This is Hakann speaking. I greet you in peace and love.
On your world, many people are scared -- for very understandable reasons.
Now, reality is nuanced, there are a lot of factors, people are different and people have free will.
Still, in people who aren’t embodying the knowledge that they’re really a reincarnating soul, fear often leads to a desire for control.
Even somewhat subtle fears, such as fear of death or “fear of being forgotten after death” or “fear that I will keep being unhappy”, can lead to a desire for control.
A dramatic expression of this desire for control is someone who is a dictator, or a dark controller (our word for the cabal / black hats).
A somewhat dramatic expression of this desire for control is the overly controlling, sometimes abusive parent or partner or boss. Or it’s the power-seeking politician. Or it’s the person who enforces censorship over other people, or who character assassinates someone.
A subtle expression of this desire for control is the average person who labels a statement as “a conspiracy theory, therefore definitely false” even if they haven’t researched it and don’t have genuine intuition about it. They’re trying to control reality and other people’s beliefs and perceptions by just claiming that something is definitely false, with no valid reason. Why? Because the world is less scary if others believe as they do.
Similarly there’s a spiritual person claiming “this doesn’t resonate with me, therefore it’s false” or “this resonates with me, therefore it’s true” if that “resonance” is based on emotions or biases, and not genuine intuition. (Of course, “this resonates with me, there I believe it’s true” isn’t control-seeking and is fine.)
Or other expressions where a spiritual person claims that something is a fact (or is factually false) based on their spiritual knowing, if that spiritual knowing is actually just what they emotionally want to be true.
That said, if the “resonance” is genuine intuition, then it’s not control-seeking; then it’s just fact and valid public service to share that.
So yes, it’s a thin line. And yes, often people seeking control think they’re doing a good thing, e.g. they think they’re doing a public service by sharing their genuine intuition. When they’re really just subconsciously trying to control other people’s perception by sharing their emotions and presenting that as “proof by genuine intuition.”
There are many other forms of seeking control, such as:
- “I emotionally want this to be true, and look this source says it’s true, therefore it’s objectively true. That other, equally-reliable source that says it’s false? I’m not going to mention it, or I’ll slander that source.” This controls other people’s beliefs and perceptions.
- performative spirituality: putting on a show to control someone’s perception of your level of spiritual development.
- strawmanning someone’s position (publicly saying that someone else’s position is X, and it’s wrong because of Y, when their position isn’t X at all)
- or “my group is especially oppressed” if that isn’t true. It’s a fear-based attempt to control other people into treating you better, not through merit or any solid argument, but through guilt.
- “you are harming this group / this ideal, therefore you must change” if the person isn’t actually harming them, or if that person is simply speaking the unflattering truth.
- or “you’re making me feel horrible, therefore you must change.”
- or a stance of: “if something bad happens to another person, that’s soul choice / karma / a good opportunity to learn / they’re meant to experience that. But if something bad happens to me, then that’s an injustice that shouldn’t have happened.” (Trying to control other people’s perceptions in a way that’s unfairly biased towards you.)
- or “if others are struggling, they shouldn’t complain and should instead work on themselves and move forward. But if I’m struggling, I want you to listen to how tough I have it.”
- or “that person is doing really well, therefore you should get your act together (but I wouldn’t accept that argument if it was applied to me).”
- or “I have it just as tough as that other group” if that other group clearly has it tougher.
- or “look, you’re clearly biased here (and I’m not going to mention that I’m equally biased, I’m going to pretend that I’m the objective one).”
- or “you’re pushing an agenda, I’m simply interested in the truth (when really I’m pushing my agenda just as hard)”
- or “the reason for my belief is obviously that it’s the truth and that I’m well-informed / intuitive / moral. The reason that you disagree is obviously a character defect or bias or lack of knowledge / intuition / morality on your end.”
- or “if it seems logical to me or resonates with me, that’s objective proof. If it seems illogical to you or doesn’t resonate with you, that’s not objective proof, you’re probably just being biased and you need to provide actual evidence.”
- or excessively focusing on acquiring wealth, status, rational knowledge, etc, which gives an illusion of “being in control.”
Unfortunately, a whole lot of people, including “normal” people who aren’t power-hungry politicians, engage in control-seeking behaviors.
Now let’s look at some non-control seeking expressions:
- “I don’t know”
- or “I don’t know, here’s a solid argument in favor and here’s a solid argument against”
- or “I resonate with this, therefore I think it’s this”
- or “I’ve done a whole lot of research, I’m pretty sure it’s this”
- or “this resonates with me, it’s true” when that’s indeed genuine intuition, and the speaker is advanced enough to know the difference between “it resonates because I emotionally like it” vs “it resonates because my intuition genuinely confirms it.”
- or “I’m in pain”
- or “this hurts me”
- or “I’m afraid”
- or “I feel...” (without weaponizing it or turning it into an implication that others should change)
- or “I was wrong”
- or “I’m sorry”
- or empowering / supporting others
- or “others have it worse than myself”
- or “yes I am biased / privileged”
- or “you are better at this than I am”
- or speaking the truth without a control seeking agenda behind it
- or genuinely listening to someone else, without an agenda
Note that people tend to really like and become less stressed when other people make non-control seeking statements such as this. Whereas people tend to become uncomfortable when others seek control. In that way, fear propagates.
There was a time when this channeler gave connection workshops, where he had exercises that encouraged strangers to genuinely listen and be vulnerable towards each other, in a safe way, after some initial exercises. Multiple relationships came out of that. Once people met for the first time during that workshop, and very shortly after the workshop ended they started kissing each other. A genuinely non-control seeking attitude is quite rare, and other people love it.
