Thank you dear Charles. I resonate with the energy and intention behind this post and, like you, i do also see the heart-corrupted capitalistic trustless love-devoid dog-eat-dog energy behind the coercive and submissive practice of NDA and the whole capitalistic cultural "infrastructre" and 'way of being' that brought it about.
I wanted to make a quick comment, if I may, which is a bit off the main topic of the post (please delete if it's too off topic in your view), but one of your sentences jumped out at me "..as we move past the mentality of separation that sees a world of separate individuals competing to maximize rational self-interest, we need to.." and I couldn't help but wonder what kind of reality do you imagine that we are living in that prompts you to make such a statement. Are we really ACTUALLY moving past that mentality? Or are we moving the EXACT OPPOSITE direction? Are you not aware of who sits in government in power over us? An administration full to the brim with war-mongering tribalist ANTI-UNITY Godless ultra-zionist NeoCon religious-fundamentalists (who view those who had a very specific religious label placed on them at birth to be of superior importance and value to others, and who push nonstop for religious division, hatred and war);
An administration full to the brim with the worst swamp creatures, with oligarch billionaire technocrat predators, who work to move everything from the public domain into their private property (they call this "freedom") and who are moving us towards TECHNO-FEUDALISM, building the digital techno prison for humanity, to cement the DOMINATION of the few billionaire oligarchs over the many.
An adminiatration by the ruling wealth class for the ruling wealth class.
The absolute LOWEST LEVEL OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENT runs this country. The most infantile cunning greedy abusive war-mongering murderous dividers of humanity. Billionaire predators and their global militarized murder machine, who work diligently to concentrate the planet's wealth in the hands of the 0.1%.
A humanity-dividing administration full to the brim with a tribalist ANTI-UNITY ethno-fascist cult of zionist supremacist terrorists, torturers, child-abusers, rapists, murderers who believe that the life of some humans (those who carry their specific religious label) are more valuable than others, and who do everything in their power to incite religious-ethnic division, hatred and eternal war - which is the most powerful tool in the billionaires' disposal to divide and rule us ;
An administration of psychologically-undeveloped love-less infantile God-ignorant abusers who view "greatness" as meaning domination, power over, subjugation and crushing others to benefit oneself...
Chatles, do these supremacists, abusers, oligarchs, ruling class oppressors, jailors of humanity, manipulative war-mongers embody what you call "moving past the mentality of separation"? or are they the POLAR OPPOSITE of that?
PPS. Before any automatic knee-jerk reactions calling me "antisemite" for daring to mention the life-destroying Nazi nature of NeoConservative ZIONIST SUPREMACY, violence, dehumanization and colonialism (and the NeoCon zionists' constant push for religious division, hatred and war), before such automatic reactions, please know that i had the label 'Jew' placed on me at birth, and I am joining numerous other jews and holocaust survivors who pointed out the Nazi-like DEHUMANIZING nature of zionist mentality, ideology and practices. Here is one example of a holocaust survivor speaking about the anti-human dehumanizing nature of israeli zionism, its profound heart-corruption, and how Nazi-like it is, how identical it is to the fascists who murdered his family in europe https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YVmCwhFk6Pc
Read the note you linked. Very skillfully articulated!!
Strong words in this comment, but in this case I do agree that they are appropriate for the nightmarish reality we are living in, ruled by greedy psychopaths, and by those who seem hell-bent on dividing humanity for their divide and rule agenda, as you rightly noted.
And possibly the most monstrous thing is that these billionaire psychopaths and their division & domination mentality are sold to us as "anti-elite pro-freedom rebel populists". And people are buying it!!!
Yes . I am old enough to remember that a handshake was often enough for a business deal or other commitment. That trust was given more freely and I believe respected more genuinely. Not to say there weren't breeches but respect in the community was a more potent force.
