Racism – Modern Romanticism

Philosophy – “Why Skin Color Matters Little” – 8/18/2022

“A focus on exterior details maintains another focus, called ignorance. We do not comprehend a person, when we are meaning to comprehend their shell. We will begin to admit that a person, within, has always been empty. We will begin to admit that those infinite details, within, are meaningless and meant to be kept in darkness.”
– Modern Romanticism

What can there be to understand about race? Nothing. Can there be something to understand about a book’s cover, unless we are playing games of preference and prejudice? It will be only when we are playing those games upon what we trust or distrust, that an exterior detail matters more than what dwells beneath it. All among politics, differences are taken into consideration, because of its rule over divided groups. When considering a democratic nation, more groups equal more voices. However, that becomes a division of people, heading into misunderstanding. This has been because of a focus on change, being a current norm when it comes to non-conformity. When we want change, we want more diversity. When we want everything to be diverse, we want nothing to remain as similar. More groups and more voices will promote division, because it will bring into prominence a focus on exterior details. Greater focus on exterior details cannot be a focus on a person. To focus on a person, one must conform to a reality.

Among what maintains itself to be real, a human being is. Human emotions. As these are what tie into realism, understanding what hurts will not be among surface details. Understanding what hurts will be to retain a focus on internal notions, since all pain, through human emotions, resonate internally. An ideal, however, opposite from all realism, relates to talent. As in, what a person believes themselves to be born with or will admit that their identity has not been with choice involved.

Even with identities prevalent among being believed as opposite from choice, choices retain their place for trust and distrust, or for preference and prejudice. People choose, based on those exterior details. As it might not have been with choice involved to how a person comprehends themselves, choice gets involved when others will see those surface details, to inevitably turn towards or against what can be viewed as either similar or unsimilar. People’s emotions, not ever a surface detail, will be a familiarity that cannot be given prejudice. For it will be inevitably a contradiction to do this, that in telling someone else off for their display of emotions will make them appear less than human.

Race, among all other surface details, resonates with ignorance, due to how it can be compared to a book cover. Within that book, or within that person, there are infinite more details to discover. Alongside that, all details in either a book or a person resonates not with ignorance, though with knowledge. One can be prejudiced towards a book genre, through noticing artwork upon its cover, making them express their prejudice when that genre does not fall inside their preferences. However, both preference and prejudice are overridden when their efforts, to compare realities, identify one overlooked book as similar to another book. Preference and prejudice, at that state, become what gets overlooked, because ignorance never mattered. A more familiar example will be when people are given this same degree of understanding. To not be prejudiced, though to know details within a person, comes always with a desire to compare an understanding of someone else with oneself. One holds standards for what can be understood as real, not for an ideal, when these comparisons compare only similarities.

With more differences, comes more ignorance. Even when one recognizes themselves to understand themselves, a result from others will be a misunderstanding into prejudice when such a person who understands themselves has made this knowledge an exterior detail. As with book covers with their artwork to display their genre, divisions among people are viewed upon their surfaces. Knowing oneself, though also wishing for others both understand and accept them, will not have this latter wish fulfilled when such knowledge remains as a surface detail.

Philosophy Series – “On Prejudice” – Pt. 1 – 11/1/2021

“One can be ignorant without being prejudiced, though one cannot be prejudiced without being ignorant.”
– Modern Romanticism

Take the singular individual, separated from the group, and in one’s sight upon them, there can be the statement that says there is ignorance for them. As in, the observant person has no knowledge of them. In this example, there could be no prejudice, since there is nothing for comparison’s sake. Two individuals come to know one another, due to their separations from the group. This is the method in which people no longer notice difference.

Take the same singular individual and the same observant person to them, to then place the former in their group in which the latter would be prejudiced against of all. Prejudice is possible in this second scenario, since the ignorance to prejudice is now swapped into prejudice to ignorance.

If a person is, at first, ignorant, then prejudice is not possible. However, if a person is, at first, prejudiced, then their ignorance is to the individualism for each person, among the observed group. Individualism can be told apart, when it is separated from the collective. Though, it must be a separation, or otherwise prejudice is a high likelihood.

Humans observe what is their ignorance towards a group, as this is similar to viewing a collection of books among the same genre. If the book genre is disliked, then no individual book will be opened so that knowledge remedies the prejudice. Whether it is prejudice against book or against people, the ignorance is always in viewing the group and in the unwillingness to separate individual from the rest. However, even of a person who likes the genre or specific group of people have prejudice to this, since it is only in the liking of the genre or group that they were attracted.

