Hakann: Truth, Love, Freedom

Channel: A.S

My dearest brothers and sisters,

This is Hakann speaking. I greet you in peace and love.

The influential right-wing American Charlie Kirk has been assassinated.

This is awful. And what is also awful is the celebration of this murder by a disturbingly large number of left-wingers (although there absolutely are many people on the left who don’t agree with political murders).

As someone remarked online: “if they can justify Charlie’s death, they can justify yours.” And I get that that is a really scary and disturbing thought.

I sense a great emotional outpouring of anger and fear and division and grief and glee and uncertainty and determination across Earth right now.

Yet, in time this may prove to be a powerful awakening catalyst.

I think one fundamental reason for the division and the inhumanity of some people is that you currently do not have a functional, widely agreed-upon bedrock of society.

This bedrock is like the soil that your society grows from. Without it your society might survive a while longer, but it will ultimately decay.

Some would argue that your society’s bedrock is families. However, it’s not a bedrock unless the vast majority agrees with it, and many don’t: only a minority of people have both a partner and children.

Plus the left will be suspicious of people trying to proclaim families to be the bedrock of society.

Some would argue that your bedrock is Christianity. However, it’s not a bedrock unless the vast majority agrees with it, and many don’t.

Also, while Jesus was a great master and while there are many valuable teachings in the bible, fundamentally “let priests be intermediaries between you and the Creator” is outdated.

Plus the god from the bible and satan are two (now-uncreated) demons who ran a good-cop-bad-cop scheme. Just read the old testament and you’ll find countless examples of the Christian “god” behaving, well, demonically. For example, he orders genocide, explicitly including the killing of children and infants (1 Samuel 15:2–3).

So while the organized religion Christianity has genuinely also done good things, I don’t think it would be a solid bedrock for your society moving forward. And as your consciousness increases, you also won’t be dependent on it to maintain stability as you were at lower levels of consciousness. Although obviously this is ultimately up to you to decide; I’m only giving my perspective.

Others would argue that the bedrock of your society should be social justice for oppressed or marginalized groups. However, it’s not a bedrock unless the vast majority agrees with it, and many don’t.

Often in practice “social justice” or “equity” means discrimination against white men, which isn’t actual justice and which can never form a true bedrock.

Some would argue that your bedrock should be socialism or communism. However, it’s not a bedrock unless the vast majority agrees with it, and many don’t.

Us galactics live under non-coercive communism with no taxes and practically no laws. And it’s great. However socialism or communism doesn’t work very well yet at your current levels of consciousness.

Some would argue that your bedrock is capitalism, or free markets. However, it’s not a bedrock unless the vast majority agrees with it, and many don’t.

There’s an inherent contradiction here because “free markets” means unregulated markets, and it simultaneously means competitive markets that make everyone richer. However at your current level of consciousness, big companies will take unregulated markets and make them noncompetitive to benefit themselves. Therefore at your current level of consciousness you can’t have “free markets” in the sense that they’re unregulated and competitive and they make everyone richer.

It’s like someone invented a word that simultaneously means “ice cream” and “food that makes you lose weight as you eat it.” And sure, it sounds really good to have ice cream, which also causes weight loss as you eat it. But just because you can invent a term and give it both these meanings, doesn’t mean that ice cream actually works like that in reality. Just because someone is in favor of ice cream that causes weight loss, doesn’t mean they’ll lose weight if they eat ice cream.

Also, capitalism decays more and more over time, because over time rich families snowball their wealth more and more.

Billionaires and huge companies use their wealth to destroy nature, poison and brainwash the citizenry, establish quasi-monopolies, make markets less competitive, rewrite laws in their favor, bribe politicians, turn houses into an investment vehicle, reduce citizens to quasi-serfs and limit upwards mobility (because if you’re in control, you don’t want others to also climb up to your level and demand a share of the power).

And you can’t pass a law to end bribery of politicians because politicians will be bribed to vote against that.

And all and these problems become worse and worse over time, as wealth snowballs.

Therefore, just because capitalism worked pretty well in the past doesn’t prove that it will work well in the future.

Do you really want to be more or less ruled by whoever happened to be born into the rich families of this generation? What if they’re evil? What if they’re idiots? Even if they’re neither, they’ll still be hopelessly out of touch with the rest of society.

