The idea of boss. Where did that come from? Why is it that someone feels standing over someone else or being placed there? Animals can be stronger, faster, bigger, or smarter, but only seem superior in one of these classes. A grizzly bear can grab a moose, because it is stronger. A cheetah can catch a gazelle, because it is faster. An animal that is bigger, seems to be well off anyway compared with edible species and within their own group's advantage. A smart animal, however, seems most likely to have the better chance of all to survive. A chimpanzee puts a stick into a termite nest and licks off the stick full of termites - delicious proteins. He does not see the termites in advance, but he knows they are there and with his cleverness he manufactures the tool he does not have naturally. The human has acquired an arsenal of tools and has developed his cleverness to special heights. With his ingenuity man surpasses the bigger, the faster and the stronger. Evolution has built around the elementary functions of the brain -scent recognition, hearing, vision, the coordination of these- a more intelligent shell to provide for a greater chance of survival. People with this intelligence designed intelligent tools to withstand life on earth. Tools also for the physical survival in the outside world through medical intervention that destroys bacteria and viruses on the inside. People use their ingenuity even further reaching to render their own species harmless - to dominate them. Not entirely innovative, because each animal group has a pecking order. The uniqueness of human domination lies therein that not his size, nor his speed, but rather his intelligence is used for the determination of the pecking order. The human boss is therefore someone who thanks to his intelligence can create the impression that he is faster than a leopard, stronger than a grizzly and larger than an elephant.
The mechanism of outclassing arose from the drive to survive - after all, we live in a world of eating or be eaten. The fear of being slain that covers all species leads to the evolutionary development of becoming stronger, bigger, faster or smarter, an arms race on all fronts. The world in which we are born is not a world whose basic plan is the pursuit of harmony, but competition as a survival strategy. In itself, this observation contains no biased judgement. It is so and it is no different, it is the world we provisionally have to work with. Who tries to answer the question of the why of the absence of harmony quickly gets stuck in a sticky web of judgments and before long creates a religion, a philosophy or a political doctrine. For politics, philosophies and religions are nothing else than value judgments about the origin of man and the path that humans should go towards and in the future. That competition and strife arise about the different ideas, a competition in which each wants to be the strongest and smartest, confirms the unharmonious nature of the world. The different views strive to outclass one another with their respective truths and do not transcend the world seeking harmony. This shows without further reasoning that politics, religions and philosophies cannot contribute even in a minor way to the achievement of an essentially better world. In other words, forget about religion - any religion in whichever form.
The religions that are most prevalent in the world, all originated in a period called Prehistory - the time until broadly 4000 years ago [2000 bce]. This fact infers a thing or two about the mentality, about the mind set of the ancients - again, this is an observation, not a biassed value judgment. Yet, countless name this specific line of thinking abhorrently paternalistic -consider the position of women- or at least outdated and unworkable. The Neolithic way of thinking has experienced two subsequent influences that may be called a modernization. One based on the beliefs of the Prophet Jesus and one based on the ideas of the Prophet Mohammed - or the groups around these people. Both adaptations of the older systems have had much influence in their time and still have great impact. The basic religious principle of judgment and the stipulation of the way to and in the future, however, these sages have not changed - or at least the religions that arose in their name. Islam is truly the last religion, because the rise of this faith coincides with the last time that humanity accepted religion as a guide and manual on how to proceed in life. Beginning with the Buddha Siddhartha Gautama attempts have been made to ease and improve the life of people in a different way than through religious notions. However, from the Buddha through the Enlightenment to existentialism, the most recent major philosophical movement, all philosophies still are a reaction to and therefore derived from the ancient Neolithic religions. In this perspective, even the modern philosophers have brought nothing essentially new and no independent new idea seems to have been evolved. It does not matter whether a philosophy was grounded in a deistic, theistic or atheistic line of thought²⁶⁾, their starting points were always the same and essentially not different from that of the religions - the prescription of a system of thought. Only the type of judgment differed, since they were formulated from a scientific reflection process. Who makes a -brief- study of the ideas from the Enlightenment onwards sees that not so much observations were made and that once more assumptions and judgments were put forth -open or hidden-.
That the principles of every religion and philosophy are the same or similar is evident from the slide rule by which the world is analysed and then ‘recommendations are given’ on how to stand in the world and how to act in it. Underlying the method of the prophets and philosophers lies a template that the religious and secular thinkers invariably put to use, creating unwittingly -one hopes- their own blind spot. While they hoped and strived to work towards a more just society, they nevertheless wielded the paradigm of the overlord. They -the prophets and philosophers- are the clever ones, the exempted since the Neolithic revolution²⁷⁾, who use their position, intentionally or in spite of themselves, to lecture and concentre the others - driving them together in the corral. Behold the mechanism by which intelligence is the means to outclass all other characteristics -size, strength, speed-. Yet, despite that religious and philosophical analysis and 'recommendations' each time were tailored to liberating and emancipating humanity, the conceptual framework -the paradigm- did not allow that man became truly freed - due to the persistent blind spot every person suffers. The religious and the philosophers scrutinized the world and not themselves, or alternatively themselves very strictly to prescribe themselves as a role model for the world. The sages did recognize intelligence as a means of control and domination of existence, but the tendency to domination by intelligence they did not consider applicable to their own thinking - as a rule they saw their own intentions as admirable. Not Moses, Zoroaster, Jesus, and Muhammad nor the Buddha declared, "Just listen carefully to what I have to say, and if you do not agree, invent something else yourself." Voltaire, de Lamettrie, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and Sartre did not say, "We have thought long and hard about these issues, but it also might sit together totally differently - check it out". Who carefully considers the blind spot of all who are being right, sees a moor fire that has had the opportunity to continue to proliferate. A largely unobserved peat fire of which all have faith that one day the flames will be extinguished, whereas no one conceives any idea about how to respond to the primary source of the smouldering inferno. In effect, those who claim to be right invariably and consequently never are.

