Introduction:
Part 2
Section 19

2). "unfreezing, moving, refreezing," i.e., through the use of dialogue —with you sharing your desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment with others, and them doing the same with you in a "non-judgmental," non-"preachy- teachy" environment, i.e., in an anti-patriarchal or facilitated (manipulated) environment (dialogue is based upon feelings, discussion is based upon commands, rules, facts, and truth, by adding feelings (your opinion) to a discussion you turn discussion into dialogue, negating commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., negating doing right and not wrong as an outcome, resulting in the outcome being based upon feelings, i.e., your (and others) carnal desires (opinions) of the 'moment' instead—the father's authority system is found in, and thus can be supported in a discussion but is not found in, and therefore can not be supported in a dialogue, i.e., by your participation in dialogue, you abdicate the father's/Father's authority system, negating your right to hold anyone accountable for doing "wrong" in the end, just don't be the low man on the totem pole, with "rightsizing" removing you for the "good" of "the group," i.e., "the people,"

3). and "group dynamics"—created by your desire to relate with others who you like, are drawn to, or have something to gain in the relationship or because of it, engendering in you a willingness to compromise, i.e., to set aside or deny the father's/Father's standards because of your desire for their approval, i.e., "self preservation," with them "affirming" your (and their) desire for pleasure (for the things of the world) and dissatisfaction with restraint (with the father's/Father's authority system), i.e., affirming your and their "self interest" which you and they have in common,

4). engendering a "consensus"—common-ism, i.e., a "feeling" or "perception" of "oneness"—putting consensus, i.e., "the group's" common desire for pleasure and common dissatisfaction with restraint (which are "feelings"), into "group," social, or community action, with everyone working together as "a team" on a community project—praxis, in order to (as in "new" world order)

5). engendering globalism—a combination of capitalism and socialism where "self-interest" is not isolated from "the collective interests of 'the people'" or usurping it, as capitalism by itself does, but is instead united with "the collective interest of 'the people" (what is a perception), i.e., the "community of interest," i.e., that which is "of and for self and 'the people,'" called communitarianism, i.e., "public-private partnership," where private (that which is nobody's business) goes into partnership with public (that which is everybody's business), thus sacrificing private upon the alter of public interest without knowing it, doing so for the "common good" of "the people" (a perception). Are we really this stupid?—treating a facilitator of 'change' as a god and those who follow him as saints, entrusting our children, our spouse, our business, our land, and even our very own souls to them (as two "children" did in the garden in Eden). There is nothing new under the sun