Reality,

 

There is physics, chemistry, biology, and, there is Embodied Language (EL), the language which creates, and, therefore, brings us into and keeps us grounded in, our own reality. In a similar way, that many people are still ignorant about or in denial of science, we refuse to acknowledge the difference between our Disembodied Language (DL) and EL. Consequently, we experience and live in the chaotic reality, we create with our DL. Surely, our EL is a scientific, but our DL is an unscientific behavior. 

 

EL is about realism, not mysticism. It is also not a philosophy, a path, a tool or system. EL is the way in which we talk with ourselves and others and use our language to our own advantage. In DL, our language is working against us. Since we are all conditioned to have DL and not EL, we are all experiencing the negative effects of how we deal with our language. Of course, we try to get away from these outcomes, but we cannot escape the reality, we maintain with our own automatic, insensitive, unintelligent language. With our DL, we can’t create a satisfying reality.

 

No matter how highly educated we become, without having mastered our EL, we remain entrenched all sorts of superstitious nonsense, since we are not in touch with our experience. As I have stated in my previous writings, being in touch with our own experiences, requires a language, which describes these experiences accurately, while we are having them. We are not in touch with our body, when we engage in DL, but when we have EL, we feel with our body that we engage in language. Embodiment of our language brings us in touch with our reality.

 

For better or worse, we live in the reality, which we individually create with our language. In DL, however, we believe, that reality exists separate from us, but in EL, we acknowledge, everything exists, because we exist, that is, we perceive it. Furthermore, we behave our own reality. This has nothing to do with our so-called thoughts or mind. When, due to environmental stimuli, neuronal changes in the body of a healthy baby occur, that baby at some point begins to speak. This learning process has absolutely nothing to do with internal language. There is never any language inside the body of a baby or an adult, as language is always overt. By overt, I mean observable, we can hear it or read it. This is the reality, which is only apparent to us during EL, because with DL, we fantasize, we have internal conversations with ourselves. This fallacy is only going to be dissolved, if our body is exposed to and effected by different environmental stimuli, than those, which brought about our DL. If we have EL instead of DL, we have a different physiological experience. Similarly, in a cold or in a warm room, our body feels very different.  

 

We create a different environment with our DL or with our EL. When we manage to stop our DL and have EL, we do ourselves a big favor, as our ongoing EL reveals our Language Enlightenment (LE). Basically, LE is our ability to stay in the reality, we have created with our EL. We always speak of the harsh or painful reality, because we engage in DL, but in EL, our reality is beautiful, enjoyable and interesting.

 

The notion of reality, that we have traditionally entertained – with DL – is of an environment outside of our body. However, the environment, like anything else we describe, is merely a word or a construct, that is neurally behaved by our body. You could say, the environment is in our body, but there is no language inside our body, yet the environment requires a living body. In EL, we are aware, we behave our environment, but during DL, we are totally oblivious about this.

 

During EL reality takes over from fantasy, as we realize, that reality can only exist, because we exist. In other words, we are one with reality, as we, literally, embody reality. Other than the reality, we are able to perceive – and describe with our language – there can be no reality. It can also be stated that our reality is only what it can be, due to our individual learning history, that is, it cannot be any other way, than how we are able to experience it. In DL, we are unable to express our experiences, as they are for us, individually, and, as a result, we live in a dissociated reality.

 

Whenever you refer to the reality, you always, inadvertently, speak or write about your own neural behavior, that is, what is experienced and verbalized by you. However, there is no you, inside of you, who experiences you. Therefore, the sentence, I experience reality, is false. In DL, in which you don’t listen to yourself while you speak, you not only imagine, that you have a mind and thoughts, but you also fantasize, that the environment is external from your body. All of these highly problematic misconceptions belong to DL and will be instantly dissolved by your EL.  

 

Awareness about the aforementioned sensory behavior, can only come about by your correct use of your language, which is EL. Perception of reality deriving from your DL, is based on your fixation on words, to which you have never listened. By simply talking out loud, alone with yourself, you begin to set the record straight, as the feedback from your body – we usually call listening or experiencing – becomes part of your language again. By giving attention to everything that asks your attention, by describing it to yourself, in your own words, you are now able to stop DL and engage in EL. Your perception of reality will have completely changed, as you are now for the first time using your language correctly, because as a speaker, you are your own listener. You can’t miss your LE, as you continue with your EL.                

 

Missed,

 

Since they engage Disembodied Language (DL), most people live vacuous, superficial, dull lives. This writing reveals the wonderful Embodied Language (EL), they have missed, which, most likely, they will continue to miss. Their sloppy way of dealing with language determines, that hearing what they would effortlessly be able to say to themselves is not important. Certainly, what others say, or what they say to others, is emphasized, to the point, that talking with or listening to themselves, is completely forgotten.

 

In EL, we listen to ourselves while we speak, but in DL, we don’t. Everyone can verify, recognize and acknowledge, that based on whether we listen to ourselves, while we speak, we adhere to two different ways of dealing with language. To anyone who notices the difference between their DL and EL, it is immediately apparent, that he or she unconsciously engages in DL, but consciously in EL. Thus, it is not a matter of our EL being better than our DL, but it is a matter of EL being effective, while our DL is ineffective.

