Wednesday, November 30, 2011

Who will stop me from just living like a bum off of all the people and just travel around the world? who says that many others will not have the same idea as me?

Understand that the main reason why people within the current money system will be inclined to give money to bums on the street, is due to guilt. Because they see that they earn money through the same system that deprives others of it, but because everyone is afraid to lose what they have, nothing is being done and the system is allowed to keep running. That is why people experience guilt when seeing bums, because they know that through their silence and continued participation in the system, they are keeping those human beings trapped in that state of barely even surviving.

In an Equal Money System, each one will have undeniable rights and access to what is required for each one to sustain themselves – and this applies to each and every single human being. Therefore, the system each one participates in doesn’t exclude anyone and your having doesn’t mean someone else’s lack as it does within the current system. Therefore, there will be no more guilt and thus no more inclination for people to give what they require to someone else. Every person has access to what they require, if Pune Beggarsomeone refuses to use those goods, then that’s the person’s problem and responsibility. Currently, bums are simply unable to do something about their situation. In an Equal Money System, being a bum will be something you do unto yourself through not claiming the goods you have right and access to – but then you shouldn’t expect any support from other beings, because you’re deliberately harming yourself.

So, if you try to be a bum in an Equal Money System to try and spite the system, you’ll only really be spiting yourself. If a person however, is troubled within and therefore feels that he doesn’t deserve what’s best for himself and as a result starts refusing to claim the goods and services he requires for a dignified life, the environment will pick up on it and intervene. Such a person will then be given the necessary psychological assistance to better his relationship with himself until he is ready to embrace what is best for himself as a dignified life.

So, no - you won’t be able to live off of other people, because you will have no means of manipulation.

For more information, visit and

Who will create jobs? Will I need a job to live?

You won’t need to have a job in an Equal Money System. According to each beings’ requirements, you will receive credits with which you can acquire that which you need to sustain yourself.

Remember that in its most basic form, economy is what has to do with the distribution of resources to satisfy needs and wants. In our current economic system, you require to earn money through working, so that, with the money you earned, you can get access to any goods and services with which you can satisfy these needs and wants – whereby not everyone receives an equal amount of money, works equally hard and where not everyone is able to get a job that will get them money to then get to the goods and services they need.

In an Equal Money System, we simply manage the distribution of resources according to the principle of what is best for all – instead of having to work for your survival you are simply being given access to what you need. Because of how the world currently works, we’ve become accustomed to the belief that we need to ‘earn our living’ – but really, that is only one of the answers to the questions of how to get the resources from the Earth to the people, and one that has proven to have many harmful consequences.

Harvesting-equal-moneyTherefore, there will be no necessity for people to have a job through which to earn money and provide for themselves. In terms of providing the necessary goods and services to sustain the population, this ‘work’ will be done by youngsters after graduation and who will for a few years of their lives (about 4 years) dedicate themselves to providing the goods and services that are required to sustain the population. Remember that many products will no longer be produced within an Equal Money System as they are either abusive or were just produced for the sake of making money, instead of being an actual contribution to the quality of a person’s life. Only the best products will be produced and it will be produced in construction-equal-moneythe most effective and efficient way, which years of experience and know-how of big corporations will allow us to do. Products will be made to last, which will relieve a lot of the pressure on production. Also, currently, so much is being wasted and thrown away each day, it is disgraceful. Such waste is not necessary and does not serve any practical purpose. Within this context, you see that it is quite possible for a small part of the population to provide for the whole.

For more information, visit and

Will we pay for entertainment and if so will the entertainers receive wages in an Equal Money System?

There will be no payments or wages within an Equal Money System. Entertainment will be on a ‘give and receive’ basis, where those who enjoy to provide entertainment, will do so as an expression of themselves and those who enjoy to watch or listen to music, acting, sports, etc. will be able to receive this entertainment.

There is no need for entertainers to receive money to do what they enjoy doing. entertainmentThey are already provided for through the system. This will allow artists and sports players the freedom of expression that is currently lacking in the world. Have a look at the songs that are being produced and their video-clips – the songs are no longer expressions of beings, they are a string of words, sounds and tones as calculated impulses designed to have people want to buy the product. Artists have producers to answer to, who, due to money, have a great influence over their work. Professional sports-players are under constant pressure and push themselves and their bodies to ridiculous bounds, because of money. Within an Equal Money System, entertainment will find itself again: from a money-making industry it will simply be all about having fun and expressing oneself again.

In terms of the entertainment itself and what is acceptable as a form of entertainment and what not – this will be determined according to the principle of what is best for all. Activities that are seen as entertainment that have a high cost in terms of harm that is done unto the environment, animals or other human beings, will no longer exist.

For more information, visit and

Friday, September 30, 2011

And God Created Genetic Disorders

 A few months ago, a few of the chicken eggs hatched on the farm and we had a bunch of new chicks to look after. We first placed them in a brooder-cage, but when they started digging their way out of there, we took them in our house until we’d be able to fix the cage. And so, they raced around in our house, having the time of their life. All of them, but one.

This one little orange chick would only take a few steps at a time and then drop down and just sit there, resting. We had a look at her legs and saw that her feet and legs had just gotten a growth-spurt. We figured she was adapting to her new legs and how it affected her body and balance. orangeBut after a few weeks, she still was only able to stumble and spent most of her time sitting or laying down. She was eating, drinking and shitting just fine, so there was no indication of an illness she was suffering from. We gave her all the support we were able to think of, but nothing helped. Actually, it looked like matters only got worse. Her legs looked and felt like rubber – there was no structure or strength in them and they were simply unable to keep her upright.

We then did some research and found out that she was suffering from a genetic disorder. The chick was suffering from a protein-deficiency and in order to be able to grow her feathers – which requires a lot of protein – her body was extracting the proteins from her bones and re-allocating them to feather-growth. This resulted in her bones feeling like rubber and her not being able to stand or walk.

We immediately placed her on a cat-food diet and after a good month of high level protein intake, she started first being able to hold herself up, then started taking a few steps at a time and eventually was able to walk and even run.

Now – why would an almighty God create an existence where this type of genetic disorders occur?? How much effort would it take – for a God – to correct the genetic design of chickens, so that such suffering doesn’t exist?? Because – remember, if we hadn’t been there and if it had just been the chick and her mother, the mother would have abandoned or killed her – because she was too weak to make it.

