You have a right not to be perfect


Listen to a recording of this dictation (subscribers only)

Ascended Master Gautama Buddha through Kim Michaels, August 2, 2020. This dictation was given during the 2020 Webinar – Being the Divine Mother in action through the integration of the Seven Rays.

I AM the Ascended Master Gautama Buddha. What does the Buddha have to do with women you might ask? What does the Buddha have to do with Western women or those in the modern democracies? Well, nothing directly my beloved, nothing directly. But certainly indirectly, I might be able to provide a perspective that can help many women free themselves from one of the factors that limits women, keeps them trapped in old patterns. We have said that the fallen beings made the determination: “We will make men the superior sex on Earth, we will put women down so they will be subservient to men. Thereby we will create a conflict that human beings will never be able to resolve.” Why did they do this? Well, we have also said this, because men are more vulnerable, responsive to the epic mindset that there is this epic cause that must be fulfilled.

What does this mean? It means that a man psychologically will find it easier to say: “I have to set aside my own interests, my own desires, my own everyday practical life. I have to go on the barricades or go in the army and fight for this cause. Come what may, whatever the result may be for me or my family I have to do this.” “A man’s got to do what a man’s got to do,” as the saying goes in America. Women are not as susceptible to this epic mindset. They are not as susceptible to setting aside their practical everyday lives in order to work for a cause. This is of course because women are mothers, and how can a woman have small children at home and say: “I have to just leave the children to their own devices and go fight this war, because this war is more important than my children.”

What does this mean? Well, it does mean that the fallen beings were right in selecting men as the superior sex, because this has led to this multiple, thousand-year-old persecution of women and conflict between the two sexes. But as we have said before: “In the dualistic state of consciousness, everything you do has a price.” The price they pay is that by selecting men as the superior sex and putting women down, they were not quite aware that they also created the very potential that can free humanity from the dualistic mindset, even the conflict between the sexes. Because women are the ones who have the potential to raise themselves, raise men and thereby raise the planet beyond the dualistic mindset. Certainly men can also come to see the shortcomings, the contradictions of the dualistic mindset. But on a large scale women are the ones who can look at ideas in the world and say: “It is not right that these ideas should harm our own children. It is not right to set aside our everyday lives and the raising of our children to pursue one of these abstract ideas. My children are concrete beings, living beings and this idea is abstract and not really living. Therefore, the living should take precedence over the abstract, essentially dead ideas.” This is what can help women around the world, come to free themselves from this epic struggle that has been going on on this planet and say: “Let us beat our swords into plowshares, forget about these epic causes and focus on improving everyday life for all people in our society.”

Many of the modern democracies have to a high degree raised themselves beyond this epic mindset and the epic causes. They are no longer seeing that they are out to conquer the world or police the world and that this is more important than the everyday life of their citizens. The United States is obviously an example of a democratic nation that has not made this transition. Which is why it still finds it necessary to maintain the largest military in the world, so that it is ready to project force anywhere on the planet with a moment’s notice. So women have the potential to drive this shift. But what I would like to offer here is that in order to drive this shift, women have to overcome an aspect of the epic mindset that has been put upon women, by the fallen beings, even by men and by many cultures and societies.

There are many subtle aspects of this. There are several ways to explain it, but let me at least begin by explaining it one way. Women have been put down in most nations for a long time. So let us focus on the most developed democratic nations. If you go back to before they became democracies, women were put down, they were in an inferior position to men. There was a shift, these countries now became democracies but for decades women did not even have the right to vote, they were considered so incapable of understanding world issues, quote, unquote, understanding the epic mindset that they should not be allowed to vote because it would lead to chaos. The same in business for example. Women have been held from getting decision making positions. They were for a long time, even kept from entering the job market, instead of except for certain occupations that were considered women’s occupations. So what happened when these modern democracies became more modern and started giving equal rights and equal opportunities to women? Well, what happened was that there was a very subtle aspect of this epic mindset that has not yet been recognized by these modern democracies. Let us as an example of this focus on a woman who enters the business world and attains a position that has traditionally been held by men. What is the unconscious or at least unspoken expectation that is put upon such a woman? Well, there is an expectation that she could fail, there is even a desire from many of her male colleagues that she would fail. What does this mean? This means that there is an expectation that the woman needs to prove herself by being even better at the job than men have been, or could be.

So, what has this created in the supposedly so enlightened modern democracies that give equal conditions to men and women? It has created this very subtle mindset, which has created a very strong collective entity, a collective beast that seeks to insert its tentacles into the auras of all women. It is a beast that we might label as the beast of perfectionism, the entity of perfectionism. Certainly it also affects men but after the so called liberation of women, it has gained a very powerful influence over the three higher bodies, the emotional, mental and identity bodies of many women in these modern democracies. Women have been projected at, they have been programmed to believe but they have also come to accept for themselves, that they need to be perfect. They need to be (as Mary Poppins) practically perfect in every way in order to get along, in these modern enlightened democracies that supposedly give equal rights and equal opportunity to women.

So you see that what has been created in these modern societies, was that even though you have given an outer political, economic, legal equality to women, you have not given a psychological equality. For it is still in many of these societies accepted, perhaps unconsciously, but at least accepted that a man can be not really that good at his job but still keep the job. But a woman has to be practically perfect at her job. She cannot make the same mistakes that men make because then she will be subjected to persecution, or at least psychological projections that she is not good enough because she is a woman. Many women have accepted this and they have built this expectation of themselves that basically requires them to be superhuman.

What do you have to live up to, as a woman in these modern enlightened democracies? Well, you have to be the perfect wife to your husband, the perfect mother to your children, you have to be perfect at your jobs. You may even have to be perfect in taking care of your parents, the perfect daughter, and who can possibly live up to this? If you took any man in these modern democracies and put them in the situation of most women, certainly most of what you would call successful women, they would crumble psychologically under the pressure that these women are under. The men simply would not be able to handle it. They would either have a nervous breakdown, or they would tear off the apron and run screamingly out of the kitchen.

What women are being subjected to by these modern democracies is simply inhumane. It is a violation of the basic humanity. No-one is perfect, according to the standard projected upon humankind by the fallen beings, a dualistic standard. Nobody ever has been perfect according to such a standard, including the fallen beings themselves, and nobody could ever become perfect according to such a standard. What have we talked about? Mother Mary in her opening dictation talked about the effect of the linear mind and the dualistic thinking. What is actually created by the dualistic mind is a certain standard. It is projected that as a human being you should live up to this standard. If you look at humankind at large, not just women in modern democracies, but even most people on the planet, they are also affected by this, whatever society you live in, there is an expectation, there is a standard in that society and there is a very strong projection that you should live up to it.

So, how do most people react to this? Well, there are two main ways that you react to this. Many people, in fact in most parts of the world, the majority of the people acknowledge that they cannot live up to the standard. So how do they react to this? Well they react as defined by the standard, by the culture in which they live, they feel bad about it, they may feel ashamed, they may feel inadequate, they may feel powerless. But they submit themselves to the fact that they could never live up to the standard. Then there are some people, varying numbers in various countries who do something so they come to feel that: “Yes, I am living up to the standard.” But how do they do this? By using the dualistic mind. What is it that the dualistic mind can do? It can create an individual version of the standard that is selective. In other words, when you go into this mindset, you can believe that because you are fulfilling certain requirements of the standard better than other people, you are fulfilling all requirements. In other words, you are denying that you are not living up to all requirements. Nobody is living up to all the requirements, nobody ever could, but some people have managed to go into a state of mind where they are denying that they are not living up to the standard. They believe that because they are fulfilling these requirements, because they have done this, because they are special in this way or that way, they are living up to the standard. Therefore, they are practically perfect in every way but these other people are not. This is why these people should be the leaders and the other people should follow them and obey them.

But it is a selective, individual standard based on denying certain things, refusing to see certain things. What is the result of this selective standard, it is created by the fallen beings, the fallen beings are trapped in it, but they have exploited it so that many, many people who are not fallen beings are also trapped in it? What is the result of this fallen standard? It creates this very judgmental, very, very critical attitude. This is what you see, that many, many people are subjected to but especially women in these modern democracies, they are subjected to this very judgmental attitude. If they make the slightest mistake, they feel they have to feel very bad about themselves. Many of you who are women in democratic nations, many of you who are not in democratic nations can see how you were brought up with such a standard. You were brought up to judge yourself based on this standard. You were brought up to respond when other people were judging you based on the standard.

Now, let me say this again, because I know how difficult it is for many people to understand, to grasp, to accept this. No-one can live up to this standard. No-one ever has, no-one ever will. If you could accept this, you could realize it is an impossible standard. There is no such thing as perfection. As a human being, one of my fundamental human rights is the right not to be perfect according to any standard. I have a right not to be perfect. I do not need to be perfect on Earth. I mean, what sense does it make that I live on this messy, chaotic planet and I am supposed to be perfect on this planet? What sense does that make? None whatsoever when you look at it. Of course, most people do not look at it. They are not even able to ask the question, they do not even recognize there is a standard. When you begin to recognize it, you can say to yourself: “No, no, no, the fallen beings are not going to get me anymore. They are not going to cause me to live the rest of my life judging myself according to this standard. I have had enough of it. I am going to look at these selves that are vulnerable to this, these selves that I have created in response to this. I’m going to systematically root them out of my four lower bodies and let them die, because I want to be liberated from this perfectionism, from having to judge myself based on this standard. I may not be able to liberate myself from being judged by other people, because they have their free will. But I can at least liberate myself, so that if other people judge me, the prince of this world comes and has nothing in me. It does not affect me. I give them their free will right to judge me all they want, but I also claim my own free will right, to not let their judgment affect me and the way I live my life.”

Many women have, without being aware of it, without doing it consciously been the forerunners for challenging this standard of perfection. They refuse to live up to the standards of their parents, the expectations of their parents, the expectations of their society, the norms and standards of their society that were put upon them. They refuse to do it. Sometimes, they have done it we might say by default because they simply could not live up to the standard. Some have even done it consciously by challenging these outer standards for what it means to be a woman in a particular society. Now, what can I as the Buddha offer to women in the modern world, who are becoming aware that there is this standard of perfection that has been put upon them? Well, of course I can offer the concept that I gave 2500 years ago of attaining non attachment. In a sense, you could say that the Eightfold Path that I gave so many years ago, can be seen as a means to overcome this standard of perfection.

I know very well that there are many Buddhists who have been affected by the fallen mindset, the dualistic mindset. They have taken the Eightfold Path and they have said: “Well, the Eightfold Path defines a standard of perfection. If I follow the Eightfold Path, if I have right livelihood, right speech and all of these characteristics, then I must be perfect.” But that is not at all what the Eightfold Path says. The Eightfold Path defines something that is right. I know that in today’s world, especially in the Christian culture, right and wrong has a completely different meaning, there is a completely different overlay to these words than there was 2500 years ago.

What has been translated as right action, right livelihood, is not right in a position to wrong. The standard of perfection defined by the fallen being says that: “If you live up to the standard, you are right, and if you don’t, you are wrong.” My intention was to give a teaching that would help people escape the pairs, the dualistic opposites. So, it was not a matter of being right as opposed to being wrong. It was actually a matter of being nonattached, being on the middle way where you were not striving to be right as opposed to wrong. You were striving to transcend this entire consciousness, attain nonattachment to right and wrong, to these dualistic opposites. Therefore, you were doing what was right according to a higher vision, a non-dualistic vision, the vision of the Buddha. The word “right,” or the word that has been translated into the English word “right,” had a different connotation, a different overlay back then or I would have used a different word. Even the “middle way” had a different connotation back then than it has in the modern Western world. Which is why so many Western people think they are Buddhist, but they fail to understand what the middle way really is. It is not the middle, a compromise between two opposites. It is transcending the opposites.

So, this is what we have given, not just I, but certainly the female masters as well, or some of the male masters. We have given you these teachings on the epic mindset, the birth trauma, the primal self, the many separate selves and how to overcome them. If you make use of these teachings, while keeping in mind what I have told you here about this standard of perfection, you can make tremendous progress. You who are our direct students can make tremendous progress in freeing yourselves from this standard. You can become liberated from having to be perfect women and you can be right women, nonattached women. You can be free women, women who have raised yourself above this judgmental standard and the judgmental consciousness. You have the tools to do this. When you do it and then use your freedom to make calls for other women, there is another group, another rung of women in the world who are in incarnation now who can do the same thing. Then more can follow and then it can spread like rings in the water. Truly, it would be beneficial if these advanced democracies as they see themselves, would recognize the right as a human right, the right not to be perfect, but it should especially be recognized for women. Women may have been given equality in a legal, physical way, but they have not been given a quality in a psychological way because they are not allowed to make the mistakes that men routinely are allowed to make. How many times do you hear this even in popular culture: “Oh, that’s just the way men are, he’s just a man, boys will be boys.”? But do they ever say: “Oh, it’s okay, she’s a woman, it’s fine that she isn’t living up to the standard but she’s okay, girls will be girls”? You just do not hear it, because it is not there. There is still that psychological judgment of women. It is high time that it be addressed, that it be spoken, that it be out there, that someone makes the calls for it.

Of course there are women who have seen it already, more women can come to see it, and it can build in momentum. You can rise up and say: “Women should be given the same freedom to be imperfect as men and for that matter, men should also be given the freedom to be imperfect. All people should be given the freedom to start at a certain level and gradually improve themselves.” What has this standard of perfection done? It has created a false path, the impression of what we have sometimes called the left handed path. Which is: “Here is a path, there are certain requirements, there are certain things you have to do. But if you submit yourself to this path and follow all the steps and all the disciplines, then when you have passed that final examination, you will be perfect.” This is what the fallen beings promise on the false path. If you go through the steps, then when you become a 33rd degree Mason, then you are perfect, you are now above criticism.

There are even ascended master students in previous dispensations who have believed, that: “If I follow all the requirements of this organization, if I give all the decrees, if I become a Keeper of the Flame, if I become a Communicant, if I go on staff, if I become a department head on staff, if I become a personal secretary to the messenger and this and that, then I have become perfect. Now, I am above all of these imperfect chelas that are walking in from the street. I am in a position of power. I have the right, I even have the obligation to judge these people and to make them aware how imperfect they are, so they can really start growing on the same path that I have followed.” These people were and are convinced that they were following the path of the ascended masters, the Path to Christhood.

But what were they following? Being inside an ascended master sponsored organization, using the ascended master teachings to justify it, they were following the left handed path or the fallen beings. You will not enter heaven by living up to any standard of perfection defined by Earth. If the fallen beings were capable of defining a standard that would give them entry into heaven, why would they still be here? Would they not have gone into heaven and done whatever they could do there? So, if the fallen beings cannot enter heaven by following their standard, what makes you think an ascended master student can do so? Utter cognitive dissonance, utter nonsense.

But I am not here seeking to single out ascended master students even though you can hope that they will use the teaching to free themselves from the fallen mindset and the false path. You can look at religious and spiritual people around the world, just about every organization, including Buddhism, at least many of the sects of Buddhism had the same dynamic. They have created a standard, sometimes it is unwritten, it is even unspoken, or it is only spoken in parts here and there: “You are supposed to do this, you are not supposed to do that.” There is created this psychological pressure on people that when you are a good Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, what have you, you are supposed to live up to this standard. Some people do not, and some people do. Those who do now feel they have raised themselves to a superior position but they have the right to judge others: “Yeah, sure, Jesus talked about – judge not lest ye be judged, but it does not apply to us. We are the priests, we are Catholic priests.”

What do many Catholics believe about their priests? What is it they often say: “Oh, he is a man of God.” What does that indicate in their minds? “Well, he is living up to the standard defined by the Catholic religion, therefore he is above criticism. We, as ordinary human beings can’t judge him. We shouldn’t judge him. He is a man of God. Yeah, I know that my son came and said that the priest had taken him on a camping trip and he had touched him in inappropriate ways. But I shouldn’t judge him. He’s a man of God. Maybe my son just imagined this. Maybe if I ignore it, it will go away.”

So you see how this very mechanism, this very standard that leads to the judgmental attitude by those who live up to it, has led to incredible abuse not only in the Catholic religion, but many other religions. What is this standard, if not an expression of the epic mindset, the essence of the epic mindset: “Some people are good, some people are evil, we are right, they are wrong. Therefore, we have a right to judge them.”? It is the epic mindset and who are most susceptible to it? Men. All Catholic priests are men, right? Many of the leaders of other religious spiritual movements, political movements, what have you, the army, are men.

Take the armed forces and look how they have their own standards. Look at the Marine Corps of the United States, they have very strict standards for what it means to be a Marine, and “whoa” to those who do not live up to it. Enormous persecution, enormous psychological pressure is put upon such people. So, who can free the planet from this judgmental mindset? Probably not the men – probably not the men. Who does that leave my beloved? Well, of course, women are the ones who have the opportunity, an incredible opportunity at this juncture in history to become aware of this dynamic, and start by freeing themselves and then freeing their children, then freeing their husbands and then freeing their societies.

I know very well, that many women have been brought up to judge themselves according to the standard. Their mothers, their fathers were judging them. Now they have become adults, they have entered a relationship and now their husbands are to some degree judging them as well. It is easy and it is understandable that many women cannot handle the strain of this and they go into this antagonistic view of their husbands. They want to free themselves from it and in order to free themselves, they sometimes have to go through a phase where you have to distance yourself from those who are abusing you. You have to acknowledge they are abusing you and it makes it very difficult to have a closer connection to them. But if women can use whatever psychological tools they can recognize, to free themselves from this judgmental standard and attitude and mindset, then the next step is they can help the men in their lives to do the same.

You may look at many cultures where the men are very judgmental towards women, which even applies to some of the modern democracies, in fact all of them, even though they are not as judgmental, as for example Muslim men are. You may think that it is the men that are being judgmental. But if you really look at it, the men are just as caught in this as the women are. As we have said many times, you cannot do to others without having first done to yourself. If you are judging women, you may be directing the judgment of women but you have already judged yourself. You have already put yourself in a box where you have very little room to move. So if a woman can free herself from this perfectionist beast, she can then as the next step help to free her husband. She can also look at her children and say: “I certainly do not want my children to grow up with this impossible standard and this judgmental attitude.”

If she can free her husband, then he can perhaps help free other men. Then again, you see how it starts in the home, it starts with one person taking the steps and then it gradually spreads. When enough individuals in a society take the step on that individual level, which may seem to have no significance whatsoever, there comes that shift, that critical mass has been reached, where now there are enough people that they can pull up on the collective consciousness. That is when there is a shift and that is when society will suddenly have to deal with this issue. They will have to confront the fact that even though we think we are an enlightened modern democracy who has given equality to women, we have not really even started giving equality to women.

Because how can we, as long as we have this judgmental standard, how can we set women free? How can we liberate women? How can we liberate men? How can we actually be a free society if we are trapped in such a judgmental standard? How can freedom and judgment co-exist? So, you can come to see that you have made progress and become a more free society. But you are not truly a free society. Because while you are giving physical, legal, economic freedom, political freedom, you have not given psychological freedom to your citizens. As the mental institutions and the rehab clinics of the modern world prove, what good does it do you to have political freedom and economic freedom, if you do not have psychological freedom? What was it I wanted to accomplish 2500 years ago when I gave my teachings? I wanted to give people psychological freedom. What was it Jesus wanted to accomplish when he walked the dusty roads of Palestine 2000 years ago? It was to give people psychological freedom. What is it that all true spiritual teachers have wanted to accomplish? What is it the ascended masters want to accomplish today? Of course it is to give psychological freedom. We would like to give it to all, we realize we cannot, at least not at the present moment. We can certainly strive to give it to those who are open to claiming it, to working for it, to following a systematic path that frees them, frees their four lower bodies, their three higher bodies from all these machinations of the fallen beings that have only one purpose, that is to take away your mental freedom. You may think that taking away political freedom in a dictatorship is aimed at some material goal. It is not. Behind all of this is the fallen beings and their goal is one goal only, to take away the psychological freedom of the population of Earth.

Everything else, everything you see in the outer is just a means to that end. A means to the one end of taking away humanities psychological freedom. Many, many people in the modern democracies are ready to acknowledge this. They are ready to acknowledge that there is a path that gives you psychological freedom. And they came into embodiment to discover and follow that path, and thereby pull up on the collective consciousness so they can pull their societies beyond this manipulation, that takes away people’s freedom. You have discovered it by following the path, by making the calls. You can create this impulse that radiates out and first frees the next rung and then the next and then the next and then the next. Before you know it, a critical mass has been reached, a shift will occur, then another critical mass will be reached, another shift will occur and it will just continue growing as society manifests higher and higher manifestations of the Golden Age vision of Saint Germain.

Truly, as we have said, look back at history, see the trends, this raising of awareness. What have you seen in the modern democracies? A move towards freedom but there is the beginning of a move towards mental freedom, psychological freedom. Now, turn around and look at the future, where is this going? Is it not so that these modern democracies will gradually give greater and greater psychological freedom to their people? The people will claim that psychological freedom, they will demand it, they will pull up on others and these societies will come to a point where they have to acknowledge that the highest goal for a democratic, a free democratic nation is to give its citizens the best possible conditions for claiming psychological freedom on an individual level. It is inevitable that this will happen. It is not written in the stars. It is written in the annals of history that point to the future.

Every positive development you have seen in recorded history has brought society forward to the point where you can have these societies that consciously acknowledge that psychological freedom is the ultimate goal. Everything points to it. When you see it, when it snaps into focus, can you who are our direct students, can you not make the shift and see it? Can you not see the inevitability of it? Therefore, take heart, take courage, be encouraged by this and realize that you are on the forefront of this wave. If you want to use this old expression, this wave of historical necessity. It is not really a historic necessity, it is brought about by the choices of many, many people who have responded to this upward pull from the rest of the universe. So it is not so much a historical necessity as a chosen necessity, but it is inevitable. It is not a matter of “if”, it is only a matter of “when”.

So, can you not then transcend all those doubts, all those fears, all those concerns: “Where is society going? Is it really making any difference? Will we have a Golden Age or won’t we?” All of these questions fade away when you look back at history, see the trends, project them into the future and then you can see that 100 years from now, 200 years from now, there will have been a tremendous development, a tremendous shift in the collective consciousness. What you see today, can now be seen by the majority of the people at least in the more developed nations. It will become obvious to them, as it has become obvious to you. There is nothing magical about you. You are a little more mature, a little more developed than the average person in your society.

So, therefore you can see something they cannot see. But as you pull them up, as they develop themselves, they can come to see what you see now. How did you come to see it? Do you have some kind of special ability? No. You cleared away some of the blockages in your consciousness so that it became self-evident. When other people do the same, it will become self-evident to them. There is no magic here. If you are in a dark room, why is it dark? It is dark because the windows are covered over by a dense layer of dirt. When you clear away the dirt, what will happen? The light will shine into the room, and when there is one ray of light that shines in, you realize there is light outside the room. Otherwise how could this thin beam of light be there? So, if I clear way a bigger hole will I not have more light shining through? And if I clear the windows completely, will I not have the fullness of the light shining through? There is no magic here. There is no special ability, what one has done all can do. Therefore, you should know that as you continue to walk your path, others will be pulled up to do the same and it will spread and spread and spread and the Golden Age will be a manifest reality, perhaps not in your lifetime, but it will be there.

So can you not then be encouraged? Let go of all these fears and doubts and these concerns, and realize you are a part of the upward movement of this planet. You are a part of the ascended masters and the movement we have created for Earth. You are an extension of us. We know it is difficult and hard to be in embodiment on a dense planet like this. But can you not lock in to the view that we have, where we are completely realistic in looking at history, projecting into the future, therefore, seeing very, very, very clearly that the Golden Age is an inevitable occurrence on this planet? The fallen beings cannot stop it, humankind cannot stop it. Those who are resisting it, those who have not seen it, they cannot stop it for a critical mass of people have already made that shift. Not just you who are direct students of the ascended masters but many others, they have made the shift so that the Golden Age cannot be stopped.

We have in this previous conference and in this conference, given some very powerful, very profound teachings and tools for women to liberate themselves and drive the change, the change that needs to happen as the next step for the world at large but especially for the modern democracies. Truly, the tools are here, the teachings are here. Anyone who sincerely uses these tools can achieve results not only for themselves, but they can also have an impact on society by liberating others. This is our goal. We look forward to what the next 10 years will bring in terms of the liberation of women. We thank you who have participated in these conferences, for the fact that you have been the tip of the spear for breaking through the resistance of the collective consciousness to a true spiritual liberation of women.

With this, I seal you, I seal this conference in the Light of the Buddha that I AM. The ineffable, the indescribable but yet the unconquerable, the unstoppable Light. Perhaps, it is unstoppable precisely because it is indescribable, because it is undifferentiated. It is not a thing and cannot be grasped by the linear mind, as I cannot be grasped by the linear mind and as my teaching cannot be grasped in its fullness by the linear mind. The linear mind can create a mental image of the teaching of the Buddha. But the mental image will never allow you to touch the Buddha, and until you touch the Buddha, you have not grasped the teachings of the Buddha.

I AM the Buddha. I AM the Lord of the World for Earth. Anyone on Earth can touch me if they are willing to transcend not only the Buddhic teaching, but any outer teaching, any outer standard. For I will not be limited by anything on Earth. Therefore, if you want to touch me, you cannot allow yourself to be limited either. All of you have that potential, you have the teaching, you have the tools. You have the example of this messenger, who has touched me many times and is touching me right now as he is feeling this indescribable Presence of the Buddha, the spherical Presence of the Buddha. Some of you are feeling it. All of you can come to feel it. I am not keeping you from touching me. Why are you keeping yourself from touching me?

 

Copyright © 2020 Kim Michaels

The modern democracies need to debate the potential of children


Listen to a recording of this dictation (subscribers only)

Ascended Master Mother Mary through Kim Michaels, August 2, 2020. This dictation was given during the 2020 Webinar – Being the Divine Mother in action through the integration of the Seven Rays.

I AM the Ascended Master Mother Mary and as an extension of my Office of the Divine Mother for Earth, I wish to continue the releases we have given at this conference.

Can you have a conference about the Divine Mother and talk about motherhood without talking about children and the situation of children on a planet like Earth?  Now obviously you can look around the world and you can look at the conditions that children are exposed to in many different nations and you can see that there are very obvious clear abuses of children taking place.

There are many places where children are treated in a certain way or they grow up in a certain environment that is clearly not in alignment with a basic humanity: children who are forced to become child soldiers in Africa, girls in India who are brought up to think they have no value, children from around the world who are lured or kidnapped into human trafficking and sexual prostitution, children whose genitals are mutilated at an early age and so on. You can continue with some of these abuses that are taking place.

As ascended master students you can obviously make the calls for the binding of the demons behind this, the fallen beings behind this and the collective entities that are behind this treatment of children that you see in so many nations. But my main concern here is not to make you aware of these abuses for they are clearly obvious. My main concern or my main purpose for this release is to continue the idea introduced by Venus – that we also need to look at the most-advanced societies on Earth.

We cannot just look at all of the obvious abuses that are taking place around the world and address them for we need to recognize that this planet is a whole. It is an interconnected whole. And as we have now said many times: “What is it that truly changes the equation on Earth? It is that the collective consciousness is pulled upwards.” But how is the collective consciousness pulled upwards? It is pulled upwards by some nations that are the forerunners for embracing a new idea, a new realization of basic or essential humanity.

Some nations are the forerunners which, for example, allow women the right to vote, and they pull up on the collective consciousness, and then a second rung of nations is able to do the same and then a third rung and so forth. It spreads like rings in the water around the Earth.

It is clear that in some cases there are problems that need to be addressed and dealt with in the nations where they are taking place. But the other aspect is that it is just as important to raise the consciousness in the most-advanced nations because this pulls up on the whole. You could say that the less-developed nations cannot go in a new direction. It is only the more-advanced nations that can embrace some new idea and then pull up the rest of the collective consciousness.

With this in mind, we need to then again turn our attention to these most-developed and most-advanced modern nations. And we need to recognize here that there is a specific factor that is holding back growth and improvement on this planet. It is clear that when you look at what is holding back growth on this planet, you can look at these more obvious abuses and you can look at the dark forces behind them. You can look at the collective consciousness in, for example, the Islamic countries that will not challenge Islam. And you can say that all of these obvious abuses, these dark things and these dark forces are opposing progress and of course they are. There is no question about it.

But if you look at what I just said, you have to see that there is also a force in the most-modern nations that is opposing progress and it has several facets. One is that some of these nations have developed a certain sense of complacency. They look at what they have achieved and they look at the difference between these nations and the less-developed nations and they think and feel that what they have achieved is good enough. They basically feel they have come over a certain hump and now they do not really need to be so concerned about improving their societies. They have reached a state that is basically as good as it can get and they do not need to go further. We have addressed this before by saying that they have begun to believe that providing the material welfare that they have achieved is enough and it is not necessary to take the next step and provide psychological well-being.

But there are other aspects to this. You need to recognize that what the real problem here is a lack of vision and a lack of imagination to see what the next step is and what could be improved.  Instead of thinking that what you have achieved is good enough, you see that there is more to be achieved.  There are still issues and problems to solve, but there are also positive things that could be manifest. And you must say that some of these very advanced and affluent nations have a clear lack of vision.

Looking at this messenger’s home country of Denmark, you see that there is a high material standard of living and it is a well-functioning country with a well-functioning economy. And you see, for example, that the country was able to respond to the corona crisis with very few infected people, very few deaths and even an economy that is doing better than most other nations.

So, the country of Denmark has developed this complacency of feeling that what it has done is good enough. And I must tell you that the primary reason for this, both in Denmark and other countries in a similar situation such as the other Scandinavian countries, the European countries, Canada, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan to some degree, is that in all of these nations materialism and a materialistic outlook on life is the main problem and the main issue that is preventing people from having a greater vision of what could be achieved. In other words, because the materialistic view of life has come to have a deep influence on the thinking in these countries, many people think that providing this material welfare is the highest possible goal. What else could there be?

If you think that human beings are basically material beings, even though you may not be conscious of this and may not be able to formulate it, you think, as we have said before, that if you take care of the material welfare, then people will automatically become happy. In other words, psychological well-being must be an inevitable effect of material welfare. That is what the unspoken assumption is in many of these countries. And it prevents people from connecting to this essential humanity, which says: “Oh, but there is so much more. What we have achieved in these affluent nations is only the foundation for a whole new era of human growth and human development where we focus on psychological well-being and we focus on developing the full human potential so that people can be more than we can even envision today.”

How do we then deal with this in these affluent nations? Well, this is what I will provide you with some perspectives on. Even though there could be other perspectives you could take, I will focus on the situation of children.

Many people in these nations feel that society has basically done what it needs to do for children. And there is a certain assumption among some of the politicians, bureaucrats, educators, researchers and scientists in these countries that society has basically fulfilled its obligation to its people by providing these very good material conditions. That is all it needs to do.

Now, of course, from time to time, there is a certain awareness that arises that: “Well, here is a certain problem and it is becoming so severe that society now needs to deal with it.” But again, there is this reluctance to deal with such issues that we have talked about. Sometimes there is a period of denial, and then there is a sense of: “Oh, this should not really be taking place.”

There is an assumption that if we give people these good material conditions, there are certain things that should not be happening and certain things that people should not be doing. This means that these societies are in a state of denial and in a state of cognitive dissonance. They are not willing to recognize what is actually happening to children in their nations. And there are, of course, certain obvious abuses of children even in the more affluent nations.

One of them is pedophilia. There is a certain frequency of pedophilia even in the most affluent nations. There are certain pedophiles that are targeting children. There are certain pedophiles in these rich nations who are travelling to other countries such as Thailand, where they can fulfill their desire to have sex with children. These affluent nations are very reluctant to look at this issue and deal with it. The same with sexual abuse in the family where family members–often men–will abuse children. The same with domestic violence where societies tend to think that this should not be happening, but they are not really willing to acknowledge the problem and say: “What can we do about it? What do we need to do about it? What are we obligated to do about it?”

There are certain issues here where there needs to be a more open debate about this. And I am not saying that what I want to do here is present you with a ready-made solution. This is what society is to do. It should vary from country to country and there is no one and only solution. But, first of all, what I want to achieve with this address is that you can make the calls that societies will begin to at least debate these issues where there, in many cases, is no debate right now.

So, pedophilia. Clearly from a basic humanistic viewpoint and the basic humanity, this is not constructive. It is not basic humanity to abuse children sexually.

What can a democratic society do about it? Well, they feel there is relatively little that they can do. And this is where societies need to recognize that a democratic society will sometimes become trapped by its democratic ideals. It will become paralyzed by its democratic ideals and not be able to act when those democratic ideals are threatened or violated. You need to recognize here that you have a democratic society which does not want to punish people too severely and which certainly does not want to have the death penalty for serious crimes. And therefore, to some degree, such a society is paralyzed and cannot deal with pedophilia.

A democratic society assumes that its citizens are not worse than its government. In other words, if a government is not abusive and narcissistic then that government assumes that its citizens are not abusive and narcissistic either. But pedophiles are abusive and they are narcissistic. They are completely self-centered. They suffer from what should be characterized as a mental illness. But it is not just a mental illness that affects themselves, it is a mental illness that causes them to very severely violate children.

Now, in the last couple of decades this has grown into a commercial enterprise. When a pedophile travels to another country, money is involved. He goes to a country where child prostitution is considered normal. Somebody is making money on this. Child pornography, which is a part of pedophilia, is also a money-making business. What can a democratic society do about this?

Well, whenever there is money involved, there is the basic business principle of risk versus reward. How big is the risk involved with making this money? And how much money could I potentially make? This is the same, for example, with drug production and drug trafficking–risk versus reward.  A democratic society needs to recognize here that by its very democratic ideals, it has created a situation where pedophiles, child pornographers, and even human traffickers that traffic adult people for prostitution are given an unfair advantage.

An inhuman advantage is given by democratic societies because what is the risk in being involved with these crimes? Well, first of all, there is a very low risk of being caught or even of being detected. And even if you are detected and caught, what is the punishment? Is it so severe that those who are making money off of it will stop doing it and say: “This is too risky. Let me find another way to make money.” And will the punishment be so severe that the pedophiles–who are the customers who are buying what the sellers are supplying–will stop buying it? And countries need to recognize here that they have simply not done a good enough job of dealing with this equation.

What can be done? Well, you can increase the risk. And obviously what is the ultimate risk in a business enterprise? It is that you could be caught and exposed to the death penalty and then you cannot continue to make money. It does not matter how much money you make because when you are dead you cannot spend it. Now we understand, of course, that many democratic nations do not want to go back to having the death penalty, and I am not saying they necessarily should.

But what is your only other option here? It is to increase the risk of detection. So, you need to create some kind of special police force that is equipped especially to detect these kinds of crimes: human trafficking, child pornography, pedophilia, and all of this stuff. You need to have someone who can detect it, who can infiltrate the black internet, find out where these pedophilia sites and rings are, and unravel them. And it needs to be done on an international basis. This will cost you money but this is part of what you are obligated to do to protect your own children.

You can also, of course, increase the punishment. If you cannot do capital punishment, you can increase prison sentences or you can consider forced sterilization of pedophiles. I am not saying there is only one solution. I am saying these are things that need to be debated in order to protect children adequately.

You need to recognize something very simple and this, of course, is not something that will be recognized officially, but still I want to put it out there. We have said before that reincarnation is a reality. We have said that when you look back at the history of the last hundred years, you can see that many, many lifestreams, many souls, have been severely wounded by the wars in the past hundred years. And where would these souls want to incarnate?

Well, obviously in a more-advanced democratic nation where they have a chance to heal their psychology. This is, we might say, the positive aspect of the reincarnation equation. But you can also look at the fact that there is a certain smaller group of souls who have these very narcissistic-abusive tendencies such as pedophilia. And you can ask yourself: “Where would such a person want to embody?”  Well, often in a rich and affluent nation, where it has, first of all, the chance to get money to buy these services, and second of all, a low risk of detection because they can fly under the radar and society is not really aware of the problem.

You need to recognize here that this is just one example of how democratic societies are attracting certain lifestreams, certain souls, who are very narcissistic and very abusive because they can misuse the freedom that a democratic society gives to its citizens. What is the basic humanitarian perspective on this? It is that a free-democratic society has an obligation to protect the majority of its citizens from these kinds of abuses and especially, of course, its children.

Now, let us look at another issue that needs to be debated. We can look at some very simple statistics from the democratic nations. Over the past 50 years or even more, divorce rates have been increasing almost exponentially. In some countries there are now a majority of marriages that end in divorce. What is the practical outcome of this? Well, in the largest number of cases of divorce, if the pair has children, then the children stay with the mother. This means now that we have a large number of children in these democratic nations who are being raised by single mothers. And I know that in some nations they are very well aware of this and they have attempted to provide various social benefits and social services to make it easier for a single mother to raise one or several children.

Nevertheless, it has not adequately been addressed in these nations. What is the nation actually obligated to do for not only the single mothers but the children being raised by these single mothers? If you are a single mother, or any single parent for that matter, you are facing a very simple situation. You have to provide the material welfare needed for your children which means you have to take a job. In some nations such as, for example, the United States, which claims to be a modern democracy, many single mothers are forced to work more than one job because they cannot make enough money to take care of their children with the minimum wage that they can get in certain jobs.

Well, if you are forced to work long hours or even work 40 hours a week, how much time do you have? How much energy do you have to spend with your children? A society says: “Well, we will provide kindergartens and schools where the children can go while the mother is working.”  Nevertheless, the mother works eight hours or more, comes home, has to take care of dinner and has to take care of other practical matters. And how much energy and attention are left over to spend what is often called quality time with the child or children? When you look at this realistically, it is not very much, is it? I am not saying this to in any way blame the mother.

My point is to make you aware that it needs to be debated whether societies have done enough for these children and these single parents. Is it enough to throw money at this problem? Is it enough to demand that the absent parent pays child support? Is it enough to provide kindergarten schools, social services, this and that? Is that enough, or could more be done? Obviously, my point is to say that there needs to be a debate about what more society could do. There is, again, not one particular solution. There are a variety of solutions that could be carried out here that could improve the situation of single parents, primarily single mothers. It is not just a matter of money; it is also a matter of saying: “Are we at a point now in our societies where the traditional family model has become outdated?”

You will see that long ago these modern democracies let go of the traditional view of life that was there for several hundred years and that was very much affected by the Christian mindset, whether it was the Catholic church or the Lutheran church. You will also see that when you look back, the traditional view—very much based in Christianity, but certainly also adopted by society in general—was that a family is a man and a woman who are living together and raising children.

If you go a little further back, it was the man who went out and got a job and provided the money for the family, and the mother stayed home with the children. Well, in most of the modern democracies, that family structure is completely outdated. There are very few people left who can even afford to do this. Even if a man and woman are staying together, they often both have jobs. So, for example, it needs to be debated: “Well, why do we see this development?” It used to be that most jobs that a man could get would provide enough of an income that the family could afford to have the mother stay home with the children. This does not seem to be the case anymore. We need to consider why.

There are, of course, several factors to recognize. One of the factors is that people’s expectations of what they can have materially has increased tremendously. Many young couples today are not satisfied with living in a small apartment in the center of town and not having a car like their parents or grandparents. They say: “We want a big house, we both want cars, and therefore we both have to work, and the children will just have to live with that.” That is a decision they are making and they have a right to make it.

But the other thing that needs to be debated is: Has the income of many people, such as middle-class people, been eroded to the point where people cannot realistically afford to have one parent stay home with the children? And then: What can we as a society do about this? This is certainly the case in the United States, but also in many other countries that the average income, not in terms of money, but in terms of its buying power, has actually been eroded. This could be addressed. It could have wide-ranging ramifications in terms of changing certain things such as what people are paid for their jobs and how much profit companies are allowed to make. The whole idea that people go into debt and pay interest to the banks which results in their income being eroded by this interest payment contributes to this problem, and there are many other similar factors that could be debated here.

Another thing that could be debated is: Now that we can look at the fact that the traditional family structure is no longer really there in our societies, what could be the next step? What could be an alternative to this? Is it enough to say that when two people have children together, they are the only ones responsible for the children? Is it enough to say that when the parents get divorced, they can go their separate ways and one parent is the main custodian of the children, and the other sees them once in a while? Is that enough? Or do we need to create some kind of situation where people can share the responsibility for the children?

Traditionally you had a situation where the grandparents would take care of the children. Well, why is that not happening today? There can be a variety of reasons. But this is something society could address and say: “How can we get the grandparents more involved with taking care of the children? What can we as a society do about this?” Could we, for example, provide some kind of family counseling that would go in and look at this, and say: “What are the options? Can the grandparents be involved? Is there some animosity or some conflict between the grandparents and the parents that could be resolved so that the grandparents could be more involved?”

Perhaps they live too far away, which is the case in some countries because of the mobility of the workforce. Well, then, are there other people in that area? Are there other single parents who could get together and support each other? Is this something that we as a society could help facilitate? Or do we need to sit down and wait for people to figure this out on their own? Could we not create support groups, even provide counselors who could help facilitate this so that single parents can come together?

Even people who are not parents could see it as part of their own education towards becoming a parent to help single parents with their children. Would it not be possible to create some initiatives like that which would make it easier for single parents? And then children would get more adult attention and supervision. There is the old saying that it takes a village to raise a child. Well, this could be duplicated in the modern democracies. Even though you do not have villages, you can create these communities that are centered around raising children. I know there are various challenges associated with this, but it is also an opportunity.

We can now go on to another topic that I want to discuss here. What is the greatest resource of a society? Many countries would say that, well, Saudi Arabia has oil, which is their greatest resource. Some other country has iron ore, which is their greatest resource. This country has coal, that country has forests, this country has agricultural land, that country has good fishing and that is their primary resource. This is a completely outdated way to look at this–completely outdated. It was never right in the first place, but it is especially outdated today. What is the greatest resource of a nation? It is its people.

What does that mean that its people are the greatest resource? Well, it means several things. But it means, first of all, that the more well-functioning and the more constructive the people are, the greater a resource they are for the nation. So, the shift that needs to happen in these democratic nations is that they realize that as an extension of their democratic ideals, they need to shift and say: “The biggest resource for us as a country is our people. It is not the big companies that are driving the economy.  Our biggest resource is our people because a company, no matter how big and powerful, could do nothing if it did not have people to do it.”

So, what does that mean for a country? Again, let us take Denmark as an example. What does it mean? How could the people of Denmark become a better resource for the country? Well, some would say: “Oh, they need to be better educated.” This view is not necessarily wrong or necessarily right, but certainly it is not the only way to look at it.

First of all, the people need to be able to function better psychologically. And this means again, as we have said now many, many times, these countries need to focus on the psychological development and the healing of their people–all of their people. But let us again focus on the children. What is the greatest future resource of a nation? It is the children that are here today. They will become the adults who will run the country.

Well, does it not stand to reason then, that if we bring up children who are psychologically crippled, they will end up being the kind of people we have today–the adults we have today who are psychologically crippled, with all of the effects this has on society and on people’s individual lives? Is it not clear, is it not obvious, that an advanced-democratic nation that considers its humanitarian and democratic ideals a priority should focus on children and giving them the best conditions in childhood and the best possible psychological conditions for growing up to be psychologically-whole and well-functioning adults?

Then how could that be achieved? Well, we have already talked about the fact that beginning in kindergarten, children should be educated in school about their psychology. All children should be subjected to a psychological evaluation, and if they need help, they would get help, both in the form of individual therapy and also in the form of group therapy. There could be group sessions with children where they could help each other work on their psychology. Many of these things that today are considered either too advanced, too expensive, or not even considered at all, will become self-evident and commonplace in ten to twenty years. And they will look back and say: “Why did societies not do this sooner? The benefits are so obvious. This is not even costing us money. This is saving us enormous amounts of money on other expenses.” This is one obvious aspect of it.

But there is another aspect that needs to be debated: Again, as I said, many democratic nations have been paralyzed by their democratic ideal of giving freedom to the people. As Saint Germain has said: “The freedom to exploit others is not really a freedom and certainly not one that should be recognized by a democratic nation.” Well, I am not talking so much about the freedom to exploit, but a democratic nation essentially says: “As a government, we should interfere as little as possible in people’s lives.” Again, this is understandable in a historical context where you see that dictatorial nations have traditionally interfered very much in people’s personal lives. And a democratic government, of course, says: “We do not want to be like the Soviet Union, so therefore, we cannot interfere in people’s lives.”

But I am not talking about interfering in people’s lives. I am talking about the fact that you can offer people something. At least, in many cases, you will not have to force them to take it. But you can offer it, whereas it is not offered today. You can offer parents help with their own psychology so they will be better able to take care of their children. Is it not obvious, as we have said before, that the psychological wounds of the parents often are projected onto the children or at least affect the children? Is it not obvious to anyone who knows anything about psychology or social problems that parents with psychological problems are more likely to bring up children with psychological problems?

But there is another evaluation that could be made here. You may say: “A democratic society should give the greatest degree of freedom to its citizens.” But I would ask: “Which citizens?” You may say: “A democratic society should not interfere with the life of a man and a woman who want to get together and have children. We should let them deal with this on their own.” And that may be seemingly giving freedom to the parents, but is it giving freedom to the children? In other words, are you giving your children freedom by allowing them to grow up in a dysfunctional home where they are abused by their parents, or where their parents’ severe psychological problems are affecting them? Is it freedom to grow up as a child in a home with an alcoholic parent, a drug addict, or a criminal? Is this the freedom that a democratic government should give to that child? Or should the democratic government say: “Our children who are our greatest future resource should be given the freedom to grow up in well-functioning homes with psychologically-whole parents”?

What you have today is that you are leaving it up to the citizens. You are giving your citizens the freedom to do what? To come together in relationships where people with dysfunctional psychology often attract each other? They have a dysfunctional relationship. They have children. They abuse their children emotionally, mentally and maybe even physically. They get divorced. Now they are using their children in a war against each other leading to severe psychological problems for the children.

What is the effect on society? Well, you have to pay social benefits, maybe to one or both parents and maybe to the children. You have children who cannot get an education, cannot hold a job and cannot function well. Maybe they get into alcohol or drugs and they need treatment for that, and so on. You can see how one dysfunctional couple having children can spiral up the cost to society where it is almost out of control in some societies or at least in certain cities. Is this really a democratic government fulfilling its responsibility to its citizens and living up to its democratic ideals? Does there not come a point where at least it needs to be debated whether a democratic society should say: “We must take responsibility for the children who grow up in our society. As a society, we must make sure that children are given the best possible conditions for growing into healthy adults—psychologically-healthy adults.”

How can we do this? Well, there are many, many aspects of this that need to be debated, but here are at least a few: One is that a society could say: “As a democratic government, are we really obligated to let anyone become a parent? We are not allowing anyone to get into a car, get on the road and drive 100 kilometers an hour without knowing how to operate a car. We demand that they take courses and get a driver’s license, so they have at least minimum skills in driving a car before we let them out there where they can kill or injure other people.” The same thing with many other aspects of society. You are not allowing someone to take care of your most important infrastructure or institutions without them having an education and experience by learning from others.

If one of the most important resources for a society, if not the most important, is your children, how can you allow just anyone to become a parent? Does there not come a point where society has a right to say, even an obligation to say: “If you want to be a parent in our society, you need to qualify?” This is not just a matter of going to some kind of course where you learn how to physically take care of the child–how to change diapers, how to use a bottle and all of these things. It is a matter of being subjected to a psychological evaluation. Are you psychologically capable of raising a child? Or are you so wounded in your psychology that you cannot take care of anyone, barely even yourself?

We have these modern societies now that for decades have given sex- education courses so that there is hardly anyone in those societies who can grow up without knowing what causes pregnancy. Many of them even provide free access to abortion. Well, does it not stand to reason that if society has done everything to make sure that an unplanned pregnancy does not occur, you must assume that most pregnancies are planned? If they are planned, is it not reasonable to say: “Before you plan your pregnancy, you need to qualify. You need to take some courses and qualify.” If it turns out that there are psychological issues, then those psychological issues need to be addressed before the parents can have children.

Another thing that needs to be debated is: What happens if after the children are born, it turns out that either the home is dysfunctional or the parents break up? Well, again, can an enlightened society really allow people to have children and live in their own homes with no insight into what happens in the home, unless they find out in school that the children are not functioning? Can there not be a society that says: “There needs to be some kind of guidance counsellor who helps all parents and who checks in on how things are going”? It does not have to be something you are forced into. It does not have to be Big Brother watching you. But it can certainly be that there is this regular contact, where people have someone to talk to at a place where they can come with their problems.

The other thing is that when a couple splits up and one becomes a single parent, society can then step in and say: “This is where we need to provide some extra support for this parent.” But even so, there can come a situation where society needs to discuss: “Well, do we need to take these children away from the parent or parents?” This, of course, is already happening in many countries, but there can be better ways of dealing with it than what is happening now. In other words, it is a matter of saying: “Can you have one or two people responsible for raising a child? Or is society also responsible for raising children?” I know some will say this is already happening through kindergartens and schools, but more can certainly be done.

More can certainly be done to involve people. For example, when you have had your children, and they have grown up and you have been a successful parent, and you have raised several well-functioning children, have you really fulfilled your parenting responsibility? Could you not have people who are at that age of having the empty-nest syndrome be involved with raising other children and supporting young parents by sharing their experiences?

Is it really viable in these modern democracies that you continue this structure you have had so far where everyone is in it for themselves? You see that an aspect of these modern democracies and their democratic ideals is focused on the individual. The individual human being has rights and the individual should have the greatest possible freedom to choose its own destiny. This is all fine, but can there not come a point where we say: “Now that we have a society that gives freedom to individuals, can we not, without taking that freedom away, get back to what was there in the past–more of a sense of community where people can help each other?”

What do you have in most of these modern democracies? Many, many people are lonely. They either live alone or they have a very limited circle of people they are in contact with. Well, could you not as a society, create something where people can be engaged with helping others and therefore overcome their loneliness, but also gain a sense of purpose? How many grandparents feel that now that they are retired, they are not really useful to society?  Well, why could they not be useful in helping their children and helping parents? But you see what you have in these societies is: “Oh, sure, I am a grandparent. I will help my own children, and my own grandchildren.” But why help only them? Why could you not help someone else’s children or grandchildren? Why does it have to be that each family is a unit in itself and is disconnected from society? Why could you not expand the sense of family and the sense of community to a broader range of people, thereby eventually creating more of a community in a nation as a whole–a larger sense of community?

If you look historically, you can see that what you really have been going through is a phase where, before the advent of democracies, people lived in feudal societies.  There was often some sense of community among the peasants in this society. But it was forced upon them because they were forced to live together and they were forced to work together on the harvest because manpower was the only way to get things done. It was a forced community.

What happened with the advent of democracy was that you shifted to this focus on the individual and individual rights. And you have now had several generations that have gone through this phase where people have been focused on their individual way of living, their individual rights and their individual freedom. But what is historically the next step here? It is that people now use their individuality to realize that no human being is an island. “I am not really actually satisfied with living as an individual. I would like to have more people around me. I would like to be part of something greater. I would like to have a sense of purpose that comes from helping others–even helping my society.”

So, if these democratic nations are going to survive and thrive in the coming age, which is the Age of Aquarius, the age of community, they need to start building a greater sense of community. The United States of America is the primary example of a nation which has been so focused on individual rights that it includes the right to exploit others through economic means. It has created a completely unbalanced society where a small power elite gains so much of the wealth that you have basically almost recreated the feudal societies through the economy rather than through the ownership of land.

Many, many things in the United States are being blocked by an emphasis on individual rights, individual freedom and American individuality. Americans take pride in seeing themselves as a nation of individualists. But the challenge in America in the coming decades will be whether they can overcome this focus on individualism and start building a genuine sense of community. If not, it will be, as we have said, that there will be more and more confrontations between various groups who will see each other as enemies. And where will it end? Does there have to be a second Civil War before America comes to its senses and wakes up? I am just leaving that question out there. I am not making a prophecy.

You see that the focus on individuality and individual human rights was a phase. It was not the ultimate stage of democracy because you are still living on a planet with other people. There are two ways that the modern democracies can go: You can have a greater and greater percentage of the population who becomes more and more self-centered, more and more narcissistic, and more and more dysfunctional because they only care about themselves, or you can have a greater and greater percentage of the population who transcends this current level of individuality and acknowledges that we are part of a whole. We are part of a community and we get much more enjoyment out of life by working together with other people.

This is the challenge facing these modern democracies. So again, it takes a village to raise a child. Well, in all reality, it takes more than two parents, and certainly more than one parent, to raise a child. It takes a community effort because the child cannot learn everything it needs to learn from one parent. In fact, you could say that if a child interacts primarily with one or two parents and maybe a few siblings, it does not expand its social awareness enough to function well in society. The child needs to interact with more children, not just in kindergarten and at school, but it also needs more adults that it can interact with more directly and learn from. The child learns primarily by observing, by assimilating and by mimicking what it sees in the adults around it. So, the more different adults it sees, the better for the child, providing those adults are functioning well psychologically.

Now, my beloved, what really needs to be debated in these modern democracies is not just the material conditions of children or even the psychological conditions of children. What also needs to be debated is the potential of children. If you look at a country like Denmark, you will see that there is a focus on education. There is a certain focus on the idea that children should do well in school–they should learn as much as possible and get good grades because the better grades they get, then the better education they can get access to, and then the better job they will get, and then the more money they will make, and then the more value they will be to society. That is sort of the unwritten assumption.

So, there is a focus on many, many different forms of education and a student needs a certain average grade in school in order to even be considered for one of them.

What is not being seen and what is not being understood and what is not being debated is that what is really behind this is an unconscious recognition that human beings have a potential that can be developed. There is some awareness already in Denmark and in many other modern nations that a human being is not a fixed entity. It is actually possible to educate a child to increase its abilities so that it can perform better in a job situation and therefore live a better life, make more money and be of more value to society.

There is some growing recognition of this, but what is missing is what we have called the essential humanity where you fully, openly and consciously recognize that our material model of human beings is outdated because it has been shown by many psychological studies that human beings have a potential that can be developed through psychological means, not by messing with the physical brain.

What is behind the idea of higher education? You put a child in a certain situation where it learns things. You are not just filling the child’s mind with factual knowledge, you are also building a certain skill, a certain attitude and a certain mindset that enables the child to function in a demanding job. You cannot take the average person and put them in the more demanding jobs, but you can put a child through an educational process that will qualify the child for that job with a high probability of success.

But are you placing that child on an operating-room table, cutting open its skull and starting to mess with the machinery of the physical brain? Well, obviously not. So, what is it that you are doing? You are developing the child in a non-material and a non-physical way. You are doing it through psychological means by working with a child’s psyche without messing with the physical brain. And that proves beyond any reasonable doubt that you can develop a person’s consciousness without dealing with the physical brain. And this proves that a person’s consciousness is not a product–not an exclusive product–of the physical brain.

It is way overdue that these modern democracies recognize this simple truth. You can make the calls for this. It is very, very important that these countries come to recognize this and see the consequences of it. Again, it does not mean they have to become spiritual or accept a certain spiritual teaching, or an ascended master teaching. But it means that these countries need to start asking: What is actually the human potential? How can we develop a human being to a higher capacity, maybe even to a higher vision or a higher state of consciousness? How can we develop our children? How can we facilitate the development of our children’s highest potential? And is this not really the highest obligation of a democratic nation, to look at our children as a resource and say: “How can we give these children the best possible conditions for developing their full potential?”

What is the primary factor blocking this? Well, on the one hand, it is materialism. But on the other hand, it is that many of the adults who are in decision-making positions were never given this opportunity [to raise their consciousness]. In some cases, they cannot really see the value of it or they simply do not want their children to exceed them. There is a certain attitude among parents that they do not want their children to exceed them, not necessarily materially, but psychologically in consciousness. Many adults do not want their children to be more intelligent, more well-functioning or more capable than they are. You see this especially in parents who have achieved some kind of position in society where they feel they have done far better than their parents. And they often do not want their children to become better than them. There is a certain sense of competition here.

But is this something society is obligated to be limited by? Or should a society say: “It is time for us to give children the best possible conditions whereby they can develop their potential”? And that means we need to look at what the higher potential for a human being is. Are you really limited by your genes, so that if your parents had a certain IQ, you cannot develop a higher IQ? For that matter, are you born with a certain IQ, or can you develop it? Are you really limited by your upbringing, so that if you have grown up in a working-class family, you can only have a working-class job? Well, obviously no modern nation believes this. Certainly, the more advanced nations have long ago given up this idea and are allowing all children with abilities to get an education. And they have made it a priority because they have realized that you cannot look at a child growing up in a working-class family and say: “That child is not smart enough to get a higher education.”

