Is it really that difficult?

To think not of individual gain, but of mutual benefit. To consider more than one's own perspective, and that of the world. To love one another.

I pose you this question: is it really that difficult?

To help people in need.

To act in spite of selfish inclination for a greater good.

Be it an elder with shopping bags or a pregnant lady in need of a seat on a rocky bus.

Be it sacrificing a bagel and a few minutes of satisfaction so that a beggar can get a few hours from his.

Be it offering sincere condolences or a gift at a stranger's wake, or buying a cup of coffee for that receptionist, or that small-shop cashier, or that worker at the movie ticket gantry you may have unintentionally offended with your demeanor.

Simple, easy acts of kindness that go a long way. That could make someone's day. That could make the world a much better place.

Why, then, aren't we doing them? It's not that difficult.

~

First and foremost, I raise the lack of proper enlightenment in modern society, resulting in vastly different sequences of prioritisation, as one of the main causes of human apathy. When we are first plunged into the world, we know not which idol to worship; the importance and relevance of various areas of attention are subsequently ingrained into us.

Our children are taught that money is important, and its possession is responsible for every convenience and every pleasure perceivable (as a child). Our children are taught that race and religion are divisive factors, be it by the intolerant teacher or by peer discrimination. Our children are taught that, to paraphrase Orwell, some people are "more equal than others", and that they thus need to be treated differently.

They are not reminded that, despite differences in language, nationality, race or religion, we are a single Mankind, battling against the forces of Nature and the unknown. They are not reminded that we remain human by simple, small acts of humility and kindness each day, the willingness of one to humble or sacrifice him/herself for the comparatively great benefit of another. They are not reminded that, unlike money, charity and consideration and understanding can multiply, and spread, and expand, making everyone richer and the world happier by a disproportionate degree. As they should be.

And they will grow up to be parents one day, too. They will fight and strive for money, and power, and dominance, just so they can bring their children up in their image. We, the teachers, the parents are not absolved of guilt. In our hectic daily lives, it's easy to pass up a beggar's plea, or drive by a helpless hitchhiker. We do not realise that our children recognise every small act of heartlessness, and, in associating it with the parent figure, will resolve to emulate and magnify it.

"It is not the young people that degenerate; they are not spoiled till those of mature age are already sunk into corruption."

~

Another reason, I postulate, would be the disbelief in the concept of reciprocity prevalent in many societies, an attitude which is also becoming increasingly rewarding in the highly competitive world. In other words, people don't believe in karmic retribution. Good guys finish last. A word of thanks is insignificant recompense when weighed against the inconvenience of generosity. After all, we do live in a society which exalts the successful thief and hoarder.

Corruption spawns where there is an unwillingness to give. Where personal interest outweighs public benefit, there will be corruption. Where one thinks of bankbook numbers as a score instead of equating them to societal contribution, there will be corruption. Where one takes from the needy under the guise of legislative requirement, there is corruption. Familiar? All-too.

From where did this culture arise? How have we fallen so far?

Fear.

Fear of helplessness. Fear of misplaced dependence. Fear of betrayal. The coward cannot trust. He can only rely on himself. And when everyone relies on him/herself, the culture is propagated. It becomes a necessity. It becomes a way of living. It becomes unquestioned, unquestionable.

~

That is what scares me, and that is what prompts me to take action in writing: our apathy to the degenerate state we are in. Who are we if we lose our humanity? What would have been had we, in the name of self-preservation, abandoned our comrades in the heat of prehistoric battle? What is to come if we completely ceased to prioritise the advancement of humanity over our petty, selfish games?

"The accomplice to the crime of corruption is frequently our own indifference."

Yet, there is hope for humanity. The little acts of kindness you see every day, be it around the corner or across the world, are testament to that. The seemingly tiny, distinctly human acts that extract us from our dark and lonely shells. The small bits of altruism that keep us afloat.

A neighbourly smile and wave.

A kind gesture to a stranger.

A "thank you".

The small things that remind us that we are, together, human.

And that to be human is an honour we must fight for each and every day.

~

On Ambition

Ambition is of a certain, proper type of hunger.

It is not the self-starving and rationing such that one amplifies the perceived pleasure from minuscule accomplishments.

It is not the formulation of excuses to pacify oneself in possession of mediocrity.