The myth is created to appease the autonomous logical part of the brain and to put it to sleep so the involuntary logical part of the brain can be reached from outside. The involuntary logical part of the brain is present in the great apes and in humans, and is a part of the earliest evolutionary step that has lead to the human²⁸⁾. It helps us in a fraction of a second to take deductive decisions of the kind we continuously make -cross the road here or there, do I purchase this or not-. This part of our brains works equally as involuntarily as the blinking of the eyes or breathing. The use of this involuntary logical part of our brains takes relatively little effort and works at high speed. It is a logical working part of our brain, but simultaneously functions based on fixed or ingrained patterns. An example of such an ingrained basic pattern provides insight into the extent of risk a person is willing to take. Someone who is in a winning position after his profit will avoid risky behaviour, while someone who is in a losing position after his loss tends to take more risks²⁹⁾. Another basic pattern of the involuntary logical part of our brain relates to absorbing new information. New information will always be integrated with existing information and when the new information conflicts with the existing information, the new information will be incorporated into the checkbox exceptions or disinformation³⁰⁾. The only person who may not respond entirely in this way is the person for whom all information is new, for example a young or inexperienced person. One is usually not aware of the decisions the involuntary logical part of the brain takes. In fact a person may even think he has taken his decision consciously. However, all kinds of primary decisions are taken in accordance with a strategy created through evolutionary ingrained patterns. In other words, a whole series of -mostly routine- decisions you think you made wilfully, are taken for you by your automatic or involuntary logical brain.
The autonomous logical part of our brain is much slower and it takes more energy to use it than what the rapid involuntary logical brain needs. The autonomous logical part arose later in evolution which is illustrated by the phenomenon that we cannot simultaneously walk and have an elaborate conversation - people then tend to sit down and have a beverage or so. The autonomous logical part of our brain is the part of a person that sets him apart -as far as we know- from all other life in this world. It is the part of the brain evolved to enable a person to look at himself and to make a free standing decision irrespective of ingrained patterns. It is the part of the brain, however, most used to create a strategy for domination. It is the part of the brain that creates myths about the world, about itself, and with which a person may appear to be bigger, faster and stronger than the others. Yet, when a person actually uses the autonomous logical part of his brain to dominate, then that person shows that his autonomous logical part of the brain is either immature or sick - for when that segment does not or cannot communicate satisfactory with the involuntary part, the animal part still prevails. Though the autonomous logical part of the brain is designed to be capable of self-reflection, it initially will follow the pattern of the involuntary part of the brain -in the early stages it knows nothing else-. By upbringing and education a person learns to use the autonomous logical part productively and purposefully in a self reflecting way. The extent to which that process is concluded with success varies widely. Though people seemingly use their autonomous logical brain productively and creatively, the underlying the fear -the urge for self-preservation- of the involuntary segment remains ever present. Absolutely no need exists to suppress the working of the involuntary brain deliberately - it serves an indispensable function. Yet, in every manner the need exists -or ought to exist- to improve the relationship between the autonomous and the involuntary brain - to bring the relationship to a 'higher' level. To become a whole person the least that should occur is awareness of the working of the involuntary brain. The maximum achievable is that a person distances himself from those outside influences that sicken the autonomic logical brain. In short, the outside world penetrates the autonomous brain through the involuntary segment. When you have say over the interaction between the segments of your brains, you have sway over the influence the outside world exercises.
Reality, however, is different. The autonomous logical brain is the most extensively used to rationalize and justify the decisions of the involuntary brain and hardly to question them. Or to sharpen the point somewhat, a newly acquired step in our evolution is subordinated to an older earlier stage. Man switches off his critical ability, his ability to think creatively and his capacity for abstracting and solving thinking, in favour of primary and schematic thinking, thinking in terms of immediate gratification, thinking in black and white - in any case the vast majority does so. Because the involuntary logical brain is faster and using it requires relatively little effort, because the use of the autonomous logical brain requires considerable and conscious effort and the result of its thinking produces not a foregone conclusion, people tend to opt for the well-trodden paths of safety, rather than the risky road where nobody else ventures. The result is that the 'higher' brain develops a sort of mental anorexia nervosa because it starves for lack of impulses, the autonomous logical part of our brain gets sick. When the autonomous logical brain for the most part is shut down from the outside -as is the case with members of for instance religious and political movements- an aversion will even arise for home grown healthy food. Phenomena like indoctrination and brainwashing use the slowness of the autonomous logical brain, while the deprogramming of former cult members expires by stimulating the autonomous logical brain like also an anorexic patient is supported. What makes a person sick is not the involuntary logical part of the brain that infects the autonomous logical brain, but the indolence of the autonomous logical brain starving and sickening itself. The autonomous logical brain becomes lazy and complacent when it is not sufficiently stimulated in the developing years, when it is told that it must obey and honour the conventions. The autonomous brain gets severely damaged by an inadequate upbringing and a school education without challenges. This damaged mental faculty inevitably leads to diseased relationships between people. It is the unsound mind, the criminal, who successfully exploits the other ill and often defenceless people. In the group that uses or abuses others every person sits who needs to dominate and who does not look or knows how to look for harmony to shape the world. Still, for each disease there is healing.

The vast majority of the people who inhabit the usually beautiful earth have no deliberate criminal intentions, even when they have put their autonomous brain on the back burner. These people more likely feel to be lost in life -how did I get here, what am I doing here- than brainsick. They are abused by people with alluring stories and myths and they believe them, because these tales appear to offer a solution to their aimless wandering. The sometimes desperation and most often fear of common folk is consistently abused by the highest in the pecking order. The only way to avoid being maltreated -by whomsoever- is to nourish the autonomous brain with lifelong learning. Reading books can achieve that, but even more than that opening your eyes will, and not necessarily see the same what others see.

