plicit consent is theft. A criminal act in the eyes of the law and in the eyes of God. So, it is timely to ask the question: to whom does the sovereignty of our parliament belong? Some would say it belongs to the monarchy. An absurd proposition for three reasons: such a claim is not written anywhere as we have no written consitution; the British monarchy lost supremacy when it was challenged and defeated in the Glorious Revolution and establishment of parliament, and thirdly, it is an untenable position to hold as one person, such as Hitler, may hold power in a fascist state but not in a democracy. The Queen may have the power to order a military coup and dissolve parliament but, frankly, I cannot see the people of this country, who stood firm against the Nazis, stand by and allow a German and her Greek husband to carry out a fascist coup of British democracy without resistance. I would also argue that sovereignty does not abide in the House of Lords as its members are appointed and not elected. Nor does sovereigny lie in the commons as members of parliament are mere tenants, allowed to temporarily occupy the commons with the permission of the voters of this country. MPs are leaseholders, not freeholders and therefore do not possess the sovereignty of parliament. Having dismissed the above charlatans, it follows that the sovereignty of parliament belongs to those who have the power to send and remove MPs from parliament and is irrevocably attached to the voting franchise and therefore belongs to every single voter in the country. And so it follows that if any politician wishes to give away the sovereignty that belongs to us, the voters, then they will have to seek our implicit permission to do so.
They have failed to seek that permission. The implications of this theft are far ranging. It means that Margaret Thatcher, John Major and Gordon Brown had no right or authority to enter into treaties and constitutions with third parties to give away the sovereignty which belongs to the voters of Great Britain.
It means that they fraudulently entered into those contracts and so, in turn, means that those treaties and constitutions are null and void and will remain illegal under British law until the permission of the owners of the sovereignty of our parliament, the voters, is sought and given. The consequence of that theft is that not only is a referndum on the EU a mandatory requirement but also that in the meantime any politician or civil servant who enforces EU regulations and fines is committing a criminal act as the imposition of such fines and regulations has no legal basis in British law. I hold these truths to be self evident."…
y like a slow Catherine wheel I am composed of perhaps 100 billion stars and am about 13.6 billion years old, give or take 800 million years! I am a fairly large spiral galaxy some 120,000 light years across and 3000 light years thick in my centre. I live in a cluster of about 30 galaxies known as the Local Group, the other large galaxy in this group, the Andromeda Nebula, being about 2 million light years away (from the Earth). Currently I am colliding with a small neighbouring galaxy, the Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy, but not for the first time. It will probably pass through me without causing any serious damage. The most distant group of galaxies I've so far discovered is 13.5 billion light years away.
I am one among 100 billion or more galaxies (who knows?)
rushing outwards from some mysterious primal explosion.
The Hierarchy of Heaven and Earth - by - Douglas E. Harding
ions I'd like to share about how we can each make the most out of the coming year. It's not that I think 2012 is destined to be an extra special cosmic year. It's that, despite the Mayan prophecies and all the excitement they've catalyzed within the new–age movement, I'm pretty sure it won't–at least not on its own. A quick scan of the press surrounding the arrival of 2012 tells us that we can expect everything from a cataclysmic increase in natural disasters to an unprecedented global shift in consciousness ushering in a new era of peace on earth. And while I lack the advanced scientific education I would need to weigh in on the likelihood of imminent geological or meteorological Armageddon, I do have a few thoughts concerning the potential for a "global shift in consciousness"–and the role each of us might play in it. First of all, as you probably already know, I am a passionate advocate for the evolution of consciousness and culture. And, in my mind, any myth or narrative that has the potential to galvanize people toward positive change is a good thing. So, the fact that so many are feeling ignited by the notion that everything could change in one year, and are even feeling called to participate in catalyzing that change is good news for all of us. The world needs a lot of change, and that is going to require a lot of passionate change agents, whatever their religion might be. However, the popular notion that, with the arrival of a key "tipping point," we're all going to pass through a momentous and noticeable collective shift in consciousness (from "fear" to "love" or from "separation" to "oneness") needs some updating in light of what we now know about evolution. Studies of how consciousness and culture evolve have consistently shown us that human beings and human cultures evolve through predictable stages on what psychologist Clare Graves called a -