It is not the distraction from crucial matters, the feeding on fake sustenance that would ultimately leave one's soul, and one's society, empty.

It is the whetting of the appetite, the creation of capacity, the extension of the conceivable boundary.

It is knowing everything one has achieved, and starving to go beyond, past the unachievable.

It is acknowledging, understanding that one's only obstacle to greatness is oneself, and consciously choosing to overcome it.

It is the drive to change.

We Begin

First off, greetings to all after a long-enough hiatus! Forever, it seems to have been, or perhaps my days have been drawn beyond their recognisable length. Either way, good day to you reading these words!

This blog looks to have ceased its most promising venture (the expansion of the Apocalyptic mind-map) due to certain minor inconveniencing factors.

Simply put, it didn't happen.

As much as I'd like to confess my slight disappointment, I am actually marginally more grateful that Humanity would live to, perhaps, die another day, or perhaps not at all! Perhaps we have a more tragic, Oedipus-esque downfall ahead of us, or perhaps we can transcend past the horrid, horrid threat of mutual destruction. Who knows?

This will be a short post; there is more to come later. Yet how better to end off than with a Quote of the Post! Here, a world that remains blissfully oblivious to its own undoing. Here, consider the words of Kierkegaard (Either-Or, 1843):

“It happened that a fire broke out backstage in a theater. The clown came out to inform the public. They thought it was a jest and applauded. He repeated his warning. They shouted even louder.

So I think the world will come to an end amid the general applause from all the wits who believe that it is a joke.” 

On Change

Embrace Change.

For the sentimental: Only then can you live your past.

Only through change will you be plunged once again into the unknown from whence you started, and in which you flourished and survived.

For the brave: Only then can you taste the present.

Only through appreciating change will you be able to see that nothing is eternal, that every piece of the past and present should be treasured and remembered.

For the idealist: Only then can you create your future.

Only through understanding change will you be able to wield its power on society, use it for societal benefit, and change the world, your future.

Defeat Is Self-Inflicted

When Humanity's cage is without, it is in suffering.

Once Humanity's cage is within, it is dead.

Defeat is self-inflicted. True battles are never so much conflicts of personal interest as much as they are conflicts of communal principle; the individual's body may suffer, the individual's mind may break, but if their principle is unwavering in spite of hardship, then the individual him/herself is the embodiment of the principle's value.

That a principle could command such allegiance and loyalty is telling; victory has already been gained against the suppressors who believe out of convenience.

On the Apocalypse

Let us embark on a train of thought regarding the presumed Apocalypse later this year. Whether or not any of this happens is irrelevant; let us just enjoy ourselves wondering!


Many believe that the world is about to end, on the 21st of December 2012.

That is enough.

By that, I mean that the power of belief is enough to bring into reality a nightmare, even without the asteroids/zombies/earthquakes/tsunamis/nuclear war/presence of any other world-threatening phenomena.

You see, we are constantly reminded of the importance of our individual power, but we must never forget the power we have as a community, and that whatever input we have in the community will eventually come back to haunt, to suppress us.


Here is my prediction:

Conditions.

Do you remember the movie 2012? Or the countless television shows and documentaries with the apocalypse as their central theme (where people pre-emptively build bunkers/hoard supplies/preach a doomsday religion)? Or even when Australian PM Julia Gillard joked about it on a breakfast show?

That is the dispersal of information worldwide via the most efficient and popular means: modern media. The belief in a doomsday is now held or at least encountered by more people than ever before. 2012 has become a year etched in our culture, and in all our minds. That is what distinguishes it from the many previous doomsdays anticipated by feverish cults.

Outreach.


Have you heard of global warming? Or the many major natural disasters (Boxing Day tsunami, Katrina, Haitian earthquake, whatnot) that have ravaged our properties and peoples, that some have attributed, quite unhelpfully, to divine retribution? Or the tensions (Senkaku Islands in the South China Sea, North Korean missile testing) and conflicts (Middle East; the whole place is a mess) and economic pitfalls (American fiscal cliff, Eurozone Crisis, or even the not-too-distant Global Financial Crises caused by the collapse of Lehman Brothers) that have plagued our world in the recent years?

