The Future can not be until modernity is killed. What holds us back from our fate and our destiny is our comfort and our reliance of cooperation within the modern world.
What the world has to offer for you is to become willing prisoners shackeling your self to the perails of the system. Year after year you lose what arbituary rights you thought you had. While at the same time you see yearnings of man become radically more mediocre and devoid of spirit.
You see all ambition and beauty of what once was your people and nation become to its own withering end. The end of history. The end of exploration, innovation, and even restoration.
Everything is simple today, there is no honour. Mcdonalds Capitalism, Walmart Imperialism, and a sucker economy which will throw you away as soon as your value expires.
Some would like to think there is no way out of this. They will deny the history of the human spirit to a degree and tell you that we are stuck.
But the truth is the Barbaic Man is eternal in all. The untamed Human spirit in its truest form always triumphs over the greatest of foes. The death of the Modern world will lay in a full rejection of our world systems and goverments. The path to the future starts from the path of the Barbaian.
𝓤𝓷𝓲𝓼𝓶: Founding Document
Each of us fall into this world, borne into different ideologies, communities and hierarchies. And so, Unism was begun as an attempt to find out which (past, present, or future) path, ideology, and behavior was best suited to save us from our current dystopian trajectory.
Jettisoning our preconceptions and individual leanings, our founding members made a pact to continue this pursuit for truth, freedom, and autonomy; sifting through history (through varied lenses) to cull only the most resonant, actionable guides to understanding and empowering humanity itself. We would appreciate your help in guiding and refining our process, to assure we are actively pursuing the best possible world of all possible worlds.
Introductory Summary:
Unism (yoo-nih-sum) is a philosophical concept & emancipatory collective with socio-political, economic, and technological implications, which began as an honest pursuit for truth and authenticity amidst a world that was, and still is, tearing itself apart at every level.
Our members, known as Unists, are guided by Unism's Twin Principles:
1) The Golden Rule - "Treat others as you would Wish to be treated"
2) Agape Love - "Agape means understanding, redeeming goodwill for all men. It is a love that seeks nothing in return. It is an overflowing love which is purely spontaneous, unmotivated, groundless, and creative. It does not seek to defeat or humiliate the opponent, but to win his friendship and understanding."
As a whole, we are neither Left Wing nor Right Wing, Liberal nor Conservative, Capitalists nor Communists - our members do come from all over the political, ideological, social and economic compasses and spectrums, but have all joined Unism with the understanding that the current options for all mainstream ideological groundings and political parties and organizations are severely lacking and inadequate, if not entirely corrupted, outdated, and useless.
Some of our principles and axioms will resonate greatly with Leftists, some will be celebrated by those on the Right (if this point alone angers you greatly, the System holds you in high esteem). Other principles will alienate far Leftists, and still others may not sit well at all with staunch conservatives. We ask those who are in allegiance with either the Democrats or Republicans; or more broadly, Leftist or Right Wing ideologies, to focus on the similarities - not the differences - between Unism and your current beliefs. Such is the case with all collectives - no one usually agrees with 100% of anything, especially not when first introduced to it. Or, do you presently agree with 100% of your party’s line, in all matters, iterations, and applications?
Should Leftism (Socialism, Communism, Marxism, Progressivism, Stalinism, Maoism, Political Correctness, Cancel Culture, and other related totalitarian forces) fulfill all of your wildest practical and theoretical dreams entirely - should either the Democrats or Republicans address all of the issues relevant to your daily life and goals - should you aim to establish a legitimate new political state explicitly and officially segregated by ethnicity or race, as a way to rebel against the slow suicide of your ancestral culture - there are many groups which take these as their goals. History, too, is littered with them. And while we welcome those of you who still hold out hope for these vestiges of Left-Right reactionism, and sympathize with the plights of our modern times, Unism is not one of them.
Unism promotes and prizes personal accountability, self-actualization, anti-fragility, the self-determination of one's individual and communal purpose(s), self-sufficiency at the national & federal level, and interdependence within the small-scale community.
We do not scapegoat or externalize our fears or our failures - we see establishing (and self-determining) one’s individual and communal purpose(s), striving with reasonable effort to achieve individual and communal goals, and obtaining these goals through personal action, responsibility, and accountability - a.ka., undergoing “the Power Process,” as the key to manifesting the better world that is within our reach. We cannot control others, we can only choose to positively or negatively impact and influence them. We lead by example, and strive for ideals that are simple to understand but take a lifetime to enact and perfect.
We believe that in order to eclipse the horrors of the past, we must not run from them or ignore them, but confront and learn from them, in order to absolve ourselves of our individual and collective transgressions, and establish a social/communal and technological order that does not inherently dehumanize, alienate, devalue and commodify human beings through ubiquitous technologization, bureaucracy, manipulation and coercion.
The issues, principles, problems and systems we address are complicated and complex - we encourage discussion and debate, safe in the knowledge that the Truth makes itself known within the human soul (‘soul’ in a philosophical, not necessarily religious sense). We implore our members to be willing to learn as much as they are willing to teach. We will never shoot the messenger, we do not reject bitter truths, and we aim to always boldly traverse the physical and metaphysical landscapes with the appropriate amounts of both skepticism and faith.
Thank you for your support, interest, or mere curiosity - we are truly thankful for your attention.
There's a brighter future in store for those who mean to shape it - not through interference and manipulation, but through self-actualization, and by inhabiting a higher plain of self-sufficiency & reciprocal compensoral coexistence.
Technology and the Human Soul
The State We Are In:
As our Modern World, and everything in it, constantly pulls us one way or the other, demanding ever more attention, opinions, new media literacies, collaboration, time, energy and effort - all to accomplish (in ever more roundabout, complex ways) what was largely assured to past generations (purpose, autonomy, empowerment, self-sufficiency, security, family, etc. appropriate to their place in time and space) - many of us have come to feel an increasing sense of inner disconnection, unease, anxiety, alienation, depression, apathy, or other feelings of disturbance within our own selves.
This pain may have seemed to be experienced in “the heart”, the psyche, or in our conscience, but could also easily have been experienced as a manifestation of our regrets, us grappling with our morality amidst a culture that encourages any and all behavior, or of coming to terms with our (often continually shifting or shrinking) expectations for our own lives...
How Can This Be?
If you have experienced these senses of frustration, depression, anxiety, or alienation - alienation unto oneself and/or towards others - this may all sound rather resonant, or at least quite familiar. But how can this be?
Surely most people don’t feel this way, right? You may have even thought you were suffering from a psychiatric disorder or a “chemical imbalance.” I mean, sure... you are in debt, working a job you don’t like for people you can’t stand, communicating less and less with friends or family, perhaps living at home or with roommates, retreating to escapism and consumerism to satiate your desire for meaning and interaction… but still, it Can’t be normal to feel like this - “It’s not my predicament, but my perception that must change!” you conclude. You decide it’s Your Brain that must be the problem.
You are not insane for thinking so - just misled, and incorrect. We are continually reassured by our culture that we all now have more freedoms, privileges, powers, and conveniences than ever. Material wealth and advanced, almost “sci-fi” technologies are commonplace. Those who feel they still lack each and every form of these may choose to chase and collect them all forever, but all those who have already obtained or experienced them (even to just a nominal degree) will know that the “fulfillment” these offer is extremely short lived, and the comedown is brutal - and permanent.
Why do we feel more miserable and emptier than was ever thought possible, with more connectivity and convenience, more touchscreens, smart things, apps, platforms, subscription services, reminders, and notifications than any previous generation? How can this be?
Disintegration and Decay:
Unism asserts that these are signs of spiritual decay and neglect. We believe that the state of a person's soul is a complex barometer for an often neglected element of physical, psychological and spiritual health, inner richness, and indicative of continuity (or lack thereof) with one’s sense of meaning and purpose in life.
We argue that this sense of spiritual decay and neglect is brought on by the total disintegration of small scale communities, freedom, autonomy, security, and, ultimately, the individual itself.
The cause of this disintegration is the state of our world, wherein, instead of the industrial-technological system being molded, steered, altered, paused, or halted to better suit or serve humanity, human nature, and society; it is humanity, human nature, and society that must be molded, steered, altered, paused or halted to fit the needs of the industrial-technological system.
Technology marches ever forward; always voluntary at first, but increasingly more mandatory as it is adopted into the mainstream. Think of what life was like before every store or business needed an online presence (at least on Google Maps and social media) to be considered “real.” Before you needed a smartphone to keep up with any office or professional job, even if just a receptionist or assistant position. Before the internet was something you never left, only briefly looked away from. As a collective/culture, there is no going backwards. There is no slowing down.
Additionally, each and every cutting edge technology of tomorrow will always be replaced by something newer. You have no sooner become accustomed to a platform, device, or service when the next iteration arrives. Your expertise becomes obsolete. Your jargon, coding, and fluencies are in dead languages. Your formats and cables are no longer supported. A New Upgrade is Available, Which Requires a Restart. This pace is only the taste, a preview of our future - a future that promises much, much more instability, disposability, planned obsolescence, hype-cults, and religious devotion to the cult of More; but accelerated, ad infinitum.
Technology is always creating more obligations and restricting freedoms: take the automobile, for example. Entirely voluntary for early adopters, it was a great and wonderful invention. One could continue to walk wherever one needed to, or drive if it were at all possible. Fast forward just 50-60 years: sprawling highways dissect the landscape, and cities are designed with vehicular travel at heart so that only a small minority of people in America can exist (work, shop and socialize) without needing a car. You can no longer walk where you please. Now there are specific zones for pedestrians, or large areas where walking is impossible, as it would impede the flow of traffic. The mainstream adoption of the car supplanted most transportation freedoms that came before it (just try riding a horse-and-buggy anywhere outside of Central Park or Pennsylvania). Now a car is all but required to participate and succeed in most metropolitan cities - you may choose public transport, but then your freedoms are even more restricted, you must wait for the bus/subway at a specific time and place, ride with whoever else is there, at whatever speed it goes, and get off as close to your destination as the bus/subway will travel. Along with this mandate comes both necessary and excessive regulations, bureaucracy, and stressors: visiting the DMV, getting licensed, having up-to-date registration, not finding parking, getting parking tickets, manufacturer defects and recalls, speeding tickets, insurance, going to a mechanic, rising gas prices, traffic, etc. etc. etc.