Criminals themselves are mostly not aware they are criminals³¹⁾, how can they. Their conscious mental functions are starved and operate at no more than the pilot flame, while they are ruled by their involuntary cognitive functions that allow them to think only schematically. They are in pain and do not understand where their pain hails from, which motivates them to hurt others. The higher in the pecking order these criminals settle, the more power they have to propagate their sick mind set, even to impose it - further on some examples. Most criminals do not consider themselves criminal, because they use a simplistic definition of crime. Most criminals think a criminal is a person who does not comply with the law. The law, however, acts only in those cases in which the state is threatened -or the public as part of the state- and situations when the state monopoly on the use of force is -threatened to be- broken. According to the criminal one cannot act criminally and therefore cannot be penalized when an act is not ruled by law. That a financial institution can dupe millions of people -robbing them from their savings or pension- with an act not mentioned in any law is supposedly not criminal, while everyone knows this is so.
Two interlocking equations to elucidate what could be criminal. First, it seems at first glance to be true that a hammer can be no object of criminality. A hammer can be used to help in the creation of a home. A hammer can also be used though to smash someone’s skull. The hammer is not criminal, it is then said, the user is. Subsequently, it seems at first glance to be true that a gun can be no object of criminality. A gun can be used to get the next dish on the table. Just like the hammer a gun can also be used in the killing of a fellow human being. The gun is not criminal, it is then said, the user is. Who sees these two equations next to each other, sees the schematic agreement and in both cases the conclusion seems valid that not the means, but the user is or is not criminal. Upon closer inspection, however, something strange is going on. Who looks more critical, sees that the underlying assumptions do not match. The hammer can be used for various purposes -creative, constructive, destructive-, while the gun is useful for but one purpose, the destructive. Who prevents the schematically thinking involuntary brain from dominating your thinking and instead uses the autonomous brain, sees that the gun can only be used to inflict pain and death - it is a criminal object. The same is true for the state. Can the state play a constructive role? Those who do not meet the requirements of the state are silenced - temporarily or permanently. In circumstances specified by law you have to pay a fine, you can go to jail for any period and in some countries the state may murder you. As with a mafia protection racket the state forces you to cede a large part of the income from your job, while you have to bide if and what you get in return. Those who refuse to pay tax are pinched off and eventually placed outside society - by whichever regime. The state exists to get you into a particular harness, while it presents itself as a gun, as a criminal organization. It is not a hammer, because you do not have a real choice concerning what is done with your funding of the state. Moreover, a phenomenon like health care exists because of the importance of keeping the taxpayer alive, a phenomenon like education just because the state then can collect tax revenue from a more skilled worker. Who critically thinks about priorities in society, again sees criminal organization³²⁾. One can experience the healthcare and educational system only as a beneficiary, if one believes the state scheme. Who is old and becomes too expensive, will die. Education primarily will knead a child for his later role and station in society. The state is a murderous gun, yet could grow to be a hammer when the people who turn the dials would not be so deathly ill.
The first criminal a person encounters in life, if not one or both parents, is the teacher at school. The teacher mortifying his pupils mentally and intellectually to ready them for society where independent thinking is not required, but where the boss must just be obeyed. A situation in which the autonomous logical brain is of use only if one strives to become one of the bosses. Awareness then inexorably extinguishes for whom has not or dares not that ambition, while the autonomous faculty grows sicker and sicker. A teacher as he should be, heals or helps to heal. A responsible and responsive teacher is no boss, desires no authority, yet has stature. Stature because of his great knowledge and his empathy with his pupils. This kind of teacher sparsely wins the election of the most popular teacher, because he challenges and teases, insists to make choices and requires self-control -no discipline, that is for the cadaver teacher-, outlining sharply the boundaries when necessary and supporting to scale the fence when a pupil shows he is ready. A teacher who never really gets angry, but who as a good actor can play displeasure outstandingly - a teacher who truly gets angry is not a very good teacher. A teacher who is a human being and shows he is a mentor who helps his young fellows to make the deadening virus ineffective, who is averse to what makes his pupils ill. Those teachers are few, both within the school and beyond. With the teacher all starts, because -though he merely is a passerby- he has lasting influence.
Parents should be the first line of protection against the outside world, but are usually not. They very much would like to be, but usually cannot. They themselves come from an education by parents who did not realize either, supplemented with a round of cadaver teachers. They have fallen asleep or else are beaten into a coma by the bosses, or by their own hand as if it were a preliminary suicide. Parents who inspire their children feeding their autonomous logical brain are as sparse as the inspirational teachers, let alone children meeting inspiring persons in both groups. Chances are greater, much greater, that children have to face the standard model in both groups and risk to be pushed onto eroded trodden paths. Moreover, in children from a certain point onwards the hormones rage. Boys get hair on their chin and girls fuller curves. Although they themselves think so, these are not the features that determine whether a person matures. During the eighteen or twenty years they have lived by then their parents -themselves sick of war, bosses and shortages- have infected them and are they blunted by their teachers -who perform their jobs with so many shortcomings-. Children and young adults almost invariably are nurtured in a setting of sickness and consequently think like a sick person, in any degree, without being aware of it themselves. This disease is already present for so many generations -in fact from the beginning of our time- that no one really knows what being healthy is. No one can tell anymore what the basic traits of being healthy are. Miraculously an in itself gladdening situation, because if there would be one person who were healthy, then all people would have him tell the rest what health is and all people would have to listen to and obey that leader - an unhealthy situation. However, what a person may do to identify the nature of the life-threatening sickness is to determine what aches deep inside and not seek the cause of the pain outside himself, but in himself.
