°
A position of power is the only way to manifest change. And the most power is at the top of a society.
In part, the top positions accrue authority through entrenched hierarchy as systemic programming. with access to people, media, and money through stable systems, a small number of people can create lasting change.
However, defending the position consumes more resources over time until a change of leadership must occur.
°
Change is commonly driven from below.
The top requires stability for profit and maintenance, which is a form of power.
To enact change is to replace those in power, creating a cyclic win-loss cycle, where there is always a bottom and top: the bottom craving change, while the top stagnates, fending off change.
(Tomorrow I will argue the opposite)
°
This chained pair is inseparable.
If we avoid responsibility, situations devolve into chaos, and if we claim control but do not delegate responsibility, negligent entropy ensues.
Extreme ownership, either refusing responsibility or taking control, are possible, but at the extremes lies resentment.
The question remains if a committed cadre can communally disperse responsibility while retaining control.
°
Do we have an innate fear of losing bureaucracy? We all claim to hate it, yet we are familiar with its convolutions.
Within the maze’s twisted containment, we become familiar with navigating the petty and having our excessive efforts casually thwarted. Yet, we don’t escape and we cease looking for the exit.
We prefer the dull corners rather than risk the jagged peaks.
We prefer the buttressing security of a system, choosing the intimate pain of common convolutions over the chaotic brute force of reality.
°
The prevailing sentiment has shifted from “faith in man” to “belief and Evil.”
Once our salvation, progress is now just an inevitable disaster. As well, our once-lauded freedoms are toxins we must mitigate with discipline.
As we withdraw into the negative, finding ways to hunker down and control ourselves, sniping at others to do the same, we move backward, or to the side, in a kind of cowardly crab walk into hiding.
The ramifications of our guarded retreat away from “communal trust” or “faith in man” is to vacate an advantageous position, which is quickly claimed by the very things we abhor.
It may seem a slight distinction, but to center disaster as inevitable has dire psychological effects that distort our actions toward self-centered competition and consumption rather than the open collaboration necessary to overcome.
°
The victim claims they are hurt by your actions, bullying you into an apology and extracting promises for future consideration.
The insidious aspect is that they prey on your empathy/sympathy: they use your best traits to hurt and control you.
°
You built a nice place. Oddly, it attracts dysfunctional people who attempt to tear it down and poison your harmony.
You cannot simply retreat: you must use the nice space as a power source. Let them in or fight them off, but hiding enables the destruction.
°
Finding balance entails much equating of efficiencies and min/max usage.Spending energy on something without tangible use is wasteful and unproductive. Our free time now produces "mental health" or must be justified.
But what about art and stories? A blockbuster movie seems a frivolous waste of resources, as does the amateur artist’s passionate pursuits.
Yet the creation is a story that sustains us, motivates us, circumvents quantification, and disassembles our rational pretenses.
°
We often switch the game without changing our motivation.
Example: We drink until we are out of control, allowing us to lose inhibition and seek attention. We then get sober to stay in power. Feeling empowered, we start to moralize.
The new game comes with new power and accolades from society, from which we can get more attention.
Are we better off? Absolutely.
Have we addressed the primal driver? No.
What happens next? We find yet another game.
°
To unsubscribe is to opt out. To be able to exit as quickly as you entered. This frictionless training is casually adapted into our daily lives: we unsubscribe from friends, family, spouses, and life.
Controlling our feed extends to avoid discomfort or boredom: when anything is too much, we drop it.
We can instantly refill our lives with novelty. Still, the process is a simulacrum of control: in the act of perceived agency, we soothe ourselves but hold so loosely that carefree choices shape our character over time.