 

We keep, unknowingly, involved in DL, as we have, until now, missed out on the conversation with ourselves, in which we admit, we would do ourselves a great favor, if we would stop our DL and engage in EL. When we actually do that and experience the difference between our DL and our EL, we feel so incredibly relieved. Compare it to someone, who lives in a city, who goes walking in the woods or mountains, who says: I never realized how much I have missed nature.

 

When we haven’t seen or talked with our family or friends for a long time, we say: I have missed you, but when we talk out loud with ourselves and experience the tangible shift from our DL to our EL, way say gratefully to ourselves: I have missed you. In EL, we reconnect with ourselves, but each time, we revert back to DL, we lose touch with ourselves. It was impossible, until now, to return to our EL, because we have never explored and verified the immense difference between our DL and EL. Our EL only happened accidentally, if the circumstances permitted it. Since we’ve never investigated these circumstances sufficiently to be able to create them, we’ve missed out on our EL.

 

We simply lack the skill to have ongoing EL and because of that, we continue with DL, without even realizing it. During DL, however, we are not only out of touch with ourselves, but we are out of touch with reality. The only way to be in touch with our reality, is by having EL. Nobody has ever considered this irrefutable fact about our language. Our language either expresses our experiences correctly or incorrectly. The former refers to EL and the latter refers to DL.

 

Stubborn ignorance about our own language, always results in what has colloquially been called our ‘private Idaho’, which, in essence, is a form of psychosis. We are not in touch, and we cannot be in touch with what is real, as long as we still engage in DL. The truth about DL – our ordinary way of talking – is, we are using our language out of fear. The issue of psychosis is totally misunderstood with DL. Presumably, it refers to a loss of contact with reality, when our so-called perceptions are altered to the point, that it is difficult for us to know, what is real or what is a figment of our imagination. However, in EL, we know, there is no inner language and any reference to inner language is utterly false.

 

EL is full of humor, but with DL, you have missed the joke again and again. With your DL, you are mediocre, thirteen in a dozen. You won’t be missed, but with EL, you are special, because everyone engages in DL, without even knowing it. Once you have had some EL, you will feel, as if you miss yourself, if you don't have it. I am special, but you can’t see me in that way, as you, like everyone else, unconsciously engage in DL. I may not be special to you, but I am special to myself, because I know very well, that I really do something, which is unique, and which has great consequences for me. If it happens, that you determine – for yourself and by yourself – what is your DL and what is your EL, you will realize, you have actually always been looking for your EL, as you have always missed being yourself. Being who you are and EL go together and you couldn’t be yourself without your EL.

 

With your dreadful, self-defeating, problematic DL, you have already missed so much of your life and of all those, who, supposedly, are close to you. If you don’t manage to get to your EL, you will have missed the greatest experience of your life: Language Enlightenment (LE).  Only if you have ongoing EL, can your LE truly reveal itself, but with merely a few brief moments of EL, you can only catch a haunting glimpse. From knowing the difference between your own DL and EL, you derive a profound sense of longing, for what you know you have missed, each time you fall back into your habit of having DL. Each time, you manage to stop your DL, however, what you have missed - EL - presents itself again and you will know, you will miss it even more, if you lose it again, until you notice, much to your own surprise, you continue with your EL. Your EL can continue, because you simply can’t miss it.                             

 

Aging,

 

Whatever has been said or written about aging – like everything that has been said or written about anything else – was based on our usual way of talking: Disembodied Language (DL). If I say or write something about aging, however, it is because I express myself from my Embodied Language (EL). Although, basically, nobody has EL, I am still able to continue with it, because I know the difference between DL and EL. I am sure, I will continue with EL until my last breath.

 

I love getting older, as it shows, that my history with DL is further and further behind me. My participation in EL is now steady and certain, but when I was younger, I felt often paralyzed by DL. It is so nice, to look back on those days, which seem like a long time ago. Everything that happened, didn’t seem to have happened to me, but to someone, I once knew, who has disappeared without a trace. Also, the people, I once knew – some of them are still alive – with whom I have lost contact, aren’t important to me anymore, in the way I once believed they were, because I wanted so badly, to be with them, and, particularly, to have EL with them.

 

Occasionally, I still watch the news, listen to what is on TV, to some You Tube video, look at a website or turn on the radio, but each time I do that, I want to go back to my own way of using language. All I hear is DL, which doesn’t relate to me. I can imagine, although people don’t know anything about the difference between DL and EL, they also, unknowingly, want to have EL, but they can’t, like me, get to it. Their aging process is very different from mine, as there is no satisfaction in what they are doing. Doing less and less, is the only relief they know, but stubborn inactivity speeds up their decline. For me, doing less of DL or no DL at all, is a blessing.

 

I have ongoing EL, which reveals my Language Enlightenment (LE), which means even though I am getting older, my life is getting better and better, but people, who age with DL, they only get to witness the ugly effects of their DL, they have always been involuntarily involved in. For them, aging is isolation, because they can no longer do what they have always done, to keep the belief, that their lives are meaningful alive. Before physical death, they die a psychological death of regret about having been so dishonest about themselves. Aging is tormenting, as they can no longer defend against this obvious fact.

