Activist – Modern Romanticism

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.

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 – “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.