2012-01-27 – Social Sustainability, Eugenics, Borderland
– Jan. 27, 2012
Conversations with Monjoronson #40
Topics:
It is time to begin reinventing our social structures
Tips for starting a co-creative design team
The slow process of introducing the CCDT concept is over
Looking for spontaneous inner commitment of individuals
The lack of concern that social sustainability is a problem
Getting co-creative design teams started is a priority
Questions from the readers:
Defining individuals that are not doing well in our society
The first five years of life
Is criminal behavior genetically determined?
Many aspects of procreation are cultural in nature
On topics of eugenics
More questions on the borderland and grid
We must continue to discuss topics on social sustainability
TR: Daniel Raphael
Moderator: Michael McCray
January 27, 2012
Prayer: Our Father Creator, we rest in your arms of life, knowing and feeling the care that you give us, appreciating all that you provide. You are concerned about our individual lives and our lives as a society and communities. We are thankful for someone being in charge who is the Light and provides a hierarchy of beings who love us as you love us. You show us the way forward in spite of our foibles and difficulties and we are so grateful for the advice and wisdom that you share with us. Amen.
MMc: Monjoronson, good morning! How are you today, sir?
MONJORONSON: I am perfect; how about yourself? (Laughter.)
MMc: I’m far from perfect. I understand that’s going to take a few years, but I’m working on it. Do you have anything to say to us before we start today?
It is time to begin reinventing our social structures
MONJORONSON: Yes. I would like you to see the metaphor of a card dealer, who is very adept and comfortable with the cards, and so the dealer places the deck face side down on the felt covered table and spreads all the cards across the table, so that all are visible from the back. It is time for us to begin turning over the cards with you, so that you begin to see each facet, each part, each card that will come into play in the future. We have provided this in a very scattered pattern. Now it is time to begin revealing those aspects concerning your societies, your communities and your social life. This is the context of the Correcting Time; it is all about the social context of your lives. It is your societies that need reinventing, to be recreated, like they are being remodeled and restructured in the process, but over time they will be completely recreated to operate in a different way.
You can begin to appreciate the Teaching Mission as teaching individuals a moral, ethical and spiritual life and how to carry that out in their lives. You can then appreciate more the work of the Magisterial Mission, which is social, has everything to do with your social institutions, organizations and social processes. It is vitally important that Teaching Mission graduates, those who have participated in that process of uplifting their ethical behavior, morality and spirituality become the principle participants in the work of the Magisterial Mission, to carry out the re-creation of your social institutions. It is vitally important that individuals within the Magisterial Mission see the larger picture and how to play their individual part, more carefully, more diligently, conscientiously and confidently.
That is why the co-creative design teams were initially taught to have a spiritual consultant involved, a Melchizedek, and that the members would consult with their Thought Adjuster, their Guardian Angel and their own celestial teachers for advice as they participated in the team. It is very possible—and we know it will be actually done—that there will be individuals in teams who do not believe in God, but who are nonetheless committed to the ethical, moral and social upliftment of their planet and their communities and their societies in the larger sense. But the mainstay of the long-term work that we have to do here must and will be done by those who are spiritually infused and spiritually enthused to see the larger picture and fit the smaller pieces of their work into that larger picture, in order for social sustainability to become a real part, an effective and emplaced part of the Correcting Time.
Tips for starting a co-creative design team
MMc: Thank you. The co-creative design team for sustainable healthcare that I am coordinating is still in the planning stages. I am currently gathering names and I will begin contacting potential members in my area, as soon as I can secure some reliable transportation. I’m wondering how many other co-creative design teams there are currently working on this and other topics?