In fact, technology is so universally and inextricably fundamental to participating in today’s culture, that even those critical of, or outright entirely against the tools and trinkets of industrial-technological society, must in some way utilize and engage with it. Beyond the obvious use of a laptop computer needed to write this, one must engage with (i.e.. confront and assent to) 100’s of technologies and computer systems at every level of society (all levels of business, food/hospitality, shopping, media, education, romance, commerce, health, recreation/entertainment, etc.) simply by existing.
In this way, you are not alone in feeling such a way. We are all aware of and have experienced this unique feeling of utter dread, dissatisfaction, contempt, pointlessness, despair and other related feelings endemic to a world that must make ideal, atomized, agency-less consumers out of us all.
Our Approach
While the industrial-technological system, and all of the material and social complications and disintegrations that come with it is clearly part of the root cause of our spiritual decay, we have not made the dismantling of this system our initial, primary goal.
Instead, we believe that the key to solving the world's problems begins with us: we cannot treat others properly until we treat ourselves properly, we cannot love others correctly or effectively until we can love ourselves effectively, by becoming worthy of our own love.
As malformed and disintegrated as the industrial-technological system, and our modes and means of life within it, has made us, this does not give us cause to externalize or project our failings Onto It. We must first address those dysfunctions, disturbances, decays, and diseases we have adopted and adapted to. By uniting to share our stories, advance our efforts, achieve our goals, and help each other abide by our stated principles, we are actively participating in a revolutionary movement that will bring dramatic change to our world, from the inside out.
Resolving and healing ourselves is the first step towards so-called ‘ego death,’ a process which enables one to reject a conception of self that is entirely isolated, compartmentalized from others, self-serving and self-obsessed. When we have achieved this unbroken state, we may walk out into the world with confidence, safe in the knowledge that life itself is interconnected in ways we may never understand, but that our neighbors prosperity is in part our prosperity, and our own prosperity is in part our neighbors. This is the circle we wish to find ourselves in.
And we hope to see you in this circle as well.
Laying The Groundwork
[1] We have a problem.
The mainstream is misled and the kids are not all right.
Our society is messed up, the system is messed up, and the ideas it all runs on are part of it.
Modern ideological assumptions have something to do with the problems, but less to do with the solutions.
[2] Figuring this out is hard, and it’s very easy to be wrong.
Seeking true insight is a process of getting out of Plato’s Cave, over and over again.
Most people have good intentions and are not to blame for our situation.
It’s respectable to say “I don’t know.”
It’s noble to say “I’ll earnestly seek to find out”.
[3] To start fixing the world, we have to start by fixing ourselves.
First you have to straighten out your own mind.
Then you can try to help others straighten themselves out, should they be willing.
[4] Our inquiry should be guided by good truth-seeking principles.
A) Truth exists, in some fundamental sense.
There is surely absolute truth. We can sense this truth.
The alternative assumption leads nowhere.
B) Open inquiry is a moral duty.
Any important topic deserves open, critical and self-questioning examination.
Any beliefs about matters you think are critically important should be tested constantly.
You needn’t fear any alternative theories or perspectives.
All intellectual taboos are potential tools of tyranny.
You’re more likely to be hopelessly wrong if you wall yourself off.
C) Bias needs to be recognized and compensated for.
Avoid anchoring bias (don’t assume you started close to the truth).
Avoid confirmation bias (see if you can prove you’re wrong, instead of trying to prove you’re right).
Look for alternative hypotheses.
Understand your opponents’ arguments in full.
Hear out every perspective you can find.
D) We need to apply the tool of reason thoughtfully. Know the limits of rationality.
There are implicit and explicit dimensions, functions, and purposes within all things.
Be clear and fair within the constraints of verbal logic.
Apply reason consistently.
Persuade people without manipulating them.
Recognize manipulation.
[5] THE TWIN PRINCIPLES:
Unism proposes that the Individual’s ideal attitude is characterized by two fundamental tenets:
The first of Unism’s Twin Principles is:
The Golden Rule - “Treat others as you would wish to be treated.”
The Golden Rule is a Universal concept - it has been independently arrived at in nearly all cultures, but it is not man’s natural impulse - it must be aspired to, and trained into us.
While the Universality unites each culture’s version around a shared central idea, each iteration expounds and compounds meaning upon that central idea.
Hinduism: Everything you should do you will find in this: Do nothing to others / That would hurt you if it were done to you. (Mahabharata 5:1517)
If the entire Dharma can be said in a few words, then it is—that which is unfavorable to us, do not do that to others. (Padma Purana, shrushti 19/357–358)
Jainism: Killing a living being is killing one's own self; showing compassion to a living being is showing compassion to oneself. He who desires his own good, should avoid causing any harm to a living being. (Suman Suttam, verse 151)
Buddhism: Do not offend others / As you would not want to be offended. [Alt. Translation: Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.] (Udanavarga 5:18)
One who, while himself seeking happiness, oppresses with violence other beings who also desire happiness, will not attain happiness hereafter. (Dhammapada 10. Violence)
Taoism: The successes of your neighbor and their losses / Will be to you as if they were your own. (T’ai-Shand Kan-Ying P’ien)
Confucianism: Is there any rule that one should follow all of one’s life? / Yes! The rule of the gentle goodness: / That which we do not wish to be done to us, we do not do to others. (Analects 15:23)
Zoroastrianism: Do not do unto others whatever is injurious to yourself. (Shayast-na-Shayast 13.29)
Judaism: That which you do not wish for yourself / You shall not wish for your neighbor. / This is the whole law: the rest is only commentary. (Talmud Shabbat 31A)
Christianity: In everything, do to others what / You would have them do to you. / For this sums up the law and the prophets. (Matthew 7:12)
Islam: None of you shall be true believers / Unless you wish for your brother / The same that you wish for yourself. (Sunnat)
Bahá'í Faith - And if thine eyes be turned towards justice, choose thou for thy neighbour that which thou choosest for thyself. (Bahá'u'lláh)
Earth Wisdom: Do one of the above; / And live in such a way that you will enrich, and not diminish, / Our relatives in the Earth family / Of animals and plants, soil, air, and water.
The Golden Rule is as much understood by what it is, as by what it is not:
The Golden Rule is Not: Treat others how you assume they are treating or would be treating you - This is projection, and “Bad Faith.”
The Golden Rule is Not: Mistreat others as you are mistreated - This is revenge, payback, or the idea that ”turnabout is fair play.”
The Golden Rule is Not: Treat others the way they deserve to be treated - This is literal, merciless “justice,” without grace)
The Golden Rule is Not: Treat others only as good as they treat you - This is “quid pro quo” or “eye for an eye”
And the Second of Unism’s Twin Principles:
Agápe Love:
The Ancient Greeks had many different words for the common English word “Love.”
Among others, three of the most relevant are:
Eros (ἔρως érōs): an ａｅｓｔｈｅｔｉｃ or sometimes romantic love; more specifically, “sexual passion” or an appeal to beauty.
Philia (φιλία philía): a reciprocal love between personal friends; "affectionate regard, friendship", usually "between equals". Philia is a dispassionate virtuous love.
Agápe (ἀγάπη agápē): "love: esp. charity; the love of God for man and of man for a good God." (Liddell, H. G.; Scott, Robert) Or, "to will the good of another." (Thomas Aquinas) Agape Love means “understanding, redeeming goodwill for all men.”
Agape Love as described by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr:
It is a love that seeks nothing in return.
It is an overflowing love which is purely spontaneous, unmotivated, groundless, and creative.
It is a love in which the individual seeks not his own good, but the good of his neighbor.
It can be “tough love” but it is never violent, wrathful or vengeful - it can be stern in its loving-kindness.
“It's what theologians would call the love of God working in the lives of men. And when you rise to love on this level, you begin to love men, not because they are likeable, but because God loves them.”
“It is this type of spirit, this type of love, that can transform opposers into friends.
It does not seek to defeat or humiliate the opponent but to win his friendship and understanding.”
“This is a method that seeks to transform and to redeem, and win the friendship of the opponent, and make it possible for men to live together as brothers in a community, and not continually live with bitterness and friction.”
“It is this love which will bring about miracles in the hearts of men.”
“It is this type of understanding goodwill that will transform the deep gloom of the old age into the exuberant gladness of the new age.”
“This is the love that may well be the salvation of our civilization.”
⇒ It is said that Agape Love is “the love of God working in the lives of men” (King Jr.) or “the love of God for man and of man for a good God." (Liddell & Scott).
What about those of use who are Atheists?
Many of the first Unists had or still do consider themselves Atheists or Agnostics, but, through much discussion and negotiation, have come to understand that God absolutely exists in (at least) the same way placebos (and, to a different extent, Santa Claus) exist - Understanding or deconstructing any of these (or refusing to) tells us more about ourselves than it does the object of examination. For each of these, their mark is left, their effects are clear to see, their power is manifest - they exist as ideas which exert power in our world, regardless of their largely absent “physical” or “wholly explainable” presence.
Unism On Paradox
Certain paradoxes are welcomed, there is liberation in some paradoxes, and paradoxes are Not contradictions, they are counterintuitive but not impossible/without significant meaning: there is a slavery in freedom (Sartre’s “condemned to be free”), and a freedom in slavery (perhaps a despicable form, but an enticing, almost comforting form nonetheless), there is victory in defeat, there is failure in succes and success in failure - these aren’t just cheesy motivational quotes -
These are the counterintuitive lessons that words do not clarify, but mystify.
Our modern age cannot bear to reckon with the withering of human resilience, to such a state that slavery becomes preferable to freedom. In such a way, we must instead fester in an eternal aggression towards, and an eternal aggrandizement of, the cruelty of the masters; these masters need not actually exist - they can be hundreds of years removed. They are still prime targets, via the perverse “sins of the father” strategy championed by the Leftist perception of history.
