Stuart Wilde Q&A: Joan of Arc, Spiritual Terrorism and Freedom

Q: In Whispering Winds of Change you talk about "spiritual terrorists." You somehow make them responsible for changing the evolution of the globe. Could you explain who they are? How do you see them changing planet Earth's evolution?

A: I refer to spiritual terrorists as those people who are quietly creating a metaphysical/spiritual/psychological change in the world. Rules and regulations imposed on society are there to sustain the status quo, to impose control through terror, and fear of retribution. Society will not accept anything that is contradictory to the status quo, the power base, or the government.

However, while the institutions that create these structures are theoretically chasing after anarchists, terrorists, and drug dealers, the foundation of our society is being pulled away from underneath them by the fact that there are loads of people going out there and creating a change of consciousness. Spiritual terrorists, through their own metaphysical, spiritual, and psychological journeys, are challenging the status quo.

I see nonviolent spiritual terrorists being responsible for the change in the evolution of the planet. We need a system that's less hateful, militant, and violent -- and more caring.

Q: In Whispering Winds of Change, you say that if the time was right, any one of us could "walk up to the system and take the crown back. That's exactly what we're going to do. We just have to know we can do it." Do you still believe that, and if so, when is it going to happen?

A: When Joan of Arc crowned the Dauphin as king, France was in a state of political turmoil, so it was a possibility. Right now our institutions are only changing as much as they have to. Recent years have seen a strengthening in the economy, and therefore a strengthening in the ego's position in the grip of ticktock, so to speak. So I don't think this would be the time to go in and sack the government. But in Whispering Winds of Change, I was stating that the power lies with the people. As the old adage goes, "There's nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come." This idea of change is in the state of becoming.

Q: Do you believe there is such a thing as freedom?

A: Freedom is relative - the further you move away from your relatives, the more freedom you have! Seriously, though, there are varying degrees of freedom. As you move up through the mineral, vegetable, and animal kingdom, the more freedom of movement a collection of molecules has, and the greater the power and complexity of their evolution. So freedom is defined by the parameters of movement an organism enjoys. It's also, in the metaphysical sense, the power of the oscillation of energy - the velocity, if you like. In human terms, it's also the power to influence others with one's energy. In its simplest terms, freedom is defined by the extent of your choices.

Within humanity, degrees of freedom vary. There are people who are very rich and technically free, but they are imprisoned by their greed or fears, often tangled in endless squabbles over money. Others maybe almost penniless but truly free, for they have the mobility to wander the land, consuming very little and needing little to sustain themselves emotionally and physically. They are simple and complete. The name of the game is, get rid of most of your self-imposed personal rules and restrictions, then try as best you can to work around most of the rules of tick-tock.

Q: Do you think the democratic system allows space for the individual?

A: The modern democratic system definitely does not allow enough space for the individual. We need a society that is ordered, lawful, and cares for its weaker members. But we also need a society where people are free to operate without the intrusion, surveillance, and permission of those people who govern the country.

What we need is a democratic system whereby the voters appoint administrators who have the voters wants and needs at heart. In other words, we need governments that are employed by the citizens, not governments that rule over the citizens. The democratic system will fragment and eventually collapse within a generation or two, and it will have to be replaced by smaller, more manageable units of governments.