Political Philosophy – “How a Population is Manipulated” – 10/23/2021

“Leadership does not govern according to its people. As for the politics of leadership, it will govern to what it might find useful or advantageous. As there is nothing more advantageous than of the fruit of chaos, for a people to believe politics sides with a nation’s population is to forget that it exists in consideration for what it might plunder. As all freed nations have become such out of the sufferers becoming the leadership, makes to what is political, in nature, as nothing more than the desire to possess freedom to itself.”

– Modern Romanticism

No leadership connects to its people. All leadership is an advantage for itself, mimicking what former leaderships had done to gain their own display of power. A nation’s population, with its freedoms and rights, are as life, with the idea that both freedom and lives are vulnerable enough to become stolen. Would then a nation’s population believe that rights and also life are precious enough to be protected, means that such are not gifts with the intent on never stealing it back. Does one steal back a gift? It cannot be the case, when this was deemed as mere sacrificial, in essence.

Life cannot be given, as is the same with rights. Freedom is not a gift, because along with rights and life, all of these things are there with their vulnerable nature, always within the threat of being stolen and lost. Rights are lost when such are, though landed in the possession of another who is the thief, speaking of the term “loss” as now on the side of the thief. Rights or freedom or life is lost to the thief, because such were not given to the thief.

Rights are a blessing to have, though even a blessing is earned. A curse is to what is lost of being blessed, though is more the case that the person, with such a loss, lacks the will to take back what was stolen. Their curse is their lack of will, since what was stolen was done by another without the desire to earn, though took to the convenience of theft. If in the recognition of what was worked for, becomes then the recognition of what was lost to ourselves, then the outcome is to take back what was taken from our hands. It is in death that a thing as life, loved by a multitude, can be lost for eternity. What has now amounted to loss, being of a thing now in possession by another, must be understood as something of what was allowed for them to have or not.

True manipulation lays in the mindset of whomever states that their rights are under protection by their nation’s leadership. Such would not be the same as having rights, though instead is the power that is ever-more endangered than life, freedom, or rights. Would one have power, being of the tyrannical sort that dictates who should be free and who should not, is always in danger from those who yearn for their freedoms. It is an inevitable factor that those who want freedom will have it. It is since such a desire to not be deceived nor manipulated will grow to a proportion that its eruption is an unstoppable occurrence.

To those who believe their rights are guarded by their political favorites, are only ever returned the favor by those same political favorites. This manner of manipulation is through the obliviousness that a person’s rights are as guarded as their life, temporary and vulnerable to the notion that all can be stolen. If a person believes that their own rights are protected by those who are leaders to their nation, then their next statement is to believe that those same political favorites hold greater loyalty to their family or friends.

Philosophy – “Why Choice is more the Slave’s Route, than Freedom’s Route” – 9/18/2021

“Were choice to ever compare to freedom, then we’ll always say the tyrant should never be accountable for their decisions. Freedom is deserved, only ever upon the realization for the consequences to such decision-making.”

– Modern Romanticism

We are not free through choice, for that is the route of the slave. A slave does not choose to be free. A slave is meant to be free, because as any life, it is not meant to be imprisoned unless for the purpose of being responsible for wrongdoing. Though, a tyrant would enslave, if through the offering of choice, that to their people would gladly take without question for its source. Just as the desperate addict would not question what the source is to their addiction, nor the businessman so afflicted by greed care for the intent of the one whom their sales are sold to, all is corruption under endless option.

Options do not make the freedom. Instead, accountability for the consequences of any person’s decisions allow the freedom, as such is deserved. Freedom, or rights, are earned, same with life. Life is earned, though a tyrant is not willing to allow it in the same sense as a kidnapper is not allowing freedom for their captive. Those who believe liberation lies in choice, are in fact slaves to the ignorance of outcome.

Continue reading “Philosophy – “Why Choice is more the Slave’s Route, than Freedom’s Route” – 9/18/2021″

10 Reasons why Love has no Relation to Consumerism – 4/8/2021

1. Love has nothing to do with consumerism, in that it has nothing to do with division.

2. Love has nothing to do with consumerism, because itself relates to never having a choice.

3. Love has nothing to do with consumerism, because the consumerist mind has more to do with wanting an excuse, being able to reason, and having infinite choices.

4. Love has nothing to do with consumerism, because “having a choice” would be more oriented towards cheating or committing infidelity.