How can God make such stupid mistakes – where a baby’s body starts eating away at its own bones to be able to grow feathers? You cannot possibly tell me that this is God’s way of punishing the chick – what did the chick ever do to him? She was born with this. She didn’t even have a chance to live – how sinful could she be to deserve the death penalty before she’s even gotten out of her egg properly?

And this applies to all genetic disorders. Why do children have to pay for the sins of their parents? If parents created their own disorders through acting in sin – well, maybe I would understand God not stepping in and saying “sort out your own shit”. But to pass on these disorders through the DNA to the children who haven’t even set foot on this Earth yet? What the hell is that all about??

If God were forgiving – he would make sure all children are born in forgiveness – he would make sure that no child has to pay for what his or her parents did, or their grandparents, or the the generation before that and before that and before that! I mean – if God were forgiving, it’s the least he could do!

Since genetic disorders currently run rampant – both within the animal kingdom as in human beings – you have to wonder: where is God in all this? And if God were to exist, can he really be good, loving and forgiving? Nope. Not with the catastrophe of a world that we live in today.

No – if God exists, he is not a good, loving and forgiving God. If God exists, he is a spiteful sadist who enjoys to enslave beings for eternity without giving them a solution to get themselves out, dooming them to unending suffering. Hm, sounds much like the Devil and…. hm, sounds a lot like human beings too. If human beings are made in the image and likeness of God, then we reflect the true nature of God. And the true nature of human beings can be seen within what human beings have created and manifested.

Have a look at the current money system – it works with passing on the debts of the parents to the children as well. Children are not born in forgiveness because not all children have equal opportunities. Dependent on where you live, who your parents are and who their parents were – will determine most of who you will be and how easily you’ll be able to generate money in the world; will determine whether you get to live or whether you have child debtto struggle to survive, day in and day out. See: exactly the same as with genetic disorders, as ‘faults’ that are being passed on from generation to generation through the DNA. The same goes with how parents’ performance and financial position determines the kind of life their child will lead.

I’d say we don’t wait for God to come and fix his creation. It’s obvious he doesn’t care anyways. If we want to be saved, we’re going to have to do it ourselves. If we want to live in a different world, we have to change the starting point of Life. The current starting point of Life is: DEBT. Both within the physical/DNA as in the money-system – because we are born with the debts and sins of those that have gone before us.

The starting point of Life should be Forgiveness. When a being comes into the world, he/she should be unconditionally forgiven and start their life in forgiveness – clear – empty – not carrying with them the mistakes of the past of those that have gone before them. This sounds lovely – but how can it practically be done?

To free the future children of the world, we require to stop the cycle of ‘The Sins of the Fathers’ – this we do through taking responsibility for who and what we exist as, as the totality of ourselves. Each genetic disorder is a manifested consequences, which has an origin-point. It is for each one to find and identify those origin-points, release them and re-align our design. This is practically done through self-honesty, self-forgiveness and self-corrective action. Through this – we stop the application of simply passing on our shit to the next generation and the next generation and the next generation. Instead: we have a look at the shit that is here, that has accumulated over eons of time: and we take self-responsibility for it. Sort ourselves out – clean ourselves up – remove the shit. That way – when new children come into the world – they are not born within disadvantage – they are born within opportunity.

To correct the cycle of ‘The Sins of the Fathers’ in the money-system can be done through implementing an Equal Money System – a system wherein each being unconditionally receives the amount of money required to sustain himself. This would mean that a child that comes into the world is financially supported – immediately – equally. They don’t take on the debt of their parents – they are unconditionally forgiven and are able to live their own life.

If God were good and loving and forgiving and man is made in the image and likeness of God – then surely this would be the type of monetary system that would be in use today. But it’s not – and God is not good, loving and forgiving.

Then remains the question: who do we want to be? Who do we want our children to be? What do we wish for the next generations? Do we want to be remembered in thoughts of hatred and resentment for what we left behind? Or do we stop and change the world around?

Stop waiting for God, people – you’re wasting your time. Instead – do what you would want God to do for you. It’s not above our human capacity – we just have to get off our lazy asses and get moving!

Wednesday, September 7, 2011

What are Currency Exchange Rates and Why do they Keep on Changing?

Economics – and anything remotely related to it – has always seemed to me like something that I ‘just don’t’ and ‘just won’t’ understand – and therefore, I just accepted it. I experienced it as a ‘big scary monster’ that I should try to steer away from as much as possible – and that’s exactly what I did. Consequently, I remained unaware of the mechanics of the economic system and interacted with it on a strictly ‘need-to-know’ basis.

And so – for instance – up until a few days, I had actually no clue of what ‘currency exchange rates’ are. As most people, I’m aware of how they play a role in calculating the value of a good or service from one currency to another – or how, when I go abroad and require cash in a different currency, the amount of foreign currency I receive, will be calculated according to these currency exchange rates. But – what they actually are and why they keep on changing: nope, no idea.

So – what are currency exchange rates? To answer that question – we first require to have a closer look at international trade – meaning: imports and exports.

As you are probably aware, not all products that are consumed within a certain country, are necessarily produced within that country. To gain access to goods and services that are not available – or not cheaply available – within the borders of one’s own country, products are imported from abroad.

As with any product being sold on a market – an exchange takes place. We exchange money for goods and services – and the same applies to imports (goods imported from abroad). Now, how does this work. Let’s illustrate it with a fictional example: when corn is imported from South Africa to Belgium, Belgium – or someone in Belgium – will require to pay for this corn in South African Rands. To be able to do that, the buyer will need to acquire South African Rands, because Euros are not a valid means of exchange in South Africa. And – like most things in this world: South African Rands can be acquired, through paying for them.

Indeed – what happens whenever one wishes to purchase goods from a country where your currency is not valid – is that you first have to buy the other country’s money, so that you’re able to use that money to make payments in the other country.

In the example of a Belgian buying corn from South Africa: The Belgian will first require to buy South African Rands with his Euros. Only once he has bought the South African Rands, can he proceed with purchasing the corn in South Africa.

‘Naturally’ – when we’re on holiday and we buy an ice-cream using our credit card, for instance, we don’t experience it as though we first buy foreign money and then, with the foreign currency, buy our ice-cream – both transactions, the exchange of currencies and the purchase of the ice-cream, happen simultaneously. However, it is important to understand that the exchange of one currency to another operates according to the same principles as any other purchase in the ‘free market’ economy. Currencies are goods that that are bought and sold – so, an exchange rate is really nothing else but the ‘price’ of a particular currency, expressed in a different currency. That wasn’t too bad, now, was it?