Doesn't it seem that as technology has separated us physically more and more, we've had to institute "technical" methods of trust-verification -- like an NDA? A handshake is so visceral, and we learn so much from it: is the person's hand clammy and cold? Warm and strong? Weak and sweaty? Our internal barometers that detect levels of trustworthiness are being taxed less and less, and are therefore atrophying, necessitating more and more technology. It's a vicious cycle. Perhaps a document like Charles's TDA can be the beginning of a virtuous one.
I agree with the energy behind this, which is exactly why I, at the ripe age of 47, decided to go to law school last year.
So I must also humbly and respectfully disagree with some of your conclusions about the law. How the law is wielded can certainly be problematic, and its origins are undoubtedly problematic in many cases. But there are very real metaphysical reasons for its existence. The law is the energetic container for this particular version of a Matrix (root word: Mother). It is flawed, as all humans things are, and yet such beautiful potential and intent is hidden within it. In this way, it reminds me of the Bible—wielded for dark purposes by those who gain from it (look at the Papal Bulls that resulted in the colonization of the Americas...*shiver*), and look at the secret, metaphorical poetry that speaks straight to a truth in the heart. And so it is with the law.
I come to the law from over a decade of rewilding, decolonization, and anarchist philosophy studies. Then I had a spiritual awakening and began to see how all the metaphysics fit with all of it. And, when I began to be able to visualize in my mind's eye the way all these words are strung together to create very real experiences for each of us here...well, I got excited.
And when it comes to Justice...big "J" Justice, not little "j" human-made justice...it is a Divine power. For more on this I highly recommend the reading of the 60th Gene Key in the book The Gene Keys by Richard Rudd. The other beautiful gift of that book's perspective is the understanding of Duality, that if something negative exists, then—it's good news!—because it means its programming partner in polarity also exists and is just as full of potential.
I see your new document here very much in line with that potential. I suppose my quibble is with a wholesale rejection of what is in current existence. Because we all know we don't et to where we're going by shaming, excluding, rejecting, and denying. I've tried all that and I'm exhausted. I'm only making tender headway these days with acceptance, understanding, and gratitude for all of it.
Thank you for all you do! So appreciate your words and perspectives.
IMO, there are different 'layers' of law for different levels of consciousness.
More explicit, demanding, and punishing codified law for the less evolved levels of consciousness; i.e. those unlikely to act responsibly.
Less explicit, demanding, and punishing for those with a medium level of consciousness who may simply err for some relatively good reason.
No codified law at all for those higher levels of consciousness who are fully tapped into their mind and heart. Eye-to-eye contact and a handshake will do... but even that is not really necessary.
Relationship is the currency of all living systems. It attracts the most interest and has the greatest ROI. We may kill and die for the currency of fiat/$$ but we will not survive without the currency of caring - built into relationship.
The currency we cannot live without
thank you for the reminder that at the beginning and end of each transaction is knowing our relationships have the integrity of Nature - supporting us through thick and thin
I believe this is swinging a bit to an opposite extreme. After experiencing (a lot of) harm in an intentional community guided by a lot of such principles (everyone has their blind spots, yeah, even people with established careers in facilitation and mediation apparently), I believe that having a more *localized* accountability structure is the answer to the large, violent systems that our culture currently prescribes.
Having no way for someone to be held accountable, except for them to hold themselves accountable (even if they seem to be upstanding individuals who share core values), is noble but foolish, in my experience. Everyone fails and falters. And part of having a safe container and a supportive community, is being able to course-correct each other when we stray from our values, and having actual enforceable ways of doing that. That is, having real, tangible consequences for breaches in agreements (though not ones that are so cruel and alienating as our current system doles out). Otherwise, people who have more power or privilege in the community may replicate systems of oppression with nothing but a non-enforceable document that ends up being more performative than substantial. I say this also because I signed many such documents in the intentional community where I was harmed and never got an accountability process, where so many people with more privilege violated their agreements over and over.