Now I’m not saying that you must abolish capitalism today. Frankly, at your level of consciousness, other political systems don’t work very well either.

Note that if you press either a socialist or a capitalist hard enough on the flaws with their system, ultimately they’ll reveal either a blind religious devotion towards their preferred system, or they’ll say “yeah well my system isn’t perfect but the other systems are worse.”

So what you need most at present is a raising of consciousness, rather than implementing a certain specific system.

So I’m not saying you must abolish capitalism today. I’m just saying here that I personally wouldn’t try to make capitalism the bedrock of my society. Plus in the future, you will have the level of consciousness where you’ll likely leave capitalism behind.

So, what is the bedrock of society? Is it rule of law? Well, it’s not a bedrock unless the vast majority agrees with it, and many don’t. Recall that lots of people were celebrating when Luigi Mangione allegedly shot a healthcare insurance company CEO. The left doesn’t see rule of law as a top priority. And just saying “screw the left” isn’t going to lead to a harmonious society.

Also, while laws are needed at a lower level of consciousness, they’re stifling and hindering at the higher level of consciousness you’re moving into. At present laws are perhaps still needed on Earth, but soon you’ll have a level of consciousness where they’ll be outdated and where you very well may abolish pretty much all laws. I’ll discuss this in detail next week.

Okay. So all these things aren’t good bedrocks of society at present. Then what would a functional bedrock of society be that most people can buy into?

Ultimately that’s a question for Earth humans to answer.

Still, let me share the bedrock of our Pleiadian society. Maybe you’ll get some inspiration from it.

The bedrock of our society is that when people are raised in truth and love and freedom, they will naturally grow up to be good-hearted, productive members of society who treat others well and who charitably take care of others.

If you have this “truth, love, freedom” bedrock firmly established, more or less everything else just clicks into place automatically.

With this bedrock in place, people will just naturally want to contribute to the society that is giving them so much.

To greatly simplify our complex society, we prioritize truth first, then love, then freedom.

So: truth before love. You have to ground your society in truth first and foremost. Western left-wingers often try to put love before truth, but that leads to censorship of truthful statistics and censorship of speech just because it’s “harmful” or “dangerous”. And censorship is never good for a society.

Putting love before truth also leads to various policies that sound superficially loving but don’t work (such as unrestricted illegal immigration, or covid lockdowns to protect grandma).

Ultimately that just leads to suffering and dysfunction.

If you put love before truth, then society stops working. And as society stops working, people start fighting each other about how the shrinking pie should be divided up. This only further damages trust and only further pits people against each other.

Whereas if you have a truth-based, functional, growing society, then it’s much easier for different and differently-minded people to get along. Growth and success unites people.

How do you create a tolerant, loving country? By having that country be truth-based, functional and growing.

Hence, you have to put truth before love.

Then: love before freedom. Otherwise you end up with a society of beggars and billionaires, where billionaires have the “freedom” to bribe politicians, where billionaires buy news networks to endlessly repeat certain messaging, where companies destroy nature and people’s health for short-term profits, and where companies destroy the free market by establishing pseudo-monopolies and by bribing politicians.

Love means that all well-meaning people should have enough — through charity and mutuality, rather than through an extractive state. After all, love means love towards all, hence taxation isn’t loving. That said, trying to implement galactic society on Earth today today may not yet work because the people aren’t quite ready yet.

If “love before freedom” makes you worried about free speech: free speech is covered by the first priority, namely truth. On your world, you can get into trouble for so-called “hate speech” even if it’s never proven that this “hate speech” is actually wrong. Whereas we put truth before love. So in our society, you can say whatever you want, and the only time you may get pushback is if someone can clearly and objectively prove that what you say is not true.

Now yes, you can perhaps think of specific situations where “truth, then love, then freedom” would steer you wrong, but this is a rule of thumb for us, not an absolute law. We don’t strictly apply it always. We have high-consciousness people who are there to make the tough decisions.

In the Earth context: truth means suppressed technology gets released, and love means that it gets used and shared productively. This will create huge amounts of abundance, which in turn will unite people.

So our bedrock is: truth, then love, then freedom.

If you agree with this bedrock, then just take it one step at a time. And step one is: truth.

