Philosophy – “The Hypocrisy of Activists” – 7/14/2022

“To suggest that our world shows itself as deranged, full of problems with other mounting inconsistences, will turn out, most often, to be a display of negligence to those affected by such faults. In focusing on a problem, we neglect those affected by a problem. However, if we accept this world as full of problems, our better route comes down to aiding those who have already accepted themselves as a part of their own problem.”

– Modern Romanticism

Activists will say it, that our world holds many faults. Our world, not a person attracted to said faults; because, to focus on a victim as a problem seems against their problem, as if meaning to separate victim from problem. Why has that become separate? External faults are not stagnant. They become magnets to attract others to them, usually out of incorrect choices under that same will or freedom a person holds, with a necessity to hold themselves accountable. If we state that everyone has been victimized, in some fashion, we are separating fault from person as if to mean a victim can be viewed as perfect, while external faults are all demons.

Whenever an activist will state this, that our world, not a person, shows error, they will contradict this statement when their tactics of problem-solving ever go to focus on person, not problem. If person, not problem, becomes their focus, it had been person, not problem, that had been a problem. Although, this creates true compassion, that in knowing to not be negligent requires focus on those affected by negative circumstance, an activist has more an understanding on sociology. While psychology will comprehend an individual, sociology will comprehend external grounds. To not be negligent means to always focus on a person, or an individual. To be negligent means to focus on our world, of its faults, instead of those affected by those problems.

How can one be compassionate, without realizing what defines an error? As humanity resembles sheer imperfection, always by what connects people together, being wounds and hurt, no empathy can surround focus on external problems. As empathy goes to define itself, seeing internal fault will be of it, as sociology will not be for it. How can a focus on external fault represent a compassion, ever extending to a person, when empathy compares always to internal imperfection or error?

No focus on external problems can be of compassion. Though, seeing a person as problematic, enough to change their psychology in one’s empathy to turn them down different roads, shows this compassion. Through being empathetic, we cannot assume. We know. We have that knowledge, because we have been there down that incorrect avenue to recognize its negative outcomes. If an activist sees all problems in our world, an activist will not ever focus on steering a person apart from their improper decisions, without contradicting their entire doctrine. An activist will not aid a person, though will present themselves as meant to absolve this world of its problems, perhaps with an underlying intent for there to be no more need for empathy nor humanity.

In focusing on what might be wrong of an individual, that person can be aided enough to make correct choices. From an empathetic connection, we recognize a person. To that person, it can be known, through an empathetic connection, that they have been helped when we did not commit to tasks they must learn to do. We have merely showed them a path, through displaying examples of betterment out of what we, before knowing them, had understood.

Philosophy – “To Debunk Pride” – 2/22/2022

“Being proud is a damning thing for the identity. Why? When you are proud for who you are, rather than what you can do, then you are the one who would favor the value of a book cover, instead of the interior pages. You would be the prejudiced one to consider the exterior’s worth over the interior. For what you see at first glance, the book cover, is the ignorance to the knowledge that only signals your fear to comprehend what is the understanding of creation. Inner details, the book’s pages, is the value of all knowledge that if a fear is bypassed to see them, will be the freedom outside of an enslaved and captive mindset.”

– Modern Romanticism

Culture is human creation. One can be said to be the betterment over the other. As one’s skills could be said to be the betterment over another, where is pride designated for this? The answer is pride is meant to be reserved for the accomplishment. If, in the accomplishment, a person had committed themselves out of harder worker than others, pride is then available to this achiever as a feeling. Then, who is able to feel pride for themselves, through their identity? Would it not be the mindset of a purest or a narcissist who states that for who they are, who they are born as, makes them better than someone else? That is, if pride is, through its innate feeling of having earned the right to display it, a matter of being able to create a thing that can be displayed, then how it is ever meant to be involved for the exterior to a person?