Though you got the seeds of your disease passed on from your surroundings, blaming the people around you for your illness only results in a further diseased relationship with your environment - and in your turn you will infect many. Though the contagion is outside you, the breeding ground on which your illness grows is in you. The hang-ups to which external ill-makers can hitch on, are inside you. Blame not what comes at you for your illness, but seek neither the cure for what came in the outside world. Search there no healer, guru, philosopher, prophet, god or scientist of the world, because you will not find the panacea that heals all your wounds, vaporizes your sins and cleans your soul. Whilst no one in the world can tell you the solution to your problems, the solution to your problems you can tell to yourself. Are you eager to stop making the outside world sick? Start the discovery of the answers in yourself. Make the most of the incredible power of your autonomous mind and your intuition to find what and who you really are - encounter your core, your soul. Accede not the person the outside world tells you are and your involuntarily brain finds safe to accept, but encounter your real self. Two matters you will probably realize quite quickly. The quest for yourself will take your life or certainly most of your lifetime to complete. You will also find that once you have made the -irreversible- choice to start the quest within yourself, new infections from outside will cease quite rapidly.

The violation of centomillennia,
about the dead and the divine

dilapidated state or had disappeared, such as the infrastructure or an education system, Charlemagne restored or created anew. Consequently and because of the vast area of his empire -most of Europe- in the eyes of his contemporaries it was justified to regard Charlemagne as the first true successor of the Roman Emperor in the west -the Holy Roman Empire- and even legitimized by the Roman Pontifex Maximus, the Christian Pope Leo III. Moreover, Charlemagne is rightly called the father of modern Europe. The ceremony and function of the coronation was efficacious regarding the people’s perception of authority - as ever with any pomp and circumstance. However, the coronation was also an act with far-reaching political consequences. Not only did the Pope with this coronation recognize the secular authority of the Emperor, but simultaneously the Emperor recognized also the authority of the Pope of Rome. This mutual recognition favoured political stability. Whenever rulers were not in agreement, however, and even became political opponents, it was a recipe for disaster. When the supreme spiritual leader and the highest secular leader factually contested each others supremacy, this yielded a politically very unstable situation. In time the pope and his successors appointed bishops in the empire of Charlemagne's heirs, who not particularly served the interests of the emperors, or even particularly not the emperor's by only serving the interests of the pope. Thus, the Investiture Controversy arose in Europe -a vulgar struggle for hegemony- during which the Emperor and his successors even nominated alternate Popes. On September 23, 1122, the Pope and the Emperor signed the Concordat of Worms, a compromise that had to bring their hostilities to an end. However, after the conflict the power of the Pope waned slowly but irrevocably. One may recall also the English king Henry VIII who in a divorce matter -from Catherine of Aragon, an aunt of the Spanish King Charles V- did not get his way from the Pope, thereupon in 1534 no longer recognized his authority and began his own church. That the Pope then excommunicated Henry at the insistence of Emperor Charles V was hardly of any political consequence. Henry's daughter Elizabeth defeated the Spanish Armada, which settled also the military aspect. Well into the first half of the twentieth century, the Pope lost ever more authority and territory located mainly in Italy, until he only had the building of his church - the Pope was jokingly called the prisoner of the Vatican. A situation that ended only on June 7, 1929 with the Lateran Treaty, by which the Italian dictator Benito Mussolini gave the Pope an area in Rome, Vatican City, and the Pope permanently renounced all his claims to territory in Italy. Not only worldly the Pope lost all meaning, also his spiritual authority diminished when from 1517 onward in the North of Europe the Reformation was building momentum.
From the fifteen hundreds onwards developments in Europe went up a gear. The Turkish conquest of Constantinople already in 1453, until that time the staple port for trade with the East, over time affected the spice trade. The Europeans, the Portuguese, sought and found an alternate route, the eastern sea route around Africa - the Cape of Good Hope. The search for a second way through a western route in 1492 led to the discovery of America by Christopher Columbus. A truly alternative route to the east via the west was discovered in 1522 by Magalhães [Magellan] - around Cape Horn. His second in command El Cano -after Magalhães’s demise in the Philippines- actually sailed as first around the world. Spain and Portugal became immensely wealthy world powers with the spice trade and the Aztec- and Inca gold as foundation. Their plundering of South America and the genocide on the Indians there is at least worth a separate chapter. Still, every power will wane and the Netherlands ousted Spain and Portugal as the major economic power in the world⁴⁹⁾, with the Dutch United East India Company as first privy owned multinational corporation in the world, with the first ever tradable shares in a company at the first ever stock exchange and 25,000 people on the pay role. However, because it was for the Dutch about economic rather than military-political power, they had to tolerate competition from the thereafter emerging international power, Britain. New Amsterdam became New York, the settlements in India fell to the British and the Netherlands 'limited' itself to Indonesia and several not less lucrative trading settlements - for example, the Netherlands had a trading monopoly with Japan until the mid-nineteenth century. From all these game altering economic developments, social change came. The millennia old kongsi of princes and prelates with the people as servants or slaves was broken, also internationally, by the group of craftsmen and merchants who became wealthier and more prominent than they had ever been. This emerging group felt only partly beholden to the ruling class, secular and sacred, and went in search for the legitimization of their life and status. The thinkers who formulated their ideas on this subject between 1630 and 1789 are among the philosophers of the Enlightenment, a movement that continues to this day to determine politics in a movement called Liberalism. The American Revolution [1776] and the French Revolution [1789] were a power political elaboration of the power struggle from what became called the Third Estate -the merchants and craftsmen-. The Americans declared their independence from the British King George III. The French settled the score in their own fashion with their sovereign -Louis XVI- and a large part of the nobility by literally putting them down under the guillotine - they were decapitated. Through Liberalism, Capitalism, a large proportion of the middle class was very well off, better than ever. The early eighteen hundreds also marked the emergence of a defined working class, the proletariat, which lacked almost everything. In response to Liberalism, the Industrial Revolution and the appalling working and living conditions for large groups of proletarians two philosophers, Friedrich Engels and Karl Marx, formulated their theses and theories [1867] that became known as Marxism - the practical application of the Marxist ideas are known as the emancipating ideals of socialism.
