Impotency Achieved
We are (or I am or they or it ? whatever) 100 % impotent, totally, in all ways, sexually, psychologically, spiritually, you name it. Total failures, total losers. Sore losers. Be a sore loser. No problem can ever be solved, give up all real fast, there are no solutions for any possible problem, end of story. Because of all the information we receive and all of the imaginary battle grounds (ever changing battle grounds) we can’t do absolutely anything about it, we cannot even touch it, or modify the path all those ever changing and new battle grounds follow. Of all of those battles, contradictions, contentions (do you want the right or left to win ? do you want the war in Irak ? do you want more or less taxes ? do you want the green economy or keep on “wasting” gas ? especially do you want “this specific person in jail or to lose” (we love personalizations of contentions, we love to fight people figures) you name it) you cannot do absolutely anything about them, you can’t do nothing about where they go, total 100 % impotency achieved no matter what, they are 100 % independent of your will power, so much so, that it is totally useless even knowing about the battle or following any of all of this information and news BS.
It is all so far away and so detached from anything you can do, and so much of an indirection, denotation, etc. that it is incredible that people waste so much energy and time and emotions and feelings over all of this imaginary, non existent, abstract BS. Who gives two ccks and a dck about Iran, Irak or Afghanistan ? what are they even ? two countries far away that have nothing at all to do with me. And why should I follow any news about them and get all worked up when my power to change or influence or interact with such remote abstract entities is a big fat zero ? So as usual, you better free your mind instead and not think about all of this BS, better no news about anything at all, it is all worthless drivel.
And you are always within a simulation of winning or losing, an emotional roller coaster, where your rage and happiness (but it could also be very shallow, it doesn’t have to be extreme feelings) are constantly being pushed up and down according to who or what is winning.
Is the stock market going up ? do I want it to go up or down ? if I want it to go up “then I win” when it goes up, etc. Is oil “finishing” ? if it does “I win” (if I wanted it to finish), hence I won my little imaginary battle and so on. Actually the “News”, all new information is always framed within an imaginary battle ground of contrasting forces, it is always some form of A versus B, and you have to take sides (do I want A to win or A to happen versus B ? are things going in the direction that I would like them to ? if yes I “feel good”, “I win”, “I have achieved”, if no “I feel bad”, etc.), you automatically take sides no matter what since our mind is a simple one transistor circuit (and we love to imagine how “right” we are, how are positions are all “so correct” and so “special” and how we can “figure the correct way to go” as opposed to all the other slobs, we like “to feel smart” and assign ourselves as smart, correct, the winners and so on), we are designed to fight, to be within the stage of a battle ground (it doesn’t even matter if it is real or fake or make believe or whatever), and after you take sides you break the symmetry of a constant emotional and feeling state to put it in an agitation state of winning - losing - following the game - taking sides, the same old emotional roller coaster, etc.
At least in sports, the battle ground is clearly simply a game, no other consequences and we take sides for fun (sometimes it gets violent and bad anyways, go figure), but in politics, economy, society we take sides thinking that there are “deeper” metaphysical, spiritual reasons, it is supposed to be deeper, what the “common rules of society must be” is so much more important (but is it ? who gives two ccks and a dck!).
But that is also because we need a constant emotional stimulation, since a steady state - a state where no battle is going on is “boring”, so we need new information to fight a new battle (but we don’t fight anything, we just follow the game as spectators hoping a given side wins and “commenting” the game “showing off” how correct we are and how our side must win). It is all based on changing your emotional and feelings state into something that is not neutral or steady and into something that is activated and going up and down and following an input information that is associated with given feelings of feeling good or bad according to “the information coming in”. What an idiotic machine our Man Brain is.
We need a constant new battle ground, and if there is no news to create it, we create it in our own mind, we create new targets to reach (but mos t of the targets are external things that we hope will happen and are independent of our will power), we invent new imaginary targets both in our personal life and in the external social world like will that building get finished ? (if it does I win), will that person do this and that (if they do this I win, etc.), will I get that raise ? Does person A do that or this, whatever etc. So we break a steady state, a neutral state, an indifferent state of feelings to activate good/bad states and involvement.
And every new news fragment becomes the next battle ground, we don’t even notice how many times we change the battle grounds, how what seemed so important yesterday is invisible today, like the Irak war is no longer on the radar, but it was oh, so important for a few years, now the sinking ship is the new battle ground (what did the captain do ? what a c*ck, and everyone likes to feel so superior to the situation) and what happened to the oil spill in the gulf of mexico ? it is off the radar, the battle ground has changed, it no longer creates a new emotional roller coaster.
And we have the never ending “Economic Crisis Adventure”: I read an old 10 years old magazine where they were talking about the then “Economic Crisis” and how the “Economy had to grow more” and such BS. In other words, we have always had (or do we need to create a battle ground ?) an economic crisis. And in the same magazine they were talking about grading system corporations have in order to fire some “non performing” workers, and the managers were saying that they have to invent and force inequality between people, find inequality between people even when there is no apparent inequality.
Like today Italy and Greece are in “Economic Crisis” mode, but I remember that these countries have been in crisis mode for decades, for Italy, after some 15 years of real economic growth from the 1960s to the 1970s, the economy there was always in “crisis mode”, go figure, and yet their level of wealth remains sky high compared to at least a hundred other countries and it will take 100 years for entire continents to reach their puny level of “middle class” wealth, so what gives ? maybe growth is a limited concept from the outset ? maybe a country cannot grow past a certain point structurally ?
And this comparison with Germany and such, well inequality exists, some areas are economically stronger than others, after all Germany fought the entire WWII against the whole world all by themselves, they have always been an economic powerhouse, so what is it with this idea that every country must be as economically as strong as Germany ? doesn’t make sense, you cannot eliminate inequality from the outset, and you can’t make believe that every country or area must become a first class economic region.
It is as if all the states of the USA must become like Silicon Valley, now what sense does that make ? how is that possible ? so Alabama and Kentucky must all become like San Francisco and silicon valley and startups etc. otherwise they are failed economic entities, etc. How idiotic can you get ?
Hey vlad, be your own queer, you don’t need another body, jackass. What a jackass always fighting this imaginary battle against niggers, how crazy can you be ?