This was the case 50 or 70 or 80 years ago. It is still the case in many countries around the world. But many countries have transcended it. Well, is it not then time to make another leap and say: “We need to look at each individual child and give them the possibility of developing their potential, which involves, first of all, as a foundation for this, healing their psychological wounds, learning how to deal with their own emotions and learning how to deal with their own psychology? And therefore, we need to look at how can we help people take command over their own psyche, take command over their own minds and develop their minds so they can unlock this higher potential.”

It has been known for a long time pretty much in all democratic nations, as has been said by neurologists and scientists, that human beings are only using a small percentage of the capacity of the physical brain. But even beyond this, human beings are only using a very small percentage of their full potential. And is it not the supreme responsibility of a government that claims to be free and democratic and has the best interests of its citizens at heart, to help people develop that potential? Does it only apply to children? No, certainly it applies to the parents as well, and really to all adults.

What you see now is that since the 1960s, there was a large group of people who came into embodiment who were focused on spiritual growth and spiritual development. And they have pursued that. And as a result of this, they have created shifts in society. Many societies are still looking down upon spiritual people by labeling them as hippies, flower-power people, druggies or whatever. There has been, however, a shift in many of these societies. But it has not broken through to the point where you say: “There is actually an alternative to living the way most people live in our modern countries. There is a potential for people to develop themselves to reach even higher levels of awareness and higher levels of vision, and therefore to be able to function at a higher capacity than people can do today.”

A human being is not a fixed entity. It is very much a pliable entity that can be developed in a constructive direction. And this development of the full potential of our citizens is the greatest resource for a modern enlightened society. Why are we not investing in this? Why are we not showing children how to deal with this as part of the curriculum in school?  This is not to say that we need to teach our children how to get into and do a particular spiritual practice or exercise, but we need to find ways for children to develop this potential. And if these methods have already been developed and proven to work, well why should we not at least offer them to our children?

Again, we are giving you a lot of information and we are throwing a lot of ideas at you. We are telling you to make the calls on it. All of you do not have to make the calls on every issue we bring to your attention. But there will be some of you who will feel that: “This issue really appeals to me. I feel strongly about a particular issue.” Then you focus on that, you educate yourself on that issue, and then make the calls on it. The more you educate yourself, the better calls you can make and the greater impact they will have. And then you see whether it might be in your Divine plan to do something in society about this issue. Many of you will have this interest.  Many of you have it for education, psychological growth or psychological healing. But many of you have other areas of society that it is in your Divine plans to work on and provide some improvement that can bring society forward.

Again, many, many people pushing society in small ways is what will bring this forward. And of course, if you look realistically at what is going to drive this change that I am talking about, where is it going to come from? Who are the people in these modern societies who can shift, so that society focuses on developing the resources of children? Well, is it not the mothers of those children who, of course, want the best for their children? Again, make the calls, you who are ascended master students. Make the calls that more and more women will be cut free to realize that this is part of their Divine plans. This is part of why they are in embodiment. This is the contribution that they wanted to make–to push their societies forward in this ongoing unfoldment towards more and more enlightened societies that have a greater and greater awareness of the basic humanity and especially the essential humanity, the higher potential for a human being. Which mother would not want to see her children express their highest potential?

With this, my beloved, I just want to express my gratitude for not only listening to and being the broadcast stations for this release, but for this entire conference and for participating in this entire conference. I know, because I can tune into your Presence, that there are some of our students in the Russian-speaking countries who will feel a little disappointed because many of the issues we are talking about are for the Western nations, not so much addressed to your particular situation. But you need to recognize here that we of the ascended masters are focused on the global perspective. We are not focused on one particular nation, be it Russia, be it the United States, be it any other nation. We are looking at the global perspective. And the topic for these two conferences has been The Liberation of Women and Being the Divine Mother in Action. And these two topics are very much related to each other, and they are very much related to improving women’s situations and thereby improving men’s situations and society’s situations as well.

We have used this opportunity to bring forth the teachings that we, from our perspective, see can have the greatest impact. You may not see it from your perspective. But as we and the messenger have tried to help you see, you can gain our perspective and you can tune in to our perspective. And if I see that wherever you live on the planet that you are still part of this ongoing movement, the upward movement of the ascended masters towards the Golden Age of Saint Germain, you can still make a contribution by making these calls, even though they may seem like they are not so relevant to your particular nations but more relevant to the Western nations. But I can assure you that as you raise up some nations, you will raise up all, and there will be an outgoing effect. There will be a pull on other nations.

And I need to tell you, whether you want to hear it or not, that as long as Vladimir Putin is in power in Russia, Russia needs to be pulled up by the collective consciousness of the world because Russia cannot pull itself beyond a certain level as long as that blockage to progress is there. There are not enough spiritual people in Russia to pull up Russia by itself because you cannot work against the free will of those who are keeping Putin in power by not wanting to challenge what he stands for. You recognize here that the realistic potential for Russia, as long as Putin is in power, is that the collective consciousness in Russia is raised.

You cannot realistically hope for dramatic political changes in Russia in these coming years, but what you can hope for is that there is a gradual raising of the collective consciousness. You can contribute very directly to this by making your calls and by raising your own consciousness. But from a realistic perspective, this will also happen by Russia being pulled up by the collective consciousness in the West being raised. It is simply the realistic solution from a global perspective. And so, this is what you can envision, this is what you can make the calls for, and this is what you can feel that you are a part of through our teachings and by using our tools.

So, with this I have said what I wanted to say here, and I thank you for this. I am not sealing this conference, as I will leave this to Gautama who is the customary master as the Lord of the World who has the last word.

Copyright © 2020 Kim Michaels

Listen to a recording of this dictation (subscribers only)

Ascended Master Mother Mary through Kim Michaels, August 2, 2020. This dictation was given during the 2020 Webinar – Being the Divine Mother in action through the integration of the Seven Rays.

I AM the Ascended Master Mother Mary and as an extension of my Office of the Divine Mother for Earth, I wish to continue the releases we have given at this conference.

Can you have a conference about the Divine Mother and talk about motherhood without talking about children and the situation of children on a planet like Earth?  Now obviously you can look around the world and you can look at the conditions that children are exposed to in many different nations and you can see that there are very obvious clear abuses of children taking place.

There are many places where children are treated in a certain way or they grow up in a certain environment that is clearly not in alignment with a basic humanity: children who are forced to become child soldiers in Africa, girls in India who are brought up to think they have no value, children from around the world who are lured or kidnapped into human trafficking and sexual prostitution, children whose genitals are mutilated at an early age and so on. You can continue with some of these abuses that are taking place.

As ascended master students you can obviously make the calls for the binding of the demons behind this, the fallen beings behind this and the collective entities that are behind this treatment of children that you see in so many nations. But my main concern here is not to make you aware of these abuses for they are clearly obvious. My main concern or my main purpose for this release is to continue the idea introduced by Venus – that we also need to look at the most-advanced societies on Earth.

We cannot just look at all of the obvious abuses that are taking place around the world and address them for we need to recognize that this planet is a whole. It is an interconnected whole. And as we have now said many times: “What is it that truly changes the equation on Earth? It is that the collective consciousness is pulled upwards.” But how is the collective consciousness pulled upwards? It is pulled upwards by some nations that are the forerunners for embracing a new idea, a new realization of basic or essential humanity.

Some nations are the forerunners which, for example, allow women the right to vote, and they pull up on the collective consciousness, and then a second rung of nations is able to do the same and then a third rung and so forth. It spreads like rings in the water around the Earth.

It is clear that in some cases there are problems that need to be addressed and dealt with in the nations where they are taking place. But the other aspect is that it is just as important to raise the consciousness in the most-advanced nations because this pulls up on the whole. You could say that the less-developed nations cannot go in a new direction. It is only the more-advanced nations that can embrace some new idea and then pull up the rest of the collective consciousness.

With this in mind, we need to then again turn our attention to these most-developed and most-advanced modern nations. And we need to recognize here that there is a specific factor that is holding back growth and improvement on this planet. It is clear that when you look at what is holding back growth on this planet, you can look at these more obvious abuses and you can look at the dark forces behind them. You can look at the collective consciousness in, for example, the Islamic countries that will not challenge Islam. And you can say that all of these obvious abuses, these dark things and these dark forces are opposing progress and of course they are. There is no question about it.

But if you look at what I just said, you have to see that there is also a force in the most-modern nations that is opposing progress and it has several facets. One is that some of these nations have developed a certain sense of complacency. They look at what they have achieved and they look at the difference between these nations and the less-developed nations and they think and feel that what they have achieved is good enough. They basically feel they have come over a certain hump and now they do not really need to be so concerned about improving their societies. They have reached a state that is basically as good as it can get and they do not need to go further. We have addressed this before by saying that they have begun to believe that providing the material welfare that they have achieved is enough and it is not necessary to take the next step and provide psychological well-being.

But there are other aspects to this. You need to recognize that what the real problem here is a lack of vision and a lack of imagination to see what the next step is and what could be improved.  Instead of thinking that what you have achieved is good enough, you see that there is more to be achieved.  There are still issues and problems to solve, but there are also positive things that could be manifest. And you must say that some of these very advanced and affluent nations have a clear lack of vision.

Looking at this messenger’s home country of Denmark, you see that there is a high material standard of living and it is a well-functioning country with a well-functioning economy. And you see, for example, that the country was able to respond to the corona crisis with very few infected people, very few deaths and even an economy that is doing better than most other nations.

So, the country of Denmark has developed this complacency of feeling that what it has done is good enough. And I must tell you that the primary reason for this, both in Denmark and other countries in a similar situation such as the other Scandinavian countries, the European countries, Canada, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan to some degree, is that in all of these nations materialism and a materialistic outlook on life is the main problem and the main issue that is preventing people from having a greater vision of what could be achieved. In other words, because the materialistic view of life has come to have a deep influence on the thinking in these countries, many people think that providing this material welfare is the highest possible goal. What else could there be?

If you think that human beings are basically material beings, even though you may not be conscious of this and may not be able to formulate it, you think, as we have said before, that if you take care of the material welfare, then people will automatically become happy. In other words, psychological well-being must be an inevitable effect of material welfare. That is what the unspoken assumption is in many of these countries. And it prevents people from connecting to this essential humanity, which says: “Oh, but there is so much more. What we have achieved in these affluent nations is only the foundation for a whole new era of human growth and human development where we focus on psychological well-being and we focus on developing the full human potential so that people can be more than we can even envision today.”

How do we then deal with this in these affluent nations? Well, this is what I will provide you with some perspectives on. Even though there could be other perspectives you could take, I will focus on the situation of children.

Many people in these nations feel that society has basically done what it needs to do for children. And there is a certain assumption among some of the politicians, bureaucrats, educators, researchers and scientists in these countries that society has basically fulfilled its obligation to its people by providing these very good material conditions. That is all it needs to do.

Now, of course, from time to time, there is a certain awareness that arises that: “Well, here is a certain problem and it is becoming so severe that society now needs to deal with it.” But again, there is this reluctance to deal with such issues that we have talked about. Sometimes there is a period of denial, and then there is a sense of: “Oh, this should not really be taking place.”

There is an assumption that if we give people these good material conditions, there are certain things that should not be happening and certain things that people should not be doing. This means that these societies are in a state of denial and in a state of cognitive dissonance. They are not willing to recognize what is actually happening to children in their nations. And there are, of course, certain obvious abuses of children even in the more affluent nations.

One of them is pedophilia. There is a certain frequency of pedophilia even in the most affluent nations. There are certain pedophiles that are targeting children. There are certain pedophiles in these rich nations who are travelling to other countries such as Thailand, where they can fulfill their desire to have sex with children. These affluent nations are very reluctant to look at this issue and deal with it. The same with sexual abuse in the family where family members–often men–will abuse children. The same with domestic violence where societies tend to think that this should not be happening, but they are not really willing to acknowledge the problem and say: “What can we do about it? What do we need to do about it? What are we obligated to do about it?”

There are certain issues here where there needs to be a more open debate about this. And I am not saying that what I want to do here is present you with a ready-made solution. This is what society is to do. It should vary from country to country and there is no one and only solution. But, first of all, what I want to achieve with this address is that you can make the calls that societies will begin to at least debate these issues where there, in many cases, is no debate right now.

So, pedophilia. Clearly from a basic humanistic viewpoint and the basic humanity, this is not constructive. It is not basic humanity to abuse children sexually.

What can a democratic society do about it? Well, they feel there is relatively little that they can do. And this is where societies need to recognize that a democratic society will sometimes become trapped by its democratic ideals. It will become paralyzed by its democratic ideals and not be able to act when those democratic ideals are threatened or violated. You need to recognize here that you have a democratic society which does not want to punish people too severely and which certainly does not want to have the death penalty for serious crimes. And therefore, to some degree, such a society is paralyzed and cannot deal with pedophilia.

A democratic society assumes that its citizens are not worse than its government. In other words, if a government is not abusive and narcissistic then that government assumes that its citizens are not abusive and narcissistic either. But pedophiles are abusive and they are narcissistic. They are completely self-centered. They suffer from what should be characterized as a mental illness. But it is not just a mental illness that affects themselves, it is a mental illness that causes them to very severely violate children.

Now, in the last couple of decades this has grown into a commercial enterprise. When a pedophile travels to another country, money is involved. He goes to a country where child prostitution is considered normal. Somebody is making money on this. Child pornography, which is a part of pedophilia, is also a money-making business. What can a democratic society do about this?

Well, whenever there is money involved, there is the basic business principle of risk versus reward. How big is the risk involved with making this money? And how much money could I potentially make? This is the same, for example, with drug production and drug trafficking–risk versus reward.  A democratic society needs to recognize here that by its very democratic ideals, it has created a situation where pedophiles, child pornographers, and even human traffickers that traffic adult people for prostitution are given an unfair advantage.

An inhuman advantage is given by democratic societies because what is the risk in being involved with these crimes? Well, first of all, there is a very low risk of being caught or even of being detected. And even if you are detected and caught, what is the punishment? Is it so severe that those who are making money off of it will stop doing it and say: “This is too risky. Let me find another way to make money.” And will the punishment be so severe that the pedophiles–who are the customers who are buying what the sellers are supplying–will stop buying it? And countries need to recognize here that they have simply not done a good enough job of dealing with this equation.

What can be done? Well, you can increase the risk. And obviously what is the ultimate risk in a business enterprise? It is that you could be caught and exposed to the death penalty and then you cannot continue to make money. It does not matter how much money you make because when you are dead you cannot spend it. Now we understand, of course, that many democratic nations do not want to go back to having the death penalty, and I am not saying they necessarily should.

But what is your only other option here? It is to increase the risk of detection. So, you need to create some kind of special police force that is equipped especially to detect these kinds of crimes: human trafficking, child pornography, pedophilia, and all of this stuff. You need to have someone who can detect it, who can infiltrate the black internet, find out where these pedophilia sites and rings are, and unravel them. And it needs to be done on an international basis. This will cost you money but this is part of what you are obligated to do to protect your own children.

You can also, of course, increase the punishment. If you cannot do capital punishment, you can increase prison sentences or you can consider forced sterilization of pedophiles. I am not saying there is only one solution. I am saying these are things that need to be debated in order to protect children adequately.

You need to recognize something very simple and this, of course, is not something that will be recognized officially, but still I want to put it out there. We have said before that reincarnation is a reality. We have said that when you look back at the history of the last hundred years, you can see that many, many lifestreams, many souls, have been severely wounded by the wars in the past hundred years. And where would these souls want to incarnate?

Well, obviously in a more-advanced democratic nation where they have a chance to heal their psychology. This is, we might say, the positive aspect of the reincarnation equation. But you can also look at the fact that there is a certain smaller group of souls who have these very narcissistic-abusive tendencies such as pedophilia. And you can ask yourself: “Where would such a person want to embody?”  Well, often in a rich and affluent nation, where it has, first of all, the chance to get money to buy these services, and second of all, a low risk of detection because they can fly under the radar and society is not really aware of the problem.

You need to recognize here that this is just one example of how democratic societies are attracting certain lifestreams, certain souls, who are very narcissistic and very abusive because they can misuse the freedom that a democratic society gives to its citizens. What is the basic humanitarian perspective on this? It is that a free-democratic society has an obligation to protect the majority of its citizens from these kinds of abuses and especially, of course, its children.

Now, let us look at another issue that needs to be debated. We can look at some very simple statistics from the democratic nations. Over the past 50 years or even more, divorce rates have been increasing almost exponentially. In some countries there are now a majority of marriages that end in divorce. What is the practical outcome of this? Well, in the largest number of cases of divorce, if the pair has children, then the children stay with the mother. This means now that we have a large number of children in these democratic nations who are being raised by single mothers. And I know that in some nations they are very well aware of this and they have attempted to provide various social benefits and social services to make it easier for a single mother to raise one or several children.

Nevertheless, it has not adequately been addressed in these nations. What is the nation actually obligated to do for not only the single mothers but the children being raised by these single mothers? If you are a single mother, or any single parent for that matter, you are facing a very simple situation. You have to provide the material welfare needed for your children which means you have to take a job. In some nations such as, for example, the United States, which claims to be a modern democracy, many single mothers are forced to work more than one job because they cannot make enough money to take care of their children with the minimum wage that they can get in certain jobs.

Well, if you are forced to work long hours or even work 40 hours a week, how much time do you have? How much energy do you have to spend with your children? A society says: “Well, we will provide kindergartens and schools where the children can go while the mother is working.”  Nevertheless, the mother works eight hours or more, comes home, has to take care of dinner and has to take care of other practical matters. And how much energy and attention are left over to spend what is often called quality time with the child or children? When you look at this realistically, it is not very much, is it? I am not saying this to in any way blame the mother.

My point is to make you aware that it needs to be debated whether societies have done enough for these children and these single parents. Is it enough to throw money at this problem? Is it enough to demand that the absent parent pays child support? Is it enough to provide kindergarten schools, social services, this and that? Is that enough, or could more be done? Obviously, my point is to say that there needs to be a debate about what more society could do. There is, again, not one particular solution. There are a variety of solutions that could be carried out here that could improve the situation of single parents, primarily single mothers. It is not just a matter of money; it is also a matter of saying: “Are we at a point now in our societies where the traditional family model has become outdated?”

You will see that long ago these modern democracies let go of the traditional view of life that was there for several hundred years and that was very much affected by the Christian mindset, whether it was the Catholic church or the Lutheran church. You will also see that when you look back, the traditional view—very much based in Christianity, but certainly also adopted by society in general—was that a family is a man and a woman who are living together and raising children.

If you go a little further back, it was the man who went out and got a job and provided the money for the family, and the mother stayed home with the children. Well, in most of the modern democracies, that family structure is completely outdated. There are very few people left who can even afford to do this. Even if a man and woman are staying together, they often both have jobs. So, for example, it needs to be debated: “Well, why do we see this development?” It used to be that most jobs that a man could get would provide enough of an income that the family could afford to have the mother stay home with the children. This does not seem to be the case anymore. We need to consider why.

There are, of course, several factors to recognize. One of the factors is that people’s expectations of what they can have materially has increased tremendously. Many young couples today are not satisfied with living in a small apartment in the center of town and not having a car like their parents or grandparents. They say: “We want a big house, we both want cars, and therefore we both have to work, and the children will just have to live with that.” That is a decision they are making and they have a right to make it.

But the other thing that needs to be debated is: Has the income of many people, such as middle-class people, been eroded to the point where people cannot realistically afford to have one parent stay home with the children? And then: What can we as a society do about this? This is certainly the case in the United States, but also in many other countries that the average income, not in terms of money, but in terms of its buying power, has actually been eroded. This could be addressed. It could have wide-ranging ramifications in terms of changing certain things such as what people are paid for their jobs and how much profit companies are allowed to make. The whole idea that people go into debt and pay interest to the banks which results in their income being eroded by this interest payment contributes to this problem, and there are many other similar factors that could be debated here.

Another thing that could be debated is: Now that we can look at the fact that the traditional family structure is no longer really there in our societies, what could be the next step? What could be an alternative to this? Is it enough to say that when two people have children together, they are the only ones responsible for the children? Is it enough to say that when the parents get divorced, they can go their separate ways and one parent is the main custodian of the children, and the other sees them once in a while? Is that enough? Or do we need to create some kind of situation where people can share the responsibility for the children?

Traditionally you had a situation where the grandparents would take care of the children. Well, why is that not happening today? There can be a variety of reasons. But this is something society could address and say: “How can we get the grandparents more involved with taking care of the children? What can we as a society do about this?” Could we, for example, provide some kind of family counseling that would go in and look at this, and say: “What are the options? Can the grandparents be involved? Is there some animosity or some conflict between the grandparents and the parents that could be resolved so that the grandparents could be more involved?”

Perhaps they live too far away, which is the case in some countries because of the mobility of the workforce. Well, then, are there other people in that area? Are there other single parents who could get together and support each other? Is this something that we as a society could help facilitate? Or do we need to sit down and wait for people to figure this out on their own? Could we not create support groups, even provide counselors who could help facilitate this so that single parents can come together?

Even people who are not parents could see it as part of their own education towards becoming a parent to help single parents with their children. Would it not be possible to create some initiatives like that which would make it easier for single parents? And then children would get more adult attention and supervision. There is the old saying that it takes a village to raise a child. Well, this could be duplicated in the modern democracies. Even though you do not have villages, you can create these communities that are centered around raising children. I know there are various challenges associated with this, but it is also an opportunity.

We can now go on to another topic that I want to discuss here. What is the greatest resource of a society? Many countries would say that, well, Saudi Arabia has oil, which is their greatest resource. Some other country has iron ore, which is their greatest resource. This country has coal, that country has forests, this country has agricultural land, that country has good fishing and that is their primary resource. This is a completely outdated way to look at this–completely outdated. It was never right in the first place, but it is especially outdated today. What is the greatest resource of a nation? It is its people.

What does that mean that its people are the greatest resource? Well, it means several things. But it means, first of all, that the more well-functioning and the more constructive the people are, the greater a resource they are for the nation. So, the shift that needs to happen in these democratic nations is that they realize that as an extension of their democratic ideals, they need to shift and say: “The biggest resource for us as a country is our people. It is not the big companies that are driving the economy.  Our biggest resource is our people because a company, no matter how big and powerful, could do nothing if it did not have people to do it.”

So, what does that mean for a country? Again, let us take Denmark as an example. What does it mean? How could the people of Denmark become a better resource for the country? Well, some would say: “Oh, they need to be better educated.” This view is not necessarily wrong or necessarily right, but certainly it is not the only way to look at it.

First of all, the people need to be able to function better psychologically. And this means again, as we have said now many, many times, these countries need to focus on the psychological development and the healing of their people–all of their people. But let us again focus on the children. What is the greatest future resource of a nation? It is the children that are here today. They will become the adults who will run the country.

Well, does it not stand to reason then, that if we bring up children who are psychologically crippled, they will end up being the kind of people we have today–the adults we have today who are psychologically crippled, with all of the effects this has on society and on people’s individual lives? Is it not clear, is it not obvious, that an advanced-democratic nation that considers its humanitarian and democratic ideals a priority should focus on children and giving them the best conditions in childhood and the best possible psychological conditions for growing up to be psychologically-whole and well-functioning adults?

Then how could that be achieved? Well, we have already talked about the fact that beginning in kindergarten, children should be educated in school about their psychology. All children should be subjected to a psychological evaluation, and if they need help, they would get help, both in the form of individual therapy and also in the form of group therapy. There could be group sessions with children where they could help each other work on their psychology. Many of these things that today are considered either too advanced, too expensive, or not even considered at all, will become self-evident and commonplace in ten to twenty years. And they will look back and say: “Why did societies not do this sooner? The benefits are so obvious. This is not even costing us money. This is saving us enormous amounts of money on other expenses.” This is one obvious aspect of it.

But there is another aspect that needs to be debated: Again, as I said, many democratic nations have been paralyzed by their democratic ideal of giving freedom to the people. As Saint Germain has said: “The freedom to exploit others is not really a freedom and certainly not one that should be recognized by a democratic nation.” Well, I am not talking so much about the freedom to exploit, but a democratic nation essentially says: “As a government, we should interfere as little as possible in people’s lives.” Again, this is understandable in a historical context where you see that dictatorial nations have traditionally interfered very much in people’s personal lives. And a democratic government, of course, says: “We do not want to be like the Soviet Union, so therefore, we cannot interfere in people’s lives.”

But I am not talking about interfering in people’s lives. I am talking about the fact that you can offer people something. At least, in many cases, you will not have to force them to take it. But you can offer it, whereas it is not offered today. You can offer parents help with their own psychology so they will be better able to take care of their children. Is it not obvious, as we have said before, that the psychological wounds of the parents often are projected onto the children or at least affect the children? Is it not obvious to anyone who knows anything about psychology or social problems that parents with psychological problems are more likely to bring up children with psychological problems?

But there is another evaluation that could be made here. You may say: “A democratic society should give the greatest degree of freedom to its citizens.” But I would ask: “Which citizens?” You may say: “A democratic society should not interfere with the life of a man and a woman who want to get together and have children. We should let them deal with this on their own.” And that may be seemingly giving freedom to the parents, but is it giving freedom to the children? In other words, are you giving your children freedom by allowing them to grow up in a dysfunctional home where they are abused by their parents, or where their parents’ severe psychological problems are affecting them? Is it freedom to grow up as a child in a home with an alcoholic parent, a drug addict, or a criminal? Is this the freedom that a democratic government should give to that child? Or should the democratic government say: “Our children who are our greatest future resource should be given the freedom to grow up in well-functioning homes with psychologically-whole parents”?

What you have today is that you are leaving it up to the citizens. You are giving your citizens the freedom to do what? To come together in relationships where people with dysfunctional psychology often attract each other? They have a dysfunctional relationship. They have children. They abuse their children emotionally, mentally and maybe even physically. They get divorced. Now they are using their children in a war against each other leading to severe psychological problems for the children.

What is the effect on society? Well, you have to pay social benefits, maybe to one or both parents and maybe to the children. You have children who cannot get an education, cannot hold a job and cannot function well. Maybe they get into alcohol or drugs and they need treatment for that, and so on. You can see how one dysfunctional couple having children can spiral up the cost to society where it is almost out of control in some societies or at least in certain cities. Is this really a democratic government fulfilling its responsibility to its citizens and living up to its democratic ideals? Does there not come a point where at least it needs to be debated whether a democratic society should say: “We must take responsibility for the children who grow up in our society. As a society, we must make sure that children are given the best possible conditions for growing into healthy adults—psychologically-healthy adults.”

How can we do this? Well, there are many, many aspects of this that need to be debated, but here are at least a few: One is that a society could say: “As a democratic government, are we really obligated to let anyone become a parent? We are not allowing anyone to get into a car, get on the road and drive 100 kilometers an hour without knowing how to operate a car. We demand that they take courses and get a driver’s license, so they have at least minimum skills in driving a car before we let them out there where they can kill or injure other people.” The same thing with many other aspects of society. You are not allowing someone to take care of your most important infrastructure or institutions without them having an education and experience by learning from others.

If one of the most important resources for a society, if not the most important, is your children, how can you allow just anyone to become a parent? Does there not come a point where society has a right to say, even an obligation to say: “If you want to be a parent in our society, you need to qualify?” This is not just a matter of going to some kind of course where you learn how to physically take care of the child–how to change diapers, how to use a bottle and all of these things. It is a matter of being subjected to a psychological evaluation. Are you psychologically capable of raising a child? Or are you so wounded in your psychology that you cannot take care of anyone, barely even yourself?

We have these modern societies now that for decades have given sex- education courses so that there is hardly anyone in those societies who can grow up without knowing what causes pregnancy. Many of them even provide free access to abortion. Well, does it not stand to reason that if society has done everything to make sure that an unplanned pregnancy does not occur, you must assume that most pregnancies are planned? If they are planned, is it not reasonable to say: “Before you plan your pregnancy, you need to qualify. You need to take some courses and qualify.” If it turns out that there are psychological issues, then those psychological issues need to be addressed before the parents can have children.

Another thing that needs to be debated is: What happens if after the children are born, it turns out that either the home is dysfunctional or the parents break up? Well, again, can an enlightened society really allow people to have children and live in their own homes with no insight into what happens in the home, unless they find out in school that the children are not functioning? Can there not be a society that says: “There needs to be some kind of guidance counsellor who helps all parents and who checks in on how things are going”? It does not have to be something you are forced into. It does not have to be Big Brother watching you. But it can certainly be that there is this regular contact, where people have someone to talk to at a place where they can come with their problems.

The other thing is that when a couple splits up and one becomes a single parent, society can then step in and say: “This is where we need to provide some extra support for this parent.” But even so, there can come a situation where society needs to discuss: “Well, do we need to take these children away from the parent or parents?” This, of course, is already happening in many countries, but there can be better ways of dealing with it than what is happening now. In other words, it is a matter of saying: “Can you have one or two people responsible for raising a child? Or is society also responsible for raising children?” I know some will say this is already happening through kindergartens and schools, but more can certainly be done.

More can certainly be done to involve people. For example, when you have had your children, and they have grown up and you have been a successful parent, and you have raised several well-functioning children, have you really fulfilled your parenting responsibility? Could you not have people who are at that age of having the empty-nest syndrome be involved with raising other children and supporting young parents by sharing their experiences?

Is it really viable in these modern democracies that you continue this structure you have had so far where everyone is in it for themselves? You see that an aspect of these modern democracies and their democratic ideals is focused on the individual. The individual human being has rights and the individual should have the greatest possible freedom to choose its own destiny. This is all fine, but can there not come a point where we say: “Now that we have a society that gives freedom to individuals, can we not, without taking that freedom away, get back to what was there in the past–more of a sense of community where people can help each other?”

What do you have in most of these modern democracies? Many, many people are lonely. They either live alone or they have a very limited circle of people they are in contact with. Well, could you not as a society, create something where people can be engaged with helping others and therefore overcome their loneliness, but also gain a sense of purpose? How many grandparents feel that now that they are retired, they are not really useful to society?  Well, why could they not be useful in helping their children and helping parents? But you see what you have in these societies is: “Oh, sure, I am a grandparent. I will help my own children, and my own grandchildren.” But why help only them? Why could you not help someone else’s children or grandchildren? Why does it have to be that each family is a unit in itself and is disconnected from society? Why could you not expand the sense of family and the sense of community to a broader range of people, thereby eventually creating more of a community in a nation as a whole–a larger sense of community?

If you look historically, you can see that what you really have been going through is a phase where, before the advent of democracies, people lived in feudal societies.  There was often some sense of community among the peasants in this society. But it was forced upon them because they were forced to live together and they were forced to work together on the harvest because manpower was the only way to get things done. It was a forced community.

What happened with the advent of democracy was that you shifted to this focus on the individual and individual rights. And you have now had several generations that have gone through this phase where people have been focused on their individual way of living, their individual rights and their individual freedom. But what is historically the next step here? It is that people now use their individuality to realize that no human being is an island. “I am not really actually satisfied with living as an individual. I would like to have more people around me. I would like to be part of something greater. I would like to have a sense of purpose that comes from helping others–even helping my society.”

So, if these democratic nations are going to survive and thrive in the coming age, which is the Age of Aquarius, the age of community, they need to start building a greater sense of community. The United States of America is the primary example of a nation which has been so focused on individual rights that it includes the right to exploit others through economic means. It has created a completely unbalanced society where a small power elite gains so much of the wealth that you have basically almost recreated the feudal societies through the economy rather than through the ownership of land.

Many, many things in the United States are being blocked by an emphasis on individual rights, individual freedom and American individuality. Americans take pride in seeing themselves as a nation of individualists. But the challenge in America in the coming decades will be whether they can overcome this focus on individualism and start building a genuine sense of community. If not, it will be, as we have said, that there will be more and more confrontations between various groups who will see each other as enemies. And where will it end? Does there have to be a second Civil War before America comes to its senses and wakes up? I am just leaving that question out there. I am not making a prophecy.

You see that the focus on individuality and individual human rights was a phase. It was not the ultimate stage of democracy because you are still living on a planet with other people. There are two ways that the modern democracies can go: You can have a greater and greater percentage of the population who becomes more and more self-centered, more and more narcissistic, and more and more dysfunctional because they only care about themselves, or you can have a greater and greater percentage of the population who transcends this current level of individuality and acknowledges that we are part of a whole. We are part of a community and we get much more enjoyment out of life by working together with other people.

This is the challenge facing these modern democracies. So again, it takes a village to raise a child. Well, in all reality, it takes more than two parents, and certainly more than one parent, to raise a child. It takes a community effort because the child cannot learn everything it needs to learn from one parent. In fact, you could say that if a child interacts primarily with one or two parents and maybe a few siblings, it does not expand its social awareness enough to function well in society. The child needs to interact with more children, not just in kindergarten and at school, but it also needs more adults that it can interact with more directly and learn from. The child learns primarily by observing, by assimilating and by mimicking what it sees in the adults around it. So, the more different adults it sees, the better for the child, providing those adults are functioning well psychologically.

Now, my beloved, what really needs to be debated in these modern democracies is not just the material conditions of children or even the psychological conditions of children. What also needs to be debated is the potential of children. If you look at a country like Denmark, you will see that there is a focus on education. There is a certain focus on the idea that children should do well in school–they should learn as much as possible and get good grades because the better grades they get, then the better education they can get access to, and then the better job they will get, and then the more money they will make, and then the more value they will be to society. That is sort of the unwritten assumption.

So, there is a focus on many, many different forms of education and a student needs a certain average grade in school in order to even be considered for one of them.

What is not being seen and what is not being understood and what is not being debated is that what is really behind this is an unconscious recognition that human beings have a potential that can be developed. There is some awareness already in Denmark and in many other modern nations that a human being is not a fixed entity. It is actually possible to educate a child to increase its abilities so that it can perform better in a job situation and therefore live a better life, make more money and be of more value to society.

There is some growing recognition of this, but what is missing is what we have called the essential humanity where you fully, openly and consciously recognize that our material model of human beings is outdated because it has been shown by many psychological studies that human beings have a potential that can be developed through psychological means, not by messing with the physical brain.

What is behind the idea of higher education? You put a child in a certain situation where it learns things. You are not just filling the child’s mind with factual knowledge, you are also building a certain skill, a certain attitude and a certain mindset that enables the child to function in a demanding job. You cannot take the average person and put them in the more demanding jobs, but you can put a child through an educational process that will qualify the child for that job with a high probability of success.

But are you placing that child on an operating-room table, cutting open its skull and starting to mess with the machinery of the physical brain? Well, obviously not. So, what is it that you are doing? You are developing the child in a non-material and a non-physical way. You are doing it through psychological means by working with a child’s psyche without messing with the physical brain. And that proves beyond any reasonable doubt that you can develop a person’s consciousness without dealing with the physical brain. And this proves that a person’s consciousness is not a product–not an exclusive product–of the physical brain.

It is way overdue that these modern democracies recognize this simple truth. You can make the calls for this. It is very, very important that these countries come to recognize this and see the consequences of it. Again, it does not mean they have to become spiritual or accept a certain spiritual teaching, or an ascended master teaching. But it means that these countries need to start asking: What is actually the human potential? How can we develop a human being to a higher capacity, maybe even to a higher vision or a higher state of consciousness? How can we develop our children? How can we facilitate the development of our children’s highest potential? And is this not really the highest obligation of a democratic nation, to look at our children as a resource and say: “How can we give these children the best possible conditions for developing their full potential?”

What is the primary factor blocking this? Well, on the one hand, it is materialism. But on the other hand, it is that many of the adults who are in decision-making positions were never given this opportunity [to raise their consciousness]. In some cases, they cannot really see the value of it or they simply do not want their children to exceed them. There is a certain attitude among parents that they do not want their children to exceed them, not necessarily materially, but psychologically in consciousness. Many adults do not want their children to be more intelligent, more well-functioning or more capable than they are. You see this especially in parents who have achieved some kind of position in society where they feel they have done far better than their parents. And they often do not want their children to become better than them. There is a certain sense of competition here.

But is this something society is obligated to be limited by? Or should a society say: “It is time for us to give children the best possible conditions whereby they can develop their potential”? And that means we need to look at what the higher potential for a human being is. Are you really limited by your genes, so that if your parents had a certain IQ, you cannot develop a higher IQ? For that matter, are you born with a certain IQ, or can you develop it? Are you really limited by your upbringing, so that if you have grown up in a working-class family, you can only have a working-class job? Well, obviously no modern nation believes this. Certainly, the more advanced nations have long ago given up this idea and are allowing all children with abilities to get an education. And they have made it a priority because they have realized that you cannot look at a child growing up in a working-class family and say: “That child is not smart enough to get a higher education.”

This was the case 50 or 70 or 80 years ago. It is still the case in many countries around the world. But many countries have transcended it. Well, is it not then time to make another leap and say: “We need to look at each individual child and give them the possibility of developing their potential, which involves, first of all, as a foundation for this, healing their psychological wounds, learning how to deal with their own emotions and learning how to deal with their own psychology? And therefore, we need to look at how can we help people take command over their own psyche, take command over their own minds and develop their minds so they can unlock this higher potential.”

It has been known for a long time pretty much in all democratic nations, as has been said by neurologists and scientists, that human beings are only using a small percentage of the capacity of the physical brain. But even beyond this, human beings are only using a very small percentage of their full potential. And is it not the supreme responsibility of a government that claims to be free and democratic and has the best interests of its citizens at heart, to help people develop that potential? Does it only apply to children? No, certainly it applies to the parents as well, and really to all adults.

What you see now is that since the 1960s, there was a large group of people who came into embodiment who were focused on spiritual growth and spiritual development. And they have pursued that. And as a result of this, they have created shifts in society. Many societies are still looking down upon spiritual people by labeling them as hippies, flower-power people, druggies or whatever. There has been, however, a shift in many of these societies. But it has not broken through to the point where you say: “There is actually an alternative to living the way most people live in our modern countries. There is a potential for people to develop themselves to reach even higher levels of awareness and higher levels of vision, and therefore to be able to function at a higher capacity than people can do today.”

A human being is not a fixed entity. It is very much a pliable entity that can be developed in a constructive direction. And this development of the full potential of our citizens is the greatest resource for a modern enlightened society. Why are we not investing in this? Why are we not showing children how to deal with this as part of the curriculum in school?  This is not to say that we need to teach our children how to get into and do a particular spiritual practice or exercise, but we need to find ways for children to develop this potential. And if these methods have already been developed and proven to work, well why should we not at least offer them to our children?

Again, we are giving you a lot of information and we are throwing a lot of ideas at you. We are telling you to make the calls on it. All of you do not have to make the calls on every issue we bring to your attention. But there will be some of you who will feel that: “This issue really appeals to me. I feel strongly about a particular issue.” Then you focus on that, you educate yourself on that issue, and then make the calls on it. The more you educate yourself, the better calls you can make and the greater impact they will have. And then you see whether it might be in your Divine plan to do something in society about this issue. Many of you will have this interest.  Many of you have it for education, psychological growth or psychological healing. But many of you have other areas of society that it is in your Divine plans to work on and provide some improvement that can bring society forward.

Again, many, many people pushing society in small ways is what will bring this forward. And of course, if you look realistically at what is going to drive this change that I am talking about, where is it going to come from? Who are the people in these modern societies who can shift, so that society focuses on developing the resources of children? Well, is it not the mothers of those children who, of course, want the best for their children? Again, make the calls, you who are ascended master students. Make the calls that more and more women will be cut free to realize that this is part of their Divine plans. This is part of why they are in embodiment. This is the contribution that they wanted to make–to push their societies forward in this ongoing unfoldment towards more and more enlightened societies that have a greater and greater awareness of the basic humanity and especially the essential humanity, the higher potential for a human being. Which mother would not want to see her children express their highest potential?

With this, my beloved, I just want to express my gratitude for not only listening to and being the broadcast stations for this release, but for this entire conference and for participating in this entire conference. I know, because I can tune into your Presence, that there are some of our students in the Russian-speaking countries who will feel a little disappointed because many of the issues we are talking about are for the Western nations, not so much addressed to your particular situation. But you need to recognize here that we of the ascended masters are focused on the global perspective. We are not focused on one particular nation, be it Russia, be it the United States, be it any other nation. We are looking at the global perspective. And the topic for these two conferences has been The Liberation of Women and Being the Divine Mother in Action. And these two topics are very much related to each other, and they are very much related to improving women’s situations and thereby improving men’s situations and society’s situations as well.

We have used this opportunity to bring forth the teachings that we, from our perspective, see can have the greatest impact. You may not see it from your perspective. But as we and the messenger have tried to help you see, you can gain our perspective and you can tune in to our perspective. And if I see that wherever you live on the planet that you are still part of this ongoing movement, the upward movement of the ascended masters towards the Golden Age of Saint Germain, you can still make a contribution by making these calls, even though they may seem like they are not so relevant to your particular nations but more relevant to the Western nations. But I can assure you that as you raise up some nations, you will raise up all, and there will be an outgoing effect. There will be a pull on other nations.

And I need to tell you, whether you want to hear it or not, that as long as Vladimir Putin is in power in Russia, Russia needs to be pulled up by the collective consciousness of the world because Russia cannot pull itself beyond a certain level as long as that blockage to progress is there. There are not enough spiritual people in Russia to pull up Russia by itself because you cannot work against the free will of those who are keeping Putin in power by not wanting to challenge what he stands for. You recognize here that the realistic potential for Russia, as long as Putin is in power, is that the collective consciousness in Russia is raised.

You cannot realistically hope for dramatic political changes in Russia in these coming years, but what you can hope for is that there is a gradual raising of the collective consciousness. You can contribute very directly to this by making your calls and by raising your own consciousness. But from a realistic perspective, this will also happen by Russia being pulled up by the collective consciousness in the West being raised. It is simply the realistic solution from a global perspective. And so, this is what you can envision, this is what you can make the calls for, and this is what you can feel that you are a part of through our teachings and by using our tools.

So, with this I have said what I wanted to say here, and I thank you for this. I am not sealing this conference, as I will leave this to Gautama who is the customary master as the Lord of the World who has the last word.

 

Copyright © 2020 Kim Michaels

It is high time for democratic societies to deal with human psychology


Listen to a recording of this dictation (subscribers only)

Ascended Master Venus through Kim Michaels, August 2, 2020. This dictation was given during the 2020 Webinar – Being the Divine Mother in action through the integration of the Seven Rays.

I am the Ascended Master Venus. I am here to give you a perspective on the situation of women on planet earth today. We have talked about Muslim nations and other nations that are behind the evolution of what we have called the modern democracies. It is clear that most of you have grown up in a part of the world that is not as repressive of women as the Muslim countries, so it is clear that when you look at these countries, you can see that they are behind where your own country is at—even if your country is not, strictly speaking, a modern democracy. But, while it is easy to see what needs to happen to women’s situation in these other countries, it might not be as easy to see what needs to happen to women’s situation in the modern democracies. So, this is what I will give you some thoughts on.

You have a concept in the Bible where the Jews were in captivity in Egypt under the Pharaoh and they were tasked by the Pharaoh to make a certain amount of bricks. In order to make bricks at that time they had to use straw. But then the Jews did something that Pharaoh disliked and now he demanded of them that they should make bricks without straw. Well, this has become sort of a symbol for when an authority figure demands something of people that they are not really capable of delivering. You are demanding the impossible of your own people. So, what I want to start out talking about is how even the most so called advanced modern democracies on earth are demanding something of their own people that they are incapable of delivering. You are making, in these modern democracies, an impossible demand. The people simply do not have the means to fulfil that demand. Why is this so?

Well, let us take these modern democracies—not all of them are in Europe, of course, but let us look at the situation in Europe because it is such an obvious example. You go back 500 years in Europe, what do you see in those societies? We have given you the concept that you can look back at the past, look beyond events, look for trends, and then project them into the future. What do you see 500 years ago in Europe? You saw societies that were much more closed than what you have today. The laws were more closed, society was more restricted – the majority of the population lived almost as slaves of the noble class and the feudal lords and the kings, with very little possibility of improving their lives. So, from a certain perspective, you can compare this to today and say: “What has happened in the past 500 years is that societies have become much more open.” In other words, a democracy is clearly a more open society than a dictatorship.

But why has this happened? Yes, you can point to a number of outer factors: political, economic, so forth and so on, and you can say this is why societies moved towards democracy. But, there is a factor that is generally overlooked, and that has actually had an enormous and decisive influence on the evolution of democracies—the transformation of these dictatorial societies into democracies. What is that factor? It is communication. What is the difference between a closed society, a dictatorship and an open society? It is a democracy. There is more free and open communication. I know many people will point to the fact that in a democracy you have freedom of speech. But that is not what I’m talking about. Yes, of course, it’s part of what changes a society into a democracy, that people are granted freedom of speech. But, it is one thing to have freedom of speech, it is another to be able to exercise it. In other words, even though people are free legally, to speak about any topic, it doesn’t mean that in their minds they are capable of talking about any and every topic.

If you look back 500 years ago in these medieval societies, what do you see? Well, of course, you saw that there were certain outer restrictions to what people could talk about. For example, what was imposed by the Catholic Church. But, beyond that, you saw that these societies had a number of taboos that people did not dare to talk about because it was considered that it was either forbidden, or it was bad luck. Bad things would happen to you if you talked about these topics. One such topic was the devil. If you talked about the devil, he might come and get you. This was believed by many people. You see that what has happened in the past 500 years in many European countries is that there has been an opening of communication. There are things that people are able to talk freely about today that they could not talk about 500 years ago. Now, there are some people who believe that in some of these more advanced democracies, we can talk about anything; there is no topic that is taboo for us, we can talk about any topic.

This is of course, completely naive. If you look at the so-called self-declared, most advanced democracies today, what do you see? You see that there are many, many topics that people are not capable of talking about. They are not free to talk about them. Why are they not free?

Well, let us let that thought rest for a minute. What is it that makes me say that modern democracies make demands on their people that the people do not have the capability of fulfilling? Well, what is a democracy? I have talked about the fact that communication has become more open, and that in order to shift a society from a dictatorship to a democracy, communication must become more open, it must improve. Normally, when we say communication, you think about people talking in words, communicating in words. But, from a certain perspective, all human interactions could be said to be a form of communication. Some people have said that war is the result of communication breaking down – you have failed to communicate with words, you have failed to talk your way into an agreement. Therefore, you grab the sword, or the spear, or the machine gun, or the nuclear bomb. But, I would say that even the sword and the nuclear bomb is a form of communication. It is, of course, a very destructive form of communication that doesn’t really resolve anything, but it is still a form of communication.

If you look back at human history, you can see that you live on a planet where there has been much conflict between people. There are many conflicts, much opposition between groups of people, and so you could look at history as a process of conflict resolution, or at least an attempt at conflict resolution. You could say: “Why do we have democracies today?” It is because people have become better at resolving conflict. This is because they have become better at communicating, they have become better at communicating with words, instead of having to communicate with swords or machine guns. War is still an attempt at conflict resolution. It’s a very primitive and violent attempt, but it is essentially an attempt to resolve conflict. Machine guns are a form of communication. It is a violent and primitive form of communication, but it is used when words were not adequate for communication. What you see in a modern democracy is that here you have a society that, in its very essence, is based on one principle – nonviolent conflict resolution. This is the essence of a democracy. You are seeking to resolve conflict without using violence.

I know very well that when you look back at the history of the last hundred years, democratic countries have been pulled into using war as a means of conflict resolution. Some will say that those wars were, to some degree, started by dictatorial countries. But, nevertheless, the point is that a democratic society is, in its essence, a society dedicated to resolving conflict in a non-violent way. This is mirrored by the fact that democratic countries give rights to their people. In other words, a democratic government is, in essence, saying to its people: “We are not going to use violence against you. Therefore, you should not use violence against each other.” I know that democratic countries are not openly saying this, but this is essentially what they are saying. What a democratic nation is saying to its own citizens is: “You should find a way to resolve conflict without violence.” Well, my beloved, this is like asking people to make bricks without straw. How can people resolve conflict without violence? Well, they can do so only through communication: non-violent, non-aggressive, non-dualistic communication. But, how can people have this form of communication? Well, they can only have this kind of communication if they know something about human psychology and have used that knowledge to gain a certain control over their own psychology.

Which modern democracy starts at the kindergarten level and gives its own people basic knowledge of human psychology? Well, none obviously! So, all modern democracies are asking their people to make bricks without straw, because they are saying: “Find a way to resolve your conflicts peacefully.” without giving them the means: psychological knowledge and tools to do so. In a sense, people in democratic nations are facing an impossible task. Now, many people are still able to do this – to resolve conflict in a non-violent way. But, this is not because society has made an effort to give them the tools to do so. It is exclusively, listen carefully, because reincarnation is a reality. Many of the people who are incarnating in modern democracies today have a long history on this planet and they have over many lifetimes learned these universal lessons that, for example, are embedded in the Christian religion, but also certainly, the Buddhist religion and other religions, of how to free themselves from the more aggressive tendencies in human psychology. But you also see, of course, many people in the modern democracies who are not at that level and who are, therefore, not able to resolve conflict peacefully.

What do you see as a dynamic in these modern democracies? Well, you see that there is a certain expectation from the level of the government. There is an expectation that people should be able to resolve their conflicts non-violently, and when they can’t, the government then will first attempt to ignore it. The government will say: “Oh, this is not something we should be dealing with, this is something people should take care of themselves.” But again, people do not have the tools, they have not been given the tools to take care of it themselves. So, what usually happens is that the problem continues to grow, or at least awareness about the problem grows, until there comes a point where the government says: “Now, we can no longer ignore this, we have to do something about for example, domestic violence, or violence against women.” The government is essentially saying this shouldn’t be happening in our country. We have such a sophisticated democracy, that these problems should not be here. People should be able to deal with this on their own. Why should we, as the government, have to do anything about this?

The government, from the very beginning, is in an antagonistic state towards its own people. It’s not taking responsibility for saying: “We as a democratic government should have given our people the tools to deal with their problems in a non-violent way, by giving them knowledge of psychology. We haven’t done this, we don’t feel it’s our responsibility to do so. Now we have to deal with this problem of violence against women or domestic violence. How do we deal with this? We don’t really have the tools, so we must develop some tools.” And what is the attitude that the government takes? It is that, here is a problem, we need to fix this. These people have a problem, they need to be fixed. Something needs to be fixed here. We need to somehow force these people to change. Enact perhaps laws that give punishment, or we have to force them into psychological counselling that doesn’t necessarily solve their problem. But, nevertheless, what can society do? Well, it can only do what it can see.

You recognize here, I hope, that I am describing the dynamic. I’m not here blaming these modern democracies. I am not blaming them and saying: “You should not have this approach!” What I’m saying is, it is time and it is high time that these societies realize that the next step in their evolution is to deal with human psychology.

What causes physical violence? What causes a man to become so angry that he beats up his wife and children? Well, it is obviously, on the immediate level, his feelings. His feelings are overwhelming him. He has such negative feelings, perhaps of anger, perhaps of feeling powerless, feeling he can’t do anything with his situation, that he cannot control himself. But why can’t he control himself? That is the question that societies are not asking. Of course, there are many reasons for this, which you know about as ascended master students. He can be open to demons and collective entities that are overwhelming his emotional body. But, on the level of what we call the universal ideas, it is because he does not have the knowledge of human psychology that enables him to deal with his own feelings so that they do not build up until he is overwhelmed by them. He has not learned to redirect his emotional energies so that they do not accumulate as anger.

When you look back at history, look at how many situations in all societies seen on the planet—look at the many situations where you see this very same pattern repeated. A man becomes overwhelmed by his emotions and acts out in violence against other men, against women, or against children. Just look at world history. Look at the individual level of ordinary people; how often a man has become overwhelmed by his feelings of anger and frustration and has acted out in violence. Then, look at some of these dictatorial rulers that you see throughout the world. How often has a king become overwhelmed by his own emotions and started a war with another king that has led to the killing of tens of thousands of people. Look at Hitler, who was essentially overwhelmed by his own feelings of anger and hatred, so that he started the Second World War. Look at Stalin, who was overwhelmed by his own fears and paranoia, leading to the killing of millions of his own people. Look at Mao, who did the same thing.

You see these men, you can look beyond the outer context and see it is the same pattern. A man is overwhelmed by feelings of fear and anger and hatred, and now acts out in violence. Do we really need to continue this pattern, even in the, so called, most sophisticated societies on earth?

Isn’t it time, in the evolution of planet earth, in the historical enfoldment of planet earth, that some societies will wake up, take a look at this and say: “We need to give our own people the tools to deal with these basic patterns in human psychology.” Men becoming angry is not the only one, there are many others. But, isn’t it simply time to do this? Now then, who can bring about this change? Can the men? Not likely! Who can bring about this change? Women can! Why can women do so? Because, as we have now said several times, history clearly proves that women are better at talking together and working together. Women are better at resolving conflicts without violence. They are far better at this than men are. This isn’t, of course, the case for all men. But, as a general perspective, women are far better at nonviolent conflict resolution than men are. Realistically, only women can drive the shift. What needs to be seen here is that the world in general, and certainly democratic nations, are standing at a crossroads.

You can take one of two ways. You can do something to rise to a higher level—a higher level of non-violent conflict resolution or you can allow your democratic nations to be pulled into the dualistic mindset, the black and white thinking that will escalate conflict within societies. If you want a textbook example of this, just look to the recent developments in the United States. It started on an outer level, with violence by the police against a black man leading to his death. Then there were demonstrations against this police brutality and police violence. Some of these demonstrations became violent because there is an element that took advantage of the situation, to plunder stores and so forth. There is an element that just wants anger and hatred. What was the response of the government? Well, some Governors attempted to take a non-violent approach to this. But look at the President, what was his response? Well: “If the Governors won’t deal with this, I will send in federal troops to deal with this.” In other words, what was the only way that the President could see to deal with this situation? It was to put force against force. He thought that the demonstrators are using force and the only way to stop this was to use more force than them. And grant you the demonstrators, some of them were using force. But why? What were they demonstrating against? The use of excessive force by the police, which is essentially the government.

Can you see here that as I said earlier, a democratic government has this assumption that its people should be able to solve conflicts in a non-violent way. Here is the American government, what is it essentially demanding of its people? “You should not demonstrate against us, we are the good guys, we are the government. We are doing the best for you. You should accept that and not demonstrate against us. If you do, you are using force, you are not using your responsibility to resolve conflict non-violently. So what do we have to do? Well, we have to use force against you.” Can you not see that this is cognitive dissonance? There is no other way to look at it. A government has now been seduced by a certain mindset, a certain blindness. To think that even though it claims to be a democracy, it is justified in using force against its own citizens, instead of listening to what the citizens are saying.

Why are people taking to the streets and communicating and demonstrating? Because they feel they cannot reach their government in any other way. They cannot communicate with the government through other means—they cannot even get the attention of the government. What is a demonstration? It is an attempt to communicate with the government. But instead of listening to what the people are trying to communicate, the government does not see this as an attempt to communicate. It does not feel that it has any responsibility to listen. It just says: “The people should not be doing this. We need to stop this. What means do we have? The Governors won’t do it, so we have federal troops that can go in.” Essentially, why won’t the Governors do this? Because the Governors live in their own state. And they will not send their own police force to arrest their own citizens, because they know this will not solve the problem. It will only escalate the problem. What does the President do? He says: “Well, if the local police won’t arrest people, I’ll send in some federal troops who don’t know these people, don’t live in that state, and they will do it.” This is a very, very dangerous development in a democratic nation.

By the way, I am not saying that America, the United States of America is not in all ways a modern democracy. I know many Americans would be violently opposed to this. But it is not in all ways a modern democracy. And this development here only proves it. You see what I’m saying here, the democratic world is, in a certain sense at a crossroad, where you can go further and further into this using force against your own people, whereby the people, at least some of them will use force back at you. And it will escalate and escalate and who can tell how far this will go? Or democratic governments can step up and say, is there a different way to deal with these situations? The obvious way is better communication. But saying that we need to have better communication is not going to do it.

How can people have better communication if they do not have a basic understanding of human psychology? It cannot be done. Where does this leave us? As I said, who can bring about the shift? Well, men cannot do it but women can, if they are willing to make that necessary shift in their own minds. Now I’m not trying to paint a dreary picture here, that the world is on the brink of disaster. What I am instead trying to paint here is an optimistic picture that shows you that there has been an upward trend in these modern democratic societies. There has been an upward trend and it has been brought about by a gradually improving communication. People have overcome these taboos of things they could not talk about. Some of them, they have become more free and open to talk about things. What I am saying is that when you then project this tendency into the future, what do you see? You see, of course, that the trend will continue and gradually, steps will be taken to improve communication further. What is the task that I want to present here that women have the opportunity to perform, that will have tremendous impact on society? Well it is of course to become more aware of communication, how important communication is and become more free in communicating. How do you do this? Well, obviously by working first of all on your own psychology, but also working on the psychology of your children, as we talked about yesterday but also working on the psychology of the men in your life.

