Friday, January 27, 2017

Politics and UFO Research: Social and Political Forces Don’t Require Absolute Scientific Validation to Mandate UFO Research

Primacy of the Social and Political Over Academic Science

Without the need for scientific validation and for its own interests and reasons, the regular Social & Political world can mandate and legitimize scientists approving them to conduct UFO research even into those aspects suggesting the validity of the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis. Society at large transcends and benefits from the activities of the scientific world and does not need to be suppressed, limited or thwarted by that world, by a priori pseudo-scientific biases, its in-group social control processes and its general unwillingness to take a serious look at upsetting, mystifying data.  On the contrary, the scientific world requires the authority granted through social and political decision to stop treating as absurd the most anomalous UFO aspects and the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis. By “Extraterrestrial Hypothesis” (from now on “ETH”) I mean the hypothesis derived from the fact that some UFO activity indicates that we may in fact be currently visited by extraterrestrial beings displaying unconventional technologies that stupefy and stagger worldviews limited to classical perceptions.  Moreover, I find it reasonable to include as part of those alleged technologies what we might call a mastery of a hyper physics in which the mind, non-locality, consciousness and “other dimensions” may intervene. Furthermore, along with such technologies we may be experiencing unconventional motivations and behaviors that do not agree with what we may normally expect in terms of contact protocols.

In the modern world scientists may assist the wider society’s attempts to make reasonable social and political decisions and to generate socially adequate policies but society itself functions as a much vaster entity transcending (even if accepting when need be) scientific validation. An massive amount of UFO reports in some cases providing anomalous empirical evidence accumulated in more than six decades while challenging cultural norms and worldviews (either as a modern myth or as a genuine physical phenomenon) is more than enough to warrant a serious investigation and to mandate the scientific community to engage in serious UFO research.

Capitalizing UFO issues through the entertainment industry has created an aura about them as being nothing but superficial, unimportant events; the realm of fantasy, hoaxers and the deluded. However, while that (perhaps accompanied by a covert effort to influence public opinion and to dismiss any serious undertaking of the ETH) has certainly hindered a social awakening, there’s no reason for society not to experience a shift in such popular attitudes, especially now that VIP witness testimony (for instance including government officials and generals) is beginning to gain momentum and more widespread recognition.

We must remember time and again that, while society may benefit from scientific findings, society itself doesn’t need the approval of the scientific world to proceed to mandate a serious investigation. Society, through policy creation can, nonetheless, ease the stigma associated with it and which prevents scientists from engaging in these matters. The potential benefits and implications (for instance as studied within exopolitics) may be outstanding and should be pursued.

Rational or Conventional?

Quite often when people experience an unequivocal UFO event which they cannot explain they say that there’s no “rational explanation” for it and by that they often mean a “conventional” and-or scientifically-validated explanation. However that is an inexact confabulation of meanings since “conventional” and “rational” are not synonyms. A valid, rational explanation can also well be one which still has not been accepted or validated by a majority of scientists.  We must also remember that science itself is a work in progress whose explanations are constantly superseded by even better explanations, quite often after anomalies which demand a better perspective are unambiguously accepted. However, according to an ideal scientific methodology, not even a majority of scientists need to be in agreement for an explanation to be scientifically correct.

The ETH (about which I include possible interactions with other physical and non-physical realms of existence) can be a perfectly rational (albeit unconventional) hypothesis within and outside the realm of accredited scientists as – for instance – sober declarations for instance by the Air Material Command chief General Nathan Twining back in 1947 suggest. Also, more recent declarations in the 1990’s by the former British Admiral of the Fleet and NATO Head, Lord Peter Hill-Norton and quite recently by Canada’s former Minister of Defence, the Honorable Paul Hellyer) also suggest a serious engagement with the ETH. Can we dismiss them all along with former KGB and FIB Major General Vasily Yeremenko declarations about the Russian military recognizing (and increasing) the presence of extraterrestrial space craft in Russia? Besides them, former Senator Barry Goldwater, astronauts Gordon Cooper and Edgar Mitchell, former Arizona Governor Fife Symington ( ) and even John Podesta (White House Assistant and Deputy Chief of Staff during the Clinton Administration and now special advisor in the Obama Administration) spoke about evidence that we are being visited or in favor of disclosure of secret research on UFOs How many more declarations like these in addition to other forms of scientific and socially admissible evidence will we need to start really thinking more in rational rather than conventional ways? How long can some countries shun an international dialogue on UFO research and the ETH while other governments (like Brazil and Peru) are officially researching and-or releasing information?

About the Feedback of Denial

The feedback cycle of denial between scientists and political leaders can be put to an end on the side of reason. That feedback cycle of scientists only willing to treat the most anomalous aspects of the UFO subject as fantasy, hoaxing, feeble mindedness or as misidentifications because political leaders are not willing to legitimize academic engagement in serious UFO research in turn because (in a roundabout way) until now the most anomalous UFOs suggesting a controversial ET presence have not been “proven” (or, rather, approved) by a majority of scientists…that feedback cycle of silliness and fear can end. Moreover, that cycle must end. It can end because society at large operating under its own social discourse procedures doesn’t really need scientific agreement or any form of “final proof” (if such a thing ever exists) to consider some aspects of empirical reality (however unconventional or strange) of relevant interest or to mandate political action and scientific research into the matter. It must end because a society needing to know information in order to come of age by adopting expanded concepts necessary to thrive as a complex interconnected planetary civilization cannot make it by allowing covert organizations permanently to hide the truth and said information, however challenging it might seem at first to be. This is a schizoid recipe for disaster; a recipe to remain in ignorance or in a species-wide infancy while destroying ourselves, other forms of life and our “home,” the environment; a recipe perhaps promoting the gradual emergence of a world dictatorial system in order to maintain a modicum of stability since we are still operating under cultural anachronistic ways stimulating primitive in-group-out group “tribal” tendencies.

Engaged by the need to control everything, we so much fear altering the system in unconventional ways that the system forces us instill greater levels of control while we forget how creative, adaptive and resilient we can be. Our attachment to a mechanistic ways of being and thinking imprisons us into forms of instability that may lead to lower levels of order and freedom.  We forget that complex. Non-linear, open systems can also easily reorganize themselves constructively. Moreover, especially in still functioning democracies, society, or rather, organized, conscious individuals are ultimately sovereign over politicians and scientists. This means that being kept in ignorance while an ancillary group is semi-legally allowed to secretly research and regulate the most crucial socially transformative information required undermines the top-down role of the whole over its parts and promotes maladaptive dysfunctions. It provides excess power to parts over the destiny of the whole.

The Real and the Important

Not everything that is socially real or even physically real is explainable in conventional terms by contemporary science. Furthermore, it neither needs to be explained in conventional terms by contemporary science. Not everything that is important (and in that sense real) for society has been or needs to be scientifically proven. Even though nothing may be proven with a 100% certainty under a classical scientific approach, social & political events include things that are scientifically proven to various degrees and also those things that aren’t. Moreover, some things that have not yet been sufficiently scientifically proven can still be socially and politically relevant and “real” within societies including at times physically real events that have not yet been recognized under conventional science. There are empirical events that people repeatedly experience over time either individually or collectively. They are deemed to be “anomalous” partly because it’s difficult to anticipate them under a predetermined regularity and within a sufficiently short span of linear time allowing us to associate previous events with latter events under linearly related causes and effects.

However, besides some hoaxes and a besides great many conventional objects mistaken for anomalous ones, there is a great amount of serious research and reasonable evidence indicating that at least some anomalous aerial objects are best explained as advanced extraterrestrial technological devices defying gravity, inertia, momentum, Newton’s Laws of Motion and our first line of instinctual (bio psychic) predispositions best suited for such classical physics. That hypothesis is both reasonable and rational and – not surprisingly - more easily accepted by normal, thoughtful citizens reasonably considering the evidence with greater freedom and common sense. The web sites and also gather good evidential information to be considered and demonstrate that Ufology and the ETH doesn’t need to be limited to a subject matter of popular belief. Another interesting web site (from Exopolitics Institute) is

The Burden of Proof

While “proof” and-or agreement by a scientific majority is not really needed for socially concerned citizens to mandate research, it is often said that the “burden of proof” is upon the “believer” (in UFOs linked with the ETH). However, in inferential statistics there’s a type of mistake often committed which is called a “Type Two Error.” Just as (in the case of a Type I Error) erroneously hypothesizing a causal relation from a data set can be an inferential mistake that will distort statistical interpretation and analysis, not hypothesizing a possible causal relation from a data set that allows for that possibility also constitutes a (Type II) error that will distort the statistical interpretation and analysis. In other words, given the amount of data - some of which could be rationally explained with the ETH - the “burden of proof” can also be placed on the shoulders of those who are simply too irrationally dismissive and excessively skeptical or simply unwilling to admit a rational possibility in favor of the ETH.      

