THE GREAT SWINDLE

- FEAR -

FEAR, as the second component of the fuel for the Great Swindle, operates on three general levels.

(a). THE UNKNOWN

Firstly, there is the FEAR. of the unknown, ie., that which we don't know and we KNOW we don't know, as discussed at the end of the previous section.

Anything we don't have adequate knowledge about to be able to understand and, at least to some extent, to be able to control, generates FEAR within us.

We FEAR death because we don't know what, if anything, awaits us on the other side, and it is beyond our ability to control or understand.

We FEAR the dark because one of our primary knowledge gathering senses, ie., vision, is severely limited in its function. We can't see what is around us, which means we cannot fully understand or control what is around us, and, therefore, we are afraid.

FEAR can vary in degree of intensity from a mere sense of anxiety or uneasiness to stark terror. Its symptoms can be anything from a nervous stomach to outright panic. But, whatever its degree, it is always, in essence, the same thing - FEAR!

It is very important to notice that at this very point we are discussing a situation in which both FEAR and IGNORANCE are combined.

And yet, although FEAR and IGNORANCE are the  two, and only  two, elements which serve to create the fuel for the Great Swindle, that fuel is not yet created in this situation. The 'we don't know and we KNOW we don't know' aspect of IGNORANCE, and our FEAR. of it, even when combined, remain benign. Something else must be added to trigger the creation of the fuel for the Swindle.

And, all too often, that something else is  added.

When we confront the unknown, and find ourselves fearing it, we also find that FEAR is not a comfortable feeling. And we wish to rid ourselves of that discomfort. And, rather than trying to gain some understanding and control of that FEAR itself, as the means of eliminating, or at least reducing, the discomfort it induces, we too often, instead, try to find a way to turn what is actually an unknown into a "known", as a means of eliminating the discomfort.

When we do this, we walk right into the trap of Erroneous "knowing". And once this  aspect of IGNORANCE is combined with the FEAR element already present, the combination necessary for creating the fuel for the Great Swindle is instantly triggered.

(b). PLAYING THE 'GAME'

To some extent, lesser in some of us and greater in others, each of us recognizes that life in a social setting has aspects to it that are very much like a 'game'. There are rules to this 'game', and there are rewards to be won and penalties to be suffered depending upon how well we play it.

To make this 'game' even more interesting, and perplexing, there seem to be two sets of rules to it.

There are the formal rules, which are usually written down, either in legislation or in moralistic scriptures such as the Bible, and which are almost unanimously at least paid lip service to.

And, there are the informal, unwritten, and seldom openly discussed rules, the followers of which seemingly too often and unfairly, win out over those who adhere more closely to the formal rules.

There is a significant discrepancy between the formal rules and the informal rules in terms of the types of behavior they dictate. The reason for this discrepancy is that the formal rules are based upon a morally prejudged and idealized view of what people 'should' be like, while the informal rules are based upon a less idealistic view of what people are "really" like.

Both sets of rules manage to survive, side by side with one another, because each contains some element of REALITY about human nature. Yet, the discrepancy between them remains as well, due to the fact that each also contains a large amount of error as to human nature and REALITY.

However, the essential point about these rules in this discussion of FEAR is that these two sets of rules do, in fact, exist, and, whichever set we follow (or however we might pick and choose between them for the parts we will follow), we often feel driven to play the 'game' of life within the confines of these rules.

Why is this so?

One reason has to do with IGNORANCE.

Without a certain number of rules, there would be no  society. There would be nothing but anarchy and chaos. And, as to those rules which provide the minimal amount of order necessary to prevent anarchy and chaos, so that society can exist at all, that is a valid reason.

But, the rules necessary to raise us above anarchy and chaos are not  the ones that make life into a 'game'. And, by the same token, those rules which do  turn life into a 'game' are in no  way essential to the task of preventing anarchy and chaos.

So why do we go ahead and play by 'game' making rules which are not essential and often result in a Swindle?

Simply because they are there to be followed and we don't know what alternatives we have other than to follow them.

This is clearly IGNORANCE. There are  alternatives available to us other than feeling constrained to abide by these 'game' making rules, and, these alternatives need not result in anarchy and chaos. (Hopefully this writing will shed some light on what those alternatives might be as you read through it).

But, perhaps the more important reason for our participation in the 'game' like quality of life is FEAR. We are afraid not  to play the 'game'. We feel forced into playing out of self defense.

After all, everyone else around us is playing it, and if we don't also play, at least adequately, if not superbly, those around us who are  playing will take unfair advantage of us, or otherwise injure us, perhaps even to the point of enslaving or even annihilating us.

FEAR of this type permeates relationships from the most intimate to the most distant and antagonistic. It arises between "lovers" as they defensively jockey for emotional advantage over one another. And it underlies arms races, nuclear and otherwise, in which each side tries to prevent a supposedly inevitable attack from the other by being prepared to return like for like.

