“What Defines Achievement?” – Excerpt from “The Origin of Prejudice” – 4/7/2021

“History is a repetition of what was concealed by the bandage to the wound, in the direct push of past errors to keep the future uncertain.”

– Modern Romanticism

Individualism can only be characterized as current stature. Stature is the recognition of one’s current place in the world that takes not to the collective’s self-comprehension, among what defines achievement. No individual achieves within the collective, due to that example must be shown so that repetition, through words, does not deceive a person’s comprehension of reality. Words do not express reality. Since that is the case, it is the acts of a person, led through by example, that reveals the definition of achievement. A collection would merely be the intrusion upon individualism, just as the past is meant to be offered forgiveness.

History repeats itself only in what is displayed as words. Words are repeated, because the actions that would make such dreams as realism have never been achieved. By the definition of achievement, only ever brought about by action, makes all manner of words, no matter how splendid, only the seduction or the deception. An explanation, however, would not be a deception, since any disclosure has already had prior action for the words to elaborate upon. For words to elaborate upon words, is a repetition. Then, it is true that an action to repeat a former one is the mere pointlessness of stupidity. The latter, of repeated actions that have always failed, is a showcase of a lack of learning.

It is not to say that achievement should forfeit itself at the single failure. However, to attempt the same method, in repetition, evokes a lack of learning for the individual. These individuals are soon placed with the collective of failures who’ve neglected to comprehend the definition of achievement. As it is not to achieve by the collective, though only through the individual, it is then to define failure as what repeats itself by words, alone. It is appropriate to state that an action cannot be truly repeated, without the words speaking louder. When words are speaking louder, it becomes the deception for the listener.

By this understanding of repetition, embraced in the delusion and deceptions of the collective, achievement cannot recognize itself without reality. What is real, besides being of what cannot repeat, due to our certainty of the past that has already been forgiven?

Philosophy – “Why Hate is not a Free Emotion” – 3/10/2021

“From love, people will trust. From betrayal, people will hate.”

– Modern Romanticism

Hatred is circumstantial as to who becomes the unfortunate soul to be targeted, by it. Though, by the one fused to this suffocating emotion, can be when a lie is what has convinced them that someone has caused betrayal. Through this delusion, hatred can be born. Deception is indeed sometimes the route that causes a person to be sunken into hatred. Though, as a suffocating emotion, it cannot be felt freely. As in, hate is impossible to feel, towards a race, towards a gender, towards a religion, towards a nation, or towards anyone or anything broad and numbered, within itself.

Individuals hate others of the same singular, though only when love unto trust was the scenario, first of all. Love unto trust, and then, when hatred was the next transformation, it was only due to a perceived betrayal that brought the hateful person low. It was love unto trust, because as hatred is no free emotion, it is always specific as to who is targeted. Specific, since hatred came from trust. Utmost trust, and when it is slashed, the perceived betrayal caused the now specific feeling of hatred to be birthed.

We cannot hate a race, nor can a man hate all women. What we can do, out of prejudice, is simply not know another. Therefore, it is prejudice that relates only to ignorance, not hatred. Though, no media would tell of racism or whatever form of prejudice through a slogan such as “stop the fear”, because that raises the idea of mutual vulnerability. If that were the new idea to speak upon, there would be unity. People would begin to question whether there is mutual vulnerability between those who fear each other, rather than employing a word like “hatred” to deceive others into believing it is one-sided.

For hatred is that, being a one-sided emotion, targeted as specific. Through the deception that makes other believe that racism or some other form of prejudice can be one-sided, it is why they utilize the word called “hate”. It is them that believe that perhaps a racist person, who might be white of skin-tone, is ever only the type to be of such an ignorant mindset.

That is to say that if any certain person cannot be prejudiced, would mean that they are incapable of feeling fear. Since it is fear that has a relation to ignorance, out of common examples of people who are reluctant to get to know another person, someone who cannot be prejudiced also cannot be afraid. It might be right to admit that a person who cannot feel afraid, would also not be needed for education. Such a latter point refers to the media’s excessive usage of the word “hate”, referencing also a one-sided understanding of prejudice, deluding a person into believing education, which would alleviate ignorance, is unneeded.

Would a black person, sometimes said to possess the immunity to racism, not ever feel fear or be anxious? If that were the case, then ignorance has rocketed itself to the level where we might even one day believe that people within black communities don’t suffer from blood pressure issues.