So, whereas all genuine, lasting empowerment comes from within, Leftist/Marxist thought dictates that it must be achieved through disempowering and deposing others. This is the final paradox, so to speak, as it And, as with most things we “go all in on” in assuming they will satisfy or fulfill us, leaves one forever spiteful, paranoid, power hungry, and with an insatiable bloodlust and totalitarian ambitions.
Therefore, Unism claims that instead:
We Are The Enemy
Our own inability to accept ourselves causes us to find fault in others.
There is no form of criticism that cannot be motivated by jealousy.
The movie isn’t over - everyone believes they are on the right path until they change their own mind. Many people will recruit others to their incorrect path before they awaken to its false course.
People want what is bad for them - humans seek out and manifest stimuli, simulations, behaviors, attitudes, emotions, values and actions which are detrimental to ourselves and others. Wanting something is not justification to pursue it nor receive it: we all want that which will destroy us - this is often expressed in the pursuit of “instant gratification,” or in shortcuts, bitterness, stubbornness, revenge, and violence. To this extent, we are all at odds with ourselves.
In the left column, we see our natural inclination, when these are at all possible, advantageous, or permissible. While the column to the right represents their opposites.
The column on the left contains perhaps the much more “human” qualities, tendencies that are inherently coded into human nature. But we understand humanity to be capable of holding to a higher order, to concepts and ideas that are informed more by “superhuman” ideals than our default, base “human nature.”
7 Steps of Reason
for Understanding and Unification
“Titles” of The 7 Steps of Reason
1) Our Shared Susceptibility
2) Our Common Condition
3) The Through-The-Mirror Phase
4) Our Superpower is Change
5) The Formula & The Scale
6) Ascending The Scale
7) The Blueprint To A Better World
In Simple Paragraph Form:
(1) Anyone can be brainwashed. In fact, (2) socialization/maturation within confined parameters is itself brainwashing. To that point, (3) until exposed to an alternative, people will remain convinced of the suitability/superiority of their default surroundings or understandings. Luckily, [once exposed to an alternative] (4) everyone can change their mind. In fact, (5) with enough information and exposure (equals time and level of immersion), everyone and anything can be understood < tolerated < accepted < embraced. (6) The degree to which this scale can be ascended is dependent on how closely the Object of Understanding is aligned with the Golden Rule: treat others only as you yourself would like to be treated. (7) The more we can hold ourselves to the Golden Rule, the sooner and better we can mend social rifts and actualize total world peace.
Step By Step:
1) Anyone can be brainwashed.
When we refer to brainwashing, this is not ‘brainwashing’ in the overt, brash, Guantanamo Bay / A Clockwork Orange manner, as some might define it or presume it to be.
The most effective forms of brainwashing are instead much more pavlovian, perhaps in many ways largely subliminal; or are often achieved in an "Emperor's new clothes" or “Inception” type way. These methods are experienced in almost all cult and “Stockholm syndrome” cases (Patty Hearst in particular), as well as in most fundamentalist religious movements: they do not hand you a suicide vest on Day 1 - it is a slow and methodical process of indoctrination, manipulation, and escalation.
It is no difficult task to picture another, random person who would be susceptible to advanced psychological conditioning which would generate, erase, rewrite or re-prioritize even their most deeply rooted values, opinions, goals, or behaviors over a long enough time. And so this initial assertion or axiom can only be contested or disputed from two vantage points: simple ignorance of the advanced yet subtle forms of psychological conditioning that are presently employed, or on an individual’s reluctance or refusal to consider themselves personally susceptible to the same techniques.
Such a person gravely overestimates their psychological fortitude, the fixed nature of their own foundation, and the supposed impenetrability of their (assumed to be) stalwart, ironclad mind. Most often, some degree of narcissism, willful stubbornness, delusional exceptionalism, or bad-faith Devil's advocacy lies at the root of their contention. Or, to put it another way, they have already been brainwashed.
Which brings us to our next point:
2) Socialization/maturation within confined parameters is itself brainwashing.
To put it in an extremely melodramatic way: we are all brainwashed.
This means that the reality which each individual everywhere grows up understanding -
will always be separated from, offset by, or even conflict with (or infringe on) another's reality: whether minimally or considerably, their experienced reality was/is confined either nationally, geographically, temporally, educationally, religiously, ethnically, or otherwise.
No one can be exposed to/informed by everything, and thus blind-spots are created. These blind-spots are often intentionally or unintentionally exploited and capitalized on by opportunists (i.e., those unwilling to recognize/legitimize any separate or opposing realities and/or the people within them: people who are closed-minded, people who are convinced they have an enlightened or superior understanding or perspective on things and refuse to empathize with or even humanize those who disagree with them (i.e. those who profess to be incredibly "open-minded."))
3) Until exposed to an alternative, people will remain convinced of the suitability / superiority of their default surroundings or understandings (their reality or components / aspects of it or in it).
⇒ This is the same principle that gives us:
Culture shock (fundamental aspects or elements of one’s culture are absent or radically different in another, creating a sense of alienation and often bitterness or dejection. Or, more colloquially: the default is seen as the best/only way until exposed to alternative),
“Grass-is-always-greener” syndrome,
Aspirational television/entertainment, which can instill in otherwise generally content and satisfied individuals a sense of inadequacy and lack of status, excitement, material wealth, etc.
Harriet Tubman's quote, "I could have freed so many more slaves if only they knew they were slaves," which demonstrates the vast capacity of humans to become fully immersed or entrenched in their circumstantial reality to the extent that they are unable to see above or beyond it.
It is for this exact reason that modern advertisements have long been meticulously crafted and designed to create (within their audiences) a want or desire where there previously was none. Hundreds of products that our parents and grandparents had absolutely no use or need for are effectively marketed and sold to persons convinced of their necessity. Bottled water, highly caffeinated energy drinks, bizarre or novel workout equipment, the fitbit - Not to mention all of the products that are the result of (or are associated with / related to) the technological advances experienced between generations (the dishwasher, garage door opener, vacuum cleaners, computers, the internet, cellphones, smartphones, roombas, smart home IoT devices, etc, etc, etc.) which, over time, become essentially required items in order to participate in mainstream modern society.
To those unconvinced, we urge you to consider your own upbringing. Were you to have been raised in a family or culture in which practice or behavior “x” was significantly different (say, that one nodded to indicate ‘No,’ and shook one’s head to indicate ‘Yes,’ as is the case in Albania), it would, by and large, not ever occur to you to seek out (much less intuitively prefer) the “normal” manifestation of ”x” (i.e., the manner or nature “x” is enacted or expressed in your present reality), and you would instead most likely champion that practice or behavior “x” that you were most naturally accustomed to.
[Once exposed to an alternative,]
4) Everyone can change their mind.
That is to say, no one can change it for you. Attempts at such will most likely be resisted (See 1 and 2).
[In fact,]
5) With enough information and exposure (equals time and immersion), everyone and anything can be understood < tolerated < accepted < embraced.
Exposure, as measured in terms of time and immersion, will vary depending on how strong a person's indoctrination against the object of understanding is. Stubbornness and obstinacy are dangerously potent in our modern age, yet these can only remain as long as specific categories and subjects of information are censored, manipulated, or outright omitted. That being said, when shown reliable / credible video or photographic evidence of a person committing a brutal murder, one would need superhuman levels of insincerity and psychological conditioning (or fragility) in order to deny what was witnessed - aka that the person witnessed had committed homicide.
6) The degree to which this scale is ascended is dependent on how closely the object of understanding is aligned with the Golden Rule: treat others only as you yourself would like to be treated.
Let's get the most extreme/popular "but-what-about"-challenge out of the way first: Hitler. Hitler is usually cited as perhaps the most evil person in modern history. Yet, with enough information and insight into his disturbed mind, one could eventually understand (as in “comprehend,” not as in “sympathize with or excuse”) why he was able to act so abominably horrific (what motivated him, where his morals ended, what depravity he found acceptable and how). But, as his countless crimes and darkest motives (from fascism to genocide to his plan for world subjugation, etc.) violate the Golden Rule so absolutely, one could (/should hopefully) never be able to advance further up the scale past 'understanding' to 'tolerance for,' much less to 'acceptance for,' and even less to eventually 'embrace' any of those devastatingly evil actions.
Now a much nicer example: Acquired tastes. When these are aligned with the Golden Rule (thereby excluding and negating any monster who would count murder, molestation, etc. as acquired tastes), such tastes are always acquired exactly according to this scale: first, one must achieve an understanding of the taste (comprehending it: the fact that it exists, what it is, what purpose it serves, and/or being intrigued by it); then comes testing it and (in the event the taste is to be acquired) tolerating it; in which case, over time one thereafter advances to accepting the acquired taste; then, in the final stages, embracing it.
7) The more we can hold ourselves to the Golden Rule, the more/sooner/better we can mend social rifts and actualize total world peace.
Should a person have no interest in total world peace, that is fine. We may not ever experience it in our lifetimes. But if it were ever possible, the path to world peace would start in your home, your neighborhood, your community, nation, and region. Peace enacted or “imposed” from the top-down can often breed sedition and rebellion. It is experienced as inauthentic, and we seem to stifle under this “freedom.” Individuals who still have a “score to settle” through force or manipulation will not adopt, nor adapt to, conditions of ‘premature’ peace: they have too much to lose from it - namely, the source of their passion and purpose in life.
It is well established that the peace of WW1 led directly to WW2. The numerous conflicts and wars in the Balkan region of Europe evidence this same principle. The Gulf War, Iraq War, and Islamic State campaigns teach this same lesson as well. Tensions, feuds, pain and vengeance do not magically end when peace is declared - the war is merely “paused.” Reconciliation and redemption are necessary, should any lasting peace, and this must be experienced by those who are most impacted by conflict: the military and civilian populations themselves.
Peace imposed from the bottom-up will be hard won, and will surely meet “top-down” resistance and increased psychological warfare, but it is perhaps the only direction that true peace can emanate from. In this way, we may resolve (and absolve ourselves) of the horrors of the past, and focus on rebuilding lives and communities truly worth defending.
