, , , , , , , , ,

Best for allSome points are so simple and straightforward that our minds can’t or won’t accept them, because we’re so used to things having to be complicated and because it would mean that we would have no excuses not to change.

The principle of what is best for all is probably the most simple and most natural and practical principle in the universe, and yet it is also a principle that we as human beings often have a hard time grasping and understanding.

I am continuing here with the series on the Desteni of Living – my Declaration of Principle

Here are the previous posts in the series:

2. Living by the principle of what is best for all – guiding me in thought, word and deed to always in all ways direct problems to the best possible outcome for all

What is ‘Best for all’ can be described as an ‘equation’ where all individual parts comprising a whole are aligned in the best possible way to support the whole to thrive and so in affect, each individual part. It is really that simple.

When discussing how to apply the principle of what is best for all in one’s own life and in the world as a whole, I have come across the following objections and will therefore accordingly here give a perspective on each one to show exactly how feasible and practical this principle in fact is.

“You will never be able to implement this principle. Because what is best for someone else is not best for me. Who are you to decide what is best for me?”

Something important to understand is that the principle of what is best for all is not yet another philosophical gimmick or doctrine. We are so used to either being entirely placated or suspicious to the point of paranoia towards any principle presented to us, with good reason, because most of what is presented as principles on this planet, often carry hidden agendas or is simply regurgitated knowledge with no real connection to reality.

However, in our world there are many examples of organisms living the principle of what is best for all and unfortunately, the human race is not one of them. Our bodies however exist within and based on this principle, just like an eco-system. Each body part has its individual and specified role through which it functions and contributes to the overall well being of the organism. An example from the animal kingdom and from nature and even some indigenous tribes is the principle of ‘permaculture’. One of the principles of permaculture is that when a resource is extracted from the earth, resources are also given back to the earth, like when you cut a tree, you plant a new one. Herds of animals have for eons of time applied this principle instinctively through grazing only to the extent that the ecosystem could bare it and still revitalize itself.

What is best for all is thus not something that can be debated where I can decide something for you that is not truly best for you and then simply claim that it is ‘best for all’. Either it is, or it isn’t. The proof however, will be in the physical practical living conditions of each individual and of the whole. And this is where it gets bit more complicated. Because in our glorification of ‘individual freedom’ and in many people landing on the principle of ‘each has a right to his own opinion’ as the only viable alternative to a totalitarian system, we miss certain key points. The first being that we tend to think and believe that our apparent ‘individual choices’ are indeed ‘free’ – when in fact virtually everything that we desire and prefer and take pleasure in has been preprogrammed into us and is being perpetually impulse through social engineering and marketing campaigns.

This means that as we currently exist, our ‘free choice’ is not actually free at all. So when someone for example argues that “If I want to drink 2 liters of Coca Cola every day and rot away my teeth that is my choice! What right do you have to tell me what to do?” – this person is not acting out of free choice as they would have most likely never considered drinking Coca Cola, hadn’t it been for relentless advertising, but even more so: they are not acting in his or her best interest. So when you decide to drink 2 liters of Coca Cola every day and we for arguments sake say that this is in fact rotting your teeth, you’re actually being detrimental towards your own physical body and thus in a way being a ‘threat’ to the equilibrium of the whole that is your body. You are prioritizing an experience of instant gratification – prompted by advertisement – over the wellbeing of your own physical body. This is not best for all and it is not best for you and I am sure that if you were in fact acting out of a true ‘free will’, you would obviously chose that which won’t destroy your body in the process. See, we only do such destructive acts towards ourselves and others when something inside of us is ‘misaligned’ with ourselves as Life and this is unfortunately being heavily endorsed and promulgated by the media and consumerist system, making us think that we’re acting out of free choice when in fact we’re acting based on a preprogrammed behavioral pattern and on external impulses like advertisement. So to understand the principle of what is best for all, you basically have to start with the fact that you would like to live, that you would like to thrive and live your utmost potential. Best for all thus means: best for you, even if you do not at the moment agree with or understand that. We’re talking about best for you at an existential, physical and practical level. We are NOT talking about a Nazi-health regime like in the movie The Island, because unfortunately most information out there about what is in fact best for you when it comes to nutrition for example, is fallacious at best and at worst is outright deceptive. No one can decides for another what is best for them, however that does not mean that there isn’t an ‘objective truth’ of what is in fact best. Certain points may differ from person to person and that is where individual choice becomes possible in a system based on the principle of what is best for all. Because it would be best for all for example, if everyone were educated about the effects of sugar on their body, if ingredient labels on products were explicit and transparent and if each of us had learned to discern on a physical level So maybe some people would enjoy Coca Cola without it being destructive to them, and in a world that is best for all, that would be fine – as long as the Coca Cola is produced and manufactured in a way that has not compromised this basic principle.