MONJORONSON: I would say that there are many dozens around this nation and the South American countries that are in the gestative stage—they have not been “born”, so to speak, they have not initiated their “coming out” to begin their work—there is still the tentative commitment by many people to do this work. I would like to say, however, that before long, many of you will have a good deal of extra time to focus your energies into this project. Many of you have very, very busy lives and have difficulty making a commitment for once a week in one of these projects. This is a project where those who have spare time will participate, much as they would in a hobby. When the participants begin to see this as a hobby, a commitment for long-term, then they will find the time to do so. If this is not fun, we should not be doing it; it must be enjoyable, satisfying and give you a sense of contribution to the fulfillment and development of a maturing community and society. Those of you who are most competent and capable and educated and experienced are of course the elderly, the young elderly, those who are over age 50. There are millions of excellent minds capable of participating in making major contributions to this work. In more succinct terms, it is unfortunate that I report that there are actually very few operational design teams, anywhere in the world.
MMc: I think you’ve answered it very well, Monjoronson, that there is the potential for these design teams to… and I think that I understand that too… there is potential for these design teams to come about, they just need perhaps more impetus—whatever it takes—in order to bring them about.
MONJORONSON: This one worked, at a time years ago, in a retirement community, a living community of approximately 600 inhabitants of the young elderly, and those who were elder. There were many who were retired who had tremendous amounts of spare time, and were searching for meaning, a purpose in their life, a means of finding meaning in their life. They were living their lives and had the summation of all their experience, with no way to apply it or to use it. Just as the elders of indigenous peoples are revered for the contributions and the experience and wisdom that they give to their clan or tribe, so too, this can begin again to be a real part of your social existence and meaningfulness that millions can look forward to in their retirement years, and of course, even long before those retirement years.
MMc: The book, “Validating Sustainability and the Schematic for Sustainability” are known by relatively few individuals—I think that’s the case. Is the plan for the awareness of these aids to grow slowly?
The slow process of introducing the CCDT concept is over
MONJORONSON: There has been an attempt on our part to introduce this slowly, to test these materials and to validate their capacity to produce positive and constructive results. Even with strangers, there was a proof of concept demonstration some years ago and that has been fine-tuned and improved tremendously. The slow process is over; the capability of the design team process and validating sustainability, using the schematic, has been proven to be effective and it is now time to share that—not only just with dozens of people, but dozens of millions of people—and we will be attempting to do this beginning this year.
MMc: It occurs to me that among institutions now in existence, universities that grant doctorates in education and medicine might be willing to perform in an experiment with procreative couples whose offspring go on into an experimental educational system. Do you think it would be reasonable to write a letter to the various department heads, explaining what such a program might involve?
Looking for spontaneous inner commitment of individuals
MONJORONSON: No, we do not suggest you take this approach. We seek to create a spontaneous combustion of energy in the communities, to see the validity of the work that will be published of what we are doing. We do not promote ourselves or our work in the ways that you are used to. Western marketing techniques do not prove to be long-lived, or the results of them tend not to be long-lived. We are looking for the spontaneous inner commitment of individuals who see the worth and value of this work and want to engage it in their own venues of their professional work and that of their associates.
MMc: The scientists that are being honest suggest that we cannot sustain the present use of finite resources of our planet past the next few decades. Therefore most programs that claim to be sustainable have to do with conserving resources. Some suggest that our current monetary-driven world creates and perpetuates the gross inequalities between people. It appears that they do not yet have the means or the plans to secure a socially sustainable future. Do you think it would be reasonable to contact these programs that wish to become sustainable with our information about social sustainability?
MONJORONSON: To our audience who read these transcripts we submit that as they feel guided, we suggest they introduce these documents and processes for validating social sustainability projects and social institutions. This has several benefits: It begins to train the group/readers to become socially active in their communities — if they who know the way and read the truth, do not act in their world, then who will? Surely, very few will act, who are outside of this group, without being introduced to these concepts by our readers. Now is the time for individuals to take initiation to think of their own networks of associates, and associations to introduce these materials. These have been fully validated and are capable of being used in the “real” world. You are most welcome to duplicate the article, “Validating Social Sustainability,” which contains the schematic and the three core values of social sustainability.
