I'd been thinking about what Courtney has conveyed, from Conversations With Harvey, that the "Good ETs" consider our having made a choice to be imprisoned. That we need to make a choice through Disclosure and ask them for help getting out of this mess. That being it was our own will that we be here, we chose to be imprisoned.
I have a fundamental issue with this.
In human law, there is the concept of coercion. If you are manipulated or coerced into doing something, you are not always held responsible for your actions. This is because your free will was interfered with.
From the description of the Death Traps, it would seem that we were indeed manipulated and coerced into entering these traps via a complex ruse, meant to deceive us. The decision we were making at the time, to "enter into the light" is based on many falsehoods introduced into society, where our choice at the time was peace, love and healing (etc). In this case, it seems rather clear that the misinformed (most of us!) would NOT reasonably make the decision to enter into the death traps had we understood what it was and what it meant for us.
So, by definition of what Harvey (et al) has apparently said, they are forcing a definition of "Free Will" based on "their" perception and value systems. While they may have a more advanced view of governance, I ask if that position is inherently unfair -- should we not also be judged by the very laws we create, even when those laws are not perfect but meant to be constructive, and to facilitate a fair and just society? Should our choices of governance also represent our (human) collective will? That perspective is a modern one, based on the concept of a free democracy--as it's clear that other societies here on earth have very harsh "value systems" -- but it's pretty clear even then, that humans do not wish to be imprisoned or controlled or otherwise forced into a manner of living -- some societies "fall in line" under duress, the threat -- that's not free will, as far as I am concerned.
So our definition of "Free Will" here vs. Harvey (et al) seems to be in conflict.
What do you think?