Much of what I have been saying intimates that much of what ails mankind is the result of the limitations put upon him by his civilization by way of cultural inculcation. The question we have to ask ourselves is which should come first, man or his society? This is a difficult, maybe even impossible, question to answer. In fact, even initiating such a contemplation is a difficult endeavor, for where are we to begin? Humans are egocentric by nature, and this is expressed in our want of freedom and independence. On the other hand, we are wickedly social and are driven to seek the company, or should I say the attention, of others. But if we are to accept that there is an unacceptable constraint on human nature by cultural inculcation then we must come to a conclusion as to which agency we should make divine, individuality or nationality. In part, this decision must be made after a painfully pragmatic take on the issue- is man even able to glory over the individual while forcing society to take a back seat. Would such an endeavor lead to social chaos? If man is to truly face up to the social ills that are the champions of discontent then this discussion must be somehow come to fruition and thereby finds its way into the social limelight of intelligentsia today.
Genruk
You are currently browsing the monthly archive for December 2010.
When a casual “How are you doing” is offered, and the reply is “OK,” what are the implications? Most likely the implications intimate that the individual’s life is currently nowhere near optimal and they are likely unhappy. Let’s examine an example from. We’ll call her Eve. Eve says she is OK. But I know the scoop. Eve is an alcoholic. Eve is cheating on her husband. Eve has a socially disreputably disease that is compounded by her drinking. AND, Eve is driving without a license. So when Eve says that she is OK, she is really miserable.
Though Eve’s problems are of her own making, there is another element that of Eve’s predicament that is constipating any and all effort to remedy her situation. She has come to appreciate the unstated sympathy that her friends and acquaintances impart upon her and has manifested into her own private perpetual pity party. She is addicted to sympathy. Eve’s problems are further compounded in that she likely has a psychological disorder that will impede any serious efforts to better her situation.
The problem is that “Eve” symbolic is our culture. The West, racing towards an age of decadence, emanates the radiation of the pity party upon all of its citizens as a sort of heroin to dampen the pain. Real life TV is a prime example of pathetic people that have found the ultimate bullhorn to pronounce their woes on a national scale, underhandedly propagating the notion of normalcy for the masses in a world replete with rampant moral as well as tangible corruption. The individual pity party has expanded into the realms of near ubiquity. Just as heroin makes life better for those suffering from pain, such a social demise offers the narcosis of sympathy. It sells because it works, but only in the short term and with a miserable denouement when the dose of the “drug” becomes toxic. Demise is the result, be it an actual heroin overdose or a fracture of the psyche too deep from mending. This begs the question: How are individuals to become party poopers of pity parties when our culture is sending invitations to the biggest bash of all?
Genruk
Tags: Apostasy, culture, Discontent, Inculcation, Philosophy, Truth
Tags: Quote
America is the champion of democracy, and the immediate results seem to indicate that this wonderful institution might be the next best thing to white bread. But is white bread a good thing? Do voters actually go to the booth with their country’s best interests in mind, or might the glamorous voter actually have a more insidious motivation? In other words, might a voter’s punch of the e-card be shadowed by their vested interests, steering them away from choices that might better the community to the single-minded benefit of those registered few? The truth is that most will likely vote for candidates whose prevarications intimate that they are on our side, the good side, as opposed to that other nefarious faction whose intents are an invidious exertion to wholesale as many souls as possible to Lucifer? Does the democratic machine that has led to the seething factional rivalry as seen today really the divine light of humanity, or might it instead foment the darker side of humanity that Western Civilization has for so long kept in the closet?
reblogged from Idle Truth

Your Say