The ides of March are here again in that from a parochial perspective from where we are writing one is back into confinement. That verily is the problem of the world in always seeing from a particular perspective. That the world was at a halt has not really truly been quite assimilated. Yet is it not the case once one is all right who cares? In some instance this is precisely where one has not quite fully appreciated the dialectics which always calls for one to be wholly and not partially alert. Is this possible?
We are always coerced into a particular way of being through hearsay, propaganda, and similar norm and as a conditioned being one espouses all the garbage being thrown around and about. Indeed, one builds up one’s approach and raison d’etre from such frivolous ways which simply corners or condemns us into subjugation or being forced to think do or participate in the world arena based on the regurgitated. There is little time to stop, pause and reflect.
And yet all else is done from he way of the reactionary. One may not contribute at all from a perspective of a real engager…it is all about being there simply from living from the world of the others where the few whether genuine or spurious leads the way. Most of the time it is a question of the blind leading the blind. The problem with societies is that one does not have kings who are philosophers. Or the vision have a lack where the norm of hatred, bickering remains at the base and where this is so there is always a superfluity in being in that the subject remains at best a product of the superficial where there is a constant base of anger and violence in operation. In some cases, in spite of our scholarship of even comprehending theoretically at the base something is lacking in that given a momentary lapse one falls easily in the dungeons thereby displaying often undue ignorance, arrogance or both coupled with its anger and hatred and or that only the petty self is the knower.
Reactionaries always place on us constraints in that one has to do things in a certain way based on what is there. A freedom means one may at long last take time. A time to really and actually stop, pause and reflect. What does one has to do or not do? More precisely, how does one relate to others? What has been learnt from the first wave of coronavirus not merely from a medical or similar materialistic perspective but actually where one perhaps may start to reflect on the frailty of being and or existence. Or is it simply a case of the more things changes, the more it is the same. Or another licence to carry on what the world had to face with earlier. That the naïve stills want a return to the days of pre-Wuhan …. Temporally may never happen. The call is surely to move onwards and forwards. That there are opposing vibrant forces in any society is there for all to perceive. The world is a confederation of opposites where each and everyone has their cherished views which they hold on to and treasure or what is called an agenda which the hold on to as being the be and end of everything. In this way, there is never a meeting place free from a way of being which at most times are exclusivist. Rarely does one comes across an open, a more inclusive culture which both acknowledges and appreciate the other. Most times one is in a culture of bickering, hatred and verbosity often leading to violence. One knows with certainty whilst the other relegated, despised and abused since the subject claims exclusivity of opiniated verbosities. On this view, one may never include the other in one’s worldview as the proponent knows fullstop. Herein is the danger of materialism.
To a large extent a not too dissimilar way of being also is apparent within the so called ways of the world seeking to find a solution. Or at best what is proposed is a mere patching here and there and so seek a way where there is a temporary relief from the mundane based on truncated view which again are exclusive to some. The test as one sees it can there be a way which is open to one and all. Then is arrogance in that one knows and that others needs always be subservient to the subject which is the measure of being in spite of one being no more than a puppet in the wilderness of time. Could there be that approach which seek not to separate and or denigrate any other ? Is it possible to just be? …..away from the realm of the dualism which tries to bind one in an affection of always me and the other where separation seems to be the main course where one remains always in a struggle as the position is merely about me-ism. When one faces reality as where we are forced to reflect, still the lesson seems not to be towards reaching out but a further withdrawal onto the self and that is precisely the problem. The appreciation that one is an entity merely a part of a whole is never quite apprehended .That whole is never quite explored. The ego takes over at all times and one remains no more than what we are aiming to point out notably remaining a reactionary.
The call is verily about calling a halt to that spurious way and prepare to move towards the other in earnest where the latter is not seen or viewed as a threat but a comrade who as much as any and every other has a right to be where one needs not feel threatened where the subject needs to awake and rise to to the level of praxis rather Han being governed by instincts where one may easily falls into the dungeon and react in spite of a little theoretical understanding at best no more than a reactionary whether through fear or lack real and actual comprehension where the other remains a thread. The point is is comradeship possible actually? If so how does the person who is so leads one’s daily life instead of being affected by anger and violence at the base? Who knows?