Is pride felt out of the freedom to express it? If so, then such freedom must have been through the knowledge of an interior, a creation, through the achievements a person took to deserve the allowance of pride. Then, is the one for pride in their identity expressing it doing so because they believe they created their identity? If so, this would mean that their interior is also their exterior, and there is nothing else to know of them. This would mean such a person, proud for simply who they are, bypassed the notion of having a skill for an achievement so that what is believed of them to once be hidden is now revealed. Again, this means that one believes themselves to have created their own identity. This would also mean that for who they are, a creation as their identity is the exterior. To them, ignorance is the same as knowledge, that through creating these identities, an exterior to a person is the same as their interior.

How is a person, proud for their identity, at all retaining freedom for the sake of the expression when someone else is only able to know this person through comprehending the interior? That would require a bypassing of fear. If unity, not division, is the place of those proud for their identity, then why believe only the self can understand the self? The self is flawed. If humans were ever omniscient, the first thing we should understand, in fullness, is ourselves. Then, believing to know ourselves, through our omniscience, will divide us from the imperfections of others when we believe our difference makes us.

Difference is a factor of wanting to be paid special attention towards, due to this being a secondary factor of narcissism that which relates to being better than another person. It is because in being different through identity, then to the expression of pride, the attention and recognition is given merely for the popularity to their supposed betterment. If one favors another’s identity through popularity, then it is no different than being the biggest fan of a celebrity who appears perfect, though is still flawed as any other human.

When the achievement is given recognition, it is because it is one better than another. Culture is human creation that does change, though only for the better or worse. Identity is a difference to the place of preference, the same as genres to books are understood from a first glance at their covers. Identity cannot be bettered. Identity can only be different, though these differences are merely given greater or lesser popularity. The same as Science-Fiction might be more the mainstream than Fantasy is also for the identity. If one is proud for who they are, they will hold the mindset of perhaps believing the Science-Fiction genre is “better” than the Fantasy genre.

Controversial – “Why Activist Professions do not Care” – 9/21/2021

“Be honest on the intent, for the sake of what is being prolonged in its conflict can raise just the opportunists from the fire. Be honest on the intent, and do not deceive when it is another’s burned surroundings that grow the life of your own.”

– Modern Romanticism

Activists are the colonists. Coming to trade. Claiming to care. Then, they claim what is yours. They do so, with your trust involved into what you give. You trade it, they claim to care for it, then they burn it.

They burn it as an example. Then, they steal what is yours, while you believe you are being treated fairly. You are not warned by an activist. You are giving what it is you believe becomes handled with care. Was it not first your truth? Does not the truth being manipulated and used become the lie?

Activists do not care, when a profession just as any other is, by Nature, for the self. A profession is selfish. The professional world is selfish. That is because when it comes to information for how it is given, there is vulnerability from who trusts the other with it. There is one-sided vulnerability. There is one-sided trust. There is the blindness for such trust, and there is a stagnant sort of vulnerability to the one who is trusting of their truth and information not being mishandled.

Activists are just as any rule. Claiming to care, they are, when they possess a profession for it. It is the mere understanding that their profession is to care, that this is a deception. In just being a profession, by this detail, alone, there is no care. There is what is mishandled, treated with carelessness, because it is a profession of supposd care.

Because activism is a profession, this simple detail marks it as both a deception and of no care.

No one, within the professional world, can care. Even among doctors and nurses, there is deception from them to state they would care. In fact, the statement, alone, is enough to provoke further trust. As well, it steers a “client” apart from those who would or should care, being one’s own family and friends.

For truth, on its own, there must be genuine care offered for it, or otherwise deception is to the voice of the one with the profession to it.

Would a therapist offer a price to their own family? For psychological treatment, would a psychologist offer their voice to a friend? If not to be clinical, then to be a friend to another, there is no cost unto this. There is no limited time. There is no strict time limit. There are family and friends who can care, with the added genuineness, in which the professional world lacks.

