Day 227: What can we learn from Continuum?

I have been following the Tv-series ‘Continuum’ for a while now, and would like to share a perspective that came up while watching the last few episodes.

For those who are not familiar with Continuum, here a short delineation so you can have some background/context:

The series starts off in the future, in the year 2077. Corporations have taken over the role of government, where a ‘Corporate Congress’ rules. A rebel group (or terrorist group, depending on ‘whose side’ you’re on) called Liber8 tries to fight the corporatocracy in favour of a democracy, but their main players are apprehended and to be executed. As they’re about to be executed, something unexpected happens and they are sent back in time, to the year 2012. With them, one of the cops who was present at the execution, was also sent back. Even though there are no longer in their timeline, the Liber8 group tries to fight the corporations and change the future by changing things in the past/present, while the lady cop still tries to catch them and stop them.

What I find interest about the series is how no particular side is being choses in terms of ‘who the good guys’ are and ‘who the bad guys are’. One could relate to the Liber8 group as being ‘terrorists’ because they are involved in illegal and sometimes violent activities, yet on the other hand they are fighting for democracy and wanting to get rid of a police-state, which is something a lot of people would be able to relate to as ‘being a good thing’.

On the other hand you have the cop who wants to uphold the rule of law, yet what is law is not always what is right or good – so there you have another moral conundrum.

The point both the ‘fighters’ and ‘protectors’ share however, is that they assume they can change the future by altering events in the past. As the series progresses, and especially now in the last few episodes, it becomes clear that even though their best intentions at changing things in the past/present, leads to bad outcomes in the future.

It’s quite fascinating, because the whole time, they are trying to change events or create events, and then hope that by altering this and that point, it will lead to some effect down the line that will make ‘everything better’. The whole point that seems to be missed then, is that it’s pointless to try and change events, try and change ‘who’s in charge’/’on top’ – without people actually changing.

You can have a timeline which is government heavy, and which can be totally unsatisfying and unbearable, while you can also have a timeline where government is basically nil and corporations have free reign, which can be equally inadequate. In the end, it doesn’t matter ‘who’ rules in terms of the polarities and dualities we are used to (corporations vs government, freedom fighters versus police/protectors) – because in the end you are dealing with the exact same thing, which is = human nature. You can go back in time as much as you want and try and change events and hope to have a better future as an outcome, but so long you don’t touch the point of changing human nature, you are merely going to have the same outcome. Because, if you’re only changing events, you’re not really changing anything.

In the series for example, there’s a lot of mention of electronic technology and biotech that can potentially be dangerous for public safety and wellbeing. A drug that can cure Alzheimer’s for instance, can be messed with to become an addictive drug that can ruin people’s lives if addicted. A health monitoring gadget, can potentially become a device for mass control and manipulation.

These are for instance some of the points that the Liber8 group will attempt to ‘stop’ and ‘destroy’ because they are ‘dangerous to mankind’. The thing is, that they’re equally beneficial to mankind.

The Alzheimer’s drug or the health monitoring gadget are in itself not evil. They just ‘do what they do’. It’s is all up to the human element, the ‘who we are’ and what principles we live and stand by, that in the end determines whether we’re going to have a cure for Alzheimer’s or another devastating addictive drug on the street. Just as atomic science was just another area of investigation and exploration to further scientific research, development and knowledge, it was the human who decided to use it in its destructive potential, rather than its constructive potential.

I mean, it makes you wonder doesn’t it, about why we’re here on Earth. All the things that have massive constructive potential, also have great destructive potential. The internet as a recent point of technological innovation can be constructive in bringing people together from all over the world and increasing the speed at which we process and send information – yet, at the same time, it’s also great catalyst of apathy, separation, shallowness and triviality. In the end, it’s not about the internet being either ‘good or bad’, but what we can tell about its users in how the internet is being used.

A health monitoring gadget can be just that: a health monitoring gadget. But it’s about ‘who wields it’, that in the end decides whether the outcome we may observe and witness, is that of creation and support or destruction and subversion.

You cannot change the outcome of a future, by going back in time and ‘prevent this and that from being made’. Because even though these objects may not come into being, the evil that wielded it, is still ever present, and that evil: is us.

We are on a planet with what seems like unlimited potential, yet the only potential we seem interested in developing is the kind that destructs and annihilates, the kind that keeps a few happy while a majority suffer.