Essentially, you could say that if you look at a democratic society especially, even any society, but it is more clear in a democratic society, you could say: What is the very core of what drives that society forward? What is the very key to improving a society?” It is very, very simple. The key is the relationship between men and women in their homes, the personal relationship between men and women. And the key to that relationship is their communication. Can they communicate? Or can they not? You could say here that if you are a woman, if you are concerned about the political situation in your country and in the world, if you feel a desire to improve that political situation, what can you do? Well, of course, I am in no way saying that women should not go out and take action, engage themselves in politics or in other parts of society. Of course, for many women, this is part of their divine plan, and they should certainly do this. But there are also many women who look at this and say: “I feel powerless to do anything about my society, what can I do?” And what we of the ascended masters are hoping to help people see is that you are never powerless, there is always something you can do.

Whatever your situation may be, there is something you can do to improve that situation. Even when you look at your country, what can you as an individual woman do to improve the political situation in your country? Well, you can start with yourself. You can always start with yourself, working with your own psychology, but the goal is not just to work with your own psychology. You can also work on your relationship to the man or men in your life. How can you improve that situation? Well, you can do it by improving communication. You may say: “Well, my husband doesn’t want to talk about feelings. Men don’t want to talk about feelings.” I would say: “You’re correct. Men do not want to talk about feelings, the way women talk about feelings, the way you have so far been talking about feelings. But is that necessarily the only way to talk about feelings? Is it possible to find a different way to talk to the man in your life than what you have been doing so far?” Well, it is only possible if you are willing to look at your own psychology, look at your reactionary patterns, look in what context you were brought up—in what culture you were brought up. As a woman, you need to be willing to look at your own culture and identify what are the roles for men and women that are defined in my culture? How did my mother relate to my father? How did my grandmother relate to my grandfather? This is what I grew up with. I grew up seeing this, seeing the adults around me relate to each other as men and women in specific ways. These were not explained to me. They were not identified as being roles. They were presented to me as this is the only way that men and women can interact. This is just how we do it. This is how women are, this is how men are and therefore this is how we interact. If you are willing to improve your own life and society, you can take a look at these roles. Identify the characteristics of them and you will see that these roles lock men and women in a certain pattern for how they react to each other. Men and women are locked.

Look at your own families, your parents, your grandparents, you may even see that there has been a shift between your grandparents’ generation and your parents generation. Maybe there hasn’t been but in some societies there has been and so look even at popular culture, look at movies and TV series, and how they portray the interaction between men and women. If you look at movies and TV series in your own country, or if you look at the mass culture being spat out, I might say, by Hollywood. What do you see about how they portrayed the interaction between men and women? And you will see that they almost universally virtually portray that men and women can’t talk to each other. At least they can’t have a free and open and neutral communication. They have certain patterns that they are locked into. They talk to each other a certain way. They may use a certain tone of voice and it blocks them. It blocks their open communication. How can you really communicate in this way?

If you look back at all societies on the earth, but especially the modern democracies, you will see that men and women in general cannot have any deeper sincere neutral conversation, there is always a charge, an emotional charge. And what you will see is that people are reacting to the emotions and they are not able to take the conversation to a higher level that is beyond emotions. You can see many times in movies and TV shows how in the modern age for example, it is often portrayed that women are no longer subservient to men. Women are no longer quiet and obeying their men. This is what you see in many of these modern movies and TV series. But what have they done instead, they have adopted this ironic, sarcastic tone of voice where they are talking to their men with this derogatory tone, putting the men down seeking to put the man in his place. So that he will, whatever feel guilty feel obligated to respond a certain way. Many women have gone into this. They think this is the way modern liberated women communicate with men. Well, it may be modern women communicate this way, but a liberated woman certainly does not. Because she is as much trapped in this pattern as the man is. So what do you see in relationships? Again, in many cases, you see that a man gets overwhelmed by his emotions because he can’t deal with his feelings. He becomes angry or irritated. The woman instantly goes into a reactionary pattern reacts to this a certain way and comes back at him with irony or sarcasm, or whatever, or anger of her own and instantly communication is blocked. There is no possibility of any real communication here. There is an emotional charge being sent out by the man. It triggers an emotional charge in the woman, she sends that emotional charge back at him. And now there is a ping pong match of these emotional reactions back and forth. Now, you also see some women in the modern world who have freed themselves from this emotional reaction, but they have gone into a mental level reaction, where they are seeking to talk in a certain intellectual way, reasoning way, rationalizing but this is not real communication either, even though it is a step up from the purely emotional interaction.

So what can you do as women? Well, you can look at your relationships and you can see if they are locked in a pattern and you can say: “What are my choices? Well, I can live the rest of my life with this man being locked in this pattern. As I saw my father and mother do, as I saw my grandparents do, as I see so many other people in society are doing.” This is one option: I can live my rest of the life the way it is now. Is this bearable to me? Well, maybe it is bearable to you. But then the question is, would this lead to growth? And the answer is clearly no, it may be bearable, but it’s not going to lead to growth. So what can I then do? Well, I can leave my current man and go out there and hope I will find another man. Many women have done this. Many men have done the same, of course. But what is the result, almost inevitably? You attract a person who has the same tendency, the same psychology perhaps even in a more extreme way, and the pattern repeats itself. Why is that? Because you haven’t changed your psychology. So you can say to yourself: “What can really change the equation? It is that I change myself. I look at my psychology I look at my patterns and overcome them. Before I even try to change my husband or change something about my husband, I change myself. If you do this honestly and sincerely using whatever tools are available—you who are ascended masters students can of course use our teachings, but I’m talking also into the collective consciousness where women can use whatever teachings are available out there, you can achieve progress.

A relationship between two people is a relationship between two people. I know that this is a statement that needs qualification because in many cases, a man and a woman are locked in a relationship but they are not actually having a relationship with each other. The man has a certain mental image in his mind. And Mother Mary started this conference by talking about mental images. And he is not really relating to his wife. He’s relating to the mental image he has of how the ideal woman should be. The wife has a mental image in her mind of how the ideal husband should be. She is not really relating to her husband but to her mental image. This is why they cannot communicate. They are not seeking to discover what kind of a person am I really in a relationship with? Nor are they seeking to discover what kind of person am I actually. But nevertheless, the reality is that when you are in a physical relationship with another human being, both of you influence that relationship, both of you are part of the equation and that means what? It means that if you change yourself, you will change the equation of the relationship—it can be no other way.

So, my point here is this. Give up the dream, that you can change your husband, find another man and this will be the ideal relationship. Recognize that this cannot happen until you have changed your psychology. So, focus on working on your psychology. When you have overcome the patterns that you have. Perhaps they are your own patterns, perhaps they are patterns put upon you by your culture, by your mother by your grandmother. When you have overcome that, you will be able to talk to your husband, man in another way. When you change the way you communicate, it gives him an opportunity to change how he communicates with you. This can put the relationship in an upward spiral that leads to growth for both people. Now, it may be possible and there will be many cases where he will not respond. He will continue to be who he is, refuse to talk about certain things, certainly refuse to talk about feelings, or psychology or other “long hair” topics— whatever the man may use in your particular culture to put this down. And in that case, you can then face a different choice of whether you should leave that man and look for another. When you have changed your psychology, you might very well attract a man who also has a different psychology. But until you change your psychology, how can you really attract a man who has the kind of psychology you’re looking for?

What you as ascended master students can do is of course, you can apply this to yourself, you can seek to improve the communication in your own relationships. You can make the calls that more and more women will be cut free to see this. Again, there are millions of women who have taken embodiment in today’s age, because it is part of their divine plan to improve communication between men and women. This is the essential key to improving society, especially in the democratic nations, the democratic nations, so to speak have reached a plateau. They cannot go up to the next level until the communication between men and women has been improved. Progress has been made, but not enough. People still cannot talk about psychology and this means in the short run, that women need to look at ways to deal with their psychology on their own. But in the long run, women need to work on the fact that society can acknowledge this problem and will do something about it to educate children from an early age to deal with human psychology. It is simply the next logical step. I know we have said this many times, and we need to continue to say it because many impulses need to be sent into the collective consciousness before there is a shift. For every time we say it, we are sending an impulse and a certain rung of women are awakened by this and that is why we continue to send out these impulses, where you may say, we are using the same words we are talking about the same things. Yes, but that is because repetition is necessary to awaken first this rung or women then the next rung, then the next and so forth. This is also how your invocations and decrees have an impact.

You give an invocation one time and the impulse awakens some people, then you give it again and more people are awakened. The more you give an invocation, the more people can be awakened and so forth. So we, together, create a snowball effect that gradually increases, expands and intensifies the momentum and more and more people are awakened. As we have said now, also several times, how does positive change happen in a society? You can look at outer factors and you can say: “Oh, this country enacted a constitution, that law was enacted, and this initiative was taken by the government or by the intellectual elite or so forth and so on. But why were these steps taken? Why did they have an impact? Because there was a shift in the consciousness of at least a critical mass of people, and what was that shift? It was that suddenly some people woke up to a new perspective and they saw: “Oh, this is obvious, this is self-evident. It is self-evident that women should be allowed to vote. It is self-evident that women should be allowed to run for public office. It is self-evident that women should not be obedient to their husbands, should not be beaten up by their husbands and should not live in economic slavery of their husbands.” This is how a society truly changes.

The view you were given of history is again, the elitist view—the top down management view, where there is an elite, perhaps a benevolent elite, that enacts changes in society and the people just follow them. This is not so my beloved. There may be a certain elite, in the sense that there are a certain number of people in the population who are more aware and therefore they shift their consciousness to accept that certain things are obvious. And when a critical mass of people, as we talk about the top 10%, make that shift in their consciousness, then the politicians can make a change and enact a new law. Until there has been a shift in the collective consciousness, the elite have limited options for what they can do.

They can use force as you see in dictatorial governments. A ruling elite can rule through force, but force does not lead to the kind of positive changes that have produced modern democracies. Force cannot lead to a free society because force always restricts. Some people are applying force and the force is restricting other people but in order to apply that force, the people who are applying the force have first restricted themselves. Otherwise they could not use force against other human beings. Look at the current situation in America with the demonstrations. The more the government is in this mindset of using force, the more the government traps itself and limits its options, limits its freedoms for how it can relate to its own people. And the more a democratic government uses force, the less democratic the government becomes. It is inevitable, there can be no other way and I am saying this because there are people out there who are ready to wake up and realize that this is self-evident. Some already have but more are ready to wake up and see this can only lead to disaster. Therefore, we need to find a new way, as we said last year in our dictations in America, to change the public discourse where the people in the government can communicate in a nonviolent and non-forceful way. And again, who can do this? Well, not the men in Congress, but the women might. With this I have concluded, so to speak the business end of my address, but I have some more things I want to communicate with you.

You are ascended master students, you know the story told about how there was a point where the earth was in a very low stage, the future of the earth was uncertain and Sanat Kumara and myself volunteered to hold the spiritual balance for the earth. And 144,000 lifestreams from Venus vowed to take embodiment on earth to hold that spiritual balance.

Now Venus has traditionally been associated with love and it is true that what caused the lifestreams from Venus to decide to embody on this very chaotic dark planet called earth was love. And it was love for the people on earth and for the planet. You see that a solar system is a tight-knit unit. You can look at physically how there is an enormous physical distance between your solar system and the nearest solar system an enormous distance. So, our solar system is an isolated unit in the cosmos. Now, I know that most people on earth think that there is only life on earth. This is of course not correct. There is only life on earth when you look at this very limited, vibrational energetic spectrum that you call the physical octave on earth. But the other planets also have self-aware beings associated with them. And certainly, Venus is the one that has the closest tie to the earth. And that is why we can create this vibrational matrix as it says in my decree where our planets do in tandem sing and we vibrate at a certain level—there can be a certain harmony there.

All lifestreams from Venus feel a certain affiliation with the lifestreams on earth. In fact, even though we talk about the original lifestreams on earth, and we can talk about the original lifestreams on Venus, there has been a certain interaction between the two planets, where life-streams from Venus embody on earth and the other way around. This has always been taking place, also with some of the other planets, but primarily between these two planets there has been this interaction. It is not necessarily so that we on Venus, where most lifestreams have a higher level of awareness than most people on earth, that we see ourselves as being separated from the lifestreams on earth. We see that the earth is not a separate planet, it is part of the same unit that we are part of and of course, we see the potential of the lifestreams on earth.

We see that the lifestreams on earth have the same potential that we have already realized on Venus. You have the potential to raise the planet up to a higher level of vibration and a lower density of matter. That of course is what gives us the love that we feel towards the lifestreams on earth. We also on Venus, see that because we have risen to that higher level of awareness, we see the original blueprint for Venus, the original blueprint for Earth created by the Elohim. And as we have a love for the planet Venus, we also have a love for the planet Earth. We see the potential that the earth can be returned to its original state and then rise beyond it. And we love that original blueprint, which is a very, very beautiful creation by the Elohim. It is still there in the etheric octave. Some people can tune into it—from time to time people have tuned into it and therefore have seen a vision of what society could become. There is really no way to convey this love in words. Whatever we say, will of course, be filtered by people’s minds. But those of you who are ascended master students could give my decree and the decree to Sanat Kumara and as you are giving the decree, you could focus your attention on our beings, on our Presence, and simply realize that the outer words are just a tool for you to attune to that Presence and experience our Presence and experience the love we have for you, the love we have for human beings and the love we have for planet Earth. And by doing this, first of all, you will have a profound experience of feeling our love, it can be a very healing experience for you but it can also of course, make you the open door for our love to stream into earth and transform people.

In essence, you could say: “What have I been talking about in this dictation?” I have been talking about communication yes, but what is the highest form of communication? It is a conveyance of love. When I talk about men and women and how their relationships are locked in these patterns, what is it that really happens there? Well, the flow of love is blocked. When a man becomes angry can he feel love? When a woman goes into this sarcastic attitude towards the man, can she feel love? Can she express love? What is it truly that will transform a relationship? It is the expression of love. You look at many relationships, you have this popular saying that it starts out in this euphoric state and then there comes a point where the “honeymoon is over” and the people now start interacting based on their psychological patterns. So what did happen on the honeymoon? What happened in the courtship phase? What happens when two people decide to go into a relationship? It is that they have been able to set aside their normal patterns and treat each other differently and therefore they have been able to express love. Then, when they engage in a relationship and now feel they are locked in the relationship, suddenly the patterns start coming back in. In many cases, it is because men in a certain culture have a certain view of what their wives should do, they cannot apply this to you before they are married to you, they set you free from it, but once you have married them, now you’re supposed to fulfill that role.

Women also have a view of how their husbands should behave and so now there comes this element of there is an expectation you should behave a certain way and if you don’t, then I have a right to then blame you for not doing this. And then I can apply various kinds of force to try to get you to perform your role. And as soon as that dynamic comes into the picture, what have you blocked? The flow of love. Who are you as an ascended master student, whether you are a woman or a man? Are you not a being who is dedicated to become an open door for the flow of light from the ascended realm into the physical? Well light, of course takes various forms but certainly one of the forms that the spiritual light takes is love. So, if you are an open door for the ascended masters, would it not stand to reason that you also strive to become an open door for the flow of love that is expressed to the people you encounter? First of all, your spouse, a man or a woman, and your children. So what can really transform your relationship? Well, not only that you improve the communication with words, but also that you improve the communication with energy where you become able to express love towards your partner. You could say, if you want to look at this, strive to come to a point where you can express love towards your current partner. It may be rejected, then you can move on. But at least strive to come to that point. Because until you can express love towards your current partner, however that partner is, you have not really freed yourself from the patterns in your psychology that blocked the flow of light through you. This could then be my encouragement to you who are ascended master students and who can recognize this consciously. It is, of course, also an impulse I send into the collective consciousness.

What will transform the relationship between men and women is not just communication. I know that there are many, many women who have it as part of their divine plan to improve communication between men and women. That is a part of the reason why they have come into embodiment. But I also know that many women, when they awaken to this, will take the approach that is so often taken in Western societies, where you use the rational reasoning, linear mind to say: “Our goal is to improve communication, how do we do this?” We need to understand communication, we need to break it down into its components and say: “What is it? How is it that we communicate? What is good communication? What is bad communication? How can we eliminate the bad and open up to the good?” Even though this may lead to a more open conversation at an intellectual level, the question is, is that the highest level of human communication? And of course, it is not. Open communication is good. But it is the Omega aspect of better communication—free and open communication where you can talk about any topic. You can talk about it in a way that is not emotionally charged.

But true communication is not just intellectual, it is not at the mental level either. True communication, or the highest form of communication is transforming communication, it is transformative communication. And that is not done at the emotional level, at the mental level or even at the identity level. That can only happen when a person becomes an open door for something that is more, something to stream from the Ascended realm into, and being expressed through that communication. And that is, first of all love. It can be other aspects of spiritual light. All seven rays can be expressed this way and can be transformative communication. But the obvious one to start with is love. Besides all of the, we might say, mechanical aspects of communication, can your communication express love? Because it is truly love that will transform relationships. Why did most relationships start with love? It may have been limited, it may have been possessive, whatever, but there was some flow of something beyond the ordinary. What can re-establish communication in the relationship? Well, there must be a flow of something beyond the ordinary, there must be a flow of love. What can transform modern democracies? There is a flow of love. You could and you will, in the golden age, have prime ministers and presidents who will be able to express love even publicly. You will have public officials who can do this. But this is some ways ahead, but where it will start is in the home, in individual people being able to express love.

And that must start with women doing this, because on an overall scale, men will not do it. Some men will, some may have already done it but women are the ones who have the potential to carry this torch to the point where it transforms these modern democracies and takes them to the next level of their evolution. That level is so much higher than what you see today, that most people in the modern democracies could not even imagine and envision it. If we explained it to you, they would think it was a utopian fantasy. But it is a very real potential.

And so again, I say into the collective consciousness and I say to you as ascended master students, stretch your minds to grasp this vision of how a love-based society can be. Because you have plenty of examples when you look back at history, when you look around you today of how a fear-based society can be. So dare to realize that there is a different kind of society, a love-based society and then open your mind to getting a glimpse of it and we will surely give it to you. Because this vision of what the earth could become, is constantly raining down through the identity, mental and emotional realms of earth from Saint Germain, from other ascended masters and certainly from us at Venus, and it is just a matter of you opening your mind to it. Right now, your mind your vision may be blocked by an umbrella. But if you fold down the umbrella, does it not rain upon you? Will the rain not fall and hit you? Well of course it will. And so our love from Venus is constantly raining upon the earth. If you do not feel it, then seek to open your mind to it and you will feel it. As this messenger has been feeling it during this dictation, as some of you have been feeling it and as all of you can come to feel it as you read or hear his dictation again. What is my greatest desire for the lifestreams on earth? It is simply this: that they could experience the love coming from Venus to earth. That is, in a sense, my only desire because it is the only way that we from Venus can help our brothers and sisters on earth. It is the only way that we can transform the earth by giving you what we are, what we have become one with, the divine quality that we embody, love. We have decided to give it, you can accept it or reject it, that decision is yours.

 

Copyright © 2020 Kim Michaels

It is time to step up to a higher awareness of motherhood


Listen to a recording of this dictation (subscribers only)

Ascended Master Mother Mary through Kim Michaels, August 1, 2020. This dictation was given during the 2020 Webinar – Being the Divine Mother in action through the integration of the Seven Rays.

I AM the Ascended Master Mother Mary, and I come to give you some thoughts about motherhood.

We have said many times that every change on Earth begins in the etheric realm in the identity octave. A change happens there, then it moves from there down into the mental realm, then into the emotional and after it has moved there, it can move through to the physical. I want to give you some thoughts on what we have been doing for a long time to bring certain ideas and realizations through the three higher octaves so they are ready to move into the physical octave. And with that, I mean that a greater number of women can recognize them. Many of you have obviously already recognized them. Many other women who have some spiritual inclination or a greater level of awareness have recognized them. But we are at a point where in this coming decade these ideas can move into being recognized by a large number of people. Perhaps not a majority, but certainly a critical mass that changes will happen.

Let us look at the situation of a woman on Earth who is becoming a mother. Whether for the first time or whether it has happened before. You are becoming a mother. You are giving birth to a child, and you are of course hoping and envisioning that this child will grow into an adult and will live a hopefully long life. What do you as a mother want to see for your child? Well, obviously if you look around the planet, you can see that mothers are in many different outer situations. They live in many different cultures. They have various outlooks and beliefs about life. If you go into the specifics, you will see that women want various things for their children depending on the situation in which they have grown up and in which they expect their children to live. Let us not be specific. Let us go beyond the specifics and look at the more general.

What does a mother want for her child? Well, the basic thing is that she wants her child to have a good life. Again, if we look at specifics, women in different situations may have different ways to define what they mean by a good life. But nevertheless, they all want their children to have a good life. And that means there are certain things they do not want to happen to their children. They do not want them to die early. They do not want them to become drug addicts. They do not want them to become criminals. They do not want them to be called into military service and die in a war or come back crippled. They do not want them to contract some kind of debilitating or deadly disease. They do not want them to be psychologically crippled or damaged so they cannot live a constructive life, cannot get an education, cannot hold a job and have a family of their own. There are certainly things we can say that women do not want for their children.

Now, we take the situation of a woman who is about to become a mother. When she projects into the future what might happen or what might not happen for her child, how can she deal with this? Well, again, as Portia said, you can look back into history and see what has happened. There are some situations that women are in around the world where they themselves have lived a very uncertain life, perhaps a poor life, perhaps a life in a region of conflict. And so they can see historically that there is a certain risk that their child might be exposed to these violent or uncertain circumstances. There are also women in a more modern part of the world that live in fairly peaceful and affluent countries where they can see that their children are likely to have a fairly good life. But still, even these mothers cannot know that the child might not become ill, might not have some psychological condition that prevents it from living a normal constructive life, or that other things could not happen to the child. When you look at this as a mother, you can ask yourself the question: “What will for my child determine whether the child has a constructive life or whether the child has a life that is plagued by various problems and mishaps and traumatic or dramatic or violent events? What will determine this for my particular child? I want my child to have a good life, but what will determine what kind of a life the child has?”

This is where many mothers, if they were to do this, they would be able to acknowledge consciously something that they know but often have not acknowledged. When they contemplate the future of their children, they feel relatively powerless to do anything about it. They feel they have very little power to determine whether their child will have a constructive or not so constructive life. Many women of course, do not think about the future of their children precisely because they feel powerless to do anything about it. So they avoid thinking about it. But if you think about it, what are the beliefs that women in different situations around the world have about what will determine the future of their children? Is it fate? Is it destiny? Is it luck? Is it coincidence? Is it God’s will as some women believe, whether it be this God or that God? Is it a child’s karma as some women, many women in the East, believe? What will determine the fate, the life, of your child? Well, if it is any of the conditions I have just mentioned, whether it be God’s will or karma or coincidence or luck, you as a mother can do nothing about that. You may, if you believe that God’s will has an influence on your child, be able to pray to God and you may be able to believe that your prayers will influence what God allows to happen to your child, but otherwise, women feel various degrees of disempowerment.

Now, the realization that is close to breaking through on a larger scale in the physical in people’s conscious minds is that this sense of being disempowered as a mother is an illusion. It is based on various erroneous beliefs that are floating around out there in the collective consciousness. It is based on some even malicious beliefs that have been deliberately put upon women in various cultural contexts. So the realization that many women can come to in this next decade is that as a mother, there is indeed something you can do to determine what kind of a life your child will have. Now, many women will of course, look at: “What can I do physically?” And there will be many women in the poor part of the world or in certain conflict-ridden regions who feel there is not much they can do physically, because the future is so uncertain. There will be some women in the more affluent part of the world who will feel that they have done everything that can be done. They have a good, secure material lifestyle. They are going to put their children in the best schools that are available. They are going to help them with their education, see that their child will get an education and therefore can get a better job than the average. And they feel that this is enough. Their child will have a relatively secure, affluent life.

Yet still, if you think about it, how do you know that the child is not one day walking down the street and is, to use the popular expression, hit by a bus? You can never quite know, can you? But the realization that many women can come to is that, whether you feel uncertainty or whether you have a certain confidence in the certainty of the future, there is still something you can do to make sure that your child will get a better life than if you did not do this. There are actions you can take that will improve the life of your child regardless of conditions in your country, regardless of fate or luck or bad luck or whatever you call it. This is guaranteed to improve the life of your child. And what is that factor that can give you the power to improve the life of your child?

Well, it is simply as we have talked about before, the recognition that human beings are psychological beings. Certainly, your child will grow up in a certain outer circumstance. There will be certain outer conditions that will influence the life of your child. And those you may not be able to do anything about. But when you look realistically at life—maybe your own lives, maybe the lives of others—you see that two children can grow up in very similar circumstances, yet one has a constructive life and one does not. You see many children who grow up in affluent nations and basically have everything they could need. They are, as the saying goes, born with a silver spoon in their mouth. Yet you see some of these children who cannot live a constructive life. And why is that? Well, it is in their psychology. What is the difference between a child that grows up to live a constructive life and a child that does not? It is all in the psychology. It is in the child’s approach to life, attitude to life, the way it looks at life, the way it looks at itself. It is a matter of what psychological conditions does the child have when it comes into embodiment?

Now, here is where many women are ready to recognize that in most areas of the world, women have been brought up, have been programmed to believe that there is not much you can do about your psychology or the psychology of your child. A child is born with a certain psychology, and there is not much you can do about it. And this is the lie, this is the illusion that many women are ready to see through. It can, on a large scale begin in more the affluent countries, but even in many of the poor countries, many women have taken embodiment there who are ready to make the shift and realize that psychology influences every aspect of your life. The shift that women can come to is to recognize: “My child’s psychology is not set in stone. My child was born with a certain psychology, but there is something I can do to help my child develop its psychology so it can take a more constructive approach to life.”

It is not so difficult for mothers when they contemplate this to see that people who have a more positive constructive attitude and approach to life generally lead a better life in terms of even physical conditions. But they especially lead a better life in terms of psychological conditions, their psychological well-being. And what mother would not want their child to have psychological well-being? What mother would not want their child to be happy, at peace and fulfilled with their lives? Well, some mothers do not want this because they themselves have grown up with such deep psychological wounds that they are not even able to wish this for their children. But the vast majority of mothers will want their children to have a happy, constructive life. And so it is not that far-fetched, it is very close, that many, many women, a critical mass of women in the affluent part of the world can break through and make this shift and realize that: “There is one thing I can do for my child that will affect every aspect of my child’s life. And that is to help my child to heal and develop its psychology.”

This then means that women can become open to looking for ways where their child can be helped psychologically. I realize that there will be some women, especially those in the affluent part of the world, especially women who have busy careers, who have busy jobs, and who are used to being able to pay their way out of everything. These women will say: “Oh, that means I will have to take my child to a psychologist and my psychologist will deal with my child.” But there are many more women who can take a more personal approach and say: “If my child is to improve its psychology, who is going to do it? Is the father going to do it? Not likely. Is it realistic or even affordable for me to send my child to a psychologist, and for that matter, can a psychologist even really help my child? Probably not so likely either. To whom does the finger point? Where does the finger point and say: “You can do something about your child?” Well, obviously, it points at me. This then gives rise to another logical question: “If I am to help my child with his or her psychology, how can I do this? Well, it means I must first work on my own psychology, because if I have certain psychological wounds, then first of all, I am unable to help my child. But second of all, it is very likely that I will pass on my own psychological deficiencies to my child.”

If you look at history, perhaps even if you look at your own family, your own mother, your own father, can you not see in how many cases a wounded psychology of the parents is either passed on to, or at least deeply affects, the children? Is it not then logical that not only in order to help your child, but even in order to avoid harming your child, it is best for your child that you work on resolving your own psychology. But wait a minute now. Is it only your child that it is good for that you resolve your own psychology? No, obviously it is also good for you, because as you resolve psychology, you can have a more fulfilled life. And I, as the Divine Mother for Earth, want that for all mothers. And for that matter, for all people. The recognition that can break through is that even though there may be several external factors that have an influence on your life, the primary factor that influences your life is your psychology. The next realization, human psychology is not set in stone. The next realization, every human being, except a very few with a very, very wounded psychology, have the option to take conscious command over their psychology and do something to heal their wounds to resolve various hang ups that prevent them from living a psychologically healthy life.

This can then lead to another realization that is part of what we have called both the basic and the essential humanity. The basic humanity enables you to recognize that many people live very difficult lives because of their psychology. The essential humanity enables you to recognize that you can change the psychology and you can do something yourself consciously to change it, and that this is the potential that many people are ready to acknowledge as part of your self-actualization needs. It is also what the most modern democracies need to acknowledge is the next step to move beyond material welfare to psychological well-being. However, here comes the next realization. What you can look at is based on an evaluation of humanity. Which countries, which societies, have the greatest degree of physical health? Many of you are already aware of this. Certain indexes have already been created. In which countries are people the most healthy? In which countries do they have a healthcare system and even an approach to health that is the most developed and therefore takes best care of their people? You can then transfer this to say: “Is it enough to look at physical health?” Obviously it is not. It is necessary to also look at psychological health. What are countries doing about psychological health? Have they recognized how big of a problem this is? Have they gone in and recognized, truly recognized, the importance of psychological health? All countries have recognized that in order to live a constructive good life, physical health is important. But hardly any country has fully acknowledged that the psychological health is even more important than physical health. And this is a shift that can happen that can be driven by women out of concern for their children, where they say: “We need to make this shift. And it is not enough to look at the material conditions we give to our children. It is even more important to look at the psychological conditions.” To some degree this has started to happen in some nations, but it has not broken through as it could be where this becomes a major priority for these societies.

What can drive this? Well, what can drive it is that women, on an individual basis, make the shift and say: “What psychological tools are available to me that I can first apply to myself and then apply to my child?” When you look at the conditions in even the most developed modern democracies, most women will quickly come to the realization that there is not very much available. There are certainly things that you can find in books and courses and this and that, but there is not that much available, certainly not as much as there could be. This can then lead to a process where there will be first a raising of awareness but even the raising of this demand that: “We want better psychological tools. We want a better understanding of psychology than what we get from traditional psychology and traditional psychotherapy.”

When you look at this realistically, even in the most affluent nations, what women can afford to first spend years going to a psychologist every week, paying a very high fee for an hour session that really does not do very much? What women can afford to send their children to such therapy? Is it therefore realistic for most women that they can fulfill their desire to give their children a good psychological life by going the traditional route? Well, it is not. So what is the only realistic alternative? It is that you find different approaches to psychology that people can apply on an individual basis. You do not need a therapist who has gone to a university for five years and studied psychology, without in many cases resolving their own psychology, to help you.

What you need is somebody who has some practical experience, some street sense, as it is often called, and can say: “I have worked on myself. I have worked on self-realization, psychological healing, even personal development, personal growth for many years. I have found these tools, these teachings. This has worked for me. I think it can work for you also.” Then you see an entirely new movement can spring up, where more and more women are looking for this, a practical approach to psychological healing and development, that they can apply first to themselves then to their children, practical, affordable, doable in everyday life. When the demand is there, well, supply must follow, and so you can see that an entirely new, what they often call industry can spring up. An entirely new movement can develop. You already have it to some degree with self-improvement, mindfulness, various courses on self-awareness, but it can also be extended to psychology, psychological healing, personal development. Of course, some women will be open to a spiritual approach to this, but many women will be open to a more universal approach that is not openly or directly spiritual.

This is a very important development that you can make the calls for, you can envision, you can work on it yourself, creating the demand, filling the demand. Some of you have experience in working with helping people with coaching, self-improvement, whatever you have. Some of you have experience with traditional psychology. So many have the potential to be part of this. There are, of course, many women but also some men who are tuned into this and who are ready to step into that role as therapists and fill the need: coaches, authors, what have you. But the focus can be, first of all, to: “Develop myself as a woman so that I can help my child, my children, develop themselves into productive individuals.” In a little longer run, it is clear the demand needs to grow to a point where society makes this a priority, makes this as available as physical health care, but that is a little more down the road. Quite frankly, there are many women who are open to the realization: “I can’t wait for society to do this. My children will be grown before that happens. I need to start now. I need to do something now. So I need to take the initiative.”

Women can come together, form groups, support groups for each other, where they are helping each other develop their psychology and help develop their children. There are many ways to do this. There is much experimentation that needs to be done so that people in different countries and different cultures find what works for them. I am not in any way saying there is only one way to do this, or that the ascended masters’ teachings are the way to do this. Universal ideas need to be brought forth. Many are already there, but they need to be put together into a practical, applicable process and method, many methods, many therapies, many approaches. This is a very, very important development. Certainly it will start in the more affluent nations, no question about it, because people have the free time and the free attention to do it. They also have the material, the money, to do it, but it can spread like rings in the water.

Now, on a little more long-term basis, what can this then develop into? Well, it can develop into what we have talked about before, where when you begin to recognize your self-actualization needs, you can become open to various forms of spiritual ideas. You come to the point where, in order to fully embrace self-actualization, you have to realize you are not a physical, material being. Otherwise you would not have the potential to actualize yourself. A cow cannot actualize itself, nor can a monkey, but a human being can. So this can open many women to a spiritual approach. Many women are already open, but many, many more can become open in this next decade to various kinds of spiritual approaches. Again, there is not one that will take over, that will be dominant, but there are some general ideas that many women are ready to contemplate.

First of all, there is the idea of reincarnation. We have talked about it before. It is very important for resolving some of these questions that mothers have. For example, as I said, you are contemplating the future of your child, and you know that there is always the risk that the child could experience some kind of accident, some kind of mishap, that could set its life on a negative track or even end this life. When you recognize that the child can have lived before, and in past lifetimes the child might have made karma, this could precipitate such negative events. You can ask yourself: “Well, what can I do about my child’s karma from past lifetimes?” Obviously, you can do various things, according to various spiritual traditions, to transform this karma before it becomes physical. Obviously ascended master students from various dispensations have been doing this for many years, giving decrees, the violet flame, to transmute the karma of their children, but many more women can become open to this idea that: “I can use certain spiritual tools to transform the karma of my child before it becomes physical and precipitates an unfortunate event.”

There is another question that many women have, even though they are not necessarily consciously aware of it or able to put words on it, and it is simply this: “Why is my child the way it is?” We are not just talking about physical characteristics. Most mothers recognize that their relationship to their child is very much dependent on the child’s personality, in other words, the child’s psychology. Many women have experienced that there are some limitations to what kind of a relationship, how close and open a relationship they can have to one of their children, or even all of their children. Why is this? Well, an important aspect of this is, of course, the psychology that the child has created in past lifetimes and carried with it into this lifetime. But, of course, your relationship to your child is not only dependent on the child’s psychology. It is also dependent on your psychology. So when you are open to reincarnation, you can see that you could have had certain experiences in past lives that you have carried with you into this lifetime, as certain psychological conditions, hang-ups, wounds, tendencies. You have a certain reactionary pattern that always causes you to react a certain way, and your child knows exactly how to push the button that triggers this reaction in you.

So then women can begin to again empower themselves by saying: “Okay, I see that there’s a certain pattern in my relationship to my child. The cause of this must be certain patterns in my child’s psychology, certain wounds, certain hang-ups and certain patterns in my own psychology. Do I then have to live the rest of my life with these patterns? Will this set a limit to my relationship to my child that will continue for the rest of my life or the child’s life, whoever dies first? Or is there something I can do about this?” Of course, the realization is that there is something you can do about it. You can fundamentally change your relationship to your child, but only if you change both your psychology and your child’s psychology. In some cases, it might be difficult to change the child’s psychology, but as society moves forward, it will become easier and easier because there will be more of an awareness. Children will learn already from the kindergarten stage that their psychology is something they can deal with. You will see that, beginning in this coming decade but also beyond, there will be of an openness to the realization that all human relationships depend on the psychology of all people involved. And there is something you can do about it. Even if you as a mother cannot change the psychology of your child, by changing your own psychology, you can still change your relationship to your child.

I grant that there are some children whom it will be very difficult to help overcome certain psychological conditions in childhood because the children need to become adults. They need to go out in life and have certain experiences before they are ready and willing to look at their own psychology. There are some children that will feel that their mothers are trying to force this upon them, and, of course, it is important that you do not seek to force your child. Nevertheless, the majority of children can be helped when their mothers resolve their own hang-ups first and then seek to help the child. When you as a mother have resolved your own psychological patterns, it is not as likely that you will seek to force anything on the child because now you are not seeking to resolve your child’s psychology to avoid dealing with your own, as is the case with many mothers today who have not realized what I am talking about here. You can look at the pattern, perhaps even the pattern with your own mothers, where you, when you were a child, did certain things that made your mother angry, and your mother did not like to be angry. So she attempted to force you to change your behavior so that she would not become angry.

This, of course, is not the pattern you want to repeat yourself with your own children. You want to take a different approach and say: “Let me work on my own psychology first before I seek to change the psychology of my child, so I am sure that I am not seeking to force anything on my child in order to avoid dealing with myself. In other words, I will remove the beam in my own eye before I deal with the splinter in the eye of my child.” In some cases, you just need to remove the splinter in your own eye before you can deal with the beam in your child’s eye because it is, of course, not universally so that children have fewer psychological hang-ups than their parents. On the contrary, in this day and age, many children have greater psychological problems than their parents. The reason for this is partly what we have described before, that when you look at the history of the last hundred years, with the many wars and conflicts there have been, you can see that there is a great number of souls who have been severely wounded in past lifetimes. They come into this lifetime with a desire to heal their psychological wounds, and they say to themselves: “Where would I like to be born?”

Well, many of them will want to be born in an affluent nation where they have a greater chance of being able to work on their psychology, but they will also look at the parents and say: “I would like to be born to parents who don’t have as many psychological hang-ups as I have, so they have some surplus, some freedom, to help me.” This is not to say that it is always that way because there are, of course, also many children, and many of you who are spiritual people are among them, who have fewer psychological hang-ups than your parents. Therefore you could potentially help your parents, or you could at least free yourself from your parents, so that their psychological hang-ups did not determine your life. But there is a clear tendency in the affluent nations that many children are born with some severe psychological hang-ups from past lives in the hope that their parents can give them an opportunity to heal them and overcome them.

So this is also something that is an expression of the essential humanity, that women begin to look for a deeper understanding of: “Why is my child the way it is?” This can make women become open to reincarnation because it does have a big explanatory potential for explaining why the child is a certain way, why it has certain psychological wounds that you cannot account for. We have talked about before how in today’s world with the current understanding of psychology, there is a tendency that society or even family members will blame parents for their children having psychological issues. So if your child is not able to take care of itself or get an education, you must have done something wrong as a parent. Either your genes are not good enough or the way you brought up the child is not good enough. But as we have said, that is not always the case. In many cases, it is not that way. You can look at a particular child and you can see that it has a deep psychological wound. A truly deep psychological wound can only come from a severe physical trauma that led to psychological trauma. You can look at this child who grew up in this affluent country, with parents that had plenty of money, that had a stable life, and you can see that there is no point in this person’s childhood where he or she was exposed to this kind of trauma. Yet the wound is still there, and it is potentially preventing this child from having a constructive life. What can explain it? Well, only reincarnation.

So there is a potential here that motherhood and a greater awareness by mothers can open women to many of these universal spiritual ideas. Now you may say: “Why am I, Mother Mary, giving this particular teaching?” Well, it is because, at least in the Christian part of the world, I am known as the mother of Jesus. And, of course, when you are open to reincarnation, you are perhaps open to the idea that I was actually embodied as the physical mother of Jesus 2,000 years ago, and I have since ascended and become an ascended master. Now, when you think about the essential humanity, we have said basically that the basic humanity is the recognition of rights, what should not happen, or what should happen to a child physically, but the essential humanity is about opportunities, the opportunities of people, the opportunities of the child. So when you raise your awareness as a mother, you would also look at: “What are the opportunities for my children? And how could I improve those opportunities?” Surely you can improve the opportunities of your children by helping them heal their psychology. But is there not more you could do to improve the opportunities of your children, perhaps even influence what kind of children you are going to have? There are women in this world who can learn from my example.

If you step back from all the specifics, you can say one thing: Whenever you think about Jesus, whatever you think about Christianity, if you free yourself from the usual doctrines, Jesus was a child that had an extraordinary potential. He had an extraordinary opportunity to do something in life that would have a big impact on the world, a positive impact on the world. So, if you are a mother who is a little more aware than the average, would you not want to become the mother of one or several children who could also have an opportunity to have a positive impact on the world? You would therefore have to say: “What could bring this about? How could I become the mother of a particularly gifted child with a great potential?” Well, you would have to do what I did 2,000 years ago and which is, of course, not recorded in the scriptures. You would have to be willing to work on yourself, not only your psychology, because it is not a matter of just healing psychological wounds and reactionary patterns. It is a matter of developing your psychology towards the higher potentials of human psychology. This means, in the terminology we are using, that you will have to walk the spiritual path and deliberately and consciously seek to raise yourself to a higher state of consciousness than what most people call normal. It was not so that the average woman 2,000 years ago could have given birth to Jesus. It could have been disastrous even for the woman and for Jesus. It had to be a woman with a certain resolution of psychology, and what was that resolution, that level of resolution?

Well, I had to have my psychology so resolved that I did not have any hang ups that would have a negative effect on Jesus. I had to be so resolved in my psychology that I was free to focus on tuning into Jesus’ potential and what it would take for me to support that potential so that I could do what was in my power to do to help him realize that potential. This had to be decided before I could give birth to him. Some of it was decided in past lifetimes. There are many women who in this lifetime have worked on their psychology and in past lifetimes have reached a certain level of resolution, where in this lifetime, it is part of their divine plan to give birth to a child with a particular potential, a higher potential. Many of these women are in affluent nations but not all of them and so there is a large group of women who are not yet consciously aware of this who could break through and who could start saying: “What can I then do to prepare myself to give birth to such a child?”

The obvious answer is beyond resolution of psychology, raise your consciousness, walk a spiritual path, get to the point where you understand what it takes for a human being to raise its consciousness and thereby unfold its spiritual potential. There are women who can do this within the next decade and there are others that can do it beyond. There are so to speak rungs of women who can gradually step up to this. You who have already stepped up to this realization of the spiritual potential, the potential for spiritual growth, can make the calls for this and you can some of you, also seek to help other women either through counselling, coaching, therapies, workshops, whatever you have, fulfill that potential. So there are certainly many things that can be done. Many, many things that can be done here within these next 10 years to create this kind of a breakthrough where mothers become more open to looking beyond traditional viewpoints, traditional beliefs, traditional thought systems and looking at: “What can I do to improve the life of my children and of course, improve my own life in the process? What can I do to improve my relationship to my children, or the relationship of my children to each other?”

How many mothers have given birth to their first child and they have enjoyed a certain time being alone with that child, being able to put their full attention on that child. Then they have looked forward to having a second child thinking, oh these two children will now be a lot of enjoyment to each other, they will be able to play together, they will help each other. And so you have that second child and barely is it “dry behind the ears” as the saying goes before it starts fighting with its sibling and then you have sibling rivalry. You have these very deep conflicts between children.

How can you understand this unless you know about reincarnation and realize that these two souls might have had severe conflicts in a past life that they have carried with them and even though they are siblings and you think coming from the same mother, being in the same family, they should like each other. Well, they hate each other from past lives and so you have again the situation: will you live with this until the children finally move away from home, or will you attempt to do something about it? What can you do about it? Well, you can use psychological tools to heal the children’s psychology, you can use spiritual tools to consume the karma between them and seek to get them on a positive track where they can grow beyond these patterns that they have carried with them from past lives so that essentially they can either free themselves from each other and move on in separate directions. Or they can resolve their differences and have a constructive relationship, but in any way in any event, they are free from the conflict that might have consumed their life for several lifetimes.

Again, you can say: “What can you do as a woman to make sure you don’t have those kinds of children? Well again, raise your consciousness or you can at least raise your consciousness so that if you have those kinds of children, you can help them and you can avoid reacting to them in a negative way. So you see my beloved, the basic message here that I project into the collective consciousness is, there is more to motherhood than meets the eye. It is time to step up to a higher awareness of motherhood. Now, I know that when I set this previous sentence you thought I meant there is more to motherhood than meets the physical eye, but you can also say: “There is more to motherhood than meets the I, meaning the sense of self of the mother, the “I” of the mother.”

Motherhood is not about “I”. Motherhood is about more than I, more than myself. Many women have traditionally engaged in motherhood from a self-centered perspective. There are two main ways this has happened. They did not have a planned pregnancy, they were thrown into it, they may have felt forced into it and so they become self-centered in feeling, dealing with the situation that they feel forced into. Or they planned to have the pregnancy because they had some self-centered desire for how their children should be. You will see, and many of you will have grown up in such an environment, that your mother had a very fixed idea of how you should live your life, what you should do and what you should not do. This is because for your mother, motherhood was not more than met her I, herself, her separate self, her outer personality.

You can see if you look at this historically, that if you go back in time even in the modern democracies you would see that mothers often had a stronger expectation about their children. You can see this especially about daughters. Mothers traditionally have a higher expectation for their daughters than they have for their sons and therefore they give less freedom to their daughters in many cases. So, you see that when you go back in time you had this situation where as a daughter your life was locked on a track and you had to follow the expectations of your mother, even your greater family and your culture. But you can see that in the affluent nations, the more modern nations, what women have gained is not just physical or economic freedom, but also more of a psychological freedom to not live their lives as their mothers did or as their mothers expected them to do. Many women have managed to free themselves from these expectations. Many mothers have also lessened their traditional expectations so that there is greater freedom in these affluent nations.

But you can go to other nations such as again, the Muslim countries of the Middle East, but also India, China, many other nations, even South Korea. Even though it is one of the modern democracies, in our consideration you have this very strong expectation from the side of parents, especially mothers, of how their children, especially their daughters should live their lives and it can be very difficult for women in these countries to break free from this. This is something you again can make the calls on. It is also something that women in the West could reach out to women in these other nations and help them overcome this. Help them grow to the point where they can recognize their essential humanity and say: “I have a right to go beyond the expectations of my mother, my father, my society, my family, and live my own life. I have a right to do something with my life that my parents and their generation could not even imagine and envision. I have a right to take my society beyond what my society can envision and imagine. This is my higher humanity, my essential humanity, my higher potential.”

You will see here that there are so many things that can be done here. Books could be written. Many, many women in all parts of the world could write books about their situation, their growth process, what they have gone through, what they have overcome. The messenger’s wife just recently read a book written by a woman in Saudi Arabia who described how she broke through some of these taboos. She drove a car, she was imprisoned, she eventually had to move from her country but still she describes the steps she went through, and many other women can relate to this. But many women in the affluent part of the world could write their stories of what they have gone through in their lives, how they have overcome limitations, overcome all of these things. It does not even have to be books. It could be blogs. It could be postings on the internet. It could be movies, TV series. All kinds of things that could come out of this because do you not see that what has happened over these last several decades is that there has been more and more women who have been speaking out, not necessarily about great political, philosophical topics, although they can also do this, but they have spoken out about their own situation, how they have overcome various limitations. Do you not see that this is a great inspiration to women? This is very much needed!

There needs to be more of an alternative to the traditional women’s magazines that are little more than propaganda apparatuses for promoting these traditional views of women, women’s role, how women should look, what it means to be beautiful and sexually attractive to men and all of these things. There needs to be some expression where real women tell their real stories of their real struggles and their real overcoming of their limitations. This could be tremendously inspiring to many other women, not only in the affluent part of the world but especially in other parts of the world where women might read this. There is even a certain value to the fact that it is now possible to watch television in large parts of the world and that even in some of the poorer nations there are still women who can watch television. And you may say, that if you look at some of these TV series about women that have been created by the Hollywood establishment, you may say that these TV series are completely out of touch with how women live and what their situation is in these poor nations and this is of course, correct.

But there is still a certain value in women in these poor nations seeing a program on TV and they see that there are women in other parts of the world who have a very different life than we have. They have much better material conditions. In fact, they have so affluent material conditions that they do not even spend any time worrying about it. They are only worrying about their boyfriends and whether they get enough sex. But women in the poorer part of the world can see that it is actually possible to have this kind of life, and if it is possible for these women who quite frankly we often can see are not particularly sophisticated or intelligent but very self-absorbed, why should it not be possible for themselves in their part of the world?

This is one of the values of spreading this even though it may be popular culture or not particularly high, it still gives a different perspective. So women sharing their real story, which is not Hollywood glamorized, but sharing your real story, your real struggles. You may say: “Well, I have grown up in a very privileged society where I have certainly not experienced severe poverty. And these conditions that women may have in Saudi Arabia or in India and Bangladesh, what value could it have for them?” But they still might be inspired by the fact that you were facing certain limitations, you overcame them and that can inspire them to say: “Well, can I then also overcome the limitations I face even though they are different?”

Because how did you overcome your limitations? By working with yourself, with your own psychology and my beloved you may say that a woman who lives in fairly poor conditions, how can she work on her psychology? But the reality is that if you have a basic awareness of psychology, what does it cost you to work on yourself? You just need a little bit of time here and there in your daily life. Then you can make some progress. So you cannot take this negative view that is out there, that there is nothing you can do or whatever I do will not have an impact. You need to keep in mind what the Buddha said when he came out of Nirvana and was challenged by the demons of Mara that nobody would be able to understand his teaching. He said as you all know: “Some will understand, some will benefit.” Some will be inspired by you and is it not worth it then to put yourself out there?

Besides, you will learn for putting yourself out there, putting your stories out there and seeing how you react to the feedback you get. This gives you an opportunity to grow. You can see when you look at the history going back to the women’s suffrage movement, the women’s liberation movement. You can see that women could not have achieved these breakthroughs as individuals. They achieved them by coming together, by supporting each other, by working together, not as the men are working together but as women can work together. This has had already a tremendous impact on the world and the potential is virtually unlimited for the kind of impact you could have on the world when women come together and work together.

Men tend to be much more focused on the outer, much more focused on conditions, religion, political affiliation, ethnic affiliation, skin color, all of these things. Women have the potential to look beyond all of these outer things to connect with each other at the heart level, at the intuitive level and therefore form a sisterhood that goes beyond all outer boundaries. Men cannot do this, at least not in the foreseeable future. Women can. Some of you have already done it, many women have done it but there is a potential in the next 10 years that this will break through on a much larger scale that will cross many more boundaries than have so far been crossed. This is one of the greatest potentials for manifesting Saint Germain’s Golden Age.

Certainly men will play a role in manifesting the Golden Age but in the practical, everyday down to Earth matters women will be driving the change or there will be no change. So will you, not to just drive a car in Saudi Arabia, but will you drive the change in Saudi Arabia, in Iran, in India, in Bangladesh, in China, in Denmark, in Sweden, in America, in South America, in Africa, wherever you have it? Will you as women drive the change? That is the question, even a challenge that I present you with. I do not want you to feel negative about it. I want you to look at it as an opportunity to say: “What can I do? What can I do to improve the life of my own children?” If you do not have children or if they are grown: “What can I do to improve the lives of other children and their mothers? What can I do to improve the life of women around the world?”

There is something you can do. This is another lie of the fallen beings that they always project at you and you will notice many times if you look at yourselves honestly, that you can hear or read one of our dictations, you can feel uplifted, you can feel elated and then after some time there comes this reaction: “Oh, there’s nothing you can do. Who are you? Who do you think you are? What can you do?” But you can say with Gautama: “There is something I can do.” And whatever you do is better than nothing, for nothing has never changed the world but something, many small somethings have indeed changed the world and will change the world in the future. Many ascended master students are looking for this big breakthrough and now we have the Golden Age. But the Golden Age will be brought by many small steps, many small changes here and there is what will bring the Golden Age. There will be people who 500 years from now, still will not think the world is in a Golden Age because they have not realized it. There are people now today who have not acknowledged the immense progress that has been made over the last 500 years, at least in some parts of the world because they have not realized it. They have not changed in their minds. But I can assure you that 500 years from now you will barely recognize this planet, because then the Golden Age will be well and truly on the way to manifesting its higher potential.

So with this I will thank you for your attention, for your openness to be the broadcast stations and I seal you in the love of my mother’s heart. In a spiritual sense you are my children and I want to do what is best for you. I have asked myself what I could do and this dictation and many of my other dictations are an expression of that. My desire to help you free yourself and live more fulfilled lives, more fulfilling lives because you know you are fulfilling your divine plan and your highest spiritual potential because you have healed your spiritual traumas and made peace with being on Earth.

 

Copyright © 2020 Kim Michaels

What is the essence of human rights?


Listen to a recording of this dictation (subscribers only)

Ascended Master Portia through Kim Michaels, August 1, 2020. This dictation was given during the 2020 Webinar – Being the Divine Mother in action through the integration of the Seven Rays.

I AM the Ascended Master Portia. I AM, of course, also part of the Divine Mother for Earth. I AM part of the Office of the Divine Mother for Earth. It has been said that I AM the Goddess of Opportunity or the Goddess of Justice. And certainly, I come today with a flame of opportunity to extend to all people on Earth, especially to the women who are willing to be part of this movement of first liberating women, then liberating men and also liberating societies from the old mindset.

Now, at our previous conference on the liberation of women, we talked about the fact that in the United States you measure your eyesight by saying that perfect vision is 20/20 and this has given rise to the saying “hindsight is 20/20” because when you look back, you always have the perfect vision to see what should have happened, what could have happened, what did happen, why it happened and so forth and so on.

It is so easy to predict things based on hindsight. It is so easy to predict something when it has already happened. However, can we not take this saying and turn it around and extend it into the future? Can we not use the perfect vision of hindsight to also look at the future? Can we not look back at the past and instead of being focused on the outer events that actually happened, we look beyond the events? We look for tendencies and certain patterns that begin to emerge. Then we can see that if there is a certain tendency that has been repeating itself, that has been going on continuously for several hundred years, perhaps even thousands of years, then is it not likely that that tendency can be extended into the future and can therefore show us something fairly reliable about what must happen and what will happen in the future? Is it really impossible to do this?

Many, of course, have attempted to do this—many different kinds of historians, philosophers, scientists and so on. But can we not refine this activity to look for certain things that relate to the topic we talked about yesterday of the basic humanity and the essential humanity? When you look back at previous societies and previous civilizations, even the ones known in this incredibly short time span of what you call recorded history, can you not see that these societies were much more violent, much more brutal at least in certain ways, than what you see today? You can still, of course, find violence and brutality in today’s world. But if you go back say 1,000 years or 2,000 years, you find much more widespread violence and brutality. You found hardly any society on earth that did not have this, at least if we talk about what we today call the Western world. Can you not see, then, that in the Western world and in other parts of the world, especially in what we call the modern democracies, there has been a clear movement away from this very physical, very raw, very brutal violence?

The level of brutality has dropped, at least in these nations. Is it then so difficult to see that the reason for this is that there has been an evolution in these societies where people have become more and more in touch with their basic humanity? Therefore, they have started to see as self-evident that there are certain things you do not do to other people. There are certain things you do not do to human beings. I know you can point to all kinds of exceptions in the form of wars, crime and so forth. Still, if you look at the general population today and if you could, which you can to some degree do, compare it to the general population of say 1,000 years ago, you will see that back then most people had a far different attitude to violence. They considered violence to be normal and inevitable. Many of them carried around weapons such as knives or swords and were ready to defend themselves at any time. Many of them lived in a constant fear that they could be attacked either by robbers or by even bigger armies from the outside that would come in and steal and plunder what they had. There was much more of this fear of violence and fear of brutality. In today’s world, at least in these modern democracies, you can barely imagine what it was like to live back then. You can barely imagine. There was this constant fear of physical attack and physical violence.

Now I know you can point to certain places even in the more modern part of the world where in the inner cities, for example, there can still be a certain fear of being physically attacked. But in general, we can see that there has been an upward trend, there has been a clear improvement in that in many societies around the world people can live without this fear of brutal violence and it is because they have changed their attitude to life. They have become more in touch with this basic humanity. Therefore, when more and more people in a society begin to accept as self-evident that I am not using violence against other people, then gradually as that critical mass is built, there will be a shift and now this society will no longer be as violent. This is not just because the laws are changed, although in many cases the laws will be changed. It is as if when the collective consciousness shifts beyond a certain point, then it is reflected in the laws of society. Can you not also see that for most of this period that you call recorded history, people lived in dictatorial societies? There were some kings, some emperors, or some religious authority, who had all power in that society. His—and in most cases it was a he—his law, his word was law, and whatever he did was what the people had to live with.

