“The world that we have made as a result of the level of thinking we have done thus far creates problems that we cannot solve at the same level as the level we created them at.” — Albert Einstein
If you accept this Truth, then it follows that it applies as much to the Game A/Game B discussion as for anything else.
As Rebel Wisdom has so neatly synthesised from the various experts that they interviewed, in their Psychology of Polarisation series, we can’t simply think or rationalise our way out of the kind of emotional trauma that gets in the way of productive and generative conversations.
Jamie Wheal expressed having direct experience of this in the meetings he attended earlier this year between the wealth-holders and wisdom-keepers, both of which broke down due to issues arising around the #metoo movement and race, neither of which were even on the table for discussion.
As David Fuller and Alexander Beiner from Rebel Wisdom discovered in their journalistic inquiry, that trauma is stored in the body and actually has to be felt through and released/expressed from the body.
Similarly, you can’t think or rationalise your way out of ancestral conditioning. There actually has to be a resolution of the polarity or a breaking of the energetic chords that create the through-line tying an individual to that lineage.
I know Lucien Tarnowski, as a descendant of the original colonisers, has spoken about his devotion to this particular cause. I encourage you to connect with him to learn more about his experience.
The same applies to the archetypes. Jordan Peterson is becoming increasingly well-known and well-regarded for speaking about the recognition of the invisible influences of the archetypes and the different patterns that play out in the human psyche. The energies of the anarchist, the warrior, the peacemaker, the maiden, mother and crone……to name a few.
While invisible to the naked eye, these energies are very real in how they play out in our psyche and in our relationships, and as such, in any endeavour to create something new, we will encounter them arising in our experience within the relational field, through the people who are participating, such that they can be witnessed, known, transcended and included.
Similarly, with social constructs, these are embedded through deep social conditioning or introjection as Bonnitta Roy stated in her recent interview with Rebel Wisdom.
Again, do you think any of us can simply think our way out of the energy of patriarchy and the generations of suppression of women?
It’s deeply embedded into the subconscious of individuals as well as the collective unconscious. The modern western world is built on patriarchy. Patriarchy as I’m using the term here refers to the subjugation of women, the colonisation of indigenous lands, the extraction of resources without regard for impact, etc. Those are the macro/extreme expressions of patriarchy.
But it’s also baked into our “work” infrastructure, into our ordered systems, into our 9–5pm, into our cubicled work environments, into the fact that we even have a split between weekdays and weekends. This is such a deeply entrenched energetic that individuals have adapted to it as though it’s a natural part of their environment.
And I haven’t even begun to elucidate the role of the ego in all of this! That’s for a whole other post.
I refer you back to Einstein’s quote; we are not going to create something new from inside the old. We actually have to create a new energetic frequency that can transcend and include the old to make way for something new.
What I have been speaking to on David Fuller’s thread (where he recently posted his introduction to Collective Intelligence series — from a post on 7th September) is the importance of the integration of the feminine aspect into that new thing in order to move from the duality and polarity of the second dimension into the third dimension.
Because the current patriarchal system leads to women assuming overly masculine qualities and traits and calling it feminine empowerment as a way to offset the misaligned energetic environment they’re born into. It also means that men are assuming an overly feminized way of being and calling it evolved masculinity as a way to offset an environment that no longer provides the initiations that are necessary for their evolution and maturity.
The whole topic of initiation for both men and women (or the absence of them in the modern Western world) is another critical thread to this conversation, but I’ll leave that to be explored another time.
What matters is the result of the imbalances described; the epidemic of strained or broken relationships that are all but considered normal in today’s culture that are a far cry from human harmony and unification.
Although many of the people who are commonly interviewed on the topic of collective intelligence and coherence don’t seem to realise it, the discussion in its current form is limited and is perpetuating mental models that, although beautiful and more precise and accurate than anything else out there, are still just mental models. And as Bonnitta Roy mentioned in her article ‘Open Group Practice: Eight Social Selves’ — “the mind is too coarse an instrument to order reality, no model that they put forth will suffice and no attempt to order Reality will be successful.”
The notion that we can simply cognise or theorise our way into a new set of infrastructure, without addressing the underlying energetics is not only naive, it is in direct energetic misalignment with the stated desired/needed outcome.
The old structures that we seem to all recognise as not working anymore actually need to come into right relationship with a new energetic, and that’s no small feat to pioneer.
Given that the old structures don’t only exist outside of us in the world around us, they also exist within us as a byproduct of our being immersed in those structures our whole lives, changing one’s mind or consciously discovering the notion of doing things in a different way often does little to actually change the way we are being on a regular basis. Shifting our way of being in a meaningful and sustainable way almost always involves something deeper.
In our team, my business partner Paul chose to navigate with a unique approach. He recognised that the effect of patriarchy over time was that women/the feminine have been traumatised for thousands of years. They’ve been exposed to toxic environments without the ability to protect themselves or set boundaries. He realised that in order for him to understand the feminine at the level of depth necessary to restore balance between masculine and feminine within himself and give him the ability to actually “meet” the women in his life in their experiences, not only individually but also archetypally and collectively, he needed to be willing to experience the same thing.
Fortunately there was a woman in his life that was willing to recreate those circumstances for him, albeit unconsciously on her part — his mother. His mother had experienced significant trauma at various points in her life that caused her, when triggered, to act out in rage. While spending some time back home after his divorce, instead of setting boundaries with her, he chose to remain open during those moments, allowing himself to fully feel the impact of what she would say or do.
He did this in service of cultivating the ability within himself to empathise with the women in his life. With the awareness that he was representing a micro of the macro, over time he was able to create an alchemical energetic in his body; meaning that by choosing a path that impacted him in the way it did he was able to reshape his subconscious mind and sense of self such that his energy impacted the people that he encountered from then on differently. He learned to naturally remain open instead of closing when he experienced intensity from the women in his life, especially the ones he was closest to. This allowed him to later fully restore his relationship with his mother which is now healthy and free of charge.
That energetic created a unique attractor field that enabled him to support a number of traumatised women to restore their relationships and get their lives back on track. Eventually Diana, myself and Max found Paul and began to collaborate, eventually becoming business partners. A community formed, and then an extended team.
It wasn’t money that drew them, or prestige, it was the felt-experience of our group field.
I believe it was Margaret Mead that said,
“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”
It only takes a small group of devoted individuals to go against the current tides and to stay resilient in the face of the momentum of the collective.
At least until more people are prepared to choose to let go of the mental grip on the cognitive models and experience the full embodiment and alchemy of the feelings and energies that are necessary for something new to emerge.
Because while we can spend considerable time coming up with new systems and structures, new ideas of new ways of being in a generative capacity with each other, what’s more important will be becoming the kinds of people who can occupy those new systems and structures, who have integrated all of the elements of separation that have stood in the way of our unification thus far.