The lack of concern that social sustainability is a problem
This is a point that can cause inquisitive, curious minds to ask for more. The difficulty to date has been the lack of concern that social sustainability is an issue or a problem. As we have said before, the circumstances of your world will change such that social sustainability will become a primary concern. A means of introducing these documents and these processes is far more than just one avenue of approach—one of which is our readers and followers. We ask you to introduce these materials to others, as is appropriate. There are other means, also, which are coming about that you are unaware of, which will be broached to your culture in this year and coming years. Time is not running out, but the developmental stages are such that it is now time to bring these forward. The developmental program and plan that we have used to date has become complete. When that occurs, then it is time to initiate a new program and plan.
We advise you that ‘you’—meaning your communities and larger societies—literally have your toes hanging over the precipice of this brink of tremendous change that will bring about a paradigm [shift] in your culture. What is fascinating to us is that there are so very few Urantians who are aware of this situation, and that it will take most everyone quite by surprise. This will have an advantage for us, as it will create tremendous social change, even more than what is occurring now, such that we can quickly bring the right pieces together so that they make a ‘whole quilt,’ something that has integrity and is continuous and has congruence. These are the fundamental elements that are necessary to support a sustainable society, even when the numbers of the population decrease.
MMc: Literally standing on the brink!
MONJORONSON: Yes, imagine your barefoot toes hanging over the edge of the Grand Canyon. If you have ever been to that tremendous physical presence, you will know what it feels like to have your toes hanging over the edge and a thousand feet of open space below you. That is where your world is currently pointed.
Getting co-creative design teams started is a priority
MMc: You made it clear that getting these co-creative design teams up and running is a priority. I trust you and I have the hope and faith that the co-creative design teams, utilizing the three core values and the other aids that you have given us, will be able to establish plans that will lead to a completely socially sustainable future for our world. Soon I will be sending short messages to people who have never heard of you, or any of this, people who may not even know me, to ask them to take part in the design team process for sustainable healthcare. What do you suggest I include in that message?
MONJORONSON: It will be helpful for you, in your message to these individuals, to let them know that all the pieces and all the resources necessary for a sustainable healthcare system, already exist. They need to be rearranged in a process and a format that has integrity. The focus of healthcare is to heal the patient as an individual. Also, healthcare as a social system has its responsibilities to empower and support the sustainability of a society, whether it is family or community or a whole society. This is an orientation which you must state, and the end result and goal is to develop and support a sustainable society, a society where everyone has access to healthcare.
Who gets an infected toe treated would include anybody and everybody who has an infected toe. Who gets a heart transplant is another schedule of priorities, which you must deal with. For a young person who is 35 and has a heart defect and has tremendous contributions they can make to their society, it makes good sense to have a heart transplant. As your scientists, your medical sciences and pathologists are determining that there are complete systems of evidence in the elder years to indicate when a person will come to death, and the likelihood of investing such radical and expensive procedures in one who would die or pass away within six months, does not make much sense and would not be a good investment.
As you begin to see medical procedures as investments in the sustainability of individuals, families and communities in a whole society, then you begin to see the priority system of who gets what treatment. It is not that it is unfair, it is according to the evidence that each individual as a patient would evince to the medical professionals. Your statement to the ones you write to should outline these larger scenarios. Many medical professionals feel helpless in the face of such daunting societal medical problems. Although they are capable, they feel like many of their efforts are fruitless and poorly used as a result of an almost dysfunctional medical service provider system. Having a unified goal and a purpose from the individual, to the family, to the whole society will assist individuals to see what you are trying to do and decide to volunteer and assist, or not. Was that helpful?
MMc: Yes, it was very helpful. Thank you.
Questions from the readers
I wonder if I can switch gears for a moment and I’ll ask some of the questions that have come to me from our audience, over the last week or so.
MONJORONSON: Certainly.
MMc: I have been given several questions about the poor, the criminal and so-called ‘lower types,’ in contraindication to the ‘higher types,’ those who are doing well in our society. I understand that being poor, ignorant and criminal, as well as most mental illnesses can be the result of environmental factors and are not necessarily the result of the person’s DNA. Is this correct?