That is the creation of tension, of an air of hesitation and insecurity, an atmosphere that seems to press down on you as you watch the evening news. What if I wake up tomorrow and gas prices increase tenfold? Or my investments in Asia lose all their value due to the outbreak of internal war? Or, even worse, Asia openly pits itself against the West? Sure, there have been worse times (the Cold War, etc.), but never have humanity's problems had such a powerful, extensive impact, nor have they ever been so publicised. Now, when a lot more, both personally and nationally, is at risk, is the atmosphere the heaviest, and does a single emotion dominate all our hearts.

Fear.



The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy.

What would you do if you knew, without a doubt, that the world was going to end tomorrow?

Let us think beyond the typical, politically correct "spend time with my loved ones, partake in sports that I'd never have done otherwise", because let's be frank now. The world is a screwed up place.

With the elimination of anything after tomorrow, jail sentences lose their repressive power. The fear of death disappears. Rules set in place to ensure continuity of society become irrelevant when continuity itself is void. People are stripped bare to their most basal instincts. The Freudian Id is unleashed; morals, as the consideration of consequence, are thrown aside in a world where consequence is nullified. Adults become kids, but with the knowledge, sexual energy and physical capability of adults. People will start to do whatever they want to do, because they (quite literally) can.

Murders taken in long-awaited vengeance. Sex, because, let's face it, no one wants to die a virgin. Violent protesting by a people consistently suppressed by their government and their laws.

And that's just the middle spectrum.

Rape, because they can. Torture, because they can. Armed robbery, because they can. Mindless destruction of property, because they can. Slaughter of innocent fellow civilians, because they can. All chains will be broken, and the world will be consumed in the fire that it has spent millennia trying to control.

Somehow, there is a bright side. All this madness will only happen if the spark is allowed to grow into a forest fire; this situation resembles a growing snowball more than it does an avalanche. A critical mass needs to be reached for the entire situation to spiral out of control, and this, in itself, has a small chance of happening. As long as our neighbours' houses are not on fire, we will silently stay in ours; otherwise, the human inclination to jump on the bandwagon will only ensure that this mad irrationality spreads like the virus it is. This, with the destruction of personal inhibition and full expression of inner desires, is how the world will end.



The Government and The People.


What will happen now? Will the last human simply languish in the remnants of his civilisation, slowly dying of exposure?

No; one ignores the role of the governing authority. As the chaos spreads, the degree of government intervention will gradually increase. New troops will be equipped. New laws will be made and passed. New measures will be put into place to ensure the strict adherence to these new laws.

The most saddening and, perhaps, most crucial inevitability is the implementation of repressive laws that affect the guilty and innocent alike, in the name of prevention. The moment such laws come into order, and the normal civilian is wrongfully oppressed, is when the government will turn against its people. There is a chance that global governments will unite against their respective peoples in a bid to oppress them in the name of peace. They have to; it is the only way to justify their actions and prevent further uprising.

There will be martial law. There will be government propaganda. There will be capital punishment.

All in the name of peace.

A hierarchy will be established that will evolve into totalitarianism. Then oligarchy. Then dictatorship. Big Brother will have been born out of these circumstances.

Big Brother will have won.



The Reconciliation.

A leader must rise from obscurity, from the ashes that will be society. And he must rally the people to go beyond what they would normally be willing to; he must rally them to change.

It is only in Chaos that people need leaders, and it is only then that obscure leaders may rise to a position of power and influence the fastest. The aforementioned circumstance is the perfect cauldron for such a figure. You see, the society is, in itself, ever-shifting, ever-changing; there is no denying such a statement. And to cope with the change ahead, we, as humans, must change. Change how? Into what? That is where we are led.

This leader will wield great power, and with it, will have to (yes.) bear a great responsibility, an even greater burden. Governments will outlaw him. Mercenaries will hunt him. The media will slander him. The world will watch him. And he must lead the world, and he must bring the people to a new dawn. And he will do so because his calling bids him to continue, to persevere.

This leader, and this person alone, can and must lead the people against their brothers, against their governments, and against themselves.

This leader is the Illuminatus.



Perhaps, Perhaps.

Perhaps we could permit ourselves to, with much creative rationality, predict what would happen in the coming months.

_________________________________________________

Clash of the Titans. Due to the freedom and accessibility of information in the country, presence of certain dangerous laws (gun laws), comparatively (to China) more liberal environment as well as gullibility being a characteristic of a larger fraction of the populace, the US will be more susceptible to riots and activism. If anarchy were to break free, the US will be more adversely affected.