 

People anxiously take anti-aging supplements, but, of course, it is all in vain, they are just sold on pills. With DL, they only know how to keep fighting with life. I see them fanatically exercise in the gym, where they have some opportunity to socialize and talk, but whenever they open their mouths, only the usual DL comes out. Surely, in principle, they could still discover their EL, and this would greatly enhance their aging process, but they are too entrenched in their DL-dramas.

 

Unless I return, again and again, to my EL, there is always a negative lingering effect of the DL, I exposed myself to. When I write words, such as these, or make a video about how I love to have EL, I no longer feel the deleterious influence of the DL, which is going on everywhere. If I would close myself off completely, I wouldn’t have any of these effects. I go through periods, when I do that, but I still want to do certain things, which I like, but which also, inadvertently, bring me in contact with DL. I like to sing my songs at Open Mike, but no one has EL with me. Only after I sang my song or someone else sang their song, there occurs, sometimes, a short chat, with one or two people. That is all there is, nothing else.

 

If I just wait for things to happen, nothing ever happens. The only EL I have ever had, is the EL I initiated. My aging process is one of great relief, as I no longer feel, I have to bring my EL to others. I felt compelled to do this in the past. It was quite a troubling experience for me, to feel, that I wanted something from people, who only want to continue with their DL. Right now, I leave them alone. They seem pathetic to me, and I laugh at their pretentious youthfulness.

 

The search for eternal youth is ridiculous and is proof, our DL goes on until we die. People are very interested in hearing about the possibility, that scientists may be able to tweak our genome to remove aging, but there is no animo for the genuine opportunity of stepping out our history of conditioning with DL, so that we can have EL. Throughout my life, people have asked me, how is it possible, that I am always so positive, that I come across so youthful, energetic and alive? The other day, someone asked me: what is new? Pointing at myself, I said: me! He looked puzzled, shook his head, but then, suddenly realized, I meant it and for a brief moment, he felt, I wasn’t lying.

 

Alive refers to the state of being living or having life. I am so alive, because I live my life with EL. With DL, people say to each other, go get a life, but with DL, they will only be able to get more misery, struggle, loss and frustration. A lot has been said about the aging process, but nothing has ever been said about the way in which our usual way of talking – DL – wears us out. In DL, we are not in contact with our body, because we don’t listen to ourselves while we speak and our words disconnect us from our experience. It is amazing, that only I can talk about this. While DL is on its deathbed, we still do not know how to talk about it, as we can’t have ongoing EL.

 

People keep looking for meaning, but what they actually want, is to be more alive. We are aging beautifully, when we can say what we really feel and know, we have spoken authentically. Our EL makes us feel alive and EL gives meaning to our lives, because we can accurately express what we need and have our needs fulfilled. Our pride in having accomplished our goals, makes aging a process of increased gratefulness. By contrast, in DL, we are like a doll or a robot, who seems alife.

 

Alife is an adjective, that describes something that is animated or has the appearance of being alive, but is actually not alive. So, alife is not the same as alive, as the former refers to DL, while the latter refers to EL. To put it bluntly: with DL, we can only pretend, with our language, as if we are alive, but only with EL are we truly alive. Wisdom and aging are related, but only with EL.  

 

 

Personal,

 

Let's finally get personal. Contrary to what everyone believes and says about this, in our everyday conversations, we are completely impersonal, since we are all used to talking with Disembodied Language (DL). People say that talk doesn't fill holes (Dutch expression), but it is and has always been a blatant lie, that merely talking won't do anything. There is, indeed, always a negative consequence of our usual, negative, unconscious way of speaking and it is high time that we dare to take personal responsibility for this.

 

Even though no one wants to admit it, the fact is, in our ordinary - but required - way of speaking, we do not listen to ourselves and continue to pretend that others should listen to us or we pretend, that we are listening to them . In DL, we unknowingly pretend to listen to others or we assume that others should be listening to us. This remains an unaddressed phenomenon of enormous proportions, because we deal with DL, day in, day out and are, therefore, absolutely incapable of distinguishing between our DL and our Embodied Language (EL).

 

From our conditioning history, 

no one is capable of having EL. 

So, we are all in the same boat 

and it is actually not something

 personal, that we have DL. Only

 someone with EL is truly personal.

 With DL, we can only pretend, 

that something is personal to us.

Moreover, when – with DL – 

we talk about our grievances 

or passions, we are always

 unknowingly faking it. As

 speakers, during DL, we 

demand the listener's attention. 

In DL, speakers always demand 

attention, but in EL, speakers

 give attention to the listener. 

The difference is enormous. 

 

Even though everyone, from the impersonal conditioning history, remains busy with DL, we, in Western, individualistic, democratic societies, apparently still agree, due to the freedom of speech - which in the United States is enshrined in the First Amendment of the Constitution – that we should be allowed to speak about anything, no matter how confrontational or uncomfortable it may be when we strongly disagree. Nevertheless, the difference between DL and EL is avoided by everyone like the plague. 