MONJORONSON: This is correct.
Defining individuals that are not doing well in our society
MMc: Would you help us better define these ‘lower types’ of individuals? Those that are not doing well in our society?
MONJORONSON: Please continue to clarify what you are asking about.
MMc: Those people who find themselves poor, ignorant or in criminal situations, also those with various mental illnesses, I believe are classified by this individual as being the ‘lower types’ in our society.
MONJORONSON: We, however, measure individuals far differently. That is, we measure them as their capacity to make contributions to the growth of their soul. The broad pejorative meaning of ‘lower’ is unfortunate and we recommend it not be used [if] they are most capable of participating effectively, to make contributions to their society. Those who are capable and those who are incapable—of course there are many individuals who live in grand houses and have expensive cars, who could be categorized as ‘lower’ as well, as far as we measure individuals. Having money, education and employment does not make one ‘superior,’ nor does the lack thereof make them ‘inferior or less than.’ We would advise that your concerns, therefore, be the capacity of capability of individuals to develop the potential that is within them.
If you have a person who is addicted to methamphetamines or to crack cocaine, then you may see evidence of permanent mental disability, which makes them less capable of decision-making that contributes to their own life and to their family and society and community. The individuals who have entered these phases of their mental disability oftentimes do not have a Thought Adjuster. It has ‘left the premises,’ so to speak, as in ‘no one is home’ to make a moral and ethical decision that contributes to their soul. It is important that each individual be discerned for their capability to contribute to their society. It is harmful to individuals who make judgments about large swaths of the population, which may include many people who are capable of making worthy decisions, except for the circumstances in which they live. I could go on at length about this, but I will leave it at that, as I think I have answered your question.
MMc: Yes, you have.
The first five years of life
How important is it to have a good, loving environment during the first five years of life?
MONJORONSON: It is paramount! It is of the most important of circumstances to unlock the potential that lies within the person, that can be expressed in their adolescence, adulthood and later on in their full adulthood.
Is criminal behavior genetically determined
MMc: Is violent or criminal behavior largely genetically determined?
MONJORONSON: Yes, it is. I have reservations about answering that with a large sweeping answer as that, but the predilections to violence are almost always genetic. However, that can also be amended by the developed genetic side of mental capability. Those of the violet and indigo races, the blue races, are capable of making superior decisions because they have a higher level of Adamic gene code in their constitution. Let us say that, yes, violence is a predilection of genetic code, and the predilection for peace and harmony and social cooperation is also genetic. A third factor, however, is that the individuals always make a conscious decision to act out either way, therefore it is the education, the loving environment and the culture in which one is raised that is highly influential to what becomes expressed in the individual’s life.
MMc: I believe that somewhere in that answer, genetic predisposition is not determinant, that there are other factors that are involved here and the person must choose to act out on their violent nature in order for that to become evident.
MONJORONSON: That is correct.
MMc: Would you say that a large proportion of the violence we see today is an outgrowth of the inequalities of our economic system? Let me rephrase that question. In nations where there is more equality, is there less violence?
MONJORONSON: That is correct.
Many aspects of procreation are cultural in nature
MMc: A question from our reader: “It appears that the lower elements of our society have higher birthrates and far outnumber the higher types. How do we stop the wrong type of human from having too many babies, and encourage the right type of human to have more?”
MONJORONSON: Do we have 12 hours to discuss this, or listen?
MMc: I understand that this is a complicated situation. Let me ask a few more poignant questions. Do we pay poor people not to have babies?
MONJORONSON: I will go back to your first question, and that is the whole emphasis of the Correcting Time, the Teaching Mission and the Magisterial Mission has its efforts and intentions to bring your societies into greater awareness of positive options for individual choices for having children and raising them effectively, to become contributing members of society. There is not one simple solution, such as you may suggest of paying poor people not to have children. That is a good idea, but how it is developed and put into practice could actually be counterproductive. Many aspects of procreation and childrearing are cultural and the effort we are making is to bend and morph your culture into much more positive ways of behaving and living.