Without something worth defending in peace, we are easily led into war - whether for the gamble of what we may gain, the assertion of dominance against aggressors (dominating the dominator), or out of sheer boredom and apathy. These three reasons are largely experienced by class in descending order: those who declare war do so for the spoils, those who wage war are motivated by duty and a desire for dominance, and those who support and celebrate warfare have made this their surrogate activity (their way to vicariously experience the power process through the actions of a collective of which they play little to no role).
Unism On Truth
There is a popular cartoon, often used in elementary, junior high, and high school
Social Studies courses, which depicts two persons on either side of a symbol:
One person claims to view four, the other refutes this and counts only three. This drawing illustrates how our perspectives can shape and influence what our reality is perceived as and “believed to be.” The conclusion should be:, by seeing things from another perspective, we can understand another person or group’s conflicting/contradictory view of the world.
One may be tempted to conclude that “they are both right,” but the true conclusion (in this specific instance) is that they both Believe they are right, and both are incorrect in assuming the other is wrong. This is due to the fact that the object of observation is something that does not exist in physical, three-dimensional, tangible form - it is instead a 2D optical illusion which simulates or suggests an impossible 3D form - and is intended to distort one’s grasp on visual reality.
Let us make our point much clearer, as it pertains to our everyday experienced world within our shared, lived reality:
Who is right in this scenario?
In one hypothetical sense, both are correct from their own perspective, and incorrect in believing the other person is wrong, as with the first scenario: each sees it as oriented towards themselves, and rejects the other’s point of view. In “abstract reality,” it potentially could be a nine or a six, as it is a symbol which contains two symbols: one being the inversion of the other.
But this is a complete abstraction. We do not experience reality as such - we do not encounter numbers appearing isolated within a void, independent of all context.
In a similar way to how the conclusion of the first scenario is that (in reality) the symbol is in fact an optical illusion which is intended to depict an object that would defy the laws of engineering, thus delivering two conflicting perspectives on either end; so too is this scenario solved by applying “real world” understanding: Who drew this? What is the context for this number? Was it intended to be a six or a nine?
We conclude there are two experiences of “truth”:
A perceived truth, and an independent/actual or intended truth.
Let’s use the first scenario as an example. Mr. Nine is convinced he is correct, and that Mr. Six is wrong. He has, of course, witnessed the “9” with his own two eyes. He prints t-shirts, stickers, and hats with the “9” branding, starts a “9 Truther” podcast, organizes regular protests to intimidate and scuffle with the proponents of “6,” and starts receiving donations to raise awareness about the importance of “9”- by warning people about the violent bigotry of the closed-minded “6” believers. Even being tolerant or sympathetic to “6” is seen as tantamount to supporting and encouraging genocide. This is particularly insensitive when one understands the full context of the “9” experience - historically, but more importantly - contemporaneously. And , which you never can and never will. You’d have to read the “9” teachings in its original language, everything else has been manipulated to distort and vilify the rich tradition of “9,” and anyways, unless both your parents swore allegiance to “9,” you’ll never fully understand. In fact, you sound like one of those “6” lovers, trying to infiltrate “9” and destroy us...
Everyone praises Mr. Nine for “living his truth,” “being authentic to himself,” and for not letting the hateful “subhumans” (who either agree with or simply claim to understand Mr. Six) deter him from the mission of convincing everyone of the “9” reality and enforcing allegiance among his followers..
Companies advertise their support for “9,” (only in countries where the majority of the mainstream completely agree with it),
Then, one day, a third man returns to the scene of the symbol, and either continues writing (or uncovering/revealing the message that was excavated or was obscured by dirt and dust). And so it is discovered that the context of the symbol “becomes,” or is determined to always have been: “6 for 1 Sale on Adult Diapers.”
Was Mr. Nine’s “truth” always wrong? Is there any way to compensate for all of the grief, harassment, violence and chaos (against “6,” all those who were not explicitly or convincingly “9” enough, as well as those who were “9” but had run afoul of Mr. Nine in some way or another). committed in the name of “9” The day before this later discovery/development, was there any way to convince Mr. Nine of the symbol’s actual meaning?
We are all Mr. Nine.
This is the consequence of “perspective as fact,” and “ideology as truth.” This does not mean that truth does not exist - but simply that you cannot be sure that you have started or chosen to be anywhere near it. Absolute Truth does exist. To say Truth does not exist is self-defeating, (it implies that the concept itself cannot itself be truth)
Isn’t Not Over Yet:
An old farmer, in a small village in rural China was thought to be a little bit odd. He and his only surviving son lived alone, his wife had passed some years ago.
One day, the farmer’s only horse broke free of its fence and ran away, off into the bordering wilderness. "Oh What terrible luck! What terrible luck you have," said the other villagers.
The old farmer replied, "Maybe so, maybe not. I suppose we'll see."
“What?” the villagers thought... They suspected he had become a simpleton. “Of course this was a terrible fate…”
Days passed, when suddenly the farmer’s same horse appeared from the forest line, followed by a group of wild stallions. His horse galloped right up to its pen, entering along with 10 of the beautiful new horses in tow.
"What Amazing luck!!!” the villagers cheered! “How lucky you are! You had no horses, yet now your stable is overflowing!! What wonderful fate!" celebrated the villagers.
The farmer replied, "Maybe yes, maybe no.. I suppose we'll see."
Again the villagers were very puzzled and annoyed. "What an absolute fool.. he can't see when good fortune falls right in his lap, the fool! He says ‘We will see’, but, ‘we will see’ what?!? What is there to see - it has already happened! I would have danced with joy were this my beautiful fate! Oh, this fool of an old farmer!"
The very next day, the farmer's only son walked out to saddle and break in one of the new wild stallions they had just gained. As he mounted the stallion, it tossed him violently in the air, so that, as he landed, he severely broke his leg. There was nothing to do - the leg was irreparably mangled, crippling him for life.
"Oh What terrible, terrible luck! Your only son, whom you relied on for taking care of you and your farm, has been so gravely injured! SURELY you must admit this is a terrible, terrible turn of events!"
"Maybe so, maybe not. We'll see.."
“Fucking retarded,” all of the villagers agreed. “This man is absolutely fucking retarded. He is so dumb, he probably eats horseshit. Does he really need us to explain to him how stupid he is? Does he not understand the difference between bad things and good things? Fuck this guy. No, Seriously - Fuck this stupid old farmer.”
The very next day, the king's army rode into the small village, going from family to family, conscripting each and every able-bodied man of the village.
Of all the households, only the old farmer's was passed over, owing to the farmer's advanced age, and his son’s terrible injury.
The rest of the men of the village, young and old, left with the king’s battalion.
The army went into battle days later, and each of the village's conscripts were slaughtered in their defeat.
This story exquisitely illustrates the propensity of the human mind to divide and judge events based on what they mean to us individually, from our limited perspective. Even with seemingly “all the information,” the true outcome of events has not yet unfolded. The best of intentions can have horrible consequences. The worst things can turn out to be the galvanizing forces for the greater good. Going to jail can make a person Decide to straighten their life out - getting a promotion can turn someone into everything they have (and everyone else has) always hated.
This does not sanction cruel or malevolent behavior - the Golden Rule and Agape Love are still supreme - it only tells us that we are not in a position (sometimes temporally or philosophically) to know whether something was wholly good or bad.
The “movie” of our lives isn’t over yet. And the twist near the end is usually worth sticking around for.
Eclipse The Past
Many of us find ourselves haunted. Haunted by the traumas, regrets, pains and transgressions of the past. The more active a role we had in manifesting these, the easier it will be to let them go - the more we hold and view others as responsible for the traumas, abuses, and horrors of the past, the more complex it will be to absolve others And ourselves.
Do not underestimate a person's ability to latch onto, exaggerate, or focus on certain minor or seemingly trivial actions or events as central traumas in their “story of the past.”
Our conception of self is informed (consciously as well as subconsciously) by our understanding of events as we experience them, constituting our “story of the past.” This can be understood as one’s autobiography, which forms the foundation of their psychology - essentially working as the translator or interpreter: funneling all input and interactions through the interpretation provided by their “story of the past.”
Our modern Western/Global culture orders and understands History’s “story of the past” as a List of Grievances experienced in relation to power (dominance and oppression). Many of these grievances exist in some form (reasonable, explainable or otherwise), or did exist to significant degrees in the past. We internalize this narrative as individuals, and subconsciously understand our own “story of the past” as organized or prioritized around our Grievance List.
Our culture (and our psychological conditioning within it) encourages us to hold the item at the top of our Grievance List responsible for our inability to experience happiness and fulfillment.
In the absence of real or “traditional” traumas (physical and sexual abuses; extreme and intentional psychological distress and manipulation), minor grudges and resentments will take the place at the top of a person’s list. Should someone be fortunate enough to lack even these, and/or should their top list-item leave them unable to elicit the necessary amount of socio-political acumen, sympathy, and attention, they must adopt the causes of groups who do.
In this way, they can reliably explain their social, personal, interpersonal, and psychological frustrations, apathy, anxiety, ennui, depression, dysfunction and dissatisfaction.
In order to escape these traumas, regrets, pains and transgressions of the past, and free ourselves from the obsessions intrinsic to our Grievance List, we must abandon the narratives that support them.
Depending on the severity of the traumas experienced, one will benefit from varying lengths of therapy, critical self-reflection, and introspection. But in the interest of time, and put incredibly simply: hurt people hurt people.
This explains why people are abused, why cycles of abuse continue (the abused becomes the abuser), and why the only agency we have in the present is to break the cycle - by becoming Unhurt, unbroken, and whole again.
This is a process that requires individual attention, personal strategy, and basic psychoanalysis and dialogue, so we will not go deeper into this process at this point. But suffice it to say that without becoming whole again, and “repairing” our “story of the past,” so as to free ourselves of its weight - at the individual, interpersonal, small group, communal, national, ethnic/racial, and international levels - we will continue to hurt, mislead, corrupt, disappoint, create friction between, manipulate, and destroy all those who we are meant to help, regardless of all of our absolute best intentions and efforts.