An activist’s bottom line is the self, being the origin for what their profession entails. It comes back to the origin. Anyone who can pierce their veil of deceit can find out what their motives are. Because, for any words, from themselves, put forth to make another believe there is promised care, comes back to themselves in the help for the mere self.

Philosophy – “The Idiot Lesser who does not Wish to Work” – 8/15/2020

“The foolish pauper will believe in deceiving words, upon the time they look to leadership to state they are loving. For no human can be God, as no human can be perfect. Imperfection of leadership states that the politician is just as foolish as the pauper.”

– Modern Romanticism

If before a bridge, then why not cross the gap to reach the end? Life is that bridge. The beginning is either one’s innocence or ignorance.

No fool, upon their journey out of misery, can claim their own nation’s leadership to stand for anything more than deception. For it is true, and factual, that if such a leadership is believed to ascend the lesser straight to the greater, foolishness is abound. No one lives, nor comprehends the work that life entails, when they skip it.

One lives, when they work to achieve that greatness. This is truth.

What person, so foolish, believes that leadership can ascend the lesser to being greater, without comprehending nothing of a human? In this scenario, it is the same as Heaven raising the dead, raising those lesser in the ground, to ascension. To believe that a human can do this, makes one believe in the words of deception. For deceit plays soft notes and rubs softly the earlobes of any person.

If one is lesser, one should work, to be middling. If one is middling, one should be ambitious, to be greater. This is truth.

How often does a person believe that God does not exist, though believes that up in a skyscraper, a human can lower a ladder to ascend a pauper? How often is it the case that a human is never ascended, though taken advantage of, for greater power towards those who have achieved it?

Idiots run the world, when those same fools were once paupers.

When paupers rule the world, all they know is to consume, to deprive everything out of life, and to chew the world to dust.

A living human looks below, and sees a pauper. A living human looks above, and eithers sees what they shouldn’t see, being God, or what they regret ever seeing, being the greedy human.

It is not that paupers are the hungry ones, so much as it is the rich man, once pauper, who is the greediest.

Philosophy – “Why ‘Anti-Bullying’ Campaigns are Ineffective” – 8/9/2020

“Comprehend the difference between empathy and sympathy, where the former is closeness, as the latter is distance.”

– Modern Romanticism

There is no greater suffering, than loneliness. All activists will self-serve, because they’ve adopted a career that stands away from the average human, to holding a vocation of being an average human.

The activist should be defined as, “The care-giving human, who makes a living from being care-giving. In this, they desire something in return, for their efforts.”

One should differ a friend from a Therapist, as this, “The friend will speak to you for an unlimited amount of time, and ask for nothing in return. The Therapist will speak to you for a limited amount of time, and ask for something in return.”

Look through the doors to patient’s bedrooms, in a hospice, and see the cold expressions upon the nurse’s faces. Their empathy has stagnated itself, out of the fear in jeopardizing their own career. It is because being a nurse offers pay. That pay goes to those whom the nurse does empathize with. He or she is, however, a deceiver on the grounds of the hospital.

What is a terminally ill patient’s worst suffering? Is it what they already know is killing them? Or, is it the fact that their family has abandoned them?

What is a PTSD war Veteran’s worst suffering? Is it what they already know is destroying their mind? Or, is it that no one has lifted them from their sorry state upon the streets, brought them into their own home for shelter? No one aids this homeless war Veteran, because no one is friends with the war Veteran.

Where one has faced loss, there is now a void. That void is nothing for hunger’s sake, as much as the Activist would be wonted to adhere to this feeling of satiation. Loss is accompanied by the idea that one did not treat this possession as an expendable. When a woman says to a man, “I am not your property”, does she wonder on the fact that he loves her? It is not “property”, in as much as he merely wishes to protect her. To protect her, as in, from being seen as expendable by anyone else, because he loves her. For death will eagerly look upon those whom others have indeed taken, of their love, for granted.

Food may be taken for granted. Same with money. All things material can be taken for granted, simply because they inevitably are.