 

I have lived in the United States for many years and now want to say something about the left- and right-wing politics. Exclusively left-wing, 'liberal' activists prefer to avoid conversation or even make it impossible. Due to the lack of communication and the complicity of school administrators, teachers, doctors, psychologists, therapists, politicians and social media companies, thousands of children are changing their sexuality and pretending this is okay, while nothing indicates, life is improving for those who, because of confusion, have taken on a different  gender. It is very personal, that children have been indoctrinated and that in recent years, trans-clinics have suddenly appeared everywhere. That a female judge, of the Supreme Court, is unable to say what a woman is, is pure madness, but it is the predictable, inevitable consequence of how people – with their superstitious, insensitive DL – talk to each other.

 

The American philosophy of life,

liberty and the pursuit of 

happiness, does not come

 – according to me – from

 the English, but from the 

Dutch colonists. The vast 

majority of Americans - if 

they’ve learned anything 

about it at all - do not know

 any better that their history

 only begins with the Pilgrim

 Fathers, but they have no 

idea, that a Dutch colony 

existed in the seventeenth 

century, called New Netherlands

 or New Amsterdam, which

 was later renamed New York

 by English colonists. The term

 Yan-kee – a resident of New 

England, and later, American – 

is a corruption of Jan-Kees, 

two common Dutch names

and dollar, comes from the 

Dutch thaler (daalder), which

 is undoubtedly a reference to

 the tolerant Dutch commercial

notion that we can profit from trade 

and become rich, which  

became an important part of the 

American national character.

 

The Dutch - liberal - influence is of a completely different nature, than the puritan influence of the English colonists, who, to avoid persecution, first fled to the Netherlands and after that, founded their fundamentalistic Christian colony in America. However, those British, who first came to the Netherlands, they wanted to leave very soon, because they took offense to the Dutch mentality, they believed was too loose. Of course, it was also their adventurer's or freedom's urge, that made them dare to take the dangerous crossing across the Atlantic Ocean with the May Flower. I dare say, the change from DL to EL is equally monumental. 

 

I have the feeling - even though I only emigrated to America in 1999 - I embody something of the Dutch colonists at the time, because I was born and raised in the Netherlands. The exam that you take as an emigrant contains some questions about English Pilgrims, but not a word about Dutch colonists. The Dutch influence is also not mentioned anywhere in any history book, and I find it important, to once more write about it here.

 

My cultural contribution, to my new country, is my fearless ability to demonstrate the difference between DL and EL. In fact, it was the Dutch, who created The American Dream, not the English. I view my ability to have EL, as a connection to the irrefutable Dutch influence on American culture. Numerous translated documents show, that the multi-ethnic immigrant society had its origins in New Amsterdam. It was only there, that everyone, regardless of skin color or origin, could climb the social ladder. Things were very different in the intolerant English colony. Like their modern-day, narrow-minded descendants, who are still obsessed with Christianity, they also condemned the Dutch at that time, who enjoyed their life. The Dutch mirrored to the English, how stuck and unhappy they are.

 

Please, consider the foregoing as an introduction and a setting of the stage, for the issue I want to talk about in this writing. The difference between DL and EL, is a vast topic that, just like the unknown, but very important, Dutch influence on American history, is pushed aside by everyone. Other topics are apparently of greater importance; therefore, we never get around to recognizing and admitting that the great difference between DL and EL exists, and that the future of America as well as the rest of the world, depends on whether we are going to accept and explore the importance of this difference or not.

 

By not recognizing the difference between DL and EL, we are involuntarily and unconsciously talking about our own experience, but if we keep endlessly busy, with those weighty topics (politics, religion, philosophy, sports, economics, immigration, art, entertainment, etc., etc), which prevent us from addressing the difference between DL and EL, then we - as individuals - without realizing, continue to hide behind some group, we supposedly represent or belong to. Supposedly, we always speak on behalf of others, but never on our own behalf. However, EL is the language of the individual. The naturalization process should mean, that every new immigrant should be able to distinguish between DL and EL and is able to choose EL, the language of freedom.

 

Only when we start discussing the difference between DL and EL, does everything suddenly become personal. Moreover, after recognizing the difference between DL and EL, it becomes clear to us that only with EL – and never with DL – can we understand why so much goes wrong in so-called communication, in peace-talks, in negotiations, and in all of the conversations, in which the difference between what we personally experience and what we keep harping on, as participants of one faith or another, is mixed-up and intertwined and during which personal experience or own way of looking at things, always wins out over presumed 'advocacy' due to membership and allegiance to some group.

 

During DL, we are unknowingly speaking from our personal experience about what we believe to be dealing with as a group. In fact, in DL, we hide our individuality behind the group process and abuse that group process to our own 'benefit'. Although it is always only about power and influence, this normal, customary, accepted exploitation of the group process for one's own gain, never results in any clarity about the major difference between DL and EL. On the contrary, people continue to turn away from anything personal, as taking it personal, is considered by everyone, who wants to take a higher step to gain status on the social ladder, as a weakness. Persistence in safely representing the pretended group interest, is best defense against any criticism of our own personal behavior, which is conveniently ignored as an ad-hominem attack.

 

The higher one climbs on the social ladder, the less chance there is, that one will be held accountable for something that is personal. Everyone protects and defends themselves politically or strategically. People sometimes babble about the politicization or weaponization of all kinds of issues or institutions, but they run away from the indisputable fact, which is visible – and audible – to anyone, that everyone in DL does not listen to themselves and only acts as if they listen to others and are actually trying to force others to listen to them or simply try to make them do what they say. In DL, we manipulate, dominate, humiliate, intimidate and argue, but we never speak naturally, honestly, sincerely, as an individual.

