It is never really clear what the context is in which Equal Money supporters will apparently go and do this brainwashing, so I will walk through the different contexts that I see could be referred to.
The first one is the idea that the Equal Money supporters will attempt to utilize mind-technology to try to persuade anyone who does not agree with the Equal Money proposal. In terms of this point - there's really nothing to worry about. We've stated several times that Equal Money will only be implemented through Political means. This means that: if a vote is held to determine whether an EMS system would be implemented and the vote determines that the majority is not in favor of Equal Money - then it will simply not be implemented. There's not more to it, no-one will go and harass anyone that did not vote for Equal Money. That's completely non-democratic.
If the vote determining that the majority votes for implementation of Equal Money and you're then asking: what about the minority that does not agree with Equal Money? That is a point that is established by the democratic rules today. When the majority votes and the vote is binding, the minority has to adjust to the binding vote. That is how democracy operates at the moment. Once Equal Money is then implemented, the democratic system would change. Direct democracy will be instated in such a way that voting is no longer about implementing the policies and decisions that the majority wants, but will stand in relation to agreeing whether the proposed policy is indeed what is best for all. So, if one votes for the policy, one agrees that the policy is best for all. If one disagrees with the policy, one must provide proof that there is inequality in the equation and that it will cause harm that can be prevented - and then one can suggest adjustments to the proposed policy or suggest alternatives.
From this point onwards - if individuals continue to be in disagreement with Equal Money and the policies that are established through such democratic means - three things can happen.
Scenario 1 - one takes some time to adjust and after a while sees that the fears one had about Equal Money had no real foundation, and in seeing how society operates according to the principles of Equality and What is Best for All - that it actually works out.
Or - scenario number 2: you continue to be in disagreement with Equal Money and express this disagreement through democratic means. Each one will have their online LifeProfile where they will stand in direct contact with the government administrators. When such input is received, you will be asked to supply specific information in terms of how you see yourself being harmed within the current system. If the information you provide indicates that you are indeed being harmed unnecessarily - solutions will be implemented to correct the disharmony in the design of the system. If it is found from the information your provided that the cause of your discontent is not within the system as the system is sound within the principles of harmony, equality and what is best for all - then support will be provided in terms of explaining how alternatives of the current system would cause greater harm. These points would have been scientifically determined through the policy-making process. If these explanations are rejected by the being without other reason than 'I just don't agree', then this may indicate that there may be some psychological imbalance where the person is not sufficiently capable of considering another as equal to themselves. In these cases, then, psychological support will be offered, where professionals will be available to assist you in correcting your own psychological disharmonies. This will not be compulsory. Forcing a person to change will not result in actual self-responsibility and self-correction - one can only correct oneself - therefore, assistance can be offered, but it cannot be forced upon the person. If assistance is refused, one will have to live with one's own discontent as the refusal to change will be one's own responsibility.
In the 3rd scenario - the disagreement with Equal Money will be expressed through spiteful behavior in deliberately acting in a way that is in disagreement with the laws and rules that have been established through democratic means under the Constitutional principle of what is best for all. In such cases, one has decided to deliberately cause harm and disharmony. Again - firstly, it will be investigated whether your discontent flows from a disharmony within the system that would cause you to 'act out'. If this is the case, steps will be taken to correct the problem. If this is not the case, then one requires to face the consequences of one's spitefulness. When a being is deliberate within causing harm and disharmony when one lives in a system that supports each one equally and provides the best results for everyone - there will be no more choice involved. One will be placed in a facility for self-correction. One has at this point forsaken one's rights to be a part of the society as one is willing to harm others within the society, and has created oneself to be a threat to others. Within the self-correction facilities, again - one will be assisted and supported to correct one's own abusive patterns. No one will attempt to change you - because one can only change oneself if the change is to stand within actual realization, understanding and integrity. This the only valid change. Therefore, professionals will continue to support you, but if one does not support oneself towards actual self-correction, one cannot expect to return to society, considering the risk one poses to others.
Herein - consider that these self-correction facilities are not concentration camps and the procedure is very similar to the correctional system that is in place currently. However, currently - when individuals break the agreements of society, they are branded as 'criminals' and are removed from society where they are placed in a cell as punishment, and from that, supposedly they 'learn a lesson'. We have seen that this approach is not effective. Firstly, because many of the 'criminal behavior' is a direct outflow and consequence of a system that does not support each one effectively, causing individuals to resort to crime to support themselves. When crime can be prevented in the way we structure our society, it should be done - but this is not sufficiently considered within our current system. Secondly - most people coming out of prison do not learn any lesson. Instead, they feel alienated and often fall back in their previous patterns. Those imprisoned are not sufficiently supported in understanding their own psychological and behavioral patterns and are not sufficiently guided in terms of how they are able to correct these patterns. Therefore - self-correction facilities will be the correction of what we currently know to be prisons - where individuals are no longer abandoned or punished - but unconditionally supported to as effectively as possible be re-integrated into society.