Once again, events leading to a reasonable support of the ETH do not need to be limited to scientific findings, especially if there has been little research and interest in the scientific arena. Above all they are a social & political issue and as such they must be treated within normal (albeit reasonable) standards of social & political discourse, not strictly limited to scientific agreement or standards of “proof” in order to be valid, vital and important. This is because in the social sciences and in political exchanges people aren’t just thought to be unreliable witnesses and so forth; they can also be completely correct and approximately correct and thus their testimonies are heard. Moreover, the social sciences are open to admit other forms of evidence even in an interdisciplinary manner.

In fact, there is enough accumulated empirical witness and experiencer evidence to reasonably warrant serious social and political concern. The 1978 United Nations Resolution of the General Assembly GA 33/426 to formally study UFOs (to which the U.S. opposed) is an indication that there are good social and political reasons to do that. If - as the 1999 French “COMETA Report” suggests - about 5% of the cases which their committee (related to France’s GEIPAN, a branch of France’s National Center for Space Studies, CNES) studied can best be rationally explained under the ETH, also is further indication that the ETH is not limited to deluded people. These position is also in general agreement with a 2010 report by France’s Astronomical and Aeronautical Association that some UFOs may well be of extraterrestrial origin and with the ETH considered (among other possibilities) in some Latin American research offices such as Uruguay’s Air Force “CRIDOVNI.”

Are all of them (and many more) deluded or are some closed-minded, “conventional truth keepers” deluding the rest of society? Only the rational possibility of an actual extraterrestrial presence (even if it doesn’t show up in ways we expect normally expect it to show up) has an enormous political and cultural importance which (once the giggle and entertainment factors are overcome) is more than enough to warrant a serious effort to take the lead on this issue and to creatively unravel the taboo unofficially established by silence in the upper echelons of government. It warrants taking a bold and historical political step by formulating a clear policy on this issue whether – at present – a sufficient number of accredited scientists and scientific institutions care about it or not. The real power is in The People who actually don’t need to wait for (normally fearful, dismissing and overly skeptical) academic research institutions to pronounce themselves notwithstanding the good examples of reasonable openness arising in France and in some other countries. Besides, as a sociologist I would say that - for the most part - traditional scientific research institutions tend to be unreliable in relation to data and evidence that challenge their fundamental assumptions. We should not expect them to know better and then to inform the rest of us.

The works of Thomas Kuhn, Paul Feyerabend and Imre Lakatos - for instance in relation to Karl Popper’s treatment of scientific “verification” and “falsifiability” - attest to the existence of some irrational aspects in an otherwise over-idealized scientific process which ought to be objective and based on empirical evidence. Moreover, research on “conformity” by social scientists like Solomon Asch and Muzafer Sheriff indicate that a group majority within a smaller collective can easily influence to various degrees independent thinking, assessments and even perceptions of most people. By educating ourselves on how we tend to “group think” we may learn to think more adequately.

As previously mentioned differently, the social & political interest about a feasible extraterrestrial presence may benefit from scientific standards of evidence but does not have to be restricted by them. Society and its functions provide a wider context within which scientific institutions are allowed to exist and, at this moment in time (February, 2014), witness testimony as well as other forms of (not only “soft” but also “hard”) valid evidence abound that would make the case for the ETH more than acceptable under a fair and reasonable court of justice.

Now, if there indeed exist non-human, technological objects that fly in our skies in modes that can be occasionally detected and in ways that sometimes interact with commercial and military airplanes, wouldn’t that in itself be reason enough to consider the matter important, especially under our modern laws pertaining to air safety and national sovereignty? I would also recommend finding more about this through the line of research adopted by experimental NASA scientist Richard Haines, PhD of NARCAP (the National Aviation Reporting Center on Anomalous Phenomena) which is also associated with the Chilean Air Force’s CEFAA (the Committee for the Study of Anomalous Aerial Phenomena). Please go to:   

Excessive scientific skepticism, avoidance, denial, bias, taboo and social control should not hinder a society’s need to know about this mystery and, on the contrary - through social policy - society should use the service of scientists and of their institutions in order to learn more about this crucial UFO phenomenon at the very least because there is a challenge to modern authority, organization, safety and, more importantly, because the ETH related to it (and if demonstrated to be true) is of paramount cultural and historical importance. We must stop being a society that allows too much power to those that subconsciously don’t want to know by (for instance, according to the detailed research of Timothy Good, Richard Dolan and Michael Salla) allowing secret subgroups to make decisions in lieu of a majority of us in order preserve our limited sense of self and reality.

A Hypothesis: In the absence of a clear national social policy due to an unconscious incapacity of government leaders (the “Sovereign” in Alexander Wendt’s terms) to acknowledge the ETH, a taboo ensues and - even if UFOs occasionally provide physical evidence that cannot be objectively ignored - they are treated as fantasy or as “non-objects.” They are treated as “TABOO” by the topmost authority or authorities and, in this situation, I hypothesize that in micro sociological events within institutions related to modern nation-states; inside institutions functioning more under (borrowing Durkheim’s term) ales formal “mechanic solidarity,” there is a response to the challenge of anomalous data by insisting on irrationally and implicitly preserving the established order, by suppressing dissenting voices and by limiting “legitimate” research to that which is already known.

When (again borrowing Durkheim’s terms) the most general rules in the “organic solidarity” of the larger society within which scientists and their institutions are embedded does not clearly specify whether some UFOs may be extraterrestrial or not (because its “sovereign” represented by a leader or leaders is unable to do so), leading individuals in institutions operating in close proximity to the undecided nation-state, institutions perhaps providing support and legitimacy for the nation-state’s epistemological foundations, may resort to cling on to what has demonstrably worked for the whole social system and culture until then. Through micro-sociological interactions they will resort to forms of social control that maintain the epistemological foundations of the nation-state.

As Alexander Wendt suggests, the inability of the “sovereign” to decide a “state of exception” (to decide whether some UFOs may be extraterrestrial or not) generates an implicit taboo which itself is required to withstand an internal contradiction between UFOs being real objects that provide sufficient empirical evidence (in line with the “objectivity” purportedly accepted by the modern state as one of its foundations) and a challenge against the modern state’s bias of anthropological preeminence (Wendt, 2008).

In my view, a stronger reason for the taboo is the bias that rational and credible individuals living in our modern world cannot be associated with things otherworldly and/or non-physical, including possible extraterrestrial “interdimensional” vehicles and a host of other phenomena.

In my view, the functionally adaptive role of making a decision on the matter is temporarily transferred to leading individuals within academic and scientific institutions providing epistemological stability to the modern nation-state. Their role now seems to be not to come up with research or evidence so that publicly forces the “sovereign” (the ruler) to make a decision on the key contradictions unconsciously challenging his rational authority. For Wendt it would instead be a challenge of the key idea that humans are the only creatures that can rule with “sovereignty.”

If the “sovereign” representing the larger society cannot make up his or her mind that some UFOs implicitly suggest the ETH, the functional need for social stability perhaps also becomes an unconscious urge within individuals in non-ruling-but-supportive academic and scientific institutions; an urge to adopt a conservative stance, insisting upon forms of conventional knowledge that has hitherto functionally served society to continue in a state of gradual development within an adaptive dynamic equilibrium.

The problem is that the uncertain, evolving and dynamic complex state of the world requires new premises and new forms of organization quite likely in accord with many of the principles of complexity science, complex thought and integral thinking. In another essay I have suggested that at a minimum extraterrestrials interacting with the Earth environment and humanity would already have incorporated some of these principles into their thinking, organization, activities and science (Piacenza, 2013). Thus, we would need to “catch up” culturally.

The Taboo is Overcome by Institutionally Unhindered Individuals

Taboos are useful to support some crucial functional adaptations even at the expense of other adaptations but taboos can also linger beyond their usefulness. Not knowing instead of knowing may end up being deleterious and maladaptive for the whole and more poignantly so in modern societies in which one of its mainstays is the rational recognition and use of empirical evidence. There is a limit to how much empirical evidence we can deny without becoming dysfunctional.