 

By competing for attention – the basis of DL – we are and will always remain impersonal. We also demand a lot of attention by saying nothing and by avoiding any form of interaction. The victim's role very effectively commands the attention of others. This is also done during verbal the acrobatics in the courtroom or in politics. Lawyers, like priests and many other so-called leaders, always insist that they speak on behalf of others. Legislators and lawyers control the entire public discourse and determine what is acceptable. However, when we ourselves determine the difference between our own DL and EL, it turns out, that nobody knows anything about their own DL and EL and that we have relinquished our power to others, to our own detriment. I would say, it is un-American to do this. With EL everything we say and do is personal, not because we take it personal - as they accusingly say in DL - but because it is truly personal and because, from our DL, there has always been a rigid condemnation about what we ourselves experience. I consider EL to be the currency of the future, as it signifies the dignity of the person who has it. With our continued EL, we revive The American Dream, because our Language Enlightenment (LE), means Living in Freedom and creating the spoken realization of our Happiness.

 

Everything is personal, due to EL, as that is exactly where our challenge lies. Only in EL is there is real progress and innovation. Finally, our individualistic, personal approach, will emphasize and guarantee honest, dignified, conscious objectivity – our LE – and will not, as in DL, condemn, abhor and deny it.

 Persoonlijk,

 

Laten wij eens eindelijk persoonlijk worden. In tegenstelling tot wat iedereen hierover gelooft en zegt, zijn wij, in onze alledaagse gesprekken, volslagen onpersoonlijk, omdat wij er nou eenmaal allemaal aan gewend zijn, om vanuit Ontlichaamde Taal (OT) te praten. Men zegt wel, praatjes vullen geen gaatjes, maar het is en  blijft een faliekante leugen, dat praten alleen niets uit zou richten. Er is wel degelijk een – nadelig – gevolg van de gebruikelijke, negatieve, onbewuste wijze, waarop wij telkens spreken en het is hoog tijd, dat wij daar eens persoonlijk verantwoordelijkheid voor durven gaan nemen.

 

Ook al wil niemand dit toegeven, het feit is, dat wij gedurende onze gewone – maar vereiste – manier van spreken, niet naar onszelf luisteren en blijven doen alsof anderen naar ons zouden moeten luisteren of pretenderen, dat wij naar hen aan het luisteren zouden zijn. In OT, doen we, ongemerkt, alsof we naar anderen luisteren, of we gaan ervan uit, dat anderen dus naar ons zouden moeten luisteren. Dit blijft vooralsnog een ongeaddresseerd fenomeen van enorme properties, omdat wij ons, dag in, dag uit, met OT inlaten, en daardoor absoluut niet in staat zijn, om onderscheid te maken tussen OT en Belichaamde Taal (BT).

 

Vanuit de conditionering is niemand in staat om BT te hebben. We zitten dus allemaal in hetzelfde schuitje en het is eigenlijk niet iets persoonlijks, dat wij OT hebben. Enkel iemand met BT is werkelijk persoonlijk. Met OT kunnen wij slechts alleen maar doen alsof iets persoonlijk voor ons is. Wanneer wij – met OT – over onze grieven of onze passies spreken, zijn wij altijd ongemerkt aan het faken. Als spreker eisen wij, in OT, de aandacht van de luisteraar. In OT, vergen sprekers de aandacht, maar in BT, geven sprekers de aandacht aan de luisteraar.

 

Ook al is iedereen, vanuit de onpersoonlijke conditionerings geschiedenis, met OT bezig, toch zijn wij, in Westerse, individualistische, democratische maatschappijen, het schijnbaar nog steeds met elkaar eens, dat wij, vanwege de vrijheid van meningsuiting – die overigens in de Verenigde Staten ligt vastgelegd in het eerste amendement van de grondwet – zouden mogen spreken over wat dan ook, zelfs al is dit nog zo confronterend of oncomfortabel, omdat wij het niet met elkaar eens zijn. Desalniettemin, wordt het gigantisch belangrijke verschil tussen OT en DT door iedereen angstvallig uit de weg gegaan.

 

Ik woon al vele jaren in de Verenigde Staten en wil iets zeggen over linkse en rechtse politiek. Uitsluitend linkse, ‘liberale’ activisten, willen conversatie het liefst uit de weg gaan of zelfs onmogelijk maken. Vanwege het gebrek aan communicatie en de medeplichtigheid van school-besturen, leraren, artsen, psychologen, therapeuten, politici en media, laten duizenden kinderen hun sexualiteit veranderen, en doet men alsof dit okay is, terwijl niets erop wijst, dat het leven erop vooruit gaat, voor hen, die vanwege verwarring, een andere sekse hebben genomen. Het is heel persoonlijk, dat kinderen zijn geindoctrineerd, en dat er, in de laatste jaren, ineens overal trans-klinieken verschijnen. Dat een vrouwelijke rechter, van het hoogste gerechtshof, niet in staat is, om te zeggen wat een vrouw is, is waanzin, die het voorspelbare, onvermijdelijke gevolg is van hoe mensen – met bijgelovige OT – met elkaar praten.