We were given dominion over the Earth and all things upon it – yet, we decided to interpret this dominion as domination, where we perceived this to be the permission to submit and subvert whatever and whomever we want at our heart’s whims and desire. However, if you investigate the word ‘dominion’, you will find that it roots back to the Latin word ‘domus’, which means house, home. We were given a choice, to develop, support and take of those living under our house, to embrace all who reside in our responsibility – and yet, without even the blink of an eye passing by, we decided that our dominion meant doing whatever the fuck we want at whomevers expense, and this is exactly what we have been living out, from the dawn of time till now.

There is no point to try and change the past.

There is no point in fighting one another.

What must change is us, who we are, our nature, the laws of our being that we live by
.
If you agree that we have to change our course of living, check out the Desteni of Living, and change the principles you live by the ones that are Best for All Life, so we may yet create Heaven on Earth.

Related articles

• Episode Review: CONTINUUM ("Matter of Time")
• Continuum Season 3 Episode 1 "Minute by Minute" Recap
• 'Continuum' recap: The slippery, ever-evolving future
• Alzheimer's Research Trust pleased by government plan

Day 226: The Thrill of Freedom

Last month my mother came to visit as well as Gian’s parents who came to visit for a long weekend. While they were staying over they were sharing stories of us as small children. Once of these stories consisted of how both Gian and I – each in our own setup as little kids – would be the ones ‘destroying other childrens’ / siblings’ sand castles’.

As my mother was telling the story, I remembered how I experienced myself in those moments.
It was a really strange experience – this typical evil ‘destroying someone else’s sandcastle’. It starts with first seeing someone put all this effort, bucket by bucket, sand heap by sand heap – where every singular action eventually accumulates into this ‘great’ thing as a sand castle. And then for a moment just conceptualizing and playing with the idea of ‘I could just destroy all this’ and ‘I could just undo all of that in ONE single moment’. And that’s where this weird feeling starts creeping in. Because you are able to conceptualize this scenario, you are able to see that you can actually do this and that you could indeed in a single act, a single moment undo everything your brother/sister/friend has built. And inside yourself there’s this inherent ‘feeling’ that this path/scenario is not cool and that you shouldn’t do it. But just because you can feel that you shouldn’t do it – the possibility/ability of you going there and doing exactly that doesn’t cease to exist. So an interesting conflict/friction emerges as you can tell you should and of you going there and doing exactly that doesn’t cease to exist. So an interesting conflict/friction emerges as you can tell you should and yet you can. And this is actually quite confusing – because nothing is stopping you from doing something you know is inherently uncool. And then you start imagining destroying the sandcastle and then you move yourself to actually go there, and oh boy the moment you cross that line, that point of ‘I’m really doing this’ where you know you’re doing something you shouldn’t be doing (and not because someone else told you that it’s wrong , but just because you know you wouldn’t want this to be done unto you) – it creates such a rush of energy, such a thrill – because you’ve just done something which ‘shouldn’t be possible’, you know you crossed a boundary.

Then depending if there’s any adults around, you’d either get reprimanded or only have to deal with a crying sibling/friend, and within that you don’t really learn anything about what just happened and what you experienced.

Because this whole event, is a point of ‘freedom’. I had the freedom to destroy someone else’s sandcastle. And just because I could, I did.

So as a child you are faced with these situations where you can do all these things yet that doesn’t mean that you should to them. And there’s no-one around to explain to you how all of this works (cause your Parents are too busy protecting their own freedom to take advantage of you, so they’re not going to tell you to not indulge into freedom because they know that would just make them look like hypocrites). In the end – the only one that is able to stop you in a moment of ‘freedom’ is you. Freedom is really just a test of character. Freedom is where you are able to set your boundaries. Freedom is not about ‘what you can do’ but who you are and what principles you live by no matter ‘what freedom’ is existent.

And I mean, what are we seeing in the world today? We still have children who in the meantime have grown up to be adults, destroying other children/adults’ sandcastles/work/effort/livelihood. We live in a world where you are able to seize power and place others into submission, where you can place yourself in a position of superiority and exploit another. That freedom exists – but does that mean that you should do it just because you can?

We live in a world of absolute freedom, which really only means that the option, the possibility of abusing one another in the most extreme ways is existent. It’ the FreeDoom to Doom one another – something we’ve been doing quite successfully since the beginning of our existence. Maybe that is what the old Bible story is really telling us, the one about Adam and Eve and the Snake – maybe it’s just there to show us that we ‘just can’t help ourselves’ but making irrational, stupid decisions which are not in our best interest. And even though this story supposedly took place at the dawn of time – we still haven’t changed – we are still unable to live by simple guidelines and principles such as ‘love thy neighbor as thyself’, simply because we’re addicted to the thrill of freedom.