Now – the second question: why do exchange rates change all the time?

The answer to this question is implied within the answer to the question of what an exchange rate is: it is a price – and as such, it is subject to the two major ‘forces’ in the ‘free’ market economy, namely: supply and demand.

So – let us have a brief look at what is referred to by ‘supply’ and ‘demand’ and how those two act as ‘forces’ that influence prices. Again, I’ll illustrate with a fictional example:

Let’s say that on the market of apples, there are 5 available apples, but there are 10 people who each want to buy an apple. We say that 5 apples are supplied and 10 apples are demanded. How, within the ‘free’ market economy, is it determined who gets an apple and who doesn’t? Through the price of the apple. What is done in a situation where the quantity demanded exceeds the quantity supplied, is – the price is adjusted in such a way that the quantity demanded drops and becomes equal to the quantity supplied. In apple-terms: There are 5 apples supplied (quantity supplied) and 10 apples demanded (quantity demanded) – what the seller/supplier will do, is adjust the price in such a way that only 5 apples are demanded – thereby equalising the quantity of apples demanded (from 10 to 5 apples) to the quantity supplied (5 apples). (If you have to read the above paragraph a few times to understand it clearly: do so.)

How will the price be adjusted to drop the quantity demanded? The price will be raised. Why? Because the general rule is that at a lower price, the quantity demanded increases and at a high price, the quantity demanded decreases. You can relate this to your own experiences: when something is cheap, you’ll be inclined to buy more of it than when it is expensive. For instance, when there are sales on clothes, you may come home with 5 full bags of newly purchased clothes when, usually, you would maybe only buy a few items at a time. So, when 10 apples are demanded and 5 apples are supplied, the supplier will increase the price of an apple, until only 5 people are left who are willing to pay the higher price.

Logically – if 10 apples are supplied but only 5 apples are demanded, the opposite will happen. A supplier wants to sell all of his 10 apples. So – to get more people to be willing to buy his apples, he will lower the price of an apple, until 10 people are willing to pay the lower price. Again, herein equalising the quantity demanded (from 5 to 10 apples) to the quantity supplied (10 apples).

So – now you understand the principles of supply and demand and how they influence prices.

Since a currency exchange rate is nothing more than the price of a certain currency, exchange rates are subject to supply and demand as well – and that is why currency exchange rates change all the time; due to changes in the quantity demanded and the quantity supplied.

In our example:

The more foreign countries want to import corn from South Africa, the higher the quantity of South African Rands demanded (remember, they first have to buy the currency before they can pay for the corn with it), the more the price of South African Rands – or the exchange rate – will rise.

The less foreign countries want to import corn from South Africa, the lower the quantity of South African Rands demanded, the more the price of South African Rands – or the exchange rate – will fall.

There – doesn’t that make economy look a whole lot less scary already?

If you’re not satisfied with the current economic system and the consequence of it within the world, it is important to investigate how it works and to stand equal and one with those that are currently running the show. The first step herein is to educate ourselves on how the system operates and how they’re manipulating it to suit their needs. Even if economy seems like a big, scary monster: it’s not – it’s just another system.

Monday, August 22, 2011

Only the Poor would Survive

I’ve been raised in the belief that in order to survive, I need to have a good education, so that I can get a good job, a lot of money and from there I’ll be able to take care of myself.
Having moved to South Africa, this belief of mine has been challenged.
In coming to live on a farm, I quickly realised that all the knowledge I gathered over the years through schooling, had become completely useless – none of it was able to be applied or used in this new environment. I had to learn how to do everything as though I had never done anything my whole life.
All that I was able to do, was limited by that which I had learnt and studied in school. Anything outside of that was ‘unknown territory’ and I believed that it was ‘not for me’ because I hadn’t prepared myself through schooling/education to participate in that.
In my stay on the farm and in South Africa, I have met several people who have done a whole range of things during their life and who seem to be able to take on any challenge, no matter in which ‘field’ or of what ‘type’. This is in sharp contrast to the (adult) people I knew in Belgium: they had a stable job, which they had been doing for years and which they would probably continue doing for years. They had studied to ‘become something’, then they became it and then they simply remained as it. They have one profession and that’s it – one profession that requires a certain kill-set. Anything outside of this profession and skill-set, is ‘unknown territory’ and should be taken on by people who have educated themselves/ specialised in different fields, professions or skill-sets.
survival-425What I see here, is that the overall economic situation in Belgium is simply ‘more stable’ than in South Africa. In Belgium, you can afford to study just one profession and remain as it, because you’ll probably be able to keep that particular job for a very long time. In South Africa, however, the economic situation is not as stable and one requires to continuously look out for new opportunities or jobs in order to generate an income. Here one requires to adapt to the environment. “These are the available jobs/opportunities at this time: either adapt yourself to these jobs/opportunities, or suffer.”
Therefore, in general, people here are better at adapting themselves to change and if ever world war III breaks out, or a world-disaster occurs – it is those people who will be able to survive – as they will simply adapt to the situation and become whoever they require to become – not defined by any education or studies. Whereas, in a country like Belgium, people are so used to everything remaining the same, that if a war breaks out or a world-disaster occurs, they won’t know what hit them and they will literally be like fish on the land – because they didn’t ‘design themselves’ to adapt to change effectively.
And so, again, all is in reverse. Those countries with high levels and standards of education believe their population to be superior to countries with low levels and standards in education. But the result is that if you train yourself really well and really long in one thing, you are excluding yourself from everything else. In terms of living-skills and survival-skills – you’re useless if you cannot adapt to change. It is those who live in countries where the economic situation is unstable and the education standards are low – who are superior human beings.
Within designing a new, Equal, Money system – we require to re-design our education systems as well – because, you won’t require to study really hard to become very good at one profession, to get a ‘good job’, to have a lot of money in order to survive. Money will be here, will be provided unconditionally.
Education should train a person in a wide variety of skills. In school, I chose to study Latin-maths – and the only ‘skill’ I learnt here, was to study something by heart. In other studies, one learnt how to cook, in another one learnt how to work with engines and so on. Why are those classes not available to everyone? And why are all classes where someone requires to make their hands dirty, seen as ‘less’ and ‘for dumb people’?? With all my knowledge, I wasn’t able to do anything when it came to practical living!
If money and income don’t determine the value of a certain job, profession or skill-set anymore – people will actually be willing to develop all kinds of skills, whereby we are no longer limited and completely dependant on others to ‘get things done’. Each one can then explore themselves into various different applications, fields, skills and professions. Herein, the focus of education will shift from survival to life. Education should not exist for the purpose of survival – survival should be a given – education should focus on life and how to live effectively.
Currently – with all the education in place – still no-one knows how to live. How to live is not something that you learn in school, it’s something you have to apparently ‘figure out’ in your ‘spare time’. If education were to actually focus on Life and not Survival – what would the world look like?