"never–ending upward quest." Integral developmental theory also tells us that these stages can't be skipped. You can't, in other words, jump from a "pre–modern" or "traditional" worldview to a "postmodern" worldview without first embracing a "modern" worldview. Put more simply, you aren't likely to get from tribalism to "global consciousness" without first embracing individualism–at least for a while. SO, the problem with the notion of a "collective shift in consciousness" is that, as a species, right now, we are spread out across a broad spectrum of at least five distinct stages of development: "tribal," "traditional," "modern," "postmodern," and "integral." If you do the math, that means that for humanity to go through a collective shift in consciousness, we'd really have to catalyze at least 5 distinct shifts in consciousness at once–and even if we did, we still wouldn't all be going through the same shift to arrive in the same place. So, if we're interested in helping consciousness and culture evolve, rather than hoping for a single global shift in consciousness, we would probably do well to turn our attention to the kinds of changes that are actually within our collective reach. As individuals, we can each engage in the challenging transformative work to evolve own consciousness-and more importantly, our own behavior –– beyond the ancient, survival –driven habits that still influence us every day.
We can also band together with small groups of other people and work together to evolve our collective consciousness and our collective behavior. And if enough individuals and enough small groups do enough work to transform their consciousness and behavior, we can certainly begin to generate a positive collective momentum in the direction of real evolutionary change. We might even begin to exert what Andrew Cohen calls "evolutionary tension" on the larger collective, visibly and invisibly pulling everyone in the direction of humanity's emergent higher potential.
Could such a momentum eventually lead us all to a "tipping point?" It's not outside the realm of possibility. The good news is that tipping points are a well–documented phenomenon. Social diffusion research pioneered by sociologist Everett Rogers consistently shows that when a key "social innovation" is adopted by a certain percentage of the population, that innovation begins to rapidly permeate the broader population through a process of diffusion that also proceeds through a predictable series of stages. It's not exactly a "global shift in consciousness," but it does mean that if enough of us begin to embody a new level of consciousness, the motivations and values of that new level will gradually be adopted by many others who have not necessarily themselves awakened or evolved to the same degree. As Ken Wilber has recently pointed out, the percentage of the population that has reached "integral consciousness " is rapidly approaching 10%, and that number has been well–documented as a key tipping point threshold. So, if you're excited about the possibility of a large sector of humanity embracing a more integral perspective, then now might be a very important moment to lean in and make a little more effort to help us get to that threshold. So, whether you're galvanized by the 2012 spirit, or simply eager to use any leverage you can to help serve humanity's higher evolution, it's hard to imagine a better time to seize the moment and use that energy to fuel your own commitment to doing everything in your power to make this year count. What can you do? Make it the year you go all the way every day with your own spiritual practice. Make it the year you close the gap between your highest ideals and the life you're living each day–even when things get challenging. Make this the year that you finally commit to evolve beyond your own ego–for real. Make it the year you show up consistently as an example of the kind of human being the world needs most–a courageous, passionate, committed evolutionary–an inspiration to everyone around you. If enough of us make the choice to go all the way to our own evolving edges, then indeed we might look back on 2012 as the year when an important threshold was crossed, or at least the year when a new momentum began. Thank you for your commitment to the evolutionary path. I look forward to sharing the journey with you, through this year and beyond. To our evolution, Craig Hamilton
Founder, Integral Enlightenment…
ve created to express those beliefs, played no small role in precipitating
the very crisis that now faces the country. In a nation that has come to think of human
nature as competitive, even predatory, self serving, acquisitive and utilitarian, is it any
wonder that those very values have led to a “winner take all” syndrome in the marketplace
in which the rich get richer while everyone else becomes marginalized, and the well-being
of the larger community, including the biosphere, becomes eroded?…