Without feeling fear, one would be incapable of having a high blood pressure, or even a living heartbeat or pulse. We could even admit, aloud, that those who unable to perhaps be prejudiced are vampires or zombies, without heartbeats or even a working lower brain.

Why would we require education, if everyone can freely state the words, “I hate everyone”? And, why would we require education, if someone can say about the prejudiced person that they are “hateful”? It would be evident, through hatred, that we knew a person, upon a time in our lives.

Philosophy – “Why Anti-Racism Encourages Division” – 2/22/2021

“Rejection is just one representation of division, out of either a disregard for how a person appears upon the surface, or by some remembrance to past experience. To reject, out of valid reason, would not be the ignorance between two people who reject each other for none. Out of no reason, that is, people reject out of ignorance. Though, with hatred, people reject each other with good reason involved.”

– Modern Romanticism

To be “anti”, to a person’s mind, references avoidance. Though, how does a person “avoid racism”, if not, at the same time, avoid people? In racism, there is avoidance, in and of itself. That is, one cannot be “anti-racist” without ignoring the fact that racism refers to an absence. Depression can be spoken of, as an example between this divide of valid and invalid reason for one’s avoidance. It is a feeling being felt due a loss or what never was. Out of hatred, there is now a valid avoidance. Though out of ignorance, there is an invalid avoidance.

Does a person, who hates another, have a valid reason for their avoidance to them? They do, by how such avoidance signifies their need to “move on” from the past experience. However, does a person who simply does not know another, though expresses prejudice to them, have a valid reason for their avoidance to them? They do not, due to how their ignorance has made them willing to look only upon the surface. It is, by this example, why the term “avoidance”, by way of racism or any form of prejudice, has to do with having no reason to have knowledge of another person. We are racist or just prejudiced, because we have no reason to do so. Though, were we to have a reason for our avoidance, out of legitimate hatred, then we can be excused from any accusation of supposed prejudices.

Hatred or prejudice is indeed related to the example of depression. This inner sadness is only ever brought about by one of two ways: either in what was lost, or what has never been. It is either an active or a passive feeling. We will feel we have a reason for it, or not one at all.

By how we feel we’ve no reason for either our prejudices or our depression, it is because we avoid out of being passive to another person.

Then, to be “anti-racist” is to encourage this avoidance, in being exposed to only ourselves or those of our kind. It becomes a narcissistic mindset, where the reflections we view are never that of newness, in terms of knowledge. We stay with what we know, being confined out of our reluctance to discover more. For if we did discover more, we’d not see difference, though sameness.

By how we are prejudiced, we simply have no reason for it. Same with ignorance, where is just no reason to be so. Same with depression, where it can be felt without any clue to its origin. Among all these things, we have avoided. We have avoided, because we cannot find an excuse for it.

Philosophy – “When Anger becomes the Reaction to Prejudice” – Pt. 2 – 12/29/2020

“Rage is the uncontrolled emotion, spread about like flame, unable to disperse without either nothing else to destroy, or in the touch of its superior, being water.”

– Modern Romanticism

How cruel can a modern world be to tell a certain race that they’re the only targets of racism, or to tell a woman that she is the only target of sexism? Is this not the same as telling a widow that she should suffer alone, in her grief? Should it not be obvious that a reaction would form, being one of anger?

Anger is the veil before the water, being the hurt of a human. As in, so long as nature compelled it to be the case, that oil would float above water, then everything of pollution, allowed to turn to ash, would be something to burn. Of oil, or of pollution above an ocean, or of anything simply not meant to belong, is what conceals the hurt, beneath. Anger conceals hurt, by how a person becoming enraged is merely pretending to be strong. As in, their rage is their lie to consume, to claim that they are strong, despite being weak because of inward hurt.

To tell a person that they’re the only targets of prejudice, would indeed bring about the isolation necessary to spark anger. Any intense feeling of loneliness is an onset to anger. It is here to prove that whoever tells a race, or any group of people, that they are the only targets to this prejudice, are those who support the divisiveness it causes. Because, out of isolation, comes the anger, and soon comes the inability to understand another. It would be understanding that would douse those flames of wrath, as it would be also the thing to cease the feeling of loneliness.