You may ask how democracy came about. How do we have a situation now where a large number of nations around the world have a functioning democracy where they do not have a dictator? They have a government that they have voted for, that is supposed to represent them and, in many cases, does at least represent them to some degree. Why did this happen? Well, it happened because the consciousness of a critical mass of the people in the nation shifted, and they became again in touch with another level of this basic humanity that there are certain things you do not do to people, to human beings. There are certain things a government should not do to its own citizens and therefore, they became open to this idea of a government that is of the people, by the people and for the people. Consequently, the political situation had to change.

I know that traditional historians do not acknowledge this, but certainly anybody who has any kind of spiritual interest, any intuitive sense, can see very quickly, can come to see that it was the shift in the collective consciousness that came first. Then the change in the laws, the constitutions and a political situation came afterwards. I know very well that when you look at traditional history, when you, for example, think back to how most of you were taught about history in school, you can say that this form of history is, in essence, an elitist history. You think that there was an enlightened or a somewhat enlightened elite of people in a certain nation that instituted the change to democracy.

I am not denying that in certain nations there were people who were more attuned intuitively to the ascended masters and therefore, like the early American founding fathers, were able to see that it was necessary to create a new form of government. However, as we have said before, even the founding fathers of America had an elitist attitude and an elitist outlook on life. It was also the case in many other nations. What you see here is, when you step back from this, you realize that what drove the political, legal and constitutional changes that shifted from dictatorship to democracy was a change in the collective consciousness of the people. There was a rising of the awareness of this basic humanity that there are certain things that a government is not supposed to do to its own citizens because the government is supposed to recognize that people have rights.

Now, the idea that human beings have rights is not necessarily basic humanity, it is more what we have called essential humanity. And what does it mean? Well look at this concept of human rights. Where does this concept come from? It is not necessarily an intellectually-reasoned concept. It is not that there was somebody who sat there and intellectually reasoned that people should have rights. It came from an intuitive sense, where people got in touch with this essential humanity and they realized that a human being is, as we said yesterday, more than an evolved animal. A human being has something. Life has something. Life has value, and therefore it must be respected, not because of any outer political reasons, but simply because that is the way it is. It is obvious that there should be respect for life and therefore human beings have rights.

If there is no respect for life, then the concept of rights is meaningless. Now, if you extend this a little further, anyone who is open to a spiritual outlook on life can see that the idea that human beings have rights and that a human life has value is because you are not physical, material, mechanical beings. You are spiritual beings. You came from somewhere beyond Earth. But why do you have rights? What is it that gives you a right? What is a right? A right, for example, is the right to live your life as you see fit without being the slaves of other people. What is the essence of such a right? It is that as a human being, you have the opportunity to improve yourself.

You have, as we said yesterday, self-awareness, which gives you the potential to suffer. But self-awareness also gives you the opportunity to improve yourself. Which means what? Why is it that self-awareness has these two sides? It can give you an opportunity to improve and it can cause you to suffer. What causes you to suffer? It is when you are not allowed to exercise the opportunity to improve yourself. When something in the physical realm prevents you from improving yourself, that is what causes all essential suffering. When you recognize that human beings have value and they have rights, you see that a government should not restrict people’s opportunity to improve themselves and improve their lot in life. Improving yourself can mean many things. If you go back to these early democracies that were created not so long ago, you see that it primarily meant that people who had lived as feudal peasants under the feudal lords were now given an opportunity to improve their physical living conditions.

They could own their own houses, they could own land, they could farm, they could get jobs in industry that was emerging and so forth and so on. You see that even many of the modern democracies have gone through a period where the main focus of these societies was to improve the physical living conditions of people. In other words, they were pursuing what you can call material welfare. This was a natural and a necessary phase. There is no question about this. But my larger point here is that when you look back at societies, can you not see that there has been a clear forward progression on this planet, where there has been an increasing recognition of the basic humanity and the essential humanity? There has been an increasing recognition of people’s humanity, and that humanity means that first of all, there are certain things that individuals do not do to each other. There are certain things that a government should not do to its own subjects or its own people. But it also means that human beings have an intrinsic value.

This means that they have rights that no person, no institution, no society should violate because people should be given the biggest possible opportunity to improve themselves. Now, how do you improve yourself? Only if you have the freedom to make your own choices about how you live, how you look at life, what you believe about life, what you know about life and all of these things. You must not only have outer political freedom, you must also have knowledge and you must, as is beginning to be seen in the modern democracies, you must have psychological freedom to decide how to live your life.

So, when you look at all of this, when you look back and use this perfect vision of hindsight to see what has happened, is it so difficult to now turn from looking back at the past, to looking forward towards the future? Is it so difficult to project this tendency into the future and say: “The increase in the awareness of humanity will and must continue? It will continue. There is no question about this.” If we then look at societies on earth today in light of this increasing awareness of humanity, we can now begin to look at what this means. Now we have talked about before that you could set up an index of humanity. You could create an index of which nations are the most humane in terms of recognizing the basic and essential humanity of their people, which companies are the most humane in how they treat their workers, how they affect the environment and so on.

With this in mind, could you not then also start to do something that is more obvious to people in modern democracies, looking at nations around the world? When you look at what has happened in for example, Europe over the last 500 years, you can see that going back 500 years in Europe, the leaders of society had a very close-minded, again, a fanatical attitude. They were unwilling to change because they did not want to let go of the position they had and the power they had in society. But you can see that they have had to let go of their power and privilege, at least to some degree. What caused this? Well, it was, as we have said, a shift in the collective consciousness where a critical mass of people acknowledged: “We do not want to live in these kinds of elitist societies anymore. We have certain rights and our society should recognize this.” Well, can you not then look at all nations in the world and see that the same must and will happen there?

You look at Europe in the Middle Ages. The mindset of Europe was dominated, to a degree that you can scarcely grasp today by the Catholic church. In other words, religion was very, very important. The religious elite had such a grip on society, that you can scarcely envision it today in the modern democracies, but even this has changed. Democracies have become secular nations that give freedom of religion, instead of allowing one religion to dominate. This is again a matter of recognizing there is a basic humanity, that nobody should be forced to follow a certain religion and the essential humanity that all people have the ability to attune in their hearts to a higher reality and that they should be given complete freedom by society as to how they use that ability. Can you not see that this seemed like an impossible development in Europe 500 years ago, but now it is there? Can you not project this upon the Islamic world and see that even though it has been said, and to a large degree rightly so, that many Islamic countries have the same attitude today, as people in Europe had 500 years ago or societies in Europe had 500 years ago? Nevertheless, Islamic countries must change and will change the same way European nations have done and it will not my beloved, take 500 years for them to do so, for cycles have been accelerated.

Do you understand that if you again look back at history, you can see something very simple? There can be a very long time span, where a certain area of the world is trapped in a particular stalemate, a catch 22, a certain mindset. You look at Europe during the Catholic age where for over 1000 years, Europe had stagnated at a certain point. Because the Catholic church did not give freedom to for example science, you will see that in that same time span, Muslim nations made more progress than European nations because at that time, Islam gave more freedom to society for experimentation than the Catholic church did. So, you see, it is entirely possible that a society can be trapped at a certain level. But then there comes a point where somewhere in the world some nations begin to break through what is holding the world back, they become the forerunners. Now in these nations there can be tremendous opposition to this shift.

Therefore, there may in some cases be wars, as you saw with the American Revolutionary War, there may be various upheavals and it may take a long time for these nations to break through. But once a group of nations have broken through a certain mindset, it will not take as long for other nations to break through. Therefore, if you look back at history with perfect vision and now project into the future, you can see Islamic countries must and will become secular democracies. They may still have the main religion of Islam, but it will not be the only religion and it will not be having the influence on the state that it has today. You can also project this will not take 500 years, this will not take 300 years, it will not take 200 years, it will not take 100 years, it will only take a few decades, barely a generation. It will happen. It is inevitable because there has already been reached on a world scale that critical mass where so many people have recognized this basic humanity, this essential humanity, that societies of the construction that you see in Islamic nations cannot survive for very long. The question is not will Islamic countries change, the question is how big of an upheaval is necessary for them to change. Will it happen very violently, because there is still opposition to it or will it happen in a more peaceful way, like you saw in many of the European nations where, after the French Revolution and the American Revolutionary War, it was seen by the rulers of society, precisely what I’m talking about? There were kings in European nations in the 1800s that were able to look back at the American Revolutionary War and the French Revolution and say, this is coming in our country if we don’t change. These kings then decided that instead of opposing democracy, they would embrace democracy and allow it to happen so there was a transition, a peaceful transition.

You can hold the vision, if you feel so moved, you can make the calls that the same thing will happen in Islamic countries. What I will also say here is that if there is to be a peaceful transition in Islamic countries, how can it come about? Well, my beloved, it is very simple. If men are the driving force, there will be violence and revolutions and bloodshed and wars. The only way that a peaceful transition can happen in Islamic countries is through women in those countries, they are the only ones when you look at this realistically, even when you look at history, who can drive a peaceful transition. As we said yesterday, women did not have to use violence to be given the right to vote and the right to run for office in democratic countries. This proves to you and again, you can look back at history and find other examples, that women have the ability to create revolutionary change in society with peaceful means, whereas men have a far lower ability to do this.

Again, I am saying this partly to put it out there in the collective consciousness because there are women who have embodied in Islamic countries precisely because they made it part of their divine plan to drive this peaceful transition. They need this to be spoken in the physical to give them that impetus to awaken and realize why they are in embodiment and why they are in embodiment in those particular societies. They need to, so to speak, come out of the closet or out of the burqa, and stand forward and work for change as they have the capability of doing, not by creating this violent movement, but by creating a revolution from within, a revolution that starts in the home, that starts with their own husbands or significant family members where they simply start talking to these men in a different way.

You may look back at the movement in the West, where women gradually worked towards the point where they have got the right to vote, you may see that they created an organized movement. You may see that they demonstrated in the streets, they demonstrated in front of parliaments, they did various things to make their cause public. This is of course, what also needs to happen in Islamic countries. But do not overlook the fact that this revolutionary shift started right in the home with women becoming aware of who they are, their own basic humanity, their own basic rights. Once they had made that shift in their own consciousness, they were able to talk to men in their lives in a different way and they were able to help those men shift and gradually this spread like rings in the water. You see my beloved, when you create an organized outer movement that goes out and challenges those who are in power in society, they will feel threatened and they will use whatever the means they have in power to oppose you.

When you create an inner movement that starts in the home, that starts in the family, that starts in local communities, where you change the dialogue, you change the way people talk about these issues, the way they look at these issues, this is much more difficult for the powers that be in a society to oppose. It is virtually impossible for them to eradicate because even the most dictatorial nations find it difficult to go into people’s homes and control everything that is being said. You see that what they often do is they try to use for example, the Islamic religion, to basically brainwash and program people not to talk about these things such as human rights. But when that outer programming no longer works, because women have liberated themselves from it, then what can the authorities do? How do you oppose this movement? How do you in essence as a man who is in power, oppose your own wife or wives in some cases? How do you do this?

Does there not come a point where you start to wonder if you are opposing yourself and your own interests? As we said, many men in Islamic countries would like to see a change so that both their wives and themselves have greater freedom. Once you create this kind of a shift in the way people are talking about an issue, then the authorities have very few options for stopping it. This is one reason I speak out to give these women that impetus to wake up. But I also speak out because women in the West have an opportunity here to show solidarity. You who are ascended master students can make the calls but women in general in the West can also awaken.

Again, what do you see has happened historically? When you go back to these medieval societies, what do you see back then? You saw that you had a small elite and that small elite was made up of primarily men who were what we today would call narcissists. Now narcissists can in some cases cooperate, but it is not really a true cooperation, because a narcissist only thinks about himself and therefore, has only his own interests in mind. But when it is in his own interest to work together with others, he can do so for a period of time, so the elite was divided. But what you saw among the people is that even though they were also downtrodden and had limited options, they were all in most cases, most of them in the same boat. They still were divided. They were also self-centered and so focused on themselves that they could not cooperate, they could not form a unified movement. So, what have you seen happen over the past thousand years or so to some degree, to a high degree, because of the influence of certain ideas that were put out there by Jesus?

Well, you have seen a growth in this coming together of people that had a certain solidarity with each other. But what is this solidarity? What is it that helps people shift from looking only at their own interest to looking at the interest of a bigger group, to saying we must stand together and demand our rights? Well, that is also an increase in not only the basic humanity, but also the essential humanity where you recognize that even though we may be downtrodden peasants, we are still human beings and we have a basic humanity, there are certain things that our rulers should not do to us. We should not be slaves of the noble class. When that shift begins to happen, then again, the rulers must change.

What do you see historically has happened over the past thousand years or so? An increase in the solidarity, where people have become more and more aware of what is happening to other people, and the need for people to stand together and show some solidarity and say we demand a change in society. This is what can be taken by women in the modern democracies and extended as a solidarity with women around the world where you can then look at all nations around the world and you can create this index, this humanity index of how women are treated in those nations.

What are the factors that are suppressing women, that are holding them back? Identify these factors, clearly spell out what the factors are, what the effect is on women, what the effect is on men, what the effect is on society. It is not a matter of blaming. It is not a matter of placing blame. It’s a matter of simply saying, from a purely humanitarian viewpoint, we recognize there are certain things that should not be done to human beings. We the women in modern democracies would never do this to ourselves, we would not do it to each other, we will not accept that our society did this to us. We would not accept that we cannot have a driver’s license, we cannot drive a car, we cannot move freely around, we will not accept it we have to cover our faces, we will not accept that we cannot hold a job, cannot get an education, cannot pursue a career, cannot become self-sufficient, but must be dependent on men for everything. We will not accept that we cannot vote, we cannot run for office, we cannot be represented in the government and so forth and so on.

We, the women in the modern democracies, would never accept this for ourselves and therefore, we cannot accept it for our sisters in other nations. We must first of all extend that solidarity and support. We must also demand that our governments do what can be done about this. Again, not something violent, but something peaceful. First of all, of course, you can create these indexes and say this is what is happening and these are the consequences, there is no blame. You do not need to blame these societies and call them names or call them medieval, old fashioned or this or that. You simply need to state this happens, this is the consequence and then you can leave it at that. You can of course, also take this further and say, should we as a modern enlightened nation, should we trade with a nation that treats women this way? Should we buy oil from the Middle East? Can we not as women, say if you are selling oil at your petrol station that is from Arabic countries, we are not buying at your station. Just imagine the impact this one thing would have. How many oil companies do you think, could continue to sell oil in your nation if all women in your nation boycotted them? Do you think the men can buy enough gasoline that they could keep these companies afloat and doing business as usual or do you think these companies would say we have to change we have to find a way to move with this trend in society? If our customers are leaving because we’re selling oil from the Middle East, we have to find oil elsewhere. There are of course, other sources.

I admit that oil is precisely one of those things that can be difficult to deal with because so much of it is concentrated in the Middle East, but it can be dealt with, there are alternatives. This can of course, go further and further and further, as you who are the ascended master students make the calls and some of you might even have in your divine plan to take physical action to create this. You will see that it will start slowly, but it can spread as rings in the water and it can gain a momentum so that by the end of this decade of the 2020s, there will be much more of an awareness, even more of an organization that is dedicated to this and spreading this awareness, which basically is this. Women are also human beings. We cannot discriminate human beings based on their sex. Women are not sub humans, they are not secondary citizens. They are in all ways fully as humane, as worthy as men and therefore they deserve not only the same rights, but the same opportunity.

It is truly, when you look at the world today, amazing in some sense that this has not already happened. We have said before that many of these western democracies reach a stage back in the 1960s and 70s, where material welfare had been dealt with to the point where most people had spare time. They had attention left over from doing physical work and you see many, many women in these modern nations who have the opportunity to look beyond their own personal situation, look beyond their own nation and look at the rest of the world and say, “How can we use the material welfare, the free time, the free attention that we have to help other women around the world? How can we do this? Why hasn’t it happened?” Well, there is a multitude of causes that we really do not necessarily need to go into but the fact of the matter is, that we have now gradually moved to the point where this awareness is ready to break through to a larger degree. That is why we have dedicated this coming decade to the cause of women, to the liberation of women and when you make the calls, you who are direct students, you will see a tremendous impact here. You will see that there will be these shifts where, even in these nations where women are still treated very, very poorly, there will be a different awareness. There will be a different debate. It has already started to some degree but it will be accelerated greatly.

Female genital mutilation, female circumcision, the attitude towards this has begun to shift but this will accelerate in this decade. There will be more of an awareness that it is not enough for a country to outlaw this but that they must take active measures to stop it where it starts, which is, unfortunately, in the attitude of mothers who feel pressured by their society to do this to their own daughters. They themselves experienced this as a very traumatic event in their lives but they are still under such pressure from society, from religion, from their culture, that they feel they have to expose their own daughters to the same trauma. This is because these women have been forced to suppress their most basic humanity which is, that when I have experienced something unpleasant, I do not want my own children to experience the same thing. I want my children to have a better life than I do. This is one of the most basic aspects of humanity.

There needs to be an effort made in these countries to go out there and reeducate these women and also take active measures to remove this pressure. You will see in this coming decade that there will be this enormous magnetic pull from the collective consciousness on these nations where these practices are still taking place. You will see for a time in some of these nations, where, as often happens when a change is imminent, there will be a polarization. There will be some who are violently opposed to change and who will resist it with all the power they have. But you will also see that this will only cause them to become more and more extreme, until their resistance to change becomes more and more absurd.

This is another thing you can learn by looking back at history. Take a look back. You can see today how the breakthrough of democracy in certain nations was inevitable. You can see this in hindsight. If it could have been stopped, it would have been stopped. The fact that it was not stopped meant that it could not have been stopped. It was an inevitable development but you can also see how in some nations this was resisted so violently that it led to a violent revolution. You can look at the French Revolution and you can say, well, the revolutionaries who beheaded the noble people, the noble class, they were obviously extremists. But why were they such extremists? Because the noble class had resisted change in an equally fanatical way. One thing led to another. One dualistic polarity led to the opposite dualistic polarity and this is what you can learn from history.

When there is resistance to inevitable change, the polarizations will become more and more pronounced until, at least in hindsight, you can see how absurd it was. You look back at the French Revolution. You look at how the kings and the noble class isolated themselves in their elaborate castles and palaces, how they lived a hedonistic lifestyle, not caring about the peasants and the fact that they had no bread to eat while you were eating cake. You can see that this was an absurd situation that they completely ignored the humanity of the majority of the people in the country, completely absurd. What did it attract? It attracted this class of revolutionaries, which we have said, there is an established power elite, if they resist change, they will attract an aspiring power elite who would be willing to overthrow the established power elite with violence. That is exactly what happened in the French Revolution, a textbook example if there were any textbooks about this, which of course there isn’t in current history, but nevertheless there will be in the future. You saw here that what the noble class did in resisting this change that you now see is inevitable was truly absurd. What the French revolutionaries did in beheading all of these people, was equally absurd and the society they created, where everyone now lived in fear of the revolutionaries, instead of in fear of the noble class, was also absurd.

You can see the same thing in the Bolshevik Revolution. The czar’s denial to promote change in Russia was completely absurd. But what the Bolsheviks did was also absurd and the society they created in the former Soviet Union was extremely absurd. You see how this absurd creation of the Soviet Union led to Stalin, who was even beyond the other revolutionaries in taking the absurdity to such an extreme, that anyone who looks back at it with humanity in mind must wonder, how could one person have such a lack of humanity that he created a society where there was so little respect for the humanity of the people? How could this even happen?

You see again, the only explanation here is that when there is resistance or let me step back and say it another way. When you look at history, you can see that there are certain changes that are inevitable. When there is resistance to this change, there comes a point where the change has gained critical mass, critical momentum and now a society can no longer postpone it, can no longer ignore it. It is forced to react to it. If the established power elite react with resistance, they must attract an aspiring elite who forms an opposite polarity and their resistance or their willingness to use violence is just as great. In other words, the established power elite is willing to use force to suppress change and the aspiring power elite is equally willing to use force to overthrow the established power elite. But what also can be seen from history is that when you have such a polarized situation, none of the two power elites fighting for domination represent the positive change that is inevitable. None of them represent this. Therefore, if a society loses one power elite and is taken over by another, it does not lead to the change that is inevitable. It leads to another polarized situation that then must be allowed to evolve into the absurd until people can see it and there is another change.

This is how some societies have changed. Some societies have been stuck in this pattern for some time. The Islamic nations are an example of this. Russia under Putin is an example of this, where he is now, after the absurdity of the Soviet Union became obvious to a critical mass of people, the Soviet Union collapsed. There was a period where there was a beginning democracy in Russia but then Putin stepped in and he became then the new czar who has opposed the change towards a truly democratic Russia. Now you can look at history and you can see it is inevitable, inevitable, that Russia will become a modern democracy that has the same rights, the same freedoms, the same respect for humanity that you see in European nations and other democracies around the world. This is inevitable. Putin is resisting it. How absurd does his rule have to become before a critical mass of the Russian people see it and demand change? That is really the only question right now, not only about the situation in Russia, but also about the situation in Islamic countries, in African countries, in Central America, South America. When will they have had enough of the Catholic influence? The same thing in many other nations, where you see this outplaying of these very dualistic leaders, polarized leaders and the question is simply when will a critical mass of people acknowledge this basic humanity and essential humanity of themselves and each other? When will that happen?

What I have given you here is an entirely different look at history. You may go out there and you will find that there are historians, philosophers, who have glimpsed aspects of this, who have seen it, at least to some degree, who have written about it, talked about it, but they have not fully grasped what I’m giving you here. The fact that what drives history is the collective consciousness. What drives progress in history is a raising of the collective consciousness which leads to a recognition of the basic and essential humanity, which therefore leads to a point where people, a critical mass of people, in the society say enough is enough. Things cannot continue as they were. We demand a positive change. And then the change must happen. If it does not happen peacefully, it must be acted out in greater and greater absurdity of these dualistic polarities, until again, there is a shift in consciousness and now the people can finally see a nonviolent way to create positive change.

Again, you can look back at history and you can see that you were all brought up with an elitist view of history. You were also brought up with a male dominated view of history, that it was often the men who were the rulers and it was the men who were driving change. But I tell you that even in the Middle Ages, women were part of what drove the change. What was one of the major factors that caused Europe to make this shift where it was not dominated by the Catholic church? It was women. The Catholic church made an all-out effort, that with hindsight, truly is one of the most bizarre and absurd periods of history to stop women from having an influence on society. It is called the witch hunts but there was also the Inquisition. There was an all-out effort made by the Catholic church to prevent women from having a positive influence on changing history. You see, by the very fact that the witch hunts took place, you see why did they persecute the witches? Because they were scared of them. Why were they scared of them? Because even back then they realized that women can drive change in society. Why else would they be scared? They were scared of losing their power. What was the cause? Women. That is why they persecuted them, so you see that the male dominated view of history is completely skewed, is completely inaccurate.

But can you not then, in hindsight, look back at the history of the last hundred, two hundred years where you have democratic nations? Can you not then see that what democratic nations have done, have been so to speak, forced by evolution to do, is to give more rights, more freedom, more opportunity to women. And can you not see that this means that in the age we are moving into, women will gain a greater and greater influence on society to the point where they will drive a change in history. How can anyone fail to see this if they look back with perfect hindsight at historical developments, how can you fail to see the tendency and project that this tendency must continue in the future? What will that mean?

Now, you who are ascended master students can see this but there are many, many women in society who are also ready to see it. They do not need to hear or read this dictation to see it. Your calls can have a tremendous impact, where they suddenly are awakened to what they already knew when they made their divine plans. What I am telling you here is, of course, not something that has just now been discovered. We have known this for a long, long time. Many women who are in embodiment today were taught about this before they made their divine plans, because they had the potential, the opportunity, to drive this change, so many are ready for it. By being spoken in the physical, it is a breakthrough by you making calls. The breakthrough will accelerate and you will see that more and more women will wake up and bring these changes.

With this, I have given you what I wanted to give you even though much more could be said about this and I am sure much more will be said in the future. For we of the ascended masters, we do, as part of our efforts to awaken humankind, intend to rewrite history or at least inspire human beings to rewrite history. We also intend to change the way history is written, so that it is no longer written by the winners, meaning the power elite, but by the real winners, the people who are inspired from above and recognize their humanity. But we also aim to change the course of history. We are not interested so much in writing history as in helping human beings in embodiment make history.

History, it has been said, is the prologue to the future, the past is prologue. Well, it often means that history repeats itself. But I can assure you that Saint Germain has very clear plans for his Golden Age. Those plans do not incorporate that history will repeat itself but that history will become an upward spiral that will lead to a greater and greater manifestation of the golden age that my beloved Saint Germain has planned for this planet and that millions of people have taken embodiment, knowing at inner levels, that it is part of their divine plan to help make it a physically manifest reality.

You have awakened. You can make the calls that others will be awakened. I can assure you that people will be awakened and you will see changes that you could scarcely believe today are possible. They are not only possible, they are inevitable.

 

Copyright © 2020 Kim Michaels

The basic and the essential humanity


Listen to a recording of this dictation (subscribers only)

Ascended Master Mother Mary  through Kim Michaels, July 31, 2020. This dictation was given during the 2020 Webinar – Being the Divine Mother in action through the integration of the Seven Rays.

I am the Ascended Master Mother Mary. I come again to show you that the same being, even though I am normally associated with the Divine Feminine, can be both the Alpha and the Omega, the outgoing and the contracting force. In my previous address, I gave you an example of how I can be the expanding force that gives forth a high-level teaching seen from above, seen from the higher perspective of the ascended realm. And now I want to give you an example of how the Mother can be, not identified with, but at least in attunement with the situation that you have while you are in embodiment on earth.

We have given you many, many teachings through this messenger and through other messengers that are very spiritual, somewhat abstract, that are certainly beyond what most people on earth can grasp. What chance is there that these teachings can have an impact on the global level? Well, as we have said now many times, we do not expect and you should not expect, that all people or even a majority of people, or even large groups of people, will in the foreseeable future come to acknowledge the existence of ascended masters and take our teachings in a direct form. This does not mean that the teachings we give to you cannot have an impact on the global scale. What will have an impact is not the teachings, not the outer form of the teachings but the ideas that are brought forth in the teachings. What we have said many times, is that when you are listening to a dictation, taking it in, experiencing it with as neutral of an awareness as you can, your chakras can be used to broadcast this message into the collective consciousness.

Now, there is sometimes a tendency in spiritual groups in general, to think that you are the only ones who are open to a sophisticated spiritual teaching. You are therefore the only ones who are saving the world or bringing forth the golden age or whatever it may be that you think in your minds. But the reality is, as we have also said many times, is that there are people all over the world in many different contexts, who are mature beings who have volunteered to take embodiment in many different situations around the world, in order to bring forth something new, in order to make a contribution to the forward progression of humanity as a whole. This may not be some big sophisticated thing in many cases. As an example of this, let me look at the entire movement where women protested against the fact that, even in democratic nations they did not have the right to vote. There were some people who started and led this movement that had a certain degree of attunement with ascended masters. They did not necessarily know about us consciously, even though a few of them did, but they had an attunement with us and therefore they could receive these universal ideas. What really drove that movement was the many, many thousands of women in these democracies, that were not yet the modern democracies, but were among the first democracies who did not necessarily have an attunement with the spiritual realm and with the ideas coming from there, but they had an attunement with something else. This attunement allowed them to sense in their inner beings, in their hearts, to sense intuitively, to know intuitively, that it simply was not right that in a democratic nation, women did not have the right to vote, or for that matter, run for office. They just knew this, and they knew it why? Well, they knew it because they had what is normally called the Mother flame, or the Mother awareness.

When a woman becomes a mother, something profound happens in her psychology in most cases. In the normal process of motherhood, something profound happens in a woman’s psychology. When you start feeling a physical child growing inside your womb, you realize that you are no longer just you. You are no longer living your life based on being yourself, being alone, not having anyone to be responsible for except yourself. You realize you are responsible for another being that is not you, and you feel intuitively that that child has certain rights. Now, this could be said to be the driving force behind what we have called the basic humanity. The basic humanity is really what we would say is the very basis for being human, for feeling that you are a human being. What is the foundation for feeling that you are human? I am not talking about the lowest, or the lowest common denominator, but the basis for recognizing that you are a human being. Well, the basis is recognizing that you are not the only human being in this world. You are not alone. No man is an island. No woman is an island.

Now, of course men can have this as well, but women when they become mothers, they usually become aware of this in a much more clear manner than many men have attained, than most men have attained. Of course, there are men who have this sense of the basic humanity, it is often because they have been women in some past lifetimes, where they have also become mothers. It is not that becoming a mother is the only way to achieve this, but it is the most common way. What you have is that in the women’s suffrage movement, the movement that argued for women being allowed to vote, there were many women who because of their motherhood had awakened this sense of the basic humanity.

Now, if we want to give a very concentrated description of the basic humanity, it is not a full description but it is a concentrated description. We can say that it is the outpicturing of the admonishment given by Jesus: “Do unto others what you want them to do unto you.” This is found in many religions and it is the basic humanity. When you are in touch with your own basic humanity, you know from within that there are certain things that other people should not do to you, and you would not voluntarily accept that they did this. You may be exposed to something involuntarily, where in a war situation someone comes to kill you, but you would not voluntarily submit to this. You know, this is not right as most people see it, still thinking in terms of right and wrong. Nevertheless, you know this should not happen. When you are aware that there are certain things that should not be done to you, then the Omega aspect of that is that you also realize there are certain things that you do not do to others. We can say that the basic humanity is simply an inner knowing, an inner awareness an inner acceptance, there are certain things you do not do to human beings. This is basic humanity.

This in a way has nothing to do with any spiritual teaching. We are not even talking about there being a purpose to life, or there being some kind of path you are following, or there being a purpose to society, or a purpose to history, or anything like this. We are simply saying this is an inner feeling, an inner knowing. There are certain things you do not do to human beings. In a mother, it is awakened by the fact that she realizes there are certain things I do not do to my child, but it also extends beyond that to the realization that you do not do it to other people as well.

 

What we foresee, what we desire you to envision and make the calls for in this coming decade, is this awakening of this basic humanity, first in women then in men. Where there is more of a widespread recognition and awareness of this. There are certain things you do not do to human beings. This is not just an individual matter. This you may call for and envision that it also becomes talked about in society.

What is the next step for these modern democracies that we have talked about? Why are they, in a sense stuck at a certain level? Why are there certain problems they cannot solve? Well, because they have not acknowledged that if you live in a modern democracy, you may well have a constitution that is based on giving certain rights to the people, but you still have not risen to this level of discussing why you have this, why people should have rights, why there are certain things that society cannot do to its own citizens. It is because of the basic humanity. Whether you call it basic humanity or something else, there needs to be an open discussion in these modern democracies of why we even have the concept of human rights. It is because we need to recognize here that a human being is not just a human being, a human being is not just an evolved animal, a human being is not just a biological machine.

A human being has self-awareness. One aspect of self-awareness is that you can suffer. There are some reasons why you can suffer, but that is not really what needs to be debated. It needs to simply be recognized by modern democracies, that human beings have the capability to suffer because they have self-awareness. They are aware that they are alive, they are conscious, they are aware of their outer conditions, they are aware of their reaction to these outer conditions. They are able to know, to determine, that there are certain things that are not human to do to others. This you do not do to others. This could lead on to a recognition that human beings cannot be strictly material beings, because if you were the product of an evolutionary process, based on the saying of “nature, red in tooth and claw” and the “survival of the fittest,” then you would not have this ability to recognize there are certain things we do not do to other human beings. It simply would not be there. You would do whatever you saw fit to do to secure your own survival. It is that simple.

But it is not even our primary goal for this to have anything to do with materialism. Our primary goal is for people to recognize there is a certain basic humanity. When you recognize this, you recognize that what is it that has enabled these modern democracies to reach the level where they are at? It is because we have had a certain recognition of this basic humanity. We have not clearly identified what it was, but we have had this inner sense that there are certain things that the state cannot do to its own citizens, and that one group of people cannot do to another group of people. This is the basis for what it means to be human. You can then acknowledge consciously and publicly that in these countries, a majority of the population have developed this inner sense of what we do and what we do not do. We know that there are certain things that should not be done to us. We know for example, that if the state starts to randomly arrest and imprison people because they demonstrate against police violence, then this is not what a democratic state should be doing.

Once we recognize that there are certain things that we know should not be done to human beings, should not be done to ourselves and should not be done to other citizens in our country, we can then take the next step. This is where you step up from that individual flame of motherhood, and you tune in to what we might call the Divine Mother, the Cosmic Mother, the Planetary Mother. Where you recognize that if something should not be done to myself, or to my immediate family, or to the people in my country, then it should not be done to any human being on earth. That is when the modern democracies could, in the little bit longer run, come to a more conscious acknowledgement of the fact that the motto of a modern democracy should not be to “live and let live,” which in all actuality means “live and let suffer.” You live your own life as the modern democracies and you let the people in other countries suffer. Instead, the motto should be: “Live and help other people live. Help other people overcome their suffering as you have overcome your suffering.”

This is something that in the little bit longer run can happen in at least some modern democracies. It will first happen among women, as we talked about in our previous conference, that women can build this solidarity with women in other countries who are less fortunate than themselves, and can therefore say: “These things that we would never dream of doing to our own children, should not be done to any children, anywhere. These things that we would never dream of doing to each other as women, should not be done to women anywhere. These things that we will never dream of letting men or society do to women, should not be done anywhere”. This is basic humanity and it is a concept, an entire philosophy that is ready, that has been lowered through the identity, mental and emotional levels, so it is ready to break through to the physical in a more widespread manifestation. You can be very instrumental in making the calls for this, to make it break through in the physical.

Now, the simple fact is that one aspect of what we might call again the Mother Flame, is that you empathize. You feel what other people feel. You experience what they experience. If your child suffers, then you suffer. When you expand this, you realize that if children suffer anywhere, you suffer, if women suffer anywhere, you suffer, if people suffer anywhere you suffer. I am not saying here that this is the highest manifestation that you suffer when other people suffer. We have of course given you many, many teachings about this as spiritual students. What I am talking about here is what can happen to the broad population, the majority of women. It is that they can begin to recognize that one aspect of the Mother Flame of the basic humanity is that you cannot just ignore what is happening to people in other countries, to children and women in other countries. You cannot just ignore this when you are a modern, aware woman. I am not here saying that I want women to suffer, but I want women to acknowledge that: “Other people are not as fortunate as I am and I can use my freedom and my affluence and my opportunity, to help others instead of just focusing on living a good material life”, which is really empty of any sense of purpose.

The sense of purpose that many women are ready to acknowledge comes from this helping others. Comes from raising society to acknowledge this basic humanity. Also raising the modern democracies to realize that we have a responsibility to help other people in other nations that are not as fortunate as we are. I am not hereby talking about building an army and sending it in to overthrow a dictator and after that, allowing the big multinational corporations to move in and monopolize the market for diapers and baby food, as you have indeed seen in some countries. That is not what I am talking about. What I am talking about is that democracies can use democratic means to raise the living conditions for people in other countries. This is a multifaceted, very complex equation that will require many, many people. Many of these people are already engaged in doing the work. But what can happen is that they gain more and more support, more and more momentum. This begins with you as ascended master students making the calls, holding the vision, sharing your ideas in a universal way and then it can spread like rings in the water.

Now, the next thing I want to discuss here is that we have also talked about the essential humanity. And what I am giving you here is a differentiation of the basic humanity and the essential humanity. The essential humanity can be described in many ways, of course. For you as spiritual students, it is that you realize you are more than physical beings, you are spiritual beings who are in physical embodiment to expand your awareness, to grow in awareness, to follow the spiritual path. But these are not ideas that the majority of women are ready to acknowledge and embrace. They are ready to acknowledge the teachings we have given before about Abraham Maslow’s levels of needs, that there comes a point where you have satisfied the lower needs and it is time to embrace the higher needs, the self-actualization needs.

Many women in the modern democracies are ready to acknowledge that in these countries, most people have satisfied the lower needs, the deficit needs, the fear-based needs, and they are therefore ready to embrace these higher needs. This does not mean that these women are necessarily having to discover and follow an openly spiritual teaching. It does not mean that the countries have to acknowledge a spiritual teaching. It especially doesn’t mean that these countries or the people have to acknowledge one particular spiritual teaching. This has been the limitation of spiritual movements, all spiritual movements so far including ascended master movements. They have always tried to promote one particular teaching instead of universal ideas. This simply is not a realistic approach, especially in the Age of Aquarius but not even in the Age of Pisces.

What needs to happen is that, (again you can envision and make calls for this) that a majority of women come to the recognition that living a good material lifestyle, pursuing a career, having a family, buying a big nice house, all of this is not enough for them. They want something more, they even need something more because they have a need for self-actualization. Maslow was not affiliated with any particular outer movement or organization, it is simply a universal teaching. Many people are ready to acknowledge that as part of your essential humanity, you have this higher need for a sense of purpose, a sense that your life has a goal, a direction, a sense that you can actually consciously improve upon yourself. It is not just a matter anymore of improving your outer situation, your material living situation, your job, the way you are treated in society or on your job. It is a matter of how you are treating yourself, how you are looking at yourself, how you are relating to yourself, how you feel about yourself, what you believe about yourself, all of this is your essential humanity.

Why? Because, as human beings you have the ability to feel this need. This need will be overshadowed by the lower needs, when you are at a certain level of consciousness. But many people in the modern democracies are now at the level where this is no longer being overshadowed by the lower needs. This is the dominant need that they have, they have not been consciously aware of it, they have not been able to put words on it but this is the central need that these people have. There are many, many people in general who are ready to acknowledge this, but especially women. How many women do you see in spiritual movements? How many do you see practicing yoga, mindfulness, meditation, coaching, going into various forms of psychological work therapies?

Are women not more conscious about improving their health, improving their bodies, improving their diet, all of these things. You see here, that women are the ones who are in a position to bring change, at least in the modern democracies because they have become liberated to the degree that they are ready to embrace this. They are ready to step forward and say: “It is time that our societies step up to a higher level of not pursuing material welfare, but psychological well-being.” This is completely universal, it is not affiliated with any particular religion or organization, or spiritual teaching. It is not something that we of the ascended masters have a patent on, we have no copyright, we have no monopoly on these ideas, we give them freely to all and you can do the same.

Do not go into this state of mind, as I have talked about, where ascended master students think that the goal is to get people to come into their ascended master organization. Just spread the ideas without requiring people to believe in ascended masters, or a particular messenger, or organization, or teaching. Do not put a label on the ideas, that they come from there or they belong to there, just spread the ideas and let the ideas grow on their own.

You will see, and this can be another aspect of essential humanity, that nature has no prejudice. You can see that even the statement in the scriptures “that it rains upon the just and the unjust,” the sun shines upon all and that nature basically is not a respecter of human prejudices. There are people, if you look at them, and as an example, let me take some fundamentalist Christians in the United States. If you took the logical consequences of their beliefs, you would think that if you had a farmer who was a fundamentalist Christian and next to him was a farmer who was an atheist, then nature wouldn’t let it rain on the farm of the atheist. Nature would hold back the rain so that his crops would fail, and he would be forced to acknowledge the superiority of the Christian belief system. This is essentially what they think. You know, of course, that that is not how nature works. Nature does what nature does. It rains upon the just and the unjust, the sun rises and shines upon all. Certainly, there are natural disasters that seem to hit some groups more than others, but nevertheless you still see what I am saying. Nature does not respect human prejudices. Therefore, why should human beings respect human prejudices?

What is a modern democracy? Is it not a country that has transcended at least some forms of human prejudice? Has the democracy not said, we should not treat people differently based on whether they are men or women, whether their skin is this color or that color, whether they belong to this ethnic group or that ethnic group? All people in our nation should have equal rights. Is it not a recognition of the fact that you will live in a world where there is much human prejudice? But this human prejudice has no reality, has no existence beyond the minds of human beings. It is not outpictured in nature. It is not written into the laws of nature, even though some people will use both religious scriptures or scientific materialism and evolution to claim that it is, that some are more favored than others.

You can see that this is not really the belief that a modern democracy is based on. If it was, you would not have rights that apply to all people. You would have selective rights and you would have attempted to create societies, as you have seen in the past, and as you see in many places on earth, where there is a privileged elite. As we have said before, democracy is fundamentally an anti-elitist philosophy and system, where you ideally should prevent an elite from enslaving the majority of the population. This is because democracy recognizes that rights must be applied to all people, not just to certain groups. There are certain things you don’t do to others, and why don’t you? Because all human beings have self-awareness, all can suffer, all have the potential to change themselves, to improve themselves, to raise themselves up.

What is another outcome of this that we look for, as an expression of the Divine Mother, how can you be the Divine Mother in action? Well, what is it that the Divine Mother ideally would like to see for people? You may look at a certain situation. Let us take as an example, women in Arabic, Muslim countries, who are forced to cover their bodies, who cannot get a driver’s license, who cannot move around on their own without having a guardian with them, and all of these restrictions that are put upon women.

Certainly, the Divine Mother would like to free these women from these outer restrictions. But how does the Divine Mother envision that this could be done? There are some people (for example in America) who are again fundamentalist Christians and who believe that Christianity is the only true religion. Islam is a religion of the devil and therefore must be eradicated. Even though they are not particularly feminist in their mindset, they may say: “Women in Arabic countries should be freed from this limitation, and it is put upon them by Islam. The United States and Western nations should assemble an army, go in and overthrow these Islamic governments and institute a free democratic government in these countries.”

This is not how the Divine Mother sees it. This is a perversion of the Divine Father and of the fallen beings. What the Divine Mother looks to, is not simply a political change, a legal change where these women are freed from these outer conditions. What the Divine Mother looks to, is a raising of the collective awareness in these countries, so that the women themselves will raise their awareness and start realizing; “I am more than this role I have been brought up to accept for myself as a woman. I am more than this. I have a basic humanity that says I should not be treated this way.” I also have an essential humanity that says: “I am more than this role that has been predefined for me by my parents, my family, my society, the leaders of my society, the leaders of my religion. I am more than this and I have a right in my mind to free myself from this self-image. I have a right to let it die, to raise myself to a higher self-image.”

My beloved, how did women in the modern democracies get the right to vote? You do not realize today what kind of a process that was. Because you can no longer remember or even imagine how it was. But if you go back to the late 1800s, it was by no means a given that women would gain the right to vote. Because there were many, many men, especially the leading elite of what is today the modern democracies, who had some belief or other that women were inferior and should not be allowed to vote, because it would lead to chaos and the downfall of civilization. The mindset you saw in these men, only a little over a 100 years ago in the Western world, was not that different from the mindset you see in the leaders of Islamic countries today. There were differences in details, but the mindset was the same. They had a fixed attitude to women. They believed that could never be improved upon, meaning they were in a fanatical state of mind and they were completely closed to any ideas that challenged this mindset.

How was the mindset challenged? Did women rise up and raise an army and go to war with the men? No, they raised their own self-awareness. Where they, whether they were conscious of this or not, came to the realization; “I am not the kind of being that I was brought up to believe I am as a woman in this society, I am more than this. Therefore, I am capable of knowing what goes on in society, I am capable of understanding politics, I am capable of casting a responsible vote. It is important for me to do so and it is important for my society to do so.” It was the raising of the self-awareness of women that gradually brought this change.

Now, my beloved, what can bring a change to Islamic countries and many other countries around the world where women are suppressed, without violence, without force? Well, it is exactly the same process, that women in Muslim countries raise their self-awareness, acknowledge that they are more than this, they find a way to come together, they talk to the men around them and they make the men listen. There are many men in Arabic countries that have been brought up to play the role of men. But they feel as limited by that role, as the women feel by the role of women. There are many men who acknowledge that they are limited by the fact that their wives are so limited, and they are ready to let go of these limitations. They are wanting to be free but the men cannot figure out how to do it. The women can gradually bring forth that higher awareness that many men will then support and gradually this gains momentum. Gradually by some women speaking out, as some women have already done, writing books about how they drove a car, were imprisoned for driving a car even though it was not strictly illegal in Saudi Arabia. And even though it led to intense persecution, it also made an essential contribution to shifting the consciousness, not only in Saudi Arabia but in Muslim countries in general, in the West, and people’s attitude to Muslim countries.

One of the biggest opportunities for creating a shift, not only in Muslim countries, but other countries around the world, is that women in the modern democracies develop this solidarity with their sisters in other countries and say: “If we do not accept in our countries that women cannot be treated this way, how can we accept that women are treated this way in other countries? What can we then do as democratic nations to improve the conditions of women in other countries? How can we use our democratic means to liberate women in these countries? What kind of pressure, if necessary, can we put on these nations? What kind of dialogue can we enter into? How can we help them make the transition that we see is inevitable, and that many people in those countries also see is inevitable, but that many among the leaders have not yet acknowledged is inevitable”?

If this breaks through, you will see that there are many men for example in Muslim countries who are ready to change things, because they see that the world is evolving in a certain direction and that certain things must fall by the wayside in order to give growth. There are even leaders in some of these Muslim countries who would like to see a change, but they cannot see how to bring it about because the religious authorities are so set against it. The people are so hypnotized by the religious authorities, that the secular rulers cannot see how they can change the equation without creating some kind of revolution, uprising, whatever you have. But if they saw that there was support among the people for this, then they would be willing to act. These are some of the ways where you can see that it is not a matter of spreading a particular spiritual teaching. But there are certain universal ideas that will come in and that will shift something in the collective awareness.

Now, there are some of you who have looked into the history of ascended master teachings and organizations in this modern era, where we have been able to step forward and publicly give teachings and expose our existence. There are some of you who may have read that in the 1800s, we of the ascended masters gave a certain support to the spiritualist movement. This was a movement where people would get together, they would sit in a dark room, usually around a round table and they would have various rituals. What they would be doing is attempt to communicate with the dead ancestors of some of the people in the room. So, someone had a parent or a loved one that had recently departed and they would attempt to get a message from that loved one. Now, you know very well, that this is not something we support or sponsor today. We are not encouraging you as ascended master students to engage in these activities. But what you do not necessarily realize is that in the 1800s, the Western world was on the brink of becoming entirely materialistic, of denying all religion, seeing it as superstition and going entirely into a materialistic paradigm.

One of the factors that changed that equation, that prevented societies from becoming completely materialistic, was the Spiritualist movement. Because there was a certain amount of people, even some among the (we might say) intellectual elite of society that took part in these spiritualist seances and they experienced something that the rational mind could not quite explain. By having this direct experience, they received a frame of reference that prevented them from becoming entirely hypnotized by the materialist movement. You can see what we are saying here. It is not that we sponsored the Spiritualist movement in order to make the Spiritualist movement a dominant factor in society, or in order to get people to feel some outer loyalty to this movement. But what the spiritual movement was instrumental in doing, was to put certain universal ideas into the collective consciousness. This had the effect of preventing the Western world from becoming entirely materialistic.

I am not saying this was an ideal situation, obviously it was not. It was so to speak, a stopgap measure. But nevertheless, what I am pointing out to you again is, it is not our goal to promote a particular teaching, messenger, guru, movement as the dominant one in the Aquarian Age. We have no desire to see any ascended master organization become as dominant in Aquarius as for example Christianity was in Pisces. For if that were to happen, you can be absolutely sure that that movement would be infiltrated by fallen beings, would be affected by the collective consciousness and therefore will become just as far from the true teachings of the ascended masters as the Catholic church was from the true teachings of Jesus. Otherwise the movement would not gain that kind of popularity.

Now, what can happen is that a set of universal ideas will become commonly accepted by many people. As we move further into the Golden Age of Saint Germain, there may be a certain widespread recognition of ascended masters and our ability to bring forth ideas and inventions. But this will again not be centered around one particular movement, one particular messenger. It is simply unrealistic to believe this, to have this image in your mind. As we have said before, we allowed students in a previous organization to do this because they needed it at the end of Pisces, they needed that initiation. Some of them passed it and some of them did not. This messenger obviously passed the initiation or he would not have been willing to do what he is doing. Many people have not passed the initiation and they are still hoping that one day their organization will be recognized as the primary spiritual movement of the Age of the Aquarius.

Well, my beloved, as the popular saying goes, do not hold your breath. With this, I will hold my breath or rather allow the messenger to hold his, as I have given you what I wanted to give you for this instalment. Again, my gratitude for your willingness to broadcast this into the collective consciousness where it certainly begins a spiral that will gradually gain momentum, be reinforced by your calls and by your studying these teachings, and by hopefully many women beginning to embrace some of these ideas, talk about them, bring them out there. You realize, that you have a tremendous power by making the calls to us. But all women who even talk about these ideas, put their minds on them, are also contributing to building and reinforcing that upward spiral, that upward momentum that will eventually bring a shift. I guarantee you, my beloved, that there will be a shift, there will be several shifts during this decade of the 2020s. There will be several shifts around the world in how women are looked at, how women are treated and there will be concrete, physical, measurable improvements in women’s situation during these coming 10 years. This is a prophecy I will give. And if YOU accept it and if YOU make the calls on it and hold firm in your minds and hearts that it is becoming a reality, then it is becoming a reality. For you have spoken it here below, I have spoken it above. Together we are One and therefore through the power of One we have already won.

 

Copyright © 2020 Kim Michaels

Use our teaching to transcend your mental box, not to reinforce it


Listen to a recording of this dictation (subscribers only)

Ascended Master Mother Mary  through Kim Michaels, July 31, 2020. This dictation was given during the 2020 Webinar – Being the Divine Mother in action through the integration of the Seven Rays.

I AM the Ascended Master Mother Mary and since I am the holder of the Office of the Divine Mother for Earth, it is natural that I opened this conference on this topic of how you can be the Divine Mother in action. However, we might begin by asking a different question: “How can you not be the Divine Mother in action?”

We have before given teachings about the Divine Mother that I will go into briefly here. We have said that you live in a particular world of form. This particular world of form was created by a Being that we have called the Creator. We have said that the Creator is the originator of form, but that the Creator itself is beyond all form, because the Creator is not trapped in its own creation. This means that any image in the world that seeks to assign some kind of form, some kind of characteristic to God is a false image, an idol, a graven image. It can be no other way.

What then is the origin of all such graven images? These images can only originate in a mind that has separated itself from its source. You have just given a very profound and very enigmatic invocation before this dictation where it talks about some of these concepts in a way that is designed to confuse the linear mind, the mind that wants to objectify everything. This is the separate mind. The separate mind believes that it is a separate being that lives in a world of separate objects. This is why the separate mind has created the idea that God is a remote being that is not in this world where you live, but is beyond this world. You may have the traditional image that God is in heaven, whereas you are on Earth. But even though this image says that God is in heaven, that God still has form, so even Heaven is a world that can be characterized by form and therefore the remote God in heaven is not the Creator for the Creator is beyond all form.

The mind that has separated itself cannot accept this, cannot grasp it. It cannot understand it. However, what I would like you to recognize, those of you who are sincere ascended master students is that, even the separate mind can be used to reason in such a way that it comes to see its own limitations. Even the separate mind can come to see contradictions in its viewpoints. Even the separate mind can see that sometimes, one viewpoint, when looked at alone might seem reasonable enough but when looked at together with another viewpoint, these two together form an enigma. It is not necessarily that they contradict each other, but you can sense with the mind, the mind can see even with logic, that there is something here, there must be something beyond these two statements and therefore even a mind can be used to recognize that there are limitations to the mind. There are limitations to logic. There is limitation to linear reasoning. This is why we give teachings. This is why we give the teachings on non-duality and the epic mindset because unless you are willing to use the mind’s ability to look for contradictions, it is very difficult for you to free yourself from the pull of the mind so that you can experience what we have called pure awareness.

You see, when you are trapped in this separate mind, this linear mind, you think you believe you have experienced that the mind can only be thoughts. Well, they may also be feelings but they are not really in the mind, they are in the emotions, they are in the feeling body. But the separate mind believes that everything is a thought. The only way to experience the world is through a thought. The only way to understand the world is through a thought. The only way to relate to the world is through a thought. The separate mind thinks that the only experience is thinking, and until you can free what we have called the Conscious You from this gravitational magnetic pull of the separate mind, you will not realize that there is an alternative to thinking and the alternative is what we have called various mystical experiences, intuitive experiences, but first of all the experience of pure awareness where you are conscious without thought, you are aware.

You may even be aware that you are aware but you are not thinking, there is no thought process that leads from one thought to another to another to another. There is no chain of associations. No chain of images. There is just pure awareness. If you have experienced this even for a brief second you have a frame of reference that says: “I am more than the thinking mind, there is more to me, there is more to awareness than the thinking mind”. This is what makes it possible to begin to grasp, even understand that the Creator must be beyond its creation, that the Creator of form is beyond form and that is what makes it possible for you to begin to grasp what the Divine Mother is and what the Divine Mother is not.

You see that what the thinking mind wants to do is to turn everything, meaning everything it can fathom, everything it can deal with, into an object. An object is something that is separate from the mind. The separate mind cannot be one with an object. The separate mind can only be separated from objects. The mind sees itself as being here. The object is out there and the mind is observing and studying and seeking to understand it from a distance.

Why have we so carefully over now several years in fact many years through this messenger, given you teachings about perception, perception filters, about a mental box? It is in order to give you the basis for grasping that the mind, the thinking mind cannot experience an object directly. It experiences an object through a mental image and that mental image exists only in the mind. You are many people hearing this dictation as it is being given live. Each one of you is sitting in your particular place. You may say you are hearing the same words. Certainly, we can say that there is only one voice coming out of the messenger’s mouth. So, there are certain words that are being spoken, not a hundred different voices or a hundred different words, but you are actually not hearing the same words because you are not hearing these words directly. You are hearing them each one of you through your individual minds. And your individual minds form a perception filter that superimposes an image upon the words as they are moving through your mind.

The words that are coming over your Internet connection into your ears are not reaching you directly. They are passing through the filter of your mind, your identity, mental, emotional minds, even an aspect of the physical mind. What is coming through to you and we will put aside who you are for now, what is coming through is not the pure words being spoken from me as an ascended master. What is coming through is what we have talked about how energy waves create an interference pattern, the words that are coming to you are energy waves, even the sound is sound waves but beyond that, beyond the physical sound that carries the words is an emotional aspect, a mental aspect and an identity aspect of these words. And as these words are passing through your emotional, mental and identity bodies, the energy waves are creating an interference pattern with the energies you have in your three higher bodies. So that what reaches you is not the pure words I am speaking. It is an interference pattern that is influenced to some degree by what you have in your mind.

Now, there is nothing wrong with this as such. I am not blaming you. I am simply seeking to help you grasp what is the reality of life on this planet. We of the ascended masters face a very subtle, very delicate task when we are seeking to reach people in embodiment and very few people in embodiment have begun to even grasp the task that we are facing. But we know that some of you can and some of you already have and the more you will be willing to ponder this, use your intuitive faculties to ponder it, seek to have that experience of pure awareness, use our tools and invocations and other dictations to reach beyond that thinking mind, the more you can grasp what we are facing. And the more you understand, grasp, comprehend how things look from our side, the faster you can free yourself from that linear thinking mind and come to realize that what the mind thinks is real, is not real at all. It is a mental image that is created in the mind itself.

Now, certainly you can say that when you look at life in the physical octave things do not go the way you want them always. Sometimes you may have a mental image of what should happen or what should not happen in your life and then what you think should happen does not happen and what you think should not happen, does happen. And you are left therefore to wonder why that is so, or rather the thinking mind wonders, why this is so. And when you look at my beloved, human beings in general you will see that if there is one thing that the thinking mind cannot handle, cannot stand, it is to not know, to not be able to explain why this or that happens. You look at the world, you look at a historical context, you go back and look thousands of years ago when the origin for example, of the Old Testament came up and you can ask yourself: “What was the state of mind of the people who, long before even most Christians think it happened, received the Old Testament from wherever they received it?”

Well, it was their desire to understand the world in which they live, and particularly understand why certain things happen and other things don’t happen. They had mental images in their minds back then, as people do today. They thought the world worked a certain way, should work a certain way. Therefore, they thought that certain things should happen and certain things should not happen. But of course it didn’t always come to pass and so they had to find, their minds had to find an explanation. So you can look at everything that has been going on in human thought and you can see that there are two tendencies. One is the tendency that seeks to create a thought system that can explain how the world works and why certain things happen and certain things don’t happen. This is what you see is behind most religions. Again, if you go to the Old Testament religions, the Abrahamic religions there is the explanation that there is a God in the sky. There is one ultimate God above all the other gods, all the so called idols and this god is, although remote and somewhat angry, even vengeful, it is also a personal god and you can so to speak make him give you what you want, if you give him what he wants. You can make a bargain with this god. You can make sacrifices, you can do prayers, you can live according to his commandments and then you will supposedly get what you want. He will give you what you want because you have made a bargain with this god. Well, what is it but an attempt to explain the inexplicable, explain how the world works, control how the world works. For you see of course that the thinking mind is not satisfied by just explaining, the goal of the thinking mind is to create a situation for you where the things you want always happen and the things you don’t want never happen. Why is this? Because the thinking mind is the origin of the entire idea that there are certain things that should happen and certain things that shouldn’t happen, there are certain things that are good, certain things that are bad, this is the origin.

