That is actually a point of convenience for me.
The truth is, any good karma will find its way back to me without me having to do anything.
On top of that, I am aware of the energies involved in public lotteries that potentially involve life-changing wins, and they’re not good.
Those energies include:
- the sad desperation of those who are being crushed by our materialistic, greedy industrialised culture, and use buying a ticket as hope of a way out of the this bad system - when the better response would be for us all to work together for a better system;
- the angry desperation of those who step their hope up into a “I want it and I don’t care who doesn’t get help” vibe - which is where things start to move into informal, unfocused but nonBPM nevertheless magick - psychic attack on all others who have bought tickets or even thought of doing so; and
- the callous indifference of those who profit from this indifference - including governments who use lotteries as a source of funding.
This applies public lotteries that potentially involve life-changing wins, but not to smaller, fund-raising raffles, etc, and does NOT apply to all ticket buyers ... but it does apply to enough for it to be significant, and I consider buying a ticket should be acknowledged for what it is: a limited cost form of gambling.
Those energies are why I have rarely ever bought a ticket - and I think the best winss are when people buy tickets as an expression of good wishes for others, which is how I won $99 in the 90s, from a ticket someone I knew then bought for me as a birthday present, and $30 from a ticket my birth mother bought me nearly two decades ago.
But if it will save me from a two hour waste of time explanation of what a non-Newtonian world view is to someone who is well-meaning but stubborn in their insistence that I buy into their zero-sum game view of reality, I may use that “I’ll buy a lottery ticket later” argument again.
The other thought for this week that I wish to write about is how pervasive and damaging air travel has become.
When I was working I occasionally pointed out the environmental damage of air travel at work, which almost mortally offended those people who were addicted to air travel at company expense - or in their own time because they were addicted to an utterly fantastical, unhinged-from-reality image of what it was to be a jet setter.
None of them were what I would consider a genuine traveller - there was only ever a superficial touristy glimpse into images - almost parodies - of local cultures, no real understanding, let alone a real connection with Earth energies of a region. (I have a theory that it is being torn out of one set of Earth energies and then plopped down in another, unbonded set of Earth energies that contributes to what we refer to as jet lag - although the physical impacts are also genuine impacts.)
It is possible for that to happen: I formed such a strong friendship with the woman who cleaned the mini-hotel I stayed in when working in Hà Nội, Việt Nam and with the translator for my first work trip to China that we stayed in touch for years, I loved being in the Gobi for the energy of the place (and found out about some local plants for cooking ... and stayed in touch with someone from the company office in Ulaanbaatar even after she left the company), and there were other connections.
I was not the only person to do so - others lived locally for years and also formed genuine, respectful connections with local cultures (two married local people), although many did not, and viewed travel as a chance to flash their bright, shiny, western qualifications at others who they thought of - quite wrongly - as lesser.
I also wish to point out that I am very aware of the survival value of tourist dollars on local economies. I would not attempt to drive prices down to what a local would spend when I was bargaining, for example (and, with that attitude, it could be quite fun). But that also applies locally - for instance, we chose to go to Gariwerd after some fires there in around 2003 or so to help the local economy recover.
But all of that has to be balanced against the environmental impact of now pervasive air travel - and the psychological damage of much of what air travel has become.
On that latter point, many people have mastered the ability to shut down or ignore matters - thus they no longer notice background noises/smells/bright lights nor how their bodies react (which is why they later think mindfulness is so surprisingly good at helping them start dealing with the trauma their body has been screaming about for years or even decades, when all they needed to do was pay attention at the time, rather than using fear of consequences [especially FOMO] as a motivation to shut themselves down).
I’ve written about the psychological harm of air travel security elsewhere, so I won’t go into that again, but I do want to record my thoughts after helping my partner recently meet some relatives from overseas at my home city’s airport:
- the experience is a sensory nightmare - particularly for some (probably many) neurodivergent people, such as myself;
- the design and construction is intended to foster and cash in on a sense of elitism (special parking services, for instance, are closer to the terminals than what poorer people can afford) and thus directly undermines social cohesion (think of that, Dear Reader, when you are inclined towards any deals meant to create a sense f being special - and many ongoing bargains aim to do exactly the sort of social divisiveness I am writing about);
- the compulsion to use tech such as smartphones involves personal security risks that I consider unacceptable; and
- the spread and busyness of the airport - apart from things like bad signage - shows how ubiquitous, pervasive and endemic the unthinking use of air travel has become.
We moved to Queensland when Melbourne airport was being built - you can read a little of the history here, but perhaps most telling is, from here, that traffic has increased 200% from 1998 to 2023, a period when Australia's population increased from 18.9 million to a little under 27.0 million (Jan 2024 population), or a 43% increase ...
This is environmentally damaging in many ways; the benefits of travel that many extol largely belong, in my opinion, to the older, slower, more expensive forms of travel (still available, if people choose to do things like take passage on cargo ships ad use trains etc); and new dis-benefits have come into being.
Please think carefully before using air travel - consider the information here, here, here, here, here, and here, which is mostly focused on the emissions aspects of flying, although the first gets in to some of the other impacts.
If you have to travel, consider some of the mitigations at the above links, and remember how traumatising the experience has become.
Here’s another link which may be of some use:
- “Walking away from marriage, children, and other stuff we're supposed to have” https://youtu.be/aWGZadtZHwo?si=qs-MYnNmPbSMAdr7 Well worth watching and giving some genuine consideration to
Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider:
- there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking”;
- I could be wrong - so keep your thinking caps on, and make up your own minds for yourself.
If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below, and there’s also Instagram.
Remember: we generally need to be more human being rather than human doing, to mind our Mӕgan, and to acknowledge that all misgendering is an act of active transphobia/transmisia that puts trans+ lives at risk & accept that all insistence on the use of “trans” as a descriptor comes with commensurate use of “cis” as a descriptor to prevent “othering” (just as binary gendered [men’s and women’s] sporting teams are either both given the gender descriptor, or neither).Copyright © Kayleen White 2007-2024 NO AI
I do not consent to any machine learning aka Artificial Intelligence
(AI), generative AI, large language model, machine learning, chatbot, or
other automated analysis, generative process, or replication program to
reproduce, mimic, remix, summarise, or otherwise replicate any part of
this post or other posts on this blog via any means. Typo’s
may be inserrted deliberately to demonstrate this is not an AI product.
Otherwise, fair and reasonable use is accepted under Creative
Commons 4.0 on an Attribution-ShareAlike basis https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
.jpg)