 

De Amerikaanse filosofie, leven, vrijheid en geluk nastreven (life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness) is volgens mij niet van Engelse, maar van Nederlandse kolonisten afkomstig. Een onpersoonlijk gegeven is, dat verreweg de meeste Amerikanen – indien zij er uberhaupt iets over hebben geleerd – niet beter weten, dat hun geschiedenis begint bij de Pilgrim Fathers, maar er geen flauw benul van hebben, dat er in de zeventiende eeuw een Nederlandse kolonie bestond, die Nieuw Nederland of Nieuw Amsterdam heette, wat later, door Engelse kolonisten, tot New York werd omgedoopt. Het woord Yan-kee – wat inwoner van New England betekende, en later, Amerikaan – is een verbastering van Jan-Kees en dollar, komt van de Nederlandse daalder, wat zonder meer een verwijzing is naar de tolerante Nederlandse handels-geest, die zo’n belangrijk onderdeel is geworden van de Amerikaanse volksaard.

 

De Nederlandse – liberale – invloed is van een totaal andere aard, dan de puriteinse invloed van de Engelse kolonisten, die, om vervolging te ontkomen, eerst naar Nederland vluchtten, om vervolgens in Amerika hun fundamentalische Christelijke staat te stichten. Die Engelsen, die  eerst naar Nederland waren gekomen, wilden echter gauw weer weg, want ze hadden moeite met de Nederlandse mentaliteit, die volgens hen te losbandig was. Uiteraard was het ook hun avonturier’s of vrijheid’s drang, die hen de gevaarlijke oversteek over de Atlantische oceaan deed wagen met de May Flower.  

 

Ik heb het gevoel, dat ik – ook al emigreerde ik pas in 1999 naar Amerika – iets belichaam van de toenmalige Hollandse kolonisten, want ik ben geboren en getogen in Nederland. Er staan in het examen, dat je als emigrant doet, wat vragen over Pilgrims, maar niet over Nederlandse kolonisten. Ook wordt de Nederlandse invloed in geen enkel geschiedenis boek vermeldt en vind ik het van belang, om hierover te schrijven.

 

Mijn kulturele bijdrage aan mijn nieuwe land is mijn onverschrokken vermogen, om het verschil aan te tonen, tussen OT en BT. Eigenlijk waren het altijd al de Nederlanders, die The American Dream hadden gecreerd en niet de Engelsen. Ik bezie mijn vermogen, om BT te hebben, als een aansluiting bij de onweerlegbare Nederlandse invloed op de Amerikaanse kultuur. Uit tal van vertaalde documenten, blijkt over-duidelijk, dat de multi-etnische immigranten samenleving zijn oorsprong had in New Amsterdam. Het was alleen daar, dat iedereen, ongeacht huidskleur of komaf kon klimmen op de sociale ladder. In de Engelse kolonie ging het er heel anders aan toe. Net als hun hedendaagse, nog steeds van het Christendom bezeten, bekrompen nazaten, veroordeelden zij ook toen al de Nederlanders, omdat die van het leven genoten en daardoor aantoonden, dat zij eigenlijk ongelukkig waren.

 

Het voorafgaande is slechts een introduktie en een sfeer-setting, van waar ik het hier over wil hebben. Het verschil tussen OT en BT, is een veel-omvattend onderwerp, dat, net als de onbekende, maar zeer belangrijke, Nederlandse invloed op de Amerikaanse geschiedenis, door iedereen aan de kant wordt geschoven. Andere onderwerpen zijn schijnbaar van groter belang en daardoor komen wij er nooit aan toe, om te erkennen, dat het grote verschil tussen OT en BT bestaat, en dat het, voor de toekomst van Amerika, maar eigenlijk voor de toekomst van de gehele mensheid, van enorm groot  belang is.

 

Bij het erkennen van het opmerkelijke verschil tussen OT en BT, hebben wij het onwillekeurig altijd over onze eigen ervaring, maar indien wij  eindeloos bezig blijven met al die gewichtige onderwerpen (politiek, religie, filosofie, sport, economie, immigratie, kunst, vermaak, etc., etc), die ons ervan weerhouden, om over het verschil tussen OT en BT te praten, dan blijven wij ons – als individu – zonder daar erg in te hebben, verschuilen achter een of andere groep, die wij zogenaamd vertegenwoordigen of waartoe wij zeggen te behoren, omdat wij het woord te voeren voor anderen. In dit geval, spreken wij dus nooit namens onszelf. BT is de taal van het individu. Het naturalisatie proces zou, volgens mij moeten inhouden, dat iedere immigrant in staat zou moeten  zijn om OT van BT te onderscheiden en om aldus voor BT te kunnen kiezen.

   

Enkel wanneer wij het verschil tussen OT en BT gaan bespreken, wordt alles ineens persoonlijk. Bovendien wordt het ons duidelijk, nadat wij het verschil tussen OT en BT hebben erkend, dat wij alleen met BT – maar nooit met OT – kunnen begrijpen, waarom er zoveel mis gaat in de zogenaamde communicatie, in het overleg, in de onderhandelingen, en in al de gesprekken, waarin het verschil tussen, wat wij persoonlijk ervaren, en waarop wij maar blijven hameren, als deelnemers van een of andere geloof, door elkaar loopt en waartijdens het de persoonlijke ervaring of eigen kijkwijze betreft, die het altijd wint van de ‘belangen-behartiging’ vanwege onze lidmaatschap bij een of andere groep.

