“There is a rotating cycle in a nation so bereft from responsibility that it somehow believes in the non-belief of the ‘expectation’; and this is to say that responsibility is what denies expectation. And yet, irresponsibility is the one side to this very cycle. The expectation is met with rebellion, while irresponsibility would indeed challenge the higher authority. Which is it? Which do we side with, as either the responsibility to challenge such authority, or the side that deals with a rebellious way against expectation? This should be known, that expectation is inevitable, and responsibility should be upheld in the highest esteem. Irresponsibility and a rebellion against expectation, is a contradiction on its own, for to be irresponsible is to reject the self’s individual authority, and to rebel against expectation, is to immediately fall into the authority from another; it is so, because without the personal responsibility, one’s own authority diminishes, so that one inevitably and automatically falls into the embrace of tyranny. And without the belief for the necessity of the expectation, one soon believes that they are in control of their decisions; though, in being irresponsible, this is never the case. How many groups must form that face the responsibility as the expectation? It is not the same. Expectation is external, and responsibility is internal. For once personal responsibility is erased, the authority of tyranny will rise, to exploit the most ancient of emotions called fear, for that desirous control.”
“The individual reigns in all their choices? Is it so that a person will find their situation as normal, and such should be left as is? What kind of philosophy is this? What does it create besides a world of distrust? We believe the individual to be in full control, and what about the individual’s own family and friends? Are they not to offer input? Are we, as individuals, soon better off blocking out all criticism, labeling it as ‘negativity’, and viewing ourselves as the only right ones? The individual would be very lonely in their own little habitat of normality. They’d say, ‘What I do is deemed as right only by me’, and be better off not knowing what another thinks on their actions. All this does is create that aforementioned ‘world of distrust’ between the common human. What people call ‘strangers’ could be friends, for every friend had once been a stranger.”
“We must comprehend the nature of the leader. It is a one who invents results. Whatever fool had said that each problem could result in many conclusions probably believed that humans have numerous feet, as the individual human; or that chaos is inevitable, because the leader has no choice but to form doppelgangers of himself, so that what his people follow are illusions; or that such numerous paths to innumerable conclusions, are there for numerable leaders to inevitably create endless competition, and never collaboration. Emotions, in reality, delay the result from its happening. Logic is the bone that does not curve. It would not shelter the heart, as a rib. It’d support the leg, or the arm, and be straight.”
Q: As you term it, the “individual perspective” has become the beginning of the selfishness to a world with only a focus on the self, and a human’s inevitable yearning for companionship?
A: The “focus on the self” stems always from a view around oneself that is full of the rottenness of humanity. One believes in the value of negativity, though possesses the guilt harbored deeply enough to blame the self. They hold value in negativity due to them believing it as “righteous” to find all humanity equal to dirt.
Q: And as you term it, such people, whose focus is solely on themselves, have only done this, because a human’s flesh, or truth, is like clay; easily molded so that it is suited to be a desired shape?
A: The human flesh is like a canvas. And in comparison to the mind, the mind is also like a canvas. Truth is blank, like the clay that has not been touched, or like the canvas without color, and what grows from this is eventually the form or the color that is the influence. Influence molds truth and makes it whole. People find fulfillment in their reputation and status, and this comes from influence. Influence and truth are not the same, because truth, as has been said, is blank without it becoming a shape. It is formless, and as a Nihilist enjoys saying, is a nothingness. Nihilism is merely the reset of humanity. A nothingness does not remain a nothingness for long. It is the very reason for why peace is short-lived, in comparison to the “long winter” or the “long, and brutal war”. Pain is continually wondered upon with the words in mind, “When will it end?”
Q: You have said that the “individual perspective” has become the selfishness of an era, due to how when society is in disorder, then one has no choice but to repair themselves? And when someone focuses on themselves, they rarely ever focus on what surrounds them?
A: Though a human is inevitably affected by the environment, or inevitably interacts with their environment, this is not to say that they care for those who create problems. Humans will see themselves as humans, and will see other humans as humans; and as a human is only a human, humans will see their mirror image in another human. A world that longs for companionship, is the world of pain. Should we have to long for companionship, it is only because we have experienced it before, or grown curious over having witnessed it, that we say we should belong to it. The “individual perspective” is the belief that there is no universal traits among humanity. Such people with a mindset as this, will be wonted to say that each human has their own “perspective” on what companionship should be, and this only entices the feeling of “personal empowerment”.
Q: And you have said that when a human eventually falls in love, and faces disaster in the romance, the blame turns upon themselves, despite the fact that they have pointed their finger in blame of the other?
A: To speak of the “mirror image” again, one will one day see the grief in their eyes, the sadness in their eyes, and come to know the meaning of responsibility. For in a world that focuses solely on the self, it is a world that will come to loathe the self. It is a world that when disaster surrounds them, it is because they have seen another’s mistake as their own mistake; that such mistakes are human mistakes; and in such companionship that a human longs for, it is through love that a broken heart can be healed. The love for the self, however, does not heal a broken heart. It embitters it, and instead of healing the wound, there is only the stain of anger.