First, I may say specifically, however, that procreation must be seen as a component that either contributes to or is detrimental to the development of sustainable societies clear down to the level of community and families. In that regard, procreation must not be seen as a topic for religious thought or participation or influence, but must be seen as an individual choice that contributes to the welfare of a society that is growing into social sustainability, or one that actually acts against that. Many of your religions have been counterproductive in the development of whole and healthy families and developing loving relationships between parents and children that provide for good working models for their own family dynamics later on.
This is a very pointed and poignant topic that needs wide expression and discussion in the future in the larger context of your society. Procreation, birth control and such are not topics for political manipulation in a society that is moving towards social sustainability. It must not be an emotional issue in the mind of the individual of a family or society or a nation. It must be seen as an individual choice, a choice that is made through educated awareness of the options available and the consequences of right and correct decision-making, and those which are contrary.
On topics of eugenics
MMc: I have several more questions that seem quite specific. The first is: “Should we castrate our inmates in our prison system so they cannot create more of their kind?”
MONJORONSON: This is a social decision for a society to make. We do not offer an opinion concerning that.
MMc: “Should eugenics be taught in our schools so that children will learn to choose wisely when it comes to mating?”
MONJORONSON: Only if eugenics is taught in the very broadest sense so that individuals can understand and make their own decisions by being more intelligently informed. Eugenics is a word that has many prickly connotations to it, which make the discussion very difficult. Eugenics must be taught and engaged from the perspective of how it contributes to the development of a sustainable society. Society must become peaceful and stable before it can become sustainable. In a nation that works toward sustainability, all of these factors become operative at the same time. Eugenics is one aspect of it, as is an informed and thoughtful program of criminal corrections.
MMc: Sex is a basic human need and often people procreate without meaning to. You say, “procreation will become an honor, a privilege, it will become an honor-award for individuals who are seen as contributing to the sustainability of their society.” At some point in the continuum of time, moving toward the outcome of procreation becoming an honor and a privilege, will we have to step in and deny people the ability to procreate?
MONJORONSON: All these topics that are involved in this question could be enveloped in the concept of social eugenics. When this is developed, you must do so so that it has integrity, that it is congruous, that the intention is well stated and moves all of society towards social sustainability. Yes, to answer your questions — your societies and communities will choose who will and who will not have children. This is an eventuality; it is a necessity; it is something that will become appreciated, though others will be very remorseful and bitter about those choices. In time, the choice to have children or not to have children will not be made by individuals, but by society. That is very ominous, it sounds very terrible to you today, but in the end, it will become a necessity because resources will be so limited. The resources for raising children and for medical services are resources that will have to be assigned by their contribution to a sustainable community. Resources that are limited would be seen as being squandered if they were used for a person who will die in a week, or an infant who has severe congenital defects. You see, it is not a simple question or situation, but it is one that has tremendous integrity when you see it as a whole.
More questions on the borderland and grid
MMc: A friend asks, “What does our soul do during its existence, or our incarnation in the flesh?”
MONJORONSON: This is not a question we will attempt to engage at this point.
[Note: The reader is referred to Paper 111 in The Urantia Book.][[ UB 111:0.1 ]]
MMc: There still seems to be a great deal of confusion about those living in the borderland. Some of our audience members have asked similar questions. I believe some of these questions arise from previous transcripts given in November of 2009, by midwayer Chief Bzutu—ABC 22. He called those living in the borderland “Packets of unassembled information, which have no personality, no soul.” Saying one should not be interested in… “fooling with these packets of unresolved anger, pure denial and rampant emotion.” Do borderland souls with consciousness have personality?
MONJORONSON: No, they do not. Personality is a gift from God, and that leaves when the Thought Adjuster leaves.
MMc: I see. That answer solves one of my questions left over from The Urantia Book.
I believe there is some confusion going on here, with the people in our audience. The question is: “What is the difference between those stuck in the grid and those stuck in the borderland?” And the next question he asks me, “Which area holds the “packets of information,” and which one holds the lost souls?”