The rulers were largely replaced and the canon of the church was no longer really leading. If the Renaissance can be seen as the cultural end of the so called dark Middle Ages, then the Enlightenment was that politically. The time of the despots was over. The dictatorships of absolute rulers like Napoleon, Stalin and Hitler in Europe have experienced only a limited -though not less cruel- time of existence. One of the most decisive philosophical ideas that emerged from the Enlightenment was the idea of the Trias Politica, formulated by the Frenchman Montesquieu [1689-1755]. This idea is for the average European an obvious comprehension and the time that this idea did not exist virtually prehistoric - in essence it was already in use by the Romans. In large areas of the world, however, the idea of the separation of powers is not applied or exists only in name, and is the state corrupt. The Trias Politica prescribes that in a modern state the legislative, the judicial and the executive power are in distinct hands - no joint interests. This constitutional philosophy and the ideological notion of the separation of church and state, attributed to the British Enlightenment philosopher John Locke [1632-1704]⁵⁰⁾, have been key elements in the emergence and development of the modern state, such as in Europe and the United States of America. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights also had its roots in the Enlightenment and is reflected in the motto of the French Revolution "Liberty, Equality and Fraternity" [1789] and in the American "Bill of Rights" [1791].

In Europe in the eighteenth century the old traditional power relations were, sometimes radically, put overboard. The balance of power as it had existed since the first people in Africa related power and religion in a tribal setting, was broken. Until this time frame accumulated wealth was a consequence of growing powerful, while from then onward it was wealth that accumulated power. It was no longer the chieftain who amassed ever more wealth, but the richest who became chief. It is certain that many Enlightenment philosophers formulated their ideas from their idealism and the desire to improve society in an essential way. One philosophized about the nature of man and how to organize the ideal society - Utopia, the land of man as tabula rasa. In the reality, however, without exception the world functions as an American presidential candidate is said to have snarled at another presidential candidate, "It's the economy, stupid." When in the nine hundreds the Vikings discovered America, this had no lasting consequence. When Columbus did it again⁵¹⁾, five hundred years later, as is known the consequences were huge - the economy was ripe for it. When merchants and craftsmen became industrialists and created multinationals, they overtrumped the old power classes. Not because they as a class had a higher moral sense, or unselfishly were committed to support the reprobates of the earth, no, it was simply because they were richer. Today the big multinationals have a larger amount of riches on their balance sheets than many a country. The new power class did not build on religious, not even on Humanist values. The propertied class based themselves on the values of Liberalism or later on rather a caricature of it. The most inhumane and degrading caricature was presented by German National Socialism [1933-1945], in the regime of Adolf Hitler [1889-1945], a form of government supported by powerful German industrialists -Krupp, IG Farben, BASF, Bayer, Bosch, Hoechst-. A more sustainable elaboration of Liberalism, more in line with its original ideals, was expressed in the development of Western democracy. The right to vote was initially restricted to the own Liberal circle and the old powers -census suffrage-, but under the influence of mostly socialist pressure groups within society, -especially the emergent trade unions-, universal suffrage was introduced in most Western countries in the first two decades of the twentieth century - although Swiss women had to wait for it until 1971.
Although giving meaning to a system may be of diverse origin, concrete power formation in any age is always about wealth and its concentrated form, money. How those in power associate with those who do not possess any power, typifies a society. Large groups in China have amassed stupendous wealth, but the working people were and are still treated as semi or full slaves. In Europe contrastingly one sees that for example the average Frenchman lives a life as a prince when compared with his ancestors in the period of the Roman Empire. The magic word that seems to have changed society is democracy, or the ideology of the power of ordinary people. No real power, but a virtual power very different from the ancient Greek direct democracy  - where the spin doctors of modern democratic power assert to base on. Still, the real power remains in the hands of the economically most interested parties, industrialists and banks. The heads of state and the prelates are relics of the past -carefully clung onto- who still play their role to complete the stage play - the puppet show with hollow dolls. The play staged at the opening of the parliamentary year and the presentation of the financial plans for the coming year - almost every country has a comparable ritual. The real power remains immovably in the hands of the owners of the money, the common people should work hard to grow that pile and are bribed with a tolerable standard of living and the mirage of democracy. At least while all goes well. In difficult economic times, ordinary people have to tighten their belts, because cuts need to be made. In old people's homes the elderly then receive less care and for days sit in a dirty diaper, in hospitals questions are asked which patient is to be treated and which costs too much, and when you are unemployed and have a benefit the amount will be cut and shortened in time while previously you have paid the full premium. Everything is downgraded until social unrest arises counterproductive for the big money owners - the same who were once the proprietors of large country estates. Then the government will borrow again to bring things to calm and the country is even more indebted to the proprietors of the large finance estate.