5. Love has nothing to do with consumerism, because itself has more of a relation to honesty. It is honesty that has a relation to a lack of freedom or a lack of the ability to excuse oneself.

6. Love has nothing to do with consumerism, because it bases itself on remembered standards, which the consumerist mindset has none.

7. Love has nothing to do with consumerism, because the consumerist mindset has more of an affiliation with easily-manipulated & exploitable feelings, over anything eternal.

8. Love has nothing to do with consumerism, because itself has nothing to do with manipulation. It is manipulation that compares to the ability to reason, and then to wriggle oneself out of responsibility.

9. Love has nothing to do with consumerism, because the consumerist mindset has a better comparison to freedom. It is the concept of freedom and infinite choice that limits itself in terms of a value’s longevity, to be more aligned with worth for the infinite amount.

10. Love has nothing to do with consumerism, because the consumerist mindset comprehends infinite choice as the independence of the person. It is independence that compels a person to rebel against the past, for which love encompasses.

Quote – “To Kneel, is to Submit before your Masters” – 2/18/2021

“If those who kneel outnumber those who stand, then freedom is lost. Weakness festers in the eyes of those who choose to bend a knee, to their slave-masters, who’d return an act of rebellion with a word. For in today’s world, as whips have been replaced with such vocabulary, kneelers are in submission to greater forces. Their weakness is a darkness, somehow allowed to foster in these sorts who bring themselves low. How else is it not a representation of submission to masters, if one lowers themselves, lowers their mind and status, to something they must view to be higher?”

– Modern Romanticism

Philosophy – “In the Midst of a Virus, Optimism and Idealism is Best” – 2/6/2021

“Those who support the facts of a world depraved, are those who seek to keep the deprivation steady and continuous.”

– Modern Romanticism

Scientists support facts. Politicians seem to support the scientists. However, doers will be idealistic, even among the pain of not letting the world spin and continuing on with the flow.

There are nations that falter, with their obsessions on realism. These are nations being fed the facts. There are people, in these nations, who are starved of being responsible. Responsible for who? Responsible for their families. Responsible for the historical outlook, with the future generations. How will future generations see us? They will ask, “Why didn’t they move?”

Facts do not move. Facts stand still. They remain. What tackles the evident oppression are always those who are against facts.

There are those who claim their death. Whereas, there are those who speak of wanting to live. This is the difference between cowardice and bravery. One does not tackle a suicide mission without appearing insane to most.

Facts are necessary. However, as all facts are frozen and stiff, the people who dream of betterment forge the movements that get to a destination. The facts do not follow.

The facts remain and the facts remain. Who supports the scientists? What side tells the scientists to feed us facts? That’s whatever side that deserves extermination. Pinpoint it, being of oppression, that they’re the side deserving the condemnation for endangering a world, full of people and their personal goals.

In the world of 2020 & 2021, those who can afford to be realistic are those who can subdue the idealistic. As in, whoever is realistic, during this world, are either cowards or the comfortable. Those of the latter will tell a person, so idealistic, that the world will one day allow them “room to breathe”. We have shown that certain humans are the greater virus, than Covid-19.

Those who can claim to wish for freedom, are the people who are compatible with today’s setting. They can be the ones who bring about the true movements, not the distractions. For no true flood and no true purge of the real threat, can ever be labelled a “distraction”.

No leader can side with facts, though also wish for change.

As it is also the truth, no leader can side with change, though also cling to facts.

In a world full of defeatists and those who bite their nails in fear, optimism is the greatest weapon. Though, in a world full of options and ampleness, there is much room to be realistic and hold onto what one knows.

No one thirsts themselves upon facts, anymore than anyone can drink ice. Does the ice move, except for the glacier that no one pays any attention to? Or, does the flood move more quickly?

Feed the world facts, and then the world will continue to move as slow as a glacier.

For the realists only ever level the outbursts of the overly-idealistic, as they become stilled and calm, like ice. Though, the optimists and idealists will always know their world of water, to pull the realist out from drowning.

Philosophy – “The Possible Reason for a Nation of 50 States” – 2/1/2021

“Liberty belongs in the scenery one attributes themselves to. Did one grow up in America, or did one grow up in Kansas? Did one grow up in America, or did one grow up in New York? Would one call America their home, or would one call Michigan their home? To belong, is to identify where one can be naturally situated, while still being a citizen towards the same nation.”