Sunday, May 15, 2011

Global Sustainable Development – No more Empty Promises

A 'new concept' I'm being taught about, is 'Sustainable Development'.

The Brundtland Commission defines 'sustainable development' as 'development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.'

So – in other words, 'sustainable development' refers to meeting everyone's needs (= no more poverty and starvation) and not exploiting Earth/nature/the environment in a way that causes long-term damage.

What do we know about the world we live in today?

That we have a third of the population starving of hunger with a whole lot more being poor (they cannot provide for basic necessities). And we have depleted (and continue to deplete) the Earth's resources whereby we extract more than the Earth is able to replenish.

So – those two aspects of our world is what humanity has been trying to tackle through applying principles of 'sustainable development'. That humanity has failed is quite obvious – look around – there has been no change whatsoever with regards to poverty or care for the environment if you compare present day to 20-30 years ago.

People are still starving and companies are still wasting resources.

It's not that we didn't have 'good intentions'. Just have a look at a few of the conferences and agreements that took place with regards to sustainable development:

Rio Earth Summit 

With 172 governments participating in the Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992 – this conference was deemed as a 'milestone' in the history of sustainable development.

The two-week Earth Summit resulted in the adoption of 'Agenda 21', a wide-ranging blueprint for action to achieve sustainable development worldwide. The Agenda consists of 40 chapters, which are divided into 4 main sections:
  1. Social and Economic Dimensions
    (deals with combating poverty, changing consumption patterns, promoting health, change population and sustainable settlement)
  2. Conservation and Management of Resources for Development
  3. Strengthening the Role of Major Groups
  4. Means of Implementation
After these two weeks, everyone was very excited, very proud and very happy – we had a PLAN!

The United Nations Global Compact 

Though, as it turned out, barely anyone implemented Agenda 21 within their corporations: Lots of talk, lots of expectations, lots of energy – little actions – no results.

Because of the major flop Agenda 21 turned out to be – a new initiative was started in 1999: the United Nations Global Compact.

Now – you'd think that they would've 'learned something' from the Rio Earth Summit and Agenda 21 disaster – but nope:

The essence of this new initiative is that

"the UN Global Compact asks companies to embrace, support and enact, within their sphere of influence, a set of core values in the areas of human rights, labour standards, the environment and anti-corruption."

Sure, the principles sound nice, but what's the point in even mentioning them? The fact that they merely ASKED companies to participate and that they counted on the people's 'good-will' to CHANGE THE WORLD (!!!) already predicts that this initiative wasn't even worth implementing and was just another waste of resources.

I mean – unless you give people speeding tickets, they don't want to adhere to the speed limits – and even then they take their chances. Did you really think that if you nicely ask people to please adhere to the ten principles of the UN Global Compact and change their companies – that they would do so? That's just dumb. 

The Millennium Development Goals 

Needless to say that, again, countries and companies didn't deliver, didn't follow through.

Then – suddenly – they had this amazing idea!

"Why don't we – instead of writing out 10 principles – formulate 8 GOALs! "

Yeah – that's definitely a huge difference – 'now we're getting somewhere!'

Yes – of course it's the same story, same problem, but they thought they had invented the wheel, so they went ahead and formulated 8 goals, 8 very ambitious goals, and they threw a deadline on-top!

In the year 2000, at the Millennium Summit, over 150 World-leaders vowed to reach the following Goals by 2015:

Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Hunger and Poverty
Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education
Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women
Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality
Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health
Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria and other diseases
Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability
Goal 8: Develop a Global Partnership for Development

We're 11 years later – would you say that in the last 11 years, world leaders have been actively engaging themselves towards reaching these 8 goals – or have they – as usual – been engaging in resource-absorbing wars, conflicts and corruption?

We have only 4 years left – anyone see a change of tide in the near future? Don't think so.

So – why is it that, despite the efforts to put together an Agenda, or a series of Principles or a list of Goals – that there is no substantial change?

Let's have a look at the nature of the question of sustainable development. In essence, what is being asked of companies, is to continue business as usual – whereby you sell products or services in such a way that you are able to fulfil your corporation's goal, which is: profit maximisation – thought, you must do it in such a way that your actions don't cause harmful consequences to the environment or society as a whole.

What is the problem with this question?

The problem is that we are trying to create a way of doing business that adheres to two conflicting principles.

The first principle is the principle of the economic system, which is profit-maximisation. This is a Self-Interested principle, whereby you want to be the winner and want everyone else to be a loser. I'm not making this up or portraying the economic system in a 'bad light'; this is the essence of the game of the Free Market mechanism that we're playing: Everyone competes with each other and everyone wants to come out as the winner. For some to be winners, there have to be losers. We can't all be winners – the Free Market mechanism doesn't provide for that. There HAVE to be losers. Otherwise the system doesn't work.

Sustainable development, however, requires that we adopt a principle of doing what is best for society as a whole. If we wish to do what is best for all – then it follows that there are certain practices that we simply cannot allow.

An example is that we cannot allow firms to harvest resources from the Earth for a reason /purpose other than doing what is best for all, whereby useless products are produced, not because people will actually benefit from those products, but because an opportunity was identified where the perceived need/desire to acquire such a product can be CREATED, through means such as advertisement – and therefore, firms will create a market for the product and be able to make money out of producing and selling this product that no-one REALLY wants or needs. The examples of such products are numerous. Simply walk around in a mall or in your supermarket and have a look at the products they sell that actually don't benefit anyone – but for which, nonetheless, Earth's resources were used to produce them.

If you are serious about sustainable development, it is obvious that such practices are a 'no-go' as they completely defeat the principle of doing what is best for society as a whole – both in the present as in the future.

But have a look: The right to choose what you want to produce is a basic principle of the Free Market economy. That's why they call it 'free'. If you want to produce a product that no-one needs, but that you'll be able to sell and make profit with (provided that selling this product is not illegal) – then no-one is going to stop you. Instead you'll be cheered at: "Go ahead! Be an entrepreneur! Thank you for engaging in our economy! We need more people like you!"

