Have you ever stopped to think how you're using your time?
You have time for what's important to you.
- What's more important and
- What's less important to you?
Distractions can prevent you from using your time in more important goals.
What are your goals?
While you ponder at this question here's a useful tip: this article is more clear in the context of the previous ones:
- What’s your opinion about our challenge?
- What's the purpose of the winners' community?
- What's your opinion about effectiveness?
- What's your opinion about uplifting music♪?
Our rulers say that our challenge is to flatten the curve of 1 invisible enemy.
What’s our actual challenge?
So far nobody offered 1 proof for the enemy.
Nothing stopped our rulers to create measures that reduce our freedom, with zero proof so
What's stopping them from continuing to create measures that reduce our freedom?
- Now in some stores you're allowed only when your skin surface temperature is within some parameters.
- Soon enough you're allowed in stores only when your app is within some parameters.
Soon enough we live in a zero freedom world in which location is not a problem: you're gonna have to scan your app at every entry point, no matter where you live, because 1 world enemy needs 1 world order. Your app is gonna be a combination of
- 1 health passport that shows your health status and
- 1 social score that shows how well you obey to their rules.
Soon enough you're allowed in stores only when you have 1 high enough social score = 1 high enough level of compliance with their laws. i wonder how high is your social score when
- you encourage people to question their laws,
- you encourage people to challenge the status quo.
By the way: 1 leader is the one who challenge the status quo.
Soon enough we live in a world in which we can no longer:
- work for overcoming our challenge.
- encourage people to challenge the status quo.
As the power of the state increases and our freedom decreases, we live in 1 world in which the state can do whatever it wants with its people, especially with the ones who challenge the status quo.
When you dare to think, when you dare to question the mainstream theory,
- in the best case, you're incapable of functioning in society, because you can't buy food, because you can't enter stores.
- in the worst case, you're locked in a mental institution because you're 1 enemy for the state.
Do you you think you can use your critical thinking now while you can, while it's still legal?
Soon enough:
- thinking is illegal.
- challenging the status quo is history.
- asking questions is 1 memory of the past.
Our actual challenge is to flatten the curve of our freedom loss.
Do you think we have unlimited time to overcome our challenge or do you think our time is limited?
It just seems to me that we lose sight of some aspects of our challenge such as: our challenge doesn't last forever. Our time is limited. Can you feel that overcoming our challenge is:
- 1 race against time?
- 1 matter of effectiveness?
Some people invest their time in virtual games, in watching entertainment, in many other important stuff. What's more important:
- playing virtual games or your freedom?
- watching entertainment or your freedom?
- important stuff that consume your time or your freedom?
When you don't have time to work for your freedom it means it's not that important to you.
How much time do we have?
I don't know and i don't think we have enough time:
- for unimportant stuff.
- for ineffective approaches.
Some people believe that taking action is enough. This belief is similar with believing that picking up sheets of paper from the floor is enough when the wind blows. In this case we don't achieve our goal, even though we take action, because our action is not effective: the wind blows the sheets of paper we're picking. In this scenario we achieve our goal (putting the sheets back in order) only when we use a more effective approach: closing a window to stop the wind. Some people say:
Sharing information is enough.
What happens when you cause denial through the way you share information?
Sharing information that's taken out of context cause denial (we repel people) because we ask for too much. Asking people to change their beliefs is too much.
- Are you so eager to share information that you continue sharing it in a way through which you push people further away from our reality (the opposite of the goal of reaching people) or
- Are you capable to think your approach so you can use one through which you reach people?
What's the point of using an approach through which we achieve the opposite of what we want?
When we ask questions in order to help people figure out for themselves, we ask for less.
Even when we ask questions, we ask too much, because this approach is still logical and logic requires critical thinking and people don't bother with that. You already know my opinion about what content we can use to be more effective from the previous article. What's your opinion? You can comment below and let me know.
Did you know that everything is done through people?
Sooner or later it might be useful to reach people. When we don't reach people, What are we doing?
When we're not effective enough we lose our challenge.
Some people are so attached to their current approach that they can't consider their goal (in case they have any). i asked somebody:
How many people are we reaching?
The reply was:
As long as i reach more people i'm happy.
Are you so eager to post articles that you don't even consider the reason you're writing them or does it make sense to have a goal?
What’s the goal of sharing information? Why are we sharing information?
We're sharing information to reach people.
- Are you writing article for the sake of writing (from inertia) or does it make sense to create content congruent with the goal of reaching people?
- What's the point of writing articles as long as we don't reach more people?
- How do we know that we're reaching more people?
- What's the indicator that shows us we're reaching more people?
- What's the indicator that shows us we're reaching people at all?
- What happens when we don't reach people?
What's more important:
- Continuing using your current approach or overcoming our challenge?
- Remaining attached to an ineffective approach or considering a more effective one?
- Functioning from inertia or taking the time to think your approach?
- Continuing using an approach through which we don't reach people (or even worse through which we repel people) or changing our approach so we reach people?
When we’re attached to our approach, we're no different than people who are attached to the mainstream theory that's based on zero proof.
What are you doing when your current approach is not ineffective:
- Are you continuing using your current approach because you're attached to it or
- Can you consider different approaches?
The bottom line is pretty simple:
Our party doesn't last forever.
It's up to you to decide what's more effective:
- Functioning from inertia, continuing 1 approach through which you achieve the opposite of your goal or
- Taking the time to think your approach so you can use one that's effective in getting closer to your goal?
Thanks for visiting my blog and reading my article.
By the way: this article is part of a book.
Hive community. Discord community.
What do you think? How can we overcome our challenge? You can comment below and let me know.
Congratulations @askmihai! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
You can view your badges on your board And compare to others on the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPTo support your work, I also upvoted your post!
Support the HiveBuzz project. Vote for our proposal!