The shortest route to becoming boss is by accumulating money and therefore power. If that fails, the choice is between a bourgeois existence with all its privileges -as long as it does not cost too much-, or stepping outside society, because it is so depraved. Stepping outside society seems a bold and even courageous step, but on closer inspection it is an act of self-gratification, because it changes the bigger picture in no fundamental way at all. Moreover, a person can never really step out unless one turns the gun on oneself - and even that is an act of self-gratification. Democracy replaced the legitimation by the prelates, of God. Politicians, as the commissioners of the real rulers derive their legitimacy now from the will of the people, just as God an equally mysterious and elusive notion. The will of the people is an amorphous concept and politicians can do with it whatever they want. It gives them the rationale for unpleasant measures - you have chosen it yourself. Politicians manipulate the will of the people with cunning campaigns and stunning statistics until they have kneaded the will of the people into what they want. That while they indeed will be never more than the commissioners of real power. Who is and has the real power will never be truly known, for that is the power they have, but if you do not know them you are certainly not one of them. The so far most recent ultimate move that led to the checkmate of the people was made by the British Prime Minister Margaret Hilda Thatcher [1925-2013] and the American President Ronald Wilson Reagan [1911-2004]. They dusted a just not outdated ideology and provided it with a new label, Neoliberalism, and put it in the window as a new commodity. Throughout Europe and then in the rest of the world, including China, the latest beatific ideology of Neoliberalism spread as if it were the second coming of the Messiah or the return of Viracocha. Every bourgeois swallowed Neoliberalism, because the selling-off of state enterprises would absolutely lead to lower taxes. Checkmate. The common man was locked back in his cage and the unions were broken. Back to how it has always been. However, history shows that the game never ends. At some point the chessboard is setup again, because in the struggle that seeks power and wealth the wheels of Fortuna and Nemesis will never stop spinning.

Capitalists and conservatives may say this all sounds very liberal or even socialist. Socialists may say this all sounds very anarchistic. Anarchists may say this all sounds too bourgeois and not radical enough. And to the religious this all may sound heretical. All these followers of a particular system of thought, however, live in the past and label hindered by the blinkers of unidirectional hindsight. They live with their backs to the future. Yet, this is not a outcry against anything. It is a call to reboot your system without the dragging burden of obsolete notions. A call to for the first time perhaps using your autonomous brain and then mellow the outcome with your heart.

You now have seen vistas along meandering roads with much traffic joining in from the bystreets and are about to arrive via the Boulevard of Overview at the Square of the Final Determination. You have seen nowhere near what else is still to be seen, yet nothing prevents you from taking on that exploration yourself. Explore reality and virtuality -for instance in books- or both and investigate your own person. Is this is the world in which I came, you may wonder. The answer is yes, for you have landed in a scary world inhabited by troubled minds. Then again, here nor elsewhere the acts are mentioned of most of the 107.5 billion people who have lived on earth in the past 160,000 years⁵²⁾ who did something kind for their loved ones or their neighbours. An act of compassion, an act of warmth, an act of consolation from people who together have celebrated because of a wedding or the championship of their club, or perhaps because of winning a lottery. The ordinary people who have to work too hard every day for too little reward. You know why these people are not discussed here, for they have not determined the course of history. On the contrary, they have themselves be led by the people with power. They believed the sops and soaps about the dead and the divine of the chieftains and the shamans, the rulers and the prelates, the lords temporal and the lords spiritual. Therefore, history is about murder, pillage and not about your friend's kindness. You are continuously bombarded, brainwashed and kept in fear by the daily news with the latest about disasters and revolutions, wars and attacks. Today people no longer listen to the prelates, but instead to the soaps and sob stories, advertising and to dreamy gurus - there is not much difference between them all, because they have the same effect. Because people have been influenced -in the ancient and the modern form- they have often fallen in the deepest misery, misery that could have been avoided, hardships that did not need to occur. Indeed, every form of misery begins with fear. Fear because of your own presumed inability and the feared greater power of the other. Taking away the fear is not easy, because the fear is not only in you, but also in the feared ability of the other. The remedy to accumulate more power than the other is no solution to your fear, because the acquisition of wealth and power will only increase the fear - the fear of losing power. The conclusion then can be no other than that the world is populated by frightened people, sick people - whether you are powerful or powerless.
The world we all inhabit is a world to get afraid of, for that is the nature of the world. Still, the only way a person knows how to respond to this disturbing world is the way of the animal. The initially dominating involuntary part of the brain only allows us to respond from instinct, self-preservation - hiding in the group while accepting the pecking order of that group. The autonomous intelligent part of our brain we have not yet learned to use otherwise than in connection with the patterns and principles of the involuntary brain - we still use power to drown out our fears. That while the potential of the autonomous brain to think originally and creatively is next to everything. The autonomous brain is self-governing, it is tenacious and it does not need to recognize the authority of any other. In addition, the autonomous part of our brain cannot work negatively when it is not used to merely rationalize domination, when it is not in the service of the old order of brain parts. The autonomous part of the brain can be used particularly meaningful when we first focus its astonishing power and strength inwardly, when we first educate ourselves before we meet the world. In other words, the enlightened and rational people of Luciwher will have to learn how to use their intelligence truly, before it can discover love. Any other consecution than first learning inwardly and then outwardly is pointless, because the autonomous part of us then remains in the grip of fear and in the service of its rationalizations - in the grip we have on each other and not in the last place the hold the world has on us all. Parenting children has varied widely over the centuries. Most often there was no method and a child had to help as soon as possible for the family to survive - in underdeveloped and poor countries this is still the case. The more enlightened a society is, the more space a child is granted. In the second half of the twentieth century, young people crawled from under the thumb where the older generation kept them put. In particular, the hippie movement suggested an alternative with its own philosophy, its own music, their own clothes. Nevertheless, within a decade the bosses had encapsulated the renewal movement and was it exploited. Especially the fashion- and music industry turned around the principles and for decades now determines in detail what a youngster eats, drinks, looks like, listens to, thinks and believes. Once more, when a person does not first use the strength and power of the autonomous brain and the autonomous self is not used to educate oneself, that person will not determine what happens in his lifetime, but the world will. Drugs are generally prohibited but are also generally widely available, while binge drinking in the eyes of many young people is a sign of independence and status within the group - within the pecking order. Within some groups in society gaining a diploma is the sign of the nerd and therefore of a looser, while high status is determined by the degree of animal behaviour and crime potential. None of these internal rules of the wolf pack are new, because they applied in the jungle, on the steppes and in Rome, from where all roads lead. The basic thought of education -or the lack thereof- is universal and the conclusion can only be that parenting makes no sense at all, when a youngster is not made attentive of the importance of the creative and critical autonomous part of the personality. First make the journey inward to grow and transform, to become the fully grown butterfly -or eagle, anything is possible- to open up and go out into the world. The world is a lot less scary and threatening -if at all- when man becomes a lot less scary. However puny humans may seem, the universe is different when man is different - literally and to the letter.