Are you starting to see what I'm seeing?

On the one side we have the capitalistic/free market economic system, which allows people to do as they please in terms of what to produce and how to produce it – and the only real requirement to be successful is that you do better than your competitors.

On the other side we have the need for sustainable development, which calls for firms and individuals to consider and do what is best for all.

Now – it is very simple: Either you follow the first principle, or you follow the second – but you cannot have both – it is impossible, they contradict each other at their very core.

So – either we allow each one to act in self-interest and we accept that a third of the population starves forevermore – and we accept that this can even get worse and that only some are the winners and most are the losers – and whereby we have no regard for the environment or future generations.

Or – we decide to end the free market system and create a new system that is based on the principle of doing what is best for all, hereby effectively eradicating starvation, poverty, destruction of the environment, etc.

Now – why is it so difficult for people to consider the second option? As long as we don't commit ourselves to the solution the world requires, we continue sticking with option 1 and continue to cause further damage – why delay?

The reason is simplistic:

People don't want to give up the free market system.

Why not? We have just shown that if we don't, we only further suffering and destruction.

People don't want to give up the free market system, because people don't want to give up their idea, perception and experience of 'freedom'. This idea, perception and experience is the very foundation of the free market system and it is what people hold on to.

It doesn't mean that we are actually 'free' – I mean, how free are you if you are driven by fear and greed?

No – we are not free – but for some reason humanity thinks it is important to cling to the idea and belief that we are free and that we can make our own choices – even if it means the death of billions – as long as I feel like I can make 'my own choice' and 'make up my mind' and 'have my own opinion'.

If you consider that all that requires to be done – for actual sustainable development to be possible – is to give up an idea/perception/belief of us apparently having 'free choice' – and that if we would just for one moment realise that our choices aren't really free – then we could make an actual change, then we could start creating real heaven on Earth.

You must understand that if you are going to give people the freedom to do as they please – then they WILL use this freedom to abuse, they WILL use it to pursue their own personal 'happiness' and they WILL sacrifice others and their 'freedom' in the process. We have been proving it for centuries – our current economic system, our current state of the world is PROOF of that. The attempts of the Sustainable Development projects thus far, have proven that: all were free to choose to participate within making an actual change, or continuing as they were – and the latter was chosen.

We've tried it the 'freedom' way – it's a fucking joke.

People don't have the right to freedom. Have a look: what do we do with those that we deem to be 'dangerous to society'? We lock them up, we put them in prison, we take away their freedom. Now, consider that anyone who thinks and believes that their own personal happiness and gratification is more important than what is best for all – is an actual danger to society. Why?

Simple – because they will rather see another suffer and come out a 'winner', than to create a system of support that will benefit all. They will rather see a third of the world's population die of hunger, than to risk losing their luxury and their 'freedom'.

Humanity has lost their right to freedom. Humanity has proven themselves to be a danger to society, to life. Humanity has failed. And as such, our freedom requires to be taken away – the free market system has to end. We've had our chance, we've had our fun – but this is enough!

Sustainable development is possible, but not in our current economic system – not in a world where 'freedom of choice' is respected and valued above life itself.

Therefore – consider a new economic system, an economic system that has sustainable development at heart, that has EVERYONE's best interest at heart. Such a system is not impossible, it is being developed as we speak.

I understand that people are afraid to give up their idea of freedom. But look at this world and realise: no freedom actually exists and no good has come of our current system of so-called 'freedom' – none whatsoever. The apparent 'well-being' and 'abundance' that exists in some countries: it is at the expense of billions – they are the few winners where billions lose. Don't hold it as a carrot in front of you. Within the current system of competition: it is IMPOSSIBLE for all to experience this abundance.

For those who understand and grasp what is being said here – for those who understand what is required – please join the Equal Money Movement. Join Start a blog and speak up.

There will be a time where you'll have to make a decision: to support your own self-interest or to support all life – when that time comes, understand how your actions affect the whole.

Join us – be 1 Vote for World Equality.




Tuesday, April 26, 2011

ECONOMY is the Science of REAL EVIL

When you study economy, you will be surprised at how clearly they show you that the current economic system DOES NOT WORK. From the perspective that:
  • They are aware that within the current economic system, only those with money will be provided for and anyone else is excluded and doomed to suffer in poverty.
  • They are aware that the current economic system is based on everyone's desire to make profit and become wealthy without any regard for the well-being of all.
  • They are aware that any attempt within the current money system – of for instance government-interventions – to try and prevent or stop poverty, is ineffective – the intended effects always back-lash and make the situation worse. And this is not because the interventions are carried out ineffectively. To operate within the current system, you are dealing with a certain mathematical equation that you simply cannot temper with. You can 'intervene' for a moment and try to manipulate the outcomes = but soon enough the system will simply balance itself out again.
This then begs the question: Why the hell are we STILL operating within the current system, if all economists are aware that the system DOES NOT WORK???

Surely, by now, someone must have come up with the simple insight that: 'Hey! If this current system does not work then maybe we should just design a new system! One that is not based on personal profit, but on what is best for all!!'

So – why are we not hearing about it, why – after all these centuries – are we still splashing around in the same retarded system? And I repeat: All economists understand the consequences of this system, understand the principles that it is based on – and understand that the abusive effects of this system, such as poverty, starvation and crime cannot be fixed from within the system. They understand that: if we want to continue with this system, then we'll have to accept poverty, starvation and crime – simple as that.

When I started studying economy, I wondered how much I would get to know about how the system really works and how much the information would be 'falsified'. And – I was so surprised to see that the information is all there, laid out before me, for me to understand and grasp. They explain how the system works, why it works the way it does, what its problems are and how we cannot fix the problems from within the system.

So – if I understand that: WITHIN THE CURRENT SYSTEM, there is NO SOLUTION TO POVERTY – then surely, all the economists who have their Masters and shit in Economy, understand the exact same thing.


And then I remembered the sad, ridiculous truth of science:

As a scientist, you are not to make statements such as 'this is what should happen', 'we should not do this', 'this would be better', 'this system sucks'. As a scientist, one has to capture the information, makes sense of it and be able to explain it and THAT's IT.

Why? Because according to the philosophy of science – scientists have to remain 'objective'. Scientists must get the facts, understand the facts and explain the facts – they mustn't say that the facts could've been different if only we'd changed the current system and that we should therefore change the system. Nope. Because – see, apparently then, you're being 'subjective' and that's 'not cool'.