Being aware that we just don’t want to deal with a reasonable possibility for which there’s a great amount of empirical data is deleterious to our self-perception and to a nation’s character. We live in self-reflective, modern societies and must be allowed to know in order to “grow up” or evolve our perspectives or else, we’ll adapt into a continuous state of cynicism, into a continuous democratic apathy and to a surrendering of individual responsibility into the hands we allow to be “in the know,” a.k.a. “the powers that be” whether or not they are the most appropriate individuals to represent all of us or not and whether or not they have outlived their - perhaps once – partially necessary function even after being appointed outside of the republic’s spirit of checks and balances.  

Taboos that have outlived their usefulness are often sustained the most by those associated with the ruling classes and with institutions closely associated, dependent, or influenced by the ruling classes. Fear of ridicule, loss of credibility within a highly competitive, status-seeking environment and the oddity of the phenomenon itself (not coinciding with the taboo against things otherworldly and with classical mechanistic theories) limit serious research efforts within institutions so that much of the available scientific opinion on the issue comes out as flawed, unreliable, uninformed, distorted or, simply, non-existent.

No questioning of classical scientific assumptions or of procedures in order to research in a different scientific manner something that doesn’t fit the norm is allowed. And with no academic and scientific backing under a self-deceiving mindset that erroneously promotes that for “anomalous” (and even “paranormal”) socially recognized situations “science” (which in itself is a socially agreed theoretical abstraction providing methods) must first determine whether the phenomenon is real or not, few well-adapted, savvy politicians risk taking a strong stand.

However, the taboo can perhaps be ended by a statesman responding to the deepest needs of The People, a respected individual capable of speaking as the voice of an abstract father (and-or mother?) figure representing the highest political authority of the archetype of “The Sovereign.”
While good empirical evidence on genuine anomalous phenomena is - for the most part - avoided by many nation-state accredited scientists working for nation-state accredited academic institutions, or perhaps working for the government and even for large corporations oftentimes contracted by the government, much of the best evidence is more easily gathered at liberty by intelligent (and diligent) ordinary citizens and non-scientists. They are capable of being daring and of responding with reasonable openness or with a healthy agnosticism. Among them, leaders of principle can challenge the taboo and the appropriation of knowledge because their livelihood, status, accepted roles, self-images and careers do not depend on the social acceptance of institutionally bound scientific peers competing with each other for recognition and resources. Among these people, those more capable of sustaining contradictions and ambiguity, of being open to spiritual, conceptual and practical approaches with an objective and critical mind; those capable of analysis and of rationally contrasting and associating many factors without dismissing crucial aspects to enhance their preferred perspectives will (until the taboo is lifted) most likely be the ones to make progress in many more ways than constrained, organized, accredited scientists.
Adequate Evidence

For society at large, witness evidence is adequate social & political evidence. Documentary evidence (like both leaked and declassified documents that have been carefully analyzed) is adequate social and political evidence. Pilots, generals, astronauts, priests, ministers, commoners speaking about secret UFO research or unique personal encounters constitute more than adequate evidence under social and political standards and that has to be emphasized. It also has to be emphasized that those standards may be more adequate than scientists’ if the latter are cognitively and socially impaired by a restrictive culture engaged in conservatively maintaining the status quo and the taboo. 

Please study the material provided by the Disclosure Project or read books chock-full of credible testimonies about the reality and strangeness of the UFO phenomenon like Leslie Kean’s “UFO’s: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go on the Record.” The many dozen respectable individuals with respectable careers willing to testify under oath to the U.S. Congress about their involvement with UFOs or personal experience and research on this matter, even by heroically risking their reputations, perhaps their retirement and more is adequate social and political evidence! Serious, concerned citizens don’t need the consent of (biased and fearful) scientists while –in order to cease functioning as stability supporters due to a sovereign’s nation-state taboo - the opposite may be true. This means that experiencer citizens can also make a contribution through their testimonies and own research. For the former case we have thousands of testimonies accruing in a survey like that of the Edgar Mitchell Foundation for Research into Extraterrestrial Encounters (F.R.E.E.) (

Moreover, for anyone willing to take their time to look at the best evidence carefully, there also is serious physical evidence (landing traces, radar and visual detections, photographic analysis, EM effects, recovered and analyzed implants of probable abductees) and, furthermore (since society may incorporate and transcend objective and scientific evidence as well) this physical evidence can also be currently used by the citizenry and its political leaders as adequate social & political evidence.

Once again, the social & political world at large is more inclusive and legitimizing of the scientific world; not the other way around. Social and political decisions don’t require absolute evidence from the natural sciences. Social and political decisions can be made without full agreement and participation from the scientific community both by people "in government" and by regular, concerned citizens. It is the larger social and political context within which science is accredited and practiced; not the other way around. Therefore, the social and political world can and should take control of the situation instead of being disadvantaged by the lack of information stemming from avoidance, disinformation, suppression, ridicule, fear of ridicule and other forms of social control vigorous in taboo-ridden and biased, less intellectually inclusive, uninformed academic institutions.

Is it Worth It?

Is the ETH of value to warrant time, energy and effort in the midst of our daily “real world” economic, political concerns? Well yes, by all means. We just need to recognize key transformative possibilities in all of this and these possibilities – providing information to create enhanced worldviews - may be just what we need in order to survive in the complex, non-linear planetary society we are creating. We must learn to think differently. Learning what is behind the most anomalous aspects of the UFO mystery (those pointing to the ETH) may inspire us to enhance all forms of metaphysical assumptions in the grand, cohesive, integral manner we need to thrive in complexity.

Do we know who we are and do we know why we do what we do? Is there a larger reality in which we fit and which can help us explain this? Are we being used and experimented upon by a subset of beings within extraterrestrial groups? From a relative, dualist stance, do we already have friends and foes in the universe? Is there available technology that may not be weaponized by which may instead assist us in formulating non-polluting forms of production, saving lives, species, averting global warming and replacing organic fuels?

Do other beings which may have been here on Earth before us have a right to crisscross ‘our’ skies, live in underground bases within ‘our’ modern nation-state territories and interact with us as they see fit? Are some of them more in favor of allowing us to achieve our own social-planetary maturity as a species while others may not trust or like what we may become and prefer to use us as resources? Do we still need to grow up in wisdom in order to achieve “sovereignty” in terms of a complex, space-faring, cosmic society?

Denial or rejection of the otherworldly seems to be alive and well in modern conservative and progressive leaders alike. Neither wants to be accused of being “irrational” but perhaps the undercurrent of denial about the dangers of human-induced climate change shows that many extreme conservatives may have in fact fallen into a pseudo conservative attitude inimical with preserving life on the planet. Would they also reject the possibility of an intelligent extraterrestrial presence more than progressive democrats?   

Are we prepared if some of these likely inter-reality and/or trans-reality extraterrestrial decide to show up in unambiguous ways? What do we need to know about ourselves as a species and about a possible complex cosmic history in order to develop into a more unified planet-wide species? Are some citizens being individually abducted by varieties of less amicable beings while others are being peacefully contacted by more amicable ones in a sort of “Galactic Diplomacy?” Are at least some of us capable of parsing these categories more carefully?

And who represents the interests of the Earth and humanity at large? From the perspective of a complex cosmic society with a variety of members probably sharing some common interests on us and probably operating under more philosophically advanced rules of engagement, is diplomatic contact with individuals already partly expressing a more ‘planetary’ wide or ‘universal’ mindset as valid as contacting elected officials with limited, local interests?

How can our metaphysical, epistemological, scientific, religious and spiritual assumptions expand to accommodate a probable science that overcomes classical material limits, apparently making use of what today we call “paranormal” effects, perhaps interacting with consciousness, non-locality and the mind? Is our human capacity to access actualizing potentials of consciousness what really matters in one way or another to many varieties of our alleged “visitors?”
Those ‘In The Know’

Even if there was an understandable need to suppress and to discredit the ETH (which in the 1940’s was usually referred to as the “interplanetary hypothesis”) for a combination of reasons: to avoid panic, to gain some time to find out who “they” and their intentions were (especially in the beginning of a polarized Cold War with the Soviet bloc), to learn about their technology in order to defend ourselves in case of them being hostile, to keep that technology out of the hands of real and potential human enemies and so on, there’s no need to continue suppressing the basics of what has been found.
There’s a limit to what can a secret council or committee (like what could have been and might still be what was called “MJ-12”) apparently coordinating different areas of secret research do to adequately represent the good of society as a whole. Most likely an open acknowledgement of the extraterrestrial presence would have been necessary at some earlier point for the next stage of human social development to naturally ensue. Even more so, instead of mainly becoming a destabilizing force leading to chaos after WWII it might have gradually become a unifying force in the long run if disclosure had taken place in a well-managed, constructive manner from the very beginning; providing a reference point external to all human societies at large, a reference point towards which we would have grown into and integrated with as unique, co-equal, respected participants.