Of course, a youngster needs to discover yet everything and no youngster should see his chances taken away to discover all there is independently - that is exactly the point. When an elder imposes the truths he has discovered himself to a young person, he commits a character assassination - he then not only lulls the youngsters’ autonomous brain, he then slaps it into an often irreversible coma. Until the age of puberty an adult of course should provide the child with as much certainty as possible, but that does not infer indoctrination - those who do commit character assassination. As of the age of puberty everything already turns insecure for the youngster and all securities of the past become like quicksand. The many crevices and potholes that arise inevitably in the world of an adolescent should never be filled with the apparent certainties of the elder, for -once more- this would constitute character assassination. The many questions of an adolescent can only be answered with the aid from the elder -when asked- who supports the adolescent in finding the answer himself. Some answers will be found quite quickly, others take a whole life before insight is born. Every human being walks his own path. The 'trick' of course is to tell on a need to know basis, at the most to pose an indicative question, and furthermore to listen to as much as possible. This applies to the child, the adolescent and not to a lesser extent for the adult. In a society in which mostly people are bleated to, listening is a rare and therefore striking expertise. Listening and engaging in conversation with each other without any underlying or hidden agenda, that is an art. To communicate without the aim to influence and ultimately to gather power is almost science. The integrity of body and mind is raped every day hundreds of times when a person is pressed to do this and to disregard that. You need to buy this, you cannot violate the law, you have to like this song, you cannot play with the boy next door. You must vote at the elections, because the system must endure. Failure to vote makes you an enemy of democracy, of the state. All these checks and regulations are aimed to subdue the individual and to keep him subjected to the powers. Dependent on commerce, the government, and the prelates or what in many parts of the world is left of it. The young people who rebel do so because they -their questions- are not taken seriously. And when the big wave of hormones has subsided they too must recognize they have to provide for their dearest for the rest of life. The crime then already is committed, the person succumbs and is subjected from then on and for the rest of his natural life to those placed above him.

All the above data are controllable, all arguments can be checked for validity, all accidentally covert opinions may be filtered out, yet are then all the facts presented sufficient to come to the conclusion that there is a master of us all who holds us in his grasp, a power that determines all our lives? That power exists is evident, because the evidence for the existence of power is abundantly present in everyone's life. In addition, the absence of the phenomenon of power would have yielded a completely different world. Power therefore exists, including its excesses, corruption and repression. Apparently there is a power in the universe, the world and in man that allows self-preservation even at the expense of the other. It is not a law or principle that applies only on earth or just for humans, it is a principle with which the entire universe is pervaded. To make the element iron a star at the expense of lighter elements will need to transform all its matter until the star explodes and spreads its produce. In this universe on all levels the one exists at the expense of the other. It has been argued here and elsewhere in this book, a force is present in the universe that strives to create order from chaos. There is a mechanism in the universe and in man that compels to planning and order. If a harmonious God exists then the master of this universe is the Anti-God, for everything in this universe can only grow at the expense of the other. Is this Anti-God then for instance the evil Demiurge of the Gnostics? This book ascertains that good and evil are unworkable notions, because they contain ideas that depend on perspective and thus are relative, and because this dichotomy consequently divides the world -meaninglessly- into proponents and opponents. This book proposes not an Anti-God or an evil Demiurg, but personifies Luciwher as the master of everything and everyone, the master of them all, while he embodies a regularity of a different order than the laws of nature. Yet, there is no uniformity in the universe, for there is a difference between the tools and the wielder of the tools - between the hammer and its user. The laws of nature are immutable, so long as the universe exists, while Luciwher's law of order and organization is subject to entropy - this natural law of entropy states that everything ultimately will fall apart into its constituent parts. As dark matter exerts a gravitational force that holds together all matter, yet will ultimately lose out to dark energy that will tear apart the universe. Just as the human body from conception is an organism under construction that ultimately will have to succumb to anility, to entropy. The overwhelming conclusion therefore imposes itself that between conception and death, in any case with regard to man, matter has been given the opportunity to review its own performance and evaluate. The thesis herein is that man has had his autonomous intelligent brain evolved to examine and to evaluate his actions -from fear, his power and the exercise of power-. More precisely, from an ethical point of view man needs to learn not to cause pain to others from his actions and seek to live in harmony. No proof than from the incongruous nature of the universe exists at all that this ethical value must be the ultimate purpose of man in the universe.