MONJORONSON: There are individuals—you call them individuals—who are stuck in the borderland, and this is an energetic state of existence. It lies between your four dimensions of this material universe and the other dimensions of the morontial universe, as you might say. They can be called “packets of energy, of information,” and that is what they are. It is simply just a different way of seeing them or perceiving them as “packets,” or “empty beings,” with nothing left but the consciousness of those ideas and that energy.
As far as the grid is concerned, the grid—as we have said before—is the race consciousness, the planetary consciousness, cosmic consciousness, although those three have different meanings or connotations to them, they have a similarity. This is the minded energy of the planet that changes over time, as the consciousness of its population changes. Yes, there are ‘bands’ of consciousness—and I call them ‘bands’ but I do not see them as literal bands of consciousness for your whole earth, for nations, for societies or sub groups, for communities, for clans—some people call this an ethos of a clan or family or community—the same type of meaning.
As far as ‘existent’ beings caught in this consciousness, there are none. You could, however, say that even some of the living are caught in this consciousness, because they are completely living the consciousness of that group of people. You could call them ‘cultural groupies;’ you could call them ‘individuals who go along with every fad and fancy,’ who try to be the ultimate, the acme model of that consciousness. You see them in your societies by the uniforms they wear, the equipment they use, by the language they use and how they are ‘stuck’ there. You are beginning to see men in their 40’s who are still ‘skaters,’ who carry their skateboards and the same uniform of skaters, even though they are of middle age. You could call these individuals ‘stuck’ in the consciousness of skaters, could you not? So there are no existent beings caught in the grid, as separate and apart from individuals who have separate identity.
Those who are in the borderland have identity, which is made from the packet of data information that they gathered during their lifetime. As far as having anything to do with them, we suggest you do not, as they do not contribute to your life. They cannot contribute to your wisdom or positively to the decisions you make. You are totally and completely unprepared—most of you—to differentiate these individuals from those who are visitors from the morontial realm. There is a certain percentage of your population who are able to discern the differences, but most have not been trained in the powers of discernment, concerning these beings.
MMc: The last question I have is: “How can we, on this side, help those in the borderland move on?”
MONJORONSON: This has been discussed in detail in previous sessions.
MMc: I wish to thank you, Monjoronson, for making this information available to us, the co-creative design team and the core values of sustainability through the Magisterial Mission. Without it I have little doubt that our world would be pitched into another dark age. I have no more questions for you today, sir. I sincerely appreciate your availability to answer questions for us.
MONJORONSON: You are most welcome. I do not wish to pursue topics or further discussion about those in the borderland and/or the grid in future sessions. That has been thoroughly discussed and in greater detail than we had planned, now let us move on from those topics. Those individuals who are curious about those topics can read them in prior sessions.
MMc: Are there any topics that you’d like to see us discuss?
We must continue to discuss topics on social sustainability
MONJORONSON: We must continue to discuss topics of social sustainability. The topic of eugenics is one that crosses all aspects of your social lives in the future, particularly of your children and grandchildren. Those decisions must be made from the discussions that we have now, and the plans that are designed and devised in co-creative design teams, concerning this topic. It is so broad ranging as to encompass most areas of social institutions of human society. Eugenics is a prime topic or prime issue of social sustainability because it gets to the heart of social learning processes, genetics, social construction, maintenance and sustainability. All the work that you do concerning eugenics must be thought of in terms of as contributing to social sustainability.
Do not let prior indoctrination, religious orientation, or your own misguided morality and ethics define how eugenics comes into existence in a sustainable society. This will be more easily discussed intelligently in the future as our work progresses to produce a holistic morality that supports social sustainability. We have spoken of this before, I have alluded to it, and it is in the process of being designed and produced. I prefer not to discuss this in detail, even though I have alluded to it, just to alert you that it is coming. It will be too shocking to some of you, to make those decisions. Eugenics is a social topic, which will be at the heart of the discussion within that text. Thank you.
