15/10/23
In our time and age, revolt and revenge, these are two available choices for people enraptured with a conscience. Revolt that requires ideation, aims for a breakthrough, is a challenge to the collective conscience - not the kind merely limited to self-meaning. Yes, in a sense, to live is to revolt, but that only extends to one's personal freedom and does not hold the talent of including others in it. The life that is other, that which is not mine, demands that I see this conundrum as a sort of space that is occupied by us in a shared experience. Our freedoms too, then, come in contact with each other, and it is for the better that they share values and morals that govern them. This is the principle. It is like an act of waking up, seeing that time has been withheld by past experience, our futures have been wronged, structures have failed, grievance has taken over impulse, and in the process of gatekeeping our personal freedoms, exploration has ceased; the sadness it has sprouted. Revolt of this kind enters into conflict, with favouritism, with institutions based on favouritism, and targets ambitions rather than people. It breaks existing moral codes and influences discovery of passion and sacrifice. Recognising that there is now the necessity of a new thought that would bind us, this requires that when groups of people march towards each other, they largely shed their beliefs (the nature of which is another discussion) and temporarily invoke their trust in the nobility of emotion, empathy and instinct- although not entirely, for that would mean that reason would be overpowered, and that must not ever happen. We must keep sowing the seeds of new reason, while noble emotion acts as manure in the process, such is the nature of a modern revolution, where the point of reference is a resurgence in mental investigation, not events characterised by force only; then there is revenge. It is a strange fact that people who impose on others, thinking that their personal freedom is in danger, are not privy to the freedom they exercise to accomplish that task. When people come together to stand for something, hoping to achieve, they can go either way. The method here is extravagantly simple. The inspiration for it comes from concepts such as power, honor and justice. There is no enquiry, the cause purely physical, one being consumed with a lust for consequences. The reference here is not wars, governments or land. Rather it is the individual. The modern individual engages in revenge in a vertiginous fashion, yet, as I said in the beginning, the basis is still being true to one's own conscience. I refer to them as unthinking minds, as only for an unthinking mind is eradication of thought possible, that is precisely the goal here, to eradicate carriers of thought and with them the thought itself. It is then only the greatest tragedy for reason, the loss irrevocable. To chase a thriving sense of having procured justice, to the extent to which my actions portend a just outcome, to create meaning from death, about how I see life and its idealities, to the extent to which I arrange my values and prove thereby that it is in fact a punishment that I see as deserving, sometimes even clothed in illusions of a revolt, I secure for myself a strong belief in revenge. These are, then, the choices available to us, one extraordinarily close to the other. It is upon us what we choose.