[Upcoming Addendum]
Usurp The Future
(Submission Pending)
Each of us fall into this world, borne into different ideologies, communities and hierarchies. And so, Unism was begun as an attempt to find out which (past, present, or future) path, ideology, and behavior was best suited to save us from our current dystopian trajectory.
Jettisoning our preconceptions and individual leanings, our founding members made a pact to continue this pursuit for truth, freedom, and autonomy; sifting through history (through varied lenses) to cull only the most resonant, actionable guides to understanding and empowering humanity itself. We would appreciate your help in guiding and refining our process, to assure we are actively pursuing the best possible world of all possible worlds.
Introductory Summary:
Unism (yoo-nih-sum) is a philosophical concept & emancipatory collective with socio-political, economic, and technological implications, which began as an honest pursuit for truth and authenticity amidst a world that was, and still is, tearing itself apart at every level.
Our members, known as Unists, are guided by Unism's Twin Principles:
1) The Golden Rule - "Treat others as you would Wish to be treated"
2) Agape Love - "Agape means understanding, redeeming goodwill for all men. It is a love that seeks nothing in return. It is an overflowing love which is purely spontaneous, unmotivated, groundless, and creative. It does not seek to defeat or humiliate the opponent, but to win his friendship and understanding."
As a whole, we are neither Left Wing nor Right Wing, Liberal nor Conservative, Capitalists nor Communists - our members do come from all over the political, ideological, social and economic compasses and spectrums, but have all joined Unism with the understanding that the current options for all mainstream ideological groundings and political parties and organizations are severely lacking and inadequate, if not entirely corrupted, outdated, and useless.
Some of our principles and axioms will resonate greatly with Leftists, some will be celebrated by those on the Right (if this point alone angers you greatly, the System holds you in high esteem). Other principles will alienate far Leftists, and still others may not sit well at all with staunch conservatives. We ask those who are in allegiance with either the Democrats or Republicans; or more broadly, Leftist or Right Wing ideologies, to focus on the similarities - not the differences - between Unism and your current beliefs. Such is the case with all collectives - no one usually agrees with 100% of anything, especially not when first introduced to it. Or, do you presently agree with 100% of your party’s line, in all matters, iterations, and applications?
Should Leftism (Socialism, Communism, Marxism, Progressivism, Stalinism, Maoism, Political Correctness, Cancel Culture, and other related totalitarian forces) fulfill all of your wildest practical and theoretical dreams entirely - should either the Democrats or Republicans address all of the issues relevant to your daily life and goals - should you aim to establish a legitimate new political state explicitly and officially segregated by ethnicity or race, as a way to rebel against the slow suicide of your ancestral culture - there are many groups which take these as their goals. History, too, is littered with them. And while we welcome those of you who still hold out hope for these vestiges of Left-Right reactionism, and sympathize with the plights of our modern times, Unism is not one of them.
Unism promotes and prizes personal accountability, self-actualization, anti-fragility, the self-determination of one's individual and communal purpose(s), self-sufficiency at the national & federal level, and interdependence within the small-scale community.
We do not scapegoat or externalize our fears or our failures - we see establishing (and self-determining) one’s individual and communal purpose(s), striving with reasonable effort to achieve individual and communal goals, and obtaining these goals through personal action, responsibility, and accountability - a.ka., undergoing “the Power Process,” as the key to manifesting the better world that is within our reach. We cannot control others, we can only choose to positively or negatively impact and influence them. We lead by example, and strive for ideals that are simple to understand but take a lifetime to enact and perfect.
We believe that in order to eclipse the horrors of the past, we must not run from them or ignore them, but confront and learn from them, in order to absolve ourselves of our individual and collective transgressions, and establish a social/communal and technological order that does not inherently dehumanize, alienate, devalue and commodify human beings through ubiquitous technologization, bureaucracy, manipulation and coercion.
The issues, principles, problems and systems we address are complicated and complex - we encourage discussion and debate, safe in the knowledge that the Truth makes itself known within the human soul (‘soul’ in a philosophical, not necessarily religious sense). We implore our members to be willing to learn as much as they are willing to teach. We will never shoot the messenger, we do not reject bitter truths, and we aim to always boldly traverse the physical and metaphysical landscapes with the appropriate amounts of both skepticism and faith.
Thank you for your support, interest, or mere curiosity - we are truly thankful for your attention.
There's a brighter future in store for those who mean to shape it - not through interference and manipulation, but through self-actualization, and by inhabiting a higher plain of self-sufficiency & reciprocal compensoral coexistence.
Technology and the Human Soul
The State We Are In:
As our Modern World, and everything in it, constantly pulls us one way or the other, demanding ever more attention, opinions, new media literacies, collaboration, time, energy and effort - all to accomplish (in ever more roundabout, complex ways) what was largely assured to past generations (purpose, autonomy, empowerment, self-sufficiency, security, family, etc. appropriate to their place in time and space) - many of us have come to feel an increasing sense of inner disconnection, unease, anxiety, alienation, depression, apathy, or other feelings of disturbance within our own selves.
This pain may have seemed to be experienced in “the heart”, the psyche, or in our conscience, but could also easily have been experienced as a manifestation of our regrets, us grappling with our morality amidst a culture that encourages any and all behavior, or of coming to terms with our (often continually shifting or shrinking) expectations for our own lives...
How Can This Be?
If you have experienced these senses of frustration, depression, anxiety, or alienation - alienation unto oneself and/or towards others - this may all sound rather resonant, or at least quite familiar. But how can this be?
Surely most people don’t feel this way, right? You may have even thought you were suffering from a psychiatric disorder or a “chemical imbalance.” I mean, sure... you are in debt, working a job you don’t like for people you can’t stand, communicating less and less with friends or family, perhaps living at home or with roommates, retreating to escapism and consumerism to satiate your desire for meaning and interaction… but still, it Can’t be normal to feel like this - “It’s not my predicament, but my perception that must change!” you conclude. You decide it’s Your Brain that must be the problem.
You are not insane for thinking so - just misled, and incorrect. We are continually reassured by our culture that we all now have more freedoms, privileges, powers, and conveniences than ever. Material wealth and advanced, almost “sci-fi” technologies are commonplace. Those who feel they still lack each and every form of these may choose to chase and collect them all forever, but all those who have already obtained or experienced them (even to just a nominal degree) will know that the “fulfillment” these offer is extremely short lived, and the comedown is brutal - and permanent.
Why do we feel more miserable and emptier than was ever thought possible, with more connectivity and convenience, more touchscreens, smart things, apps, platforms, subscription services, reminders, and notifications than any previous generation? How can this be?
Disintegration and Decay:
Unism asserts that these are signs of spiritual decay and neglect. We believe that the state of a person's soul is a complex barometer for an often neglected element of physical, psychological and spiritual health, inner richness, and indicative of continuity (or lack thereof) with one’s sense of meaning and purpose in life.
We argue that this sense of spiritual decay and neglect is brought on by the total disintegration of small scale communities, freedom, autonomy, security, and, ultimately, the individual itself.
The cause of this disintegration is the state of our world, wherein, instead of the industrial-technological system being molded, steered, altered, paused, or halted to better suit or serve humanity, human nature, and society; it is humanity, human nature, and society that must be molded, steered, altered, paused or halted to fit the needs of the industrial-technological system.
Technology marches ever forward; always voluntary at first, but increasingly more mandatory as it is adopted into the mainstream. Think of what life was like before every store or business needed an online presence (at least on Google Maps and social media) to be considered “real.” Before you needed a smartphone to keep up with any office or professional job, even if just a receptionist or assistant position. Before the internet was something you never left, only briefly looked away from. As a collective/culture, there is no going backwards. There is no slowing down.
Additionally, each and every cutting edge technology of tomorrow will always be replaced by something newer. You have no sooner become accustomed to a platform, device, or service when the next iteration arrives. Your expertise becomes obsolete. Your jargon, coding, and fluencies are in dead languages. Your formats and cables are no longer supported. A New Upgrade is Available, Which Requires a Restart. This pace is only the taste, a preview of our future - a future that promises much, much more instability, disposability, planned obsolescence, hype-cults, and religious devotion to the cult of More; but accelerated, ad infinitum.
Technology is always creating more obligations and restricting freedoms: take the automobile, for example. Entirely voluntary for early adopters, it was a great and wonderful invention. One could continue to walk wherever one needed to, or drive if it were at all possible. Fast forward just 50-60 years: sprawling highways dissect the landscape, and cities are designed with vehicular travel at heart so that only a small minority of people in America can exist (work, shop and socialize) without needing a car. You can no longer walk where you please. Now there are specific zones for pedestrians, or large areas where walking is impossible, as it would impede the flow of traffic. The mainstream adoption of the car supplanted most transportation freedoms that came before it (just try riding a horse-and-buggy anywhere outside of Central Park or Pennsylvania). Now a car is all but required to participate and succeed in most metropolitan cities - you may choose public transport, but then your freedoms are even more restricted, you must wait for the bus/subway at a specific time and place, ride with whoever else is there, at whatever speed it goes, and get off as close to your destination as the bus/subway will travel. Along with this mandate comes both necessary and excessive regulations, bureaucracy, and stressors: visiting the DMV, getting licensed, having up-to-date registration, not finding parking, getting parking tickets, manufacturer defects and recalls, speeding tickets, insurance, going to a mechanic, rising gas prices, traffic, etc. etc. etc.
In fact, technology is so universally and inextricably fundamental to participating in today’s culture, that even those critical of, or outright entirely against the tools and trinkets of industrial-technological society, must in some way utilize and engage with it. Beyond the obvious use of a laptop computer needed to write this, one must engage with (i.e.. confront and assent to) 100’s of technologies and computer systems at every level of society (all levels of business, food/hospitality, shopping, media, education, romance, commerce, health, recreation/entertainment, etc.) simply by existing.