This originates from the thinking mind and so the mind, in order to keep you forever engaged in the mind, must give you the impression that there is some way to figure out how the world works so that you are in control of your life and only the good things happen and the bad things don’t happen, at least not to you. They may happen to other people but that is their problem for you are after all a separate being, are you not, at least according to the thinking mind you are. So you see throughout history, how people, not only individuals, but groups of people have put enormous mental and emotional, even identity level efforts into creating these thought systems that can explain everything and that can put them in control so that only the good things happen to them and the bad things happen only to those other people who are not part of their thought system, who are not therefore the good people. You have the concept thought about by many, many people, philosophers, theologists, and just ordinary people of why bad things happen to good people. This is what the thinking mind must explain in order to keep you hypnotized, trapped in, fascinated by the thinking mind.

You are on a quest to understand. What happens then as we have said before, all people have this need for security and in order to satisfy it you create or rather, in most cases the fallen beings create this thought system that claims to be based on an absolute infallible truth. It may be the Christian religion, the Jewish religion the Muslim religion. It may be scientific materialism, communism, whatever you have. But there is a thought system that claims to be based on an absolute, infallible truth and therefore when you adhere to this system, when you blindly follow that system you can believe that you are safe—you are in control of your life.

What happens when you go into this state of mind that we have talked about in our discourses on fanaticism? What happens when you go into this state of mind? Well, you accept as I said that you have an idea that could never be expanded. You have an absolute truth that could never be expanded. Now, how could you ever be free of this? Once you go into this state of mind, how could you ever be free of it? Look at history and how many people have been trapped in this state of mind for a very long time. For over 1,000 years people in Europe were trapped in the Catholic mental box. Many people are still trapped in the Catholic mental box. For a long time, many people both in the Soviet Union and outside the Soviet Union, were trapped in the communist mental box. Many people in the Western world in what we have called the modern democracies, which pride themselves on being the most sophisticated societies on earth, are trapped in the materialist mental box and you can see that people can be trapped for a very long time. You can see that the Jews, which are some of the people that you in the Western world have the oldest history of, have been trapped in virtually the same mental box for several thousand years.

How can people get out of this once they’re in it? Well, my beloved that is one aspect of the Divine Mother. What we have given you in ascended master teachings is that there is a certain polarity. We have said that ultimately when the Creator decides to create, it does not create directly out of itself. It first creates a void then it establishes a certain sphere in that void which is filled with a substance that can take on form. This form is in a sense the feminine aspect, the mother aspect of creation. The substance, which we have called the Ma-ter light can take on any form, it therefore gives birth to form and the mother therefore gives birth to form. Therefore, the Ma-ter light is the mother aspect compared to the Creator. That is one polarity you could say, between the Creator as the father aspect and the Ma-ter light as the mother aspect, but the Ma-ter light cannot create by itself so in order to create any form the Creator has to define two forces an expanding and a contracting. The expanding force cannot create by its self because expansion would just continue indefinitely and no form could be maintained so it must be balanced by the contracting force and therefore a new polarity is created where the expanding force is the Father, the contracting force is the Mother.

But there are many such polarities. In the beginning, in the first sphere, there was a polarity between the Creator and the self-aware beings in the first sphere. Once the second sphere was created, there was a polarity between the ascended masters in the first sphere and the un-ascended beings in the second sphere and this of course goes on to your sphere where you could say that there is a polarity between the ascended masters in the spiritual realm and you who are undescended beings. Therefore, you could say that we the ascended masters represent the Father aspect, you represent the Mother aspect.

But you can go beyond this and realize that there are other characteristics of the Mother element because even the Ma-ter light in an unascended sphere is also an aspect of the Mother, the Divine Mother. And what is the role of this aspect? Well, as we have said, ideally, and certainly on a natural planet we of the ascended masters represent the Father aspect. Those who are undescended beings on a natural planet represent the Mother aspect but you are not separated from the Father. You are in constant connection with the ascended masters, your I AM Presence and therefore you see yourself as a being walking a path towards higher levels of awareness. As we have said many times you start out with a point like sense of self and you expand that sense of self as you co-create. You create a form by creating a mental image in your mind, projecting it upon the Ma-ter light and as you experience the form you have created you can raise your awareness, expand your sense of self, create something more sophisticated and this goes on.

But you are still always seeing yourself as a Being who is not separate. You are not separate from other beings on your planet. You are not separate from your Source, the ascended masters, your I AM Presence and so there is that constant figure eight flow, that constant exchange of awareness, ideas, insights, perspective between the ascended and the undescended beings. There is the figure eight flow that we have talked about, between the ascended realm and the unascended realm.

Now, what happens on an unnatural planet? Well, that flow is broken. Why? Because the separate mind cannot see its self connected to the ascended masters or connected to other beings in its sphere, or connected to matter itself. So, you see that what happens on an unnatural planet is that most people on the unnatural planet are not connected to their I AM Presences or to the ascended masters. Therefore, you cannot learn from us, you cannot raise your awareness by connecting to us—we cannot give you direct insights. Of course, our entire goal of bringing forth these teachings through sponsored messengers is to raise up as many students as possible to where you overcome this barrier and you gain, at least sometimes, that direct intuitive connection with us or with your higher being so that you can now receive direct insights. You are in other words, on the direct path, the path of inner guidance, the path of divine direction, where you are receiving something from beyond the material realm or rather from beyond the four levels of your own mind and you are using this to raise your awareness.

What does it mean to raise your awareness? It basically means that you separate the Conscious You from identification with a perception filter that is defined in your identity, mental and emotional minds, even the physical mind. This is essentially what the path is all about. Now I said earlier that when you look at human endeavors, one aspect of what people have been trying to do is create these thought systems that explains everything. But you do actually see that there is another effort, another initiative that has been going on for as far back as you know and that is that there has always been an attempt from the ascended masters to bring forth a teaching that can help people free themselves from the thought systems in the world, and thereby free themselves from the mental boxes of their own minds.

The teachings given by the Buddha were such teachings. We might call them challenging teachings, teachings that are meant to challenge people’s mental boxes, challenge their perception filters and thereby hopefully help them free themselves from those perception filters. The teachings of Jesus—the original teachings of Jesus, were also an example of this. Even the teachings of Mohammed, at least until he went into a dualistic state of mind, were meant to do this. The teachings of the Kabbalah, many other teachings of Buddhism, even certain teachings of Hinduism, the Taoism and many others were an attempt to give people something that could challenge the linear-thinking mind and its belief that it had everything under control.

So you have these many examples of teachings that were meant to free people from their mental boxes. What you who have studied our teachings for some time should be able to do if you haven’t done it already, is to make this switch where you suddenly realize, you see it, you are experiencing the reality of it, that the goal of the spiritual path, the goal of true spiritual teachings is to free yourself not only from the collective mental boxes created by humankind or groups of people, but your individual mental box. And the key to doing this is that you are willing—you are willing to challenge your mental box, you are willing to use even the thinking mind to think the thought that the way you look at reality is not the only way. It is not even the highest way. It is not the ultimate way, there is more to know there is more to experience as we have said many times. This is the key to the spiritual path. Now, is this a guarantee? Well, certainly not. Everything is subject to free will. As I said, the original teachings of Jesus were meant to challenge people’s mental boxes. There were some among his early followers and those in the following centuries that used the teachings that way but there were relatively few who were able to do this and so as almost always happens after some time, people who are not willing to challenge their mental boxes, they take a teaching and they use that teaching to reinforce and validate their mental boxes. In other words, they take a challenging teaching that is meant to liberate your minds and they turn it into a new mental box that traps your minds. This is what started happening at a very early stage as you see even Peter was an example of this, which is why Jesus told him to ‘Get thee behind me Satan’ because he was trying to take the example and teachings of Jesus and validate his mental box of what should or should not happen to the Living Christ in embodiment, thereby what should or should not happen to himself. There were Christians from the beginning, groups of Christians who did this and it all culminated with the formation of the Catholic Church.

Now I trust that you who are ascended master students can see this. But can you also see, are you willing to see that even ascended master students can do this with an ascended master teaching? Are you willing to acknowledge that previous groups, previous dispensations of ascended master students have done this to the teachings we gave them? Are you willing to see that even some people have attempted to do this with the teachings we have given through this messenger which is why some people have left these teachings when it became clear to them that we will not conform to their mental box. And why will we not? Well, because we have a very long experience of seeking to liberate people from their mental boxes and since we still have a messenger who is giving teachings, we can see when certain groups of students have used our teachings to reinforce their mental box and therefore we can come in and say something that will challenge those mental boxes. And either the students will then be willing to challenge their mental boxes and come up higher with the teaching, or they will not be willing to do this and therefore they must reject the teaching, reject the messenger and they use their thinking minds to come up with some explanation for why the teaching isn’t true, why the masters would never say this, why the messenger is no longer a sponsored messenger and so forth and so on.

They have now done what the Christians did, what the Jews did, what so many other people have done. They have used their thinking minds to claim a higher authority than what comes from the ascended masters. They are claiming they know better what the ascended master should or should not say, just as Peter thought he knew better, what should or should not happen to Jesus. It is the same pattern that repeats itself over and over and over again. We have seen it so many times that some of you will be able to appreciate why, as long as we have a sponsored messenger who is in embodiment and can give new teachings, we will do everything we can to not allow the students following those teachings to stagnate. We will do everything we can to challenge your mental boxes so that you find it more and more difficult to use our teachings to validate and reinforce those mental boxes.

Now back to my question about how we can free human beings who do not acknowledge the existence of the ascended masters or any source beyond the material universe. You may say that the Christians acknowledge the source beyond the material universe but they do not, they only acknowledge the source that is their mental image of God and their mental image of Christ. That is why they have created a mental image that became solidified with the Catholic Church instead of following the Ascended Master Jesus Christ for the past 2,000 years.

So how do we free people who are in this state of mind, who cannot, will not hear any direct teaching from us whether inside themselves or from an external messenger? Well, this is the role of the Divine Mother and it is built into the functioning of the Ma-ter light. And how does this work? Well, it works in a very simple way. The Ma-ter light will outpicture the mental images that human beings project upon it and you may say: “Well, but did you not just tell us that most people have a mental image that defines what should happen in their lives and what should not happen in their lives? So, if the Ma-ter light was outpicturing people’s mental images, then shouldn’t they be in a situation where the Mother light outpictures people’s mental images so that only the things they wanted to happen did happen and the things that they didn’t want to happen did not happen.” In other words, if the Mother light is really outpicturing people’s mental images, shouldn’t the Mother light validate their mental Images? A very valid question my beloved, so how does it work? Well, first of all you must ask yourself which mental images should the Mother light outpicture? Is it this group’s mental images, or that group’s mental images? Because you would see then, that the Mother light should outpicture vastly different things based on people’s mental images. So, there should be seemingly one physical reality here in this part of the world and another physical reality in another part of the world. How would that even be physically possible given the nature of the density of matter?

You see my beloved when the majority, even the vast majority as is the case on earth, of people on a planet (that) go into the separate mind, they have as we have said before the effect that they make matter on that planet more dense. The more dense matter becomes, the less it responds to people’s minds. In other words, people may think that matter should outpicture their mental images, but by the very fact that they have created these mental images as separate beings, who are separated from the planet on which they live and separated from their source and separated from each other, they have densified matter. This means that when matter becomes more dense it becomes less responsive to the mind. This means that matter responds less to a particular individual or particular group of people. Instead matter now responds to all human beings, to the collective consciousness that is shared by all human beings. It also means that, it seems as if matter is independent of the mind, which is what has given rise to the materialist paradigm, the materialist thought system where it is thought that matter does not in any way respond to mind, it follows laws of nature that are independent of the human mind. In a sense, we could say that it is correct that matter follows certain laws of nature. It is just that those laws of nature are to some degree, affected by the collective consciousness of humankind. They are also defined by the Elohim, and so forth and so on, but to a large degree the densification of matter is affected by the densification of the collective consciousness.

But the other aspect that comes in here is that people’s thought systems reside where? They reside primarily in the mental mind but also in the conscious mind. So when someone says: “I am a Christian, I believe in the Christian God and the Christian image of how the world should work” this resides partly in the conscious mind and that is why people are thinking that they are projecting a certain image with the conscious mind and they think that the Ma-ter light should respond to the images and beliefs they have in their conscious minds. But as we have told you, you have a subconscious mind. Your emotional, mental and identity minds and you are constantly projecting through those minds as well.

What is it that is being projected upon the Ma-ter light? What have I just said earlier? When you are hearing these words, you are not hearing the direct words because they are filtered through the perception filter you have in your identity, mental and emotional minds. In other words, whatever comes into your mind creates an interference pattern with what is in your mind. Does it not stand to reason that whatever leaves your mind also creates an interference pattern with what is in your mind before it leaves your four lower bodies?

You’re having a conscious thought. Many, many spiritual people have gone into treasure mapping and using other kinds of supposedly failsafe methods to manifest what you want in life so they are creating in their conscious mind a mental image of what they want. “I want this beautiful house, I want a new car, I want plenty of money” and they are projecting this out and they think they are projecting out exactly what is in their conscious minds, but they are not because as that image passes through the emotional mind an interference pattern is created between the conscious impulse and what is in the emotional mind – what you think you are worthy of, what can happen, what cannot happen. Then it goes into the mental mind, now a new interference pattern is created. Then it goes through the identity mind and another interference pattern is created so what comes out of your four lower bodies is not the same as what you have in your conscious mind. That is why in a certain sense you could say that the Ma-ter light is out picturing what people are projecting upon it, when you look at what they are projecting with the totality of their four lower bodies.

The Ma-ter light is, within the framework defined by the Elohim – you may call it the laws of God, or the laws of nature as you like, outpicturing what humankind is projecting upon it through the totality of their individual minds, their four lower bodies but also through the totality of their collective minds, the four levels of the collective mind. Why is this happening? Well, it is happening because it is the only way for the ascended masters to free people from their mental boxes, their perception filters. You are projecting something with the conscious mind. If what you are projecting with the conscious mind was exactly outpictured by the Ma-ter light then what is outpictured by the Ma-ter light would validate your perception filter, your mental box. How would you then ever free yourself?

What is the only way in the school of hard knocks as we have called it, to free people from their perception filters? It is precisely that the Ma-ter light is outpicturing something different from what people are projecting with their conscious minds, which gives them an opportunity to say: “Why isn’t life conforming to what I am projecting with my conscious mind? Why isn’t life going the way I want? Why are the things that I don’t want happening and things I do want are not happening? Why is this?” and here people can take two ways. Usually they go into a phase where they are in denial, complete denial. They are outpicturing, they are holding on to their existing thought system. For example, you see many, many religious people, Christians and Muslims and Jews especially, but even from other religions, who are fanatically, we might say, holding on to their belief system. Somehow the Christian explanation of how the world works must be right even if it doesn’t seem like it and even if it doesn’t seem to work here on earth then at least it will be right in a way that when I leave embodiment, I will go to heaven because I’ve been a good Christian. This is what many people believe. This is a state of denial, complete denial.

The question is how do people get out of denial? Well, there is only one way. They have a firm belief system, belief about what will happen after they die. Then they die and they experience that their belief system was not right. What they thought was going to happen is not going to happen. They thought they were going to heaven whether the Christian or Muslim or the Jewish heaven and they don’t, they are sent back to Earth. When that has happened a sufficient number of times they will begin to question it. Now, for some people, a sufficient number of times is a very, very high number of embodiments, my beloved. There are people who are still fundamentalist Christians in this lifetime, and who have embodied in a Christian environment since the formation of the Catholic church, and they have still not been willing to question their mental box. Their mental box has somewhat changed, some have shifted from Catholic to fundamentalist, but nevertheless they are still not willing to question their Christian mental box. There are people who have embodied in a Jewish mental box for many more embodiments going back to the time of Abraham.

It is for some people a very long process but eventually there comes a point where people start to question their mental box they have had for many lifetimes. What happens to many people is that they get so shocked when they come into their next embodiment, and they carry with them this inner knowledge, inner intuitive knowledge that their mental box is not correct. Many of these people actually choose to embody in the same mental box, for example the catholic in a catholic family, but they know from childhood that there is something missing, something wrong with the catholic religion. But they are often so shocked by this that they start to look for another infallible belief system and some of them shift from a Christian mental box to a materialist mental box and now they begin to believe in scientific materialism and they believe that scientific materialism has now finally provided the infallible, the final thought system that can explain everything. There are people who have embodied for several lifetimes in this but the materialist belief system is not that old yet and so there are many people who have not yet embodied enough times and had their belief system challenged after they died, that they have come to the point where they can question that belief system. That’s why you see many people who are still stubbornly materialist and will not question that mental box even though they have experienced at least a couple of times, that they didn’t disappear into nothingness after the body died, that they still have awareness and that they reincarnate again.

So the next step after denial, or after questioning one belief system, is that you start being willing to question the most common belief systems that exist in the world. In other words, you can look at yourself, you can look at many other spiritual people, basically all people in what you might call the New Age or the spiritual movement, they have come to the point where they have realized the mainstream belief systems, whether they are of a religious orientation or political or materialist orientation, something is missing. What many people then go into is a phase where now they are willing to look beyond the most common belief systems. In other words, it’s not just a matter of going from the one extreme of religion to the other extreme that denies religion. You are, as many people say about themselves, spiritual but not religious. You realize that religions are not enough but you also realize materialism is not enough so you are looking for something spiritual. Then people go into finding a not so common belief system, a thought system, a guru, a spiritual teaching and they now accept this is the final one, finally I found the ultimate one. This will take me home. This will set me free. Now grant you, there are a number of belief systems on earth, there are number of gurus on earth who have raised their consciousness and started to see through the dualistic illusions and the epic mindset. It is not my intent to say here that there is only one religion or one spiritual teaching or one ascended master teaching that is the only one. I’m not even saying that the teaching we are giving through this messenger is the only one.

But what happens to many of these people is that they are still seeking the ultimate thought system. They have not grasped that there is no ultimate thought system because the purpose of a thought system is only one thing, it is to help you question your personal mental box and to continue to question it until you stop identifying yourself with it, you have freed the Conscious You from the mental box, you are no longer inside the mental box, you have stepped outside of it and you can see it is just a mental box. This is not a matter of questioning the teaching. It is a matter of questioning what is in your mind that is beyond the teaching. It is these subtle beliefs about yourself and about life that you have built up since you came to this planet, or since you were exposed to the fallen beings and went into duality, created what we have called the primal self and these other separate selves – this is what forms your mental box. There may sometimes be separate selves based on a certain outer teaching and it can even be based on an ascended master teaching but there’s more to it than that. There is that you come to see how you, your mind, your beliefs are limiting yourself and you come to experience that you are pure awareness and therefore you are more than all of these beliefs in your mental box. Therefore, you can begin to dismiss these selves one by one and this is what frees you.

Now, you may look at a certain guru who is an embodiment who has reached a higher level of awareness and has started going into non-dual awareness. You may say that this guru has started to free himself from these mental boxes and therefore he can give teachings to the students that can help them also. But if the students think that following the guru is enough then the guru cannot help them. The same with the ascended masters, we are of course beyond all mental boxes on earth, we are seeking to give you teachings that can free yourself from the mental boxes but if you’re not using them that way it is not going to work for you.

We have given several teachings, several dispensations through sponsored messengers over the past century. They all have elements that can help you transcend your mental box. Some students have used them that way, but the majority of the students who were attracted to those movements did not use them that way. They believed this is the final revelation even though all of these movements have said that they are part of progressive revelation, they have believed this was the final one. Progressive revelation ended with our messenger and we don’t need to pay attention to what the masters might be saying now because they are not saying anything. The real ascended masters are not talking. These other people who claim to be messengers they are just channeling impostors and so they sit there, having used an ascended master teaching that was meant to help them transcend their mental boxes, to reinforce their mental boxes. What can we do about it? Nothing. They are no longer on the path of divine direction even though they claim to be following an ascended master teaching. They have put themselves back in the school of hard knocks. The only chance is that over time, perhaps several lifetimes for many of these people, they will experience that they are not going to ascend after this lifetime even though they have given thousands of hours of violet flame decrees and they believe that that would guaranteed their ascension, but they are not, so they will have to come back down in embodiment and maybe after several embodiments like this, they will begin to be open to question their mental box and the way they have used the teaching to validate and reinforce the mental box rather than using the teaching to systematically get rid of the mental box by getting rid of these separate selves.

We have said we have done everything we could through this messenger to give you teachings that can set you free but there is no guarantee that they will set you free unless you use them to overcome your mental box. My beloved, what is the task of the Divine Mother, the Office of the Divine Mother? Well, in a sense you could say that the task of the Divine Mother is to challenge people’s mental boxes. We who are part of this Office do it in two ways, we do it through the school of hard knocks, we do it by giving teachings – teachings that continually challenge the students who are willing to listen to these teachings so that you can come up higher.

What is the outcome, the ideal outcome we would like to see happen in this coming decade of the 2020s that we have said is dedicated to liberating women or changing the way women are looked at, women look at themselves? Well, it is of course not that everybody, all women, come to acknowledge ascended master teachings because that isn’t a realistic goal. For that matter not all women can in 10 years make the transition from these states of consciousness I have talked about to acknowledging an ascended master teaching. But it is certainly one of our goals that as many women as possible will come to the point where they grasp, consciously and intuitively experience, the reality of what the spiritual path is all about – that it is all about overcoming your mental boxes, challenging the mental boxes.

Again, this doesn’t even mean that you have to acknowledge an ascended master teaching. There are other ways that many women who may not hear about an ascended master teaching come to challenge the mental box of what it means to be a woman. Our previous webinar about the liberation of women was meant to do this but we aim to give more teachings of course, as the decade progresses. Even in this webinar we also aim to give teachings that can supplement that goal of helping women free themselves from the mental boxes that have been created by the fallen beings, by men and by women themselves. For of course it is not so my beloved that the fallen beings have direct power over your mind. There are many people on earth that have given away their free will, given away their power to be in control of their own minds, so that the fallen beings can directly influence these people’s minds. That is why you see for example, a crowd of people can be taken over by a collective mind and now they become a lynch mob that are throwing stones at the police or smashing windows and stores and raiding those stores as you saw in these demonstrations. You saw in the United States for example, how the demonstrations started, and what was the point of the demonstrations? What started the demonstrations? Was it not to protest against police violence? Well, how can you protest against one form of violence by allowing yourself to perform another form of violence? Two wrongs cannot make a right so you see that the only chance such protests could have an impact was if they remained non-violent. When you cross that line of allowing violence, and I know there was only a minority of the demonstrators that crossed that line, but then you still are going against your original purpose of overcoming violence.

You see here that women are in a certain mental box. They have been put in that mental box by the fallen beings, by men, but you will not get out of it by fighting men, even by fighting the power elite. You will get out of it only by first freeing yourself from that mental box and then serving to use your newfound freedom and insight to help free others. Women will not be liberated by fighting men. Women will be liberated only when they first liberate themselves and then liberate men. When both men and women are liberated then women are fully liberated. But why are we talking about women? Because it is a fact that there are more women who are ready to step up to this higher level than there are men therefore we look to women to drive that movement where people begin to see, societies begin to see the dualistic mindset and its subtle and far ranging effects on society and on history and on individuals. This is one important aspect of the Office of the Divine Mother.

Now we know of course that it is not a majority of the people on earth who are ready to take this step. It is for that matter not even a majority of the top 10%, but it is a critical mass among the top 10% who are ready to embrace this willingness to challenge their mental boxes. Again, they don’t even need all of them an ascended master teaching to do this. There are other teachings, there are even non-spiritual teachings. There are people who are ready to make this in an entirely secular, more universal context. Even psychology can help people do this and start to challenge these mental boxes and realize that you, there is a part of you that is more than your mind – the thinking mind, the reasoning mind, the linear mind, the analytical mind, the intellectual mind. When more and more people begin to realize this and question the mental boxes created by this mind, then that will be what will drive progress into a new level of awareness for at least the more sophisticated societies on earth and eventually other societies will be pulled up with this.

With this I have given you what I wanted to give you in this installment. We have of course much more to say about this, where we’ll talk about what we have called ‘the basic humanity’ or ‘the essential humanity’ which is what the majority of the people can begin to grasp but this will be in another release. This release is complete, except for thanking you to be willing to be, as we have said many times, the broadcast stations that through your chakras have broadcast this message into the collective consciousness where it can serve to awaken some of those who are not consciously aware of the ascended masters and our teachings. For this you have my gratitude and I look forward to what else we, as the Office of the Divine Mother, will give to you during this conference.

 

Copyright © 2020 Kim Michaels

Is America a free society?


Listen to a recording of this dictation (subscribers only)

Ascended Master Gautama Buddha through Kim Michaels, September 20, 2020. This dictation was given during the 2020 Webinar – Choosing America’s Future.

Vajra!

I am the Ascended Master Gautama Buddha, and I claim my right to manifest my presence in America. What gives me that right? I hold the spiritual office of Lord of the World, and America is part of the world, therefore, under that spiritual office. What can the Buddha contribute to the topic of choosing America’s future? Well, a big theme in America for many Americans is freedom. Unfortunately, many Americans have not developed a buddhic perspective on freedom. And therefore, they are not free. They are not as free as they could be. They are not as free as they would have been had they not been manipulated by the power elite into giving away their freedom. 

Too many Americans are focused on freedom as an outer thing. You have political freedom, you have economic freedom, you have freedom of speech, you have freedom to do this, freedom to do that. Some even think you have freedom to do whatever you want, regardless of how it affects other people. This, of course, is not the case, as the Buddha promoted the concept of the sangha, the community. 

Now, it is, of course, important to have these outer freedoms: freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom to assemble. But many Americans, because they have become polarized into this Christian conservative faction actually do not respect freedom of religion. Many Americans from both of the two factions that dominate the public discourse do not respect freedom of speech. Well, they respect freedom of speech for themselves but not for others. They feel that they should be allowed to say anything they want, but others should not be given the same freedom. Those who disagree with them should not be allowed to say what they want to say. Many people feel that they should have freedom to practice their religion but other people should not have the freedom to practice a different religion, especially one that they consider as an inferior or even a false religion.

Well, my beloved, ask yourself this simple question: given that all religions in the world contain the ethos do unto others what you want them to do to you, how can you expect to be free if you are not willing to give the freedoms you want to other people? How can you have freedom of religion if you are not willing to give other people the freedom to have a different religion than yours? How can you have freedom of speech if you are not willing to give other people the freedom to say something that you disagree with? Sooner or later someone will disagree with what you are saying. And they will want to limit what you can say. Sooner or later someone will not like your religion and they will want to prevent you from practicing your religion. Your religion may have a certain status of superiority right now, but it will not always have this or you will not always in future lifetimes belong to the same religion. It is a simple principle that, quite frankly, all Americans are able to grasp if they are willing to just consider it, that if you want to preserve your freedoms you must give the same freedom to others. If you want the right to be who you are you must give other people the right to be different than you are. Otherwise you will not, in the long run, preserve your own freedom. 

Now, there is, of course, another aspect of freedom that many Americans have not considered. And it is the fact that you may have outer freedom, you may have political freedom, but can you exercise that freedom? Can you do whatever you want? What does it take to exercise freedom? What does it take to exercise outer freedom? Well, you must have inner freedom, you must have some psychological freedom, some mental freedom. Because it does you no good to have a certain outer freedom if you are so wounded, so crippled in your psychology, that all of your energy and attention is fed into dealing with these psychological wounds, trying to avoid that you are hurt again as you have been hurt before. Or if you are going into these reactionary patterns that actually take away your freedom, because you are always trapped in this reactionary pattern. 

You all have seen people who are so disturbed mentally that perhaps they are always talking, they are always saying something that makes no sense. Perhaps they are moving in certain ways, they cannot sit still. They have cramps or whatever you have in mentally ill people. But many Americans are not willing to consider that they also are crippled psychologically, even though it may not have a visible effect. Many are not willing to consider that they could be crippled psychologically, but it is so common that it is considered normal in their society, at least in their local area. 

This is what the Buddha can add to the discussion of freedom in America. You are not truly free by having outer freedom, political freedom. You are only truly free when you have psychological freedom, mental freedom. How do you attain this? Well, we have, of course, given many teachings through this messenger about how to heal your psychology and overcome the things in your psychology that take away your freedom. But to reach back to what the Buddha said, what I said 2500 years ago—or at least what the being who was in embodiment back then, a being that I, of course, have transcended many times since then—said: What gives you freedom? Well, you must overcome the pairs, which is what we today call the dualistic extremes. You must strive to attain non-attachment. Because it is only by attaining non-attachment that the demons of Mara will come to you, and they have nothing in you whereby they can pull you into a reactionary pattern that takes away your freedom. 

Now, if you look at what other masters have talked about at this conference, you have the culture war. You have two factions that are fighting for dominance in American society. Look at either of these two factions. Look at the people who are pulled into the mindset that dominates these factions. Are these people free? Some of them will say that they are. Some of them will think that they are because they have the superior idea, the superior worldview. But if you look at it from a purely psychological perspective, are these people psychologically free? What you will see is that most of them have their entire intention, their entire energies, their entire thoughts pulled into thinking about these issues. They have their feelings pulled into responding with certain feelings towards other people. 

If you look at these people who are pulled into these culture wars, who have a strong reaction to it, you will see that their emotions are in constant uproar. As we have said, many of them are completely overwhelmed by this anger energy. Well, my beloved, can you be truly free when you are angry? The reality is that you cannot. And most people will be able to see this if they will just put their minds on it and think about this logically, rationally, neutrally. An angry person is not free, cannot be free. Why? Because anger draws your attention into focusing on certain thoughts, certain feelings, and repeating them over and over again. Many people who are angry have a scenario they are playing out in their heads over and over again, and it consumes their attention. They are not free to think about whatever they want. They are not free to feel whatever they want. They could not choose to say: “I don’t want to be angry anymore. I want to be at peace,” because the anger is so strong that it has taken over their feelings and their thoughts. Is it just anger that has taken over their thoughts? Or is it what we have called collective entities? 

Each side in this culture war, they have built a number of very powerful collective entities. And those people who really go into one of these positions and accept it, and really open their minds to the rhetoric, they also open their minds to these collective entities who come in, take over their minds, and suddenly the people are not free. Most of their attention is pulled into these repetitive patterns that take away their freedom to choose what they want to feel, what they want to think. Now, many of these people have been wounded from childhood, many of them were wounded from past lives. They have come into this lifetime with these wounds, these reactionary patterns that have taken away their freedom. For many of them it is not really that taking this Republican or liberal position is what has taken away their freedom. Taking this position was simply a consequence of the fact that their freedom was already taken away. It just gave them a certain outlet whereby they could direct their anger at another group of people and feel that they were among the righteous who were taking America in the right direction. 

You can always debate which came first the chicken or the egg, which came first the individual psychology, or the collective psychology created by one of these factions. But nevertheless, the net result is that the people are not free. They are not free to choose what they do with their minds. 

This is, of course, when you look back, the entire purpose of the Buddha’s teaching. It was never my goal to create a religion, not even what has been defined today as the various branches of Buddhism. It was my goal to create a universal movement that would give people psychological freedom. This, of course, was also the goal of Jesus, who did not come to start the Christian religion as you know it today or have known it in the past. He came to start a universal spiritual movement that would give people psychological freedom, spiritual freedom. 

Now, what is it that takes away your mental freedom? It is that your mind is polarized. It is pulled into accepting one side, one polarity, as true and another as false. You are, therefore, affirming, validating the one side and you are fighting the other. You are engaged, then, in a dualistic struggle. And you are seeking to defeat the opposite polarity to your own, which means you are struggling against other people seeking to either defeat them, convert them or possibly kill them. And how can you be free when you are engaged in such a struggle? It cannot be. What is the only way out? Well, it is what I defined as the Eightfold Path, which Jesus defined another way, which can be defined in many other ways as we have done now through these teachings. There are many mystical paths that can take you out of the dualistic struggle, but they all work the same way. They work by helping you come to a point where you see the beliefs that you have adopted, that are pulling you into the dualistic reactionary pattern and, therefore, taking your freedom. And when you consciously see it, and resolve it, you can choose to leave the dualistic struggle, to leave the path of the dualistic struggle. And you can step onto what I call the Middle Way, what Jesus called The Way, and which has been called many other things throughout history. You can choose to step onto the path where you are working your way towards greater and greater freedom from these dualistic reactionary patterns.  

There are some who believe that the Republicans are the only ones who can guarantee the freedoms of America. There are those who believe that the liberals are the only ones who can give greater freedom to Americans. The reality is that neither side can guarantee or give greater freedoms. They can only limit people’s freedom by pulling them into this dualistic struggle. 

Now, of course, we are ascended masters. We are permanently beyond this struggle, and therefore, we have no need to force people’s free will. We have no need to force people to transcend the dualistic struggle. If a majority of the American people have not had enough of the dualistic struggle and want to continue in that struggle, then we naturally bow to the free will of a majority of the people. But naturally, all choices have consequences. If you choose to stay in a dualistic struggle, you are choosing a confrontational future for America. You are choosing that America will continue to be a confrontational society. But you are not simply choosing that it will continue to have the level of conflict and tension and confrontation that it has now. Because the conflict must accelerate. The struggle must intensify. Because this is essentially what you are saying you want. It is also the only way that you can come to a point where you have had enough of it. If you have not had enough of struggle at the present level, then you must experience a greater intensity of struggle, so that you more quickly move to the point where you will have had enough and can, therefore, be free of it. 

This is mandated by the law of free will, because not all people in America want to continue to struggle. Not all people in the world want to continue to struggle, and America is part of the world. America is not an island. No nation is an island. You may think that you are the biggest and most powerful nation on earth, you have the biggest military, you can defend yourself against any foe. You may think that you have a right to do whatever you want in your country. Well, from a certain outer perspective you do. But from a higher perspective you do not because America is part of the world. And Americans live within the collective consciousness of humankind. And humankind lives within the collective consciousness of all of the self-aware beings in your unascended sphere. And the vast majority of the self-aware beings who are not on earth have chosen the path that leads beyond duality, confrontation and struggle. They have chosen the compassionate path, the path towards oneness, unity. Americans cannot simply choose to go against this upward movement of the universe. 

Americans can make a choice that they want more confrontation. But if a larger and larger percentage of the people on earth choose that they want to transcend confrontation, then these people will create a pull on the collective consciousness. And this means that if Americans choose confrontation, the confrontation must increase. The struggle must intensify. This is simply a part of the law of free will. You do not have free will in a vacuum, as an individual. You have free will within the context of the unit where you live, meaning for, in your case, planet Earth. There are certain freedoms you can exercise within the unit of America. But there are certain freedoms you cannot exercise as an island because you are also in the larger unit of the planet. What you see in the modern democracies is that more and more people, more and more nations are making decisive steps to go beyond the confrontational past, and manifest a more compassionate and less confrontational and, therefore, a more free society. There are countries in the world where the people, most of the people, are far more free psychologically than most Americans.  From an outer level, you can say that these countries have the same political freedoms as America has. But when you look at the psychological aspect, you see that the people in these nations are far more free than most Americans are.  

Now, you can also look at America and you will see that there are people in America who have also transcended or started to transcend that dualistic struggle and therefore they are more free than the majority of Americans. The people who have become more free in other nations, they exert a pull on the collective consciousness of America and the people within America who have transcended the struggle, also exert a pull on the collective consciousness. This is essentially why you see that the public discourse has taken a turn, it has taken and become more confrontational, more angry, more hateful. It is why you see a greater and greater contrast, animosity, anger between the two factions in the culture war. You see the accusations becoming more and more intense, more and more hateful. This is simply an outcome of the fact that many people have chosen to start to transcend the dualistic struggle, but some Americans are holding on to it and that means that they become increasingly burdened. They have to struggle harder and harder to resist that upward movement towards greater freedom. As a result of that, their inner experience of life becomes more intense. They become more and more burdened. They become more and more frustrated. They feel actually less and less free, more and more limited. But instead of recognizing that it is their own psychology that makes them feel limited, they cling to the idea that it is some external force that is limiting their freedom. Therefore, they now feel justified to direct their anger against that external force, be it the government, be it another group of people be the scapegoat. Therefore, they become more and more overpowered by these collective anger entities and this takes away their freedom. They have less and less mental and emotional freedom. They even have less freedom at the physical level because they are so trapped in thinking that even on the outer level, they have to live up to these ideas in their worldview. Therefore they have to act a certain way and there are certain things they are not allowed to do. You see that these people have lost their freedoms at the physical level, the emotional level, the mental level, and they have even lost their freedom at the identity level because some of these people define themselves based on these worldviews. They define themselves as conservatives, as Christians, as Republicans, or they define themselves as Democrats or liberals. They are so invested in this that it pulls them at the identity level into thinking that they are this way. They are defined by these outer confrontational things and therefore they forget, they overlook that they are human beings and even beyond this, that they are spiritual beings. 

Now again, take Saint Germain’s profound discourse going back to the Declaration of Independence and what it really means. What does the Declaration of Independence say? All human beings are created equal – a very, very profound statement. All human beings have been given inalienable rights by their Creator. You see, the Declaration of Independence does not define any divisions in the human race. It does not say Christians have inalienable rights, Republicans have inalienable rights, conservatives have inalienable rights, white people have inalienable rights. It says, all human beings have inalienable rights. So how, in the democratic system of America, can you be truly free? Can you be truly free if you identify yourself as a Christian, as a Buddhist, as a Republican, as a Democrat, as a liberal as a conservative as white, black, this or that? Can you be free, if you identify yourself based on these divisions that are not specified in the Declaration of Independence? No, if you use the language used in the Declaration of Independence, you can be free only if you identify yourself as a human being first. You may see that you have certain characteristics as a human being, but you see that beyond these outer divisions and characteristics, there is a certain basic, certain common humanity. When you are aware that you have this humanity in yourself, and that all other people who live in America have the same humanity, and that is why you are all guaranteed certain rights by the Declaration of Independence and the constitution, then you can have the freedom that the American system is meant to give you. But you can have that freedom only when you are willing to give that same freedom to others, and how can you give that freedom to others? Not if you identify them, as Republicans or Democrats or black or whites, meaning they are different from you. You can give the same freedom to others that you want, only if you identify them as human beings first. You see the basic humanity in them, as you see it in yourself. 

Now, from the perspective of the ascended masters, can you be truly free as a human being? No, you cannot, because a human being is defined by so many conditions here on earth and many of these conditions take away your freedom, some are even deliberately defined to take away your freedom. You can only be truly free if you identify yourself as a spiritual being, who is having a human experience, who is living in a human body expressing itself through a human body, but you are more than that body. You are even more than the outer mind, even more than the humanist sense of identity defined by your society based on how it has been defined, going many thousands of years back into the past. This is the only way to really attain freedom. But of course, even at an interim level, it is not beyond the capability of most Americans to come to this realization: “Wait a minute, the Declaration of Independence does not talk about Republicans and Democrats, blacks or whites. It talks about men, meaning not just male, but all human beings. All human beings were created equal. All human beings were endowed with rights and the only way that I can preserve my rights is if I give the same rights to others. Because if I am not willing to give the same rights to others, then it is inevitable that some faction will form within the American society and they will seek to set themselves up in a position of having more power and more privilege by taking away or limiting the rights of other groups of people, potentially even the majority of the population.” And this is of course, exactly what you see, as we have talked about the formation of this power elite, that has no respect for the constitution or the Declaration of Independence. They have no respect for the population of America. They have no respect for human beings because they do not see themselves as human beings. They do not see themselves as spiritual beings either. But they see themselves as being superior to human beings. Some of them have no clear idea what that means, others have more of a clear sense of what kind of beings they think they are. But they clearly do not identify themselves as human beings because they think they are inherently superior to most human beings in America or on the planet. This is something that most Americans have not realized. You, who are our students can make the calls that they will realize it, that more people will realize it because it is one of the absolute, foundational realizations that the American people must come to, for the golden age to be manifest in America. 

It is, as Saint Germain said, how can he release new ideas and new technology, if they are used to cement the position of the power elite? Why would he want to release a technology that has the potential to set people free from certain burdens, if a power elite managed to monopolize it and therefore enslave the people even more. You can argue that with today’s forms of energy, people are less free than when they lived on individual farms around the country and they could supply most of their needs, through their own farming and their own work. Today, all people are so dependent on, for example, electricity, or gasoline for their cars, that they are far less free than they were 200 years ago. Nevertheless, people have then other freedoms because of technology. So they, for example, can move around more, they can more easily have access to knowledge and so on. So there are other freedoms that people have gained that the power elite have not been able to take away. But it is clear that the American people need to recognize that it is a complete illusion to believe that because you have established a democracy in America, America is automatically a free society and will remain a free society for the indefinite future. It is absolutely essential to recognize that there is a power elite, who never agreed with democracy never wanted democracy because they want a society where they can attain a privileged position. Ever since democracy was created in America, they have attempted to do everything they could, using both democratic and non-democratic deceptive and dishonest means to undermine democracy, in order to give themselves that privileged position. As you can clearly see from this latest study that we have talked about, they have been remarkably successful in giving themselves a privileged position through the economy, especially through the financial industry. But they, of course, use the government to do this by undercutting, sabotaging the democratic process. And this means what? It means they have taken away the freedoms that the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence actually guarantees to the people of America. In other words, the power elite has used the government that should guarantee the people’s freedom to undermine those constitutional freedoms. This is a simple fact of life. It is not rocket science. It is not something that the average American could not grasp, if people were willing to look at it in a neutral way, and simply make the logical rational conclusion. 

We have given many, many teachings that can help you, that can help people in general free themselves from this hypnotic state that most people are in. We can say, as we have said before that as long as people think, as long as a group of people in America think that their foremost task is to fight another group of people, as long as that is the case, then the power elite are secure in their privileged position. Now, we as ascended masters are not encouraging people to fight the power elite, but we are encouraging people to stop fighting each other and  realize that it is not that other group of people that are threat to your freedom, it is the power elite. Therefore, it is not a matter of fighting the power elite, but it is a matter of going back to the values, the principles that defined American democracy, and demanding that the current government, the entire political apparatus, and the economy, be brought back into alignment with those principles, so that all people are guaranteed these inalienable rights. The government serve to guarantee these rights for all people, instead of taking them away from most people and giving extraordinary rights to a small power elite. This is not what America was meant to be. This is something that most Americans can come to see by just putting their minds on it. Therefore, they can see that it does not matter whether the Republicans or the Americans win the presidency, or win a majority in the House or in the Senate, or in the Supreme Court. It does not matter. This will not fundamentally change the equation. If the liberals won an absolute majority, that would not change it either. Nothing will really change the gridlock, change the equation, until you expose the influence of the power elite. Until the people see this and decide, “This is enough, we will not tolerate this anymore!” 

What can bring about this shift? Well, it is actually closer than you might think. That is why you, who are ascended masters students, can play a decisive role in turning the rudder of this ship that critical degree that sets America on the new course. There are not enough ascended masters students, at least not in this dispensation alone, to create this dramatic change in the short term, but you can still turn the rudder of the ship that critical degree, so that America is set on a course that over time will bring it towards the golden age, will bring it away from confrontation and towards compassion. 

What is the Declaration of Independence? Is it a confrontational document or is it a compassionate one? Well, I will leave the answer up to you, but try to reread the Declaration of Independence with this in mind and you might find more examples, more expressions of compassion, than you, at first glance, would think are there. Although, you could say that the War of Independence was confrontational and you could say that the Declaration of Independence was confrontational, it was certainly seen that way by the British, there are actually many elements of compassion in it because how can it not be compassionate to acknowledge that all human beings have rights that no power elite should be able to take away from them? Is not that an expression of compassion for the people? 

You see here that America, despite the confrontational beginnings, was actually set on a course from the beginning towards becoming a more and more compassionate society. American democracy has the potential to develop into a truly compassionate society, where there is that sense of unity among the people, that sense of community that is based on all people having compassion for each other because they realize that what truly benefits me as an individual is what benefits other people and what benefits the whole. This is compassion. When you have this compassionate mindset, you have a frame of reference. It is as if you have a moral compass that always points to true north. True north is what? It is unity among people rather than division and conflict. Unity must be based on compassion, not on confrontation.  

This concludes the remarks I wanted to give you. We want to let you know that we are gratified that so many people chose to be part of this conference. As the messenger explained his vision that you and your individual places has been a spiral of spiritual energy created, reinforced by the people outside of America, and it has covered large parts of America. Therefore, we consider that this conference has been a success, that you have even exceeded the highest goal we set for it. We are very grateful that you have been willing to apply yourselves to this. Truly, if you could see the effect that this has already had on the collective consciousness and the effect that it will have as that new course is set, you would recognize that what you have done is a truly compassionate effort. With this, I seal you in the flame of compassion that the Buddha holds for earth. I seal you in the heart of the compassionate Buddha.

 

Copyright © 2020 Kim Michaels

Only women can bring change to American society 


Listen to a recording of this dictation (subscribers only)

Ascended Master Portia through Kim Michaels, September 20, 2020. This dictation was given during the 2020 Webinar – Choosing America’s Future.

I am the Ascended Master Portia. Given that we have dedicated the 2020s as the decade for the liberation of women, we naturally want to give you a perspective on the situation of women in America. What are the choices facing women? What are the choices facing America concerning the situation of women?

Now, in order to give you this perspective, I first want to deal with a particular phenomenon in the American mindset. When you look at the nations on earth, you can look at each nation in terms of how much pride the citizens of that nation have in their nation and how much of a desire, how much of a need they have to feel that their nation is somehow superior to other nations, perhaps even all other nations. There are many nations on earth that have grown beyond this sense of national pride. Most of them are among the smaller nations. But naturally, the United States has not grown beyond this.

The United States is one of the nations in the world where you find the greatest sense of national pride that many Americans feel and need to feel that America is the greatest nation on earth, is better than other nations, and so forth and so on. Naturally, the national pride has over time suffered some setbacks. But still many Americans have this sense that America is the oldest democracy, America is the greatest nation on earth, and is certainly one of the most advanced if not the most advanced nations on earth. The problem with pride is that it always blinds you. What happens in a nation that has great national pride is that the people become blinded to a realistic assessment of where their nation is at, especially compared to other nations. Many Americans have this sense that America must be right, must be superior, that America cannot be really wrong, that other nations could not be better than America, could not be further evolved or more advanced than America.

This creates a certain unwillingness in the American collective psyche, to look outside the borders of America. Americans have some, unrecognized in a sense, that perhaps America is not as great compared to other nations as they would like to believe, but they have an unwillingness to take a look and see if that is the case. This is a mindset that is more powerful in America and in most other nations, not all other nations, but most other nations. The problem with this mindset is that it makes America and Americans unwilling to learn from other nations, from the progress made by other nations. The problem here is that America is a large nation but it is not the only nation in the world. It is not even the largest in terms of area, or the largest in terms of population. So, it simply is not logical that all of new inventions, all of new ideas, all of new ways of doing things better, could be brought forth in America. Naturally, there will be other nations who have good ideas, who implement them, and could come up with something that works better than what was there in the past.

If Americans are not willing to look at and learn from other nations, that means Americans have to reinvent the wheel every time and sometimes they will not be able to reinvent the wheel because people in America, due to the collective consciousness, the national sense of identity, will not be able to see certain things that people in other nations can see. Americans may be able to see that the result is better, but they would not have been able to come up with the idea. They can take the idea and implement it. They cannot come up with it on their own because the equation is different in other nations. This is not really a matter of being more or less sophisticated necessarily, but just that every nation has a certain collective mindset that is open to some things and closed to others, so you cannot expect that any one nation will be able to get all of the best ideas. This means that either America will look at other nations and learn from them, or they will not learn and therefore, it will not make progress. Therefore, it can potentially fall further and further behind, at least in certain areas.

Now, this national pride in America is clearly more prevalent in men than it is in women and therefore, women are the ones in America who have the greatest potential to be willing to look beyond the borders of America, to look at other countries and look at what good ideas are there. Of course, women are the ones who have the potential to look at these other countries and say: “What are women’s situation? What is women’s situation in those countries and have those countries make greater progress in terms of liberating women, giving equality to women than we have in America and if so, what can we learn? How can we implement this in America? How can we, the women of America, bring America to the same level that we see in these other nations?”

Now, if you do, as women in America, look around the world, look at women’s situations in other nations, you will actually see that there are quite a few other nations where women have a better situation than they have in America. This is the case in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, many European nations, and especially in the Scandinavian nations, where there is a greater equality among the sexes, not just in terms of legal terms, or equal pay for equal work, but in terms of the mindset of the people, where these nations have made further progress in overcoming the male superiority that have traditionally been there in most societies on earth. This sense of male superiority, is still very strong in the United States. It is especially strong among those who call themselves the conservatives, those who hold on to traditional values, those who claim to be Christians and those who are the least willing to consider new ideas, the least open minded. This sense of male superiority, of course, goes back to the story of Adam and Eve, and their fall from grace, because it was Eve who ate that fruit and tempted Adam to do the same. With all of this condemnation that has heaped upon women ever since, as we talked about in our Conference on Women, so this is quite strong in America, because the Christian influence is still so strong in America, whereas many other nations, especially the Scandinavian nations, have moved to become more secular nations.

Now, as we have said, it is absolutely necessary for a functioning democracy, that it has a secular form of government, and that therefore, also the people of that nation become less blinded by a particular religious mindset, thinking that there is only one true religion, and that this religion should dominate the political life of the nation. As we have said before, the attitude displayed by most Christians and conservatives in America actually shows that these people do not respect democracy. They want a more authoritarian form of government, based on the principles in the Bible, as they themselves interpret them. This essentially means that what these people would like to see was the day and their particular church were put in charge of America, and were given dictatorial powers. Naturally, not a realistic scenario, but this is how many of these people think and that is why they are the ones who are least open minded to improving the situation for women. Their view of women is that women are inferior to men. They were created inferior to men, or they became inferior when Eve ate the forbidden fruit. Therefore, women should find a certain role in society, being secondary to men or even being the servants of men. They should, by and large, be kept from important decision-making positions. There are many of these people who do not want a female president, who do not think that women should be allowed to have decisive power in the political process, in companies or in churches.

So, women in America can acknowledge that this is the case, they can recognize that this is not something that is easy to change for them and therefore, it is in the short term, not easy for women to change this at the political level. What can you do, then, if you cannot change this at the level of society? Well, you can certainly change it at the level of the individual. You can change it in your own consciousness, but you can also change it by finding together with other women, forming various groups, various political initiatives even, and then gradually increasing the attention on women’s situation, and on how women are discriminated against in so many areas of American society. You can draw attention to the fact that other nations have achieved greater equality and a better condition for women.

What you especially can do and what we want to bring out in this release, is that there is a need for women in America to take a look at what is so often called traditional values. Whether you call them Christian, or conservative, or whatever, there is this set of traditional values. What women can recognize is that if a woman in America is to live up to these traditional values, she will be boxed in, in a very small box, there will be very strict limits of what she can do and cannot do in American society. This relates, in large part, to the fact that according to traditional values, a woman is supposed to get married at a fairly early age and then she is supposed to give birth to any number of children, depending on the culture.

The question simply is, is this role, traditional role for women, in alignment with the divine plan that a certain percentage of American women have, that they have created for their lives. When you look at this traditional role, you see that if a woman is supposed to get married quite early and have children, it is much more difficult for that woman to get an education. Now, some have dealt with this by getting an education first, having children later. But nevertheless, if you get an education and then have children, you may be able to get a job but how much energy and attention can you devote to that job? Therefore, how can you compete with the men who are able to devote much more attention to their jobs and therefore, can play the game and reach higher positions that women often cannot reach? Not because they are not capable, but because they have a responsibility to watch their children. You see that because of these so-called traditional values that are not found to the same degree in, for example, in the Scandinavian nations, women are limited by what they can actually achieve. I am not specifically talking about a career in business, although that is part of it, but I am especially talking about what women can achieve in terms of bringing change to American society.

Now, Saint Germain gave this very profound discourse on which people in America are open to Golden Age ideas. It is clear that when you look at American society, you find that, in general, women are more open to new ideas than men. This is sort of a statement that needs to be qualified because we cannot say that all women are more open to new ideas, because you find many of the women who have been brought up in this environment where they have been indoctrinated with these traditional values and therefore, they are no more open than the men in that environment. But if you look at the nation as a whole, you find that there is a larger number of women who are open to new ideas than there are men. What does this mean?

Well, this actually means that if you look at it realistically, who can bring forth the new age ideas that will manifest the golden age in America, then women have a greater chance of doing so than men. Or we could say it another way, if the golden age is going to be brought forth with a timetable that Saint Germain considers ideal, then women have to be part of bringing forth these ideas. This does not necessarily mean that women and men will bring forth the same type of ideas, there is a general tendency that men, and this is not an inevitable thing but this is how the culture is currently, are more focused on the technical aspects, whereas women would be more focused on the political, cultural, or sociological aspects of society. So, in other words, there is a general tendency as the culture is right now, that men are more open to bring in forth technological ideas.

When it comes to bringing forth the changes that could implement these ideas, women are the ones who have to drive that change. Saint Germain talked about the fact that natural energy requires major changes in all aspects of society and many of these changes will have to be driven by women if they are to be manifest, because men are simply not able to do it, they do not have the awareness, they do not have that focus. So, the question simply is: “Can women in America become free to play the role that Saint Germain would like to see, and that they themselves would like to see when they made their divine plans?” What will it take for women to be able to fulfill their divine plans, then play the role that Saint Germain intends for them in bringing forth the golden age? There are, of course, many changes that will have to happen.

What will have to happen is the movement towards what you see in the Scandinavian countries where women and men share a greater responsibility for the home, for the bringing up of the children. This is reflected in the laws of society, this is reflected in employment, so that men, for example, can get paternity leave to take care of their children, as women can do it. There is a general awareness in the business world of accommodating women so that they can fulfill their parental responsibility, but also allowing men to do the same. There is, of course, an absolute necessity to give women equal pay, to give women an equal representation in business boardrooms and other areas of society. These are some more long-term goals that are political goals that women need to work towards.

The more immediate change that many women can move towards is that they can change their own attitude towards women’s roles, especially relating to traditional values, and they can help other women do the same. Basically, when you look at it realistically, you can see that Saint Germain has a timetable for how he would like to manifest the golden age in America. For this timetable to be met, it is absolutely necessary that quite a substantial number of women will engage in the business world, in the political life, in other areas of society and will be able to devote the majority of their time and resources to bringing forth these changes in society. For a substantial number of these women, this will mean that they do not have children. In other words, there is a substantial number of these, should we say, open minded and progressive women in the United States today who have it as part of their divine plan that they will not have children. But of course, many of these women have still grown up being affected by these traditional values and the general attitude in society even beyond the Christian conservatives, that women are supposed to have children. If you are a woman, it is part of your career path in life that you get married and have children and so, this is something that there is a certain segment of women that need to free themselves from this.

I am not saying they need to create a general culture that all women should do this. But it needs to be recognized that right now the situation is so that men have the freedom to engage in business or society and devote the majority of their time and attention and energy to it, but women do not have that same freedom. It is absolutely necessary that more women engage in these areas of society and the only realistic way that this can happen is that there are some women who devote the majority of their time and attention to this task. This means in practical terms, as society is right now, that these women cannot have children. This is not a loss for these women, because they have carefully considered the situation before they took embodiment and they have decided, this is not what I want to do. Or rather, they decided this is what I want to do. I want to focus on the role I can play in changing society and this is my main goal in life. Therefore, all other things are secondary, including having children. Some of these women can have children later in life, some of them can adopt children, some of them can marry a man who has children from a previous relationship. It is not that they cannot necessarily have contact with children. But for some of them, it is in their divine plan that they will live their entire lives without having children.

This is, again, important to understand that this is not an ideal for all women. But there is a certain percentage of women in the United States, some of them are still children, who have it in their divine plans to not have children, but devote their lives to changing society. Quite frankly, these women are advanced, evolved life streams that have vast experience from past lives and they are very, very capable of producing these changes, far more capable than most men are. They are extremely confident. They are extremely competent and they are very well able to drive these changes. Some of them, are of course, already in embodiment and have reached in some cases a mature age, where they have been able to have an impact. Some of them have had children and in some cases lessened their impact, but many of them are not yet at that age and so they have time to make that change, where they realize what is in their divine plans, and accept that this is part of their divine plan and therefore, this is something they are willing to do. They are willing to implement this and they are willing to stand against the considerable and very aggressive condemnation that they will be exposed to from American society.

