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

Book Concept – “A Fine Line for Justice” – Based on the Idiocy within the Freedom to make a Decision – 6/1/2020

Within limited choice, there is limited power. There is limited potential, and there is less arrogance. There is less people to believe that destruction is the way to go for preservation of another individual. Such means that not division of origin, being of skin color, ethic background, religion, social status, etc. would be preservation, as much as it is on the side of destruction, provable by its division. When a person upholds motives of preservation, their ideals have stuck themselves on selfless endeavor. They uphold honor and justice, in its objective sense.

When bringing people to believe that “all things are subjective”, what will occur is the dissection and insecurity on what is the objectively correct move. For to be right in doing something only means to never have had a choice in doing it.

When we love another, we don’t hesitate, nor do we consider, the correct move to make. We will only be as those we’ve said do not pay attention, when we take time to consider. In essence, we’ve been blind to trouble, to the knowledge of what to do. Base a society around choice, and continuous consideration is the method of pure doubt by a person.

Choice, or to make a decision, involves consideration. Though, all it amounts to, is what will benefit the self. What comes from this, if made as a purified lifestyle within a social realm, is the negligence of preservation of another, and more of the destruction of others. We will cling to a word that is “empowerment”, never the word that the emotion of love holds to be dear, being “eternity”.

To show someone the world of your own, not merely hiding yourself, would be like nowadays Walmart showing Target its world, its secrets, its motives, its designs, and much would be compromised. Competition yields fewer results, over collaboration.

To be objective, in this world, is to retain the structure of a whole. To be subjective, in this world, is to dissect the whole, so a multitude comes from an entirety.

One cannot look at “justice” in this world, and believe one has their own view on it, their own interpretation of it, their own opinion on it. If they do this, they will inevitably corrupt it into the definition of “vengeance”. Anything born out of subjective viewing makes a thing based around personal gain and desire, not for the benefit, or the preservation, of another individual.

Quote – “How there is Ease to every Difficulty” – 6/1/2020

“In our current times, pain is seen as subjective, along with much else. It is seen in this fashion, only to divide ourselves into a competitive state, of believing one person’s pain deserves more attention than another. From the Socialist mindset, to ‘take care’ of the individual from a governmental standpoint, would mean to inject worry and fear into a populace. From this, there will be leaders wondering who can be better suited to being treated. For how else does a person say that their pain is not needing simplicity to be treated, when they will instead add complexity to it? They will add these complications, act as infants, so that they are treated first. In such pain, they believe themselves special, crying out as loud as the infant.”

– Anonymous

Philosophy – “Diversity is the View of the Surface” – 5/8/2020

For those who say that diversity sees more than appearance, they would be wrong. Diversity focuses on appearance, and nothing more. Artificial diversity is objectively different from natural diversity. Natural diversity, that exists among the the varied species in a wilderness, is different from a bio-engineered species meant to exist in that same wilderness only for a specific purpose.

Natural diversity has its place among familiarity. Artificial diversity has its place among the unfamiliar. To imagine it like a UFO landing in someone’s backyard, the life-form that exits from the UFO would not be familiar to humans. That unfamiliarity is the artificial diversity. It is the notion by which the view of the alien creates fear, not acceptance. One does not accept the unfamiliar into their presence, any more than someone would just allow the person dressed as a burglar into their home.

Then, to see the surface of a person, only means that anyone whose focus on diversity is prominent, is someone who does not see anything deeper. Anything deeper, that would reflect someone’s heart, someone’s intellect, is beyond sheer diversity. All that person, whose focus is solely on diversity, means to see is their appearance.

Anyone who can see the person simply for their appearance, never make it as a primary focus, can indeed make it as a secondary focus. That is, those appearances will be seen for an instant, only for their eyes to pass through to view something better. Though, when a person’s sight is upon appearance, through the desire to have the world more diverse, it is they who enforce prejudice.

The focus, as that term is the only thing worth nothing about this, is what makes someone see what they see. Whatever they see, is their focus. If their focus is on diversity, then their focus is on appearance. If their focus is past simple diversity, then they will see something beyond diversity, that goes into the heart of a person.

Nothing is so alien as something we simply haven’t seen before. Therefore, everything forced about diversity, is merely the ongoing compliance with and for prejudice.