But I do agree that these things should be witnessed (and enforced?) by the community (whatever that is defined as by the group), and being guided by transformative justice models for addressing harm, which necessitates a community approach. Without the active holding by our local community, there is no real structure, and that is where the violent state swoops in to fill the vacuum.
I agree. Too much of a swing to the opposite. I belong to a group that's governed by a contract, and have been a key driver of the contract being as functional as it is. Let me just say that these days especially, people can have almost no understanding of what it means to have duty, obligation, uniform standards, fairness, etc.
Lots of people think for example that whatever's in a contract is now what is allowed. They don't understand that laws govern what is allowed in a contract, nor that laws provide the shared understanding of the terms in the contract, nor that laws provide the additional information necessary to fill in the gaps in the contract. All contracts have gaps. It's impossible to specify every eventuality.
People simply do not understand this. And these people can be so resistant to this information that they simply will not learn it, even when they are informed (educated) by an attorney.
So unfortunately, a positive type agreement like this one here is absolutely meaningless with people like this. And one will not discover that one's dealing with people like this, until a situation arises which would violate the terms of a more punitive agreement such as an NDA. It is impossible to know everything about a person in advance of interacting with them, just as it's impossible to specify in advance everything that could happen.
I said that these days, people can have almost no understanding. People no longer have to know much, to function in the world. More layers of complexity, more hierarchy, more division of labor, means that people are often just taking instruction their entire lives, and living lives largely free of any obligation where they have to figure out the situation together with their partners in that obligation. We no longer have people educated to a classical standard that would ensure shared knowledge in the sorts of concepts needed for a positive, "trust based" relationship like in this ^ proposed trust agreement. People don't understand the philosophical concepts, may have very idiosyncratic and personal understandings of the terms, and have no theory or practice in a way of approaching mutual misunderstandings to come to an agreement. They probably don't even have much theory or practice in acting autonomously to take on responsibility.
So no. It's a nice ideal, but the strictures of the NDA are all I'd trust for most people.
Love it. Though I would love it even better if it were a simple conversation over tea, not something written down in document form. In the end it is always about the relationship between the two people, or institute, or company. I find myself simply letting slide the attachments that don't reflect the reciprocity that is the more natural, and lovelier, way.
LOVE this. Number of years back I realized I could not in good conscience promise I would keep secrets. At the time I was married and, at a minimum, I wasn’t planning to keep secrets from my spouse. I decided at that point, that when I was asked for confidentiality, I would instead acknowledge the sensitivity of the information and promise to take 100% responsibility for what happened with it after it was in my care. Naturally I would choose not to share with anyone where the info could do harm to anyone. But I left open the possibility that there may come a time when the info could serve healing. If you trust me to hold it thusly, I’d say, then I am happy to carry it with you. You’re not trusting my capacity for secrecy in this agreement. You’re trusting my love and my discretion. 😊
A loose example comes to mind - baptism. The two godparents publicly declare they will invest time in the child and to teach them the ways of God. The child is shown before the congregation who not only witness this promise but are also instructed to love, know, and reflect love to the child as she grows up. There is no formal agreement, or signatures. Just a party later on and some photos.
My philandering grandfather was my godfather. I do really love this, but I think it could be negotiated in advance what reparations will be made if someone acts outside of their agreements.
One thing I love about this is that it is an example of how many of our common practices are rooted in a antagonistic world view. And yet because they are commonplace, it is easy for me to not think about it and make that connection. A Trusted Disclosure Agreement is not only a great idea, but it opens up my brain to thinking about other practices that need to be examined.
I agree completely, I recently passed on a deal because of the NDA. Especially icky feeling is that they have no time limit, the institution can hold a club over one's head for life. People used to do a deal on a handshake and the world was a better place.
I love this. It reminds me of hearing dolphin researcher, Star Newland, talk about language sculpting. Using phrases such as "support domestic harmony" instead of "fight domestic violence". Fits nicely with this, and many of Charles' other essays.
For literally anything that anyone wants to do, they must be digitally identified, verified, and tracked. Every transaction, your whereabouts, energy usage, your communications, internet usage, etc. All will require digital ID and permission. Much of this has already become 'normal'.
