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.

Excerpt – “Sweet Medicine – On how Leadership Utilizes the Focus of Speech to Deceive” – Philosophy – 1/13/2021

Speech is the tactic for which a leader uses, that reveals nothing for the underlying proof. As it should be mentioned, the term “intention” cannot be signified in speech. Among any person, each secret that is within one of us, will never be revealed without implemented trust for a listener. Such means, that were a leader to a nation never to reveal intention, only ever signifies that there is no trust from leadership to the people. Would it be the correct case to believe that a nation’s people should trust their leadership, or that the leadership should trust the people? If such is ever the latter, then it is that the leader, without trust for the people, holds fear of the population to be threatening. Though, the only ever time when the former is the case, is when leadership is honest and forward by the fact that nothing is held within, for the sake of the people never being speculative.

Of a nation where freedom is seen to the population, there will always be thinkers of this characteristic. Free thinkers, to be those of speculation, will never be trusted by leadership. Such would mean that the only method to subdue this distrust would be to abandon the nation’s people of their ability to freely think for themselves. It can only be, that in a nation where its people are trusting of its own leadership, there will come of it either the pure darkness of poverty or the bliss that name some places “Heaven on Earth”. Again, to make either the case of the result, trust must be the implement for leadership so that blindess will be to that result. As people are blinded both in darkness and by intense light, there will be to both the shutting down of people’s free voice.

Freedom, by way of a people’s speculation, has no room to trust leadership. Speech is the way for either existing leadership or for new leadership to make itself the sole presence of mind.

Quote – “The Differences of Criticism” – 9/19/2020

“As hatred cannot be offered by use of words, then it falls to criticism to undertake speech made through use of intellect or idiocy. For when the former takes place, being of intellect, then it is the debate that stages the ground. When it is the latter taking place, being that of idiocy, there is no intellect, and there is merely the insult being hurled.”

– Modern Romanticism

Quote – “The Difference between Hatred and Criticism” – 6/26/2020

“True hatred is life’s suffocation. It does not speak. It only behaves. It proves, by holding a hand upon the throat, keeping us from breathing. Love is a breath, yet it is a single breath. For we hold upon love’s breath for an eternity. We only let that breath go, when the one we love is released, and in death, there are no more breaths. Lust is the repeated breaths, chaotic and motioned. Lust is the numerously spilled sighs, countless in their number, unable to be grasped.

Criticism is the ability to better life, though lacks necessity upon death of that life. Whatever we mean to express, through our honest selves, is devout upon criticism. We want to better them, the life, before they die. Criticism speaks, gently through intellect. It does not act. It does not dismantle nor cause destruction. It merely reminds the listening person of what they already know of themselves.”

– Anonymous

Quote – “Why Hatred cannot come in the Form of Speech” – 6/13/2020

“Hatred and love are revealed through proof. No one can speak hatred. Rather, it is criticism that speech reveals. Such criticism, through speech, is meant to be spoken at the level of high intellect. Should one be hurt by words, and words alone, the only thing those words are doing is reminding a person what they already know of themselves.

Words are a reminder. To speak to someone the words, ‘I love you’ is a mere reminder, as if the loved one forgot the proof for it. Therefore, one cannot hate another, nor love another, through speech. One must act, through love or hatred, for it to be proven as such. Again, with words, one is merely reminding someone of a fact, already proven long ago.”

– Anonymous

Philosophy – “The Necessity of having Less Choice” – 5/31/2020

Were a person to not have a choice in the manner of an action, it would be more-so suited to objectively doing the right thing. How is this? To imagine it like a person who loves another, doing what is right for them, it is never a choice neither for the love, nor for the proof of that love. We merely do it, because we feel it right within our hearts.

Though, to possess a choice, or rather, rule a society based on choice, would make the people of a population more prone to dissect objectively correct actions into subjective decisions. Such choices, like all choices, were based on a contemplation of them. What occurs next is a population of people who question the right thing to do. All you have from this is sheer confusion and fear, being opposite of what you can do for another, out of care for them. For if to be subjective means to make a personal choice, then to be objective means to simply help another person, never out of personal choice. One would not consider what one would personally have at stake, though automatically considers what another has at risk.

Is it not also the same among science and of wisdom? What is the purpose in hoarding knowledge? To be objective would mean to offer the whole picture, the whole truth. It would fill the heart, the mind, while fragments would be like divided bread to fill a stomach. Being objective means to offer something, to be selfless. Being subjective means to only have a small understanding of the whole.

Therefore, having less choice in a matter, makes a person more prone to doing what is right for a world.

Philosophy – “A Critique on the Existence of Journalism” – Dialogue – 9/22/2019

Q: What strikes your pity to be so prominent?

A: It is because whenever I see a person aiming to engage in Journalism, I see no more than the smile of insanity or excitement. Logic is never in the equation of Journalism, nor in its existence, and femininity has merely encompassed it, like a spread of peanut butter on a slice of bread.

Q: What makes you intolerant towards Journalism?

A: Journalism resonates upon its sole ingredient: excitement. The thrill of the chase after the truth, is much different than a spread of directions, a spread of paths, as this relates more to the lie. A lie is complex, as are emotions, and each emotion is a different path. The source of the confusion comes from simply witnessing these emotions in their drama. Unless someone has the idea of writing of lost cats or children with sore legs after kicking a ball, there will be the crudeness of engaging in the lie, itself.

Q: What is the lie, itself?

A: The definition of a lie is simple complexity. A complexity that creates numerous paths, this is a lie. A deception, that is easily convincing, marks the essence of the emotion. Journalism strikes me as the only weapon that employs this. The usage of emotions, and never the consolation towards them. The witnessing of tears or fear, for the sake of the camera, makes it a reality, despite both the emotions and the presence of a camera making the scene an unreality. The viewer had not been there, though viewed the deception through a lens, and it all becomes a mere “perception”.

Q: What do you make of perceptions?

A: It is the one-sided story, the essence of the debate, the source of division, as each “perception” created from a sight upon a television screen, creates the feeling of loneliness, separation, and anxiety. Each viewer of a screen has been deceived, and now they are the victims from which deception creates puppets. Each string, that is, from the puppet master, marks each separate path towards an emotion. A puppet is only a representation of a lifeless corpse, without the strings. With the strings, the puppet is seen to be wild. It moves, though is still lifeless and without a soul.

Q: And back to Journalism?

A: In utilizing the ingredient of excitement, truth is always ignored. Truth is never discovered in this scenario. A Journalist will be so intent in “rushing within the rush”, so to speak, that they will never make an attempt to look for truth. They rush, lost in the crowd of both spectators and those who perceive, that they remain concealed. Most of them are rushed on caffeine, creating a further “fast-paced” attitude, marking them as the perfect vessel to be the perfect puppet. The wild one, is like a corpse reanimated.

Q: What more of Journalism?

A: A complexity is merely an emotion, and each emotion creates deception. Each person conflicted with a “mental illness” is lied to, whether by Psychiatrists, or by their own thoughts. A simple cure, such as a pill, is still alike the simple cure, that is suicide. The remedy is never to become a robot, though to use logic to uplift those deep in their emotions. It is because, whether it be depression or simple fear, there is calmness that reveals itself as more daunting than the fear, itself.