So here we then get into what best for all means on a global level. I have in previous posts used the example of how it would be best for everyone if all had access to clean water. It would not only be best for the people who currently does not have access to clean water, but also to everyone else who may or may not be indirectly affected by water elsewhere in the world not being clean. So let’s say that we now on a national as well as on an international political level agree that clean water is best for all. What we’d then have to do is to conduct and utilize research being done on water to asses the most practical way to ensure that all water is clean. This may mean that certain production facilities or for example ships that transport crude oil may have to change their infrastructure to ensure that they do not contaminate any way. It may also mean that water purification systems would be installed into homes or that everyone gets access to equipment through which they can monitor the level of purity of their drinking water. Some might argue that such solutions will be very costly, but within the principle of what is best for all, there is only one bottom line: is it best for all or not? See for instance, it may be more cost-effective for companies to dump their contaminated water into a water stream that runs into a farming community’s fields, but in the end it would be so much more costly to everyone if no clean water is accessible and people have to migrate and uproot themselves because they live in an area where their children are falling ill due to contaminated water. What I am saying here is that looking at things in a long-term perspective, the solutions that are best for all are by far the most cost-effective, because through them we are actively protecting and prioritizing the well-being of our planet, the eco system, the animals and our own health.

How can we live the principle of what is best for all in our own lives?

At the moment we live in a world system and under national laws of each country that aren’t founded upon the principle of what is best for all. This means that we will not always be able to act in ways that are best for all, simply because the structures of the system prohibits us from doing so. Let me give an example. Throughout my life I’ve always flushed grease and oily substances down the drain after cooking. A couple of years ago I came across an article that explained how our drainage system is not build to handle grease and oil being flushed out and how it literally gets stuck inside the pipes to the detriment for the entire sewage system. I was absolutely flabbergasted that I had never heard about this before and that it wasn’t something anyone was being educated on in terms of taking responsibility for not pouring fatty liquids down the drain. However, I didn’t know of any alternatives so I kept flushing the grease out the drain. Then a friend showed me how she had found a solution in for example if she’s cooked a chicken, she would place paper tissues into the container to soak up the excess fat that she would then throw in the garbage bin. This is a small but simple way that one can take co-responsibility for something that isn’t working to an optimal level in the world system. It doesn’t mean that it is best for all at an absolute level, but within the giving circumstances it is the best option we have.

Let’s look at another example of how one can live the principle of what is best for all despite living in a system that isn’t yet founded upon this principle: My partner and I live together with our two cats. Since my partner and I are both walking process, we agree to optimize our living to be based on the principle of what is best for all. So for example when we discuss whether we should take our cats outside for example, we look at what is best for all as the whole group of us four beings. If a fifth person or another being like a dog would come into our lives, this being would obviously be included in the equation of what is best for all. So the ‘all’ in what is best for all can also be a mini-version of the eco-system. I would for example like to move somewhere where our cats can go out through a cat-door, because this would give them more freedom in deciding when they want to go out, but it would also alleviate the responsibility that my partner and I currently have to take them in and out. On an absolute level, it would obviously be best for all if animals wouldn’t have to be dependent on humans in any way whatsoever, but this is not something we can manifest from one day to the next and so therefore we have to look at what is best within the current conditions that we are all existing in.