While I think it would be extremely foolish to share with the world at large technology that can be weaponized, I also think that society needs to be informed of everything else that has been found. The whole of society needs to know more in order to culturally adapt and evolve to new circumstances rather than being denied, suppressed and distorted by smaller institutional elements acting as “ignorance guardians” and as defenders of ideals which can only last in a less evolved expression if unrelated to the truth. But (if the ETH is not only valid but also a necessary step needed to recognize an actual reality) the larger extraterrestrial context that summons us to grow up needs to be recognized for nation-state societies to adapt to a high degree of interrelatedness demanding the more advanced integral creation of a mindset of unity in diversity. We would need that knowledge of being embedded within a vaster extraterrestrials context in order to maintain a meaningful coherence as a planetary society. 

Extrapolating from Gödel’s theorems we would need to know ourselves as parts within a larger context to either maintain a sense of consistency or completion. We would need to know the reality of the extraterrestrial presence in order to survive as a civilization by maintaining an internal state of meaningful coherence.

How long can elements of the whole control the whole for the good of the whole without that whole becoming dysfunctional? Assigning by presidential order a temporary unacknowledged committee like MJ-12 supervising and coordinating unacknowledged research on the subject even if legally allowed and useful under some unique circumstances would cease to be functional in time if it thwarts what society needs to know in order to adapt and evolve.

After a possible threat and meaning of an extraterrestrial presence has been assessed and knowledge continues to be indefinitely diverted from the larger society who is to tell that secret research teams with little communication with one another even if coordinated by an overseeing committee will perpetually be what society at large needs to handle the extraterrestrial presence? Basically (delving into historian Richard Dolan’s concept of a “run-away society”) I concur that a danger exists that a secondary, unsupervised, unacknowledged/unofficial society entrenched in its unwillingness to ever inform of its findings to the larger society that engendered it may perhaps split of while still using the parent society as its “supply store.” If more advanced technology and knowledge is involved (potentially providing independence and the power to pursue a different path), how long can such a subset society remain faithfully in service of the main society that originated it? Was this also being warned about by President Eisenhower in his farewell speech?

What Can We Do?

What can we do? We can change the situation. At least as individual participants in the more encompassing “formal” or “official” society we can start by recognizing that, within our social and political democratic processes, we don’t need to wait for scientists validate what we think is important. We don’t need to wait for them to come to a final determination in order to legitimize our interest in the ETH. We can indeed proceed under the assumption of reasonable possibilities whose implications can be important for us whether most scientists approve of these possibilities or not. Under the standards of social and political discourse there already are more than enough reasons to treat the ETH issue as legitimate and socially relevant issue.

Moreover, if we consider that, in spite of scientific blindfolds, fears and reluctance, there is sufficient evidence to accept the ETH we can also try to verify it by attempting to make contact with those alleged extraterrestrials beings who (from a reasonable and common sense human perspective) seem to respect our conscious will. According to many abduction experiencer & voluntary contactee accounts many of these alleged beings (whether abducting or preparing and inviting individuals to a friendlier contact) seem to have no qualms surpassing conventional diplomatic channels as they may already be interacting in different degrees and ways with many human individuals around the world. We would need to grow up and to learn to think less dichotomously in order to interact with them under conditions of dialogue and mutual respect.

One important line of evidence for this has been Dr. Roger Leir’s work extracting and having reputable scientists and laboratories analyze genuinely anomalous physical objects from people that claim to have been abducted by aliens (Colbern, 2008). Another important line of evidence has been collectively given in a peaceful manner by non-abducting, human-looking, alleged extraterrestrials within contactee groups in Latin America and in different countries with Spanish-speaking groups (Salla, 2013). Thus, in terms of social and political concerns, besides attempting to verify a unique presence through “nuts & bolts” Ufology we shouldn’t underestimate experiencers and-or contactees that seem to be rational and coherent and that may provide forms of evidence and prima facie experiential insights unto the nature of our alleged “visitors.”

I think that –if there indeed are extraterrestrial visitors as the ETH and a range of evidence suggests - wanting to know about this, caring about this subject, treating it with respect, respecting researchers, abduction experiencers, contactees, former cover-up participants wanting to come out clean, and also adequately seeking a possible contact on a voluntary, mutually-respectful basis, would speed up the “visitors” decision to finally show up in an unequivocal way for most humans to come to terms with what they may have unnecessarily denied for decades.

Colbern, Steven (2009). “Analysis of Object taken From Patient John Smith.”

Dolan, Richard (2000-2013). “Writings & Articles Index”

Good, Timothy (1996). “Beyond Top Secret.” London: Pan Books.

Greer, Steven M. (2001). “Disclosure: Military and Government Witnesses Reveal the Greatest Secrets in Modern History” Crozet: Crossing Point, Inc.

Kean, Leslie (2001). “UFOs: Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go On the Record.” New York: Harmony Books.

Piacenza, Giorgio (2013). “Integral Exopolitics.” Exopolitics Journal.

Salla, Michael (2013). “Extraterrestrial message for Humanity: Report on Ricardo Gonzalez’s Workshop at Mt. Shasta”

Salla, Michael E. (2013). “Galactic Diplomacy: Getting to Yes with ET.” Kealakekua: Exopolitics Institute.

Wendt, Alexander (2008). “Sovereignty and the UFO,” Political Theory. Retrieved from

Hatzopoulos, Dimitris “Best UFO Resources: Executive Summary and Essential Readings on UFOs.” Retrieved from

UFO Evidence: Scientific Study of the UFO Phenomenon and the Search for Extraterrestrial Life

Monday, January 23, 2017

Trumping the Truth and Exopolitics Amidst Illiberal Democracies

Trumping the Truth and Exopolitics Amidst Illiberal Democracies
by Giorgio Piacenza

“To Trump” used to mean “to blow a trumpet” and then referred to an "overriding factor" (like a “trump card” in a game of cards). However, it could now mean to topple, to upset, to overthrow using false or distorted information presented in an enticing manner. But what would it topple, upset, overthrow? The social order. The rules of engagement, implicit social agreements, especially the modern reliance on facts and objective truth upon which modern liberal democracies, along with modern science, blossom.  And it is for the most part withing these liberal democracies that exopoliticians hope to elicit recognition of an extraterrestrial presence or promote an intelligent response when that extraterrestrial presence is publicly recognized and/or disclose.
While it’s true that the irrational and emotions are part of our voting patterns and political affiliations and behavior, the modern political system itself requires (for its structuring and continuity) sufficient respect for a rational system. Otherwise, a pre-modern, essentially pre-democratic mentality will make use of the modern, liberal, democratic system…"trumping” it.

The truth and a hallowed respect for it is crucial for the existence of America as a Republic and a healthy democracy but – as many intellectuals and media analysts are observing - Trump trumps the truth! He is making it not only RELATIVE as post moderns but even more subservient to POWER. It’s as if when you are against something Trump states or stands for you are against truth itself!  Now facts serve the CAUDILLO/CHIEFTAIN personality that twists the truth backed by many truth-seekers aligned with  mythic, religion-like beliefs! And he can con and intimidate and motivate enough individuals apparently seeking to increase his personal POWER “to make things right” only as he sees it. It’s as though he had the magical authority to turn lies into truth.

In an illiberal world in which distinguishing truths and objective facts from lies and "alternative facts" doesn't matter as it did before, as politically-informed citizens and as exopoliticians we must remain as precise, objective and factual as possible. This is because we are still trying to establish mainstream credibility and because we are trying to figure out what kind of human policies in relation to plausible or actual non-human intelligences would be the most constructive and convenient for humanity, for lifeforms on the planet and for all stakeholders. 