In this way, you are not alone in feeling such a way. We are all aware of and have experienced this unique feeling of utter dread, dissatisfaction, contempt, pointlessness, despair and other related feelings endemic to a world that must make ideal, atomized, agency-less consumers out of us all.
Our Approach
While the industrial-technological system, and all of the material and social complications and disintegrations that come with it is clearly part of the root cause of our spiritual decay, we have not made the dismantling of this system our initial, primary goal.
Instead, we believe that the key to solving the world's problems begins with us: we cannot treat others properly until we treat ourselves properly, we cannot love others correctly or effectively until we can love ourselves effectively, by becoming worthy of our own love.
As malformed and disintegrated as the industrial-technological system, and our modes and means of life within it, has made us, this does not give us cause to externalize or project our failings Onto It. We must first address those dysfunctions, disturbances, decays, and diseases we have adopted and adapted to. By uniting to share our stories, advance our efforts, achieve our goals, and help each other abide by our stated principles, we are actively participating in a revolutionary movement that will bring dramatic change to our world, from the inside out.
Resolving and healing ourselves is the first step towards so-called ‘ego death,’ a process which enables one to reject a conception of self that is entirely isolated, compartmentalized from others, self-serving and self-obsessed. When we have achieved this unbroken state, we may walk out into the world with confidence, safe in the knowledge that life itself is interconnected in ways we may never understand, but that our neighbors prosperity is in part our prosperity, and our own prosperity is in part our neighbors. This is the circle we wish to find ourselves in.
And we hope to see you in this circle as well.
Laying The Groundwork
[1] We have a problem.
The mainstream is misled and the kids are not all right.
Our society is messed up, the system is messed up, and the ideas it all runs on are part of it.
Modern ideological assumptions have something to do with the problems, but less to do with the solutions.
[2] Figuring this out is hard, and it’s very easy to be wrong.
Seeking true insight is a process of getting out of Plato’s Cave, over and over again.
Most people have good intentions and are not to blame for our situation.
It’s respectable to say “I don’t know.”
It’s noble to say “I’ll earnestly seek to find out”.
[3] To start fixing the world, we have to start by fixing ourselves.
First you have to straighten out your own mind.
Then you can try to help others straighten themselves out, should they be willing.
[4] Our inquiry should be guided by good truth-seeking principles.
A) Truth exists, in some fundamental sense.
There is surely absolute truth. We can sense this truth.
The alternative assumption leads nowhere.
B) Open inquiry is a moral duty.
Any important topic deserves open, critical and self-questioning examination.
Any beliefs about matters you think are critically important should be tested constantly.
You needn’t fear any alternative theories or perspectives.
All intellectual taboos are potential tools of tyranny.
You’re more likely to be hopelessly wrong if you wall yourself off.
C) Bias needs to be recognized and compensated for.
Avoid anchoring bias (don’t assume you started close to the truth).
Avoid confirmation bias (see if you can prove you’re wrong, instead of trying to prove you’re right).
Look for alternative hypotheses.
Understand your opponents’ arguments in full.
Hear out every perspective you can find.
D) We need to apply the tool of reason thoughtfully. Know the limits of rationality.
There are implicit and explicit dimensions, functions, and purposes within all things.
Be clear and fair within the constraints of verbal logic.
Apply reason consistently.
Persuade people without manipulating them.
Recognize manipulation.
[5] THE TWIN PRINCIPLES:
Unism proposes that the Individual’s ideal attitude is characterized by two fundamental tenets:
The first of Unism’s Twin Principles is:
The Golden Rule - “Treat others as you would wish to be treated.”
The Golden Rule is a Universal concept - it has been independently arrived at in nearly all cultures, but it is not man’s natural impulse - it must be aspired to, and trained into us.
While the Universality unites each culture’s version around a shared central idea, each iteration expounds and compounds meaning upon that central idea.
Hinduism: Everything you should do you will find in this: Do nothing to others / That would hurt you if it were done to you. (Mahabharata 5:1517)
If the entire Dharma can be said in a few words, then it is—that which is unfavorable to us, do not do that to others. (Padma Purana, shrushti 19/357–358)
Jainism: Killing a living being is killing one's own self; showing compassion to a living being is showing compassion to oneself. He who desires his own good, should avoid causing any harm to a living being. (Suman Suttam, verse 151)
Buddhism: Do not offend others / As you would not want to be offended. [Alt. Translation: Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.] (Udanavarga 5:18)
One who, while himself seeking happiness, oppresses with violence other beings who also desire happiness, will not attain happiness hereafter. (Dhammapada 10. Violence)
Taoism: The successes of your neighbor and their losses / Will be to you as if they were your own. (T’ai-Shand Kan-Ying P’ien)
Confucianism: Is there any rule that one should follow all of one’s life? / Yes! The rule of the gentle goodness: / That which we do not wish to be done to us, we do not do to others. (Analects 15:23)
Zoroastrianism: Do not do unto others whatever is injurious to yourself. (Shayast-na-Shayast 13.29)
Judaism: That which you do not wish for yourself / You shall not wish for your neighbor. / This is the whole law: the rest is only commentary. (Talmud Shabbat 31A)
Christianity: In everything, do to others what / You would have them do to you. / For this sums up the law and the prophets. (Matthew 7:12)
Islam: None of you shall be true believers / Unless you wish for your brother / The same that you wish for yourself. (Sunnat)
Bahá'í Faith - And if thine eyes be turned towards justice, choose thou for thy neighbour that which thou choosest for thyself. (Bahá'u'lláh)
Earth Wisdom: Do one of the above; / And live in such a way that you will enrich, and not diminish, / Our relatives in the Earth family / Of animals and plants, soil, air, and water.
The Golden Rule is as much understood by what it is, as by what it is not:
The Golden Rule is Not: Treat others how you assume they are treating or would be treating you - This is projection, and “Bad Faith.”
The Golden Rule is Not: Mistreat others as you are mistreated - This is revenge, payback, or the idea that ”turnabout is fair play.”
The Golden Rule is Not: Treat others the way they deserve to be treated - This is literal, merciless “justice,” without grace)
The Golden Rule is Not: Treat others only as good as they treat you - This is “quid pro quo” or “eye for an eye”
And the Second of Unism’s Twin Principles:
Agápe Love:
The Ancient Greeks had many different words for the common English word “Love.”
Among others, three of the most relevant are:
Eros (ἔρως érōs): an ａｅｓｔｈｅｔｉｃ or sometimes romantic love; more specifically, “sexual passion” or an appeal to beauty.
Philia (φιλία philía): a reciprocal love between personal friends; "affectionate regard, friendship", usually "between equals". Philia is a dispassionate virtuous love.
Agápe (ἀγάπη agápē): "love: esp. charity; the love of God for man and of man for a good God." (Liddell, H. G.; Scott, Robert) Or, "to will the good of another." (Thomas Aquinas) Agape Love means “understanding, redeeming goodwill for all men.”
Agape Love as described by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr:
It is a love that seeks nothing in return.
It is an overflowing love which is purely spontaneous, unmotivated, groundless, and creative.
It is a love in which the individual seeks not his own good, but the good of his neighbor.
It can be “tough love” but it is never violent, wrathful or vengeful - it can be stern in its loving-kindness.
“It's what theologians would call the love of God working in the lives of men. And when you rise to love on this level, you begin to love men, not because they are likeable, but because God loves them.”
“It is this type of spirit, this type of love, that can transform opposers into friends.
It does not seek to defeat or humiliate the opponent but to win his friendship and understanding.”
“This is a method that seeks to transform and to redeem, and win the friendship of the opponent, and make it possible for men to live together as brothers in a community, and not continually live with bitterness and friction.”
“It is this love which will bring about miracles in the hearts of men.”
“It is this type of understanding goodwill that will transform the deep gloom of the old age into the exuberant gladness of the new age.”
“This is the love that may well be the salvation of our civilization.”
⇒ It is said that Agape Love is “the love of God working in the lives of men” (King Jr.) or “the love of God for man and of man for a good God." (Liddell & Scott).
What about those of use who are Atheists?
Many of the first Unists had or still do consider themselves Atheists or Agnostics, but, through much discussion and negotiation, have come to understand that God absolutely exists in (at least) the same way placebos (and, to a different extent, Santa Claus) exist - Understanding or deconstructing any of these (or refusing to) tells us more about ourselves than it does the object of examination. For each of these, their mark is left, their effects are clear to see, their power is manifest - they exist as ideas which exert power in our world, regardless of their largely absent “physical” or “wholly explainable” presence.
Unism On Paradox
Certain paradoxes are welcomed, there is liberation in some paradoxes, and paradoxes are Not contradictions, they are counterintuitive but not impossible/without significant meaning: there is a slavery in freedom (Sartre’s “condemned to be free”), and a freedom in slavery (perhaps a despicable form, but an enticing, almost comforting form nonetheless), there is victory in defeat, there is failure in succes and success in failure - these aren’t just cheesy motivational quotes -
These are the counterintuitive lessons that words do not clarify, but mystify.
Our modern age cannot bear to reckon with the withering of human resilience, to such a state that slavery becomes preferable to freedom. In such a way, we must instead fester in an eternal aggression towards, and an eternal aggrandizement of, the cruelty of the masters; these masters need not actually exist - they can be hundreds of years removed. They are still prime targets, via the perverse “sins of the father” strategy championed by the Leftist perception of history.
So, whereas all genuine, lasting empowerment comes from within, Leftist/Marxist thought dictates that it must be achieved through disempowering and deposing others. This is the final paradox, so to speak, as it And, as with most things we “go all in on” in assuming they will satisfy or fulfill us, leaves one forever spiteful, paranoid, power hungry, and with an insatiable bloodlust and totalitarian ambitions.
Therefore, Unism claims that instead:
We Are The Enemy
Our own inability to accept ourselves causes us to find fault in others.
There is no form of criticism that cannot be motivated by jealousy.
The movie isn’t over - everyone believes they are on the right path until they change their own mind. Many people will recruit others to their incorrect path before they awaken to its false course.