This type of FEAR often sails under the banner of, 'The best defense is a good offense'.

No matter how distasteful, unpleasant, immoral, dangerous, expensive (or even just downright ridiculous) the 'game' might become, we are afraid not to play it because of what others might do to us if we don't.

And, there does appear to be some validity to this form of FEAR, at least on the surface.

But, whatever valid basis our FEAR of what others might do to us if we don't play the 'game' may have, the crux of what this discussion, when analyzed closely, leads us to, is that yet another type of FEAR. actually underlies our entanglement in the 'game' making rules of our society:

If we did pay attention to our inner lights, which is to say if we did think for ourselves, we would recognize that if life is some kind of a 'game', it is so only because we, as a society, and each of us as individual members within that society, have made it so.

There is nothing inherently 'game' like about life. The 'game' quality exists only to the extent that our culture and society have imprinted that quality upon it.

And, as members of our society, each of us helps to maintain and enforce the rules by which life is turned into a 'game', by observing those rules ourselves, and by insisting that others do the same.

In short, to the extent that life is a 'game', that 'game' can only continue so long as we  continue to play it. The 'game' consists totally and only of the players, (us, ourselves, as individuals) who insist upon continuing to play it, and following the rules underlying it.

(If even so much as a sizeable minority of the players dropped out of the 'game', and stopped blindly following its rules, the 'game' quality of life would cease. Or, in the alternative, that same sizeable minority could, if it so CHOOSES, change the entire nature of the 'game' so as to make it as fully enhancing and nurturing of life, spirit and growth, as the current game is defeating and destructive to the higher qualities of life. And there is only one reason preventing either of these alternatives from becoming a REALITY - there is a Swindle going on).

(c). 'Who? Little Ole Me?'

The third level on which FEAR operates as a component of the fuel for the Great Swindle is within the 'Who? Little Ole Me?' Syndrome.

This syndrome, in essence, is our surrendering to others a portion of the power to control our own lives and destinies, and using 'Who? Little Ole Me?' as an excuse for doing so.

FEAR is one of the reasons (IGNORANCE is the other) that we fall prey to this syndrome.

When we surrender to others the power of control over our own lives, quite often it isn't out of IGNORANCE that we are in FACT exercising our own POWER of CHOICE in so doing, but, rather, it is out of FEAR.

We often KNOW full well what we are doing, and that we are allowing  our own  inner FEARS to be the final basis upon which we make our CHOICE.

Why do we do this? What do we FEAR?

Consequences! (of course).

We weigh in our minds the benefits to be derived from doing what we wish to do against the possible unpleasant consequences of doing so. If we find the potential consequences sufficiently unpleasant, that may generate enough FEAR of those consequences within us to result in our CHOOSING to refrain from doing what we wish to do, and do what others would have us do instead.

But, even though we may make our choice based upon that FEAR, the simple, blunt FACT is that it is we  who are making the CHOICE, and we who are allowing  our own  inner FEAR to be the basis of it.

This is the REALITY of the situation whether we recognize it or not.

If we don't realize it, it is definitely IGNORANCE (likely manifesting in 'Who? Little Ole Me?') that is blinding us to this REALITY.

However, if, as is equally likely, we do  realize what is actually taking place, and let it happen anyway, it is FEAR that is at work (again, most likely in the form of 'Who? Little Ole Me?').

This holds true throughout the entire spectrum of life in which the 'Who? Little Ole Me?' syndrome can, and does, operate.

The person who avoids the responsibility of making decisions for himself because he doubts his own ability to make good decisions, and therefore FEARs the consequences of his doing so, is caught up in the 'Who? Little Ole Me?' syndrome.

The person who finds his personal circumstances unpleasant or unrewarding, and yet, because of feelings of hopelessness, due to his own self-doubts or sense of being 'trapped' by his circumstances, who finally just 'gives up', and allows himself to slip into a state of lethargic apathy as a result, is also enmired in this syndrome.

The wife who stays with an abusive husband, and the employee who stays at a job he detests, because they doubt their ability to financially survive if they leave, and therefore FEAR the consequences of leaving, are each suffering from this syndrome.

And, as unrealistic as this may sound at first blush, those who allow themselves to be coerced into doing what they otherwise wouldn't do, even under the threat of physical violence or even death, are within this syndrome.

In each of these cases, from the person who begs to be told what to do, to the person who is coerced by threat of physical injury or death, and all other such situations in between these two extremes, the 'Who? Little Ole Me?' syndrome is in operation.

Because, while in each of these cases, the person is exercising his own POWER of CHOICE, and KNOWs that that is what he is doing, (which eliminates the IGNORANCE factor, at least directly), he is nonetheless making his choice based upon FEAR, which is the very FEAR factor we are discussing here.

Obviously, the potential consequences to be FEARed in these situations can vary from seemingly trivial to catastrophic.

Nevertheless, FEAR is FEAR, regardless of its quality or its basis.