I try to explain this to people by first having them recognize how much we each trust each other every moment of every day. People eventually realize that massive degrees of trust are what make human interactions work, at all levels.
IMO, strip away that baseline trust we have for each other, install and demand a Zero Trust security model for virtually everything, and the human mind will quickly erode. Hyper-paranoia will overtake society.
I liken this to my feelings on pre nuptials... I always think - wow - if this is the space you have to begin should you be marrying this person? Why do you not trust them or have enough trust in yourself that you would create a relationship that is built on grounds that hold so much more trust - not naive to how things are and that people can change and all the things - it just always felt such a weird energetic space to begin to relate.. for as @Jacquie Chandler (below comment) points out Relational capacity is the way of the Living Systems. It is what I talk about all the time, and how building at the speed of trust - as Life does - is the way in which to develop these relationships so that they are steady. There is indeed much to distrust in all the worlds events today - and what is required to uphold that distrust is distrust itself and the longer we continue to play into that and not build steady sound relationships we will continue to feed and play off the energy that is holding us back ... rather - lets go outside and begin to build relationships.
Thank you dear Charles. I resonate with the energy and intention behind this post and, like you, i do also see the heart-corrupted capitalistic trustless love-devoid dog-eat-dog energy behind the coercive and submissive practice of NDA and the whole capitalistic cultural "infrastructre" and 'way of being' that brought it about.
I wanted to make a quick comment, if I may, which is a bit off the main topic of the post (please delete if it's too off topic in your view), but one of your sentences jumped out at me "..as we move past the mentality of separation that sees a world of separate individuals competing to maximize rational self-interest, we need to.." and I couldn't help but wonder what kind of reality do you imagine that we are living in that prompts you to make such a statement. Are we really ACTUALLY moving past that mentality? Or are we moving the EXACT OPPOSITE direction? Are you not aware of who sits in government in power over us? An administration full to the brim with war-mongering tribalist ANTI-UNITY Godless ultra-zionist NeoCon religious-fundamentalists (who view those who had a very specific religious label placed on them at birth to be of superior importance and value to others, and who push nonstop for religious division, hatred and war);
An administration full to the brim with the worst swamp creatures, with oligarch billionaire technocrat predators, who work to move everything from the public domain into their private property (they call this "freedom") and who are moving us towards TECHNO-FEUDALISM, building the digital techno prison for humanity, to cement the DOMINATION of the few billionaire oligarchs over the many.
An adminiatration by the ruling wealth class for the ruling wealth class.
The absolute LOWEST LEVEL OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENT runs this country. The most infantile cunning greedy abusive war-mongering murderous dividers of humanity. Billionaire predators and their global militarized murder machine, who work diligently to concentrate the planet's wealth in the hands of the 0.1%.
A humanity-dividing administration full to the brim with a tribalist ANTI-UNITY ethno-fascist cult of zionist supremacist terrorists, torturers, child-abusers, rapists, murderers who believe that the life of some humans (those who carry their specific religious label) are more valuable than others, and who do everything in their power to incite religious-ethnic division, hatred and eternal war - which is the most powerful tool in the billionaires' disposal to divide and rule us ;
An administration of psychologically-undeveloped love-less infantile God-ignorant abusers who view "greatness" as meaning domination, power over, subjugation and crushing others to benefit oneself...
Chatles, do these supremacists, abusers, oligarchs, ruling class oppressors, jailors of humanity, manipulative war-mongers embody what you call "moving past the mentality of separation"? or are they the POLAR OPPOSITE of that?