Of course, all would be better if every country just sat back and solved their own problems, but what are the chances of this happening, really?

With the US busy with domestic uprisings, the Middle East will erupt into heated conflict as the Palestinians hammer into Israeli-occupied land.

China will meet with the opportune moment to take the Senkaku islands by force, starting a full-scale war in Southeast Asia. China would, if they could, occupy Japan in cruel vengeance for 1937.

The EU will, itself, be consumed by internal strife, only exacerbated by the current turn of events. Maybe Russia will then choose to pick off a few smaller nations, restoring some of its land before the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Who knows.

Who will win these wars? Who will falter and fail? The predictions of a different era deserve a separate discussion. Whoever wins, the world as we know it will cease to exist. We will be plunged into an era of War, Destruction and Chaos.

The Age of War.

_________________________________________________

Vae Victus. The entire world suffers from uprisings and riots to an equal extent, and all the governments face an impending choice: revolution or repression.

Revolutionary Countries will have had their governments overthrown and either chosen a charismatic representative to temporarily lead the people, or descended into anarchy. Either way, much akin to the French Revolution, there will be mob trials, and mob judgement, and mob sentencing. The military and economy will fall into disregard and disrepair during this period, severely weakening the country. But it cannot be helped; it is a revolution.

Repressive Countries would have cracked down on the people, imposing strict sanctions on the people, and maintaining order. They will either fail and crumble into a Revolutionary Country, or it will succeed and become an authoritarian state. These Repressive Countries would have immense military power not only due to their maintenance out of necessity, but also from the training and experience gained from suppressing the populace.

As the sole example of order in the region, with states descending into anarchy all around you, and fielding a far more powerful military, what would you do?

In the name of Peace and Order, the Repressive Countries will quickly and easily overcome neighbouring Revolutionary Countries, leading to a massive aggregation of power by a few strong nations.

Vae Victus, indeed.

_________________________________________________

(Any other ideas are more than welcome; drop a comment or write in the tagbox!)

On Leadership

Leadership is a very elusive concept. There are many different kinds of good and bad leadership, and many different kinds of people to be led. You will hear people talking about determination and wisdom- well, I find these standard answers either astoundingly vague, wildly inaccurate or... irrelevant altogether. Those concepts are about leading while being led, or becoming a leader- no.

Let me tell you what leadership- true leadership really means.

There are six tenets to great, long-lasting leadership. All of them are equally quintessential; failure in any one area will result in a failed leadership: tyranny, genocide, or just plain inefficiency.

One, Love. A true leader must love his people, love his society and, most importantly, love his purpose. He must believe and have faith in what he works for: a greater future, and then love his people enough to sacrifice himself for them to reach this greater future, even if without him. He must not be selfish or have any personal agenda or greed, or lust. His priority is his people, his society. 1984's Big Brother is a failure in this area; as some of you may know, the Party, for the purpose of power and a rigid hierarchy, intellectually handicaps the populace (proles, as they are). Everyone is worse off. The leadership has failed.

Two, Rationality. A true leader must always be thinking, competent. He must know what, how, and most importantly, why. He must be able to relate to his people, share their joys, and understand their suffering. This is what everyone says leadership really is; they are not entirely wrong. Failure in this area would result in the breakdown of the most basal of leader-follower bonds: trust. To this end, a leader can only be allowed to keep power while competent. ...I'm sure you can think of many such incompetent leaders that deserve your ire; history is full of them.

Three, Resilience. A true leader needs to be flexible and adaptable; this trait will no doubt help him on his rise to power, but he needs to keep it in order to stay there. As times and circumstances change, so must his leadership, lest he be caught unable to deal with constantly evolving and emerging conundrums and threats. In application, the leader must not doggedly and blindly remain on the same goal even when the world around him has changed. Everything must be renewed from time to time. Hitler should never have maintained his aggression so far into his leadership; it was useful for stirring discontented populace and overthrowing the Weimar Republic, but did not provide the best kind of momentum when it came to the international stage. Like their troops on the Russian front, Nazi Germany's death to exposure owed to their inflexibility.