These women need a certain strength, many of them have not had it, you who are ascended master students, well, you can make the calls for these women to be protected so they are not overwhelmed by this negative reaction. You will see that once women start acknowledging openly that children are not for me, I do not have time in this lifetime to have children, there will be a tremendous condemnation directed against them. But nevertheless, some of them can and will persist and they will create an environment where these women are supporting each other and supporting the role that they know they can play in American society. This is of course, not a complete evaluation of the situation of women in America, but you can see that what we said in our conference about women is that you cannot actually liberate women unless you overcome this biblical overlay that women are responsible for the fall of men. And you can see that when you look at the so-called modern democracies, there are virtually none of these democracies that have this condemnation of women, biblical condemnation of women, to a higher degree than what you find in the United States.

In this respect, the United States is far behind, for example, the Scandinavian nations, but also many other nations around the world. It is somewhat amazing to us that American women have not objected to this, have not spoken out about this. Some of course have, but many have not. Many other ones who have been exposed to this could have spoken out, could have said that it is time to change the attitude towards women, it is time to throw away this idea that women are responsible for the fall of humanity and therefore, should be kept from decision making positions. You who are ascended master students can make the calls for this, specifically in the United States, specifically, in churches or cultures or environments where you know that this is prevalent. This would include, for example, the Republican Party, to a lesser degree, the Democratic Party, but even there, you will find some of this.

You will find some men in America who are not really Christians, but who still have this attitude, this distrust of women that they should not be allowed to make decisions in society. You will find this, especially in the business world, where many of the middle level and high-level managers are men and even though they are not particularly religious, they still have a distrust of women in the business world. This is clearly something to make calls on. It is also something that needs to be changed but it will only be changed when women go into the business world and change it from within, partly by demonstrating that they are capable, but party by challenging the mindset making it visible.

Now, one of the things we have often talked about is that in any society, what holds back progress is that there is not a free and open dialogue. There isn’t the ability to talk openly and in a fairly neutral way about particular issues and problems. It is clear that when you look at America, not only because of the polarization and the culture wars, but also the tone of the public discourse, there is a lack of this free and open communication. This needs to change, this will change in the golden age. And who can change it? Again, only women. Only women have the ability to change this at the large scale. Naturally, men can and will be part of the process but far more women are open to this, because women are generally more open to talking about their problems, talking about issues. This is something that women need to become more aware of. They need to support each other in doing this. They need to, first of all, shift their mindset so they recognize that this is not only a valuable thing to do in society, it is an absolutely essential and necessary thing to do.

As we have said, what is the choice faced by America? Will it be compassionate or confrontational? Well, if America continues to have the level of public discourse and dialogue that it has right now, then the future can only be confrontational. The only way it can become compassionate is if you have an open and free dialogue, a compassionate dialogue and who can bring this about? Well, primarily women, so this is quite clearly something that needs to happen, that women need to be aware of. Saint Germain talked about how people 200 years from now will look back at your time. Well, not even 200 years into the future, but just decades into the future, people will look back at America at the present time, and be absolutely amazed at the attitude of women, at the discrimination against women and how women are put down in American society. They will not understand how America could claim to be one of the most advanced countries in the world and be so far behind many other countries when it comes to women’s situation.

These are some perspectives that we wanted to give you. Naturally, we will talk more about women’s situation not only in America, but elsewhere in this coming decade. For now, this is what we wanted to bring out. It is, of course encouraging that one presidential candidate has nominated a woman as his vice president as his running mate. It is absolutely necessary that there will at some point be a female president and it is also necessary that what you normally call minorities will gain representation, more representation in the political process. It is clear that there is a culture war in society right now in America where those who claim to be representing traditional values are very concerned about the opening up of American society such as gay marriage and this tolerance for alternative lifestyles, alternative views, and they see it as potentially bringing forth the downfall of civilization. But when you look at this from a larger perspective, and more long-term perspective, you see that, as we have said, a democracy cannot really function unless there is tolerance for differences.

Therefore, it is inevitable that as democracies evolve, there will be greater tolerance. Women, of course, can play an important role in driving this move towards greater tolerance, because they themselves form the biggest group in society that have been persecuted and discriminated against and so, they are the ones who have the potential to drive this move towards tolerance. Of course, how can you liberate women, unless there is greater tolerance in society? And, if there is greater tolerance in society well, there must be greater tolerance towards those who have a very different lifestyle, a very different view of life. It is simply part of the democratic process. It can be no other way. This does not mean that there cannot be a debate about alternative lifestyles or alternative views of life, but that cannot be forced in a democratic society. You cannot forcefully suppress and discriminate against other people, because they have a different view of life than you have, then you do not respect the democratic process.

We could say that, as we have talked about before, that there are certain people who may not necessarily be in alignment with the highest ideals, but they do sense that a change is necessary in society and a change is necessary in American society in terms of bringing forth greater tolerance for differences. Even those people who are part of some alternative group or that are demanding equal rights, they are part of this necessary change, towards greater tolerance in society and women, of course, need to be part of this change. Therefore, women also need to have a certain tolerance for different lifestyles, different views of life. We of the ascended masters look at this in a more long-term perspective. We look at many of these issues that are today creating such conflict in American society will in the long run, just fade away. I can assure you that a hundred years from now, there will of course, still be gays and lesbians in American society and in other societies but it simply will not be the issue that it is today. There will be an entirely different attitude, where it just is not so important to people and to society.

What you can see with this is that it is not that we are advocating a particular view. We are simply saying that as societies move on, many of these issues that are so divisive today will fade away, people will look back and they will not understand how people could argue in such a confrontational way about these issues that are simply no longer important to people, because they have expanded their awareness, their collective consciousness has been raised so people can look at these issues without looking through this filter of black and white thinking. And so, you see that this greater openness, this greater tolerance for differences is part of this change that must happen for a critical mass of Americans to be able to accept some of these golden age ideas that Saint Germain is ready to release, including the natural energy technology.

Many, many changes need to happen for people to accept this. But again, women can play an important role in bringing about these changes and this is the main message we want to get across. Naturally, if you look at this upcoming presidential election, women can also play an important role in electing a president who can be more compassionate than confrontational. And so, if enough women will make the effort to vote, then this can have a decisive impact on the election and therefore have a decisive impact on whether America elects a president that can turn America into a more compassionate society, or whether they elect a president that will turn it into a more confrontational society than it already is.

 

Copyright © 2020 Kim Michaels

The good president must be neutral and represent all Americans


Listen to a recording of this dictation (subscribers only) 

Ascended Master Godfre through Kim Michaels, September 20, 2020. This dictation was given during the 2020 Webinar – Choosing America’s Future.

I AM the Ascended Master Godfre. I have deliberated whether to give a dictation at this conference. Naturally, I am quite aware that most Americans today do not accept reincarnation, will deny reincarnation and will deny the process of the ascension. Therefore, they will deny that I AM the Ascended Master Godfre who was embodied as George Washington and who had other embodiments after that one until I finally ascended. They will deny any of this, and therefore, is there any point in me giving an address when so many people will not listen? However, as we have explained, our goal is not to convert particular people to believe in this or that. Our goal is to raise the collective consciousness. Therefore, I can speak into that collective consciousness, using your chakras as multipliers, as magnifiers and as broadcast stations, to get a message across that some will understand, some will grasp and some will be able to take and use to bring America forward.

The question I would pose before you is this: If you could take George Washington and transport him to today’s world, as he was when he was president of these United States, how would he react? Imagine George Washington, riding into Washington D.C. on his white horse, riding up to the White House, which was not built when he was president, and walking into the White House into the Oval Office. Imagine that George Washington was made president for a day. How would he react? How would he look at America today and at the presidency as it is today with the demands that it has? 

Well, I can assure you, as I am able to project my awareness back to how my awareness was when I was embodied as George Washington, that it would have been very shocking to George Washington and to his state of mind, to enter the White House today, and to see the difference between what it was to be America’s first president, and what it is to be president in the modern age. It is perhaps understandable that many modern people cannot grasp the difference between life as it was back then and as it is today. You have grown up in this world, you have from childhood become used to this world and you have no real awareness of how it was those two centuries ago. 

The first thing that George Washington would have noticed is that life is so much more fast-paced today than it was back then. Everything happens so quickly. There are so many demands on people. They have to react to so many things in today’s world that it is completely overwhelming for a person from that time. Your entire mind, even your physical brain, will go into overload when exposed to the frantic pace of today’s world. Even the pace of most ordinary Americans is frantic. But the frantic pace especially affects the president and those who work in the government in the White House. What a difference in pace! I had many fewer decisions to make. I had incredibly much less information to process. We have gotten to a point where the information that needs to be processed by a president is literally overwhelming. Even though modern people have grown up in a more fast-paced world, and are therefore used to processing more information, many times more than George Washington was used to, it is still overwhelming. Quite frankly, nobody can do it. Nobody has the capacity of mind to process that much information. Any president goes into overload. The question is how the president deals with this. 

There are two main scenarios: The president can adopt the attitude that he or she does not need to process all that information because the president has a state of mind that allows him or her to make decisions based on his ideals, his knowledge, his personality and his abilities as a leader, and therefore he does not need to process all that information. He could just make a snap judgment that this is what we are going to do. This is a similar mindset that you see in many leaders of large businesses who also face this information overload. They can become so used to not actually processing the information, not actually considering all sides of an issue and not even listening to what their advisors are really saying, but make a snap judgment based on their confidence that they will choose the right thing to do. After all, how would they have gotten to the White House if they were not able to make the right decisions? They think. This is one way to deal with the information overload: you do not process it.

Another way is that you do not think that you know everything or that you are capable of making snap judgments. Therefore, you attempt to listen to your advisors who have studied all of the information and can compress it for you and give it to you in an abbreviated form. This is what we might call the Reader’s Digest approach to being president. You allow your advisors to compress the information, so you only get the essence of it, and not the full story. This, of course, means that you do not have the full understanding of the issue, but you at least have some understanding of the issue. You are willing to listen to your advisors, and then when you make a decision, as the president sometimes has to do, you are not making a snap judgment, you are going into your heart and you are asking yourself: “What is the most compassionate thing to do?” You cannot necessarily know what is right, but you can know what is the most compassionate thing to do.

You will see presidents even in recent decades who have taken both approaches. I do not need to name names, because you can take a look for yourselves. The difference between these two approaches is that the one approach assumes and takes for granted, that: “Because I am president, I can of my own self do something.” The other approach says: “Just because I am president, does not mean I always know what is the right thing to do.”

The third approach would actually be the approach that is described in this invocation that I described in great detail in the dictation upon which the invocation is based, and it is that you surrender. [The invocation given prior to this dictation was based on the dictation Godfre gave at Mount Vernon on February 13, 2011.  That dictation “What it takes to be a good president of the United States” and the invocation based on it was published in Kim Michaels, A Spiritual Clearance for America, 2019.] You surrender unto a higher power however you see it because you recognize that there is a higher power beyond yourself. 

Now, there have been presidents who have approached this, but in the history of these United States, there have been very few presidents—in fact, there have not been any presidents—who practiced this to the extent that I did as George Washington. This is partly because they did not have that experience that I had at Valley Forge of coming into that total surrender, where I fully acknowledged that I could of my own self do nothing. But nevertheless, it is still an ideal for what it means to be president. It is the highest ideal. You listen to your advisors and you attempt to gain as much information about the issue as you can. You can also consider what the most compassionate thing to do is. 

But before you make a big decision, you go into your private space. You center in your own heart and in your inner being and you let go of all human opinions, all prejudices and all preconceived opinions about what you should or should not do. You find a way to ask the higher power as you see it, not to tell you what to do, but to give you a higher perspective on the situation and on the issue. This is the third approach to being president. It is truly the only way that you can function as a president. This is one thing that has not changed from the time of George Washington to today. We might even say that because of the larger amount of information that you need to process today, it is even more important to have that surrender. 

Now, what does this really mean? What does it mean? What does it take to be a president and instead of making a snap judgment, or even a more carefully weighted decision, you stop. You refuse to make a decision. You go within, you tell your advisors to go have a cup of coffee and to leave you alone in the Oval Office. You sit there or you fall upon your knees. You empty your mind of all preconceived opinions and you ask this higher power, however you see it, to give you a higher view of the situation, and then you are completely open to whatever comes to you. 

What does it take to do this? Well, first of all, it takes a certain spiritual maturity. This is not something you can emulate. Throughout your life you must have had what we call genuine mystical experiences where you have stepped outside of your normal state of mind and contacted or experienced some reality beyond your normal state of mind and your normal perception filter. Otherwise, you would not have a frame of reference that there is something outside of your own mind and your own perception filter. Then you have to be willing to reach for that something and that means emptying your mind and setting aside all of your personal idealistic, ideological, preconceived opinions and judgments about what you should, and especially what you should not do as president. You also need to set aside the expectations that you know your advisors have, that the people around you have, that your voters have, that the people have, that the press has and that the Congress and the Senate have. All of these pressures are impinging upon the president and are being sent at him as arrows at the emotional, mental and identity levels, 24 hours a day.  You have to be able and willing to set aside all of these pressures so that you can go into a neutral state of mind.

What does it mean that you are in a neutral state of mind? Well, it means many things. It means that you are free of all of these preconceived judgments and the sense of identity that most people have. But in terms of being president, what it truly means is that when you, as president of these United States, go into a neutral frame of mind, you are neither a Republican nor a Democrat.  You cannot be neutral if you have an overlay that says: “Because I am a Republican president or because I am a Democratic president, this is how I have to look at this issue, this is probably the decision I have to make, this is what is expected of me by my party, by my electorate and by my advisors.” You cannot be worried about what reaction you are going to get if you disappoint or surprise all of these people. 

Despite the fact that you have gone through this long process where you have been a Republican or a Democrat and despite the fact that you are elected as representing one of the parties, you have to be able and willing to set that aside because you realize, or rather you should realize, that as president that there are two houses of Congress, there are two parties in the House of Representatives and the Senate, but there is only one president. There is only one chair in the Oval Office behind the desk. You should realize, as one former president [Harry S. Truman] had a sign on his desk saying “the buck stops here.” You are the one at the top. 

What does that mean? It means that the Republican party can afford to say: “We represent only Republican voters. We represent only Americans with a certain mindset.” The Democratic party can afford to say: “We represent only Democratic voters, people with a certain mindset.” But as president, in order to be the best possible president you can be, you cannot afford to say this. You are the one president that must represent all Americans. 

In order to go into a neutral frame of mind and receive a higher vision from a higher power, you need to be willing to recognize that when you are sitting in that one chair in the Oval Office, you must represent all Americans, or at least as many Americans as possible. What does this mean? This means that you cannot look at the issue through the particular ideology, platform, mindset or worldview of either the Republican or the Democratic party. As president, you need to look at what the greatest good for the greatest number of people is, not what I am supposed to do according to my party line. In order to be the best possible president, you need to have some awareness that in life there are certain fundamentals, certain principles, certain ideas and certain facts that are neutral. These are what we might call objective because they do not change whether you look at them through a Democratic mindset or a Republican mindset. They are what they are. This is what is best for the people regardless of party coloring. 

If you can do this as president, you can be the best possible president that you can be, given your personality and given the times you live in, and how very complicated the equation of this large nation is in those four or eight years where you have the privilege of sitting in that chair. If you fall into letting all of your decisions be colored by either your party ideology or by your personal conviction of your own superiority, you cannot be the best possible president that you could be. You might, in fact, be far less than what you could be or what someone else could be in that situation if they had a greater willingness to surrender. 

I said that if George Washington walked into the Oval Office today, he would be shocked by the frantic pace. Of course, you realize, I am sure, that George Washington would not even be allowed to walk into the White House today. He would be stopped by security. They would demand to see some form of identification, and he would not be able to produce one. He might say: “But I am George Washington.” They would laugh at him and demand that he take off his wig and take out his wooden teeth. They still would not believe who he was. He would not even be allowed in the door. 

Nevertheless, if George Washington could walk into the White House, the one thing that would shock him the most would be how partisan the presidency has become, how partisan the Congress and the Senate have become, how partisan the political process in America has become, and how partisan the public discourse has become. George Washington would have looked at this state of animosity between people who adhere to the two parties.  He would have looked at this and he would have said: “Well, it is a good thing that it was not like that back then because we would have never been able to come together to fight the British. We would have been so divided that there could not have been any  unified resistance at all. We would never have won the Revolutionary War. We could not have accomplished the feat of establishing an independent nation. How can we actually expect to carry on an independent nation when the people are so divided?” 

George Washington was quite aware that “united we stand, divided we fall.” He knew that there was only that fragile sense of unity that was behind his army that allowed him to be the instrument for bringing forth this victory over the superior British forces. There was a united vision that even though they were numerically and in other ways inferior to the British forces, the colonial forces could still win. George Washington would have looked at the current state of division in the United States and he would have asked himself: “How did the people of America ever become so divided? How can we have such a state of division in the United States?” He would have realized very quickly that this is not really because the people themselves are so divided, but because they have been manipulated into this division. He would have realized why this was so. 

It is because there is an external force compared to the people who are manipulating the people. He would have realized that during his presidency and before, he was fighting an external force in the form of the British, but today the American people are faced with an external force that is external to the people, but seemingly not external to the country because the power elite, most of them, are in the United States. However, he would also have realized very quickly that this power elite has no loyalty to America. They have no patriotism and they even have no sense of the value of America. They only want to advance their own causes at the cost of the people. They are not loyal to America. Some of them are internationalists running these multinational corporations or financial empires that have no loyalty whatsoever to America or the people of America. 

George Washington would have realized that just as the people in colonial times were facing this aggressive external force of the British royalty, the people of America today are facing this external aggressive force of the power elite. He would have realized that this power elite can only rule because they have divided the people. He would have looked at what is dividing the people and seen, of course, that it was many things. But one of the things that is certainly dividing the people right now is the two political parties. So many people have been manipulated into a state of consciousness where they believe that only the Republican party can save America. If the Republican party does not win, the Democrats will take America to its certain ruin. Other people believe that the Republicans are so conservative and so reactionary that they will bring the ruin of America, and only the Democratic party can bring America forward into a better age. 

What George Washington would have very clearly seen is that both groups of people believe that a particular man-made political ideology can solve all human problems. Neither of these groups of people see the need for the president to surrender himself to a higher power to gain a higher vision, nor do they see the need for themselves to surrender to a higher power to get a higher vision. Naturally, some of them, especially those on the Christian side, will think they are surrendered to a higher power and that their particular church’s interpretation of the Bible represents that higher power. 

But George Washington would have seen right through this because he was not what you today call a Christian, certainly not the fundamentalist kind. He adhered to a more universal form of spirituality that he expressed as “Nature’s God,” which had meaning for him. When he surrendered to a higher power, it was not the God of the Old Testament. It was more like Jesus’ God of the loving father figure. But George Washington saw it more as Nature’s God, a universal God that is beyond all man-made images. 

George Washington would look at this and say: “But neither of these two factions have their minds open enough to receive a higher vision of what is the highest good for the largest number of people. They are focused on their particular worldview, thinking it is the only true one.” There may be a certain group of Americans who adhere to the Republican worldview and a certain number that adhere to the Democratic worldview, but neither of these groups have a majority in America. Neither of these views represent a majority of the American people. The only reason a president from one party or the other party gets elected is because there is a group of Americans in the middle that sometimes swings to one side and sometimes to the other because they really are not in either of the two camps. But there is no other camp to vote for and they feel they must vote for someone, so they tend to lean to this side or that side. But they do not feel they have a real choice. 

This is the one thing that George Washington would have realized has happened to America: this polarization that was not nearly at that level when he was president. Even though there were, of course, differences of opinions back then and different interest groups, nevertheless there was not this kind of polarization. There was not that clear belief that one way is the only right one, and the other one is sure ruin. 

This is basically what I wanted to give you: this perspective of what it really takes to be the best possible president you can be. I could, of course, go on to give you my evaluation as an ascended master of the current president, the one who is running for office in this election or recent presidents, but I have no desire to do this. You can yourselves take what I have said here, take what I said in my previous dictation, and use this to evaluate recent presidents. You can come to your own conclusion based on your own discernment. I will not attempt to push you in any direction here or give you some pre-made answer. I will give you the freedom to evaluate this for yourselves because again, we of the ascended masters are neither Republicans nor Democrats. We have a universal mindset and our highest goal is to raise the collective consciousness of the American people. We do this by giving them a perspective and then allowing them to do with that whatever they want. The same goes for you who are our direct ascended-master students. You have our perspective. It is up to you what you do with it. 

With this, I am grateful for having had the opportunity to speak. I have not taken it very often for a variety of reasons, but I am nevertheless grateful for the opportunity. I may take it again sometime in the future to talk about other topics than American politics. Thus, for now, I seal you in the flame that I AM.

 

Copyright © 2020 Kim Michaels

Can we preserve the Union in the future?


Listen to a recording of this dictation (subscribers only) 

Ascended Master Saint Germain through Kim Michaels, September 20, 2020. This dictation was given during the 2020 Webinar – Choosing America’s Future.

I am the Ascended Master Saint Germain. You, who have grown up in America, have all learned in school that one of the greatest American presidents was Abraham Lincoln. Why is he considered to be one of the greatest American Presidents? Well, as the saying goes: “He preserved the Union.” So, the question I want to raise at the beginning of this discourse is: “Can we preserve the Union in the future? As America moves into the golden age, can we preserve the Union? Is it even desirable to preserve the Union?”

Now, in order to discuss these topics, I want to raise some other questions as well. What is the golden age? It is a state that is very different from what you have right now. The images, the plans, the designs, the matrices that I hold in my mind for the golden age both planetary and in America are so different from what you see manifest today, that the vast majority of people simply could not fathom them. They could not grasp them, they could not breach the gap between the current reality and the golden age. The gap becomes bigger the further we move into the golden age, but even if you look 20 or 30 years ahead, most people in America could not fathom the changes that will happen in American society.

So, the question here is: “What is actually going to bring the golden age into manifestation?” Well, it is actually ideas. I have ideas – I also of course have energy, I have light that can endow those ideas with a certain power. But first of all I have ideas, and because I naturally respect the law of free will I am not going to force these ideas on societies or on individuals. What will it take for these ideas to be brought into the physical where they have the potential to be manifest? Well, I cannot simply drop these ideas from the sky, they have to come through the four lower bodies of individual human beings. There has to be one individual, or  a group of individuals who can work together and receive an idea from me. This brings up the question: “Where can we find such individuals or such small groups of people who are open to the ideas of the golden age?”

The other aspect of bringing the golden age, is that it is not enough in itself to bring the ideas into the physical. They also have to be acted upon, they have to be spread. That means there has to be a large number of people, a significant number of people, a critical mass of people who are willing to accept these ideas, and change their lives accordingly. My beloved, even you who are ascended master students often have an incomplete view of what it will take to manifest a golden age. You think it is somehow just going to happen, that the golden age is just going to drop from heaven – but it is not! For these golden age ideas to even come into the physical, some people will have to be willing to change their consciousness. For these golden age ideas to be implemented, especially on a large scale level, many people will have to be willing to change their lifestyle. It is not going to happen automatically. People will have to embrace the changes, they will have to be willing to embrace these changes and change their lives accordingly in order to manifest better conditions. It can be no other way.

If you look back at the last 100 years or 200 years, you can see many changes in society. How did they come to pass? Was it inevitable? You see for example, one of the greatest changes in society over the past several hundred years, has been not only the invention of computers but the widespread use of computers. The golden age simply could not be manifest without the internet, without people being connected in a higher way than they were before. Naturally, there was a group of people, who even though they were not always working together (but still they were working on the same topics), they were able to receive the separate ideas that brought forth the computer revolution and the internet. They were willing to implement them.

As you know, in the beginning it was considered that only a few people were able to use computers. This was because in the beginning it was much more difficult to use computers. It required a certain type of person who was willing to think in a different way than most people have been brought up to think. Who were willing to learn the somewhat arcane language and ideas that required you to use a computer in those days. Therefore, they were willing to embrace this. But, in order for this to really have an impact, many, many people – millions of people around the world had to change their mindset so they were able to use a computer, so they were even able to conceive of what a computer is and how you use it.

Now, you will see if you look back, some of you can even remember this yourselves, that in the beginning there was a tremendous resistance in people, in the collective consciousness, to the spread of computers. Many were suspicious of computers. Many took one look at a computer, and felt it was way too complicated for them and decided that this is not for me; “I am not going to even consider using a computer!” There are people, many of them are not still alive, but there are many people who decided: “I will never use a computer!” Thereby of course, not only cutting themselves off from the benefits of using a computer, but actually slowing down the progress of society through the spread of computers.

What you see here is that, naturally, the computer and the internet is a golden age idea. You see that there was a resistance to that idea. There were many people who resisted it, there are still some people who resist it. It was only when a critical mass of people accepted computers, that they wanted a computer, that they wanted to learn how to use a computer, that it really had an impact on society and it will, of course, be the same with many other ideas.

So, the question I put before you about choosing America’s future, is this: “Will America choose to be a forerunner of the golden age, or will America choose to resist certain key golden age ideas and therefore fall behind other nations?” In other words, it is not a matter of if the golden age is going to be manifest because it is. But the question is: “Where will the golden age manifest first, will it be in America or elsewhere in other parts of the world?

Now, naturally many Americans have this sense that America is the greatest nation on Earth. Many spiritual people, ascended master students,have the the sense that America is sponsored by Saint Germain. So they take it for granted that the golden age will manifest first in America, they think it is self evident. Of course the golden age will manifest here, weren’t we the country that invented computers and spread the use of computers? So, naturally we will be open to any kind of technology that is part of the golden age. Well my beloved, I am not so sure that the American people at large will be open to some of the technology that will bring in the golden age. The golden age will not be brought only by technology. There will be many, many changes that are required in society, in culture before the golden age ideas can be released, and before they can be implemented and accepted by a majority of the people. This is not a given, this is not guaranteed in any way.

So, the question is this: “Are the American people in general, in a state of mind where they can receive, accept and implement golden age ideas? Is America currently one of the forerunners for receiving golden age ideas, or has the balance shifted, so that there are now other countries that are ahead of the United States?” The answer is of course, that there are quite a number of other countries that have moved ahead of the United States, in terms of the openness and willingness to accept golden age ideas. Why is this so? Well, it is what we have talked about; the mindset of the American people, the polarization, the rising anger, the scapegoating, the willingness to say that: “It’s those other people that are the problem – not us.” The unwillingness to look at one’s self. The cognitive dissonance of seeing that America is no longer the greatest society on earth, because the economy has become so top heavy that the top 1% have siphoned off 50 trillion dollars from the bottom 90%. This has created a society that simply is not capable of implementing certain golden age ideas.

Now, this ties back then with a question I asked: “Can we preserve the Union?” The reality is that if you look at a map of America, you could actually color America, not based on whether they are red states or blue states, republican or democratic states, but whether they are open or not open to New Age ideas. And that very much ties into, how tied they are to the past, how tied they are to tradition, how closed they are to anything that goes beyond a certain tradition. How open minded are people? Are they focused on a certain set of traditional values that they think must be upheld at all cost. And they think that if those are not upheld and if new ideas come in, it will be the downfall of civilization?

You can see certain states where there is very little openness. If you were to say that openness is light, then many of these states are completely dark. You have all seen these images taken from satellites at night, where you can see how there is more light in the larger cities and there are other areas that are completely dark at night. Well, there is something similar you could do by mapping the openness of the people. By looking at this, you can clearly see that there are some areas of the United States not always following state boundaries, but in many cases they do somewhat follow state boundaries, there are some areas where people are more open to new ideas.

Now, you have to recognize here that in order to be open to golden age ideas, people have to in general, be open to new ideas. You cannot realistically expect that the majority of the American people at this current level, have the discernment to say: “Oh well, this idea is not a golden age idea, I will not even consider it.” The fact of the matter, is that the people who are open to golden age ideas are often simply in general open minded. They are open to many different forms of new ideas. Yes, it is true that sometimes they do not have discernment and they embrace certain ideas that are not necessarily constructive, or certainly not part of my golden age matrix. Nevertheless, the people who are not open to new ideas because they cling to traditional values, they are not able to receive golden age ideas.

So, you see, as I even said in an answer to a question, that there are certain areas where people in general are more open to golden age ideas. The West Coast, especially among the larger cities. In the center of the country; Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, even a few cities in the North, such as Minneapolis. There are also certain places on the East Coast where there are at least some people that are open to new ideas, both New York and Boston, even to some degree Washington D.C. where there is at least a concentration of people who are open. It does not necessarily mean the collective consciousness is open, but there is a certain concentration of people who are open. You also see vast areas of the United States where you do not find enough open minded people.

So, if you could construct such a map, you would see that if America is to move into the golden age, what needs to happen? What needs to happen is that the people in the areas where they are more open minded, they will have to have a larger influence on America, otherwise the shift cannot occur. What needs to happen, is simply that the people who are open minded need to pull up the rest of America, they need to pull up the collective consciousness. Now, right now, if you look at pure numbers, there are fewer people who are open minded than there are people who are closed minded. There are more people that cling to these traditional values, and resist any kind of change that is not defined by their worldview, whether it be a Christian worldview or in another way.

The question for America is: “Who will win this tug of war? Will the open minded people be able to pull up on the collective consciousness, or will the closed minded people be able to pull down on the collective consciousness?” Right now, quite frankly, after four years with a president who is part of this very mindset, the closed-minded people are winning the tug of war. They are pulling down the collective consciousness, instead of the open minded people pulling it up. This is, quite frankly delaying the implementation of the golden age in America.

So, this goes back to my question: “Can we preserve the Union?” As we move further and further forward in time, the contrast can potentially become bigger and bigger. The question is: “Will the contrast become bigger? Will the polarization get worse. Or will there be an evening out, so that the open minded people can pull up on the collective consciousness?” Now, if that does not happen, if the conservative people continue to resist changes, resist new ideas. What will happen? There will be more and more tension in the collective consciousness.  There will be more and more of an awareness in certain parts of the country that we must break free from this reactionary mindset, so that we can manifest our destiny and bring forth a higher form of society. We cannot allow these closed minded people to hold us back from the vision we see of what the future could be like.

So, the question is simply: “Will certain states have to break free of the Union in order to manifest a golden age in those states? Or, will the entire collective consciousness be pulled up, so that these states can manifest the golden age without having to break free of the Union?” That is a question: “To be or not to be, to be open minded, or not to be open minded.” That is the question concerning whether the golden age will manifest in America or elsewhere.

Now my beloved, I have a great love for America. I have sponsored America. I would like to see America be one of the forerunners of the golden age. Of course, I do not have the vision that America will be the exclusive country that has the golden age. I have a great love for other countries and peoples around the world. I want to see the golden age manifest in as many places as possible. But, I certainly would like to see America be one of the forerunners. The deciding factor is not me or my willingness to release ideas. The deciding factor is simply the American people and whether they are open minded or not.

There are many, many changes that need to happen in the golden age. It is not just a matter of technology, but technology is a big part of the equation. There are many forms of technology that require widespread changes in the political system, in the economy, in the culture, in people’s attitude before they could possibly be manifest. I want to give you one example of this. If you project a couple of hundred years into the future. Imagine that you are now a group of students who are attending a university class, a history class at a university. You are looking back at the present time with the knowledge that you have 200 years in the future. You are looking back at the present time and evaluating what society was like. What will be one of the things that will surprise these students the most?

Well, these students will live in a vastly different society. You can scarcely imagine what society will be like in a couple of hundred years. But, one of the big, big differences is that they will live in a society where there is no limitation of energy. These societies will have technology that you can barely dream of today, because they will have unlimited energy. It is not only electricity but also other forms of energy. But, just to talk about what you know, just imagine a society that had unlimited electricity available. These students in the future will look back at your current time and they will say: “What? They had limited amounts of energy? What? People had to pay for electricity? They had to pay to run their transportation vehicles (because they will not have cars at that time)? How could this be?”

Then, they will look at what was the cause of this and they will say: “What? This society claimed to be a free democracy, but it allowed these huge corporations to create a virtual monopoly on energy, the production and delivery of energy. How could this happen in a free and democratic society? It is a wonder that they didn’t require people to pay for the air that they were breathing, when they required them to pay for energy?” Isn’t it self evident (and it will be self evident to them)? No-one should have to pay for energy, it should be as free as the air we breathe.” Now, why will these students have this attitude? Why will these students have this attitude, why will they have grown up in a society where there is unlimited energy?

Because there will be new energy sources that do not have to be produced by, for example burning fossil fuels, or splitting the atom or doing whatever you do today to provide energy. There will be unlimited energy that does not require a cost to produce it. There is of course, a cost associated with having technological devices that can run on this energy, but there is no cost of producing and delivering the energy. The energy will be freely available in unlimited quantities everywhere. You do not have to be hooked up to an electrical grid in order to receive energy, it will be available locally. There will be technological devices that can use this energy wherever you are.

You can live in a house in the middle of nowhere (so to speak), and you can still have more technology than you can even dream of in modern houses, and you don’t need to be hooked up to the grid. You do not need to be hooked up to the internet or wires and cellular networks in order to communicate, it is just there wherever you are. What I am saying here is, this is one of the inevitable changes of the golden age, this kind of energy. I am not saying free energy, because free energy is a concept created by the power elite in order to discredit the possibility that there could be forms of energy that they cannot monopolize. But there is energy, abundant unlimited energy available everywhere.

What will it take to move society to that point? It is an inevitable change that will happen. The question is, where will it happen first? Well, let us look at America and consider what changes would have to happen in American society, for America to receive and embrace an entirely new form of energy technology. What would have to change? Well my beloved, the changes are almost unimaginable for most people. It is not simply a matter of receiving this technology, as you received technology that could produce electricity or technology that could use electricity. It is not just a technological change that is required, because I will not release these ideas until I see drastic changes in society.

First of all, this kind of technology, while it is very difficult to monopolize, it would still be possible for certain corporations to use the technology to gain some kind of monopoly, perhaps on the production of the devices. So, there has to be a shift in society, where Americans become aware of the existence of a power elite. They become aware that there is a group of very narcissistic people who are forming a power elite, have formed a power elite, almost since the inception of America. They have grown stronger and stronger, gained greater and greater influence on society and it can be seen primarily in the economy, and in the political process. So, as long as America is such a top heavy society that has such a strong power elite, and the people are so unaware of this and unwilling to become aware and do something about it, well the change cannot happen, America cannot receive these ideas. Even if the ideas were released, they could not be accepted and implemented on a broad scale. Why? Because the power elite would prevent this and the people would not even know what had happened, or if they knew they would not even care.

You see here, that those who are the conservative, closed minded people who want to cling to traditional values, well they could not even accept these ideas, they could not even accept a society without a power elite. Because as we have said, they do not actually accept democracy. They want to have a strong leader that is based on authority. Well, as long as you have so many people who claim to this authoritarian mindset, this new energy technology cannot be received because it is anti-authoritarian, it is anti-elitist! It is not a top heavy technology. It is something that can and must be available to all people.

Now, my beloved just imagine for a moment that you had the technology right now, whereby energy was available at no cost to all businesses in America. Can you imagine the economic growth that this would produce in a very short period of time? Instantly, people would have much lower costs, much lower costs. This would mean that businesses could make a bigger profit. That new businesses will spring up, that businesses could do things that they cannot even dream of doing now, because it is too costly in terms of energy. There are new industries that would spring up in a very short period of time, that very few people can actually envision right now, the majority of Americans could not even envision it at least right now. What could Americans see?

Well, they could see that right now there are huge corporations in America that are tied into the production of energy. They would see that the moment this new energy technology was available, these companies would collapse, they would have no basis for their business. Nobody would buy oil if you have a free energy source available right there. These conservative minded, closed minded Americans would see that their jobs could be at risk. If we do not need coal, what happens to the coal miners jobs, or those who work in the oil industry, or those who work for the big oil companies and other companies involved with producing electricity, running the grid, and all this kind of stuff?

So, even if the idea for this kind of technology was released, what would be the reaction from conservative closed-minded people who cling to traditional values? They would see this technology as a threat, a threat in the short run to their jobs, but even to the entire structure and order of society that they have grown up with. And because they are conservative and cling to what they call traditional values, their default reaction to anything new is to resist it. They would resist a change that would have untold benefits for society.

It is almost like a certain religious group of people in the eastern United States who resist modern technology, and still drive around in horse carts and have no electricity in their houses. It is almost the same mindset. Now, look at other changes that would have to happen in such a society. This technology that I am talking about, well not only can it not be monopolized, but if you have energy that is available at no cost, well my beloved, how do you make money on that?

Let us say that your smartphone did not have a battery because it had a little device inside of it that would extract energy from a different realm, a different dimension. The energy would be available inside your smartphone and it could run indefinitely without needing a recharge. Well, certainly a company could make money on producing the phone, but nobody can make money on providing the batteries and the electricity to charge the batteries. The American business community today would be enormously disturbed if they were to see this as a realistic possibility. It would create such an upheaval in the mind of the American business community, that they could not even begin to deal with it, they could not even grasp it. Therefore, they would also resist this technology with all the power they have over society. What does that essentially mean? It means that for this technology to be accepted and implemented, America would have to change it’s entire attitude towards business and what is the American attitude to business based on right now? Three things my beloved, profit, profit and profit.

Well you would have to change the mindset, to realize that the purpose of a business is not necessarily to produce a profit. Or at least it is not to produce a profit to a small elite in society. The purpose of a certain form of technology and the businesses that take advantage of this technology, is not to make a profit for the elite, but to benefit all of the people, to benefit all businesses to benefit the economy at large. In other words, the reality of the matter is that this technology could not be accepted and implemented, unless America transcended the current business climate and mindset that is geared towards concentrating profit in the hands of a small elite. Instead, they would have to adopt a mindset where the real purpose of businesses in general is to benefit people by raising the economy. How do you raise the level of the economy? Well, as we have said before, two thirds of the economy is consumer spending. So, you have to get money in the hands of consumers. That is the only way to raise the overall economy to a higher level.

This is precisely what can happen with technology that is, so to speak, democratized technology that cannot be monopolized in terms of producing it or supplying the energy for it. You see here the ramifications of such an invention, such a technology are widespread. When you look at a shift away from the focus on profit for a small elite but focus on what actually benefits all of the people, you see that there are certain cultural, social changes that come into play. Suddenly, we will begin to realize that when you have this kind of non-local energy technology, people do not have to live in big cities. Furthermore, you will have much better communication technology than you have today, much more instant technology. You do not even have to talk about connection speed anymore, there is no time delay in the technology that can be brought forth in a golden age as a result of having this source of energy.

So, you realize why do you need to have a huge factory that produces cars? Now again, cars will not even be here 200 years from now, but nevertheless let us just go with what you know now.  Now, why do you have to have one city in America called Detroit that is the city of cars? Because it is the center of car production in America. If you have non-local energy sources, if you have more instant communication technology, why do you have this concentration of businesses? Why could you not have many smaller businesses that produce goods locally? If you have freely available technology, transportation costs will immediately be reduced. There will even be technology that can reduce it even further by the fact that goods do not have to be physically transported from one place to another. Nevertheless, you will see that all of a sudden you can begin to look differently at businesses.

Why should America allow businesses to become bigger and bigger and bigger?

Why should you allow this kind of free competition (meaning not really free competition) but unrestricted by the government and unrestricted by any concerns about what is best for the people?

Why should you allow a power elite to use their power, to use the money they have accumulated, to accumulate more and more money?

Why should you allow them to concentrate wealth and power, and the effect of concentrating wealth is you concentrate these businesses, these corporations so that they become bigger and bigger and bigger?

Why should you have a situation where most Americans are working for these huge corporations that do not care about the working Americans because they care only about the shareholders, or the owners at the very top? Why should you have this kind of a business climate?

Why would you not have many local businesses, where people can start up their own business. They can still work together on producing a product but it does not have to be – that one company owns the patent, or has out competed the competition so they have a virtual monopoly on producing cars, for example. Why should that be the case?

Could you not have an entirely different model, where one big corporation is replaced by thousands of local businesses owned by a single person, or you may have a small group of people who are working together in a business where they are all co-owners of the business.

This is much more in line with golden age ideas and even the concept of a spiritual path. Even the concept of seeing a reward for your own labor, which is the American dream. You understand that the American dream, that if you work harder you will be rewarded, is not compatible with huge multinational corporations. It is much better served by many small independent businesses, where people who work there, can see that their work has a more direct impact on how well the business is doing. And if there is a shared ownership or shared profit, then it has an impact on how well they are doing themselves, even if they do not own the business.

So, you see again a total shift in the attitude towards business in the way in which business is done. Another shift that will have to happen is even more dramatic. Now I have talked about this kind of energy, I have called it freely available energy, energy produced at no cost. I have call it non-localized energy. But what could be another word for it? It could be “natural energy.” There are 7 billion people on the planet, but there are many, many more plants. There are many more trees for example, than there are people. Well, from where do the trees get their energy? Do they have to pay for it? Is there some multinational corporation that delivers energy to the trees and takes payment for it? Well, of course not, because the trees are getting their energy from what we might call natural sources. In other words, sources that cannot be monopolized by human beings, and that does not require the intercession of human beings in order to be available for the trees. So, natural energy is an energy that is available (we might say in nature/from nature that does not require the intercession of other human beings for you to have it wherever you live. You may need a technological device in order to use it, nevertheless once you have the device, you do not need to pay for the energy. There is nobody who needs to produce it or deliver it to you, it is naturally available.

Well, right now you have an unnatural energy supply. This has many, many ramifications on society, but it first of all has ramifications on the economy. Because if you have an unnatural supply of energy (nevertheless all economic activity requires energy), it means you also have an unnatural economy.

This is what we have talked about several times, where we have said that there is a natural economy, which is the economy that produces goods and provides services. In other words, this economy takes people’s ideas and their labor and converts them into something that has practical use – practical value.

Now, as we have said, on top of this natural economy, the power elite has created an unnatural economy. It is where they are using money to make money. They are using the money they have accumulated to create certain financial instruments that can make money for them, without them providing goods or services. In other words, the money is not made by providing something that has value, the money is just made by the money that you already have, which becomes more money. This is an unnatural economy. It is an investment economy. It is a speculative economy. It is what I have called a gambling economy because it is all perception based.

When you produce a hamburger, it is a physical thing that has practical value. But when you produce some kind of smart financial instrument that allows you to make money off of money and avoid paying taxes, you are not providing anything that has practical value. You are not even really creating money, at least you are not creating value. I have said it before and will say it again briefly. You may say that the stock market in America currently has a certain value. In other words, if you took all of the stocks that are traded in the New York Stock Exchange, look at the current level of the stock market, you could calculate that all of those stocks are worth X amount of trillions of dollars. But they are not worth that. Because the stock is not worth more than what you could sell it for. If everybody started selling their stock, wanted to sell their stock today in order to get the trillions of dollars out of there, the stocks would instantly plummet in value and they would not be worth that amount of money. There could come a point and this happened in1929, where a stock certificate was not worth the paper it was written on, because the paper had no practical value. The only thing you could do with it was use it as toilet paper, or to light your wood stove. There is no value in this unnatural economy.

Well my beloved, before a natural energy source can be released, before it can be accepted and before it can be accepted by a majority of the people without being aborted by the power elite, you would have to have a confrontation with the unnatural economy. You would simply have to shift, so that the American people would say: “Why should we accept this unnatural economy that only benefits the top 1% or the top 0.1%? Why shouldn’t we have an economy where the only money that is made, is made by producing something that has value. Where everybody gets a fair share of that money based on the labor they put into it, so everybody prospers?

Money, if you look at textbooks about what money is, they will all say the same thing. Money is originally a medium of exchange. You use it to exchange goods and services in an easier way than if you have to barter. Strictly speaking, nobody needs money. No society needs money. But it is convenient to have it and it is convenient for everyone. It gives you more freedom in terms of what you do with your life as an ordinary person. But what has happened, is that after the creation of money, especially after the creation of fiat money, and especially after the creation of financial instruments where you can make money off of money, is that the power elite have completely perverted money and the money system. They have created this debt-based economy that is essentially a pyramid scheme, that extracts money from ordinary people in terms of interest, and concentrates it in the hands of those who have the money to lend and who can even lend more money than they actually have.

You have a situation today where even most businesses could not function if they didn’t go into debt. You have this vicious circle, where people in order to keep up with the economy, must go into more and more debt. You can see many Americans who are so heavily in debt, that their net worth is below zero. They have a negative net worth because they owe more money than the value of what they own. You see the same with many corporations and for that matter my beloved, you see the same with the Federal government, which owes more money than they could ever repay.

What is the essence of this money system, this debt-based money system? It is that people are trying to avoid going bankrupt, by paying the interest and taking new loans, thereby concentrating more money in the hands of those who control the financial system and the banks. So, interest, a debt-based economy funnels money from the lower levels of the population towards the higher levels of the population. Everybody is caught, or at least everybody who is not part of the top elite is caught in this vicious circle of debt that most cannot even pay back.

Everybody has to squeeze and it lowers the entire level of the economy. Because instead of having money to spend on goods and services that benefit businesses, people have to spend their money on paying interest that only benefits the banks, or rather the owners of the banks, and when is this ever going to stop? How many trillions of dollars does the federal government owe right now, to whom do they owe the money? A group of private banks, the Federal Reserve Banks.

This messenger over 30 years ago learned from reading a book, that the Federal Reserve is not owned by the Federal government, is not controlled by the Federal government. It is a group of private banks, large private banks, who have as a matter of pure deception, taken the name the “Federal Reserve”. This means that the American taxpayers, now they do not owe money to the government, they owe money to private banks, the government owes money to private banks.

Well, what does it say in the American Constitution? It says that only Congress has the power to print money. So, why has Congress given away this constitutionally mandated duty to print money, and allowed a set of private banks to control the money system? Why my beloved? Well, this is a question that the American people will have to deal with before they can create a natural economy that can be based on natural energy. Because I can assure you, that right now, the power elite has such a hold on the American economy, such a hold on the political establishment in the United States, such a hold on the business establishment of the United States, those who are not part of the banks and the financial system but who are actually producing something. They have such a hold on the American people, especially those who are conservative, closed-minded and not open to new ideas, that there is no way this power elite would allow the implementation of this natural energy technology.

They will resist it with all the power they have, with all the power they have. They will discredit it by labelling it as “free energy”, ha-ha, it could never work, because you cannot get more energy out of a device than you put into it. Well, my beloved, if you go out in your backyard and plant an acorn, it will in time grow into a big oak tree. You can cut down that oak tree, and put it into your wood stove and release the energy stored in the oak tree, and thereby get energy out of the oak tree. Well, how much energy did you have to put into the oak tree? Indeed, how much energy does humankind, presumably the governments and the large corporations have to put into the sun? Yet, without the sun’s energy, no life would be possible. There is freely available energy in nature, that did not require human beings to put anything into a technological device in order to produce that energy. This is not a crazy idea. This is not an idea that only a few cuckoos believe in. There may be only a few people who believe in it right now. I grant you that many of the people who do believe in it, still think and dream that it can be produced by a technological device that they can get a patent on, so they can make huge amounts of money.

There are unfortunately, many people in this free energy field, who have the same mindset as the financial elite have. They are not really dreaming about freeing the people, they are dreaming about making so much money that they can become part of the elite. That is of course, why they cannot receive viable technology. Do you really think that I would release the golden age ideas to people in this mindset? Of course not. They would not even be able to receive and fathom the ideas, even if I did release it. You see here, you cannot take a monopoly, or a patent on the sun or the sun’s energy. You cannot create some kind of business that it can extract payment for the air people breathe. So, why did you ever come to this idea that energy is something that needs to be produced by a technological device. That this can be monopolized, or at least virtually monopolized by a business that therefore dominates society and can become bigger and bigger and bigger?

Why did you, humankind, ever come to this idea? Well, because you had the feudal societies for hundreds of years, you had other societies for thousands of years, where a small power elite dominated the population. So, when certain forms of technology were released, all that could be released at the time, all that people could fathom at the time, was the kind of technology you have seen where energy needs to be produced by putting energy into something. You put something in, you get something out. But you cannot get more out than what you are putting in because humankind, the power elite and the people were not at a level of consciousness where they can fathom natural energy, where they could fathom a different form of technology. They just were not there. Are they there now? “No! not by a long shot,” as the saying goes.

Most Americans are simply not there in consciousness. If they were to read or hear this dictation, they would reject everything I have said. They would either laugh at it, or they would argue against it, or they would simply reject it as dangerous, because it’s not according to our authoritative worldview.

Some would say: “Well, you show me in the Bible where talks about natural energy.” And if it’s not in the Bible, they won’t accept it. Well, I really don’t see any bible verses that talk about Smartphones, yet many Christians have still accepted them. You see, my beloved, the changes that will happen in the next 200 years are tremendous. They will partly be driven by this technology, natural energy technology. But before that technology could even be accepted by the people, there has to be a drastic change in people’s mindset, in the collective consciousness. This involves many more aspects of society than I have talked about here, because the changes will be all-pervading. They will pervade every aspect of society. You may look at society today and there are many things you take for granted. But if you were to project your mind back 200 years to when they did not have electricity, society was so different that you cannot even fathom it.

You would see that as a result of the release of electrical technology, almost every aspect of society has been affected by this. At least every aspect of people’s lives. Many, many ways that people look at life, look at what they can do in life, and what they can’t do in life are affected by the fact that there is something called electricity that can drive certain devices. So many things, so many changes have happened as a result of this. But you also have to realize, which most people have never even considered, that in the very beginning, there was a campaign against electricity. There were certain businesses that launched (as they could do with the communications technology of the time), a campaign to discredit electricity, by labelling it as some mysterious force that was very dangerous and could kill people. That it would be extremely dangerous to put this force into people’s homes. This was of course, because they wanted to continue to sell lamp oil to the people who could only light their homes by oil lamps. But nevertheless, it was there.

There was a shift in the mindset that needed to happen before people could even accept having electricity in their houses. This was a drastic change for many people, some people even resisted it. Some people to this day refuse to have electricity for whatever reason. You see that the natural energy technology is a far more dramatic step up, than the step from pre-electricity to electrified societies. It is a far bigger step and it will require a far bigger change in people’s mindset.

Now, currently, how many Americans could accept this technology? Very few. But who could accept it? Naturally, the most open-minded people, those open- minded people might be somewhat unbalanced, they might accept all kinds of other ideas that are not realistic. But nevertheless, you have to start somewhere to create changes in the collective consciousness. Who are the people who could not accept it? Well, those are the most closed-minded, those who cling to a traditional worldview, traditional values, who do not want change. There is simply right now, a majority of the American people who are afraid of change, who psychologically resist change beyond what they can handle. And they could in no way handle the changes that will be brought about by this energy technology.

The question then again, is, who can bring the golden age? Well, the closed-minded people certainly cannot. Are there enough open-minded people in America? And can they pull the collective consciousness up, that this kind of technology can be released first in America? Or will it be released first in some other part of the world? Well, that is the question. It is not really such a dramatic question because as I said, the technology cannot be monopolized, will not be monopolized. It is not so that if the technology is released first in America, then there will be a huge business boom, because America will sell the technology to the rest of the world. Naturally, there will be some of that reward for the country that first implements the technology, but it will still be available everywhere. Therefore, there will not be the same kind of business monopolization that has been there with other forms of technology such as computers.

You will not see, even if America can receive the technology first, that America will dominate this kind of technology. But naturally, there will be some of the first businesses that embrace the technology and produce devices that can use the natural energy, they will have an advantageous position. Which businesses will this be? Well, certainly none of the existing businesses and corporations in America, because they will not be able to see the value of this, they will feel threatened by it just like many businesses felt threatened by computer technology, or new forms of energy. There will be an entirely new type of business that will have to be created, and that again will require people who have a vastly different mindset than you find in today’s American business climate. They will have to be the kind of people who are not focused on profit. Who are focused on making enough money to have a reasonable lifestyle but then spreading the wealth, and growing the totality of the economy by benefiting ordinary people, not an elite.

Obviously, this is some very exciting ideas for me, I could go on talking at length about this—this is certainly not the last time I will talk about it. Nevertheless, I realize I have given you more than what most of you can handle. Even ascended master students can find it difficult to accept this. But nevertheless, I ask you to keep these ideas in your mind, to hold the vision that progress in society will continue. How my beloved, could we have a golden age unless we have progress? Because certainly you do not imagine that the society you have right now is a golden age society, do you? If you do, you certainly have a very limited vision of what the golden age means to me.

So, allow yourselves to free your minds from these constraints that have been put upon you by current conditions. Current conditions, cannot say anything about the golden age. Because the golden age will be so far beyond current conditions, that it is like asking a stone age person to suddenly step into modern society. They would not be able to fathom it. Neither will most people today be able to fathom the ideas that are coming in the golden age. You can begin to glimpse it, if you are open.

What I have given you here is just a very, very small taste of the changes that will be coming in the golden age. I have lifted the veil. I have pulled back the veil just a little bit, so as not to scare you and overwhelm you with the changes that will be happening. They obviously will not happen in your lifetime, all of them. But some of you will incarnate again and you will experience these changes. Of course, by then your mindset will have had time to grow, so you can accept the changes. But if you can, start making that change in your mindset now. It will benefit you greatly, both for the rest of this lifetime and if you have future lifetimes. They will of course also assist you in ascending after this lifetime, if that is what is in your divine plan.

With this my beloved, I will seal this release, by thanking you for being willing to put your minds on this, whereby your chakras become the open doors for radiating this into the collective consciousness where many more open-minded people can glimpse this, can embrace it and therefore there is now a greater opportunity than there was before this dictation, that society will actually move in that direction, so that the golden age can be manifest in America. So that America can be a forerunner for the golden age, not alone but at least it can be part of that group of nations who will be forerunners for the golden age. For this, you have my gratitude my beloved.

 

Copyright © 2020 Kim Michaels

Do you want to be comfortable or take America to the next level?


Listen to a recording of this dictation (subscribers only)

Ascended Master Master MORE through Kim Michaels, September 19, 2020. This dictation was given during the 2020 Webinar – Choosing America’s Future.

I AM the Ascended Master More. What do I represent to earth? I represent the will to be more and the power to be more. Where does the will to be more come from? Well, it comes from the fact that you were created as an extension of the Creator’s being, and the Creator has the will to be more. You are created with a point-like sense of identity and you have inherent in your being the will to expand it and thereby be more.

What gives you the power to expand your awareness? It is the multiplication factor from above coming through the cosmic law that as you multiply your talents, you will be given more than what you have multiplied. This is out-pictured in Jesus’ parable about the talents. The three servants that were given the various numbers of talents and those who multiplied it received more, and those who did not multiply them lost whatever they had been given. This signifies that when you expand your awareness, you receive energy from above, from your I AM Presence, from the ascended realm, and this gives you the power to expand your awareness even more. This builds an upward spiral that over time becomes self-reinforcing so that you can continue to expand your awareness indefinitely until you reach the Creator consciousness and even go beyond it.

What does all this have to do with the current situation in America? Well it can give you a different perspective on a phenomenon that is found more in America than in most other nations. You have a large group of Americans who have been willing to work hard in their lives. They have been willing to make an effort. They feel they have risen to a certain position where they are comfortable. They have a reasonable material standard of living, and they feel they have achieved something, and they feel that those who have not achieved what they have achieved, it must be because they have not applied themselves. They have not been willing to do what it takes, they are too lazy, or they are too stupid, or they do not have the drive. This is what many Americans feel, so you have this division that has been created in America between what we might call the haves and the have-nots, those who have the will to work hard and improve, and those that they perceive as not having that will.

Now, if you take Saint Germain’s extremely profound discourse, you will see that all human beings are created equal. What does this mean? They all have a drive to improve their situation. They all have the will to be more. They were created with this. It is natural, so why can you look at a society and say that some people have a will to apply themselves, the will to do better, and some people do not seem to have that will? Why do some people not have it? Why are they not willing to make an effort? Well, the people who seem to not have the will to be more did not start out that way. They were created with that will. Why do they not have the will to be more anymore? Well, that is precisely what I want to discourse on.