Philosophy – “Why Anti-Racism is, in fact, Racism” – 9/21/2021

“One can be ignorant without being prejudiced, though one cannot be prejudiced without being ignorant.”
– Modern Romanticism

Ignorance is to the notion that something is missing. This would not be in alignment with hatred, because one cannot hate what one is ignorant of. Instead, one fears what one is ignorant of. Two things aligned with the other, of ignorance and fear, is then for hatred to be allied with knowledge. Hatred is the place for being knowledgeable to another thing. Though, in being ignorant, there is complete blindness. In ignorance, it is very much like the act of first falling in love. To that extent, it is blind. To be blinded through hatred is not possible, because this suffocating emotion can be the result of having loved.

Racism, so much conjoined with both fear and ignorance, involving the distance for the interior, then causing a person to be confined for view upon the exterior. To this, there is no hatred. There is the fear that questions what could not be asked for of its truth. This is due to being knowledgeable would involve closing the gap that fear has caused, and when truth is known of a person, there can be hatred that is bred from it. As hatred is only possible because of the existence of love, humans do not feel it in their blindness. The result of love can be hatred, because through love, there was the attempt to understand and to know the value of another person. After betrayal, there can no longer be closeness, as another gap becomes built without the desire to repair the fallen bridge. Although, the secrets that were once shared between two individuals are now taken in opposite directions. In vengeance, people can exploit those secrets, even expose them, due to the knowledge gained.

Philosophy – “The Ignorance in Focusing on Race” – 6/15/2021

“Ignorance sustains itself, when an individual never performs crossovers to others among its own kind. For each people, there is individualism. For each human, there is realized imperfection enough to state to the self that not all can be accomplished, while alone.”
– Modern Romanticism

Racism is an issue comparable to depression. It is, for what it represents.

Racism represents absence.

Absence of what? Absence of others, to fill the void a prideful individual immersed in a collective has kept as a gap within themselves.

Since pride will keep a person collected in their stubbornness, chaos is to their hearts in the belief they should not care for other individuals. Other individuals, who require not the convenience for what is most familiar, though the necessity that reveals itself as knowledge. We are in understanding of other individual, not collective, crisis when we possess this knowledge. The collective will remain ignorant, in that its sheer focus on surface-details, as race, punishes them in refusing to acknowledge the essence of sameness to crisis in other individuals.

Equality is the place of knowledge. We understand others, beyond the surface, and then comprehend ourselves the same as them.

The beauty of a human is in comprehension of our likeness to another, in the respect that we can form unity around such a notion. Togetherness is achieved only by the understanding of pain, mutually so, not to ever compete on its level.

Upon the surface, we notice the physical self. Within, we notice something more. Of others, we see difference in appearance, apart from ourselves. Though, within them, we see that greater essence that is meant to receive itself to us as all the same. It is a sameness, though the surface would block the prideful and stubborn individual from being its witness.

Whether upon the surface, or to another, to see the exterior, such as a detail of race, we are blocked from seeing that sameness that proves crucial to the creation of unity.

If an individual sustains their own ignorance in staying afloat upon the surface, then their cowardice is proven simply by never having the yearning to know more. If truth shocks or provokes fear to the individual, then looking beyond the surface is in comparison to seeing past the cover to a book. If those pages, just like the details of a human, are read, then there is greater knowledge to be had over the ignorance represented of race.

Philosophy – “Why One cannot ‘get rid’ of Racism” – 5/14/2021

“Retiring the world of what consists itself as pertaining to absence, is all the effort to bring it about, ever further.”
– Modern Romanticism

To “stop”, or to just “get rid” of what presents itself, to a person, as something that references absence, will indeed, deepen the issue. An issue, as racism, is something that has direct relation to a singular word, being “absence”. Absence, of something that pertains not to unity.

Since absence, just like depression, cannot be forced clean from the mind, it requires a replacement of equal value from what was either lost or never was.

We are equal, in that sense, through the realization that to fill the void of what is absent through racism, means to find value in another person. Another person, not like what one prefers, for one is not picky (or just able to choose) on what is needed.

A person, being equal to any other, is not a convenience. This, in turn, proves the necessity of love, being never a simple convenience.

The one difference between something needed, as love, and something convenient, as a resource, is that the former is everywhere, whereas the latter is never where you want it most.

Treating people as resources, pertaining them all to “representation”, is not the essence of equality.

Love makes all equal, though as racism is a gap in the heart, nothing just preferred will fill it.

If racism is solved through an understanding for what equality represents, on its own, then we’ll find it impossible to prefer what we need.

Philosophy – “The Pointlessness of Anti-Racism” – 4/22/2021

“One can be ignorant without being prejudiced. However, one cannot be prejudiced without being ignorant.”
– Modern Romanticism

To be anti-racist would have to mean to be anti-ignorance. However, how can one be anti of an absence, pertaining to ignorance, without broadening the void?

Instead, to make the error of relating prejudice to hatred, would have to mean to be anti-knowledge, if one is anti-racist by way of this hate. It is not hatred that fuels prejudice, though it is instead an absence of knowledge to another individual. In knowing the individual, one knows the culture, because one has penetrated past mere skin color.