You may find that after you’ve established the truth, everything is much clearer and all the subsequent steps are much easier. So just focus on establishing the truth first.

This means: call out liars. Call out censorship. Demand transparency. Demand disclosure. Demand a release of suppressed technologies. Demand a release of suppressed files and dossiers.

A clarion call for truth can be a powerful rallying cry, and it can unite people on the left and on the right.

While all lies and secrecy should eventually be called out, in the short term it’s smart to focus on the release of the Epstein files first. You can make further demands for more truth after that’s accomplished.

After all, the Epstein files are important and it’s something that average people on both the left and the right can agree on.

So: keep relentlessly pushing for a release of the Epstein files. Don’t let up. And metaphorically hold everyone’s feet to the fire who stands in the way of that, regardless of which political side they’re on. This isn’t about trying to make your political side win, it’s about establishing the truth.

If you believe in your political side, then your political side will ultimately benefit from establishing the truth, right?

If you’re not an American, ideally formulate some information request towards your national leaders that average people on both the left and right of your country agree on. And insist on a true answer, and not just some sugary “nothing to see here” political answer.

If you’re asking questions, you’re as – a – king. So write politicians and for example ask why exactly your country is sending money or weapons to Israel, when the UN has just found that Israel committed genocide. See https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/09/israel-has-committed-genocide-gaza-strip-un-commission-finds

It’s probably more powerful to ask for an answer on why your country is sending to Israel, rather than demand an end to that, because if you ask a question you put the pressure on them. Whereas if you demand that they do something (such as stop the aid) they can just say “no” and then there’s no pressure on them.

If you’re not getting a real answer, just ask a follow-up question. Don’t be afraid to be impolite. The more you make them defend a stupid or evil position, the stupider they’ll feel, and the more pressure they’ll feel they’re under.

So long as you’re asking questions, you’re as-a-king.

And if eventually the conversation gets cut off, just send your question to another politician or representative and repeat the process.

Politicians are supposed to work for you, after all.

Anyone who opposes truth and disclosure simply isn’t a part of the solution. Easy as that.

You might think that politicians are never going to release Epstein or Israel related truth, however disclosure pressure may facilitate more people waking up. It may build a bridge between the left and right. It may facilitate whistleblowers stepping forwards. It may nudge the gray hats to take more open action. It may nudge neutral politicians to stand on the side of the people. And it will stress out dark controller puppets even more, causing them to make even more mistakes.

A public demand for truth and disclosure and real answers will absolutely move your society in a positive direction.

Maintain the bipartisan nature of this truth movement. Don’t turn it into yet another partisan attack vehicle that pretty much only attacks one political side. To do that, at first just focus on topics that the left and the right can both agree on.

Yes, eventually you’ll also want to call out lies that only one political side engages in, but start with stuff like Epstein and money to Israel that the left and the right can both agree on. Start with the stuff that most people are already united on.

Now especially just after Charlie Kirk’s murder, I get that it may feel that it’s critical that your political side triumphs. Still, I guarantee you that prioritizing truth and disclosure first will be more effective than engaging in partisan politics.

What do you think the dark controllers want you to do: attack the other political side, or form a bipartisan movement that calls for the release of the Epstein files?

Keep in mind that on the same day Charlie Kirk was killed, US politicians voted against a release of the Epstein files.

Now, I understand the argument that calling some normal right-winger a nazi or fascist or far-right is perhaps an incitement to violence, or stochastic terrorism, given the prevalent idea that it’s virtuous to kill nazis.

Plus it’s obviously a lie, as discussed in the previous channeling “Tunia: Nazism was left-wing.” If you refuse to believe that nazism was left-wing, well, it should still be obvious that it’s a lie that your average right-winger is a nazi.

The harsh truth is that if you just let certain people pump out propaganda constantly, then a portion of the population will lose touch with reality. That’s what propaganda does.

It’s overly simplistic to think that if you don’t stop speech and you just have people talk to each other, then pretty much everyone will find the truth. That’s not what happens, because propaganda is powerful, especially in this era of smartphones.

Then again, an argument could certainly be made that trying to stop “nazi” speech via either enforcement of existing laws, or new laws, would limit free speech too much. That could get abused later. Perhaps it would do more harm than good.