And as soon as you start making statements about how the economic system is a mess and it doesn't work and we should change it – because: look around: we're accepting poverty, crime, abuse, rape, murder, starvation, profit, personal gratification – all in the name of the SYSTEM! – you can't be taken seriously anymore as an economist, because now you've gone and let your subjectivity 'cloud your judgment'! 'That's really unprofessional of you!'

And obviously, anyone else who figures out that the system doesn't work is not going to be taken seriously – why? BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT AN EXPERT! You're not an economist – 'sorry, you don't know what you're talking about.'

So – we've created this magnificent closed system of information control. Basically saying: "If you want to study Economy, that is cool. But you must understand – you're not allowed to use your knowledge against the current system. In fact, you're not allowed to make any normative statements about the system in any way. If you do, you'll simply not be taken seriously as an economist and then you won't be able to get a job as an economist and then you won't be able to make money and then you'll DIE!! "

So – what's the point of studying economy then? Well, the following: "We have good news, though! If you study economy, you'll know how the system works. You'll know the ins and outs and be able to use that knowledge in your advantage. That's right! You'll be able to manipulate the system to suit you, to take advantage of others! Isn't that wonderful!"

And that is exactly why we haven't had anyone else come up with an Equal Money System. (Which – honestly – is the obvious solution to the current system if you understand how the system works. Meaning: all economists already KNOW that it is the solution.)

The reason that we are not already living in a society based on equal money and what is best for all – is because:

  1. Science is designed in such a way that it will never really allow change, because the experts are not allowed to speak up
  2. Economists do not want to speak up and rather use the 'secret knowledge' to give themselves advantage in the system, to gain personal power
  3. Economists who do want to make a change and want to do research on the topic, will not get funds. Why? Because funding comes from either someone who expects to gain profit out of your research, or from the government. (Remember – this is how the system works, your research is your 'proof' – if you don't have 'proof' no one wants to listen to you.)
No individual or business will fund research into equal money, because equal money is about stopping profit – so obviously, if you're a profit-seeking business-man, you're not going to support research into equal money.
The government is not going to fund you either, because the government consists of politicians who are too concerned with remaining in power and winning the next elections. Therefore – what they're interested in is quick-fix solutions to make it look like something is happening, to make it look like they care and to prevent too much protest. So – they will invest in short-term projects, rather than an actual long-term solution.

So – Leila and I are working on a video-series to assist you in understanding the basic mechanics of our current economic system. Because, once you understand how the current system works, you'll understand why an Equal Money System is the solution. I suggest you also read up on Leila's latest blog-post: Vocabulary is the Key to Self-Expansion – in relation to not allowing yourself to be intimidated by economy or the science of economy. Those that are currently in control and in power of the world understand how the economic system functions – if we want to change the system – we have to stand equal to that. I will make an announcement with links on this blog as soon as the first video of the series is online!

To all those who understand how the current economic system operates – yes, I'm talking to all of you economists out there – if you don't want to be an evil bastard: join us. Those ideas you've had silently come up in yourself several times as you were studying of 'this doesn't seem right' and 'is there no other way?' – stop suppressing that! The economic system is just that: a system created by human beings. And if you are a human being who understands the ins and outs of this system and understands that this system is abusive and is not what's best for all – then it is your RESPONSIBILITY to act! It is your responsibility to speak! It is your responsibility to do everything in your power to bring about a new system!

Join us on Facebook and the Equal Money website.

Monday, April 4, 2011

Self Comes Forth within Agreement

Comfort as how it is lived and experienced in this world is as a 'hiding' from pain. Comfort always occurs After something unpleasant has happened to you and then someone comes to comfort you. Comfort – Come into my fort – Come here, I will comfort you, I will create an apparent fort around you, where you can pretend that you are safe and secure from whatever it is you're hiding from. In that, you can suppress your experience so that it feels like it is now 'gone'.
This definition and application of the word 'comfort' is quite problematic – as all that happens is a suppression of what you are experiencing. And – in a way this is obvious, because – most of the time – what you are actually trying to hide and run away from, is yourself, your own inner experiences. No fort is going to keep you safe from yourself… so all that you 'can' do – apparently – is to suppress your inner emotions so that they are gone and you are now 'safe'.

In those moments, where you seek comfort from someone – what is usually the experience? It is an experience of inner turmoil and it is like this inner turmoil has 'taken over' inside yourself. And all you can do is just be that turmoil and cry as the turmoil and worry with the turmoil and think about the turmoil and it is like a storm that doesn't stop and the only way you know for the storm to stop is to have someone else step in and comfort you.

In that storm, in that inner turmoil – it is like you have lost yourself.

So – what is the alternative? How can you stop the storm without having someone comfort you and suppressing the entire experience? Because – common sense – if the experience is suppressed, it means it is not gone at all – it is merely suppressed. You don't feel it anymore, but it's still there, lurking in the depths and the shadows of yourself. And with any next opportunity, when you are off-guard, it will just come storming back in, taking you over, all over again.

The alternative is for you to – from within the storm – stand up. This is done through applying self-forgiveness, breathing and self-corrective statements. As you apply these tools, you will see that the storm clears – and you come forth. When self comes forth – that must be… self-comfort.

Instead of being comforted by someone saying 'come into my fort' where you can try to hide from the storm inside yourself – you comfort yourself; allowing yourself to Come Forth through applying the tools of breathing, self-forgiveness and self-corrective application.

This new perspective on the word 'comfort' is also applicable in relation to the words 'comfortable' and 'comfortability'. Because – when you say that you are comfortable in the presence of a particular being, do you not mean that you are able to be yourself? That you feel that you are able to share things with this person that you would not normally share? So – you are comfort-able – able to come forth as who you are. Eventually, you want to be able to be here as who you are no matter what – though, initially, you will find that you feel comfortable only around certain beings.

In terms of an agreement partner – that comfortability is what you are looking for – someone where you are able to come forth – where you feel like you can share things that you would not normally share, where there is no pressure to be anything else than just you. This point of comfortability is signalling to you that there is potential for an agreement here.

If you find an agreement partner and both of you have decided to walk together – you will find moments where you are no longer comfortable, where you want to hide from the other, where you want to run away from the person, where you want to 'appear better' to the person, etc. This does not mean that your agreement is now invalid and that you have to break up. It simply means that you're facing a particular point. Then, it is to push yourself to communicate with the other being, push yourself back to that point of comfort. Stand up – come forth.