A fascinating aspect of individuals comprehending each other is to open one’s doors to who one knows. Though, among immigration, to open doors to who one doesn’t know well, may be to invite danger. One raises walls against danger, inevitably so. Though, to comprehend the culture is to be past skin color. That is the knowledge, that against ignorance, is the only true way to be anti-racist.

One cannot be anti-racist, and at the same time, be anti-hatred. Genuine hate comes as an experience of betrayal, and through this, there was knowledge. There was, at one time, a connection between individuals. When betrayal struck, hatred formed when love, itself, became twisted and corrupt. Love is pure. To then become hatred, means for love to have been touched by it. Though, it is by the aspect of knowledge that two individuals once identified with each other. To be anti-racist would mean to be anti-ignorance, not anti-hatred. If one is anti-hatred, then one is for the notion that toxic people or betrayers should still be around those they betrayed.

If we are to be anti-hatred, as we wish to be anti-racist, are we next going to side with the idea that perhaps a woman should invite her narcissistic ex-husband back into her life out of blind trust?

To trust, is to know. Then, to have that knowledge, means to have wisdom. One has learned, from their past errors through experience of betrayal. More than all else, one has learned how to forgive. Love does not re-enter back into a modern realm, without learning how to forgive.

We are beautiful when we are fragile, when we are open. However, we cannot be open to evident danger. It is the danger that we know it to be, not among the individual, though typically among the collection. Though, we cannot say that the collective represents the individual, when it is through the knowledge of a one that we see a different perspective. Separated from the collective, and then a person is in awareness to an individual, not the group.

Individualism is to knowledge, as ignorance and fear is to the collective. Love has its realm within forgiveness, though must be to the experience of betrayal for it to be appropriate. Individualism should praise the idea of forgiveness, as the collective should reject the afflictions of fear and ignorance in place of knowledge. It is then that individualism rules, by this comparison.

To be truly anti-racist, among all these comparisons, would instead refer to being anti-fear and ignorance. To be anti either of those things, would only be needful, when we are for the idea of individual comprehending individual. To comprehend the individual, is in full relation to what is deeper than what represents the collective, being the external details such as skin color and race.

As it is, can one look upon the race to be like the cover to a book? That, if the book is never delved into, its details would remain in ignorance to the potential reader? If race is comparable to the book cover, then why would it be the discussion of any academic or similar setting? Is not the academic, or the craver of knowledge, more interested in the book’s details, over the cover?

Quote – “Why Victims are the most Prejudiced” – 4/14/2021

“If victimization is equivalent to innocence, then the latter will be equivalent to denial. Of a denial that comes forth from a disbelief that one, as a victim, cannot possibly be like those who antagonize them. In this, there is more than a likelihood for such victims to be as their supposed ‘enemies’, even to wear their face, though in deception of all others who side with them. It is always at the highest possibility that one will become as those they resent, in the sheer disbelief that they are nothing like them. Such denial is the dropping of one’s own defense and self-awareness.”
– Modern Romanticism

“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 – “How Racism becomes Enforced through the Subject of Race” – 1/19/2021

“Race is no subject, other than being similar to speaking of the two slices of bread, instead of the individual ingredients that compose the sandwich.”
– Modern Romanticism

Racism can vanish on its own. All we simply need to do is quit the subject of race, altogether. It is a subject that, through its continual utterance, makes only note of what occurs on the outside of a human being. For when we focus on the race of a person, we do not focus on people. If we were to even attempt to understand the latter, we’d never express the rage being the emotion so close to prejudice. As we feel rage, we feel fear. As we feel fear, we block others from attempting to understand us. If we were to understand people, we’d find no need to understand the two slices of bread that hide the many details within.

For we are not at all human when we cannot come close to devouring that information, that truth, when all we do is hover upon the outside. When we stay upon the outside, remain speaking of race as though it’s a better subject over people, we are simply hesitant. We are not in consideration of whether it’s best to approach them, for that would be wisdom. We are, in fact, fearful of the idea to ever know them. To perhaps forgive them on whatever we believe they are errored on? It would be a step closer than usual, that makes a person hungry for truth. If we are starved of truth, then we remain alone, burning through our rage the most valued thing we can share to another human. And, that is, our vulnerability.

To continue to speak of race is to speak of solid colors, just like speaking of a covering to inner details. These are solid colors that represent no true “diversity” of ourselves. We are only ever diverse by what we can create, from within ourselves. We are not diverse by how we are divided among those separate colors.

We can show what is within, to paint the art with our tears, our vulnerability, among all things we hid beneath our rage and fear for others. We can show the internal, to never again speak of the external. For even when we stay prideful for ourselves for who we are, we should instead be prideful for what we can do, by the actual and objective bravery that would bring about the ultimate painting. It is the painting of all colors, as such artworks go.

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.