(The qualitative differences between the FEAR of having to decide what to have for dinner and the FEAR of physical injury or death, as well as the source of all  FEAR, and its cure, will be gone into in the later sections of this writing).

For now, the main points to be recognized from this discussion are that FEAR is FEAR, regardless of its quality, depth or scope, and the role which FEAR plays in the syndrome of 'Who? Little Ole Me?'.

It might appear at times that just pure 'laziness' is a major factor in our surrender to others of the power to control our own lives; that it is simply too much bother and trouble to accept control over our own lives and that we allow others to do it for us simply because it's easier and more convenient for us that way.

But this may well be a false appearance (and, thus, may easily lead us into Erroneous "knowing").

In order to fully understand this, we must first clearly distinguish between the situation which in FACT does  constitute a surrender of power of control to others, and the situation which appears to involve such a surrender, but in FACT does not.

For clarity of meaning, let's call the situation of actual  surrender of control, 'apathy'; and the situation of apparent, but not actual , surrender - 'laziness'.

With respect to 'laziness', while some people might view a 'lazy' person as having some type of 'character flaw', there is really no flaw involved at all.

The seemingly 'laziest' person in the world may not really be 'lazy' at all. This is to say that he may well not have surrendered the least bit of his own power of control over his own life in the slightest degree.

He may very well KNOW exactly what he is doing (or not doing); and what he is doing (or not doing) is exactly what he wants  to do (or not do).

Others around him may be displeased, or even offended, by what he is doing and not doing, but that in no way alters the fact that he is conducting his life precisely in the manner in which he chooses.

Even if he is doing what appears to be absolutely 'nothing', if that is what he CHOOSES to be doing at that moment, then that is what he is  doing, and his power of control over his own life is fully intact.

But, as is more likely, if by 'nothing', what is meant is nothing of any worth or value according to the standards of others around him, then what is actually happening is that, far from having surrendered his power for setting such standards for himself to those others, he has fully retained all that power for himself.

In short, he is exercising his POWER of CHOICE, the most fundamental creative power any of us have, to create the life he wishes for himself.

Indeed, those around such a 'lazy' person who take displeasure or offense to his self- chosen life style, are themselves  surrendering their own  power of control over their own  lives, and quite likely by way of themselves engaging in 'Who? Little Ole Me?'

(As discussed in the section on IGNORANCE, to allow another person, or what he does - or does not do - to engender feelings of displeasure within us, and to feel powerless to improve the situation for ourselves, is the very definition of the 'Who? Little Ole Me?' syndrome.)

So, we have now eliminated so called 'laziness' as being either a cause or an effect of 'Who? Little Ole Me?' (and, indeed have shown that it may well be a sign of being free from the chains of this syndrome).

But, the apparently 'lazy' person, as well as any other person, may still be caught up in 'Who? Little Ole Me?' in other ways.

Which now brings us to apathy.

Apathy is the type of indolence and lethargy which involves an actual  surrender to others of power of control over our lives.

And, at the outset, it must be clearly understood that apathy, as with many of the concepts in the Great Swindle, covers a broad spectrum.

One need not be catatonic or living a life filled with sloth or boredom to be suffering from apathy.

In whatever way, and to whatever extent one surrenders to others any degree of the full power of control over his own life that he would otherwise have, and he does so by way of inaction or indolence, then in that way, and to that extent, he is being apathetic.

Even with the 'lazy' person who has chosen to be 'lazy', if he finds that any part of the 'nothing' he is doing is nothing of value or worth even by his own  standards, then to that degree he is being apathetic.

And, the same holds true for anyone, including even the person who otherwise wouldn't be thought of as being 'lazy' at all.

Even the dawn to dusk, hard working, 'nose to the grindstone' person who, to whatever extent, does what he does because he feels compelled by 'circumstances' (others?) to do so, and, as a result, finds himself indolent and lethargic about doing other things which would be more meaningful to him, is suffering from apathy to that extent.

And, as is quite apparent with the hard working person, such apathy isn't due to 'laziness' at all. It must obviously be due to something else.

What is that something else?

IGNORANCE and FEAR.

'Who? Little Ole Me?'!

He either doesn't KNOW that he can restructure his life so as to make it more meaningful for himself, or he FEARS the consequences of trying to do so.

(Indeed, apathy, in its broadest sense, can be seen to be almost a synonym for 'Who? Little Ole Me?').

When 'Who? Little Ole Me?' is in operation, apathy, in some form, regardless of how subtle or hidden it might be, results.

Which brings us full circle on the subject of 'laziness'.

When a person feels a thing to be of value and worth doing by his own  standards, (whether it is 'working hard' or just 'lazing' around), and he is exercising his own, unfettered POWER of CHOICE with respect to his life, he will, as a matter of natural course, do  that thing.

And, if he is not  doing that, and to whatever extent he is not doing it, and is doing something else, or truly nothing  instead, he is in the throes of 'Who? Little Ole Me?'.