– Modern Romanticism

Belonging. It’s a word that resembles acceptance. Though, upon its opposite, of something related to oppression, there is rejection. Perhaps the more abstract idea behind composing a nation of 50 states, was in the aspect of that “belonging”. To know where one stands, to become one where one feels most supreme, or to simply feel welcomed, must be to the liberty for which an American understands their actual origin. It is their origin, with the secondary reminder, still necessary, that they are unified with the rest. Split into 50 states, it is still America, though there to offer belonging not merely in one country, though in the diverse realm of acceptances that make the 50.

How can it be that a system would, in such a nation where “belonging” is a factor we find most precious, be universal, without erasing such a notion of acceptance? If each state possesses individual faults within either its show of standards or lack thereof, or of its show of culture, there could not be more of a fitting realm of competition given to us, even of the good sense. If we erase acceptance, then we erase the 50 states to perhaps become the New America. Though, that erases belonging. That erases liberty. Must liberty be what we call a sense of where we fall back to, being our home? Of the American soldier who yearns to steer back to such warmth of their home, and not to the dictator’s realm, there can be things better attributed to a state, of that belonging, rather than simply for the entirety. Though, it would still be America, as it will always be such, even with where its citizens belong.

Could a system, so universal, erase the belonging, the acceptance, the liberty for which we find such previous factors enjoyable? We can only be a dictator, enough to erase liberty. Even in the dream of perpetual and qualitative momentum, within progress, within enlightenment, within change pertaining to each voice coming forth, there can be sheer darkness. Nothing would be universal, except for what we understand, deep within. That, beyond the competition of sports, the competition of ethics or perceptions of morality, the value of something according to the monetary standard, all citizens of each state are still Americans. They comprehend each other, unified, as the United States.

Would any idea of a universal system ever come to pass in that idea-maker’s mind, that anything of such an origin as a workaround, does not place in closest regard what an American should remind themselves of? As in, could such a person with that idea ever comprehend why liberty has been embedded into an American’s mindset, that something deemed as “universal” of a system, would not work, due to that it allows them to forget themselves? Americans would forget themselves, as Americans, due to any system reaching itself as universal, would erase the liberty for which one citizen, of any state, would no longer feel their sense of belonging.

Belonging must be understood, of an American, as where they originated, though still with the remembrance that they are from one country. The reminder comes after the notion of that origin.

Philosophy – “The Objective Problem with Diversity” – 1/22/2021

“Split the gathered knowledge in a mind, and once more, one gets the many words for separate books, put upon library shelves to be abandoned.”

– Modern Romanticism

It should be noted immediately that the only result of diversity, upon when it is forced, is ignorance. Does one not force apart a thing, after it has been gathered together for its creation of wholeness? Would one of their adoration upon diversity direct this towards families, separating perhaps fathers from the unit? That has already occurred.

Perhaps the cruelty in this mindset would be better off causing deliberate grief, in the killing of children of their own mothers? Though, why not “go that far”, when such is down the same path?

Diversity, according to the causation of it, leaves a stain of what was bled. As in, through what was ripped apart, whether being of flesh (an abortion) or of communities (of mind), relates to the reminder of all that was lost. What cannot be torn away is the love that did indeed unify a thing, in creation. For it was to the opposite form, of true diversity, that “creation” brought about the differing colors. No one “introduces diversity” without being the deconstructionist who tears down what was already naturally built. Once more, why not cultivate this mindset to be something for people to kill off others, in the name of the pangs of grief, of the heated despair caused by loneliness? It is all down the same path.

Diversity, when introduced, deconstructs. It tears apart. An example of an abortion is the causation, not the creation, of diversity. An example of a psychopath dismembering a person, is what is “causation” to diversity. Though, what of love? How does a person side with choice, though also side with love? It cannot be, that according to what love represents, there is choice involved. Love involves no choice. How then, does a person who sides with this cruel form of diversity, ever comprehend what it means to unify?

The ignorance that is caused by this cruel form of diversity disallows all people from realizing what creates unity. That is, creation, itself, is the breeder of unity. We do not cause diversity in the name of unity. We create diversity in the name of unity.

Philosophy: Creation & Causation, and the Act of Sheer Responsibility for Upheld Life – Chapter One – “Of all Artists” – 9/21/2020

To the future, the artist can tell where the present will go. For the present, the artist can see that the past shall shape his wisdom, so that the future holds clarity. For to what the artist can create, there is always a distance from Creation, to futurist scenery. Though, it cannot be that an artist will foretell the future, when the present is never obeying his command. A command, directed upon only the present, will move Creation to the future.