PS. By the way, I just published a short note that elaborates a bit more on this theme (I guess that's why that sentence jumped out at me) https://substack.com/@headandheart1/note/c-89589245
PPS. Before any automatic knee-jerk reactions calling me "antisemite" for daring to mention the life-destroying Nazi nature of NeoConservative ZIONIST SUPREMACY, violence, dehumanization and colonialism (and the NeoCon zionists' constant push for religious division, hatred and war), before such automatic reactions, please know that i had the label 'Jew' placed on me at birth, and I am joining numerous other jews and holocaust survivors who pointed out the Nazi-like DEHUMANIZING nature of zionist mentality, ideology and practices. Here is one example of a holocaust survivor speaking about the anti-human dehumanizing nature of israeli zionism, its profound heart-corruption, and how Nazi-like it is, how identical it is to the fascists who murdered his family in europe https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YVmCwhFk6Pc
And here is another holocaust survivor speaking powerfully about Israeli Nazi-like mentality, how identical it is to the mentality of his Nazi torturers in europe https://www.doubledown.news/watch/2024/may/7/holocaust-survivor-absolutely-demolishes-israel stephen kapos 12 minuts
And here is another holocaust survivor explaining why he opposes zionism
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=upmrOAwfSsU gabor mate interview with puers morgan
And one more
https://www.doubledown.news/watch/2024/april/28/meet-the-wrong-jew-the-media-doesnt-want-you-to-know-exists
Read the note you linked. Very skillfully articulated!!
Strong words in this comment, but in this case I do agree that they are appropriate for the nightmarish reality we are living in, ruled by greedy psychopaths, and by those who seem hell-bent on dividing humanity for their divide and rule agenda, as you rightly noted.
And possibly the most monstrous thing is that these billionaire psychopaths and their division & domination mentality are sold to us as "anti-elite pro-freedom rebel populists". And people are buying it!!!
Current structures in today's societies have failed, are obsolete, and will eventually give way.
1. Dunbar's number. (https://duckduckgo.com/?q=dunbar%27s+number&t=newext&atb=v344-1&ia=web)
Positives:
1a. Restraint of psychopathic tendencies.
1b. Re-establishment of high trust, high integrity, caring for each other.
Yes . I am old enough to remember that a handshake was often enough for a business deal or other commitment. That trust was given more freely and I believe respected more genuinely. Not to say there weren't breeches but respect in the community was a more potent force.
Doesn't it seem that as technology has separated us physically more and more, we've had to institute "technical" methods of trust-verification -- like an NDA? A handshake is so visceral, and we learn so much from it: is the person's hand clammy and cold? Warm and strong? Weak and sweaty? Our internal barometers that detect levels of trustworthiness are being taxed less and less, and are therefore atrophying, necessitating more and more technology. It's a vicious cycle. Perhaps a document like Charles's TDA can be the beginning of a virtuous one.
Yes Mary I believe we are losing our ability to trust and to communicate. So much of it is truly subtle.
I agree with the energy behind this, which is exactly why I, at the ripe age of 47, decided to go to law school last year.
So I must also humbly and respectfully disagree with some of your conclusions about the law. How the law is wielded can certainly be problematic, and its origins are undoubtedly problematic in many cases. But there are very real metaphysical reasons for its existence. The law is the energetic container for this particular version of a Matrix (root word: Mother). It is flawed, as all humans things are, and yet such beautiful potential and intent is hidden within it. In this way, it reminds me of the Bible—wielded for dark purposes by those who gain from it (look at the Papal Bulls that resulted in the colonization of the Americas...*shiver*), and look at the secret, metaphorical poetry that speaks straight to a truth in the heart. And so it is with the law.
I come to the law from over a decade of rewilding, decolonization, and anarchist philosophy studies. Then I had a spiritual awakening and began to see how all the metaphysics fit with all of it. And, when I began to be able to visualize in my mind's eye the way all these words are strung together to create very real experiences for each of us here...well, I got excited.
And when it comes to Justice...big "J" Justice, not little "j" human-made justice...it is a Divine power. For more on this I highly recommend the reading of the 60th Gene Key in the book The Gene Keys by Richard Rudd. The other beautiful gift of that book's perspective is the understanding of Duality, that if something negative exists, then—it's good news!—because it means its programming partner in polarity also exists and is just as full of potential.