One approach is that you only stop speech that is both an incitement to violence and a very clear lie, as in the case of “MAGA are nazis.” Although this, too, might get abused if nefarious actors get into power.

The gut reaction of most Pleiadians here would be “you can’t call normal people nazis, that’s a very clear lie” rather than “you can’t call normal people nazis, that’s hate speech” or “yes you can call people nazis.”

In any case, I still think it’s less productive to focus on this than it is to put your energies towards insisting on a release of the Epstein files.

Ideally a truth movement is formed, which focuses on bipartisan truth disclosure requests such as Epstein.

If forming a truth movement sounds like too big a project, well, consider writing or calling a politician. Or talk to someone in real life about the importance of the Epstein files. Or just keep writing about it online. Any small contribution helps. Keep the conversation alive. Keep insisting on the truth.

Why is truth so important? Well, your country chooses leaders by voting for them. And voting as a system simply won’t produce good results if the people aren’t being told the truth.

Furthermore, the dark controllers simply can’t exist without secrecy.

If truth is revealed and disclosure is provided, then you’re like 95% of the way towards New Earth already.

It’s also incredibly hard to argue against a truth movement, so long as this truth movement remains reasonable and bipartisan.

If you feel called, this is an invitation to start such a bipartisan truth movement, perhaps together with others. After all, it’s powerful when individuals demand answers, but it’s even more powerful when people together demand answers.

Yes, this invitation is also extended to you, the person reading or listening to these words.

Some of you complain that most of your leaders are awful, and I agree, but then: be the change you want to see in the world, and stand up.

As JFK said: “the very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society.”

Make secrecy repugnant again.

With all my love,

Your star brother,
Hakann

** These messages are exclusively submitted to Eraoflight.com by this writer. If you wish to share them elsewhere, please include a link back to the original post

If you want to meet like-minded Earth humans, please see https://eraoflight.com/2024/06/19/hakann-local-meetings-for-those-seeking-first-contact-with-benevolent-ets/

If you want to learn about a useful healing modality, please see https://eraoflight.com/2025/01/11/hakann-onion-healing/

25 Replies to “Hakann: Truth, Love, Freedom”

  1. Richard

    Firstly, I think this perspective you’ve given us is very valid, you’ve worded the benefits of putting truth first very well, and I do agree with it from the perspective of truth vs secrecy or truth in the sense of beliefs vs real life events (e.g., data) in opposition to those beliefs.

    At the same time, I also think that there is something to be said that some things can be considered true from a certain perspective (or level of consciousness) that aren’t true from a different perspective (/level of consciousness). How do you put truth first when you deal with one truth opposing another truth from a different perspective?

    Some answers pop up already in my mind, nonetheless I’m also curious how you look at it and approach this.

    Reply
  2. LCX

    P1/4

    Thanks to Hakann for the wonderful discussion! I’ll share some of my related thoughts below.
    I think one fundamental reason for the division and ​the inhumanity of some people is that the current complexity of Earth society is too high, and people have not yet completed the understanding and game of this complex situation.
    If Cha​rlie recognized the need for bulletproof glass, and if the law stipulated that after Charlie’s death, a left-wing representative with similar relative influence must be monitored and silenced, or an already silenced right-wing representative with similar influence must be unsilenced, then the risk of this assassination would be greatly reduced.

    Reply
  3. LCX

    P2/4

    It seems that the complexity of Earth society, or the complexity of the social deceptions, is too high, even unreasonable, relative to the average capability and lifespan of Earth people. However, from the perspective of a testing ground, this complexity is reasonable; it should be designed to push Earth people to their limits, or even crush them near the limits. If the galactics intervene late, and their attitude toward Earth people is more like that of cold experimenters, then this is coordinated.
    However, if the galactics intervene late, and treat Earth people like close friends or siblings, this is uncoordinated. In order to be more coordinated in this perspective, theoretically the galactics could intervene earlier and reduce the complexity of Earth society, for example by extending Earth people’s lifespans, and limiting Earth society’s technological level, the speed of technological development, the speed of communication and transportation, the gap between rich and poor, the size of cities and countries, and the number of publications, etc. Alternatively, Earth society can be divided into a few levels, with high-level society possessing advanced technology and deep truth disclosure, while low-level society only have relatively simple knowledge. Furthermore, doing so wouldn’t necessarily infringe on Earth people’s right to choose, as the current situation is so complex that Earth people often don’t understand what they’ve chosen or acquiesced to.
    When Earth people or a certain level of society digest a certain level of complexity, accumulate enough experience and lessons, and then further complexity restrictions can be removed, this will allow Earth people to evolve more comfortably. The galactics can transfer overly advanced individuals from Earth society to other advanced planets to delay the development of the highest level society, so the lower level societies will catch up faster, and ultimately, the entire Earth civilization will establish coordinated public perceptions, no longer needing to be divided into a few levels. At that time, Earth people can easily answer “What would a functional bedrock of society be that most people can buy into?”

