Aristotle was wrong, in that it’s not nature which abhors a vacuum, but ego itself, living only to instill what’s beyond its grasp with its dreams and claims of ownership. What defines emptiness for any ego is a universe or world or passing stranger with no time or space for its biases or desires or fetishes or quirks or whims or wishes. I myself have never been eager to welcome blame or credit for the words or actions of others, or to share blame or credit for my words or actions with others. Living this way seems wholly unnatural contrasted with the words and actions of everyone I have every known, which leads me to believe that what nature abhors about the void is not the void itself, but what others invariably make of it.
There is no leadership in civilization, not in governance or religion or industry, or social circles or family trees, only predictable egos obsessively clashing for dominance. Everybody, trying to sell everyone else a used car. All whom I have ever known depend upon scapegoats for the many problems they themselves originate or cultivate in life, and to say I could continue without any of those people is not an arrogance on my part, but an independence. Because there is no such thing as the justifiable ego, yet to go without indulging any ego results no differently than slamming the door on the world at large.
For a culture as enthusiastic about free market economics as they are dependent on the sense of belonging, contributing members loathe competition consciously or not. They want exclusivity, they want monopolization, of the rights of others, their resources and opportunities and their attentions and thoughts and feelings. If they cannot be the personality cult centerpiece then they require those centerpieces to assuage their fears by reinterpreting their weaknesses as strengths. Social networks are patterned for such codependency, as are political parties and religious sects and any other persuasion of focal point for daddy issues. I waste no time or space insisting that all things unfamiliar or uncomfortable without exception must be the stuff of existential nightmare. Not when every day of this detestable life have I encountered only people insisting that their love be the priority and responsibility of anyone and everyone else and that their own peace of mind requires sacrifice be made by anyone and everyone but themselves. Everyone I have ever traded words with is at once a coward in this sense, and evil.
If I am not cowardly enough to follow others, and not evil enough to necessitate others following me, then I provide no fuel to what powers that complicate your life. None of you, regardless of who you imagine yourself being, can say the same. Having no preferences either which way, there is not one life on this planet past, present or future I would argue against trying to help save, even were the sacrifice to be completely my own. That’s autonomy, intrusions neither to or fro unless to maintain life’s access to potential. My enriching others beyond what resources or opportunities I possess intrudes upon my autonomy, while others enriching me intrudes upon their own. The void does not exist to be weaponized toward anyone’s benefit. We can prevent one another from falling victim to the want for repainting it with dreams or claiming authoritative ownership, whether it’s the greater vacuum of a void, or the void’s bastard offspring of the always objective truth, or the always subjective love. As they all exist regardless of how anybody thinks or feels about the matter. There also exists a cute concept of “delusions of reference” whereas in practice absolutely nothing is the center of anything amidst endless fields of molecular structures reconstituting themselves without our input. Every person, place or thing enabled to the contrary is a false idol of an anchor bent on drawing everything outside its fancy down below whatever could have been or should have been or would have been.
As evolution concerns itself with adapting to changing environments, then surely it is the opposite of evolution, to oblige environs to change themselves for one’s pleasure. A point missed entirely by everyone offended by anything, to say nothing of the gerrymandering or the gentrifying or those seeking domination by any stretch. People are not property. Consciously, most folks would prefer to not be owned by others with their livelihood and well-being entirely out of their own hands. But subconsciously is another matter, eager to join groups and eager to condemn non-members to said groups, those persons for the most part prove themselves incapable of extending any empathy, as the mandates of their thoughts and feelings upon others demand compliance and conformity where none is necessary to survival, as though survival, happiness and all standards of success rely on others experiencing the nullified capacity for self-determination. I argue that anyone willing to condone human possession or lethal force under any circumstances imaginable are threatened by their own liberty being mirrored by others. For then their preferred hierarchy or whichever other fantasy can no longer be so readily engaged, or noted as special. It’s never the lack of superiority which manifests real problems. The worst that anybody can say of me is that I refrained from serving their self-interests. In fact have I been cast as the worst sort of criminal or sinner, for finding no logic in what assuages others being the meaning of life. I am crazy because I cannot make exceptions for human ownership or for lethal force, or trade my attentions away from such concerns to be enraptured by inconsequential theatrics. People who live-stream their computer games save no more lives than do Nazis. By their own language it’s a beta thing to whinge about inadequacies of entertainment, and it’s announcing a pacification to prattle on about one’s collection of goods and services. I’m reminded of the old adage, that to err is human but to forgive is divine. It’s not in my power to ever issue forgiveness, as it’s been my lot to clean after the mess of god complexes populating proper society.
Suffice to say, needing the best and needing to identify with the best are 2 separate things., a point incidentally missed by proponents and opponents of Affirmative Action. Competency in any field from janitors to teachers to pilots undoubtedly entails bigger concerns than reflecting or agreeing with any ego’s perfection. And denying this reality is what makes the masters of every trade today as accomplished as an over-flowing toilet. But should the best leaders have anything in common with you, then they as well would require someone else to solve their conflicts for them. I will knowingly die alone before I would ever allow myself to be a follower or leader for anyone. And for refusing to encourage the growth of ego in others, refusing to mistake any hope for purpose or fantasy for meaning will I face no other end.