Now, you may look at America today, as we have said before, and say that there is a real possibility that a person can apply himself or herself, they can work hard, they can come up with a new idea, they can see the opportunities in a new field. They can rise to a certain position, they can make a certain amount of money, and they can do well, perhaps even very well in financial terms. There is the possibility that this can be done by a certain number of people. But what if all Americans attempted to do the same thing? Well, as we have said, this could not be done because the economy, the level of the economy, simply is not there. Not everybody could do well, could do better than the middle class, even if they worked as hard as they possibly could. This is because the economy has been manipulated by the power elite because they have extracted the value of the people’s labor. They have taken it away from them.

But now look historically. Look at some societies in the world today. If you go back to the feudal societies of Europe that we use so many times as an example because it is such an obvious example, what good would it have done a peasant to work hard? He might have ended up producing more on a certain piece of land that might have been his responsibility. But would he have gotten more out of it? Nay. Because the nobleman would have just taken the fruits of his labor. You see many situations in history, many societies around the world, where if the people used their will to work harder and make an effort, they would not be rewarded accordingly.

Now, we have said that this is because the fallen beings have inserted themselves so they can reap the fruits of the people’s labor and thereby prevent this multiplication factor by the cosmic law, so that when people make an effort they are rewarded accordingly. This is what the fallen beings have done for all of recorded history, but actually for much longer. They have done it in many societies. If you look at history, you can see from a purely realistic evaluation that the vast majority of people on earth have lived many, many lifetimes in one of these closed, repressive systems where they did not harvest the fruit of their labor.

What has this caused these people to develop over time? Well, they have lost their trust in the law, the law of multiplication, the law of a multiplied return of their efforts. They have for so many lifetimes worked hard without seeing that return that they have come to doubt that the law works, that the law will multiply their efforts and that the law will give them more in return when they do more. This has caused them to go into a spiritual stagnation where they are not expanding their sense of self, their self-awareness. They have stagnated at a certain level. They have often come to accept in the identity level that they are just peasants, they are just workers: “There is nothing we can do. We cannot rise above this level. We will always be the slaves. We will always be those who don’t have an opportunity, who don’t get rewarded, who can’t get anywhere.”

You see many, many people around the world who are in this frame of mind. They are stuck in this not believing in the law and the workings of the law. They do not actually believe that they will be rewarded for their efforts because they have experienced it so many times. Can you blame people for this? Can you blame them for having lived so many lifetimes in these repressive systems? Well not really with any degree of reasonability. You can, of course, always say that people have co-created their own situations and they are the ones who have put themselves in that frame of mind but nevertheless.

What many people sense in America is that Saint Germain’s vision for America was to create a society where people again would have the freedom and they would be rewarded for their efforts. America would give them the financial or the economic opportunity where they could work hard and they would personally reap the reward of their work. This is what America was meant to be. Many people in America today correctly are tuned to this ideal. They sense that this is the way it should be. But what happens to many of these people is that they have used the freedom they have in America to raise themselves up to a certain position. They have a comfortable middle class, maybe upper middle-class, lifestyle and they feel they are well-to-do. What they have failed to realize is, first of all, that their middle-class lifestyle has been eroded over the last several decades. But the next thing they do not realize is that they could not raise themselves beyond that level. It would be very, very difficult for them to reach a much, much higher level. The reason for this is, again, the economic system that is too top heavy and therefore concentrates wealth in the hands of the top one percent, the top zero point one percent, to which they will never ascend. They will never become part of that elite. Not even some of the people who have become very rich, like the owners of Amazon or Google or Apple or whatnot. Not even these people would become part of the real power elite because they were not born in that position and they are not considered to be trustworthy enough to be part of the elite.

What you realize here is that there are people who live in a state of cognitive dissonance. They correctly sense what America is meant to be. They realize this is the American dream. They feel that they have lived that American dream, they have proven that the American dream works. But they fail to realize that it cannot work for everyone in the current situation, and that it cannot even work fully for them because they have come to a position where they feel comfortable but they have also accepted that this is all they can rise to. They have accepted that they cannot do better, that they cannot rise higher and therefore, they are, in some ways, in the same state of consciousness as the many people that they look down upon. What is it in the so-called poor people that are not making an effort? They have accepted: “We cannot do better; we cannot rise higher.” This is what even the middle class and the higher middle class have come to accept in America. They have accepted a certain level of wealth, a certain level of influence, a certain self-awareness. This is what they believe is all they can achieve in this lifetime.

What would actually have a major impact on America is if many of these people would begin to think harder about their situation, about the situation in the nation. They could realize, even based on this study about the income distribution, that it simply is not possible that all people could see a reward of their efforts. There are many, many people in America who are born into a certain situation, in a certain segment of American society, where even if they worked hard and applied themselves, they could not rise above a certain level. They could not really do well in America. There are many segments of the population, whether they have this skin color or that skin color, or whether they come from this background or that background, who would find it very, very difficult and almost impossible to do what these middle class people have done themselves. I know again, you can always point to examples of certain people from a certain background who have raised themselves. But the fact is again, individuals may be able to do it, but everyone could not do it. And if everyone cannot do it, what does that show? Well, God created all human beings equal with an equal potential to grow. If they cannot grow that means the American system is out of alignment with cosmic law with the basic principle of growth. This should be a cause for concern for those people who are vigorously defending the American system, thinking that this is the best country in the world, the best system in the world, the most advanced country, the richest country, the greatest country in the world and so on. It should make them realize that America may be a great country but not for everyone. America is the greatest country in the world if you belong to the top one percent, maybe even if you belong to the top ten percent, but if you belong to the 90 percent, then America is no longer the greatest country in the world. It may have been 40 years ago, but it is not today.

This is something that if people would realize this, if they would acknowledge it, it could cause them to recognize that changes are needed. It is necessary to look at the hard facts of how the growth in income has been taken away from the bottom 90 percent of the American people. It is necessary to look at why and how this has happened, and why America has allowed the emergence of this elite that has gained such political influence that they can make the American economy so top heavy. How could this even happen? How could this be done?

Now you can of course research this, you can trace it. You can go back and see this decision led to this effect, that decision led to this result and many individual decisions changed the system in such a way that it benefited the elite and it took from the people. It created in America what we might call the reverse Robin Hood principle. Robin Hood as you know took from the rich and gave to the poor. America takes from the poor and gives to the rich. Not really what the founding fathers envisioned, certainly not what Saint Germain envisioned and not what the natural law mandates.

In other words, America is out of alignment with nature’s law and nature’s god who gave you the framework for the Constitution and the nation you have. What have we said also? The growth in wealth in America has come about by the multiplication factor, but that multiplication factor has been reduced by the fact that the system has become so top heavy. This has caused the American economy to be at a much lower level today than it would have been if this top heavy economy had not been created. This could, one might say that it should, cause these middle class and upper middle class people to realize that they cannot simply sit there and be content with what they have. If they are true to their own principles, their own beliefs, they should want to be more than what they have now. Not necessarily that they get more money or a more comfortable lifestyle. They should want to be more in the sense that they live in a nation that is becoming more, and where other people can become more and do better for themselves instead of being held down by this unequal economy. In other words, these people should come to a point where they say: “We must use our position, the freedom we have, to demand a change in America so that we have a more just financial and economic system that truly gives equal opportunity to all. This is how we can pay back the universe for the affluence and the opportunity that we have been given. We can use our advantage to help others. Those who could not in the current situation do it through their own efforts.”

Many Americans have already started to help others. Many Americans have already been willing to move in that direction, but it will not really make a difference until they realize that the central problem is the unequal distribution of wealth and income, and that this needs to be changed and it will only be changed from below. It cannot be changed from above. It was created from above and there is very little chance that those who are in the system will change it.

There are, of course, some people who have a lot of money and who can see the problem, who can see where it leads to, who can see the potential for a violent revolution, but these people, as I said, the newly rich, they are not part of the old established elite. The old established elite will not change. Perhaps a few people here and there, but as a whole, they will not change. They cannot change. They have had too many lifetimes where they saw themselves as the superior elite, whatever outer excuse they used for justifying it, and they will not let go of this sense of superiority because it is more important to them than anything else. It is even more important than the money or the power. What these people are driven by, what they exist for is this sense of superiority. They must feel they are superior to the general population, or they simply cannot exist. They cannot bear to exist, and when you realize this you realize that throughout history, so many societies have been functioning for the basic purpose of allowing a very small group of people to maintain or expand their sense of superiority. The feudal societies functioned like that. Even the communist societies of Soviet Russia and China functioned that way. Ancient China functioned that way. Many other historical societies have functioned that way for the emperors or the czars or the kings, in order to give them that sense of superiority. Naturally, you have it in other countries besides America, but America is the one country where you can say that from its Constitution, it was meant to not be that kind of society. It was meant to give equal opportunity to all people. Therefore it is a greater problem that this is happening in America than if it was happening, as it of course is and has been, in Saudi Arabia.

You see here that if you are truly Americans, if you are truly patriots and care about America and the future of America, it is high time to focus your attention on this problem and realize that until this unequal distribution of income and wealth is changed, America really cannot move forward. It cannot move to the next level. It cannot even move out of the downward spiral created by this unequal distribution. It can only get worse, and it can only get more and more chaotic. There can only be more and more anger. There can only be more and more conflict.

Why do you think so many people joined the demonstrations against police brutality? Was it just because they were concerned about police brutality? No, it was because a growing segment of the American population are realizing that they have no real opportunity and they are becoming more and more angry because of this. You who are the middle class people, instead of seeking to see them as enemies and to want to limit them with law and order, and the military and this and that, you could acknowledge that it is actually your opportunity, your responsibility to help them to change American society, and it is in your own interest to do so. Because you cannot expect to maintain your current standard of living if the country deteriorates into civil unrest. Neither can you of course fulfill your responsibility towards your country by turning this country back into a growth spiral where everyone can see the results of their labor, the fruits of their labor, and they can work harder and make more money and have a better lifestyle, and the entire economy goes into an upward self-reinforcing spiral as it was in the first three decades after the war, and as it could have continued if the power elite had not managed to abort it.

You who have taken advantage of the freedom and the American economy, it is your responsibility to re-establish that freedom where people are rewarded for their efforts. I simply project into the collective consciousness that this is the responsibility. Instead of looking down upon those who are not as fortunate as you are, instead of saying: “They have not applied themselves, they have not been willing to work hard,” make that shift and come to realize that it is your responsibility to do something to change the equation. And that these people are not lazy. They are not unwilling to work. They have simply been hurt by being in embodiment so many times where the fruits of their labor have been stolen and now they see that it is even happening in America, and therefore, they have nothing left but anger. They have nothing to lose. You have something to lose, but they do not, and when people have nothing to lose there is no telling what they will do and how far they will go and how destructive they might become. It really is a matter of looking at the country. Who can do something about it?

The power elite have created the situation. They cannot, or rather will not, do anything about it. The politicians who have been manipulated into creating the situation are not likely to do something about it either. Some politicians can, but mostly the newer elected ones. The poor people, the disadvantaged people cannot do anything about it either other than revolt and become angry and violent. So who can do something? Well, the people in the middle and upper middle class who have time and attention left over to look at the country, see where it is going, see what needs to be done and then decide to do it rather than being satisfied with their comfortable lifestyle.

We have talked about the future of America and the choices you have. Well again, what do you want America to be? Do you want it to be a compassionate society or a comfortable society? A society where a certain segment of the population is comfortable, but a growing number are very uncomfortable. Do you want comfortability or do you want to make the switch into becoming compassionate and fulfilling your destiny, your responsibility, to take America to the next level?

This is the question that I project into the collective consciousness. I am grateful I can use your chakras and auras to reinforce it and I simply allow it to spread as rings in the water, respecting the free will. I will say, those in the middle and upper middle classes, this is your opportunity to become more. More than you might have envisioned you could have become, but it is still an opportunity for you to grow and thereby put America in an upward spiral where more and more people can grow until all those who are willing to apply themselves can see a just, a natural, return on their efforts. A multiplication of their efforts, as Jesus indeed promised them 2,000 years ago and as the law has promised them since the beginning of time.

 

Copyright © 2020 Kim Michaels

Is it possible to preserve American democracy?

Listen to a recording of this dictation (subscribers only)


Ascended Master Saint Germain through Kim Michaels, September 19, 2020. This dictation was given during the 2020 Webinar – Choosing America’s Future.

I AM the Ascended Master Saint Germain. I come on a special mission, for which purpose I have somewhat slowed down my vibration to give you a more measured, a more Buddhic you might say message, that is meant to cause contemplation—cause you to think beyond the way you normally think and look at these issues. Now, the theme for our conference is “Choosing America’s Future”. Mother Mary has defined some of the options as: will America be a compassionate or a confrontational nation? What I would like to bring up here is the question: Will America be a democratic nation or an undemocratic nation? Is it possible to preserve American democracy or to preserve America as a democratic nation?

For this, we need to look at different perspectives. First of all, let us briefly look at the public discourse in America. If you step back from all of the rhetoric, from all of the things being said, if you do not focus on particular viewpoints, if you do not try to decide what is right and what is not right about what is being said. In other words, if you step back from the contents of the public discourse, but focus on the energy behind the public discourse, the vibration behind the public discourse, what do you feel? What do you sense intuitively? What is the dominant feeling behind the public discourse in America exemplified in this debate that goes before that goes before the presidential election?

Well, the dominant energy that I want to bring to your attention here is anger. There is a rising anger in the public discourse of America and there has been a rising anger now for quite a long time. This is not an anger that is directed against some outside force or group. It is not even as I talked about yesterday, an anger directed against the power elite. It is an anger directed by normal Americans against other normal Americans. There is an anger from conservatives directed against liberals, there is an anger from liberals against conservatives. This is what has been called the culture wars.

But if you step back again, and do not focus on the contents of these wars, but just on the energy, you will see this rising tide of anger and as we have said, the rising tide does not lift all boats, but unfortunately it has lifted an awful lot of boats in America where people have been lifted you might say, or even sunk into this anger. They have been pulled into this maelstrom of anger energy that is becoming stronger and stronger in the collective consciousness of America. Now of course, if you look at history you will see many examples where nations, not necessarily democracies, but different nations have also had a rising anger in the collective consciousness. If you were to look for a situation of a nation that had the same intensity as the anger you find in America today, you would actually have to go back to the 1930s and look at Germany.

There are naturally some clear differences. In the 1930s, Germany was not a democracy, it was a totalitarian nation with a fascist regime and the anger was not as such, directed against another group that could be said to be normal Germans, it was directed against a group that could more easily be construed as not being normal Germans, but being an outside group living in German society, namely the Jews. I know that many will resent any comparison between Nazi Germany and America today but I am not talking about these outer things. I am talking about the anger energy, the intensity of the anger energy. If you look beyond these differences, if you look beyond your desire to distance yourself from Nazi Germany, which of course all nations have, even Germany itself today, then you will see that when you only look at the intensity of the anger, the level of anger, there is a reasonable comparison. The level of anger directed by conservatives against liberals and by at least some liberals against conservatives, is very intense.

I’m not even here talking about the amount, the total amount of anger energy. There is far more anger in America today than there was in Germany in the 1930s but because the population of America is so much larger. I can also assure you that back then, it was much more difficult to create that level of anger in the German population because communication wasn’t as effective as it is today. The Nazi leadership had to go through a much greater effort of using what mass media was available back then, in order to generate the level of anger in the German people. Today, this is much easier because of the Internet. Why is it easier? Because the Internet makes it possible, or at least makes it easier than before, to create this self-perpetuating momentum that moves through the collective consciousness.

If you look back to the 1930s of Germany, you see that Hitler had these mass rallies where he would speak in front of tens of thousands of people, work them into this hypnotic state and then they would go out from there still carrying with them that energy that they had taken in during the mass rally, the anger energy. They would then go out and meet with people they knew and they would in many cases, be able to spread that anger energy to these people as well. So there was also back then this self-perpetuating effect, where the anger could spread from that original event. People carried it with them and spread it to other people who might even spread it to others and so on. But today, this has reached an entirely new level with the Internet where people can take these posts created by a few people, share them, endow them with more anger energy and it just keeps spreading and spreading not only in America, but even around the world.

Now, the question simply is, can a democracy be preserved if the level of anger in the population goes beyond a critical level? Can there come a point where there is so much anger in the people of a democratic nation, that it effectively aborts or destroys democracy? It distorts the democratic process to a point where the democratic process cannot function and now you have something that is not actually a democracy, even if it still is from a legal constitutional sense and even if people still vote. But if they vote based on this anger, can the democratic process actually work?

To contemplate this question, we need to go back to the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. What is the foundation for the United States Constitution? Well, it is of course, the ideas, the principles, the ideals set forth in the Declaration of Independence. What does it say? “All men” (and today it would have said), “All men and women are created equal.” In other words, all people in a society, all people in the world are created equal. What does this actually mean? You can look at people today in society and say, “But they are not equal, they are very different. One person has abilities, another person does not have any abilities, one person is lazy, one person is willing to work hard, one person is such and such. One person is this, one person is that, one person has this color skin, one person has that color skin” and so on. So you observe that people are very different. What is the real essence, the real idea behind this statement, …all humans are created equal?

Well, this is difficult to understand for most Americans. You as ascended master students can realize what we have told you, that all people started as a Conscious You that had a point-like self, sense of identity. In that sense, you were created equal. You started out with the same point-like sense of identity and you have then over many incarnations, many lifetimes, expanded and built as the sense of identity you have today. What you have today is not equal. But what you were created with was equal. Now, of course, those who received these ideas that were incorporated in the Declaration of Independence did not have this awareness. So how did they look at it? How did the Founding Fathers look at this idea?

Well, some of them were Freemasons and they actually had an awareness of reincarnation. Some of them did realize that originally people were created equal but what it really meant for them was, that people were by God, by their Creator, created with the same value, with the same rights, with the same freedoms. In other words, God did not create two distinct classes of human beings, the ruling power elite and the majority of the population. The Founding Fathers were well aware of the history of Europe, the feudal societies, the societies dominated by the Kings that were based on this belief in the “divine right of kings”—that the King and the noble class were created differently by God, they were created to rule. This was the belief that created the feudal societies of Europe. It was, of course, a false belief and the Founding Fathers were well aware of this.

God did not create two classes of people. God created all people equal, of equal value, with equal rights and freedoms. Therefore, the Founding Fathers realized at least to some degree, that the new society they wanted to create in America had to be a society that recognized that essential equality of all human beings, and therefore was dedicated to making sure that a ruling class could not form, that you could not have a power elite that would set itself up to rule America, dominate the population and essentially turn the majority of the people into slaves of the elite, as had been the case in the feudal societies. This, the Founding Fathers, most of them, understood quite clearly. In a sense, they wanted to create what we could call a classless society. Now, the Founding Fathers were also well aware that they, most of them, were property owners, had what Thomas Jefferson called the “gentleman farms” for many of them. They had reached a certain position in society, in many cases due to their own hard work and they of course wanted a society where people could still do this, they could still work their way up. But what they did not want was a society where certain people could work their way up and then once they had reached a certain position in society, they could turn this into a privileged position that other people could not threaten. In other words, they did not want a society where a privileged elite could enjoy a certain position that no one else could rise to, no matter how hard they worked. This was quite well understood by the Founding Fathers, at least most of them.

Now, you find in the Declaration of Independence, a rather peculiar wording that many people have not really considered and it is the words, “nature’s God”. Many, many people in America believe that America is a Christian nation. They believe that America is founded upon Christian principles and therefore they think, if they ever bothered to think about this, that when the Declaration of Independence talks about “nature’s God”, well surely it must mean the Christian God, because there is no other God in their worldview. But this is in no way the case. The Founding Fathers, most of them, fully understood that America was not meant to be a Christian nation and they had some understanding that nature’s God was not the Christian God, the Old Testament God the angry, remote God in the sky.

Now they had various understandings of what is meant by “nature’s God”. Some of them did not have a very deep understanding of this. Even Jefferson himself had a limited understanding of it, but he had some awareness that it was not the Jehovah of the Old Testament. It was not the Christian God. It was not the angry being in the sky.

What is actually behind this need to use the expression: “nature’s God”? Well, it is a need to define that the United States of America is based on the recognition that there is an authority that is beyond anything on earth, any human authority. There is a certain authority figure, which deserves the word “God”. But it is not the Christian God. We might instead of “nature’s God” say: “the natural God”, meaning, the God that is not created by human beings and influenced by human opinions. It is, so to speak, the real God, the original God, the original Creator, who is beyond any religion on earth, any image created by any religion on earth— any idol ever created by human beings. This is, of course, where Christians will say: “But the Old Testament God is not an idol. All the other Gods were idols, but the Jews had the only true God”. And this is where most of the Founding Fathers would disagree with these Christians, because they had the awareness that the Old Testament God was not a natural God, it was not a God that was beyond human idiosyncrasies. And why is this so? Because this god had a chosen people on earth, this god favored one group of people. In the Old Testament worldview, you do not have a classless, egalitarian society, where all human beings were created equal. In the Old Testament view, the Jews were created in a special category from all other people. And the Founding Fathers were aware that as long as you have a partial god, you cannot actually have a truly democratic, free society. Because if you have a God that is partial, then there will inevitably be the emergence of an elite, who claims to represent this god and will therefore attempt to take on to themselves a certain authority, which means their words are more important than the words of the people. They have an authority that the people do not have. They have an authority given by God, they will claim that the population should follow. The Founding Fathers were aware of the connection between the Catholic church and the kings and noble class of the feudal societies. They were aware that the Catholic church, by its worldview, encouraged the creation of a power elite that would rule the people. They knew that if you allow a religion like that, to attain dominance in a society, then it cannot be fully democratic.

Now, what else do we have in the Declaration of Independence? “All men are created equal. They are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights”. The importance here is that an authority that is completely beyond the human level, the earthly level, has endowed all human beings with rights. This means that there never should be, in these United States, based on this Declaration of Independence and Constitution, an authority that thinks that it can define the rights of the people. Be careful to listen to what I am saying. In a fully democratic society, the government does not define the rights of the people. They are defined by an authority that is beyond the government. The church, a particular religion does not define the rights of the people. They are defined by an authority that is beyond any particular religion on earth, for that matter, beyond all religions on earth. When you see the emergence of a power elite, whether it is supported by a religion directly or not, that thinks they can define the rights of the people, then you do not have a free democratic society.

In the Soviet Union, the Communist Party believed that they could define the rights of the people. A number of years ago, this messenger watched on TV, as the Chinese Prime Minister visited the United States, this was during Bill Clinton’s presidency, they had a discussion about human rights. And the Chinese Prime Minister said matter-of-factly, because this is what he truly believed that: “Surely the Chinese people have rights, but it is up to the government to define those rights.” But this is not the view of the Founding Fathers of America.

However, it is the view of many, many people in America today, including many of those who call themselves conservatives, and many of those who call themselves Christians. They do believe that the government should define the rights of the people, and that it should be done based on Christian values—the Christian worldview, whatever those values are, and whatever that Christian worldview is, given that there are many different churches in America that all claim to be Christian. But nevertheless, there is a certain collective consciousness that says that there is a Christian traditional set of values and that this should be the foundation for defining the rights of the people. But this viewpoint would make the Founding Fathers rotate in their graves as the saying goes, because most of them recognized that if you allow any authority on earth to define the rights of the people, you no longer have a free democracy. Because those who define the rights of the people will inevitably form a power elite, who has special power and special privileges compared to the population. In the feudal societies of Europe, they believed they had the right to define the rights of the people. King George in England, that the Founding Fathers opposed, believed he had the right to define the rights of the people living in the colonies. He believed even that this was given to him by God, because surely, the people could not define their own rights. And surely, he recognized no real authority beyond him, in the sense that he used God to give himself authority in the eyes of the people. But in his own mind, he thought he was the highest authority as the many Catholic Pope’s have believed throughout the ages and some even today, among the Catholic clergy believe this, that the Catholic church is the highest authority on earth.

The essence of this is again, you cannot allow any human power to define the rights of the people, if you want to preserve a democracy. What does the Declaration say further: ‘All humans are created equal, they are endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights. And among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’. Life is fairly straightforward. No institution in society has the right to go out and kill the people. Simple enough, it can of course, be complicated, as you see, in many societies, where certain police forces, secret police have taken onto themselves or have been given by the government, this right to go out and kill people, even without a trial in the court of law. You could look at today how certain government agencies in America believe they have the right to kill people, you can even look at the police force and see how they believe they have the right to kill people when they feel threatened, or when these people resist the power of the police. You can always have a debate about this, and whether it is being understood and respected. But this is not my main purpose of this discourse. So let us move on to liberty. What does it mean that people have the right to liberty? How far can we take this? What do they have the liberty to do? Well, most Americans today would say that liberty is something that needs to be defined, what people have a right to do. And it needs to be defined by the laws of society. This is a reasonable enough starting point when you are considering liberty. But it is not the final word here. Because who defines the laws? Well, you will say ideally, that the elected representatives of the people define the laws. And again, this is reasonable enough. But what is their basis? What is the worldview from which they define these laws? It is, whatever is the dominant worldview at the time. And this may be more or less out of alignment with the principles, the ideas behind the Declaration of Independence. In other words, if the right to liberty is given to people, by their Creator, who is nature’s God, does it not stand to reason that the liberties that the people have are also defined by God? Does it not then stand to reason that the laws of a society, if it is to be fully democratic, should be in as much alignment with these ideas and principles of nature’s God, rather than some manmade worldview or authority. In other words, again, Liberty cannot be defined based on a Christian worldview. Or a  communist worldview, or a conservative worldview, or a liberal worldview. It cannot truly be defined on any human worldview. But human beings should strive to transcend all manmade worldviews, and tune into, connect to, experience the Creator’s original vision and intent.

What is the Creator’s original intent? All people are created equal, in the sense that all people have been given free will. You know the old joke that all men are equal, but some are more equal than others. Well, most people, most Americans today, many other people in other democratic nations believe that maybe we should have free will, but some people can make better choices than others. And therefore, their will should be more free. And those who are prone to make bad choices, should have their free will restricted. But this is not coming from the Creator. This is coming from human beings, a human interpretation. The Creator gave all human beings free will. That means you have a right as an individual to do whatever you want, based on your current level of consciousness. But there is one restriction of free will defined by the Creator: You do not have the right to take away the free will of any other human being. This is the only restriction of free will. It does not mean you cannot attempt to take away the free will of others because you have that opportunity once you are an embodiment on earth, but you do not have that right from the Creator. In other words, all men are created equal, meaning the free will of all people is of equal importance. And that means that no person has the right to use his or her free will to take away or limit the free will of another human being. This also means that no authority on earth, no government, no religion, no power elite has the right to take away the free will of the population. How many people have truly acknowledged this? Now, I know many people will say: “But how can a society function if everyone does whatever they want to do, regardless of the consequences that it has for others?” But you see, what have we told you? You are all created with a point-like sense of identity. That means you start at a certain starting point, a certain self-awareness and you express your free will, you exercise your free will based on the vision you have. You cannot do anything else. But as you express your free will based on the consciousness you have, the awareness you have, you experience a consequence of your choices. You experience that your choices create certain consequences. And when you experience those consequences, you can expand your awareness. In other words, as you exercise your free will, you refine your free will. You voluntarily limit the choices you make, based on knowing what the consequences will be. This is the basic process defined by the Creator of this world. This is the basic liberty given to all people. You exercise your free will based on your current level of awareness. And as you experience the consequences, you have the opportunity to refine the choices you make. What are those consequences that you experience? Well part of it, a big part of it, is how your choices affect other people and therefore affect your ability to get along with other people. Because of course, we could say that one of the basic principles behind free will is that no human being is an island. You do not live in a vacuum, you live in a social setting, a group setting with other people. You are dependent on those other people for many, many things, in many cases your very survival depends on other people.

So, naturally the process that people go through of exercising their free will, is to learn to balance your individual free will with the individual free will of the people around you. But this is not a forced thing. It is a voluntary thing where people raise their awareness by experiencing the consequences of their choices. So, one person can express to another person how their choices affected them. Thereby, the first person can then have a chance to refine the way they make choices in the future. This is the process, whereby people learn from each other and where they can grow together. A community of people living together, can ideally raise their awareness together, refine the way they use their free will, so that they gradually expand their awareness from the point-like starting point to a spherical awareness. Where they realize that, at least these people that I am living with in this community, we are all connected, therefore what I do to others actually affects myself. This is the basic idea found in most religions on earth: “Do unto others what you want them to do to you.” This is a, what we might say, a commandment that is stated after people had lost the awareness that I am giving you here, of how free will ideally works.

43:09 In the ideal scenario, the original scenario, people grew together, expanded their awareness of each other, grew into a greater and greater sense of connection and oneness and harmony with other people, so that this group of people voluntarily, as a result of their raised awareness, began to make choices that raised the whole rather than one individual at the cost of the whole. So, this is the original scenario designed by the Creator.

Now, what is the next right after liberty? The “pursuit of happiness”. Well, what does this mean? It means that you have the right to pursue what you think will make you happy, based on your present level of consciousness. What does this mean in a society? It means that people should have the right to pursue happiness as they see it, as long as it does not take away other people’s rights to pursue happiness as they see it. I know of course, that this is a difficult ideal to attain. But why is it so difficult? It is difficult because the natural process that was initiated originally has been aborted, has been distorted. It has, as we have given so many teachings about, been distorted by the duality consciousness. We have given teachings that the duality consciousness is part of the equation of free will. It is the inevitable companion of free will, where in order to have a truly free will, you must be able to go into a state of consciousness where you define yourself as being different from, as being separated from other people.

This then gives rise to the illusion that what I do to others does not affect myself. This is what has aborted the entire natural growth process, where people expand their awareness together. This separation has been heavily reinforced by the fallen beings who were allowed to embody on this planet, who have then created many of these dualistic polarities that divide people into two factions that see each other as enemies, often engaging in an all out war to destroy the enemy. I recognize that it is not an easy ideal to live up to. What I am seeking to point out here is, that these are the ideas, these are the principles behind the American nation, the American Constitution and the American democracy.

Now, I recognize fully that in 1776, virtually all human beings on earth were completely blinded by the duality consciousness. It is therefore, from a realistic standpoint,7 completely impossible that American society, even though it has the Constitution that it has, could escape the influence of duality. I am not here trying to create this idea that America should have lived-up to these ideals from the beginning. It was completely unrealistic to expect this. I did not expect it, nobody else in the ascended host did. But the reason why this was given as the starting point of the American nation, was that America has the potential to grow into living up to these ideals. Even though the founding fathers had some understanding, none of them had the understanding I have given you here in this short discourse. Most people, of course would not be able to grasp what I have said here, but at least many ascended master students will be able to grasp it because you have the many other teachings we have given.

So, what was it that I as the Ascended Master Saint Germain inspired upon these founding fathers of America? It was a set of ideas and principles that could set a direction for the American nation—a direction that America could gradually become, or grow closer and closer to living up to. In other words, this is an ideal for what America can become. It is of course not exclusive to America, it holds true for all democratic nations on earth.

Now, why hasn’t America lived up to this? Well, for two reasons: partly because the people of America have been blinded by the dualistic state of consciousness. Partly, because as we have talked about both Mother Mary and I, that from the beginning there has been a power elite who never accepted democracy. There was a clear power elite in feudal Europe and they were the ones who had the privileged positions in society. These souls, many of whom incarnated again and again as the feudal Lords and as the Kings, did not want democracy, the fallen beings do not want democracy. They did everything they could to destroy the American nation in its inception, using King George and the British but they were not successful. So, America was created as the first modern democracy and many other democracies followed.

What have they done ever since? They have attempted to make sure that America could not follow this ideal course, towards living up to the ideals defined for this nation. They have also tried to undermine, even destroyed the democratic process, so that America has less and less of a functioning democracy. Their intent is very, very clear, there is no two ways about it. They will do everything they can to use the freedom that the American system gives them, to destroy democracy in America. They will do, and they are doing and they have been doing, everything they can to destroy democracy in America.

What are the means they have used? Well, any and all means that they thought could achieve the desired end. The ends can justify the means is their modus operandi. What does this mean? Well, it of course means many, many things. They have, as I have said attempted to use the economy. Mother Mary explained very clearly how they have used the economy to attain these monopoly positions. They have attempted to use the political process, they have attempted to create this entire phenomenon of lobbying, where those who have money can buy political influence. But, what I want to talk about here, is to reach back to what I started with for this discourse. One of the means that these anti-democratic beings, some of them are human beings in embodiment, some of them are not in embodiment—are non-physical beings. One of the means they have used is to create more and more anger among the people, divide and conquer, divide the American people into opposing factions. But what they really attempt to do is to build this self-perpetuating spiral of increasing anger.

Why do they do this? Well, because they know that if you get people to be angry enough, you can make them do things they otherwise would never have done. You can make them agree to things they otherwise never would have agreed to. If you had been a professional, for example an attorney or someone in the law enforcement system, who has spent your life dealing with people who commit crimes, you would have been able to see that there are two major reasons why people commit crimes. One of them, is what you might call professional or career criminals who do it as a way to make money. The other big group is what you would call normal ordinary people who commit a crime. These people are not really criminals, they have gotten themselves into a certain situation where they committed a crime. They were always pressured into committing that crime, because in their normal state of awareness, they would not break the law.

One of the things that is most common for getting people into this state of mind where they break the law, is precisely anger. When people get angry enough, they will kill somebody, even though they normally are not violent people and would never dream of killing another human being. But when the anger reaches a critical level, their minds are taken over, are clouded by the anger. You of course know that there are collective entities behind this, but even professionals in the law enforcement field will realize that people’s minds are clouded by the anger, so that they will do things they normally would not do. This is precisely what the power elite knows. This is precisely why they have very carefully now over several decades, used any means available to them to build this increasing anger. They know that sooner or later the anger will erupt like a volcanic eruption. You will know that anger is a spiritual poison and the natural disasters that can be produced by the anger energy is volcanic eruptions. Well, a volcanic eruption is a physical thing, but at the emotional level there is the equivalent of a volcano, where anger can become intensified to where it becomes like hot magma that burns everything in its path. This is what you can see in a mob of people that are rioting, there is a group mind that takes them over and now they do something that they would never have done as individuals. So, these power elite people, they know and the beings behind them know, that when they generate this anger, it is just a matter of when it will erupt.

Now, you may say: “Why do they want this anger to erupt? Because they want to create chaos. Why would they want to create chaos in a free democratic society? Because chaos quickly leads to a crisis situation that the population cannot endure, and now they will look for a way out of the crisis. What is the way out? Well, it is always that the power elite comes in and says: “In order to stop this phenomenon we need more authority, we need more power. Law and order must be upheld. So, we need to do whatever needs to be done to stop this, whether it be demonstrations, riots, whatever you have.” This means you strengthen the government apparatus, which essentially means it becomes more and more totalitarian. And even though the excuse might be to protect the people, or uphold the law, the reality is that it undermines the democratic process and the democratic freedoms. It turns a society into something that is no longer a free democracy, but a midway stage, a halfway house, between democracy and totalitarianism, or at least authoritarianism.

What have I said is the principle behind giving human beings free will? It is that a community grows together, expanding their awareness to where they all realize, that what is best for the whole is what is best for the individual. This is based on raising awareness, not force. This is not something that is forced upon the people from above, from some authority in society. It comes from within, through people’s raised awareness. It cannot be forced. Oneness—a sense of community, cannot be forced. What can be forced is separation, animosity, the creation of enemies, anger and hatred, this can be forced. Oneness, community, co-operation cannot be forced, it can only be based on raised awareness.

So, of course the fallen beings do not want the population to raise their awareness, because they know that when the people raise their awareness, they can no longer be controlled by a small elite. So, they will do everything to abort this process, everything they can to abort this process. Now, we have said before, what did the fallen beings have to do to distort life on earth? They projected that there is a standard for right and wrong and they projected that people should live up to it. If they did not, they should be forced. So, you create a standard that is dualistic because it has two opposite polarities, then you label one of them as right and one of them as wrong. Now, the people who belong to the ‘right’ polarity, you project that it is not only justified, it is necessary for the good of society or even the survival of the human race, that they force those people who are wrong to come into alignment with what they have defined as right. Labeling is the foundation for conflict. The value judgment of right and wrong, is what makes that conflict erupt like a volcano.

What are the labels you see in American society today? Well, many, many, many labels but of course chief among them, Republicans and Democrats, Conservatives and Liberals, Christians and non-Christians. You have seen over the last several decades, the emergence of this belief that the Christians in America represent traditional values, and that these values must be upheld or disaster will be the result. You have seen this willingness to force others to come into alignment with these Christian values. You have seen a belief that this is based on the teachings of Christ and would be sanctioned by Christ. But as I recall it from my Bible studies, Christ said: “Turn the other cheek, do unto others, love your enemies, do good to those that hate you.” In other words, what did he say? Don’t force other people. Don’t force your will upon other people. Don’t force other people to come into alignment with your will.

So, how do these people construe that this could be sanctioned by Christ? Well, they don’t because they don’t think, they are not aware. Why do they not think? Well, partly because they are in the dualistic mindset, they believe that this is absolutely right, that their viewpoint is the only truth, but also because of their anger. They are so angry, have become so angry with the way things are going in America that they are not thinking, they are not aware. There is no real thought process here, where they attempt to look at themselves from outside the perception filter of their consciousness. There is no willingness to step outside and look, where is this going? Is it really in alignment with what Jesus told us? What will be the result of this? Is it really logical, that we can solve all of America’s problems by forcing this set of vaguely defined Christian values and tradition upon the nation? Look at history my beloved, for  a thousand years in Europe you had societies that were dominated by Christian values, as they were defined by the Catholic church back then. Did it create an ideal society? I think not, maybe some people think differently. Maybe some people think, but that was the Catholic church, or that was the church in the Middle Ages, but we today in our fundamentalist churches, we have the real interpretation of the Bible, so we could create what the Catholics could not create.

As I have attempted to explain here, which of course I am aware that they will never acknowledge, you cannot create an ideal society by taking any man-made view, any man-made religion or ideology, or political theory, or philosophy and forcing it upon society. The very purpose of life on earth is the growth in consciousness, the growth in awareness. The very reason, the cosmic spiritual reason for the emergence of democracy, is that democracy is the (at least for now) ultimate way for people to exercise their free will, and grow in the awareness of how what is best for the whole, is what is best for the individual.

The very process whereby people voluntarily expand their awareness, to feel a connection with others, to have a vision of the whole, is best facilitated right now at least, by democratic societies, that is the entire purpose of democracy. The purpose of democracy is not to produce a particular result, it is certainly not to produce a society that is dominated by a particular religion or ideology, or theory. The purpose of democracy, is to produce a society where the vast majority of people have raised their awareness to the point where they feel a sense of community, a sense of unity, a sense of harmony, a sense of oneness. They see the connection between the whole and their individual interests. They work together, and by working together they multiply their talents. As Mother Mary and I have talked about – these early communities where they had this greater sense of connectedness.

So, you see here that what these people who are driven by this anger have failed to grasp, is the real purpose of democracy. Now, I have talked about the religious right, or the Conservatives. There are also in recent decades, there have emerged this group of people who call themselves Liberals and who also believe that by imposing their vision upon society, you could create the ideal society. They also have a certain anger that they are often expressing against the Conservatives. So, none of these two polarized groups can really bring America out of the gridlock that America is in. Why is that? Well, because the simple fact is that none of these groups respect democracy. I have said very clearly that the fallen beings, the power elite have never respected democracy and have done everything they could to destroy it. But what the power elite have gradually created and reinforced over these last three or four decades, is that there is now two major groups emerging in American society that also do not respect democracy. Many among those on the Christian right do not actually want a democratic society, they think that the reason America has gone astray, the reason for all of the problems is that we have a democratic society. They want a society that is based on authority, the authority of the Bible as they interpret it through their so called literal interpretation. They actually want the kind of society that you have had during the Middle Ages. The kind of society that produced the massacre of the Cathars, the Inquisition, the Crusades, the witch hunts and other atrocities. This is the kind of authoritarian society they want, based on so called Christian values, the Christian values that did not come from Christ but from a human interpretation imposed upon Christ. The kind of human interpretation that Jesus would have said what he said to Peter, ‘Get thee behind me Satan, you have nothing to do with the reality of Christ, because you are based on the things that be of men and not the things that be of God.’

So, what needs to be seen here is that there are now two groups in America that dominate the public discourse. Neither of these groups have respect for democracy. Some among the Liberals will claim that they are liberal, they want to give everybody freedom, but it is still based on a certain worldview that they want to force upon society, by using political means. This is not respect for democracy. Respect for democracy means what? You allow the democratic process to work. You allow the people to vote based on their present level of consciousness and experience the consequences. Now, I know there are ascended master students, most of them from previous dispensations who are not open to what we are saying today. Who believe that I Saint Germain, want to force certain things upon society so we can manifest the Golden Age as soon as possible. This is not the case, this is a complete misunderstanding of who I am and what my intention is. The Golden Age must be a voluntary process, it cannot be forced upon society. It can only be based on a raising of awareness, and raising of awareness must be, can only be, a voluntary process. How do people raise their awareness? By making choices and experiencing the consequences. That is why I have said, I am not concerned ultimately about the American people electing this or that President. Right now you look at the upcoming election, it is clear that from my viewpoint I can see that if this person is re-elected, it will have certain consequences. If the other person is elected, that will have other consequences. None of them is the ideal scenario. There can be some rather dramatic differences in the consequences. But my view is simple. If the American people want to elect a certain President, they must be allowed to do so and experience the consequences, so they get an opportunity to learn from those consequences.

My view is a long-term view of America. I must take a long-term view, because in the short-,term America is as Mother Mary so clearly said, ungovernable, even by me. You may think, that if I could somehow appear in some physical manifestation and get all people to follow what I said, this would solve all of America’s problems, but it would not. The only solution is the raising of awareness and that must come gradually over a long term. Naturally, it could go faster if the American people were not in the school of hard knocks. But this is not something we can change overnight. So, I clearly see that the American people must be allowed to make the choices they want to make and experience the consequences. Now, why is it that some people cannot accept this? Well, first of all it is easy enough to see with the fallen beings that they do not want to give the people freedom to make any choice they want, to choose any representatives they want, or even to vote directly on issues, because they want to control people.

But what about these groups that I am talking about, that have emerged, that are part of the American people? Why can they not let the democratic process work? Well, because they have been trapped in this epic mindset, the dualistic consciousness, where they believe that there is one result that should be achieved, and if it is achieved there will be an ideal society, if it is not achieved, it will be the end of civilization as we know it. This is the black and white thinking, the epic thinking of an epic reward or an epic disaster or punishment. It can be no other way. What I see, is that whatever happens in this presidential election, or in the next 10 years or 20 years America will muddle through, as America has been muddling through since 1776.

It may, for a time take a more authoritarian turn as it already has started doing, but this will not last forever. The pendulum will swing to one extreme, the momentum will stop and then it will start swinging back towards the other extreme. But because of the rising collective awareness on the planet, the swings of the pendulum will eventually start becoming less and less, until it is more centered in the middle. Not the middle between the two dualistic extremes but the Middle Way of the Buddha, which is beyond duality, beyond the extremes. This is my long-term vision for America, it is a matter of how long it takes, how many extreme consequences the American people need to experience.

As I said, you could very well have something like a civil war, or mass rioting and violence before the American people wake up and realize that this is not what democracy is about. And that a democracy cannot function when two groups of people see each other as enemies, and are using democratic and undemocratic means to fight each other and to force their vision upon society. When will this happen? When the anger becomes intense enough and the consequences severe enough that some people begin to say: “No, this has gone too far, this is too much. We cannot continue down this road. We must stop”. This has already happened several times in American history. It happened in the 1960’s with the conflict between black people and white people. Even though there was turmoil, there eventually emerged a higher awareness that people with dark skin were created equal by their Creator and therefore, had the same inalienable rights as those with white skin.

I am not saying everyone accepted this, many people still do not accept this, but there was a raising of awareness and this is what led to a new status quo. I am not saying it was an ideal status quo in terms of equality between the races, but it was better than what was there before. So, you see that there was a period of tension and anger that was released, that was replaced by a higher awareness where people simply said: “This has gone too far.” Most people will come to that point where they say: “This has gone too far, we cannot continue like this”. The majority of the people will come to that point. Some will never come to that point but the majority of the people will and this will shift the equation upwards and there will be a new awareness.

What is anger? It is the antithesis of tolerance. What is one of the founding pillars of democracy? It is tolerance. If you recognize all men are created equal, all humans are created equal, and they are endowed by their Creator—they are all endowed by their Creator, with the same inalienable rights. If you truly recognize what this means, you realize that the very basis for American democracy and all democracy is tolerance. Tolerance of what? Tolerance of differences. If you do not have tolerance of differences, a democracy cannot function. What you see today, is that those on the one side of the culture war have no tolerance for those on the other side and vice versa. This is completely anti-democratic, it is directly undermining the democratic process. What is the inevitable outcome? Tension and conflict will continue to intensify, until more and more people start coming to the point where they say: “This is enough, this has gone too far. We need to drop the animosity, drop the anger, drop the focus on differences, focus on the similarities and a connection between us and tolerate each other”. Of course, it is the hard way to learn this, but again if this is the only way the American people can learn it, then so be it.

Now, many people in Canada, many people in the European democracies and in other democracies around the world, have already learned that lesson to a far higher degree than the American people have. The American people like to think it is the most advanced nation, the most advanced democracy, but as we have said now, both Mother Mary and I, there are some serious questions to be raised about that. One measure for how advanced a democracy is, is the populations tolerance for differences. Do you blow up differences and use them to create animosities and conflict between groups of people? Or do you find a way to tolerate the differences so that you can coexist? Ultimately, the differences can be a source of growth for all involved when you transcend the dualistic mindset. But you can still find a way, a state of mind where you tolerate the differences. This is what many of the other democracies in the world have achieved, to a higher degree than America has achieved. America can and will achieve the same, it might take a few years, it might take a decade, it might take several decades. But if you look forward in time, based on having understood what has been happening in time, you will see that the result will be greater tolerance.

Now, I know you can go back to the founding fathers and you can glorify them and think they had some kind of higher awareness or maybe even an ideal society. But if you do go back, you see that there were some very big differences, very big conflicts and there was a clear lack of tolerance even back then. In a sense, you could say it is a wonder that Americans could ever stand together to create a new nation. But they only did it because they had a common enemy. You see in the Civil War, which was the extreme outplaying of intolerance, that you have so far seen in American history. But you see that since the Civil War there has been several shifts in the population, where it has led to greater tolerance. A major milestone in this process, was that women were given the right to vote. What an incredible intolerance on the part of men that they would not tolerate that women could vote in a democratic nation.

So, you see that if you look deeper, at the deeper trends, if you look behind all of the outer conflicts, even the culture war and the conflict between conservatives and liberals, you see that there is an undercurrent of increasing tolerance in America. Now, some of those who call themselves democrats or liberals, have tuned into this undercurrent to a greater degree than most of those who are republicans or conservatives. This I will admit. But you still have the culture war, where, as I have said before, the Democratic Party has been captured, has been hijacked by those who are extremists on the left wing or the liberals, and who see themselves as the enemies or the opponents of Republicans. What those who have understood and locked into the increasing tolerance have not yet done, is to free their party from the extreme views. There are of course, also some Republicans, even Senators in Congress, who have locked into this, but they also have not managed to change the equation in their party.

Nevertheless, what I am saying is this, if you look back and understand the trends, American society as most societies around the world, have been moving from lesser tolerance towards greater tolerance. This movement will continue, the fallen beings cannot stop it. It will have the inevitable consequence, that at some point in the future, Americans will have had enough of the divisions, enough of the warring, enough of the culture wars, enough of the anger and they will rise to a higher level of tolerance. It is not a matter of if, it is only a matter of when.

What can you who are ascended master students do to speed up the process? Work on yourselves. Look at whether you have been pulled into these spirals of intolerance, then free yourself from it and be the forerunners for raising the collective consciousness. Obviously, you can make the calls as well, as many of you have already been doing. You can use these invocations in the two books that we have given, that are very, very powerful for shifting the equation.

So, with this I have given you what I wanted to give you in this installment, which I realized has been a long discourse. A discourse that has been slower than my normal pace, because I want you to contemplate these ideas. My purpose here is not to overwhelm you with a wave of high frequency energy that raises your consciousness, but to give you some thoughts to ponder that can gradually shift your consciousness, where you see it, you experience it, and you have expanded your awareness of these very profound, very essential ideas.

What is the basis of tolerance? It is what we have called the basic humanity, at least the first level of tolerance. The higher level of tolerance is the essential humanity, but then you are really moving beyond tolerance and moving into Oneness, where tolerance is no longer needed. There is no longer a need for tolerating differences, because you do not see them as a source of conflict but as a source of growth. If all people had been created the same, there would be no growth. The very basis for growth is diversity. When a society or a group of people in a society, begin to see diversity as a threat and build up intolerance for diversity, then growth will slow down and democratic processes will be undermined.

So, with this I am grateful for you having tolerated this long discourse. I hope it will also raise your awareness of why it is valuable to hear from beings who are beyond the human power plays, the human perception filters. We are nature’s god’s for earth. For the real Creator, the ultimate Creator cannot be recognized by people in the current state of the collective consciousness on earth. We are those who represent nature’s God because we are above and beyond all human idiosyncrasies. We can give you a frame of reference that can help you raise your consciousness beyond your current level. If you do not have a frame of reference beyond your current perception filter, how could you possibly raise your consciousness? It has never been done. It will never be done. There must be a frame of reference from outside your current perception filter. You can achieve it through the school of hard knocks, or through the path offered by the ascended masters. I hope those of you who call yourselves ascended master students will choose the inner path rather than the school of hard knocks.

 

Copyright © 2020 Kim Michaels

The solution for America is that you change yourself


Listen to a recording of this dictation (subscribers only) 

Ascended Master Saint Germain through Kim Michaels, September 18, 2020. This dictation was given during the 2020 Webinar – Choosing America’s Future.

I AM the Ascended Master Saint Germain, and I am in the golden age consciousness. Why is America not in the golden age? Because not enough Americans are in the golden age consciousness. Why are they not in the golden age consciousness? Because they have been divided by all of the factors that Mother Mary spoke about.

What is the golden age, my beloved? How will you manifest the golden age? Well, you know, the next 2,000 years have the potential to become a golden age. You also know that the next 2,000 years is the Age of Aquarius, and it is the age of the Holy Spirit and the age of community. Community, as has so often been said, so often that it is almost a cliché, but nevertheless it is true. It means “come ye into unity.” Come into unity. But how do you come into unity? Well, as Mother Mary said at the end of her release, you come into unity through the mind of Christ, you are divided through the mind of antichrist.

Why are Americans divided right now? Because they have become open to the manipulation of the mind of antichrist. What is one of the factors that have made them open to this? Well, this is what I will expound upon. You see, my beloved, we have talked before about the fact that Americans have an obsession with winning. But underlying this desire to win is, of course, a certain mindset that is very competitive. Americans often do not realize this because Americans tend to live in a bit of a bubble because America is such a big nation that Americans do not travel as much as other nations outside their nation, because you can do so much traveling in the United States and still see new things. But people in smaller countries around the world tend to travel more. They are exposed to different cultures and they realize there are many different mindsets, many different ways of looking at things. So Americans are not so used to hearing what other people think about America. Otherwise, they would know that many people consider Americans to be very competitive.

You can look at the Olympics, you can look at sports in general, and see how often Americans want to win, how they have a certain very competitive attitude of wanting to win, wanting to be better than others. And it is even reflected in this national sense that America is the greatest nation on earth, that America needs to be better than other nations and that America is more advanced than other nations, which as Mother Mary said, we would seriously question. Nevertheless, it is not my task here to do this. What I want to point out is that this competitive mindset is precisely one of the things that has divided Americans because the very essence of competition is that you are in some kind of struggle against other people. Competition and cooperation are not compatible. They start both with a term “co,” but that is where the similarities end. You cannot cooperate with people if you are competing with them at the same time. Now, there is another word that starts with “co” and it is community. So? You cannot come into community, you cannot form a community through competition, but only through cooperation.

You see here that we have the popular saying in the United States that you want to “keep up with the Joneses.” Well, there are many Americans that are in this state of mind where they want to keep up with the Joneses. If somebody down the street gets a new car, then they have to get a new car that is a little bit fancier, a little bit bigger. Or at least it used to be that way when the middle class Americans had money to spend on these kinds of luxury items, which many of them do not have anymore, despite the fact that both husband and wife are working.

There are many Americans that want to keep up with the Joneses but there are also many Americans who want to be the Joneses. They want to be the people that other people are trying to keep up with, but they want to stay ahead of them. They do not want other people to catch up.

You see here, this is what on a national scale works in the favor of the power elite who have stolen the money from the people. They are, as Mother Mary so magnificently explained, they have set themselves up as an elite, they do not want to share with others, they want to have a privileged position that nobody can threaten, and nobody can take away from them. In other words, there is a consciousness here, you want to have a privileged position, and then when you have it, you want to keep other people from getting close to your position. What does this mean if you look at it historically in America? Well, you see that the people who have the money today, the people in the top one percent, how did they get the money? You have this, again, the American dream that everybody through hard work can become a millionaire. This is part of this dream. But if you look at how the people who are billionaires today, how they or their ancestors, how they accumulated that much money, it was done through certain business measures where they were free to destroy the competition and to do whatever necessary to accumulate the money. But when they had accumulated the money, they did everything they could—both using their money and illegal methods, but also using the government—to shut down freedom of competition. In other words, they used the freedom of the economy to gain a privileged position for themselves and when they had gotten that position, they attempted to destroy the freedom of the economy so nobody could threaten their position, or at least very few people could do so.

Now, my beloved, if you look at things from a purely logical perspective, would it not be to everybody’s advantage if everybody in society had lots of money? As Mother Mary said, consumer spending accounts for two-thirds of the economy, so the more money consumers have, the more they spend, the more businesses can be started, the more the existing businesses make money. Everybody prospers. Everybody makes more money when people have more money to spend. So the richer everyone in a society gets, the bigger the economy will be, and the more people can make money. Even the richest people can make more money if everybody has more money to spend. So why wouldn’t these rich people want everybody to get rich? Well, for the simple reason that they want to be ahead of the population. They want to be the elite that stands out, that has what nobody else has.

Look back to the feudal societies of Europe. Here are these few noble men sitting in their castles, having several hundred peasants do all the work so they can live a privileged lifestyle. Now, as we have said before, if you take one of these noblemen, and look at what money he actually had, he didn’t have very much money compared to what the rich people today have. There are people today who, even if you account for inflation and all of these factors, have much greater wealth than the noble men of medieval Europe. But that was not what meant anything to these noble men. What meant something to them was that they had more money than the majority of the population. That they were so far ahead of the majority of the population. They also, of course, competed amongst themselves, but nevertheless, they could feel that they were part of an elite, and that elite was so far beyond the regular people that there was no comparison. This is what means something to these fallen beings in embodiment and that is why they do not want all people to have lots of money. They do not want the population to prosper too much, because they do not really care about making more money than they have. They care about having more money than most people do and having it be such a large gap between what they have and what the have-nots have, that it is an insurmountable gap that nobody can ever cross it, or maybe just a few people can cross it and also become millionaires or billionaires. But this is something they have to allow in order to maintain that American dream.

Now you can look at certain people, like the owner of Amazon, who started out with nothing, but started out in a new field that none of the established businesses could really see the value of, and has still made a huge fortune for himself. This is something that the power elite, the old established power elite, do not really like. They tend to look down upon these people because they are not part of the old establishment. But they allow it because it maintains that American dream that really everybody could do the same if they applied themselves the way he did. But the fact of the matter is that everybody could not do the same. Everybody cannot become prosperous because the money is not there, the economy is not there, the freedom is not there, the competition is not there. You may have one or two people that break through the glass ceiling and accumulate a vast fortune, starting with nothing. But if all Americans tried to do the same, even if they applied themselves and worked as hard as they could, they could not all do it, because the economy simply is not at that level. And it is not at that level, because the power elite has kept it at an artificially lower level.

This is the competitive mindset. And unfortunately, and this is what keeps the status quo the way it is, you do not only find this among the top one percent of the power elite. You find it among a rather substantial percentage of the American people. They also want to be ahead of others, not as far ahead as the power elite, they just need to be a little bit ahead. But they want to be ahead. They want to be the Joneses that everybody else is trying to keep up with. This has created a mindset in America, and you will find it everywhere. This has created a mindset where some people, in their youth, made an effort, started their own business, did whatever they needed to do and they gained more money than the average. But now that they have gained that more money, they have become a little bit complacent, a little bit lazy. But what they want to do is they want to maintain the lead they have over others. They want to still be ahead but they are not really willing to make an extra effort anymore to work harder. So what do they do? They want to keep other people down.

