When dis-integration is called for you need managed disintegration. That way the vector is still correctly toward breaking away from a tyrannical trade confederation, but the result is a greater wholeness for the nation breaking away. The same goes for the management of dis-equilibrative modern economies; and in both trade and economies as a whole, the economically integrative policies of a universal dividend and a retail discount are what will enable a stable and humane progression toward that goal. The irony is that after the economy/economies reach a self reliant state free trade would be much more possible and likely.

This is the conscious process of the integration of opposites also known as wisdom….and a call for mere reactions that still leave in place unexamined untruths in orthodoxies on either side is a courting of chaos instead of freedom.

This is why economics needs to be more open minded integrative philosophy than closed minded “science”. That way one can successfully integrate perfection and imperfection and not have to worry about economic dogmatism at all anymore because the understanding that perfection INCLUDES imperfection enables one to no longer get hung up in the obsessive phenomenon of duality and so continue the integrative process of more complete truth seeking. It would also enable a mindset more conducive of wise macro and micro-economic policy integration. Wisdom being the integrative process itself the problem with econometrics is more lack of wisdom than lack of science.

The Process of Thirdness-Oneness Is The Inclusion of Truth and The Deletion of Untruth….From Both Sides Of a Duality, But Not The Rejection of The Entirety Of One Side Of The Duality. This Defines Integration As Opposed To Reaction.

This also distinguishes science from opinion, science from philosophy and philosophy from spirituality, and the mind that has honestly climbed this ascending scale gains science (objectivity), philosophy (wisdom) and spirituality (both temporal/physical and self knowledge/knowingness). Such scale can be understood utilizing The Cosmic Code:

philosophy –> spirituality  [ (wisdom x spirituality)  <–>  knowingness in both/all spheres ]

science –>  philosophy [ (science x philosophy)  <–>  wisdom ]

opinion –>  science  [ (opinion x truth)  <–>  scientific truth ]

Our modern problem (particularly economically and monetarily, but also in many other ways) is we’re still stuck in dogmatic science and consequently degraded/incomplete philosophy and withering spirituality (and yet too often obsessive religiosity).  Religiosity is too often characterized by divisiveness, duality and a failure to understand and maintain Grace even while it is continually advocated.  Spirituality is characterized by respect and affirmation of all realities, even incomplete and erroneous realities although not their truthfulness, and both recognizes and integrates Space, Time, physicality, ideas and consciousness and so can attain a gracious natural completeness.

Reaction begets reaction in kind eventually unless one does their own inner work. The trick is to realize that cultivating graciousness is both the best thing to express toward others and also its own best reward. Eventually one realizes that cultivating grace/graciousness is not naive or an “airy-fairy” idea but an empowering experience where nothing of value is lost and one’s ability to be effective is actually greatly increased.

Steve Hummel 12/02/2016

Trinity-Unity-Oneness/Grace is the ultimate paradigm because it recognizes and affirms all basic realities as actual and real, but understands that the state of Trinity-Unity-Oneness is the unifying concept and experience that is most fully real.

can see the truth(s) in both sides of the duality and chooses to act to create policies that effect aspects of the philosophical concept of grace….the philosophical concept of grace being the exact and ultimate third way concept as in Trinity-Unity-Oneness.

Steve Hummel 12/02/2016

If one believes that the economy is in a continual/inherent state of enslaving disequilibrium, would it not be more logically consistent to pursue policies that would effect a continually freeing disequilibrium….rather than try to enforce policies that  would at best effect a static/momentary but not continual equilibrium? Wouldn’t the former policies be more consistent with temporal reality in which there is no stopping of the flow of time? Wouldn’t the former also be more scientific as science is the correct observation of the temporal/time flowing universe in which we all live?  And wouldn’t such policies actually free both humans who can only experience the temporal universe as it is now….and in the flow of every proceeding now….and also businesses which are completely and inextricably embedded in the time flow of the temporal universe?

MS:  You Can’t Negotiate Religion

Me:  You’re right that you can’t negotiate religion. However, Spirituality which is the rational contemplation and discussion of the ideas and experiences behind religion can be….discussed. Then it’s just a matter of correct choice between opposites like freedom or enslavement. Of course regarding things like economics, money systems and trade….one must remain open minded about the exact policies that will create freedom and free flowingness….given the present and continuing moment to moment state of those systems.  If the state unhindered and left to itself is disequilibrium it requires action/policies to restore equilibrium….or even “a higher disequilibrium” that would improve both individual freedom and systemic free flowingness.

There has to be, and is, a third way other than a redux of the same old tired liberalism or equally tired conservatism. It will take an integration of the truths in the above two ideologies…and a deletion of their untruths that yields a new, a genuinely new economic idea, philosophy and aligned policies to accomplish that. When the old orthodoxies are no longer workable it’s stupid if not insane to keep trying to use them….alone. The mark of paradigm change is that old structures aren’t necessarily abandoned, unless they are part and parcel of the problem itself, but rather the new idea enables a transformation of them. Agriculture did not stop or eliminate hunting and gathering it transformed them and enabled more production. The new idea we require will not stop or eliminate finance or profit making systems it will transform them while enabling a genuine balance of production and consumption….and if acculturated properly will also do so utilizing less net resources.

The question we should be asking ourselves is what idea, what concept marked the change from hunting and gathering?