 

Wij zijn, in DL, altijd onbewust bezig, om vanuit onze eigen persoonlijke belevenis te spreken over waar wij zogezegd als groep mee te maken zouden hebben. In feite verschuilen wij, in OT, onze individualiteit achter het groeps-proces en misbruiken wij dat groeps-proces, om daar ons eigen ‘voordeel’ mee te doen. Ofschoon het  altijd gaat over macht en invloed, dit gewone, gebruikelijke, geaccepteerde uitbuiten van het groeps-proces voor eigen gewin, heeft nooit tot gevolg, dat er duidelijkheid onstaat over het grote verschil tussen OT en BT. Integendeel, men blijft bezig, om zich van het persoonlijke af te wenden, want dan zouden wij het letterlijk –  persoonlijk – gaan nemen en dat wordt door iedereen, die uit is op het innemen van een hogere trede of status op de maatschappelijke ladder, beschouwd als een zwakte. Volharding in het vertegenwoordigen van het voorgewende groeps-belang is de beste afweer tegen iedere kritiek op ons persoonlijk gedrag, die altijd daardoor als ad-hominem wordt genegeerd.

 

Hoe hoger men klimt, op de maatschappelijke ladder, hoe minder kans er nog is, dat wij zullen worden aangesproken op iets, dat persoonlijk is, maar waar iedereen zich hiertegen politiek of strategisch indekt. Men bazelt wel eens wat over de politizering of bewapening van allerlei kwesties of instituties, maar loopt weg van het, voor iedereen waarneembare, onomstotelijke feit, dat iedereen in OT niet naar zichzelf luistert en dus alleen maar acteert, dat ze naar anderen luisteren en er eigenlijk alleen maar op uit zijn om anderen te dwingen, naar hen te luisteren, en om hen te laten doen, wat zij zeggen. In OT, manipuleren, domineren, vernederen, intimideren en argumenteren we, maar we spreken nooit op een natuurlijke wijze.

 

In het strijden om de aandacht – wat de basis is van OT – zijn en blijven wij altijd onpersoonlijk. Ook eisen wij natuurlijk de aandacht, door niets te zeggen, en door iedere vorm van interaktie uit de weg te gaan. De slacht-offer’s rol dwingt heel effectief de aandacht van anderen af. Ook wordt dat gedaan tijdens de verbale acrobatiek in de rechtzaal of de politiek. Advokaten doen, net als priesters of andere zogenaamde leiders, altijd het zegje voor anderen. Deze wet-gevers hebben de gehele publieke conversatie onder de duim en zij bepalen wat aanvaardbaar is of niet. Wanneer wij echter zelf het verschil tussen onze eigen OT en BT gaan bepalen, dan blijkt, dat niemand eigenlijk iets weet van OT en BT en dat wij ten nadele van onszelf, de macht uit handen hebben gegeven. Met BT is alles wat wij zeggen en doen persoonlijk, niet omdat wij het – zoals men in OT zegt – persoonlijk nemen, maar omdat het echt persoonlijk is en omdat er, vanuit OT, altijd al een strenge veroordeling is geweest, naar wat wij zelf ervaren. Ik beschouw  BT als het nieuwe betaal middel, omdat het de waardigheid bepaalt van de persoon, die het heeft. Met voortgaande BT wordt The American Dream nieuw leven ingeblazen, omdat wij met onze Taal Verlichting (TV), in Leven met Vrijheid,  de gesproken realizatie van ons Geluk creeren.

 

Alles wordt persoonlijk vanwege onze BT, want daar ligt de uitdaging en alleen daarin is de echte vooruitgang en vernieuwing. Tot slot, onze individualistische benadering met BT, zal onze persoonlijke, waardige, bewuste, eerlijke, objectiviteit – TV – benadrukken en niet, zoals in OT, veroordelen, verafschuwen en ontkennen.    

 

Evidence,

 

When someone has the evidence, something is true, it is not because that this person has something to prove, but because he or she is right. So, I am one of those people, because I am right, because unlike everyone else who has Disembodied Language (DL), I have Embodied Language (EL). Yes, I have the proof, but I have nothing to prove.

 

When you start having EL, everything will be in order. Your EL has a ranking effect. Your logic is the result of your correct way of speaking. The correct way to talk, EL, is when you finally produce the sound you want to listen to. In order to have the voice we can enjoy, it is first important to recognize that the sound we despise, must be acknowledged and stopped.

 

Your supposed need for proof is no more important than the presumed need for proof of others. Our EL never takes place while we are proving ourselves, to ourselves or to others. Proof of EL is self-evident and if you don't understand that, then you don't have it, then you're still fiddling and messing around with your DL, which still hasn't stopped.

 

Not you, but your conditioning 

has made you produce DL, in 

which you produce the sound 

you do not want to listen to. 

So, in DL, you always speak 

with a strange sound, which

 alienates you from yourself.

 Stopping this negative behavior

 can only happen, if you admit 

to yourself - because you can

 clearly hear it - that you 

actually don't want this.