I see your new document here very much in line with that potential. I suppose my quibble is with a wholesale rejection of what is in current existence. Because we all know we don't et to where we're going by shaming, excluding, rejecting, and denying. I've tried all that and I'm exhausted. I'm only making tender headway these days with acceptance, understanding, and gratitude for all of it.
Thank you for all you do! So appreciate your words and perspectives.
IMO, there are different 'layers' of law for different levels of consciousness.
More explicit, demanding, and punishing codified law for the less evolved levels of consciousness; i.e. those unlikely to act responsibly.
Less explicit, demanding, and punishing for those with a medium level of consciousness who may simply err for some relatively good reason.
No codified law at all for those higher levels of consciousness who are fully tapped into their mind and heart. Eye-to-eye contact and a handshake will do... but even that is not really necessary.
Relationship is the currency of all living systems. It attracts the most interest and has the greatest ROI. We may kill and die for the currency of fiat/$$ but we will not survive without the currency of caring - built into relationship.
The currency we cannot live without
thank you for the reminder that at the beginning and end of each transaction is knowing our relationships have the integrity of Nature - supporting us through thick and thin
Good job Charles Eisenstein. Thank you for the template. This is timely for me and I can put this to use.
This is GOLD!!! Thank you for bringing integrity and awareness to the gift of giving someone our word.
I love this Charles and the place from where it has been written. Thank you
I believe this is swinging a bit to an opposite extreme. After experiencing (a lot of) harm in an intentional community guided by a lot of such principles (everyone has their blind spots, yeah, even people with established careers in facilitation and mediation apparently), I believe that having a more *localized* accountability structure is the answer to the large, violent systems that our culture currently prescribes.
Having no way for someone to be held accountable, except for them to hold themselves accountable (even if they seem to be upstanding individuals who share core values), is noble but foolish, in my experience. Everyone fails and falters. And part of having a safe container and a supportive community, is being able to course-correct each other when we stray from our values, and having actual enforceable ways of doing that. That is, having real, tangible consequences for breaches in agreements (though not ones that are so cruel and alienating as our current system doles out). Otherwise, people who have more power or privilege in the community may replicate systems of oppression with nothing but a non-enforceable document that ends up being more performative than substantial. I say this also because I signed many such documents in the intentional community where I was harmed and never got an accountability process, where so many people with more privilege violated their agreements over and over.
But I do agree that these things should be witnessed (and enforced?) by the community (whatever that is defined as by the group), and being guided by transformative justice models for addressing harm, which necessitates a community approach. Without the active holding by our local community, there is no real structure, and that is where the violent state swoops in to fill the vacuum.
I agree. Too much of a swing to the opposite. I belong to a group that's governed by a contract, and have been a key driver of the contract being as functional as it is. Let me just say that these days especially, people can have almost no understanding of what it means to have duty, obligation, uniform standards, fairness, etc.
Lots of people think for example that whatever's in a contract is now what is allowed. They don't understand that laws govern what is allowed in a contract, nor that laws provide the shared understanding of the terms in the contract, nor that laws provide the additional information necessary to fill in the gaps in the contract. All contracts have gaps. It's impossible to specify every eventuality.
People simply do not understand this. And these people can be so resistant to this information that they simply will not learn it, even when they are informed (educated) by an attorney.
So unfortunately, a positive type agreement like this one here is absolutely meaningless with people like this. And one will not discover that one's dealing with people like this, until a situation arises which would violate the terms of a more punitive agreement such as an NDA. It is impossible to know everything about a person in advance of interacting with them, just as it's impossible to specify in advance everything that could happen.