So. Almost certainly there have been times in your life where you were scared and desired control, at least to some extent.
I’m not saying that you necessarily desired to become a dictator. However, if you shared your opinion and the other person rejected it, yet you still want them to believe or behave differently, that’s a desire for control (so long as we’re not talking about “I want that person to stop assaulting me / others.” Directly harming another is not okay.)
Some people will argue “I don’t want control, I just want that person to improve their life / act in a way that’s better for society.” If that person has already rejected your suggestion, then that is a desire for control. It’s not actually for the highest good to want to override someone else’s free will for the “greater good.”
It’s fine to undertake initiatives yourself to improve society, but if you can’t emotionally handle for example the other political side acting in a way that you think is bad, then that’s an issue for you to work through. And sure, if you wish, you can vote or become a politician yourself or have political debates.
If you think you can’t have a good life unless others change, well, to an extent that may be true, but you also may be underestimating your ability to create a good life if you consistently put in self-improvement or self-healing work. Plus you might be excessively attached to your current incarnation, which is understandable, but ultimately you’re a reincarnating soul.
Your name doesn’t refer to the real you.
Notice the sneakiness of the desire for control: it often comes in through the back door and typically pretends that you simply want to change things for the greater good, or that you just want to speak truth, or that you’re simply being rational, or that you just want to help out your group (but you’re doing so at the expense of other groups who need help just as much).
A desire for control is especially hard to resist if a significant group of other people genuinely wants you to have control, because you’re pushing something they like or agree with or think will help them.
A whole lot of people succumb to the temptation to seize control if enough people want them to.
Leaders nearly always become controlling once they’re in power, even if they started out with good intentions. It’s really hard to resist the ego logic of: “that group of people wants me to be in control to make things right, therefore I need to be in control for the greater good, and hence I need to maintain and protect and increase my control, because after all I’m one of the few good ones. If I do bad things for power, that’s a regrettable necessity to keep a good person, i.e. me, in charge.”
In turn, leaders very rarely make decisions that reduce their control, even if those decisions would be obviously good for the people. Because after all, a group of people loves them, therefore they’re a great leader, therefore they need to be in control and be powerful in order to do good things, therefore they can’t truly empower the people -- many of whom are bad, after all.
A person’s rational mind is always there to provide good-sounding rationalizations for the desire for control.
This is a trap the gray hats are in: they started out with good intentions. Then seeking control genuinely seemed like the good thing to do, to steer the world in the right direction. And now they don’t really want to liberate Earth and empower the people, because that would reduce their control. Because they’re good and the people are bad, right? So how could they, the good ones, give up control and empower the people, i.e. the bad ones?
I get that this makes the gray hats sound like black hats, but the gray hats aren’t trying to kill most of the population and enslave the rest. That is a significant difference.
Conversely, remember Cincinnatus, the Roman aristocrat who was granted absolute power in Rome to deal with an emergency? He dealt with the problem, and then sixteen days later he willingly stepped down and returned to his farm.
Similarly, Washington could have become a quasi-king, but he refused.
The reason Cincinnatus’s and Washington’s stories are so powerful, and that we’re still talking about these long-dead people, is that they’re examples of people who willingly gave up control. And that’s rare, as illustrated by how legendary and resonant these stories are.
In most other situations, people have to be pressured out of their positions of control by mechanisms such as their term coming to an end. If clinging on to control means that pretty much everyone would see them as a dictator, then keeping control is much less tempting. Control only becomes really tempting if a sizable group of people cheers you on for doing so.
The gray hats -- and bureaucrats, and black hats -- don’t have a term of office. They have no natural point in time that nudges them out of their positions of control.
Even Cincinnatus and Washingtons, paragons of giving up their control, still really like their control.
Cincinnatus was an aristocrat, living in a society where the law in practice heavily favored aristocrats. He opposed reforms that would have limited arbitrary aristocratic legal power, thus protecting his unfair privilege. So the archetypal figure of giving up control for the greater good... still protected the unfair control of his own social class.
Similarly, despite “all men are created equal”, Washington failed to do as much as he could have for women and for slaves.
People really, REALLY like their control -- especially if a sizable group of people cheers on their control.
And in a less dramatic way, this is a trap for modern spiritual people as well. If they grab control by just making a claim without sufficient research or intuition to back that up, and it’s a claim that appeals to a sizable group of people who’ll cheer them on, then that’s a very egoically tempting claim to make. Of course, the rational mind is always there to rationalize that we’re just spreading the truth.
Which is why you see a lot of people say “this is true” or “that is false” as if those are objective facts, often dressed up in spiritual language -- even though those people don’t have the knowledge or intuition to really know those things for certain.
How do we address the desire for control?
Doing your spiritual work eventually lets you stop identifying with your current incarnation, which takes the sting out of fear.
“Whatever arises, observe that.” That lets you develop genuine self-insight in the medium term.
If you find the part of you that wants control, observe it.
Offer help once and share your opinion once, and then let others make their choices. Even if people are clearly making mistakes, let them make their mistakes -- don’t try to control them.
In situations where you haven’t done research or have genuine intuition, you can have an opinion but don’t cling too tightly on to it, and don’t present it as fact.
Do internal work, heal and get your own life in order. If you feel good about yourself and you’re doing well, you might not desire control.
I hope this was helpful.
With all my love,