Another example is that what is best for all in fact might not be what I would prefer. Let’s say that I really want to buy a new summer dress, but my partner explains to me that we have to get the carburetor of our car fixed and that we won’t have enough money for both purchases. In such situations it has been tremendously supportive to have a principle such as what is best for all as the foundation of our relationship and agreement, because I can, despite really wanting to buy a summer dress, see how it is necessary that we instead invest that money in fixing our carburetor because it is more important to have a car that can drive than me getting a summer dress. What this means is that a lot of emotions and feelings and needless discussions about priorities can be superseded because we agree on this basic principle. When we have such discussions about what to do or what to buy we simply ask each other and ourselves: but what is best? Recently for example, my partner and I have had many discussions about where to move when my partner is done with his education. Sometimes we will for example look at options and my partner will say, “This might be good for us to do.” I can then ask him: “but will it be best?” So by introducing this principle into our lives and especially into our decision-making, we can ensure that we actually elevate our decisions to the highest standards possible, not just what is or may be ‘good’ – but in fact what is best. Sometimes we may not have all the information required to see what is best, but then we can go and do research to find out. Other times we may have made a decision and then later on new information emerges that changes the equation and we then have to reconsider what we saw was best initially. The point that I would like to make here is that implementing the principle of what is best for all into our lives makes decisions so much more practical and simplistic and it prevents decisions being made out of self-interest or fear, because we can at all times look at the physical and practical implications of a certain decision and ask: Is this best?

One of the effects of starting to live this principle has had on my life, is that I now do a lot more research when I am looking at making a decision for myself or for my life with my partner and our cats. This means that the decisions I make are much more informed and educated than previously where I mostly relied on how I felt about a certain decision. So many decisions I would make on a whim or based on fear. Now, if I see that I want to do something or that I don’t want to do something, but I also see that it isn’t best for all, I can bring it back to myself and go and investigate my starting-point. What I have come to see is that what is best for all is something that exists as the optimal potential or outcome of a certain decision or process. What this means then is that all we have to do is to communicate, research and educate ourselves on ourselves and our reality and environment to be able to effectively asses what that ‘best’ scenario or outcome is. At the most basic level of living this principle it means, as Bernard once told me, that when I am best for me, I am best for all. This means that I have to first be able to determine what is in fact best for me and what it means to be best for myself in self-honesty and through that I actually enable myself to begin walking the process of living and becoming my full potential. Expanding ourselves to look at and live in a way that is best for all means to understand that we are part of an interdependent world where what we do affects the whole and where what is being accepted and allowed elsewhere on some level affects our lives and living conditions. When we start living what is best for all, we can begin including the needs of others into our decisions and stop existing in bubbles of self-interest. If everyone lived what is best for all, what would exist would be best for each individual as well as the entire earth; the eco-systems and our world would be nurtured and supported to its full potential. What such a world would look like and what potentials in fact exist, we will have to find out. We can start by taking the first step to decide to begin implementing the principle of what is best for all into our own lives.

“Self is an Eco-system. This eco system is by your own allowances and acceptances and determines the Nature of who you are. It functions according to the demands you place on yourself and how you supply yourself the fulfillment of these demands. In your self eco system you are the center of a very small world. Yours. And you are completely alone with only your back chat with no one ever knowing the real you as you want to hide it at all costs, because if people hear your back chat, you know they will know the real you. They will realize the real nature of you as human. This nature of self. This eco system must be abolished to create an ecosystem that is best for all life, all inclusive as that is where you will find life and home.“

“The daily self Task: to place yourself in writing in a structured way will in time be your proven sanity, trust , honesty and consistency that transcends all ego.
All the structure must show is your dedication to what is best for all life and the confirmation through cross-referenced feedback that you are in fact living this commitment breath by breath into being as you as life.” – Bernard Poolman

Investigate Desteni, investigate the forum where on is invited to write oneself out in self-honesty and where any questions regarding the Desteni Material will be answered by Destonians who are walking their own process. Visit the Destonian Network where videos and blogs are streamed daily. Suggest to also check out the Desteni I Process and Relationship courses as well as the FREE DIP Lite course