I'm probably too all over the place at the moment to do this, but here we go.
Basically, emotions are dangerous. They're employed by charlatans to make intelligent people believe in silly narratives, exploited workers admire their abusers, good-natured people hate strangers, citizens love Big Brother. They use our open hearts to rape our brain. Essentially, they make us stupid.
A fantastic way to gain independence, then, is eliminating emotions. But emotions continue to exist no matter what you do and there's no such thing as not being dependent on anyone. What you can have, possibly, is not letting your guard down by the wrong people. This is where I seem to have trouble. Dependence.
Dependence, or emotions, or being a human and not a fucking android, means letting yourself be carried away by things even if they don't make perfect intelligent logical sense. In the end, all analytical, critical intelligence can provide is damage control. It never helped anybody enjoy anything, and anybody who claims it has is fucking lying.
Another word describing being a human and not a fucking android is trust. You can have trust in people, just as you can have faith in institutions and enterprises, which you apparently usually do for completely wrong reasons. I have faith, as it happens, in democracy, human rights, individualism, science, and artistic and spiritual pursuits, among others, but actually trust very few actual people any further than I could throw them, which possibly explains why I seem to trust women slightly more.
The question is, could people really be as dangerous as the really shitty institutions? Is there a person out there as bad as Judaism? Could he possibly hide his shittiness as well as she did? Could his shittifying possibly be as insidious? Are there people out there as inside-out disgusting as racism or fascism? But isn't it racists and fascists in the first place that are responsible for spreading (and insinuating) racism and fascism anyway?
Who's actually dangerous?
Basically, emotions are dangerous. They're employed by charlatans to make intelligent people believe in silly narratives, exploited workers admire their abusers, good-natured people hate strangers, citizens love Big Brother. They use our open hearts to rape our brain. Essentially, they make us stupid.
A fantastic way to gain independence, then, is eliminating emotions. But emotions continue to exist no matter what you do and there's no such thing as not being dependent on anyone. What you can have, possibly, is not letting your guard down by the wrong people. This is where I seem to have trouble. Dependence.
Dependence, or emotions, or being a human and not a fucking android, means letting yourself be carried away by things even if they don't make perfect intelligent logical sense. In the end, all analytical, critical intelligence can provide is damage control. It never helped anybody enjoy anything, and anybody who claims it has is fucking lying.
Another word describing being a human and not a fucking android is trust. You can have trust in people, just as you can have faith in institutions and enterprises, which you apparently usually do for completely wrong reasons. I have faith, as it happens, in democracy, human rights, individualism, science, and artistic and spiritual pursuits, among others, but actually trust very few actual people any further than I could throw them, which possibly explains why I seem to trust women slightly more.
The question is, could people really be as dangerous as the really shitty institutions? Is there a person out there as bad as Judaism? Could he possibly hide his shittiness as well as she did? Could his shittifying possibly be as insidious? Are there people out there as inside-out disgusting as racism or fascism? But isn't it racists and fascists in the first place that are responsible for spreading (and insinuating) racism and fascism anyway?
Who's actually dangerous?
