3.21.25 - The One Above Truth and Objectivity pt 2

You will find minimal representations of other works here. Minimal call backs and examples of myself justifying my reasons or thoughts by harkening back to more established writers and philosophers. I simply do not care to do so. If you find that some of these thoughts are reminiscent of something you have read then I am propagating that thought process through and through. I will contradict myself over and over again but eventually you will see an overarching plot that will not change throughout my contradictions. There is no reason to take me seriously and there is no reason to believe any of my statement. I am but a man with time and conviction.

Let us go back to our thoughts. We will be going in and out of random topics.

Lets look deeper into

"We could build lawless sectors where people could kill each other or live out their wildest fantasies. People have needs and people have proclivities, its about finding a balance and understanding that some people will not change." - [AFALOZ TOATAO PT 1]

Why is this important?

As much as we all want to pretend that humans are righteous we all have our own secrets and wants and needs. I want to go deeper into the awesomeness of what a nation would look like when its all interconnected in one land mass. Where people can choose to only live in lets say an Asian sector that allows other non-asians. Or have a sector thats only specifically for christian fundamentalist. I want to go over how this could be managed and who would be the governing body but what we need to address are the dark thoughts of humans first. To understand that these are the most vile portion of humanity but at the end of the day they are still portions of humanity. Can they help the way they are? Is it how they they were raised? Is it what they saw growing up? Is it what happened to them? What happens when everyone is raised without concern of food?  Without concern of being unheard? Would these deplorables still exist? All  I know is that they exist now and they will continue to exist until we understand them better so they should and will have a section for them.

I envision multiple sectors that are lawless, a sector that is lawless with violence and one without violence or one that allows for all sexual deviances, a sector for people who want to partake or have whatever it is done to them. This allows people who harbor these emotions and sensations but are inclined to be more secretive about them to travel to these sectors to have their urges fulfilled. 

Are these vile thoughts that we are about to get into? Yes. If you do not wish to read then do not read, at the end of the day these things happen and they happen to people who wish for  none of it so why not give those who want it to happen to them have an outlet. There are suicidal people who wish to die and they take their life, why not allow for someone who wishes to murder be the one to kill them? Is it anyone's rights to stop what another wishes to do? What is important will always be consent, the willingness for one individual to go through an action that another individual wishes to put on them.

Who agrees on consent? Why is the world view point so different in all aspects, whether its voting, sexual endeavors, military, marriage its all so different. Even in the USA there are "federal" limits but there are state limits as well, all contradicting each other and sowing discourse amongst many as it conflicts with their moral obligations based on what dogma of law they ascribe to. 

This would be a separate topic but lets go back to the the sectors of lawlessness.

Imagine a sector of society that allows for lawlessness. The people who would live here would still get the same amenities as anyone else, they would get support for utilities, food clothes, shops, money whatever it is that they could require. The difference would be the rule of law. 

In a non-violent lawless sector, people could steal, harass, threaten, but all without violence. I count violence as physical contact without the consent of the other party. So no punching, raping, stabbing, murder, etc. Yet it would allow someone to not listen to dogmatic societal rules, which I havent thought of yet but they would be more akin to being nice, being understanding, dont do to others what you dont want done to you.

Punishments' would have to come within normal society to give a reason for the law, these lawless sectors would have no punishment's for non-violent law breaking.

These lawless sectors would be filled with individuals who break the laws of other sectors, lets give an example. If there were a sector that allowed drugs but you are only allowed a certain monthly quota, you break that quota and steal or request from someone else or attain it in any manner that is not allowed then you would be put in a lawless sector. Where you would be given as much drugs as you want but now you must be with others who also break the law, others who might not share your belief, be ripped away from your normal support system forced to restart again. These lawless sectors might not have the same amenities that are special to the sectors they stray away from. In the drug sector for example, there could be sanctioned drug orgies or hospitals that are equipped for dealing with patients who overdose from their low tolerance, whatever the case  is. These lawless sectors would not have the specialized niceties that they would be accustomed to in the sector they were from prior.

We must think of what would be important to people who live this way rather than what is important to us now. 

You cant stop others from breaking the rules, the rules are there as guidelines and some people just dont fit in guidelines. A lawless sector yet it has a law of none violence.

Contradictions are important as life exist with no purpose. 

Now the truly vile sector, a lawless sector that allows for violence.

Everything and anything would be allowed here, any vile thing your mind could conceive would be allowable here. The end all for law breakers, a sector with minimal amenities that ascribes to nothing and everything. I am sure this community would become fragmented as there would be those who wish to have a society that functions within the lawless violent sector and those that want chaos.