Imposing a belief system not based on the best possible assessment, experience and analysis could be as disastrous (or more) as dismantling all civility within the international order so as to unilaterally impose an aggressive regime's doctrine. Exopoliticians should remain - to the best of their knowledge - highly respectful of facts so as to orient exopolitical policies under careful assessments that critically and integratively consider all possibilities under many sources of data and information with a careful search for objectivity.  From an Integral Theory perspective, we need to preserve classical reason in order to evolve to a higher stage of reason inclusive of the previous stage. And we will likely need that higher stage of reason in order to deal with the connectivity and complexity of extraterrestrial matters.

But what can we expect when politically actionable narratives based on beliefs and desires are imposed over facts? During the 2016 U.S. election many frustrated people wanted an anti-Establishment change and that feeling was taken advantage of. But, so far, we have been retracting into totalitarianism as a narrow recognized option to regain security and order. And, what if an elected President were not just narcissistic and cunning and, nonetheless, motivating but also delusional enough as to pose a serious national security threat? And what if those civil servants (like the Vice-President) who can (according to the Constitution and Amendments) initiate the Presidential impeachment process were deluded enough not to notice what is going on (or not to want to notice it) thus continuing in a state of denial and/or irresponsibility blindly supporting this President? Is there anything LEGAL anyone can do?

Mind and consciousness expansion are not recognized, wanted or accepted in this conventional environment. But new options must be found to educate and prepare the American electorate for today's highly interconnected world. We need to enhance and expand our cultural foundations for the vision of Democracy to live on in a perfected way. We also need to submit future candidates to non-partisan psychological tests.

While America should be put first in an American President’s mind, the phrase “America ONLY” is pre-fascistic, perhaps even pre-imperialistic amidst what is perceived predominantly as an international competition and perhaps some international alliances among similar thinking regimes around the world. As more well-established liberal democracies fall into a pre-fascistic, nativist, illiberal mindset, the tendency to exist as though each were a planet unto itself and to take unilateral actions against other states multiplies. This speaks against a unified intelligent response toward intelligent extraterrestrial entities if their existence is officially disclosed. We need to think what may the role of Exopolitics be in an international order turned more illiberal. Can exopolitics provide a practical new direction for the future, for preserving the best of the past while structuring the possibility of an open future under more inclusive premises and paradigms?

Greater levels of connectivity for instance understood under quantum holographic and other theoretical frameworks inclusive of consciousness, psychic and non-physical interactive realities and unity consciousness are simply labelled “weird” and left out of any ‘mainstream’ options. This emerging understanding of a practical, connective spirituality is left out under traditional politics and culture. Can exopoliticians and experiencers become a sizable influence to revert this now that humanity on earth needs more unity and solidarity than ever? As Suzanne Hansen mentions in her 2015 lecture at the Exopolitics Conference in Denmark, the main body of the river (to me an allegory of the mainstream) is dirty because we have soiled it. But inasmuch as mainstream perpetuates problems supplying few if any solutions to our current state of affairs, then mainstream is lunacy unless we save the original intentions of modern liberal democracy (the liberation and advancement of Man through self-organization in civil society) and move on with it into a more adaptive stage. But power politics, capitalism running mostly wild of the leash has distorted the meaning of individual liberty and is destroying our beloved collective home, a living, conscious planet Earth…where America exists.

Outrageous statements by Trump distract and become habitual until people don’t care for facts and objective truths anymore. Critics may tire of tactics by which rational criticism is differed, reversed, squashed and nullified. Like Putin manipulating the media with distraction techniques. Like under previous right and left wing populists and authoritarians with loudspeakers (trumpets if you will), half-truths and non-truths when emphatically asserted and defended are taken seriously and seriously engaged by modern mentalities, academicians, thinking persons, critics until they become worn-out because the non-rational “trumps” the rational as per public opinion. In fact we are talking about a battle to influence public opinion at all costs. At root it is the pre-modern against the modern and - in the long run - both and/or the continuity and future of humanity as a cosmic sovereign species can lose. 

And Trump is an expert in re-framing the narrative. His assertions quite simply still convince too many (true believers and those that want to believe) even if inaccurate or – quite simply - false. Untruths said with a straight face works! Many want to jump into the leader’s bandwagon now to see what they can get from it. Partisan, dogmatic voting there is but no independent thinking. A global, self-serving mafia-like behavior among individuals forming all kinds of organizations trying to breach the system of law and order is implicitly telling us “align with us or lose.”

Republican politics is – for the most part – “mythic” and mythic level politics doesn’t care too much for objective truth (OT). Objective truth is part of the modern mindset and values as much as Democracy itself is part of the modern mindset and values. Balance of power and moderation among republican ranks has eroded due to many factors beginning with a missionary ZEAL to recompose a traditional vision, returning to a conservative greatness situated in an imagined past. Local legislatures political districts have been re-drawn,  job losses (mostly due to automatization but also linked to neoliberal globalization) have been blamed to democrat policies although both parties aligned with corporate priorities. While speaking to frustrated mythic consciousnesses it’s easy to blame and demonize against “others” (the Democrats, Mexicans, the Chinese, some non-Christians).On the other hand, perhaps most Democrats have been for too long out of touch with the poor, working class and Middle class. 

Quite likely, since institutions are reflecting a decay both in traditional and in modern-rational values they need fresh new integrative principles that can reinforce the best of the past but assist in the shift toward clear understanding about a deeply interconnected reality. We need to understand life and consciousness and spirit and levels of existence more clearly and how they interconnect. We need to grow up intellectually, ethically and as a species gaining greater degree of understanding about who we are and exopolitics should have a role in this (inasmuch as it may promote disclosure and work along with emerging new paradigms). 

As Ezra Klein, author of "How Politics Make Us Stupid" shows, quite often facts do not win arguments because many individuals reason in order to get the answers they want to be right.  I think that when this tendency dominates politics in our world today the evolution of modernity into processes suitable for a unified world based on connectivity and of the role of consciousness is endangered. When mythic consciousness-based constituents are politically "motivated" by a charismatic leader with an essential pre-modern, authoritarian identity their votes can support an illiberal, pre-modern government functioning within democracy but inimical with it.  Under charismatic leaders, their more rigid or focused "Identity Protection Cognition" (a term by Yale University researcher Dan Kahan) for which facts are made to fit group and identity beliefs in order to avoid dissonance is even more activated. 

Is Protectionist Nationalist Capitalism a Solution over Neo Capitalist Globalism?

While a return to protectionism is a challenge to the Establishment corporations influencing policies generating a form of globalized neo-capitalism with positive and negative consequences (the latter criticized by left-wing academics and politicians), that same protectionism is a challenge to international cooperation during a time in which for the most part we truly need to learn to connect and to collaborate, rather than to impose. It can signal a similar path to follow across the world atomizing international cooperation.

As the U.S. seeks to DOMINATE the world due to its sheer economic and military power, other countries will quite likely try to emulate this inasmuch as this is possible to them. It is a recoil or a regression to a previous, more local, mythic, pre-modern, tribal, ethnic, mentality, not friendly with environmental concerns and other concerns that require GLOBAL UNITY and COORDINATION.

Will neo-liberalism/neo-capitalism suffer or simply adapt to a more isolationist and aggressive phase? Will the largest transnational corporations lose sway by having bilateral agreements instead of multi-lateral agreements? In both cases transnational corporations can benefit and exert influence. For the Trump government to make agreements more favorable to the U.S. these agreements could be imposed to less powerful countries like Brazil, Peru or Mexico. Will this benefit or harm the U.S. and the rest of the world economically?

Perhaps the sentence best describing the current administration's mindset would be “You either do it as per our terms or be left out.” It’s a dichotomous, win-lose mindset more proper to a dogmatic, religionist, pre-modern mindset than with the more modern (but also lobbies and corporations-influenced) Democratic Party politics. The latter should have led American society truer to their basic principles to preserve the continuity of social and cultural evolution from modern to postmodern and to integrative. Now we may well be in for a cultural setback and for a resurgence of intolerance from which I hope we’ll recuperate and retake the evolutionary path enriched by more experience.

The path towards a more unified humanity participating in the “global commons” is crucial not only for preserving life on Earth but also for constructively adapting (as a more conscious, free and coordinated species) to an intelligent extraterrestrial presence currently evidenced mostly beyond any reasonable doubt among ideally neutral and rational individuals.

How will EXOPOLITICS respond amidst illiberal democracies (democracies that no longer guarantee civil rights)?