How else does prejudice become erased, if not for understanding? How else does anger become extinguished, if not for revealing what does hurt? And, how else does a person connect with another, if not to be trusted on the reveal for that hurt? We are then truthful in what we reveal, deep beneath what compelled us to lie and be “strong” in rage.

Philosophy – “Why Anger becomes the Reaction to Prejudice” – 12/24/2020

“To tell one race that they’re the only sufferer from prejudice, is always equivalent to saying upon someone that they should feel alone in their suffering.”

– Modern Romanticism

How would anger not be the trigger to an immense feeling of loneliness, especially one so encouraged, upon a specific race? Is not the cure to prejudice to not feel the anger, though to weep against the shoulder of one so understanding?

Anger is the feeling that rises from loneliness. It strikes out against the world. People are angry not because of prejudice, though because of the loneliness that suffering brings when it is not unified. Anger is felt upon realizing one can only understand their own suffering, when it is not the case. Rage poisons the individual, as such a person will not, in their loneliness, release their pain through a cleansing session of weeping.

How cruel can some idiotic celebrity, politician, or activist be to say upon a race that they are the only target to prejudice? Why not then be the ones to say upon a widow that she should suffer in the dark? Why not say to a despondent and alone orphan that no one should help them? If such is the mindset we obey, then we are lost.

Personal Post – “A Thing about Ignorance/Prejudice…”

I began this blog with the idea of writing poetry. Then, it expanded into both prose and philosophy. I write through this blog to share a density of emotions and analogies, carried through the words.

As I see the world today, I am left with the conclusion that people are not close, especially when the focus is on what I call “surface details”.

“Surface details” are the divisions of color. “Colors” can be a race, a gender, a religion, etc. All colors should be referenced as a mask, to conceal truth. What truth? The truth that is in the heart. We have to know a person, be close to a person, trust a person, to understand them, and have the knowledge of them. Not to ever manipulate them, though to feel empathy for hurts, and heal those hurts through love.

Why would anyone wish to focus on their color, when they could take off such a mask, to show the truth of the heart?

As a child and adolescent of a white skin color, the majority of my friends were black. I did not care. I played basketball. I mingled with those who were attracted to that sport. It’s interesting to note, that even as I write this, such details feel so alien. Even now, I do not feel good.

To conclude the last paragraph, my best friend is Hispanic, while the love of my life who all 1,000+ poems on this blog are dedicated to, is Bisexual. But, I say, who cares?

Who cares about such surface details, which if a person is so comfortable in discussing, would make them prejudiced?

I hold a way of thinking that conforms with this blog, that any person is very much yearning for someone else to see their heart. They want that person to handle it with care, with compassion, with gentleness. Why would anyone wish for loneliness to counter company?

Why not see the truth of a person? Why not engage with them? If we throw around a slogan that says, “Only you understand yourself,” we are saying that no one else should speak to you. If we can only understand ourselves, and are openly admitting that, we are believing the entire world would be ignorant of us. We are then proud of another’s ignorance to us. That is a direct enforcement of prejudice.

Prejudice is ignorance, as ignorance is always aligned with fear. We are fearful, when prejudiced, because we do not have the courage to face what we do not wish to know.

Quote – “The Moron who Believed Prejudice to be a Simple Dislike” – 8/27/2020

“The moron who states that prejudice is a simple dislike, is same in the belief that soldiers warring with one another, from nation to nation, simply ‘dislike’ one another. How could a soldier simply dislike his enemy, over fearing them? Fear is a refinement tool. It tempers any individual to comprehend certain wisdom. Whether to trust or to distrust, makes either the courageous or fearful individual. No one neutrally dislikes, without prior experience to what is disliked. By that prior experience, a person is fearful of outcomes to what is embraced, gotten close to, of whatever is cast off into distance. Their distrust, their dislike, resonates in fear of outcomes to being close to whatever is kept at a distance.

One cannot neutrally dislike what is given that reproach, without being occasionally reminded on its existence. What forms prejudice in this world is the distance. Such distance always pertains to the fear in never being close. For the only reason to not be close, is in the fear of seeing something one does not wish to know.”

– Modern Romanticism

Quote – “Why not Believe Prejudice as a Fear?” – 8/27/2020

“When prejudice is believed to never be a fear, it becomes a one-sided standpoint on who can possibly take a form of it. When prejudice is believed to be a fear, equality is soon promoted in the belief that all sides, when prejudiced, feel the same thing. For when emotion can be realized, in terms of sameness, there is a unison involved where comprehension becomes commonplace.