There is a shift that happens in many people. First, they are all focused on striving to make money for themselves. Then when they feel they have enough, they now shift, and now they are focused on keeping other people down. This is what in many, many places in the United States has created what you call the ‘old boys’ network. This messenger saw an example of this when he lived in Montana, where our previous dispensation to Summit Lighthouse moved in to a very conservative area, where there was an ‘old boys’ network of ranchers that had been raising cattle on their large ranches for a hundred years. They did not want this new age cult to come in. They, for that matter, did not want any change and therefore they resisted everything. There was a small town where the government wanted to build an airport and a university. But the city fathers rejected that. So it was built in another town, which then grew to many times that size, and there was much more prosperity among the people. But the ‘old boys’ network in the little town did not want this because they wanted to maintain their privileged position and this is what you see in many, many places around the United States, in the country, in smaller towns, even in larger towns.

You see almost everywhere this tendency that there are businesses that have a certain dominant position in a town or in an area of a larger city and now they want to keep other businesses down. They do not want other businesses to come up. They have become a little bit lazy. They do not want to work as hard anymore. They do not want some young upstart who is willing to work hard to take their customers away. So they do whatever they can within the law, or beyond the law, often as a form of corruption that is not necessarily as negative a corruption as it can be, but still a form of corruption where they keep the old boys in their privileged positions by cooperating about this. This is a mindset that does two things. First of all, it keeps the real power elite in power, and therefore it keeps the entire economy top heavy. But second of all, it slows down the economic growth. Because again, there comes a point where you have enough money to buy the house you always dreamt of but you cannot buy two dream houses, or three and you cannot dream of a better house. You cannot buy a bigger car than the car you dreamt of when you were young, and so on, so many people come to a point where they may accumulate money, but they are not spending it, so they are not keeping it flowing through the economy. They are not willing to share it either, and sharing the wealth makes other people do well.

And what is the effect of this mindset, this consciousness? It is anti-community. This is not how you build a community. If you look at the examples that Mother Mary talked about of these first American settlers that came over. They had a very strong sense of community, a very strong sense of helping each other because they knew that this was the only way that they themselves could do better. They did not even consider that they could do better as an individual. Their entire mindset was that: “The way that I can do better is to help my brothers and sisters in a community do better because when a community prospers, all members of the community will prosper.” This was their mindset. This was the real mindset that built America. It is still there, you can still find it. But it is not the dominant mindset in America right now, and has not been for some time.

Let me give you a little bit of a history lesson here. We go back, first to the 1800s. Large businessmen came up, realized what Mother Mary said: “In order to really accumulate wealth, we cannot do it through a free market economy where there is free competition. We cannot do it by just providing a product or service and making a reasonable, we might say a natural, profit, off of doing that.” There is, in other words, when you look at a certain economy, you can see there is a level. The entire economy of a nation has a certain level. People have a certain amount of money. They can pay a certain amount of money for necessities and therefore you can make a certain profit on providing those necessities. This is the natural profit. Now the natural way to increase your profit is to raise the level of the economy so everybody has more money. They can afford to pay more, they can afford to buy more, and therefore you can actually make a higher profit. If you double the level of the entire economy, the natural profit can also double. But these people were not content with doubling their profit. They wanted to multiply it a hundred or a thousand times and this is what you cannot do in a natural economy, a free economy with free competition.

You can only do this in a monopolized, top-heavy economy that takes the value of the people’s labor and concentrates it in the hands of the elite. In other words, the reality of the so-called free market economy that people are always screaming about in America is that you can only make a natural profit. There is a natural profit to be made. And this means that in a natural economy, you will not see the emergence of an elite that is so far ahead of the broad population.

You cannot see this in a natural economy because you only make a natural profit. What these power-elite people wanted was to create an unnatural economy where it is possible to concentrate wealth in the hands of 1% of the population. This is essentially the kind of economy you had during the feudal societies of Europe, where the wealth of the people’s labor was funneled upwards to the noblemen who owned the land and owned the people. This is what they wanted to repeat in America. This is what they have been working on since the 1800s. First of all they created the Federal Reserve, they created financial instruments, they created stocks and bonds, they created the banking system and created many other things.

What did it lead to? Well, if you look forward to the 1920s, you see what they call the “roaring twenties” where the economy was supposedly booming. But it wasn’t really the natural economy that was booming, even though it was also growing during that time. But the growth was top-heavy. It was concentrated in the hands of those who had enough money to buy stocks, and who had so much money that they could create a bubble of stocks. This led to a phenomenon that has been known in economic circles as speculation. In other words, you are buying something, for example, it can be real estate, it can be stocks, it can be other kinds of financial papers, but you are buying this not because of the value it has for use, but because you are speculating that even though you pay a certain amount for it now, the prices will go up and, therefore, you can sell it for a profit in a short time. In other words, you are speculating that prices will continue to go up.

Now, my beloved, if you had a natural economy where the wealth was being distributed evenly across the people, not necessarily that everybody had the same amount of money, but that all shared in the growth, if you had such an economy then you could see that prices could continue to grow because everybody would have more and more money, and they could afford to pay more and more. This is where you could potentially see a continued rise in prices. But it would not be as fast as when you created a bubble economy where, again, people are not buying something because it has value, they are buying it because they speculate that it will keep increasing in price so they can sell it at a profit.

Now, if you look at the United States of America, you will see a phenomenon that you do not see that obvious in any other nation around the world, even though you do see it in other nations, but you see it especially in America, you see it time and time again. An obvious example is the stock market crash of 1929. Stocks had as such no value, or rather stocks have value in the sense that if you buy stock in a company that makes a profit, you are paid dividends. But what drove the growth in stock prices in the1920s was not that people were hoping to get dividends out of their stock. It was that the stock market was growing artificially because people kept buying on speculation that the prices would continue to go up, so they could make a short-term profit without doing anything.

You have seen so many times in different parts of the United States where there is a real estate bubble. All of a sudden real estate prices are going up. People are buying an apartment. They know they do not actually have the income that they can afford to live in that apartment long term, because the price is too high for the apartment. But they realize that they can live in it for at least a year or two and then they can sell it for a profit, they hope. But, of course, such a bubble cannot continue indefinitely. It is a pyramid scheme. There will come a point where those who started the cycle are smart enough to realize that it cannot continue much longer and then they start pulling their money out. There is a group of these top 1% or less, who know that they can drive these bubbles and they have done it over and over and over again.

They drive the bubble by putting their money into the stock market or into a real estate market and they make prices go up. Then they count on some of the people who are lower down on the food chain, who don’t have as much money and who are not as ruthless, they will start buying hoping to make a short-term profit. They know this can only keep going for a certain amount of time. But in the meantime, they are having a lot of value added to their investments because their stocks or their properties go up. Then there comes a point where they think: “now is the time to pull out” then they start pulling out and all of a sudden when they start selling, the prices cannot be maintained, and the prices start going down and this can lead in many cases to a panic where there is a crash. This means that now the top 1% not only got their money out in time, they made a huge profit. But most people are the ones that are lower down on the food chain. They lost money, in many cases, all of their money because they had over-invested. This is what the power elite will do time and time again. This is what they have done time and time again and they will continue to do it until the people smarten up and demand that the politicians stop this kind of exploitation, for it is exploitation.

This is not a free market economy. A free market does not mean that the top 1% have complete freedom to exploit 90% of the population. This is not a free-market economy. You cannot maintain a free-market economy if you allow the ruthless people to seek to create monopolies and these bubbles, boom-and-bust cycles. What is it that really happens in such a boom-and-bust cycle? Well, what happens is that you are destroying the sense of community. You are creating a situation where individuals are only concerned about themselves. They are driven by greed. They want to make more and more money. They do not care that other people lose money. They do not care if society loses money. They do not care that all of those ordinary people who are working jobs that they do not make more money and do not increase their standard of living. They do not care about anything but themselves.

So you have the top elite who are completely blinded by their greed but then you have those who want to be part of the elite, those who want to be the Joneses and they try to get in and make a short-term profit. And they are usually the ones that are left holding the bag, as the saying goes. What happens here is that you have the most selfish, the most self-centered, the most egotistical, the most insensitive, the most narcissistic people in society who create these boom-and-bust cycles, partly by ruthless manipulation and partly by blind greed. But they have been allowed to do this over and over and over again. Now what happens when you start doing this? Well, for a time, it may seem as if the natural economy is growing alongside the bubble economy. You create an unnatural economy that is like an octopus sitting on top of the natural economy having its tentacles out everywhere seeking to siphon off profit and value upwards.

For a time, the natural economy can be growing. But then there comes a point where the unnatural economy keeps growing so much faster than the natural economy and there is a shift that happens where there is no longer sufficient focus on multiplying the talents. When I say multiplying the talents, I mean doing something that benefits everybody, which raises the entire level of the economy. When you artificially drive up real estate prices, you are not creating more value, you are not building more houses, you are not building bigger or nicer houses. You are just artificially inflating the prices of existing houses. Stocks are even worse! What is a stock certificate worth? It isn’t worth the paper it is printed on, as they say.

When you create this artificial economy, what do you do? Well, you suspend the very principle that drives economic growth, which is what Jesus described in his parable about the talents where the three servants receive different numbers of talents. When you multiply something by doing something that benefits the whole, there is a multiplication from the spiritual realm. This is how an economy can actually grow and continue to grow. There can be sustained growth in the economy without any boom and bust, without any inflation, when it is a natural economy but this requires there to be a multiplication factor and when that multiplication factor is suspended by greed, then there will come that point where the economy goes into a bust.  There is a crash. It can be no other way.

Even if you did not have the multiplication factor, these boom cycles must come to an end because they are artificial. It is a pyramid scheme. It is dependent on more and more people putting more and more money into it and that cannot be done when just a small minority gets money out of the cycle. How can there be more and more money coming in when there is nothing going out? It cannot happen. Even from a practical level, these will have a limited lifespan. But especially when you consider this multiplication factor, it is clear that they will go down.  So what happened in the 1930s? Well, the economy went into such a deep downward trend that it became as self-reinforcing as the upward trend had been in the 1920s. Those who still had money did not dare to invest it, didn’t dare to start a new business because they didn’t think they could make it. They did not think they could make money when so many people had lost their jobs and were unemployed and in many cases, they could not.

What was it that really happened? The unnatural economy destroyed the natural economy. The boom-and-bust cycle destroyed the natural economy so that the recession became much worse than it otherwise would have been. Did this matter to the top elite? No, because they had all the money they needed to continue living their lavish lifestyle. They had the money to wait it out until they could have the next cycle of boom where the economy was again growing. But what really happened here? What happened was that the sense of community was destroyed and now you had the recession where it was each man for himself and there wasn’t that willingness to help each other at the same level as there had been before. Again, this took down the multiplication factor continuing through the 1930s.

What turned it around? Unfortunately, what turned it around was World War II, where Americans had an external enemy that caused them to be united in fighting that enemy. This restored some of that community spirit, the willingness to sacrifice for the greater good, and that restarted or accelerated the spiritual acceleration factor so that the economy again started growing. This, unfortunately, was at an enormous human cost that had to be paid by those who were killed in the war, those who were hurt by the war and so on. What is it that then happened after the war? Well, there was a sense of community spirit that carried over into the decades after the war. There was this sense of a growing middle class who believed in the country, who believed in the system and who believed in the economy. They dared to invest and they dared to spend money, and the economy became a self-reinforcing upward cycle, mostly again because of this multiplication factor that people had.

But then from 1975 and forward, it was not just one thing, it was many things that the top elite managed to get through at the political level, that again started to restrict that multiplication factor. That is why the economy has stagnated, economic growth has stagnated, and again, this is partly driven by the people who are acting as individuals who have the competitive mindset, who want to be ahead of others, who want to have a privileged position and then prevent other people from challenging it. How can you, when you have attained a privileged position, prevent other people from challenging your position? Only when you restrict free competition, well, if you restrict free competition, you will also restrict the multiplication factor because when you restrict innovation, you restrict the willingness to serve people better, then the established businesses, and so on. You cannot maintain that cycle.

Once those people who want to attain a privileged position by using freedom, and then want to maintain the privileged position by restricting freedom once they get into power, then the multiplication factor goes down. And what you have seen now is simply this taken to an extreme that really is absurd. It is absurd to look at how much money has been concentrated in the wealth of the top 0.1% of–you can’t say the American people, because they certainly don’t see themselves as part of the American people and they don’t act like it.

My beloved, this can change in two ways: It can change by another bust that leads to an enormous downturn in the economy that will have enormous negative effects on the general population. It also will have negative effects on the top (1%) because they have created such a system now, that if it tumbles they will not be able to maintain the wealth like they did to a large degree in the 1930s. They simply will also lose, most of them. It will have enormous negative ramifications. This can lead to such a crisis situation that there is a violent revolution or uprising by the people. There could be a war scenario where America could get involved with foreign wars to such a degree that it becomes also very, very devastating and expensive. And this is one scenario. It is not an unrealistic scenario.

I, of course, hold the vision that this will not come to pass, that the American people will have a shift, go through a shift where they will be willing to say: “We want to change.” And, therefore, there will be such an upwelling of determination on the part of the people, a majority of the people, that a critical mass of people become united by this one goal: to change the top-heavy, elitist economy. This can happen. But even this has more than one scenario. The ideal scenario is, of course, that the people will become united by a higher vision of how the economy could really function, as a natural economy that benefits everyone. But unfortunately, there is another scenario that also has a high probability and it is that the people will not be united by a higher vision. They will only be united by anger against what they come to see as a common enemy.

Now, as Mother Mary said, the top 0.1%, most of them are fallen beings. Just a few are completely taken over by the fallen beings. They have created their positions and maintain them by dividing the people. There is always an inherent risk in doing this because there can come that shift, especially in today’s media age with the internet, where the majority of the people come to see that the enemy is not another group of people, but the enemy is the power elite. The enemy is the elite that has divided the people into all of these warring groups. If the people are united by this vision and united by enough anger, then that can also lead to a not peaceful transition, but at least not as negative as if there is a crash in the economy first, where they demand change. This is, of course, not the highest. It is clearly a dualistic change. But as we have said before, sometimes there can be a situation where the higher vision simply is not possible because not enough people can grasp it. So they must be allowed to outlive their consciousness.

Right now there are too many Americans who are into this divisive state of mind, where they do not want to look at themselves. They want to point to another group of people as the enemy. If they become united and point to the power leaders, the enemy, this could also lead to change, not the highest form of change but certainly it can lead to change. It will, of course, not in the long run solve the problems because only a higher vision will solve the problems, because this will not really overcome division. The people can be united against a common enemy, as they were in their fight against the Nazis and the Japanese, but this did not mean that all division in the American society had now been overcome, as you can clearly see today. Even if the people are united against the elite, this will not, of course, overcome all forms of division, but there will be the stage set for another conflict further down the road. Nevertheless the scenario must be allowed to outplay itself.

You have already seen the beginning of what can happen with these demonstrations against police brutality. You see from this there is an anger in the people. Many, many people have accumulated anger, and a large part of this anger comes from the fact that they know, even if they do not consciously acknowledge this, that they cannot maintain their middle class standard of living. That something has happened so they are losing income, they are losing wealth, their standard of living is being steadily eroded. They don’t know what to do about it. They don’t know what the cause is. So they have the anger, and when they see a way to take this anger out, well, then you see these riots and demonstrations.

Now again, there is, of course, no question that police brutality has gone too far, and it is both valid and within the democratic rights that people protest against this peacefully. But because of the anger you can see that it is often difficult to keep those protests peaceful. You can also see that the police are enveloped in what we have called a collective entity of anger against the people. That is why you see this police brutality that keeps going. Even after the first demonstrations there were still shootings, completely unnecessary shootings. How can it be necessary to shoot a person in the back seven times? You can only say that police officer’s mind was overtaken by a collective entity, but there was no rational thought in this person’s mind. And despite all of the protests that have been taking place, it still happened.

There is no rational explanation for this other than the accumulated anger, and it is just a matter of time when this reaches this level where the government will not be able to stop it. They can put in the National Guard, they can put in Special Forces, they still will not be able to stop it, I guarantee you. If they attempt to stop it by force, well, what is the difference between the United States of America and some dictatorship that America claims to be far above? You see the dilemma that America is in, which is why Mother Mary said: “Right now America is ungovernable.”

How do you maintain law and order if too many people are rioting? How can you do it and still maintain some kind of democratic principles? My beloved, it cannot be done. It is an impossible situation. Is there a way out?

Well, certainly there is a way out. There is more than one way out. But it is a shift in the minds of the American people, where they begin to look at what divides them and they begin to connect to this basic humanity that we have talked about so many times. What is it you have in a true community? You have that sense of humanity. It can be a community like the first settlers in America, who were very poor, who were in a very difficult situation in a hostile environment that they did not know, and they were united by their need to even survive. But still there was that recognition of the basic humanity: “We are in this together. We can only survive by helping each other. We cannot survive by fighting each other or competing with each other.” So this can be something that can emerge, where there are people who look at the riots, look at the government’s response and say: “Now wait a minute. This has gone too far. Can’t you see that this has gone too far? We need to stop this. This is not what America is all about. This is not what a democracy is all about and this is definitely not the way to move America towards a better future.”

If enough people will form a counterweight for this, then there can be a shift. There can be a shift away from division, where people begin to unite and say: “We simply cannot allow this downward spiral to run amok. We need to stop it, and we need to stop it now.” There is a real potential that this can happen. As Mother Mary said, many, many people in America are aware of these things. It would not be news for them if they read this dictation, because they have these ideas already in their minds. Of course, they got them from us because they were tuned into us, even though they have never heard of ascended masters and don’t need to. But they are there. It can happen. The potential is there.

Now the question that I present to you who are direct students is: “Will you be the forerunners for this happening? Will you be those people who can tip the balance in that direction?” If so, you must yourselves overcome this division. You must overcome the divisive mindset where some of you, in fact too many of you, have been pulled into the entire mindset, the epic mindset: “This party is right. The other party is completely wrong. This president is the only one who can save America. That President will take it to hell.” All of this mindset. If you want to be forerunners for a positive shift towards the golden age, you need to take a look at yourselves, and you need to look at why you have been pulled into this mindset. You need to recognize that it is a fear-based mindset. It is the epic mindset that we have given so many teachings about. You may have studied these teachings, you may think you understand them intellectually, but you have still been pulled in by these selves you have from past lives, in many cases going back to your cosmic birth trauma. They are fear-based selves. There is some kind of fear you have that made you vulnerable to being pulled into this entire mindset of scapegoating, seeing other people as the problem.

You can only be forerunners if you use the tools and teachings we have given you to pull yourself out of this, to overcome these fear-based selves.

My beloved, the solution is not that you change other people or change the country. The solution is that you change yourself. You have selves that are projecting that an outer change must happen. You will not be free of those selves until you realize that it is not a matter of fighting for that outer change to happen, feeding your energy into it day in and day out by reading these conspiracy theories or websites that are based by fear and anger. It is a matter of seeing that this comes from a self and letting that self die. Only then will you be free. And if you are not free, my beloved, how can you be in tune with the mind of Saint Germain? For I certainly am free.

Some of you think that fighting this epic battle, where you are feeding your energy day in and day out into these collective entities, that this is being in attunement with the mind of Saint Germain. I tell you it is not. How can you know? If you are willing to be honest, you will see that this mindset takes away your mental freedom, your emotional freedom, your identity-level freedom. You are not free. Therefore you cannot be in attunement with me, for I am free, in fact, I AM freedom.

Now, my beloved, we have said this before. I do not know how much more clearly we can say it. But I do know that the law will not allow us to continue to say this indefinitely. There comes a point where we must leave those students behind who will not hear the message, and, of course, we will. We respect free will. We will leave you behind. As you have seen, we have left students behind over and over again. Or rather, they have left themselves behind by choosing not to transcend themselves. We are the ascended masters, but how did we become ascended? By transcending ourselves and I can assure you, as we have said many times, there is continued self-transcendence in the ascended realm. You can go back to the 1930s and read the dictations that were valid dictations at the time, given by Saint Germain through Guy Ballard. You can be inspired by them. There is still much of value there. But if you believe that the Saint Germain that I am today is the same as the Saint Germain that spoke through Guy Ballard in the 1930s, then you have not locked in to my ever-transcending presence. For I have transcended myself millions of times since the 1930s.

How many times have you transcended yourself since you were in embodiment in the 1930s? How many times are you willing to transcend yourself for the rest of this embodiment? When I transcend myself, if you are not transcending yourself, you cannot keep up with me. You cannot keep your connection with me. It is not that I am leaving you behind, that I am rejecting you. It is that you are rejecting me. For I cannot and I will not stagnate so that you can maintain your present level of identity and have an excuse for not transcending it. That would be against the law, the cosmic law, for an ascended master to do so. We cannot stagnate because a group of students decides to stagnate. We cannot be the same today, and we cannot say the same today, as we did during those years of the Summit Lighthouse, where we gave many valid dictations that still have value. But they are not given from the level of consciousness that we are at today. And if we gave teachings today from that level of consciousness, we would not be the ascended masters. We would be the false hierarchy imposters, who are imitating what was given back then. They cannot imitate what we are today because they cannot transcend themselves. But they can imitate a past image, a past level of consciousness to some degree, at least enough to fool some people who cannot read vibration and were not transcending themselves and therefore cannot see the need for the teaching to transcend itself.

There are ascended master students, or rather there are people who call themselves ascended master students, who are in the same mindset that I started speaking about. They have reached a certain position where they feel they are ahead of others, and now they want to stay ahead of others by holding other people back. You have seen this in every organization we have sponsored. A certain group of people, often among the first to come into the organization, or those who had sacrificed a lot to gain a position in the organization, suddenly did not want new students to come in and raise their consciousness to a higher level. So they try to in various ways keep these new students down, keep them in their place, so that they could still be the elite.

This is not an acceptable state of consciousness in an ascended master organization, and it is why we have stopped several organizations, stopped sponsoring them, because we could no longer sponsor these students in their mindset. So we must move on. We must be completely at peace, and we are completely at peace, with the fact that some students will not move on with us. This was a hard lesson to learn for this messenger, who wanted to help everybody and wanted to be able to help everybody, and thought he should be able to help everybody, and thought that if he could not help everybody, there was something wrong with him. But by working on his cosmic birth trauma, and some selves that he had brought with him from a natural planet, he has been willing and able to transcend it and recognize that he too must be completely at peace when some students leave. And when they then turn around and accuse him of no longer being a messenger and no longer having contact with the real masters, and the same old song and dance that we have heard so many times over the last hundred years.

My beloved, this is what I wanted to give you for now. It is a big mouthful. It bears studying many times, not with the mind, not with the intellect, but with the heart. But it can set you free so that you can be those forerunners for that shift that will bring America closer to the Golden Age of Saint Germain.

 

Copyright © 2020 Kim Michaels

Will America be a compassionate or a confrontational nation?


Listen to a recording of this dictation (subscribers only) 

Ascended Master Mother Mary through Kim Michaels, September 18, 2020. This dictation was given during the 2020 Webinar – Choosing America’s Future.

I am the Ascended Master Mother Mary. Although you could call me the Ascended Master Maray, for I represent the Ma-Ray, the Mother Ray to all people on Earth. Now then, what does the Cosmic Mother, the Divine Mother want for all of her children? Well, it is not dissimilar to what many mothers on earth want for their children. Most mothers on earth want all of their children to do well in life. Not necessarily to do the same, but according to each child’s personality and desires, they want all of them to do well. This is what we might call a normal state of motherhood.

As the representative of the Divine Mother for earth, when I look at America what do you think I see? I see, that all people who live within the borders of America are my children in a cosmic divine sense. What do I want for all of my children living in America? I want all of them to do well. This I trust should be obvious, at least to those who recognize that there is such a thing as an ascended master, who has no ego, no prejudices, no judgments, no human judgments, who is free of all human psychology and therefore looks at life on earth, looks at people on earth differently than what most people are able to do.

Now, my beloved when I look upon America and I use the standard that I want all of my children to do well, how does America stack up compared to this cosmic mother’s desire for all people to do well? Well, I am not here talking just to ascended master students, I am talking into the collective consciousness. Are all people in America doing well? I trust that no ascended master student would answer yes to that question. But I can assure you that there are people who live within America who either would answer: “Yes, all Americans are doing well,” or who have never even considered the question.

There are quite a significant number of people in America, who if faced with that question, would say: “But look at even the poor people in America, and how they are better off than the poor people in some other third world nations.” They would in other words compare America to a different country, as if you could compare, as if you could say that the standard of what it means to do well in America can be compared equally to another country. If the people in that country are not doing well, then all people in America are doing well in comparison.

But is that a reasonable comparison? Of course, it is not. Each country must be looked at, based on its general level of development. Naturally, it is not my desire on a worldwide scale, that there should be this enormous difference between rich and poor nations. Naturally, I want all of my children on a worldwide scale to do well, which means I want all nations to be rich, affluent and developed. But, we have an unequal distribution of wealth on the planet and that means that there are some nations that are doing better than others, and in those nations, we need to look at what is the level of the economy in these nations. Then we need to say: “Compared to that level, compared to the level of economy, the level of wealth in America, are all people doing well?” Based on this, again, there are some people who would say: “Oh, yes all people are doing okay.”

There are some who will actually refuse to even consider the question. Because they want to maintain an illusion that in America, all people could do well if they really wanted to. In other words, they want to maintain the illusion that if people are not doing well in America, it is because they are lazy, or stupid, or not willing to apply themselves. They have in their minds this view of the American dream, and they genuinely think that America gives equal opportunity to all of the people living within its borders. They think, that if anyone really applied themselves, they could become rich, or at least well-to-do. Many people have this image, this dream and will not let go of it.

Now, you have heard the messenger refer to this article in Time magazine, that talks about the growing income inequality that has been happening since 1975. It also says that there was a greater income equality between 1945 and 1975. Well, I will grant you that if you go back to those three decades after the war, you had a reasonable basis for saying that all people in America who really applied themselves could become well-to-do, not necessarily rich, but well-to-do. But what has happened since 1975, which this study by the RAND Corporation demonstrates, is that there has been a shift in the American economy. Where not only income and wealth, but also opportunity has been taken away, systematically taken away, from the 90% of the population, actually even 99% of the population. And so, in order to say, in order to maintain this dream that all people could do well, you have to ignore facts like this. You have to ignore what most people can see, that many middle class Americans are working harder and harder, both parents are working, yet they have a less and less affluent lifestyle.

It is not for lack of willingness to work. Even the middle class, who have gone to college and gotten an education, who are working in jobs, often working more than 40 hours a week, they are still making less and less real income and finding it harder and harder to maintain a well-to-do middle class lifestyle. This can be observed by anyone who is willing to take a look. The question I would like to present to you is: “Is there really an economic basis for maintaining the American dream, that everyone can do well if they really work hard and apply themselves?” Is the economic basis there?

When you look at these cold, hard computer data about the distribution of income, do you really have a basis for maintaining that dream? Because this study demonstrates that what has been taken away, is not simply income but opportunity. You can apply yourself, you can work hard, you can study, you can get a degree, you can work harder and harder at your job, but you are not making more and more money, because that money is going to the top 1%. This is proven by cold, hard data. Yes, you can ignore it. But then again, what basis do you have for your dream?

So, another question then is: “Why are there so many people in America, who want to uphold the American dream?” Instead of looking at the facts, looking at what they can see around them, looking at their own lives and realizing, something has happened in America that makes it very difficult for most people to fulfill the American dream. What has happened?

Well, the income inequality is of course one factor, but there are others as well. Why is it, that there are so many people who want to maintain that American dream? It must be because that dream gives them something. What does it give them? It gives them a validation for a belief that most of them would not be able to articulate. This belief says that: “I am a separate, individual human being. And I am not my brother’s keeper, I am a separate individual. When I do well, it is because of my personal hard work and I do not have to share that with anyone else, help anyone else, do anything for anyone else, I can live my personal individual life and I do not have to consider how other people are doing around me.” This is the belief that many Americans want to maintain. That is why they will not take a look at the American dream, and compare it to solid economic data.

Now, why is it that a substantial part of Americans, in fact a larger part than in any other country on earth, have this attitude? Well, we can begin by looking at a popular image that is very much prevalent in America, in the collective consciousness, in the American culture, in the collective awareness of Americans. It has been heavily reinforced by Hollywood. It has its roots back to the Wild West. It is as I have talked about before, this sense of individualism, the rugged individualism. Who built this country? The rugged individuals who went out there, struggled against nature, struggled against the Native Americans, caught the beavers, shot the buffalo and mined the gold, they were the ones who built this country.

You have so many popular movies, that show back to the Wild West. How it was that individual who finally started shooting back who solved the problems. You have modern movies, that again show that one individual who was reluctant to fight but when the bad people continued to provoke him, he finally starts shooting and when he has shot all the bad guys, the problem is solved and supposedly they live happily ever after – or at least until the next bad guy comes around, which of course the movies never show, because it isn’t shown after the words “The End.” So, you have this cultural phenomenon in America.

Now, you can see, for example that American movies are shown all over the world. There are many nations, (let us just take the Scandinavian nations as an example) where they also watch American movies. If you could compare the mindset to what happens in the mind of a person in Scandinavia when they watch one of these movies, to what happens in the mind of many Americans, you would see a vastly different reaction. Many people in Scandinavia do not see this as a sign that the rugged individualism is an answer to anything, or is an idol to uphold. They do not see these people as heroes. They may see the movie as entertaining or exciting, but they do not have the same dream that Americans have. Therefore, they do not see these movies as validating that dream, the American dream that anyone can do well if they really apply themselves. Many people in Europe have a more nuanced view of this, they realize that you can only do well within the context of the society you live in. Many people realize, that you can apply yourself and do better than you would if you did not apply yourself, but there is a limit to what you can do based on the society you live in. Some Americans have not been willing to acknowledge this.

Now, let us then look at this myth that it was this rugged individual, who went out there in nature and who colonized America and made it what it is today. Is it a reality my beloved? How many of you, who have grown up in America, grown up with these movies, this myth, these ideas? How many of you have ever considered this? Have you actually considered who built America? Who colonized America? What was it that colonized America? What was it that made America a prosperous nation? What was it that made it a nation? Was it individualism? If you go back, look at the historical facts, you see that the first settlers who came to America, were not individualists. They came as a community, they came as a group. You have those who settled in Virginia, those who settled in what is now Massachusetts and they came as pilgrims. They came because they belonged to a specific group, a religious group, they were persecuted for their religion in Europe and they sought freedom from that persecution in America.

What did they have before they came and what did they maintain after they came? A very strong sense of community. They did not see themselves as individuals who could do whatever they pleased, regardless of how it affected others. This, was not a group of people where some of them said: “I just need to take care of myself and my family, and never mind what happens to those others.” They came with a strong sense of community, “We are in this together, we only do well individually, if we do well as a community. If we all do well, if we all help each other, then we also do well as individuals. But if we go our own ways, only look at ourselves and our own interests, then not only will we not do well, we will not survive.” They knew they were dependent upon each other, and they acted like it, because this was their natural state of mind.

You look at the first settlers that came to these shores and you will see that they had a strong sense of community. They very much felt that they were their brother’s keeper. This, my beloved is what initially built America. The strong sense of community, the willingness to help one another, to stand together, to share what little you had so that all could survive. This community spirit is what initially built America. Now, of course these community spirited people were not the only ones who came to America. There were also people who came from Europe, who had a more individualistic mindset. If you go back and look at the historical facts, who were these people? Well, quite frankly many of them were criminals who were seeking to escape the law in Europe by going to America. Why were they criminals? Because they only cared about themselves. They were the strong rugged individuals, who did not think they needed to be concerned with other people, but they could take whatever they wanted. Now, as America continued to grow and became more and more affluent, you saw of course a shift in what kind of people came. You saw many, many people who had grown up in very, very poor conditions in Europe. For example you saw many farmers, who simply could not feed their family on the land they had. This was due, not to their lack of willingness to work but due to political and economic conditions in these countries.

Many farmers from Scandinavia, where the climate was harsh, could simply not feed their families on the land that was available to them. It did not matter how hard they worked, because with the farming methods they had at the time, you could only grow a certain amount of grain, on a certain area of land. There was at the time no way around it, you could not compensate for it by hard work. There were certain economic/political conditions that made it impossible to sell the grain for more than a certain amount of money, and this meant that many of these people were facing starvation. Now, many of these were farmers, they were not criminals, they had grown up on individually owned farms that had been passed down from father to son for generations. They also had a very individualist mindset. It was not a criminal mindset but it was also very individualistic. They came over here with the same mindset, hoping they could find land here and do well as individuals. Yet, still, they had some sense of community, some sense of needing to co-operate and help each other. You saw of course also, that as the feudal societies in Europe collapsed, new opportunities emerged. You saw the emergence of the industrial age, where suddenly you saw a group of people who could not in a feudal system have done well, because they were not born as the sons of a nobleman, but they still had this desire to do better than others. And now they saw an opportunity in the industrial age by starting factories, owning factories, and thereby making money on other people’s labor.

You saw the emergence of a class of these people who, in the feudal society, they were either feudal lords or they were so suppressed that they could not express their desire, but now in the industrial age they could. You saw people like this who emigrated to America, because for various reasons they thought they would have greater opportunities to accumulate wealth in America, than in Europe. In some cases, it was simply because they were not born as the oldest son, so they would not inherit the father’s industrial empire. But many other considerations come into play.

What I am saying is this. What originally built America was a sense of community, a sense of togetherness. But there was from the earliest age and especially after the industrial age, also a large influx of people who had this individual awareness, which we (to use a popular psychological term) would call egotistical, they were self-centered. They were focused on themselves, they had very little compunctions about doing well regardless of how other people did. They had no compunctions about taking advantage of others, not necessarily openly stealing from them, but certainly making other people work for them and paying them as low a wage as possible, so that they themselves could make most of the money on whatever they provided.

This led in the 1800’s to the emergence of this group of large businessmen, factory owners, financiers, especially in the north eastern states of America. This was clearly a group of people who were focused on themselves, completely selfish, in many cases completely ruthless, they were what you in today’s psychological terms would call narcissists. You can look at many of these names that are known, I do not even need to mention them because you all know them. You can read about them, read their biographies and you can see how their only concern was to amass as much money as at all possible, regardless of how it affected other people. In the 1800’s, some of these became aware that this could actually not be done in the kind of economy you had in America. In other words, a relatively free market-driven economy, where there was free competition, where anyone could start up a business at any time and compete with other businesses. So, if you were selling lamp oil at a certain price, and someone else started a business selling lamp oil but they were willing to settle for lesser profit than you had enjoyed, they could undercut your prices and take away your business. In order to compete with them you would have to lower your price, which meant you could not make as much of a profit.

These people realized that, as long as you had free competition, you could not amass really large amounts of wealth. What could you do, then? You would have to limit competition. They did this themselves in all ways available to them, trying to undercut other businesses, destroy other businesses, even hiring criminals to destroy those businesses, killing the people who were threatening them in some cases. These were ruthless business people who did whatever they thought they could get away with to destroy the competition.

Some of them realized that, if you were to really amass huge amounts of wealth, you would have to use the government to give you a privileged position. There was simply no way to do this, as long as the economy was really free, as long as competition was free. Some of these large businessmen realized that they needed to use the government to limit competition, thereby enabling them to concentrate profits and wealth in their own hands. With this emerged a class of people in America who had the same mindset as many of the feudal lords in Europe.

The feudal lords in Europe, the noble class, did not exist independently. They only existed because they had a symbiotic relationship with the King and the Church. In other words, they had realized that in order for them to have a privileged position they needed to make use of the government, the king and the church, those who had the power, so that they could have a privileged lifestyle.

Now, of course when you recognize reincarnation, you could see that many of the feudal lords in Europe, after the feudal system collapsed, they reincarnated in America and became these large industrialists and business people. Not all of them, because some of the feudal lords in Europe had inherited their position, and did not really have the drive to take it by force. So, there was also a certain group of people that had never really had power, or had rarely had power in Europe, and they were the ruthless ones that were willing to do anything and everything.

You see in the 1800’s the emergence of this, an upper class in America. They themselves, very much considered themselves an upper class and they still do. If you could look into the minds of these people as we have said before, you will see they consider themselves to be the upper class, the noble class of America. The ones who know how government, how society should function and it is therefore their duty to make the government do what they think is best for the nation. Most of them are convinced that they are right, that there is only one way to look at America, and that it is theirs.

What have they done? Well, they have continued from the 1800s to today, to seek in all ways possible to them to influence the government to create an economic system that allows them to concentrate more and more wealth in their own hands. There has been some ups and downs in this period. You can see that, during the Roaring 20’s, there was a very large concentration of wealth in the hands of this elite. Until of course, their pyramid scheme of the stock market crashed in 1929 and took the economy into the Great Depression — which the country really did not get out of until after World War Two, where then the noble class of America, it took them three decades to catch up, to where they again got enough grip on the political system that they could start turning the economy into this top-centered economy, that this latest study by the RAND Corporation demonstrates that you have today and have had since 1975.

What have they done? They have created a feudal system in America that is not based on owning and inheriting land, but owning and in many cases inheriting wealth. Wealth, not in the form of land or even actual goods, or even businesses, but wealth in the form of money and financial instruments. This is in essence, the same system as the feudal system of Europe. Where a few people are in a privileged position that the general population cannot ever emulate, cannot ever threaten. And these people are continuing to extract more and more money from the general population, harvesting the rewards of the people’s labor, without giving them just payment for the labor they are performing.

This is essentially what the feudal system was. A privileged elite took the fruits of the people’s labor and gave them as little as possible in payment for that labor. But what builds wealth? What builds an economy? It is the labor of the people. What happens when you take the wealth from the people? Well, you will slow down economic growth as this study points out. But, the people in the top are not concerned about economic growth, they are concerned about the growth of financial instruments. They are not concerned about what is being produced but what wealth can be created through these artificial means.

You see here that, as the study points out, two thirds of the economy is driven by consumer spending. When you take more and more money away from the consumers they must spend less, and that will in the beginning slow down economic growth. But there will come a point where the real economy, the manufacturing economy, might not be able to sustain itself. There might be an economic crisis. Suddenly, when there is an economic crisis, those who have invested in these financial instruments (like those who had invested in the stock market in the 1920’s) get scared. They want to get their money out because they realize that a piece of paper will not buy you anything, so they need to convert it into real money and when everybody tries to do that at the same time, the entire system will collapse.

Now, this does not necessarily mean that the entire economy will collapse. There are still people, they still have to eat, so there is a real economy. But as was seen in the 1929 crash, that real economy can go into a very deep depression, that of course hurts the general population. It also hurts the rich, but they feel it less because many of them have enough that they can still weather the storm.

What is it, this study really points out? It is that American society, the American people in general, have allowed the economy to become top-heavy in these last several decades. Now, you may say: “Why have the people allowed this?” Why have the people gone along with this, why haven’t they noticed? Why haven’t they protested? Well, in large part because there is so many Americans who are still holding on to this American Dream, that they have not been willing to recognize, as I said, that there is no financial basis for that American Dream anymore. That is why they have not been willing to recognize, that the system has become so manipulated that most people, no matter how hard they work, cannot become well-to-do. They are becoming less and less well-to-do. They are becoming unwell-to-do. But there are still so many of these Americans that have not let go of this individualistic dream, that they have upheld the system.

What is the solution here? What is the choice that America is facing? You had an economy that was top-heavy, it has been top-heavy for decades. What did the corona epidemic do? Well, it made the top-heaviness of the economy more visible. It made it clear that those in the top have a far lower chance of dying from the corona virus than those at the bottom of society. What is the choice for the future of America? Which future, which options do people have to choose from? Which future must you choose? Well, you must choose whether you will continue to uphold a top-heavy economic system, which then inevitably must lead to a crash, as it has done in the past several times, 2008, 1929, others can be mentioned. Or, you can choose to take a stand and demand a different form of economy. The kind of economy that America should have had all along, where it is true that if you work harder, you do better.

It is not that we as ascended masters are seeking to create some kind of socialist economy where everybody gets the same pay for the same amount of work. It is very much in line with the spiritual path that your individual efforts are rewarded, as long as these are not selfish, self-centered, narcissistic efforts. There is still a great value, that people can say: “If I do better, I get rewarded. I get more money, I can live a better lifestyle”. But it is still possible to do this within a sense of community where all people in the community are seeking to do better. By being mindful of each other, cooperating, working together, everybody can do better.

You see, my beloved as this study points out, the 90% of the American population have had their income stolen, taken away, eroded. It is not just individuals, it is also communities, groups of people who have had their income taken away. The result of this is that their efforts are not rewarded, they are not doing better as individuals or as communities. What we would like to see of course, is an economy that functions by having as much freedom as possible, free competition. Where anyone can start a business that can compete with the larger businesses, because the larger businesses do not have a privileged position. We would also like to see the emergence of this community spirit, the spreading of this community spirit, where people realize that by standing together they will do better than when they stand as individuals.

My beloved, what is it that Americans time and time again say about their country? “We are a democracy. We are the oldest democracy.” Many Americans think that you are the most advanced democracy, something I would question seriously. Nevertheless, let’s not even go into that. What is a democracy? You had for hundreds of years, a feudal system. Where a small elite at the top of society had control of the majority of the population. How did that change? Why did it change? How could it change? Well my beloved, because the majority realized that they were the majority, and if they came together as a group and made a demand as a group, then the elite would have to give them what they asked for. The elite cannot stand against the majority, unless the majority is divided into separate groups that never co-operate because they are always in conflict with each other. “Divide and Conquer” is a lesson that the elite has learned over thousands of years, but that many among the people in America have not learned. Why? Because of this dream of the individualism, the American individualists.

Consider the plight of workers in America, compared to some European countries. Where in Europe they have stronger labor unions, they have more solidarity among the workers. Where the workers will come together, they will strike. Maybe, even all workers in a nation will have a general strike because people from many different industries and jobs have enough solidarity, that they realize if we all stand together, we can all benefit. This, you do not find in America in general, because the American people are far more divided than are the people in many European nations. Why is there this division in the American people? Is it because the American people are different from the people in Europe? Well, to some degree that is true. To some degree. Many of the people with a very individualistic state of consciousness left Europe and came to America, and have continued to reincarnate here, but of course there is no fundamental difference. People everywhere are able to learn the same lessons, but why hasn’t that lesson been learned by most American people?

Well, because when this power elite started to emerge in the 1800’s, they knew “divide and conquer” is the time-tested method. They realized that in a democracy, you cannot manipulate the government beyond what a majority of the people allow you to do. So, how can you prevent a majority of the people from objecting to the policies of the power elite? Very simple, you must divide those people into as many groups as possible, create as much animosity and as many conflicts between them as possible. You must continue to fan the flames of those conflicts so the people can never come together as a majority and say: “Enough! We want a different form of economy that is not top heavy.”

Look at America and how many divisions you have seen. Go back to the Civil War which created this schism, that still hasn’t been healed in the American collective psyche. Look at ethnic groups, look at nationalities. Look at all of these divisions you have in America. Look today at the political situation. Look at the political discourse, as I have talked about before, the way people talk to each other. Is it difficult to see that it is polarized and it is becoming more and more polarized? My Beloved, can the democrats fix the problems in America? Can the republicans fix the problems in America? Neither of the two political parties in their present form can fix the problems. What needs to happen is a shift, so that suddenly there is the emergence of a majority of Americans who are united in demanding a specific kind of change, for example the end of this top heavy economy. Then, whichever party is willing to run with that mandate, will then be transformed into a new political party that will be able to change the situation. It could be the Republican Party, it could be the Democratic Party. It could be a third party if it was possible for such a third party to get into Congress. Which of course, it isn’t right now. But it will not happen from the top down.

My beloved, what have I attempted to say here? The problem is that the American economy and American political system is top-heavy. A top-heavy system will not be changed from the top down, it must come from the bottom up, it is the only way it has historically happened. Yes, there have been times where the elite saw that the people wanted change and instead of waiting for a violent revolution, they voluntarily agreed to those changes. This, of course is the highest possible outcome and it will happen if enough people are united in wanting the change.

So, what is the choice that the American people are facing right now? It is not the choice of which President they will elect in November. It is not the choice of which party is going to rule or have a majority in Congress or the Senate or have the presidency. The choice is, what kind of society do you want in the future? Do you want a society that is compassionate, or a society that is confrontational. Right now you have a society that is confrontational, this is an artificially manufactured condition. Where for over a century, over 150 years, a very aggressive power elite in America, have attempted to create or magnify divisions in the American people, so that they can manipulate themselves into a position of power and privilege. They have been remarkably successful.

Of course, they cannot see that the more successful they are, the more they shorten the time until their system collapses. As it has done so many times in the past. They will not see this, they will be the last people to see it. But nevertheless, they have been remarkably successful in dividing the American people into all of these factions. My beloved, we see this division even among ascended master students, who for some are convinced that this particular politician, or this particular party will solve all of the country’s problems. Well, my beloved if you who have an ascended master teaching cannot overcome the division, what hope is there that the American people can do so? What hope is there?

You have a teaching about how to develop Christ discernment. What does Christ discernment do? It shows you that all people are one. You all came from the same source. This means what? This means all of these artificially created divisions are unreal and should not matter. With Christ discernment, you see beyond them and you see the need to unify people, to create a spirit of community. What is community based on? Well, several things but certainly one of the pillars of community is compassion. You have compassion for each other. You are saying: “In our community, no-one should have to suffer like this. No-one should have to go hungry. No-one should have to lie at home and die of a virus that they could have been cured from, if they had been given proper care in a hospital. But because they don’t have health insurance, they can’t get that care.” This is compassion. This is being your brother’s keeper. This is realizing the truth behind Jesus’s statement: “In as much as ye have done it unto the least of these my brethren ye have done it unto me.”

Americans pride themselves, many of them, of being a Christian nation. What are you doing to Christ in the poorest among you? in those other groups that you think are the cause of all of your problems. Are you allowing someone, ultimately the noble class of America, to make you believe that another group of people are the cause of your problem? Are you allowing the power elite to get you to go into scapegoating? Where you think: “Oh, it’s the aliens, the illegal aliens that are causing all of our problems?” It’s this group, it’s that group, it’s the next group. Have you allowed yourself to believe that a certain president can solve all problems and is God’s gift to America? Or that another party if elected can solve all of the problems?

You see my beloved, if you take a completely realistic look at America right now, you will see that America is ungovernable. Nobody, neither the Republicans nor the Democrats, nor this nor that candidate could govern America successfully right now. Why not? Because there is so much division in the American people, that no matter what policy you enact, you will only increase the division, increase the anger, increase the animosity. Can you not see, that the anger, the scapegoating, the pointing fingers at others has reached an epidemic level, where it makes it impossible to govern America, especially peacefully.

What could you possibly do, that would not cause a large part of Americans to become angry and think this is the end of the world? Nobody, nobody could govern.

If Saint Germain descended right now and manifested a physical body, even he could not govern America in its present state. He may be able to work towards the unification of the American people. But in its present state, nobody can govern America. It is an ungovernable country. Why? Because of the division. Why is the division created? Because the power elite wants to do everything they can to prevent the American people from being united and overthrowing their rule. Yes, my beloved the problem with the power elite is that they do not remember the fairy tales they learned as children. I am specifically speaking about the man who killed the goose who laid the golden egg. Even they, some of them, can see it is not sustainable. Very few in the elite can see it. But there are people in America who can see it, such as the people who created this study. Many other people, journalists, politicians, academics, ordinary people, many, many people can see it.

I am not trying to paint a doomsday scenario here. The fact of the matter is that all of these things I am pointing out are not new. They are already known by many people in America. Many, many people can see the problems, can see the tendencies, know what should be done. Why haven’t they made a difference? Why haven’t they changed the public discourse. Because they cannot, because of the division among the people. The minute you get the people to come together and not be divided, there will be a shift. And all of a sudden, all of these people will now be able to speak out, they will be heard, they will have an impact. There is a very real potential that America could change dramatically within one or two decades. But the shift must begin in the minds of the people. It must begin again, with the top 10% who overcome these divisions created by the fallen beings that we have given you the tools to overcome, so that you see beyond these outer differences.

We have talked so many times about how a small group of people can shift the collective consciousness. But you can only do that as ascended master students if you are united. If you see the higher vision that we have given you. But for this to happen, you must be willing to take off the glasses, the colored glasses that distort your vision. You must be willing to look beyond all of this inflammatory rhetoric, all of these more or less insane conspiracy theories, all of this animosity and scapegoating that is going on. Naturally, I am not trying to put some guilt trip on you. But you have a potential to be forerunners of a change. If you want to fulfill that potential, you need to be willing to make a shift in your individual consciousness. If you continue, if the other people in the top 10% continue to be divided, then the shift cannot happen. The majority must follow either the bottom 10% or the top 10%. The bottom 10% are in a certain way always divided amongst themselves, but they are united in creating a system that puts them in power and privilege. So, if the top 10% are divided, then who are the people going to follow? Well, they won’t necessarily follow the bottom 10%, but they will continue to be stuck in these divisions and animosities and scapegoating, created by the bottom 10%.

So, my beloved, perhaps not the message you expected from the Divine Mother. Although, if you have followed these teachings for a while, you should have learned not to really expect anything but to simply be open, and neutral to whatever comes. So, I have, of course, in this discourse largely spoken into the collective consciousness. But certainly, there are some among you who could benefit from stepping back, taking a look at your own state of consciousness, seeing whether you have that compassion, the compassion born from the realization that, we are united in Christ and divided in anti-christ.

So, with this I thank you for being willing, most of you. A few have not been willing because they have not agreed with what I have said. But most of you being willing to be the broadcast stations to send this message into the collective consciousness, where it will begin to spread as rings in the water until some people will pick up on it, and dare to speak out and demand change, for change is the order of the day – now more than ever before.

 

Copyright © 2020 Kim Michaels

Ascended Master Resources

This website is part of the Ascended Master Resources network, which also contains the following websites:

Ascended Master Answers
Numerous answers from the ascended masters to people’s questions.

Transcendence Toolbox
Practical tools for enhancing your spiritual growth, including decrees, visualisations and invocations.

The Mystical Teachings of Jesus
The true teachings of Jesus as he taught back then and as he teaches today.

Explaining Evil
A profound explanation for the origin and methods of dark forces and how to free ourselves and the planet from them.


TRANSLATIONS:

Arabic 

Dutch

Estonian

Hungarian

Polish

Korean

Lithuanian

Persian

Swedish

Russian

You can experience that masters are real! 

Kim’s talk given at the 2020 Webinar – Being the Divine Mother.


I’m normally reluctant to speak after a dictation because I don’t want to say anything that could interfere with your experience of the dictation, your experience with the master. But I feel moved to share something with you here. Venus was talking about the love that has been streaming through this dictation and that the messenger has been feeling. So after the dictation was over I was contemplating: “Well have I been feeling the love.” Because normally when I receive a dictation I am in this neutral state of mind that I have been talking about. I don’t necessarily even really feel in a normal way what is coming from the master. I am just focused on being neutral, or I am just in that neutral state of mind. But I realized that I have of course been feeling the love, but then now that I could just go within and centre in my heart, I was allowing myself to open myself to it.

What I felt was not what you would normally call love on earth. What I sensed was this, which I have sensed before from the masters, this expansion of consciousness, this expansion of perspective. It is what has sort of driven my relationship to the ascended masters since I first heard about ascended masters. This was back in 1983/1984 where I became aware of the concept of ascended masters. At some point in the early stages there, I had a very superficial view of what the masters are. There came a point where I realized that they have value precisely because they are not in embodiment. Therefore, I could grasp at the time that they see something that I don’t see. Their perspective is much broader than mine.

It is like I am inside this little box and I have this small binocular that is giving me a very limited view of the world around me, and I’m looking at the world through this binocular. But the masters are not only outside of my box but they are not even on earth. They are looking at earth from a much broader perspective. This understanding has followed me ever since and it has been (sort of) the basis for my relationship with the ascended masters. Because I realized that I cannot tell the masters what they should say or what they shouldn’t say. I can’t with my mind, with the outer mind, I can’t fathom what they should say or what they shouldn’t say. Therefore, it’s pointless for me in my outer mind to have an opinion about what the masters should say or what they shouldn’t say.

I have over the years, both in the Summit Lighthouse and later. I have met a number of people who didn’t grasp that. They hadn’t had that experience, had that perspective. They were convinced that they could know what the masters were like, what the masters should say and especially what the masters shouldn’t say and it’s just not been in my consciousness. I have looked at these people and I couldn’t really understand where they were coming from. I know you could come up with various theories – they are doing this; they are doing that. I don’t want to analyse it here, I just want to say, for me I have realized that I cannot as a human being in embodiment on this very scary planet, it is pointless to have an opinion about the masters. What they should say or what they shouldn’t say. I can’t notice with my outer mind; I can’t analyse with my outer mind. If I think I can, I’m just out of touch with reality and I’m certainly – I put myself out of touch with the ascended masters.

I have met people who were convinced that they are in contact with the ascended masters, but still in their outer minds they have this very limited view of who the ascended masters are, how they should be or what they should do or not do. Over the years my relationship with the masters has of course developed because I have raised my own consciousness. So I can fathom more than I could thirty/forty years ago about the ascended masters and the spiritual path. So I have a much broader perspective that I have today but still I feel that with the greater understanding I have today compared to thirty years ago, I still can’t tell the masters what they should say or what they shouldn’t say. I can’t know, I can’t analyse, it’s pointless, it’s fruitless. I just experience as a reality this is nonsensical.

My role as a messenger is to always be open, to let the masters say what they want to say through me. It’s not my role to have an opinion about it, to filter it. The less I filter, the better messenger I can be.  So, where this leads to in terms of Venus’s dictation was that after this, I had this experience that I have had before that I wish all of you could have. Where it was like I was taken out of this situation I’m in as I am sitting here in this physical body. It wasn’t that I was taken to anywhere in particular, it was just that I had this spherical awareness, this enormous sphere and it was not like I was somewhere particular in that sphere, in a particular location looking down on earth. It was like I was just (if you want to put words on it) everywhere in the sphere, I just had this spherical awareness and I realised this is what the masters have. When they look at us they have this spherical awareness. It is so far beyond what we can have in the physical body because obviously we have a localised awareness. There is nothing wrong with that, that’s the nature of being in embodiment, at least on a planet like this. But it’s just so valuable to have had that experience, that there is such a much broader awareness than what we have here.

So for me, you can look at ascended master teachings and you can read them with the outer mind and you can say: “Oh they have such an amazing understanding and all these perspectives and all these insights you get.” Yes of course that’s valuable, but to me that’s not the most valuable that I have gotten out of my relationship with the ascended masters. The most valuable is these experiences of this spherical consciousness that they have. Some of you I know have experienced that as well but I also know many people haven’t. They have studied the teachings, there are people who have studied ascended master teachings for thirty/forty years, they know the teachings very well on an intellectual level but they have never had that experience of the consciousness of the masters.

So I guess what I wanted to share with you, is that it is not that the masters are withholding that experience from any of us. They give words to us, they give teachings to us that we can grasp with the outer mind. Their hope is that we will use those teachings to go beyond and have that direct experience of the master’s consciousness, so that we have that spherical awareness rather than this localised awareness that we have down here.  It’s not that we need to have this experience all the time, we may not need to have it very often. But if you have just had it once, you know there is a frame of reference, there is an alternative to this localized sense of consciousness. You are not trapped here. You are not the localized self; you are so much more than that.

I think that’s the most valuable we can get out of being ascended master students. When we experience that awareness – and each master has this awareness. You may look at a particular master (for example) in the Summit Lighthouse so many people had a specific image of El Morya.  At one point I experienced him totally differently as this pink love. Since then I’ve always had this awareness that the masters are so much more than we can fathom with the outer mind. We can experience the totality of the master’s being and consciousness but we have to open ourselves to it. They are already doing that and we have to neutralise that outer mind that wants to fit the master into its mental box so it feels it has even the master under control. I’ve known people who claim they loved El Morya but it was possessive love. They thought they had El Morya firmly in their mental box and they knew what he was going to say or not say. I have met people who rejected the masters or rejected a particular messenger because “the masters would never say this.” Once you experience the masters you realize that they are so much more than you can conceive with the outer mind. You also, and this is what I just had again now after this dictation, was this experience that the masters are real. They are so real! I mean it’s not a matter of using this outer mind to consider “are the masters real, or are they not real.” “How are the masters, is this master real or is this messenger in contact with the real masters or not!” It’s a matter of stepping outside of our own mind and experiencing the reality of the master. When you experience that, all of these considerations of the outer mind, they just melt away. The masters ARE real but you can’t know that through the intellectual reasoning. There is no proof that can be given. But you can experience it and once you experience it, everything else just fades away. So that was all I wanted to share.

 

Copyright © 2020 Kim Michaels