 

The ridiculous idea, that you have to be convinced to have EL, is complete nonsense. However, if it ever comes to the point, that you have EL, it will not be because you have been convinced by someone or because you would have convinced yourself. Your EL happens because it can happen. If it can happen, it will happen, but if it isn't possible, then it won't happen. If this is the case, then you can be sure that you are still honking your horn with DL. This must first be accepted, only then can it stop.

 

Proof that you have EL never has to be provided and there is nothing to prove to others. As soon as one asks for proof, one is actually saying, one is not interested in experiencing what it is. Curiously, we are all used to speaking with an acted voice that does not suit us and always represents our anger, confusion, struggle, loneliness, fear and sadness.

 

Even though, in our unconscious DL - since others require us to provide evidence - we are trying to prove ourselves, this tendency suddenly disappears, when we have, without having done any practice, suddenly, just like that, EL, with ourselves. Even though, out of old habit, we still may try to prove to ourselves that we have EL, it turns out, no proof is needed, as we feel perfectly good and nourished.

 

There are all kinds of reasons, why you feel so upset in DL, because you are never in touch with yourself as long as you have DL. The reason you continue with DL and never get around to your EL is because, due to your usual way of speaking, you deal with your language in such a way, that your language itself implies the continuation of the disorder. In other words, participation in DL creates chaos in your life. You only acknowledge this to yourself, when you start talking – out loud – with yourself and listening to yourself and, thus, determine for yourself that, based on your conditioning, you continue to have DL, again and again, because this is simply what is expected of you. You now expect of yourself, what others have expected of you.

 

Since we cannot trust anyone in DL, including ourselves, we have to sign, so that it is in black and white, that we are not lying. Since we, in spoken language, apparently cannot be trusted, our signature, in written language, is the so-called proof that we have agreed to some kind of agreement.

 

When you have EL, you start to hear yourself saying and doing things, that were imposed on you, which you no longer want to do. In DL, the speaker does not listen to him or herself, as the listener is always someone other than the speaker him or herself. Because of this, the listener in DL is, by definition, forced to listen to the speaker. If you talk out loud to yourself and listen carefully to the sound of your own voice and feel the intonation of your voice with  your body, you can’t avoid admitting - to yourself –  normally, you speak with unpleasant, false voice.

 

So, when we talk, we do 

something with the sound

 of our own voice, that 

makes us not want to hear it. 

This happens unconsciously 

and only during DL and once

 we become aware of this, 

we stop using our voice in

 that unnatural way. When

 that happens, it comes as

 a great relief, that we have

 stopped doing something 

that was detrimental. We 

were our own worst enemy,

 as we had the wrong voice, 

which kept us out of touch 

with our own experience.

 

You could also say that stopping DL and allowing EL is the restoration of our sound-experience, while we speak. The resonant sound that we feel so good about, which we cannot even produce in DL, makes us able to say all kinds of things, that we could not say before, with the sound of our negative emotions.

 

You produce a different vibration or energy in EL than in DL, which can be produced effortlessly and without any preparation, but which is nevertheless forgotten and disappears every time, because your old conditioning, with OT, takes over again. It is a matter of catching yourself time and time again, that you are apparently not listening to yourself most of the time and, therefore, you get stuck in your DL.

 

When you bring attention to your language and take time for yourself, to talk out loud with yourself, so that you can listen to yourself, you will experience again the liberation, relaxation and meaning of the frequency of the voice, that really suits you and that makes you whole and completely at peace.

 

The order of EL arises from the soothing silence which is expressed and heard by us. So, we do not talk to ourselves in order to become silent, but speaking with ourselves, makes us aware that in EL, we always speak from our silence. You could also say, we speak from love, peace, clarity, insight and the experience, that we are filled with energy. Even though it often happens, that we let go of our sound of well-being and end up back in DL, each time we go back to our sound, there is a sensation of ecstasy.

 

It is remarkable, that people talk so often about the so-called hard evidence of one thing or another. Why do we use hardness as an adjective to show the truth? It's because in DL we keep beating each other over the head with what - according to us - is the truth. Certainly, the truth, during EL, is not hard and that is why we are open, to be sensitive and honest.

 

Becoming attuned to the sound of your own EL, is a process that immediately lets you know, you always get out of it what you put into it. If you would just try it once, you will have a good experience, but that temporary change is not of lasting significance and requires more. However, if you do not respond to this challenge, by talking to yourself again and again and picking up the thread of your EL, you will forget about it and continue with your DL as before. Many people have been introduced to EL, but abandoned it, because it is so radical and so all-encompassing. Even though it takes a lot to have EL instead of DL, it is worth it and you will continue to be amazed at how wonderfully it improves everything in your life. This is unmistakable proof, that your EL works.

 

I often hear people often talk about overwhelming evidence. This means what is said is true, because everything indicates that it is so. Nothing indicates that DL – our usual, problematic way of speaking – is true, but everything shows that EL, the language that creates space, which you can hear me speak so exuberantly (on my two You Tube channels, maximuspeperkamp-hw8sw and Maximus Peperkamp) is true. Just convince yourself and start talking to yourself and listening to yourself. No, you don’t need to do that, remember…