If you keep on applying this point, if you keep on pushing for that point of self-comfortability within agreement – you will see that it becomes much easier for you to be comfortable around other beings as well. What are agreements, but a training ground in realising your equality and oneness to and as other beings?

So – remember that it is not because you are comfortable in the presence of a particular being, that this comfortability will remain unchanged if you decide to walk an agreement together. Your comfortability is a starting-point. As you walk together and go through all kinds of experiences that are being triggered and you suddenly realise that you're not at all comfortable with your agreement partner anymore – that's when you want to go back to your starting-point. Because if you continue as you are, where you are in each other's presence, but not actually present as you with the other – you'll each move into separate directions, individually and communication will become more and more problematic.

So – go back to your starting-point, meaning: push for that point of open communication. Share what it is that you're experiencing, despite feeling uncomfortable about it. And as you talk with each other, and openly share what each one has been experiencing, you're placing yourself back as the starting-point of comfortability. This means that you're both present again, here, together – and able to direct the particular point that caused you to become uncomfortable around each other in the first place.

Saturday, March 19, 2011

Freedom and the Crucifixion of Jesus

Have a look at one of the typical representations of Freedom within this world: 
A human being standing on a ledge with his/her arms spread horizontally to the side – generally with wind blowing through his/her hair for extra drama. A typical example is the scene in the Titanic where Jack and Rose both stand in this position at the front end of the boat.
When I was on a trip with my parents, I saw a kid climbing on a pile of rocks, spreading his arms side-ways and squeezing his eyes closed – taking on a pose so that his dad could take a picture. As I saw this boy take on this pose, I spontaneously laughed out loud, because he looked like Jesus on the cross – and I thought that it was his intention to portray this, because in the way he squeezed his eyes, it looked like he was in pain. However, when the boy heard me laugh, he turned red and looked embarrassed. Then I realized that he didn't mean to portray Jesus on the cross in pain, but a 'free man' squeezing his eyes because of the apparent intensity of the experience of freedom. 
In that moment it struck me: Why is one of the most prominent symbols of freedom the same pose as Jesus dying on the cross for the sins of man?
Isn't this odd? Why would freedom and crucifixion be related? How is it related?
To answer these questions, we can investigate the crucifixion of Jesus in the bible:
What was the point of Jesus dying on the cross? He died for the sins of man – meaning: he paid off their 'debt'. What does this mean in the Mind of Man? It is interpreted as such that because Jesus has already died for my sins and he has already 'paid off my debt' – I get to do anything I want – without consequences! And this – in the Mind of Man – means Freedom. 
So from this perspective – Freedom and Crucifixion are equal and one – the symbol is the same because they form two parts of the same polarity equation.

Let's investigate further and have a look at how this polarity equation plays-out in our world today.
How is freedom in this world experienced? Through being able to 'make my own choice'. But when it comes to being able to choose in this world – you need/require money. Only when you have money are you really able to make a choice. Because, if you don't have money you don't have many options: you do what you have to do to survive and help your family survive – so really, what choice do you have?
The amount of money that exists is limited. It is also distributed unequally: some have more money than others – some have a whole fuck load more than others. So – what kind of world do we live in? We live in a world where some have a whole fuck load of money – and thus a whole fuck load of options and thus the experience of being able to 'make my own choice' – where others have a lot of money with a lot of options and a certain experience of being able to 'make my own choice' – where a whole lot of people have little money with little options and a very limited experience of being able to 'make my own choice' – and a whole fuck load of people have no money, no options and no experience of choice in any way whatsoever.
Obviously – since money is limited – if someone has more money than they would have if all money was distributed equally – they have this money because they 'took' from someone who has less money than he/she would have if all money were distributed equally. So – within accepting and allowing and defending one's Freedom, one's Free Will, one's Free Choice – what are you, by implication, accepting and allowing? You are accepting and allowing the crucifixion of those who now – because you have 'more' – have 'less'. You are taking away their Freedom, their Free Will, their Choice. Because, as we said – in having more money – they have less money. With less money, one has less options and thus less (or no) choice.
Thus – common sense: within this world the majority of people's freedom is sacrificed for the minority's freedom. Every single day, we crucify those whose options we take to be able to experience 'Freedom', 'Free Will' and 'Choice'. 
We focus so extensively on this one event in the past of one Man apparently dying for the sins of Man – that we don't see how this is happening daily, continuously, endlessly. The Crucifixion of Jesus is not a one-time event – it is the essence of the nature of existence, permeating through our reality as we all participate within the current Money System. Jesus' crucifixion is happening right now, at this very moment. 
How many more must be crucified, how many more must die, how many more must suffer – before we realise: it doesn't have to be this way. 
This crucifixion must end, it cannot be justified, because – none of us on the 'positive polarity', who have sufficient money and are able to 'make our own choices', would be willing to be sacrificed, would be willing to be crucified. We are no Jesus – we are merely sinners.
It doesn't have to be this way. An Equal Money System would provide equal money, options, freedom and choices. No-one has to be crucified, no-one has to be sacrificed. We can end this cycle.

Tuesday, March 8, 2011

Practically Living with Animals at the Desteni Farm

Today I walked through a series of events where actual and possible animal-attacks kept on following each-other.

Okay – let me first explain to you the lay-out of the farm in terms of who lives where, as the housing area of the farm is divided into two parts.

You have the front part of the farm, which includes the gate where you enter, the 'main house', the pool, the car-port, the 4 wooden rooms on the one side, with 'the music studio' (Cerise and Fidelis's house) behind that and the other two wooden rooms on the other side of the main house.