The evolution of the brains started with the development of the sensory areas, the perception. The oldest memories that a person has, are often linked to the oldest area, the olfactory sense. Then those parts were linked to motoric functions, movement, and then the coordination of perception and movement developed. Who smells fire will like to run away. On top of this section the limbic system was built. That part of the brains is involved in emotion and pleasure, reward and punishment, fear and aggression, emotional decision making, emotive learning and the emotive memory, as well as processes controlled by hormones, such as the regulation of blood pressure, heart rate, hunger, thirst, sexual arousal and the sleep-wake cycle. The rational functions are not only evolutionarily developed much more recently, also in the development of every person it grows late into the development, in puberty. The neocortex houses the abilities including reasoning, planning, imagining and logical thinking, and is directly connected with the limbic system. This is the involuntary logical brain that tries to bring order to the chaos of information that flows to a person. It divides the world roughly into opportunities and threats, based on experience -evolution-, from crossing the street with the green light, to eating no unripe fruit, avoiding an unknown snake, to asking for a raise when a colleague is long-term sick and counting your blessings when your plan succeeded. This is the level at which most people function most of the time, because the most recent evolutionary development of the brains, the autonomous logical brain, has dozed off or is put to sleep, or even beaten into a stupor or into a coma - psychologically or physically. Those who become the bosses, may use the autonomous logical brain productively although they can keep it awake in only one way. They use their autonomous logical brain to bring all levels of brain functions in line, so that no internal conflict will occur. That is why these bosses usually feel superior and behave accordingly, whether they are a chieftain, the author of a groundbreaking theory, or the ceo of a bank or a multinational. They feel they have achieved a personal success and worry not too much about all the others whom they made into an employee, a follower or the enslaved to their company's mission statement - theories and myths. They are the produce and the continuation of the way of the world and only at the end of the day they wonder whatever they have achieved. Their money is worth nothing anymore on their deathbeds, their stories are debunked and replaced with new stories, their whether or not scientific theories are superseded and their companies merged with even larger ones. Those who do not focus exclusively the autonomous logical brain outwards to the world, but inwardly and walk the inner path, think critically about the way of the world and the nature of being human, maybe even the why of the world and humanity. This person does not put all his encephalic abilities in line. This person does not try to homogenize all brain levels to prevent -or obscure- the internal conflicts, this person keeps everything to the light to solve internal conflicts. To be able to do this a person needs no guru or any other leader, for he can give direction to his inner suffering himself. And see, that man heals and is no longer afraid and sick - he tries to live in harmony.

What a wonderful creature is man. So much desire and so many opportunities to realize his want, if he only knew what he needs. So much intelligence, wherein the entire universe fits, and the talent to outstep the limitations of the universe. One cannot do other than feel for such a being.

Some readers wondered where this essay was really about. Essentially, I answered, it is about the material and non spiritual explanation of what is all around us. Suppose God -or the Creator, or the FirstOne- does exist, then all that goes about in the universe is made palpable not through some elaborate supernatural trick, but through the workings of the natural laws -why else should they exist-. Or seen from the other end, the fact that all exists is apodictic proof of the existence of a creating force - the Creator, the FirstOne. That is not to say that I am a creationist, far from it, but more about that elsewhere in these books - I am not any ist nor subscribe to any ism. Scientists discover the tools and components of the laws of physics in increasing detail, yet they never will unveil the underlying cause of them. Why our world is concrete and eternity not in concrete eyes is in depth the subject of all these books. A series of five providing in five different ways an entrance to the subject of how to overcome the Luciwher Paradigm. In the above I have given my thesis concerning a physical explanation [i.e. not the psychological or mythical explanation] for the workings of the Luciwher Paradigm - the mind-set of the human causing his inclination to think and act as he does. Whether I live in a castle of my own making barring myself from reality or fortify humanity is for the reader's insight to acknowledge. I know the answer of course, but would not presume to convey it - thus not getting in the way of the reader, I hope. The comfort I do offer concerns the knowing that all answers -of any kind- are found when one does not listen to the fairytales -of any kind- of others, or at least not hold them for gospel at face value, and instead dives into oneself. So, I aim to debunk the nonsense you are bombarded with since the day you were born -your upbringing, school, religion, the primate of science-. However, the debunking is particularly not targeted at the content of what people convey to each other -wonderful stories, myths and theories-, but at the power they try to exert through conveying them -influencing, subduing and enslaving-. Man's susceptibility to the dispensing of power is an aspect of the Luciwher Paradigm.
The place where no one plagues anyone with power and terror, where nobody is sick of want for eternal peace and love, surely must be heaven - or paradise, or whichever name you want to ascribe. Our present world is not that place and it does not look like it will be here ever. Yet, the presence of the yearning for love and peace is indicative for the fact we came from somewhere else - we ineluctably cannot be native to this universe. Our bodies are, but our soul -where the origin of our yearning resides- is not. The body in which we can feel trapped is built in a certain way reflecting the need for organization and control. From engineering cells into a body to forming a community. From keeping coordinated control of our bodily functions to centrally controlling people in the society. As far as we know people are the only ones who purposefully paint art, compose music, write books and think up science, all due to the way our brain uniquely and universe altering is built. On top of the sections all animals posses, the primates anyway, the human species is endowed with an autonomous logical brain. It connects with all early functions of the brain, but it is also quite capable of thinking detached from the animal parts, though that takes much effort and energy. The autonomous logical brain essentially is free and cannot be controlled from the outside. Yet, an attempt may successfully be made to control or manipulate the autonomous brain from outside through the 'lower' stage by pelting it knock out or by any way of lulling it asleep. An attempt that may be helped by the fact that all brain processes except the autonomous process take comparably low levels of effort and energy. Contrariwise, it takes a lot of energy and effort to think autonomously and critically, and warding off the attacks on your mind.
Rulers use anything to lull the autonomous brain into a prolonged stupor. The most ancient form of course is violence, then came religion and shortly thereafter political doctrine. The most recent development is science, for scientists act for us by proxy and we just have to believe they act in the best interest of us all. This essay nor this book are a plea to abolish the achievements of the human - that would throw us back to the Stone Age. Yet, they are a call to build on in a new way. They aim to be an incentive to think for yourself, to use your autonomous logical brain incessantly. To think and feel for yourself and not let you be told what to think and to feel. These books are not a call to anarchy, downing the old. It is a call to discontinue the old by curing yourself, for whether you are powerful or downtrodden, you are sick. The cure is not out there, but in you. Leave the animal behind and truly become human.

Notice: please, do try this at home.

These books contain in various forms the analysis of the working of the Luciwher Paradigm and suggest a way of living with it. The one who cannot be enticed with bread and circuses and who does not fall asleep has overcome -not beaten- the Luciwher Paradigm.