What would a place like this truly look like? Would people who have to live here just not be allowed to populate? Would we neuter them like we do to animals? If children were allowed to be born here they would be subject for removal and placed in a sector for unwanted children as they have no autonomy and no concept of consent and have broken no rules yet another contradiction to have sub rules in a lawless violent sector.

What would be the purpose of these sectors? Why the need for them?

There are going to be people who simply do not want to adhere or cannot be placed in any given sector. There are those who are going to believe they belong in one sector but cannot abide by their laws. In a world of everything there must be a reason to follow civil suit even in tailor made environments, there are those who are going to want to dissent and that should be allowed as well but there should be consequence as we have learned throughout our childhood. There are reactions to our actions.

Why should anyone follow a rule of law if there are no consequences? These sectors are important as it will be the grounding factor on how a post modern society works, a society that doesn't rely on monetary value to show success must rely on something else to measure success. That sensation would be replaced by the adoration and love of your peers, if there is no monetary reason to work or function then a cultural/societal reason needs to be as fulfilling and as enticing.

Ethics would be the fundamental currency of society, how well can you function and uphold the values of your chosen identity? I don't want to get into this yet but right now our measure of success is based off how much money we make, some will say its based on prestigiousness of your job but that's because your  monetary quota has been met. Some will say its not the prestigiousness but the magnum opus that is awarded to the best of the best of any given field. Whether its an Oscar, a Pulitzer, an employee of the month award, there's something you chase once your basic needs have been met.

When money is no longer the limiting factor we expand and find ways to satisfy our urge to be more than those around us or to attain recognition beyond what anyone else is getting or to just have pride. 

Anyway...back to the lawlessness.

These sectors serve as a reminder, a reminder that even in a world of abundance there must be some common understanding on what it means to function as a society. If there are no rules to follow and we are all at the whims of our fleeting thoughts then we cannot gain a consensus on how to move forward as a species. 

Yet we cannot be bogged down by the current laws, the laws that individual nations hope to uphold to various degrees of human conciousness that all function in different wavelenghts. 

The laws that are inherently tolerable by a Palestinian is very different to that of an Israeli. Same with a South African country and its northern counterpart.

You may ask, how is this any different to our world now?

Its not, its not supposed to be, the only thing is that we would all be under one continent and those who are  from South Africa who are starving and wish to be away can go to a sector that more aligns on how they see themselves. They could wish to live in the sector that is a melting pot of cultures and religions and nations that are tolerable and wish to assimilate to form a new human culture. Maybe they only want to live with other South Africans in a sector made for only  white south Africans rather  than a sector only for black south Africans. 

In doing so yes you fracture and create  more groups but we are fractured together and are allowed to  quickly move to another sector if the values no longer align with our own. 

The hope is that by living in these sectors even the heavily segregated ones, eventually the offsprings of those will see how others live and move away and slowly but surely these fractured and segmented sectors will begin to disappear. That one culture will come out as a winner without having to resort to blood shed and destruction of each other.

This is a utopia where everyone is willing to try this new experiment. Where people are not concerned about the lost of "land culture" where people arent so nostalgic about the first piece of land they imprinted on as this would mark the ability for humans to lose nostalgia for Earth. 

How can we ever leave Earth if we cannot even let go of the emotional hold that a these nations give us, these cities, the culture around us?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay very fragmented and jumped a few times but over all I feel like I hit the main topic of this article pretty well. I want to expand more on it but I think I will move on for now.

I will often reference previous topics and blog post as I want to always be reading and expanding my own thoughts. 

As I mentioned in my other blog post of this, I do read  other philosophical takes and its not lost on me that many of these topics have been talked about or thought of but I am so tired of how humans think.

I am so tired of having to show pseudo intellect by showing how much I know on other more established figures. I just dislike the reference-ability of everything. Which is of course ridiculous as we cannot even describe an apple without all the interconnected subjective thoughts that we associate with it but thats were we get lost at.

We get lost on what an apple means to us and how it differs from what others think an apple is but we never bother to ask why they are  different to the other but ask how they are different or ask what are you referencing when you state its red. Is it red because it shares similar qualities to a cherry or to my blood? Is it an apple because of the shape? Who did you learn your shapes from? What books did you study to learn those shapes? 

Discourse within discourse when all this is, is just my thoughts. Is it so bad to reinvent the wheel? What if the wheels purpose is different from what the original inventor had purposed their invention for when it comes to my iteration of this wheel? What if my wheels purpose is to traverse the sun, surely it cannot be round and made of rubber but still function to move my vehicle. What is inherent in that wheel to call it a wheel? 

If my thoughts are not new then they are not new, if my thoughts are from others then they belong to those others.

Yet at the end of the day. I am writing, the day ends and I have one more yet to yet.