We saw in Part I that the deep existential crisis humanity is currently experiencing has led to the emergence of an unprecedented toxicity, which is poisoning virtually any key issue that becomes an object of public discourse.
We also saw that this toxicity is expressed in terms of the most extreme polarisation; a polarisation from which is it practically impossible to escape and for which the predominant impression is that it can be solved only via means of a total annihilation of the proponents of all associated views, save the ones corresponding to the view that will eventually prevail.
It was also said that the way out of this fundamentally problematic and highly menacing situation, which also happens to get exponentially worse as time goes by, requires from as many human beings as possible (not already having done or doing so) to enter into an introspective mode and understand who they truly are.
Understanding who they are will provide them with the specific and unique answer of what they need to do in their individual case, and on their individual level, to save the world.
This is not an exaggerated statement: one’s world can be saved only if one knows how to act in order to save it and, of course, acts accordingly.
The rational questions to follow here would be: are the actions of an individual sufficient to save their world?
And can it not be the case that an individual, and their world, be saved despite the individual in question remaining completely passive?
The answer to the first question is: yes, the actions of one individual may be sufficient to ensure such a gigantic outcome; there is a plethora of historical examples that showcases the truth of this statement.
And even if we accept that such individual actions would not be sufficient per se, it is crystal clear that some individual action (or, even, lack thereof) is required.
The answer to the second question could also, and on the surface, be a «yes, maybe»; however, when delving a bit deeper into it, one may reach the conclusion that there is always some, if little, form of action which is required by a human being in order to save themselves and the world they live in.
In any case, there can be no disagreement as to the fact that a human being always needs to act in accordance with what they know they must do.
And, again, what one knows one must do is directly related, beyond a shadow of a doubt, to the knowledge of who one truly is.
This is because one’s actions must always resonate with what one’s, not just perceived but also true, self-interest is.
And one’s true self-interest is obviously in complete alignment with who one truly is.
So, who are you, friend?
Who are you, really?
It can be argued that the root cause of most of the significant problems humanity is facing today stems from this crucial lack of true self-awareness by the overwhelming majority of human beings.
Who still go about their lives, deeply troubled and confused and in desperate want of a clear guidance, direction, and leadership on what they are to do with them.
The critical, potentially fatal, mistake made here by most human beings is that they consider and believe that this guidance, direction, and leadership must come from the outside.
Perhaps in earlier historical occurrences it has indeed come from the outside; nobody can deny that there have been instances whereby movingly inspiring visions or monumentally imposing leaders have successfully mobilised enormous masses of human beings in engaging with and being successful in astonishing feats, seemingly impossible campaigns or adoption of a novel idea or application that led to their lives being radically and sweepingly transformed, often against all odds.
It’s of course never easy to affirm with certainty whether, in the grand scheme of things and from a perspective encompassing all humanity, such occurrences have been for better or for worse.
My personal opinion is that whatever has happened so far in the history of humanity is or can prove to be beneficial for it, at least from a «lessons learned» point of view, so long as humanity is still existing and evolving.
In other words, I believe that humanity can learn and improve from any blow, no matter how detrimental and devastating, provided that it is not eliminated by it.
Perhaps, this is a somewhat controversial or at least unconventional view; if you feel that’s the case, I encourage you to park it for now or, simply, ignore it.
Coming back to what we were saying some lines above, the present state of world affairs is far from anything even remotely resembling regularity.
This is in fact a transition period unlike any other ever faced by our species.
The turmoil generated by the ever-pervasive uncertainty currently dominating virtually all of our civilisation’s affairs is of such magnitude that anything which formerly served as a constant in most human beings’ lives has either collapsed or, at best, is becoming rapidly and irreversibly obsolete.
This is the time that we can’t afford to look outside of us, expecting that salvation will come into our hands like a fruit that’s about as ripe as it needs to be.
This is not to say that we are entirely on our own with nowhere to turn to; that we have already passed into a post-apocalyptic state of affairs where «every man for himself and every woman for herself» has become the golden standard of life on Earth.
Not yet, at least…
What I am strongly recommending, though, is that this is the time for each one of us to, first and foremost, look inside of us.
And investigate who we are.
In order to realise (in both meanings of the word) who we are.
In order to then transform ourselves and our world in accordance with who we truly are.
[To be continued…]