For the most factual and exopolitically useful information from whistleblowers, experiencers and high-quality Ufology to be rationally processed in a socially useful way we at the very least need modern, rational, people in governments run by modern, rational thinkers. Pre-modern truths ought to be preserved but understood in modern and postmodern stages of development.

I hope that that progress towards the greater universal tolerance required for a harmonious, intelligent exopolitical response to the discovery and/or disclosure of an extraterrestrial presence is also not seriously "trumped." 

Perhaps individuals aware of an important, culture-shifting reality that is still officially rejected or denigrated in formal institutions  must simply hold on to their awareness and the clearest information they might have for it may serve first to preserve the ideals of modern liberal democracy and also to develop a platform for commencing an updated cultural understanding about the reality and our place in the universe, especially if modern and pre-modern and modern institutions, premises and values also denigrate each other proving themselves perhaps partially correct but sorely insufficient for the highly connective mindset humanity needs to grow into.

An informative article by Jeff Salzman on how worldviews and degree of aperture in consciousness is related to how much we tend to trump facts:

Sunday, January 8, 2017



By Giorgio Piacenza

The creator of the term “exopolitics” (Alfred Webre) defined it as “”the study of political process and governance in interstellar society.”” In 2004 Dr. Michael Salla, promoting an academic exopolitics defined it as: “The study of the key individuals, institutions and political processes associated with extraterrestrial life.”

In 2009, the Strategy Committee of the Exopolitics Institute defined “exopolitics” as “an interdisciplinary scientific field, with its roots in the political sciences, that focuses on research, education and public policy with regard to the actors, institutions and processes, associated with extraterrestrial life, as well as the wide range of implications this entails through public advocacy and newly emerging paradigms.”

In order to practice exopolitics is it not absolutely necessary to believe that extraterrestrials are currently interacting with planet Earth and/or humanity but (in contrast to exobiology) it is necessary to at least seriously consider the legal, political, scientific, religious and cultural implications of what this presence could mean.
If diplomatic contact were established with other civilizations, who would represent the interests of common people, nations, the Earth and nature as a whole? Would it be the United Nations that until now is formed by nations that represent themselves in a forum to solve their differences in a peaceful way and to promote agreements? Would it be any of the more powerful nations like the U.S., Russia, China, India, Canada, Brazil? The European Union? How would religions be represented? And what about intellectuals, humanitarians, universities, scientific academies?

Most exopoliticians today consider that the accumulated evidence provided by a Ufology of a scientific character in the last six and a half decades has sufficiently demonstrated that we are being visited by a variety of intelligent beings from the Cosmos. That “ufology” would include not only physical evidence but contacteeism and abduction research, both of them now also called “experiencer research.”  The exopoliticians would also consider that specific secret groups from some of the more powerful of the world’s nations have covered-up this fact, perhaps – among other reasons – to study the technology behind the mystery. They also basically agree that, by conducting these investigations without any checks and balances from civil society, the rights of citizens have been in some ways violated. Moreover, they would say that research has been conducted using public funds without submitting to democratic supervision or accountancy.
Is all of this warranted? Has it all been done only having national security inmind or have there been abuses of civil rights, even perhaps unwarranted enrichment? As a species, we need to heal all this. We need to know who we are. Why would ET’s be here? Can we or can’t we handle the truth? While there’s evidence that a fraction of humanity is experiencing genuine contact events with a variety of beings, there is still too much denial, fear and old-style covert militarism handling aspects of this situation, some of it perhaps managed for the sake of power, under a paradigm of disconnection, under a secret association of top aerospace corporations, elites, unacknowledged covert military projects and intelligence teams “in the know.”
Not only our leaders, but the mass of humanity needs to grow up beyond such an unending projection of conflict that also projects a continuity of our Earthly fears, hateful subdivisions,selfishness and conflicts into the Cosmos.

The growing emergence of credible whistleblowers who (in order to defend democratic ideals) reveal that they worked in secret government projects investigating UFOs and different kinds of extraterrestrial information is quite extensive.  It is sufficient to carefully read the declarations recorded by the “Disclosure Project.” However, these and other informants and/or “whistleblowers”/credible concerned citizens have openly decared in venues such as “Project Camelot,” and “The Citizen’s Hearing for Disclosure.” In fact, Exopolitics Institute founder Dr. Michael Salla has also conducted interviews with individuals like William Mills Tompkins (with documents accrediting he worked for aerospace firms and for the U.S. Navy) regarding the existence of a secret space program dating back to the 1940’s.

Important cases indicative of the reasonable possibility that some of the effects were best explained by considereing the activities of technologically-advanced, non-human intelligences were researched and/or assessed by a high-ranking French team of security experts and scientists who produced the so-called “COMETA Report.” Furthermore, testimonies from military and government officials attesting about important (and even nationally recognized) unique UFO cases have been gathered by reporters like Leslie Kean. Also, the number of declassified UFO documents from countries like England and Brazil is significant. All of this and much more points to a physically real phenomenon, sometimes interactive, sometimes exhibiting intelligent behavior; a phenomenon that is already being officially investigated in several countries. Therefore, in a way, the U.S. is becoming an “odd” super power by not unequivocally publicly recognizing an interest in UFO research. Moreover, leaked classified documents (which in some cases have been carefully analyzed verifying their autheticity) exist. For example, see the work of Dr. Robert Wood (former Mc Donald Douglas scientist) on the SOM-1 101 documents for this.

There have also been physical analysis of implants found in persons who claim to have been abducted; implants possessing truly anomalous characteristics (like isotopes not naturally occurring on Earth, a nano technology apparently connected to the nervous system, the lack of an inflammation response, the emission of electromagnetic signals and no sign of entry) all indicates that (unless all can be explained by secret military operations) we are really facing a complex, intelligent presence that can only be irrationally ignored by preserving our own ignorance while other countries with a more open-minded attitude move forward in understanding.

As per further evidence of direct contact, “experiencer” testimony, the Edgar Mitchell Foundation for Research on Extraterrestrial Encounters (F.R.E.E.) has conducted a major international survey for persons that claim conscious memory recall of having experienced contact(s) with non-human intelligent beings inconnection to UFO sightings. Thousands of individuals have already responded in various languages and some unique patterns have arised (often challenging some widely held assumptions about the contact experience and abductions). Whether we consider these reports as sufficient proof that objectively real extraterrestrial contacts are happening or not, it would be ludicrous – from a scientific point of view – to simply dismiss these reports. This is an important type of research that adds more credibility regarding the extent and plausible objective reality of the contact phenomenon and sheds new and/or more precise information about it. A link to F.R.E.E. is 

In addition to ancestral myths, stories and knowledge about “star visitors” there is well-researched, modern and old UFO photographs, some taken before the advent of the computer age. All of this points toward the realization that we are infact being “visited” in a semi-covert way.  “They” normally seem to show up briefly and on a limited manner and leave all too soon. There are lies and misperceptions or mistaken identities, but it would be unreasonable to dismiss all of it as such.
Above, first a 1943 photo from Huánuco, Peru researched by Mr. Juan Manuel Llanos (from the Asociación Peruana de Ufología) and then a 1938 photo from Poland researched by Mr. Robert Bernatowicz from the Nautilus Foundation.

Outright dismissal and apathy toward what could be a most significant, worldview-changing situation can be explained by a deep-seated “not wanting to know” expressing itself in multiple ways. However, perhaps under a different exopolitical approach, this can gradually (if not speedily) be reverted. Is it unreasonable to think that the attitudes of ridicule, ultra secrecy, fear, power-seeking, religious condemnation and denial could play a role in extraterrestrials generally not being more open about their presence? 

Since the Exopolitics Institute was created in the U.S., similar institutes and organizations have emerged in Germany, England, Spain, South Africa, Hong Kong and several high quality international conferences have been organized. The movement exists but has not reached a wider audience. One of themes more referred to in some conferences has been that of government secrecy. Another has been that of “Galactic Diplomacy.” Then again, friendly interactions besides forced interventions (abductions) conducted by some varieties of extraterrestrial entities have been mentioned. Also, some of the information brought by some contactees (showing some degree of evidence like photographs, other witnesses and videos) has been analyzed. Moreover, information from different parts of the world has been incipiently cross-referenced. 