People want what is bad for them - humans seek out and manifest stimuli, simulations, behaviors, attitudes, emotions, values and actions which are detrimental to ourselves and others. Wanting something is not justification to pursue it nor receive it: we all want that which will destroy us - this is often expressed in the pursuit of “instant gratification,” or in shortcuts, bitterness, stubbornness, revenge, and violence. To this extent, we are all at odds with ourselves.
In the left column, we see our natural inclination, when these are at all possible, advantageous, or permissible. While the column to the right represents their opposites.
| Convenience | Hard Work |
| The Path of Least Resistance | The Hero’s Journey (The Road Less Traveled) |
| Short Cuts ("Sin") | Mastery, Discipline (“Piety”) |
| Instant Gratification | Delayed Gratification |
| Consumerism / Consumption itself | Production, Creation, (Asceticism/Fasting) |
| Usury | Charity |
| Passivity | Agency |
| Flight | Fight |
| Negativity | Positivity |
| Nihilism, Existentialist Dread | The Power Process |
| Body, Mind | The Soul (Spirit “pneuma”) |
| TECHNOLOGY | NATURE (Humanity/Environ.) |
The column on the left contains perhaps the much more “human” qualities, tendencies that are inherently coded into human nature. But we understand humanity to be capable of holding to a higher order, to concepts and ideas that are informed more by “superhuman” ideals than our default, base “human nature.”
7 Steps of Reason
for Understanding and Unification
“Titles” of The 7 Steps of Reason
1) Our Shared Susceptibility
2) Our Common Condition
3) The Through-The-Mirror Phase
4) Our Superpower is Change
5) The Formula & The Scale
6) Ascending The Scale
7) The Blueprint To A Better World
In Simple Paragraph Form:
(1) Anyone can be brainwashed. In fact, (2) socialization/maturation within confined parameters is itself brainwashing. To that point, (3) until exposed to an alternative, people will remain convinced of the suitability/superiority of their default surroundings or understandings. Luckily, [once exposed to an alternative] (4) everyone can change their mind. In fact, (5) with enough information and exposure (equals time and level of immersion), everyone and anything can be understood < tolerated < accepted < embraced. (6) The degree to which this scale can be ascended is dependent on how closely the Object of Understanding is aligned with the Golden Rule: treat others only as you yourself would like to be treated. (7) The more we can hold ourselves to the Golden Rule, the sooner and better we can mend social rifts and actualize total world peace.
Step By Step:
1) Anyone can be brainwashed.
When we refer to brainwashing, this is not ‘brainwashing’ in the overt, brash, Guantanamo Bay / A Clockwork Orange manner, as some might define it or presume it to be.
The most effective forms of brainwashing are instead much more pavlovian, perhaps in many ways largely subliminal; or are often achieved in an "Emperor's new clothes" or “Inception” type way. These methods are experienced in almost all cult and “Stockholm syndrome” cases (Patty Hearst in particular), as well as in most fundamentalist religious movements: they do not hand you a suicide vest on Day 1 - it is a slow and methodical process of indoctrination, manipulation, and escalation.
It is no difficult task to picture another, random person who would be susceptible to advanced psychological conditioning which would generate, erase, rewrite or re-prioritize even their most deeply rooted values, opinions, goals, or behaviors over a long enough time. And so this initial assertion or axiom can only be contested or disputed from two vantage points: simple ignorance of the advanced yet subtle forms of psychological conditioning that are presently employed, or on an individual’s reluctance or refusal to consider themselves personally susceptible to the same techniques.
Such a person gravely overestimates their psychological fortitude, the fixed nature of their own foundation, and the supposed impenetrability of their (assumed to be) stalwart, ironclad mind. Most often, some degree of narcissism, willful stubbornness, delusional exceptionalism, or bad-faith Devil's advocacy lies at the root of their contention. Or, to put it another way, they have already been brainwashed.
Which brings us to our next point:
2) Socialization/maturation within confined parameters is itself brainwashing.
To put it in an extremely melodramatic way: we are all brainwashed.
This means that the reality which each individual everywhere grows up understanding -
will always be separated from, offset by, or even conflict with (or infringe on) another's reality: whether minimally or considerably, their experienced reality was/is confined either nationally, geographically, temporally, educationally, religiously, ethnically, or otherwise.
No one can be exposed to/informed by everything, and thus blind-spots are created. These blind-spots are often intentionally or unintentionally exploited and capitalized on by opportunists (i.e., those unwilling to recognize/legitimize any separate or opposing realities and/or the people within them: people who are closed-minded, people who are convinced they have an enlightened or superior understanding or perspective on things and refuse to empathize with or even humanize those who disagree with them (i.e. those who profess to be incredibly "open-minded."))
3) Until exposed to an alternative, people will remain convinced of the suitability / superiority of their default surroundings or understandings (their reality or components / aspects of it or in it).
⇒ This is the same principle that gives us:
Culture shock (fundamental aspects or elements of one’s culture are absent or radically different in another, creating a sense of alienation and often bitterness or dejection. Or, more colloquially: the default is seen as the best/only way until exposed to alternative),
“Grass-is-always-greener” syndrome,
Aspirational television/entertainment, which can instill in otherwise generally content and satisfied individuals a sense of inadequacy and lack of status, excitement, material wealth, etc.
Harriet Tubman's quote, "I could have freed so many more slaves if only they knew they were slaves," which demonstrates the vast capacity of humans to become fully immersed or entrenched in their circumstantial reality to the extent that they are unable to see above or beyond it.
It is for this exact reason that modern advertisements have long been meticulously crafted and designed to create (within their audiences) a want or desire where there previously was none. Hundreds of products that our parents and grandparents had absolutely no use or need for are effectively marketed and sold to persons convinced of their necessity. Bottled water, highly caffeinated energy drinks, bizarre or novel workout equipment, the fitbit - Not to mention all of the products that are the result of (or are associated with / related to) the technological advances experienced between generations (the dishwasher, garage door opener, vacuum cleaners, computers, the internet, cellphones, smartphones, roombas, smart home IoT devices, etc, etc, etc.) which, over time, become essentially required items in order to participate in mainstream modern society.
To those unconvinced, we urge you to consider your own upbringing. Were you to have been raised in a family or culture in which practice or behavior “x” was significantly different (say, that one nodded to indicate ‘No,’ and shook one’s head to indicate ‘Yes,’ as is the case in Albania), it would, by and large, not ever occur to you to seek out (much less intuitively prefer) the “normal” manifestation of ”x” (i.e., the manner or nature “x” is enacted or expressed in your present reality), and you would instead most likely champion that practice or behavior “x” that you were most naturally accustomed to.
[Once exposed to an alternative,]
4) Everyone can change their mind.
That is to say, no one can change it for you. Attempts at such will most likely be resisted (See 1 and 2).
[In fact,]
5) With enough information and exposure (equals time and immersion), everyone and anything can be understood < tolerated < accepted < embraced.
Exposure, as measured in terms of time and immersion, will vary depending on how strong a person's indoctrination against the object of understanding is. Stubbornness and obstinacy are dangerously potent in our modern age, yet these can only remain as long as specific categories and subjects of information are censored, manipulated, or outright omitted. That being said, when shown reliable / credible video or photographic evidence of a person committing a brutal murder, one would need superhuman levels of insincerity and psychological conditioning (or fragility) in order to deny what was witnessed - aka that the person witnessed had committed homicide.
6) The degree to which this scale is ascended is dependent on how closely the object of understanding is aligned with the Golden Rule: treat others only as you yourself would like to be treated.
Let's get the most extreme/popular "but-what-about"-challenge out of the way first: Hitler. Hitler is usually cited as perhaps the most evil person in modern history. Yet, with enough information and insight into his disturbed mind, one could eventually understand (as in “comprehend,” not as in “sympathize with or excuse”) why he was able to act so abominably horrific (what motivated him, where his morals ended, what depravity he found acceptable and how). But, as his countless crimes and darkest motives (from fascism to genocide to his plan for world subjugation, etc.) violate the Golden Rule so absolutely, one could (/should hopefully) never be able to advance further up the scale past 'understanding' to 'tolerance for,' much less to 'acceptance for,' and even less to eventually 'embrace' any of those devastatingly evil actions.
Now a much nicer example: Acquired tastes. When these are aligned with the Golden Rule (thereby excluding and negating any monster who would count murder, molestation, etc. as acquired tastes), such tastes are always acquired exactly according to this scale: first, one must achieve an understanding of the taste (comprehending it: the fact that it exists, what it is, what purpose it serves, and/or being intrigued by it); then comes testing it and (in the event the taste is to be acquired) tolerating it; in which case, over time one thereafter advances to accepting the acquired taste; then, in the final stages, embracing it.
7) The more we can hold ourselves to the Golden Rule, the more/sooner/better we can mend social rifts and actualize total world peace.
Should a person have no interest in total world peace, that is fine. We may not ever experience it in our lifetimes. But if it were ever possible, the path to world peace would start in your home, your neighborhood, your community, nation, and region. Peace enacted or “imposed” from the top-down can often breed sedition and rebellion. It is experienced as inauthentic, and we seem to stifle under this “freedom.” Individuals who still have a “score to settle” through force or manipulation will not adopt, nor adapt to, conditions of ‘premature’ peace: they have too much to lose from it - namely, the source of their passion and purpose in life.
It is well established that the peace of WW1 led directly to WW2. The numerous conflicts and wars in the Balkan region of Europe evidence this same principle. The Gulf War, Iraq War, and Islamic State campaigns teach this same lesson as well. Tensions, feuds, pain and vengeance do not magically end when peace is declared - the war is merely “paused.” Reconciliation and redemption are necessary, should any lasting peace, and this must be experienced by those who are most impacted by conflict: the military and civilian populations themselves.
Peace imposed from the bottom-up will be hard won, and will surely meet “top-down” resistance and increased psychological warfare, but it is perhaps the only direction that true peace can emanate from. In this way, we may resolve (and absolve ourselves) of the horrors of the past, and focus on rebuilding lives and communities truly worth defending.