To love, makes the artist someone who shall raise. Raising what has been created, as a Creation, is the essence of support. For what the artist raises, shows he is responsible. An artist supports, by way of the past, for the present to step forward into the future. Love is the expression that the artist shows to his Creation, and in his support, what is raised, is never neglected. For among all love, there is the raising of things vulnerable, or things beautiful. In what the artist views as beautiful, is what all artists view to be beautiful. Alone, and afraid to make the journey, without guidance; and soon, Creation reveals the artist’s design for how it has been structured.

Reinforced, and never remade; protected, and never changed; adored, and never to abhor, is the ideal notion of artist to Creation. Of mother to child, it is the same. Love beats the heart, out of excitement, and never fear, to see what shall become of this Creation. Love makes the soul yearn. For it is the development of both who we are, and what we attach ourselves to, that to its loss, we lose ourselves. We lose our development, being what each human yearns for. It is out of knowledge that to be lost in the present, is to be stagnant without love.

All mothers, among all artists, treasure their attachments, for they are never material. In not ever being material, they are never viewed as disposable.

Love drives Creation, out of realization that to create, merely means to perhaps benefit the vulnerable form. For as the artist makes, they make themselves. They understand themselves, as they fortify themselves. They unmask themselves, showing truth to the world that would be otherwise kept hidden. The artist will, though should not, deny themselves as not alone in the world of others alike. Their loneliness in personal comprehension can shut themselves to isolation, which is the realm of the artist. They discover vulnerabilities, within, that without space, would be kept locked away.

Love always burns those images into view. We are meant to create, not for the gain of it, though for the gift of it. Therefore, the artist who beholds the Creation as his own property, is indeed selfish. His love to the message of statement, of appearance over doing good, makes him arrogant. The making of statements, in sheer intake. In doing good, we inevitably sacrifice materialism.

Love fells rays upon what cannot be seen, over what is deemed as invisible. Thus, the artist connects with another of his kind, making true understanding between Creators.

We cannot be in love with ourselves, without meaning we are in lust with ourselves. The artist who creates, is one who gifts. Though, in their desire to say it is only they who can comprehend the Creation they have made, such are inevitable words. For who else, whose confusion to life has made them an artist, would not offer themselves the personal satisfaction of that revelation? Revelation awaits all who hunger for a store of knowledge, even if it comes from somewhere within the artist, themselves. Their modesty is their subtlety. When they wish to understand their own thoughts, they become lustful in their newfound path to acknowledge and accept themselves.

To be on the path towards a future, not merely within the space of the present, there is meant to be knowledge of the past. Knowledge of former mistakes, not ever received by the artist with blindness. How else, in this scenario, does an artist create? How else, if not to make sense of confusion that originates from the past? Of answers to unasked questions, definitions to undefined understandings, as they become the torments we face in our sleep. All realities are unperceived nightmares. They are faced in the dark, for we do not attempt to dissect them, in daylight.

On the way to Creation, an artist makes of the dark, being things they do not understand, as their present. For to be in the present, is to be lustful. Though, to steer such a present towards the future, is to be loving. Love moves the emotions, the mind, and stabilizes all things that would be dust, without it. To Creation, all artists command what can, and should, face their Creator’s direction.

Guidance, among principle, ignores choice, and does not heed to materialistic freedom. Love loses its light, whenever we cannot remember. To remember what? It is only to remember what originated the love, or simply originated. We were not here, first. As both our mother and our father survived enough to put us upon earth, we can be grateful enough they thought themselves to lack a choice. In raising us, that is, for to the artist, raising the Creation involves no freedom upon the self.

To the Creation, love guides it. To love, there is not restraining control, though only the mind that leads the vulnerable form. As it is, no artist should see the form, the shape, the physical essence as what needs to be free. We free the mind, as such is the only representation of this freedom.

Survival befits the guide, who controls what is led, towards the future deemed as uncertain in the eyes of the Creation. For were the Creation to create, they’d sure recall what their Creator told unto them. That, to create merely means to continue what shall survive. Artists create, because what exists of things no one, not even the artist, comprehends, there is darkness. From darkness, comes the light of Creation. From Creation, comes other Creations, begun to its development by its father, born into the world by its mother.

Love cannot deny life, for the artist will expression the rawness to that emotion, by way of knowing pain. To empathize, means to understand the woes of a Creation’s experience. We love, out of knowledge that the Creation can be hurt. We then protect, out of knowledge that our own instincts lead the hurt towards mending. We carry in our arms, the wounded of their forms, to be healed and then sent for another test.