To simply say that the ET presence is “impossible” according to the laws of physics (such as those we havefound as per classical physics and General Relativity) would be to affirm that we know is where the limits of older civilizations stand. It would be equivalent to ignoring the fact that science often advances with amazing strides and that it continuously overcomes its own limits, finding unexpected ways to build on past successes. It would be equivalent to categorically stating that the non-local findings of quantum mechanics will never be applicable to large, everyday objects.  Perhaps by learning to distort the spatial energy density at the zero-point “quantum vacuum” and by understanding the non-local way inertia operates we would come to understand that the normal physical limits are a valid but also restricted to a local situation and within a range that can be overcome.

Engineers Tom Valone, Eugene Mallove and Thomas Bearden performed very interesting studies about how some of the elements of extraterrestrial technologies might operate. The“emDrive” devised by Roger Shawyer is also quite promising and only seems to violate Newton’s second law. These possiblities have to do with an interactive quantum vacuum. Parts of this technology might serve to generate forms of clean energy and may be released to the public if it is found that they cannot be weaponized.

In April 2013 at the National Press Club in Washington, DC 40 witnesses declared before 6 former U.S. congressmen (and citizens from the U.S. and around the world) in a mock (yet damn serious) public hearing under oath. Peru was well represented by retired Coronel Oscar Santa María Huertas (who intercepted with his jet fighter and shot at an alien space craft during a massive daytime sighting above La Jolla Airforce Base in 1980, Peru) and by the attorney Anthony Choy (researcher of the “Chulucanas Incident” in northern Peru and one of the civilian founding members of OIFAA, the Peruvian Airforce’s Research Office of Anomalous Aerial Phenomena). Their declarations contributed to the “eye-opening” or “discovery environment” co-generated with the shocking declarations of the other witnesses. Former U.S. intelligence officers, veteran researchers with serious degrees of evidence about a cover-up, plus captains, sergeants, majors and coronels (like Richard French) from the U.S. and other countries, also contributed with their very clear and objective declarations that point toward extraterrestrial “visitation.” Retired Coronel Ariel Sánchez from the Republic of Uruguay narrated how in his country “anomalous aerial objects” are studied with greater openness, educating the civilian population without conclusive saying that extraterrestrials are here but (like other official research organizations in LatinAmerica) without discarding the extraterrestrial presence as a reasonablePOSSIBILITY.

The former U.S. congress persons (Merrill Cook, Darlene Hooley, Carolyn Kilpatrick, Mike, Gravel, Roscoe Bartlett, Lynn Woolsey) had arrived to the hearing with some skepticism knowing little about the wide-ranging UFO subject matter but were quite impressed by the quality of the witnesses assembled. In the end they suggested that some other country or group of countries (perhaps Latin American countries) formally ask the United Nations to produce an international conference on the theme of UFOs/the ET presence. They did recognized that it was an important issue of global scope that concerns everyone.  A former Brazilian senator was present and promised that, upon returning to his country, he would promote this idea. Also UFO researcher Ademar J. Gevaerd announced that the Brazilian Air Force had declared that it would not only declassify thousands of UFO files (besides what they had already declassified) but that it would collaborate more closely with civilian researchers.

The in-depth studies of historian Richard Dolan and of other notable concerned citizens, exopoliticians, academicians and activists like Michael Salla, Stephen Bassett, Daniel Sheehan and Steven Greer seemed to show that the cover-up of the extraterrestrial presence will not be sustained for much too long. Hundreds of DVD’s containing the all the hearing’s declarations and inquiries from the former congressmen were sent to current congressional leaders but years have gone by and little or no interest has been shown. 

However, in society in general,the taboo that implies simply speaking about this likely presence is winding down. The same goes for events deemed “paranormal” which also seem to be “impossible” but which innumerable studies (including meta statistical studies such as those conducted by Dr. Dean Radin) show that they are not.
But what we need a more flexible mindset to create a more inclusive worldview in which science and these events related with subjectivity are compatible. We need to update the mental narratives that define or color our self-identities, doing it with empirically and scientifically proven awareness that we indeed participate in a vaster, psychical, conscious, multi-layered, coherent, non-local, feedback and feed forward, intelligent information matrix dependent of a more essential spiritual reality.

But what role will Peru and Peruvian thinkers play when the reality of this presence is (even if gradually or partially) finally revealed and/or vastly acknowledged? How will a Peruvian (or similar developing country) Government react when information about possible semi-legal agreements with some ultra covert military forces have been discretely made (without democratic supervision) with specific extraterrestrial groups, some of which may not have our best interests at heart? Will an international leadership form to establish contact with other, more pro-human extraterrestrial civilizations?

I surmise that Andean countries like Peru generally possess cultural traditions which are more flexible and adaptive, even to events that escape prosaic physical explanations. Populations have been culturally suppressed but have sincretically adapted. They found attractive commonalities between what they knew and some Western Christian beliefs and practices. While the acceptance of all forms of life is more natural in the original Native American traditions in which connectivity with subtle energies is also easier, the sense of the Sacred as felt and colored in relation to Christian Catholic concepts like the supreme Love, Understanding and Power of Jesus also connect some contactees (and potentially other members of society) with the possibility of interacting with very highly evolved, benevolent extraterrestrial and intra terrestrial beings.    

We strive in the modern, religious and traditional worlds without being excessively defined by any of these.  Its upside is adaptability. Its downside is not having well-defined values. However, unless modernity, decadent institutions, corruption, materialist and consumer values overtake us completely, we may have more possibilities for culturally adapting to new exopolitical realities and even of contributing some original perspectives to the emerging exopolitical movement.

I intuit that some of the ancestral Andean Traditions (in union with current/modern knowledge) can help us to produce our own theoretical models in relation to Exopolitics and in relation to the cultural transformations implied. After extensive reading and participating in a few traditinal ceremonies, I will use my own interpretations of what sone of the Andean concepts might refer to. A particular tradition called “Tinkuy” or “unforced encounter” may be intellectually (and feeling-wise) quite useful to connect with other worlds.

By means of contact “experiencers” in general and researchers like psychiatrist Dr. John Mack from Harvard; by means of information from whistleblowers and a long-standing research (at least since the beginning of the “Modern UFO Era” in the 1940s) which includes the physical and psychical aspects of UFO encounters, we can safely say that we know that contact events with extraterrestrials tend to produce physical space-time anomalies together with pronounced interactions between the minds and consciousnesses involved. As in Native American natural medicine (often erronesously called “shamanism”), what in modern times is  called “subjective” blends in with what is called “objective,” showing that these events correspond to other kinds of more inclusive, reconciling, interactive laws. This calls for a new kind of science integrating physics with classical and “paranormal” experience, consciousness, meaningfulness, rational metaphysics much more.

Perhaps the Andean concept of RECIPROCITY (Ayni) (part of a much more complex wisdom) can guide us. Maybe we can also demonstrate that, just as we have adapted in a syncretic but creative way (at least until postmodernism and excessive commercialism without losing our original identity) to European ideas and mores, to Christianity and Modernity during the processes of cultural crossbreeding and the assimilation of foreign cultural patterns, we could also adapt to the new world which would form under the open recognition of the extraterrestrial presence without undergoing an excessively intense cultural shock. Perhaps we (and humanity everywhere) will demonstrate that the essential esoteric teachings of our religions rather than disappearing would interconnect and broaden, get richer and deepen.

What if besides God’s universal laws and patterns defining what an ideal human being is, varieties of ETs (likewise ultimately dependent upon those and/or other patterns) also contributed to our gene pool? Should we be protected from that knowledge like everalsting children? No, because I think that we can grow up and adapt. But we need to know and not just that ETs are here, that there are kind and unkind ones, that some elements still called “the government” have lied to us or that there is advanced multiple reality shifting technology. I think that we need to know about our origins and who we are or were supposed to be in relation to beings that may have been active on Earth far longer than a few decades.

I think we are much more resilient and that the “Durant Report” conclusion for the “Robertson Panel”about the dangers of contacting a more advanced civilization was not too valid. The possibility of syncretism enriching rather than diminishing human civilization is real as long as the cultural leaders representing the highest wisdom of a civilization are not eliminated or suppressed. The danger would be when a civilization forgets the highest principles that guide it as can happen not only in Perú but also in the U.S. and the Western world which brought liberal democracy and with it, some univeral human rights principles that should extend worldwide but which may be hundered if we continue on a stubborn path of prompting elites, discordant ideologies, abusive exploitationof nature, commoditizing and objectifying people, continuous superficial entertainment and exalting winners over losers and violence.