Without something worth defending in peace, we are easily led into war - whether for the gamble of what we may gain, the assertion of dominance against aggressors (dominating the dominator), or out of sheer boredom and apathy. These three reasons are largely experienced by class in descending order: those who declare war do so for the spoils, those who wage war are motivated by duty and a desire for dominance, and those who support and celebrate warfare have made this their surrogate activity (their way to vicariously experience the power process through the actions of a collective of which they play little to no role).
Unism On Truth
There is a popular cartoon, often used in elementary, junior high, and high school
Social Studies courses, which depicts two persons on either side of a symbol:
One person claims to view four, the other refutes this and counts only three. This drawing illustrates how our perspectives can shape and influence what our reality is perceived as and “believed to be.” The conclusion should be:, by seeing things from another perspective, we can understand another person or group’s conflicting/contradictory view of the world.
One may be tempted to conclude that “they are both right,” but the true conclusion (in this specific instance) is that they both Believe they are right, and both are incorrect in assuming the other is wrong. This is due to the fact that the object of observation is something that does not exist in physical, three-dimensional, tangible form - it is instead a 2D optical illusion which simulates or suggests an impossible 3D form - and is intended to distort one’s grasp on visual reality.
Let us make our point much clearer, as it pertains to our everyday experienced world within our shared, lived reality:
Who is right in this scenario?
In one hypothetical sense, both are correct from their own perspective, and incorrect in believing the other person is wrong, as with the first scenario: each sees it as oriented towards themselves, and rejects the other’s point of view. In “abstract reality,” it potentially could be a nine or a six, as it is a symbol which contains two symbols: one being the inversion of the other.
But this is a complete abstraction. We do not experience reality as such - we do not encounter numbers appearing isolated within a void, independent of all context.
In a similar way to how the conclusion of the first scenario is that (in reality) the symbol is in fact an optical illusion which is intended to depict an object that would defy the laws of engineering, thus delivering two conflicting perspectives on either end; so too is this scenario solved by applying “real world” understanding: Who drew this? What is the context for this number? Was it intended to be a six or a nine?
We conclude there are two experiences of “truth”:
A perceived truth, and an independent/actual or intended truth.
Let’s use the first scenario as an example. Mr. Nine is convinced he is correct, and that Mr. Six is wrong. He has, of course, witnessed the “9” with his own two eyes. He prints t-shirts, stickers, and hats with the “9” branding, starts a “9 Truther” podcast, organizes regular protests to intimidate and scuffle with the proponents of “6,” and starts receiving donations to raise awareness about the importance of “9”- by warning people about the violent bigotry of the closed-minded “6” believers. Even being tolerant or sympathetic to “6” is seen as tantamount to supporting and encouraging genocide. This is particularly insensitive when one understands the full context of the “9” experience - historically, but more importantly - contemporaneously. And , which you never can and never will. You’d have to read the “9” teachings in its original language, everything else has been manipulated to distort and vilify the rich tradition of “9,” and anyways, unless both your parents swore allegiance to “9,” you’ll never fully understand. In fact, you sound like one of those “6” lovers, trying to infiltrate “9” and destroy us...
Everyone praises Mr. Nine for “living his truth,” “being authentic to himself,” and for not letting the hateful “subhumans” (who either agree with or simply claim to understand Mr. Six) deter him from the mission of convincing everyone of the “9” reality and enforcing allegiance among his followers..
Companies advertise their support for “9,” (only in countries where the majority of the mainstream completely agree with it),
Then, one day, a third man returns to the scene of the symbol, and either continues writing (or uncovering/revealing the message that was excavated or was obscured by dirt and dust). And so it is discovered that the context of the symbol “becomes,” or is determined to always have been: “6 for 1 Sale on Adult Diapers.”
Was Mr. Nine’s “truth” always wrong? Is there any way to compensate for all of the grief, harassment, violence and chaos (against “6,” all those who were not explicitly or convincingly “9” enough, as well as those who were “9” but had run afoul of Mr. Nine in some way or another). committed in the name of “9” The day before this later discovery/development, was there any way to convince Mr. Nine of the symbol’s actual meaning?
We are all Mr. Nine.
This is the consequence of “perspective as fact,” and “ideology as truth.” This does not mean that truth does not exist - but simply that you cannot be sure that you have started or chosen to be anywhere near it. Absolute Truth does exist. To say Truth does not exist is self-defeating, (it implies that the concept itself cannot itself be truth)
Isn’t Not Over Yet:
An old farmer, in a small village in rural China was thought to be a little bit odd. He and his only surviving son lived alone, his wife had passed some years ago.
One day, the farmer’s only horse broke free of its fence and ran away, off into the bordering wilderness. "Oh What terrible luck! What terrible luck you have," said the other villagers.
The old farmer replied, "Maybe so, maybe not. I suppose we'll see."
“What?” the villagers thought... They suspected he had become a simpleton. “Of course this was a terrible fate…”
Days passed, when suddenly the farmer’s same horse appeared from the forest line, followed by a group of wild stallions. His horse galloped right up to its pen, entering along with 10 of the beautiful new horses in tow.
"What Amazing luck!!!” the villagers cheered! “How lucky you are! You had no horses, yet now your stable is overflowing!! What wonderful fate!" celebrated the villagers.
The farmer replied, "Maybe yes, maybe no.. I suppose we'll see."
Again the villagers were very puzzled and annoyed. "What an absolute fool.. he can't see when good fortune falls right in his lap, the fool! He says ‘We will see’, but, ‘we will see’ what?!? What is there to see - it has already happened! I would have danced with joy were this my beautiful fate! Oh, this fool of an old farmer!"
The very next day, the farmer's only son walked out to saddle and break in one of the new wild stallions they had just gained. As he mounted the stallion, it tossed him violently in the air, so that, as he landed, he severely broke his leg. There was nothing to do - the leg was irreparably mangled, crippling him for life.
"Oh What terrible, terrible luck! Your only son, whom you relied on for taking care of you and your farm, has been so gravely injured! SURELY you must admit this is a terrible, terrible turn of events!"
"Maybe so, maybe not. We'll see.."
“Fucking retarded,” all of the villagers agreed. “This man is absolutely fucking retarded. He is so dumb, he probably eats horseshit. Does he really need us to explain to him how stupid he is? Does he not understand the difference between bad things and good things? Fuck this guy. No, Seriously - Fuck this stupid old farmer.”
The very next day, the king's army rode into the small village, going from family to family, conscripting each and every able-bodied man of the village.
Of all the households, only the old farmer's was passed over, owing to the farmer's advanced age, and his son’s terrible injury.
The rest of the men of the village, young and old, left with the king’s battalion.
The army went into battle days later, and each of the village's conscripts were slaughtered in their defeat.
This story exquisitely illustrates the propensity of the human mind to divide and judge events based on what they mean to us individually, from our limited perspective. Even with seemingly “all the information,” the true outcome of events has not yet unfolded. The best of intentions can have horrible consequences. The worst things can turn out to be the galvanizing forces for the greater good. Going to jail can make a person Decide to straighten their life out - getting a promotion can turn someone into everything they have (and everyone else has) always hated.
This does not sanction cruel or malevolent behavior - the Golden Rule and Agape Love are still supreme - it only tells us that we are not in a position (sometimes temporally or philosophically) to know whether something was wholly good or bad.
The “movie” of our lives isn’t over yet. And the twist near the end is usually worth sticking around for.
Eclipse The Past
Many of us find ourselves haunted. Haunted by the traumas, regrets, pains and transgressions of the past. The more active a role we had in manifesting these, the easier it will be to let them go - the more we hold and view others as responsible for the traumas, abuses, and horrors of the past, the more complex it will be to absolve others And ourselves.
Do not underestimate a person's ability to latch onto, exaggerate, or focus on certain minor or seemingly trivial actions or events as central traumas in their “story of the past.”
Our conception of self is informed (consciously as well as subconsciously) by our understanding of events as we experience them, constituting our “story of the past.” This can be understood as one’s autobiography, which forms the foundation of their psychology - essentially working as the translator or interpreter: funneling all input and interactions through the interpretation provided by their “story of the past.”
Our modern Western/Global culture orders and understands History’s “story of the past” as a List of Grievances experienced in relation to power (dominance and oppression). Many of these grievances exist in some form (reasonable, explainable or otherwise), or did exist to significant degrees in the past. We internalize this narrative as individuals, and subconsciously understand our own “story of the past” as organized or prioritized around our Grievance List.
Our culture (and our psychological conditioning within it) encourages us to hold the item at the top of our Grievance List responsible for our inability to experience happiness and fulfillment.
In the absence of real or “traditional” traumas (physical and sexual abuses; extreme and intentional psychological distress and manipulation), minor grudges and resentments will take the place at the top of a person’s list. Should someone be fortunate enough to lack even these, and/or should their top list-item leave them unable to elicit the necessary amount of socio-political acumen, sympathy, and attention, they must adopt the causes of groups who do.
In this way, they can reliably explain their social, personal, interpersonal, and psychological frustrations, apathy, anxiety, ennui, depression, dysfunction and dissatisfaction.
In order to escape these traumas, regrets, pains and transgressions of the past, and free ourselves from the obsessions intrinsic to our Grievance List, we must abandon the narratives that support them.
Depending on the severity of the traumas experienced, one will benefit from varying lengths of therapy, critical self-reflection, and introspection. But in the interest of time, and put incredibly simply: hurt people hurt people.
This explains why people are abused, why cycles of abuse continue (the abused becomes the abuser), and why the only agency we have in the present is to break the cycle - by becoming Unhurt, unbroken, and whole again.
This is a process that requires individual attention, personal strategy, and basic psychoanalysis and dialogue, so we will not go deeper into this process at this point. But suffice it to say that without becoming whole again, and “repairing” our “story of the past,” so as to free ourselves of its weight - at the individual, interpersonal, small group, communal, national, ethnic/racial, and international levels - we will continue to hurt, mislead, corrupt, disappoint, create friction between, manipulate, and destroy all those who we are meant to help, regardless of all of our absolute best intentions and efforts.
[Upcoming Addendum]
Usurp The Future
(Submission Pending)