Though, the most undying thing that is never taken for granted, is love.

Love doesn’t die, because we protect what we love. We do eat the bread, and then it disappears. Do we eat, or use, or loved ones? We do not. We do not wish them to disappear, like something expendable.

Though, through “anti-bullying”, there is the same ideas, as above.

What does an Activist see of a child, if he or she cannot befriend them?

What does an Activist see of a child, if he or she cannot endanger their career, to be more honest about their emotions?

What does an Activist see of a child, if he or she cannot run from what confines themselves, to free what confines the child?

The bullied child’s greatest torment is the same as the terminally ill patient in a hospice. It’s the same suffering as a PTSD war Veteran. It’s the same suffering as anyone who comprehends, deep within themselves, they they’ll die faster because of what is absent, not present.

The “anti-bullying” Activist cannot offer a heart. They can offer knowledge.

Knowledge, for its own sake, is consumption. It’s the idea by which, having already stated this, adheres to appetite and satiation. In this, there is corruption. One corrupts what was not loved.

As the Activist aids bullied children, they learn about bullied children. They document what they witness in journals and papers, for their “research” within the bounds of Universities. Yet, if being all for knowledge, why not be all for heart?

Knowledge is gained. Used. It is by this, that an Activist, even if not stating it openly, is using a child for their gain. For their appetite, for their satiation, for their desire, they gain by what they learn.

For to spoil anything like knowledge, would ruin it, make it as lack of a surprise. That is what the researcher craves. It’s the “A-ha!” moment that clarifies realization, in the discovery. Down the road of “anti-bullying” Activism, there is no heart. There is only knowledge.

Philosophy – “To Hell with the Activists” – 7/3/2020

It is as if a human cannot comprehend what cannot disappear. Life, itself, that is, as it seems such activists are siding more with death. What pertains to existence? Is it what will not disappear, entirely? For something like death to disappear, would cause life to have no purpose, as life. As in, to die, because it can. Though, to what cannot disappear, being life on its own, being of life, itself, relates exactly to what an activists advocates against. Some desire prejudice to be extinguished from our world. Some desire not merely the whole of prejudice, though certain prejudices, like stereotypes, or racism. Why desire to make disappear, what cannot ever leave?

Humans are humans. People will always be people. There is no departing from who we are, at our core. What we call a “social construct” in the desire to tear it down, will inevitably result in ourselves being torn apart. We tear ourselves down, because we called what we have created a “construct” that such stupid minds believe was not made by human hands. They must believe that. They must believe that at the center of human instinct, we were not the ones to create Hell.

Hell is a construction, though more-so a causation. One can only extend Hell from their inner selves, being of what won’t soothe itself, without communication. For we are only ever prejudiced, as an expression, because we refuse to communicate with the unknown.

Hell is caused, because it causes destruction. Destruction cannot be constructed. We cannot tear down what is tearing apart ourselves. We will only succeed in tearing apart who we are, being the named “equality” that defines ourselves to be like someone else. Of the same instincts, of the same reasons, of the same motives, to fight for something that we don’t want to see die.

To extinguish the flame of the human spirit, is to make disappear what cannot leave, being life. It will not leave, because we don’t want it to leave. In essence, what an activist “fights against” is themselves, as they are blind to what they are also contributing to, being of what they oppose.

And, why would we want the greatest form of entertainment, to be erased? Human stupidity becomes our laughing stocks, when it is shown. Why would we desire prejudice to be gone, when we can find humor in it?

What an activist wants, if they cannot at all make disappear what will inevitably remain, is money. They are actually proving this written point, that they yearn to fight for their own families, through their own careers, in profiting from something that will be eternal. In being eternal, their careers are eternal. A non-stop fight to a non-stop fight, this is, and these “activists” burn in their own Hell, as well. They feel pain just as anyone else does, and disappear as individual human existences, as anything else that holds shape. But, they will not go away, just as anything else of life, itself.