:

-self-validation and feelings of self-importance and other everyday human needs (ought not to destroy others)
-acceptance of problems and controversy
-no compulsion to solve problems in a broader sense
-increased compulsion to be violent
-use of the system to solve any problem, especially their own, if needed
-reactionary adaptive planning of the law
-using law as a tool opposite of what it should be used
-the compulsion to construe the worse and make problems worse
-the creation of more violence
-the compulsion for intensive magnification
-the compulsion for extensive magnifications
-the compulsion for complexity, dogma, and using process as a tool
-the compulsion for transference to those that matter more or to whom they like
-the compulsion for transference on broad concentric ring class actions
-the creation of transference for legal protection and increasing the itinerant difficulty
-the itinerant ease to cause transference to others of more acceptance
-the separation of those that matter more and those that do not matter
-the compulsion to get a person in a situation where they kill themselves by creating perceptive political issues where people do not want to help
-the compulsion to isolate a person and destroy a person’s health
-the compulsion to do anything because when the value is so high, they can do anything —–solving problems at the wrong resolution or not defining problems adequately in the first place creates more and more legal issues and problems
-the system creates violence and destruction that makes an increased need for self-validation and feeling of self-importance and other everyday human needs (ought not to destroy others or families, or communities or society because indirectly it destroys our natural environment as well)
-At every step in these cycles, there is more demand for more and more people with self-validation needs.  However, we ought to transition to more problem-solving needs and define problems more systematically rather than primarily choosing the issues that suit the needs of those in control.
-Maybe we should focus on putting the energy and resources into the holistic side of the spectrum instead of the reactionary side.  We ought to inspire people to solve problems instead of using the reactionary system, which is amorphous (infinite variabilization) and uses whatever tool it can overtime to win for those that have created the perception that they matter more, are “better,” or are part of an accepted organization which is closer to more people that matter more.  Sometimes, it is about those with connectivity, those with a considerable amount of concentric ring inclusion such that they have connectivity to those that can help the most.  Politics and law are intertwined like a cowboy and a horse.  Sometimes, they switch positions.
-A primary focus should be getting people to focus on ways to help transition.  It is difficult if many are in power and control complacent positions that rarely have to answer to anyone because they usually look at things from all angles to ensure they are protected in all situations in life, even if it means doing whatever to anyone else.  Some people say they are perfect, but their perfection seems significantly detrimental and destructive to everyone else, rendering them highly imperfect.  Violent chaos is often the result which serves no purpose but to make life more difficult for many.  It makes life better for the few who can protect themselves from violence, are more perfect, matter more, are “better,” and are proximal to those higher relative importance and higher relative significance organizations or concentric rings or have networks of influence.  Why did they get that much connectivity and influence in the first place?  I worry that we are destroying individuals, our society, and our natural environment because we function like this.
Each person’s perspective depends on their position in life, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs position, connectivity, privilege, political acceptance, coached diplomatic ability, politically affiliated organizations, energy from cumulative concentric rings, proximity to the power, profit, wealth, heroics, and anything else that gives them more plumage.
-We must transition to a more in-context ecogeorelative ecogeosystematic approach while enabling each individual to have the foundational fundamentals, prioritized classes, inspiration, inclusiveness, and each person’s validation needs without hurting anyone or anything.  We must inspire transitions from current conditions on their life’s path spectrum to their desired future condition.  Any input a person needs to help them get what they need from a genuinely holistic perspective to help the person live, learn, explore, and love is beneficial.  People must live out their passions, dreams, interests, and motivations to contribute to helping others and what is needed in our world.  When we help others, we help everyone else as well because each person who is helped learns how to help more people.  Once everyone is out of their survival zone, everyone is free to contribute what they can towards solving problems or contributing to homeostasis in humanity and our natural environment.  This increases the likelihood that we will be relatively free from susceptibility to perturbation.  This frees our energy to get allocated to genuine holistic motivations that allow us to strive towards a more sustainable striving life on Earth. -Every individual can help by doing as much introspection to turn their detrimental energy allocations of the past into genuine holistic energy allocations of the future.  We must all work together on planet Earth and respect everyone for their similarities and their differences because it is these two concepts that make a person uniquely qualified to be themselves such that they can help with whatever they can help with in our transitioning, inclusive, and genuine holistic sustainable striving planet Earth.

Undoubtedly, there is tremendous holistic positive energy potential from those in the extreme self-validation cycle.  Imagine if they started to allocate nothing but positive energy toward real problem-solving.  We need absolutely everyone on Earth to contribute to this effort, and we must leave no one behind.  Many of the self-validators have tremendous brain power but allocate it to more processes and procedures to get ahead, etc.