    Reply
  4. LCX

    P3/4

    Okay, if I were to answer this question, I think passive safety would be a good answer.
    If proactive safety refers to not allowing people to have ability or intention to harm others, then pursuing proactive safety would greatly limit everyone’s ability and freedom, such as people having to be placed in some kind of big hamster ball in order to move around in public places, which is clearly unreasonable.
    Passive safety refers to everyone having a reasonable ability to strike back. For example, if someone is stabbed, they can call the police, or their smart device will call the police, or passersby will help them call the police, or the monitoring system of the police will detect the situation. Eventually, the judicial system will effectively pursue and punish the attacker. It’s reasonable for people to carry certain weapons when going out, in pursuit of real-time counterattack ability. It would be even better if the police can identify who will actively create danger and limit their armed level.
    Typically, this safety also includes economic safety, meaning that a person shouldn’t lose the opportunity to effectively participate in social competition, or even survive, just because they fall behind in social competition.
    On a planet with many dangers, if a society cannot protect people, or even the society itself creates many dangers, and people can easily lose everything, then establishing or joining that society is meaningless. Without guaranteed safety, people are likely to lose their concern for truth and love. Modern society generally provides short-term safety, but in the long run, the safety of the vast majority of people will ultimately be damaged.

    Reply
    1. LCX

      It seems that P4/4 will not be displayed, the complete reply can be found at channelings.substack.com/p/hakann-truth-love-freedom

      Reply
  5. Collin

    Hi Hakann. In my opinion, Earth humans currently have no future. They have no future because the elites stole it from them, and there is currently not enough unity to create a new future. I agree a functional society needs a bedrock or commonly-held belief system. This bedrock could range among the following:

    1. Science and technological advancement
    2. Love and spirituality
    3. Equality and equal opportunity
    4. Environmentalism
    5. Justice and truth
    6. Individual expression and free speech
    7. Sustainability and societal order
    8. Community and family

    These are just a few examples. I think on Earth people just tend to think “I hate people who disagree with me,” but few people actually stop and think about what they actually stand for. Because of this, I think people just end up being hypocrites and having selective memory. This is a sad reality, and the elites can easily manipulate people. It’s hard to manipulate people when they know what they stand for. That’s why confusion reigns supreme on Earth. Hopefully, the dark cabal can be removed soon so light and understanding can return.

    Namaste.

    Reply
    1. 99th_monkey

      Nonono, simply

      “Why have the Epstein files not been released yet?”

      “Why are known perpetrators of child sexual slavery being currently withheld from the public?”

      Reply
  6. Gwydyon

    While Truth – Love – Freedom is a bit simplified I like it for its practical simplicity, so it’s easy to internalize and convey to others.

    Interesting notion that questions apply more pressure than demands, I think that’s true, but I was not aware of it so clearly.
    Yet there are very rare occasions to ask questions publicly with the politicians having to answer in front of a camera immediately. Text questions get answered with void statements.
    Why even give these abject puppet politician actors validation by treating them as relevant figures. The government is hijacked and run by criminals, void of virtue and not legitimated by informed people.

    Reply
    1. the_complaint_department

      We validate, honor and love them because they were once humans like us. Most have begged for this unique chance of voluntary redemption, to be the ones to cast the ring in the fires of mount doom.

      Obviously any average human is more suited to handle power than those who currently hold it; we just play along so they can learn.

