Question: I am not left wondering about the failure of peaceful protests in Belarus in 2020, when people protested en masse against election fraud, and these protests were brutally suppressed by the authorities. And now in Georgia, where there are also mass demonstrations in defense of the democratization of the country. It seems that in both countries, a fairly high percentage of the population wants change for the better. Nevertheless, people cannot achieve their goal peacefully. At the same time, the example of India, which managed to peacefully free itself from English colonization, same ruling elite, comes to mind. If it is a matter of people or society, what do Georgian and Belarusian people lack compared to representatives of India? Was the level of the collective consciousness of Indians of that time higher than that of Georgians or Belarusians today? If, of course, my comparison with India is correct, or is it all about the ruling elite, and English colonizers were less fierce and aggressive, and were ready to make concessions, unlike, for example, Lukashenko? Can only violence on the part of the Belarusian or Georgian society lead to any changes for the better?
Answer from the Ascended Master Saint Germain through Kim Michaels. This answer was given during the 2025 New Year Webinar.
Well, you raise several interesting questions here that cannot be answered fully in a short answer. But what I will say is that there was clearly a difference in the collective consciousness between India during the time of the English colonization and countries like Georgia and Belarus today. And the primary difference was the influence of religion or spirituality in Indian society. You have both a Hindu spiritual tradition and you have a Buddhist spiritual tradition that have influenced India and therefore created in the Indian collective consciousness some awareness of the need to be non-violent. We can say that there was a greater awareness of non-violence in the Indian collective consciousness. There were more people who were willing to change and who were willing to wait for society to change in a non-violent way instead of taking up arms.
You could say that Gandhi, who became the exponent of the non-violent approach, he could arise in India because of the collective consciousness and their commitment to non-violence. Gandhi would have had little chance in Belarus or Georgia or Russia or China. He would have simply been killed or imprisoned by the authorities. He might have shared a cell with Navalny, for example.
This is one factor. But another factor is of course, that the British were not as brutal and insensitive to life as the Russian leadership had been for a very long time. And this has, again, something to do with the collective consciousness of England. You can look at England and its history and you can see that there has been tremendous brutality, tremendous insensitivity to people. But there has been a gradual change towards a more civilized humanitarian approach. However, if you are to really look at this equation, you also have to factor in Hitler, because clearly the British had a higher level of sensitivity than Hitler’s Germany. But they also had the awareness of what Hitler had done. And they were, of course, very concerned that they would not be seen as being as brutal and inhumane as Hitler. And therefore, there was more of an openness to not clamp down with outright brutality on Gandhi’s movement.
And of course, you do not see that in Putin’s Russia, in Lukashenko, and in several other nations, Iran, North Korea, China, etc., etc., etc. The British government at the time of India was clearly a more democratic form of government than Lukashenko’s government in Belarus or Putin’s government in Russia. These are also factors. Now of course you can step back from this and say: “Well, why do the Russian people attract the kind of leaders they have attracted?” It is, of course, linked to the collective consciousness. The same thing in Belarus. I mean, Belarus could have gone the same way as the Baltic countries and had distanced itself from Russia and become part of NATO. Naturally, in the late 1990s, Russia could not have stopped them from doing so. As we have said, Ukraine could have done the same, but the collective consciousness was not there, and it was not there in Belarus. We can always go into why that is the case, but then we have already talked about the background of the Russian people going back to the time of Atlantis, which you can find in some of our older dictations.
Copyright © 2025 Kim Michaels