Why is God called Father? To begin, and nothing more. A beginning is to life, and all else related to such Creation. What has been created, was not out of choice, though out of love. If what is created is born out of lust, then it is in the crime for selfish gain, to rob what can be used. To reap a benefit, merely means to manipulate the life, never to love it. As love is useless, it is then the emotion that purely and strictly defines the forward motion to being developed. We love, because we can, as there is no other reason. There never is a reason to love. There never is an excuse. We either love, or we do not.

For to manipulate would mean to deceive, and if any artist deceives a Creation, they would not be like God. They’d be like Satan, offering a choice outside the realm of love. In offering a choice, there is desired power over one’s own form, over how one could define themselves. Without love, we are merely the choosers to a different destiny.

In not heeding the artist, Creation rebels. In being deaf, Creation throws its ears to mass noise, instead of mass silence. In silence, we pray. In silence, we weep. In desperation, we are merely meant to be silent, so we know the artist can listen for the one who can show gratitude.

Creation is a test, and a lesson, for other Creation. Love will lose its light, when Creation cannot heed what created it. When we suffocate, we do so by how we suffocate love. Where and when had been conceived, is defined by the who in such a scenario. Who was trusted by the woman, enough to reveal her wounds? Then, her scars that were committed by former men; who accepts them? A man, or a soon-to-be father, is meant to comprehend what he does, as himself. His beginning is her ending. His Alpha is her Omega.

Beginning of life. To next, the ending of life. All is the artist’s path to their Creation, making of who is loved the developed person who had never faltered. Due to their support, they never stunted in growth, metaphysically so. Of their mind, they were free, and of their forms, they were sacrificial.

To lead on the Creation to the future, can only be in the realization that who had created the artist, was also a Creator. Love is the reason to be pushed. Onward, towards the future where one can further making something of greater light. To be beautiful, is to be vulnerable. To be loved, is to have those vulnerabilities overseen, and thus, understood. Cracks to flesh, makes the vulnerability known of what is beneath.

Who had created the artist, being also a Creator, is they who had loved, and had taught guidance to the current generation. Of individuals who last, it was only due to who allowed them to live, that they can understand the meaning of responsibility.

Love is the only emotion that compiles all others. In the artist’s belief that no one besides him could create their work, they would be right. To the Creation, the artist comprehends all they know of themselves, to form what is created into shape. The artist shapes Creation, through the use of knowledge. For to know, merely means to understand how to move. Thus, the artist understands how to make move the Creation. To move it into shape, that is, is the artist’s goal. For as all people, and even among animals, are artists, then it is to the inevitable understandings of movement, that pushes Creation to the future.

The artist creates, to diversify the world in terms of separate ideas. Ideas that can blend, though will always form a one. Though, to idea that compete, there is still to be a one for whichever emerges victorious. A oneness, is always a Creation blended from a multiple. Creation is that which is formed, by the artist, out of separated understandings. These are understandings that come from the artist, of themselves, and of what the artist understands of others. It cannot be what the artist assumes of others, for such is merely the naivety of what cannot be understood between individual Creators. A Creator is a oneness, formed of themselves to the limitless height of the developed. All that is developed, is limitless, though only in what the Creator creates. It is not in development that we gain, though only for what we can gift. In development, there is never limitlessness in pieces, or division by way of what has been fractured of Creation. It is always Creation for the sake of the next.

All artists blend the idea to the next, especially by way of the Creation heeding what the Creator has taught them. To understand the words of the Creator, means to understand truth. To understand truth, means to obey it. For as knowledge is passed, then it is truth that becomes passed, in the sheer name of trust. We trust what is not deceptive, being not of appearance. We cannot claim to trust what we see, because a focus on appearance becomes always the blindness to action. Such focus on appearance, turns corruption covert. For if we focus on appearance, we are blind to the acts of those who are evil. As they tell us to see appearance, we become deceived. All is tempting of the appearance, for it is a distraction, and nothing more.

To the strict focus of appearance, is to never wish for sight upon the act of the person. To want a Creator, or even God, to show themselves, is to want to be deceived. For to trust, is meant to never see a face, though only the actions that would prove the face necessary to be revealed. Why would anyone ask for the face of God, without in comprehension that by way of love, action must be foremost so a face is recognized?