The second part consists of 'the second house' (Rozelle, Andrea and Robert) and the new building at the back, which is where I, LJ, Gian and Leila live.
The two parts of the farm are separated by a fence and the music studio. The reason for the split is because some animals require a 'safe refuge' from the pack of dogs that sometimes chases after birds or cats. And also because Baru and the other big dogs don't do well together.
So, this afternoon – I go outside because Bumi (one of my and lj's new pups) was crying by a gate, and what has happened before is that the big dogs in the 'first/front part' of the farm saw her crying by a gate and they ran up to her barking an growling, because they still see our new pups as 'intruders on their terrain.' So – I go out and see Bumi by the gate, but the big dogs are all running around in front, not taking notice of her. As I look at the dogs, I suddenly see a Hadeda ( flying up in the sky from in between the dogs and realise that's what the dogs are 'entertaining' themselves with. So, I yell at them to stop and at the same time I see Cerise and Fidelis running down to chase the dogs away from the bird. 
The hadeda wasn't closing her one wing, so Cerise, Fidelis and later LJ investigated where she got hurt. The damage wasn't too serious, so we took her in the house to take care of the wound and have her rest a bit. 
I used 'purple spray' to disinfect the wound after cleaning it, which is an anti-septic spray that we use specifically for animals. I had fetched the purple from the main house, so, after I was done, I go down to the main house to bring the purple spray back. As I leave, Bumi follows me to the gate and starts crying again. In the meantime, Sunette and Fidelis had started treating the dogs against maggots, because the hadeda (that they had been chasing) was covered in it. This treating of dogs is usually done in the garden behind the main house, from where all the dogs could easily notice Bumi's cry. (Bumi in picture on the right)
So – as I am walking down to the main house, I see the dogs go into 'alert mode' as they hear Bumi crying. Gracy had been the 'most ferocious' in the previous confrontations, so I try to grab her as she passes by me, but she pulls loose and goes straight for the gate. Even though Bumi now sees this pack of crazy dogs running at her, barking and growling, she still tries to get through the gate, instead of running away. So, I run and yell at the dogs and chase them away to make sure Bumi doesn't get hurt. Because, what happened before, as well, is that Bumi pushed her head through the gate and then got stuck – so if that'd happened while the dogs were trying to attack, she would've gotten hurt.
I take Bumi to the house and when I go back out into the garden, I see Timelines wants to come for a visit. Timeless lives in the 'first part' of the farm, but enjoys coming for visits to the 'second part' because she is friends with most of the dogs here. The problem is that she is often the one to start barking at Baru (who lives in the second part), which can lead to a fight. So, if Timeless comes for a visit in the back, we always make sure that Baru either isn't in the garden, or we take her immediately into the house to prevent a confrontation between the two dogs.
So, I bring her up to the house and she says hi to all the dogs here. Then, suddenly, I see Leila and Gian's parrot walking out of their room, into the kitchen-area. Usually, either the parrot is locked up in his cage when their door is open, or is free to move around in the room, but then the door is closed – or Leila or Gian are with the parrot in the kitchen or lounge area to make sure no accidents happen.
But this time, I was alone with the dogs in the house and there comes the parrot walking out of Leila and Gian's room. Timeless and the parrot haven't spent much time together – so it's possible that Timeless will attack the parrot – or that the parrot attacks Timeless, because, yes, birds are very territorial as well.
So – I go 'oh crap!' and try to get Timeless' attention so she doesn't notice the parrot and try to get her out of the house as quickly as I can. As I open the door of the house, Timeless hears something in the 'first part' of the farm and runs straight down to the second house. Usually Timeless always stays by us when we bring her back to the 'first part' of the farm through a gate close-by our house, to avoid coming near the entrance of the second house, where Baru likes to hang out. But, as I said, this time she ran straight down to the second house because she heard something going on there. Gian, who was also out in the garden, and I try to call Timeless back, but she doesn't want to come back. As I go down to the second house, I see that luckily Rozelle was there and she was holding Baru back with a chair. Esteni was already on her way to Timeless back into the first part of the house. 
I was pretty shaken up with how these events had followed each-other so closely, each time having to intervene asap to make sure no-one gets hurt. First the dogs and the hadeda, then the dogs and Bumi, then Timeless and the parrot and then Timeless and Baru!
Living together with animals is always seen as something 'idyllic' – as though, because you live with a lot of animals in the same place, everyone lives in peace with one another all the time. Yes, there are moments where different animals are able to live with each other, enjoying each other's presence – but, just as with humans, there is also conflict. And the more animals live together in one area, the more conflict there is – just as with humans. If it hadn't been for all the fences and gates and Bernard being the 'alpha dog' – we wouldn't have been able to live with so many animals on one farm.
Even just in our house, we spend a lot of time on 'animal-management' as we live with a parrot, a duck, two hens and 6 dogs. There used to be 3 chickens: the two hens and one rooster – but we had to find another solution for the rooster, because, as his 'roosterness' developped, he became more and more aggressive towards Chimera (small dog) and started attacking her, pecking at/pulling on her eye-lids. We had just set up a new chick's house in the back of the garden, so we decided to place Tweeter (the rooster) in with the chicks. 
That was quite a tough decision and experience, because Tweeter had been with Lj and myself from the day he was born. His mother wasn't taking care of him to be able to take care of his sisters who were a bit older and already able to walk. So, we took Tweeter in and trained him to be able to live with humans and dogs. He even learned how to bark! When the dogs were barking, he'd blare out this horrible sound, which was his bark, lol. 
So far the hens haven't caused any problems, nor do the dogs have issues with them – so we will see how this develops. At the moment, the hens actually seem more relaxed with Tweeter being gone. We also haven't yet gotten to the state where the hens are laying eggs, they're still too young. So that will be another point that will require consideration and direction. The 'shitting-problem' was solved through making diapers for the chickens. It's like a harness that I sewed up, that's got a pouch where we place in paper towel. And every few hours, we change their diapers, meaning: throw out the old paper towel and place in fresh one. We cannot let them live in the garden, because of Baru, and because they might escape through the fences. And we tried to train them to shit on newspaper, but it just wouldn't take. So, now they have to wear diapers.
When things 'go well' where various animals and humans are able to live together, it's not because of everyone just 'liking each other' and simply 'getting along'. It requires planning, consideration, training, management, awareness, attention and… trial and error. It's not something that 'just is' or 'just happens', it is a 'work in progress'. And sometimes you can want to make it work as much as you can, but you have to consider practicality. Like we had to do for Tweeter. We wouldn't practically be able to 'get Tweeter to a point' where he would be able to 'peacefully' co-exist with the other animals in the house. Because his programming as a rooster of dominating those 'under him' is so ingrained as himself, that it'll require a lot more time than we practically have available, to get him to that stable point of being able to co-exist with others without trying to dominate them and cause shit. So, we re-homed him. He currently seems to be quite satisfied as being the rooster in the midst of hens and chicks. We 'hope' he'll also share with them his story and experience of living with us, so that, in turn, he can assist the other chickens. 
So, here just sharing my experience of today as well as some observations within working and living with the animals on the farm, which is where I am currently exploring and enjoying myself a lot!
Thank you for reading.