I said that these days, people can have almost no understanding. People no longer have to know much, to function in the world. More layers of complexity, more hierarchy, more division of labor, means that people are often just taking instruction their entire lives, and living lives largely free of any obligation where they have to figure out the situation together with their partners in that obligation. We no longer have people educated to a classical standard that would ensure shared knowledge in the sorts of concepts needed for a positive, "trust based" relationship like in this ^ proposed trust agreement. People don't understand the philosophical concepts, may have very idiosyncratic and personal understandings of the terms, and have no theory or practice in a way of approaching mutual misunderstandings to come to an agreement. They probably don't even have much theory or practice in acting autonomously to take on responsibility.
So no. It's a nice ideal, but the strictures of the NDA are all I'd trust for most people.
Love it. Though I would love it even better if it were a simple conversation over tea, not something written down in document form. In the end it is always about the relationship between the two people, or institute, or company. I find myself simply letting slide the attachments that don't reflect the reciprocity that is the more natural, and lovelier, way.
LOVE this. Number of years back I realized I could not in good conscience promise I would keep secrets. At the time I was married and, at a minimum, I wasn’t planning to keep secrets from my spouse. I decided at that point, that when I was asked for confidentiality, I would instead acknowledge the sensitivity of the information and promise to take 100% responsibility for what happened with it after it was in my care. Naturally I would choose not to share with anyone where the info could do harm to anyone. But I left open the possibility that there may come a time when the info could serve healing. If you trust me to hold it thusly, I’d say, then I am happy to carry it with you. You’re not trusting my capacity for secrecy in this agreement. You’re trusting my love and my discretion. 😊
A loose example comes to mind - baptism. The two godparents publicly declare they will invest time in the child and to teach them the ways of God. The child is shown before the congregation who not only witness this promise but are also instructed to love, know, and reflect love to the child as she grows up. There is no formal agreement, or signatures. Just a party later on and some photos.
My philandering grandfather was my godfather. I do really love this, but I think it could be negotiated in advance what reparations will be made if someone acts outside of their agreements.
One thing I love about this is that it is an example of how many of our common practices are rooted in a antagonistic world view. And yet because they are commonplace, it is easy for me to not think about it and make that connection. A Trusted Disclosure Agreement is not only a great idea, but it opens up my brain to thinking about other practices that need to be examined.
I agree completely, I recently passed on a deal because of the NDA. Especially icky feeling is that they have no time limit, the institution can hold a club over one's head for life. People used to do a deal on a handshake and the world was a better place.
I love this. It reminds me of hearing dolphin researcher, Star Newland, talk about language sculpting. Using phrases such as "support domestic harmony" instead of "fight domestic violence". Fits nicely with this, and many of Charles' other essays.
Charles - FYI, the digitally-obsessed NWO-types intend to run all of society from a "Zero Trust Security Model" point of view (https://zerosecurity.org/zero-trust-security-principles/14814/).
For literally anything that anyone wants to do, they must be digitally identified, verified, and tracked. Every transaction, your whereabouts, energy usage, your communications, internet usage, etc. All will require digital ID and permission. Much of this has already become 'normal'.
I try to explain this to people by first having them recognize how much we each trust each other every moment of every day. People eventually realize that massive degrees of trust are what make human interactions work, at all levels.
IMO, strip away that baseline trust we have for each other, install and demand a Zero Trust security model for virtually everything, and the human mind will quickly erode. Hyper-paranoia will overtake society.
I liken this to my feelings on pre nuptials... I always think - wow - if this is the space you have to begin should you be marrying this person? Why do you not trust them or have enough trust in yourself that you would create a relationship that is built on grounds that hold so much more trust - not naive to how things are and that people can change and all the things - it just always felt such a weird energetic space to begin to relate.. for as @Jacquie Chandler (below comment) points out Relational capacity is the way of the Living Systems. It is what I talk about all the time, and how building at the speed of trust - as Life does - is the way in which to develop these relationships so that they are steady. There is indeed much to distrust in all the worlds events today - and what is required to uphold that distrust is distrust itself and the longer we continue to play into that and not build steady sound relationships we will continue to feed and play off the energy that is holding us back ... rather - lets go outside and begin to build relationships.