Whether in love, or undergoing a tantrum of fear, there is comprehension. As an example of a solider to see another of his kind, there is the same expression in either’s eyes.”

– Modern Romanticism

Book Concept – Title: “The Book Cover” – Philosophy on Prejudice – 8/15/2020

Appearances are the way for a human to have penetrative eyes. As in, to have the ability to see through deception. For deception only brings itself on to lacking itself as appropriate for what one sees. Why would the pauper dress as a rich person, if they were not rich? That is one example. Why would the rich person dress as a pauper, if they did not first dispose of all their funds? This is the opposite example. Deception, to the eyes, cannot be penetrated when what is first seen is never appropriate.

The book’s cover was plainness of former days. It should be believed that this had encouraged readers to not ever judge a book by its cover, by its condition, nor by its title. Titles were not very exciting. Titles such as “Les Miserables”, meaning “The Miserable” would not garner attention, during a time when “exciting” titles are better “marketable”.

An old book was a simple hardback, with perhaps a border that surrounded it from edge to edge. No painting, no other print, was ever included into the cover’s design. It was plain, with most often just a solid color for its entirety.

What this represents is that the cover to a book should not be like the cover to a person. What person wants to show themselves off, either in tattoos, or piercings, or excessive cosmetic, or avant-garde clothing, if not to even subconsciously reject anyone from knowing beyond it all? Such an outer bizarre appearance, makes another not wish to see beyond it, for it is that trust is rarely ever an ingredient. To the eyes, all one can see is the appearance, if such is so intricate. Yet, what is also intricate, if not deception? A lie is swallowed up, even to the viewer, and from this, intricacies and wonderments blossom in that viewer’s mind. Thus, what becomes of this is prejudice.

Prejudice is an obscure and wrong belief, originating entirely from ignorance, making what is believed to be seen, now an intrusion. What they see, is never within that person whom is shared prejudice. For if all they see upon the outer is ugliness, then that ugliness will remain a barrier, and it will promote prejudice. For what is beautiful, must be appropriate for what it is. Why would one disguise themselves, if to not, again, represent the lie?

Quote – “What Defines Prejudice?” – 7/31/2020

“All fear, makes two individuals equal. Though, to what a person can know of what they fear, makes them compassionate. All prejudice does not originate directly from hatred, though from fear. As love and fear are the two primary emotions of a human, hatred is an extension off fear. Hatred is not even a primary emotion, so it is objectively not it that defines prejudice. One acts out of hatred, though one feels nothing more than fear, in the act.

It is, as well, that in the feeling of fear, one remains distant, provokes division, and contemplates nothing except for the imaginings of what a certain person could be.

To think on the tyrant, of whom he has eliminated. Do they feel hatred, or do they feel fear? Their acts of elimination in terms of genocide, have been bred from fear. For that is because, to the tyrant, all truth is a threat.

We fear what may shock us, being truth. Therefore, to know a person, it is truth that is the knowledge. Is is a heart that we do not stab, though embrace.”

– Modern Romanticism

Quote – “When Prejudice Remains as Prejudice” – 6/13/2020

“Fear is the emotion where prejudice originates. To eliminate prejudice, would mean to eliminate fear. To eliminate fear, would mean to eliminate love. Because, to have any reason in the world to be brave, represents why fear is cloaking one’s shoulders, in the first place. That is, to be brave, means that one is feeling fear. One cannot be brave, without first feeling fear. One cannot be in love, without a need to demolish what one fears. What one can fear, most of all, is to trust another, which involves love. When we allow someone else to love us, we are trusting another, with our most guarded secrets, with our differences. For the reason why love is said to be unlimited, is because fear will always represent humanity’s convenience in only being for themselves, while love will remedy that mere convenience by way of offering what one needs. Trust and acceptance are what one needs, by way of realizing that to have such things, one must feel fear, so that one can love and be brave.

Therefore, prejudice cannot ever be eliminated, without first eliminating fear, and then one eliminates love. Whatever drug-inducing method will eliminate fear, will eliminate all bravery, all need to stand up for oneself. Thus, one has put an end to the human spirit.”

– Anonymous