Four, Independence. A true leader thinks for himself and is not a lackey of his ministers or his people. He does not make his decisions solely to appease all of his ministers, or let his rule be governed by the mob; he is accountable, but not slaved. He governs, and is not governed. Given the greatest access to information as well as being the highest authority, he must be able to make the correct decisions for his people. The current leadership in the U.S.A. stands testament to such a failure; the president is helpless in the face of filibustering and meaningless contradiction, and spends billions of dollars boot-licking the people, half of whom are, perhaps one can say... less aware of the overall global picture. A society governed by its people is subject to their whims and transient tendencies; until people become rational and educated enough to at least minimise the worse repercussions of aforementioned impulses, it would be unwise to hand the rule of a society wholly to its people.

Five, Responsibility. A true leader is responsible and accountable for his ways, thinking and decisions. He must be able to answer to the people for his actions, especially in times of crises. He must not be inclined to push the blame to an unconcerned scapegoat simply to stay in power. This is a follow-up of the previous characteristic; his decisions are his own, based on his own judgements and analyses, and they must be accredited to, or blamed on, him alone. Multinational corporations practise the choosing of a scapegoat in times of crises, forcing them to resign to appease the public; this is irresponsible and ultimately inimical to the overall societal makeup should it be implemented in global governing; incompetence stays within the structure like a bad rot. Osama's leadership of al-Qaeda also lacks this responsibility. Sure, he claimed "responsibility" for the 9-11 attacks, but selfishly endangering everyone of similar cultural background, sowing discord between two very broad ethnic groups and then slinking away is hardly what can be called mature and responsible. In his opinion, he was only accountable to his beliefs; his people were secondary, their welfares expendable.

Six, Permanence. A true leader is, to a certain extent, permanent in the eyes of his people. He remains even after he is gone, as the representative of an idea or a purpose, as a role model, as a venerated figure worthy of respect. A true leader has to do more than lead; he must enter the hearts and minds of his people, as it is only there that his reign will persevere. As much as he knows his people, his people must know him. Crucially, when good leaders represent a pre-existing idea (such as when Constantine led the early Christians), they validate the idea and doubly invigorate their followers. This is particularly advisable as the ruler can tap the pre-existing reputation gained by those before him, and thereafter hitch onto the permanence of the idea, perhaps even becoming synonymous with it. In his belief, his decorum, his honour and his compassion, he must remain unchanged throughout his reign. He must remain incorruptible, untarnished; only then will he attain the positive kind of permanence, and only then will he remain eternal.


By now, you may think you have noticed the seemingly unforgivable hypocrisy littered thickly around my claims. What, then, if I tell you that many a leadership has failed precisely due to its inability to recognise the beautifully contradictory synthesis that is necessary for great rule?

They have always come close, but never close enough.


A leader must Love despite Independence. One must understand that independence is not the complete abandonment of consideration for the ruler's subjects in decision-making. Society's welfare should supersede society's approval; a leader should be able to take independent action that is unpopular with the public (thus seemingly not prioritising society) only when it is internally perceived to provide greater benefit the public only in subtler ways, or if there is an equal or greater benefit in the long term. The leader should be allowed to ration food to keep surpluses if he projects tough times ahead. This is tough, parental love but still, nonetheless, Love.

A leader must be Rational and then Responsible. The contradiction arises when the best and most rational decision for the society holds the leader negatively accountable in the people's perspectives. In this essence, one can say that the leader must be rational in all aspects other than when he considers his responsibility. Fear of responsibility should be factored out of decision-making to ensure that the best ones are made, but responsibility must be taken anyway. This exclusion is, ironically, the leader's personal responsibility.

A leader must attain Permanence through Resilience. Some may think that it is impossible for the people to truly know a leader who is constantly changing and thinking unpredictably. Well, if the rule of a society is a classical melody, each leader is a single note, their flexibilities vibratos; does not one recognise the note regardless of vibrato? And is not the vibrato necessary for the beauty of the melody to express itself? A true leader can maintain a long-lasting image even while being creative. Perhaps, even, it is necessary for the leader to be resilient when interacting with the people for him to earn their hearts and minds.



A true leader must first be competent, and he must love his purpose and people. He must, by nature, be resilient and flexible in the face of adversary. When making decisions, he must be authoritative enough to make hard decisions in the interest of his society, and be fully accountable for his decisions. Through this, he will remain eternally in the hearts and minds of his subjects.

For Yourself and your People,

you must Be how you Think,

for you are Eternal Change.

Independence, but Love.

Responsibility, with Rationality.

Permanence, through Resilience.

Adam