It is always that we do not prove through appearance, as that would relate to deception. Were “proof” to hold meaning in sheer appearance, we’d be deceived. It would be unlike requesting proof of someone’s care, not their negligence, through their acts. Whomever neglects us, in this world, never acted for us. Therefore, why would they need to make an appearance? Though, to wonder solely on why God never shows His appearance, is to question the reason why the abandoned street orphan never has anyone to simply appear, in their own sight. For appearance is nothing, if not the greatest deception to those who expect action. To simply appear before the child, to simply proclaim one is their caregiver, though to see in full view the child’s apparent negligence, is to experience deception.

Action proves, as appearance does not. Existence relies on the realization that one is alive, not that an understood Creator would be a true thing.

No love can simply be an appearance. The artist creates, so that the Creation can remember the actions of care that its Creator implemented. We have no mind without love, as have no motivation for existence without its heart. We would stagnate ourselves in our own wounds, as they never mended. For as we fracture, love heals. Love is the healing that does not shatter, until the mind is broken. Though, when the body is broken, love comes to seal the wounds, protecting all that is vulnerable.

Quote – “Politics and Art… or, Logic and Feelings” – 7/31/2020

“In the attempt to blend politics with art, it never is that feelings dominate logic. Whereas, it will be that feelings, being of chaos, remain as is, until logic cleans up the mess. Where a riot will leave a disaster, logic will clean up the wreckage. Where does the cleaner take the rubble? Does he smear it around, or does he head it straight to the dumpster? It is the latter, always. Logic dominates feelings, making the blend of politics and art the overtaking of art from politics, and it is always in that method.

Feelings, in terms of politics, epitomizes chaos. It is because one completely disregards logic, if their intent is to cause chaos. Chaos is never a goal, as it is a method. It is never an end, as it is a means. As chaos is caused, it becomes a distraction for someone’s benefit.

Therefore, it should be that politics and art should remain separate.”

– Modern Romanticism

Quote – “The Idiocy in Erasing a Nation’s History” – 7/27/2020

“Whatever soldiers of the past fought for, to end or remain alive, makes those roots numerous by the many tears a storm of the mind had done to topple a body dead. Love protects, like how the mind is meant to protect the form, through wisdom. Therefore, to cut the roots of a nation, embedded in that nation’s history, means to set up the current people for doom. It is to state that current people will not be prepared for a storm, powerful enough to cause everyone to fall. For it is that each person will be on their knees, in submission to that tyranny. They were not prepared, because their roots were lacking.”

– Modern Romanticism

Quote – “The Leader who Forgets the Past” – 7/7/2020

“A vision that loses sight of the past, loses sight of the future. This is factual, in understanding the very human denial to believe that one’s ending, one’s failure, would not appear as painful as how one started. For whether that pain be the labor of a mother, or of a worker whose palms and fingers bleed in their effort to build, one never forgets the efforts of a duty. One protects what they built, with just as much effort as it had taken to build it, in the first place.

No leader can be a leader whose heart does not comprehend the mistakes of the past. For they place themselves on the likelihood of repeating what once occurred, and they will be surprised, much to everyone’s laughter.”

– Anonymous

Philosophy – “Why Erasing the Past is the Dumbest Idea” – 7/6/2020

“It is a human’s greatest denial, that their beginning cannot be the same as their ending.”

– Anonymous

An idiot Democrat will believe in creating a clean slate out of history. Their lack of comprehension is in that they fail to notice that history repeats itself, so cleanly. It moves through us, in that clarity. A repetition, so clean, that it is the only repetition somehow unnoticed, by that idiot Democrat. They have built mass production. Though, they fail to comprehend the repetition of history. They have built the corporate world, under Le Corbusier’s ideologies, in a forest of skyscrapers. Since old architects of Post-Modern design, such as that of Austria’s Otto Wagner, they have meant to build ugliness on top of objective beauty. This twisted ideology of “reconstruction” has made levels from a lacking foundation. It has really only ever involved ignorance.

Does the tree ever grow beneath the Earth? As in, if what we see clearly has roots, then those roots represent our past. If we cut the roots, then we are building something beneath ourselves. We are building ourselves directly towards Hell.

A purified lack of wisdom will see the past as needing to be erased. Yet, what idiot Democrat has ever possessed logic? Their lacking wisdom, not ever bound up in Zen, is their easily-displayed moronic attitudes. Those idiots will die beneath their own pitiful cravings, stamped as marks on their own belt. For they will perish by fate and Nature, itself.

A vision that loses sight of the past, loses sight of the future.