      Reply
      1. Gwydyon

        You speak of validation as souls or human beings, I speak of validation as earned decision makers. I don’t even want to direct my thoughts at them, even less interact. In their current role they play they are good for getting arrested (and beforehand making visible the rotten state of the state). People without honor and virtue can never be true leaders and on some level they know they have been put on their positions by the satanic force. I know of course what Hakann means, but in my eyes they are not worth us attending to them in their impostor roles.

        Reply
        1. Acc

          Agreed, what they need right now is not communication, but to be arrested first before any communication.

          Reply
        2. the_complaint_department

          As I child I once heard that all/any anger is truly about ourselves.

          “If you trip on a wire, you may seem to feel angry at the wire or whoever left the wire exposed… but if you examine the feeling, the truth is you’re angry because YOU didn’t see the wire, while (for some reason) believing you could/had to see it. Otherwise you barely notice you’ve tripped, get up and be on your way with no emotional disturb whatsoever.”

          There is a general anger towards politicians that masquerades as indifference… And like all anger, it slowly fooks up your life and your health. It’s called a vice because it tends to build up, so eventually you’ll also consider them responsible for your ill life and health… and so on.

          I’m not opining on whether or not to talk or write to politicians here – just warning against subconscious resentment buildup and it’s very real effects.

          Reply
          1. Klaudia

            ❣️🙏😍: thx tcd: “I am TOO ACCEPTING” myself saying OFTEN lately –> “VERY REAL EFFECTS from _subconscious_ resentments” sounds promising a lot.

          2. Gwydyon

            Asking questions is to umask them. Treating them as the puppets they are is also umasking them.

            But you might be right that I would not resent them like this, if I was already fully conscious of my sovereignty.

  7. Viktor

    //Also, while Jesus was a great master and while there are many valuable teachings in the Bible, the fundamental principle “let priests be intermediaries between you and the Creator” is outdated.// –

    Jesus did not write the Bible or create a religion. The New Testament was written by his disciples and followers from memory many years after Jesus’s Ascension (the earliest being 60 years later). These records were subsequently rewritten and edited many times, and only at the Council of Nicaea in the 3rd-4th centuries AD were they approved by a majority decision and began to exist almost in their modern form.

    As for religion, after Jesus’s Ascension, his followers scattered throughout the Roman Empire and founded various branches and subdivisions of early Christianity in the form of small sects with often strong differences in their understanding of Jesus’ teachings. Only under Emperor Constantine, who made the Christian sect the official religion, did these different directions and branches of Christianity form a common teaching of Jesus Christ (probably again at the Council of Nicaea).

    As this shows, Jesus had no direct connection to either the Bible or the Christian religion. His name was simply appropriated by others for their own purposes. Therefore, in the Bible, or more precisely in the New Testament, we can, at best, rely only on Jesus’s direct speech. And even this direct speech of Jesus is not necessarily transmitted word for word by his disciples. And nowhere in this direct speech is it written that priests should be intermediaries between man and God. Jesus said that “the kingdom of God is within man.” And this statement will never become outdated.

    Reply
    1. plato

      Well said, Virktor, but poor Hakann doesn’t know history, not even Jesus!
      But it’s OK, if I were having fun in Pleiades, I would also give useless advice that “no one else” has ever thought of in millennia and I would philosophize about whether the chicken made the egg or the egg the chicken?
      The poor guy argues and contradicts himself, but he doesn’t understand it.
      One thing is for sure, they won’t help us cut the Gordian knot that we didn’t create!

      Reply
      1. Anselmo (Brazil)

        I think that it would be much more useful and interesting if our friends Pleiadians could share with us details of daily life on a 5D planet, not just aboard the ships. People daily routines and such. This is not vain curiosity, but to have a general view of what awaits those who will be going to the 5D New Earth. Lightworkers are completely ignorant about life on 5D. There are valuable and rare glimpses of how it will be in Operation Terra and Telos.

        Reply
      2. the_complaint_department

        What Viktor said does not contradict anything Hakann said, you’re just using him to support condescending arguments.

        ‘Cutting the Gordian knot’ does not work here if we are the knot. I know that he sounds naive at this point because he is proposing something ridiculously obvious and which we have been lead to believe “has been proposed, tried and failed numerous times” but that is simply not true.

        Truth works. What MAKES the knot Gordian is precisely the loveless discussion of who created it.

        Reply

Leave a Reply to Carol HoffmanCancel reply