What if the Ideal Man (the Adam Kadmon) was indeed a Divine creation in a higher (now mythicized) plane of existence and what ETs might have done as per pur physical vehicles is but a small part of it all? What if ‘they’ need us to grow up and -due to our ignorance about who we are and lack of political unity – some go about it more aggressively while others more spiritually and respectfully? And among them, who would be more politically convenient to openly establish closer bonds with? Should we prioritize contacts with beings first willing to share metaphysical knowledge rather than contacts with beings willing to share a technology with the potential to mire us into firther cycles of conflict? Should we let any secret government appointees represent humanity and handle the exopolitics?

What we need is to become seriously interested in these issues and to participate by educating ourselves with a breath of vision, information from all sources and a critical but emotionally balanced mind. We need to expand our ethical embrace to all sentience, caring about and including those varieties of ETs that may have committed abuses and mistake in our past and which may still commit them (without necessarily allowing them to act this way with us any more).  We must learn to find out who those entities that respect us the most are and to ally ourselves with them. We must also not jump to conclusions as to who is positive or negative in a xenophobic way. The issue may be more subtle and complex, requiring a more integrative kind of logic.

How can exopolitics really develop in Peru interacting with the world? What are our potentials? There already is a certain flexibility and openness. There’s also a native way of thinking about complementarity between dynamic opposites in the original Andean tradition and it may be philosphically and culturally useful. But in “modernizing Perú” there’s also a growing allegiance to modern entertaiment and commercial, cultural, political, economic forces and a psychology of cynicism due to extensive corruption.

Our Air Force was open to receive reports from citizens and spoke openly about what was being reported or researched. If we – as citizens or even within institutions – were to collaborate with bona fide contactees able to communicate with beings willing to provide evidence this would give us an unusual recognition if we were able to become earnestly/responsibly interested and able to film -with interactive clarity – actual extraterrestrial (transdimensional) vehicles during programmed appointments for those sightings. Thus, can we seek this interaction with ‘them’ to help them be less ‘unusual’ in our presence by accepting them with the same respect they bestow on us? I think so.

As Latin Americans in general and as Peruvians in particular we can perhaps stand out in this type of “connective exopolitics” of…CONTACT; of taking a stance to relate Humanity and the Earth system with more benign, positive beings that respect us more thoroughly in order to learn and educate (they can learn from us as we can learn from them) in an essentially egalitarian exchange, respecting our common essence without generating dependencies. The Qu’ero people of the Andes and other native American compatriots perhaps know there are advanced beings that live underground among us in the planet. The Paco Pacuris”….They also are in the Peruvian territory protecting…Earth.

As a people we are a hope for the planetary future of exopolitical relations if we maintain and respect and enhance these benign relations. Possibly in all Native American traditions there is an easygoing, calmer acceptance of a variety of experiences that connect us with other intelligences, ancestors, nature spirits, even star beings. All of them – like humans (Runas) – simply are conscious beings. Accepting a relationship (Tinkuy) with other types of Runas would simply extend our the range of our “home,” that part of the universal tapestry that imposes limits and responsibilities on us.

What appears to our awareness, especially in a community-sanctioned form, can be incorporated into our reality system. Relationships are the main factors in non-polluted Andean thinking and only through relationships can something really exist. Concepts such as reciprocity, male and female complementarity in everything and parity (the idea that anything that exists comes in pairs), lend themselves to recognizing further relationships among all entities. This thinking tends not to be “essentialist” as in the Western traditions, but everything is considered “alive” and basically originating in what can be understood as a dimensionless center called CHAUPIN. Moreover, levels of reality (often connected with wat could be called “time frames”) are accepted and encounters between beings and realities are said to generate new forms of existence. Thus, a natural or unforced “encounter” (or TINKUY) with beings from other realities can generate creative outcome that enriches the tapestry of life. The distinction between worlviews, the sacred and daily life is less important and there’s an emphasis in responsibility. Feeling (munay), thinking/conceptually understanding (yachay) and acting (llankay) are integrated and equally important. 

The division of reality into three levels and four areas all of which originate from what may be considered an indefinable (maybe “non-dual” Source – the Living Energy or “Force” (Kawsay) – may also be another key concept, compatible with current philosophical advances like Integral Theory.

I think that, as a particular exopolitical expression, we can take the initiative of communicating more actively with protective beings in order to balance the Earth system, the expressions of its Living Energy or “Force” (Kawsay). In the Andean traditions it is understood that there is “heavy” force (or energy, so to speak) and that some beings live under it but benign curandero and priestly practices exist to lighten up this burden and heal.  Thus (as in other native American traditions) the existence of some “service-to-self” extraterrestrial entities could be more naturally accepted and there can be practices to neutralize or restore human and planetary life that has been influenced by them.  
Forgiveness and a fresh openness to a more positive path is possible and lies ahead.
At Teotihuacan, Mexico July 2014 sighting with Sixto Paz 
The first photo on the left is from Teotihuacan, Mexico when UFOs were seen during a meditation led by Peruvian contactee Sixto Paz Wells.  There are several other contactees and telepaths potentially capable of same. It’s important to continue with these pro-active, amicable human-extraterrestrial citizen efforts worldwide.

The second image depicts that when the center of the Andean Cross (Tawa Chakana) is placed over Cuzco a 45 degree angle to its upper-left center tip aligns with important sacred sites (Huacas) along the Capaq Ñan (Inca and pre-Inca road system). An intermediate line between true north and the main Capaq Ñan line would play an important part in ancient cosmic rituals related with alignment of the Earth and “tying up the Sun.”

“Chakana” means “bridge” (a bridge in an interwoven, relational, multi-level reality) and the “Tawa Chakana” (the four-sided chakana) also represents an Andean cosmology about how reality is structured. If adequate, it may help understand how universal influences structure the cosmic tapestry that extraterrestrials (capable of modifying spacetime and of utilizing psychic, spiritual and material aspects) also understand. It could be useful to understand the creation, relationships and connectivity among realities born from the unforced encounter (Tinkuy) of distinct realms. 

This symbolIt has an open center (Chaupin) or Source of Life. “Yana” would mean “pure” or “flour” or “clear”. “Yanan” (also meaning dark) would represent dependent reflection, a necessary illusion. “Masintin” would represent a specific influence among equals or a parts-generating influence which can be conflictive or cooperative. “Yanantin” would represent the ideal harmony between two opposites that complement. Yana, Yanan, Masintin, Yanantin would be primordial influences that combine into 4 areas of expression and each would basically express within three “worlds,” including an actual world of already-existing (organizing?) principles (Hanan Pacha) and an interior, emerging, future-oriented, potential and/or chaotic, but psychologically real world (Uku Pacha). The middle level (Kay Pacha) would be a world of perceivable, relational experiences for anyone living in it and would be generated by the natural or unforced encounter (Tinkuy) of the other two worlds. It would maintain the characteristics of the parent worlds but also be born (and relationally sustained) with its own original contribution to the tapestry of Life.

Ritual cosmological representations (“mesas”) made by curanderos (andean priests, ritualists or “paqos”) also often divide these into 4 general “spaces” formed by “Yana” “Yanan” “Hanan” and “Uku.” In a certain sense, “Masintin,” representing indivisible or unique entities in equal relationships with each other would correlate with “Hanan” (as clearly-given principles) and “Yanantin,” representing dual and harmonious, but less defined relationships, would correlate with “Uku.” 

There might be different combinations between the Hanan and Uku pachas giving rise to worlds of experience with different characteristics (perhaps different “densities” if they are physical). From our physical perspective the Hanan Pacha would correspond to what is called the Seed World in Vedanta Cosmology (Causal in Theosophy) and the Uku Pacha would correspond to what is known as the Subtle or Mental World. 

The basic Andean Chakana can also be multiplied as a fractal. The most advanced Andean “priests” (Ruwa Altum Misayoq) would be able to travel across many or all worlds by first going into the center. 
If our paradigms (theoretical models and methods) explaining empirical, interactive episodes with non-human intelligent entities and realities can be enhanced by ancient Andean traditions that can also complement and supplement other ancient wisdom traditions, current thinking on quantum physics (like the Quantum Hologram Theory of Consciousness) and emerging transdisciplinary and integrative philosophies, the stated goals of “Exopolitics” (as expressed in the 2009 Exopolitics Institute’s definition) would be facilitated.

Further information: