Mormon Face: On
OK, while for you that which is me were up to me and what I tell - let's say: I'm not a stupid fuckslut, but a smart and intelligent man.
Lets keep it as that for now too and at all if you have problems the other way. The primary thing that I have on mind is its implication for my future in terms of - ... - I'll put it that way: It is to me nonsense nontheless if the future to me is to be defined in misery. Well, lets break it down!
I'd not want to be the smart guy if my life otherwise were more comfortable we might say - so - as man I have to be prepared to waive on certain things like maybe a girlfriend for instance. Thats what I feel or get or understand. Well, not a problem! At least - so far. What next?
It goes on and on - so I feel - which has a logical backend to it and so, I'll be clear about it. There is a general philosophy of comfort - and the more I accept that it cannot be, the more it'll slip away. It is however stupid because that philosophy isn't just about comfort. So in here you'll see the "hard core" - you'll see me once more deliberately going against what seems right - aiming at some "imaginary" point - but you'll figure that there is nothing wrong about my point. It is - deliberately so - the end.
First of all this isn't about what I have to do considering the circumstances. It is about an idea or ideal. But so it should be evident already that the circumstances that aren't the ideal put me into misery; Where matter of fact the circumstances I'm in are not ideal, so, I'm naturally in some misery as all of us and I do try to get along as all of us should and yet ... I "complain". Why? Why not! So, things aren't ideal! Yea, quite right! Thats what I'm saying! Or am I not? Breathe in, breathe out - it shouldn't hurt too much to agree with me on this one!
So, next thing: If we have the ability to realize this ideal - why should we pretend that we need to be as miserable as though it weren't possible? Try to get the answer into your head - then you can defend your spot against my argumentation!
OK, if it weren't possible - OK, different issue! So you should know that while you do believe that it isn't possible, you should know that there is no real base of discussion outside of looking at points of evidence. This might at some point look, in case the discussion were to go that way, that I can't be argued with - being considered ignorant or arrogant where in fact there is an interest I follow to become arguable with - where I do present points of evidence that I do believe in. Or, once no evidence is available, I'll try to formulate that thing - my concept sotospeak - as an objectively comprehensive something where counter arguments can be applied on.
More complicated were it when two ideals concurr, or otherwise if we weren't allowed to combine the two because of some moronic who is who nonsense. But shit aside - let me commence.
The first point on my list is Independence. Ignoring the big and broad social dynamics but looking into a more narrow social compound, it is my experience that a compound of Independent individuals where each has something to do, is having trouble with individuals that aren't independent enough. So, Person A would be doing its thing while Person B would need help at things that are common sense within that community. Trivial things. Like, can you help me find something on the internet? I would for instance go, for my sake, and show that person 'how to'. But if that person is just not independent enough to learn - I'll have a problem. So, I'll have to teach that individual - or - I'll just acknowledge that this person would be better off in an environment where it would learn such things. It is however, so a primary and most fundamental rule of the building, not an option to be continously bothered by that person for each and every time it doesn't get along. If there however is an individual within that community who is quasi there to help such people out, its diffrent but again the same. That person so holds a duty, so, why should I let myself be bothered?
Within that community now - each indivdiual holds, we presume, an individual profficiency. Its like looking at a Ship. In an advanced ship there are multiple instruments and those are arranged into stations and each station is operated by an individual that is profficient with these instruments. The Captain won't go, push the operator aside and do everything by himself - but he'd consult the operator. Now is there no "best" position per se - on the Star Trek Enterprise each position on the bridge would be the 'best' of its kind - for instance.
What this means for what I want to show is about how it applies on a vacuum of duty. So, taking a social compound and first up nobody has anything to do at all. To get you a better idea: Taking myself as male into a compound of females - so - cliche fantasy - nobody has anything to do, or, so the "ideal" that each girl/woman in the vicinity would be there for my own pleasure. This would be the 'default' image you'd be getting once I were to start talking of what I'd want - in sexual regards - once being a man. So in my fantasy the vacuum of duty is shifting in terms of my own favour/pleasure. One might say that it were impossible, but I have to object because if I had enough money it certainly were possible. Nobody would have a duty and in that regard we were free to enjoy ourselves the way we would. But that's not the point here!
So, we have to begin filling this image with duties. Easily, taking me as reference point/captain, all duties fall onto me! [...silence...].
Do/Would you/we really need to argue about anything here? So, taking something trivial but necessary like cleaning up the toilet - who would do it? The ten that have nothing to do or me because I mentioned it? I sometimes feel as though I'd be the one fingers would be pointing on and that of course is the problem! So, the idea were that I begin cleaning the toilets while the other duties I have would, because therein there is more prestige, be shifted onto them. Just ... because!
Naturally that can't be right! So, the first step should be to fill the image up with equally valuable duties. That means that by the rule of independence each is to find something important to do. So we have an imaginary purpose for the community and that resembles the primary set of duties. Secondary are cleaning up, etc.. So, each would get a primary and a secondary duty.
Extending that now into the bigger social scheme - we can quite naturally see what I mean when I over-romanticise the 'ancient greek' political infrastructure. I've had it in a discussion today that I wanted to say ... but, someone interfered and pointed out that ... and so I realized that our social-economic structure of today isn't all that different from how it was there. There is an educated elite, a big chunk of slaves and a quasi-minority of "not unfree" individuals. But it is my point that something better is possible in deed. Instead of centralizing each aspect of our society, it has to be compounded to more properly suit our population. The problem with centralization is that a crowd that is in the millions cannot effectively take any influence. The 'central point' is effectively too small for a mass that large to communicate any interests. Voting is as good as it gets, but lets leave that aside.
The first thing that needs to be done to comprehend what I mean is to setup the demand to not think about too small of a center for too big of a crowd. Thus the first product will be communities wherein the individuals are quasi friend or family. This needs to at first be secluded from any personal/private stuff and then compounded into the different fields of interest. Following a given interest, each compound realizes a given set of duties. Taking Astronomy as simple example, there would be a Very Large Telescope and a community around it. So there are many Telescopes and so there are many communities of that field of science. In each community there are people more profficient here while others there. Parallel to that there will be communities that have an entirely different interest - communities that will eventually need the assistance of one or more Telescopes and so they'll need to communicate that interest. While each community does supposedly manage itself, the first priority there is that each community has contact to those that are interesting to them. Extending this idea one bit further the case is that these communities would be supported on social interest, thus, they aren't entirely isolated - alias: Growth. So these communities would have a natural attachment to another community - as for instance schools. Another 'on demand' connection would be to the press. Press again is a field of communities where again there are different fields of interest. Someone attending Astronomy school can so at this point choose between Skyseeing, Physics and Journalism. Skyseeing can be an interest that can apply to the fields of Physics or Journalism - and via the connection to schools a certain grade of the required profficiency can be expected.
You'll see and wonder: What I say isn't too different from how things do work today, but what is different? However, to squeeze it in real short: I say: Mankind isn't on too bad of a way! That is my oppinion! Not all would share my optimism, but well - that shan't be the point here.
Maybe you don't see here yet how this is what I mean or meant - but, maybe you just didn't want to see it.
As next this picture is to be focussing on what is called 'social demand'. There it should be a dead givaway that the one other thing that has been mentioned and is of relevance here is school. Social demand alias the big chunk of social community is the basis from where young aspiring individuals emerge that head for schools and wherever that school is taking them. The first valid point in conference to me is that I have a life that sucks because I aborted school. OK! But by doing so I fucked the things that are taught in school and made my own way - period. Good or Bad? Well, whatever!
School at first should be open to the individuals interest and not to its grades, etc.. The next is that it will need to hold the capacity, and, the capacity would determine - in reference to the incomming potential - what criteria it has to erect. But that should stop people from being "ideologically" attending a school, learning independently, and yes - being potentially capable of getting to an exam that way. But - wait! This isn't a factor of school - it is a factor of society. So, lets ignore all exceptions and side-ways, back-doors, etc. for now and lets simply assume that each society is simply full and working properly without any "too much" problems.
So we have that social base and it is implied that it is where the food and stuff is comming from. So it'll have schools that lead people into those areas of profficiency. Those connect to their different destinations - where in regards of Farming there isn't just 'Farmer' as option but also corresponding fields of science. At the base schools are the first institution that this society would support - which means, ignoring infrastructure for now, that this society doesn't need any political instrument as of yet. Politics occurs once we start to implement a shortage - like - lets say that this society couldn't support all fields of science. Well, so it wouldn't be capable of supporting all individuals with food and so - one or more specific fields of science has/have to be emphasized. It is at this point simply a politics of common sense.
If how we get there is the question, I'd say that we won't ever get there politically! It is like the snake biting its own tail. We might take our primary ancestors as example: The Bacteria! So, some scientists might know to add: Well, our body does still live in symbiosis with certain kinds of Bakteria, saying yes, we still host some of our "Ancestorial" compadres. The question were for instance, that if we can't support everything, why? Are not enough people working on food production? Or is it another problem? Simply saying that we can nourish everyone - people that have 'nothing to do' need to be accounted for. We might simply also call them artists.
Getting there is for me a matter of starting to gather into communities that host the growth of itself while thereby behaving like a bakteria. Growing, then splitting up and that way differentiating itself into a more and more complex union. At some point this will have grown to a point where there is no more 'central access gate', but, more or less, simply churches that do respectively sit in the center of a social compound of communities. It is at this point of course a matter of life to unfold this way and not a matter of me to formulate it in depth. At least I won't do so - at this moment.
So the question to me is: What is my calling and where does it take me to? Simply - right now - I am that one single compound of one at the start, technically. At least that is what I consider myself to be. So I would take all the duties that I hold and that would require a community around it. From there on it is no longer a question of what I need to be but a question of how that community will work most profficiently. To me it however occurs that next to that there is another thing that will need to grow, and that is the social backend. Effectively that means that I will "resume" my duties once there is a community that can work with those things. This means that at first there will be 'my Community' - which means that its just about my personal interests as though I were a Bakteria or well - Artist - in that concept of mine. The first thing we'd want to produce is a Church, from there on social space can grow, attached to that there may be schools and attached to those there can be professions. The only word I think I need to drop at this point is the word: Secretary. That would be a person that would hold a duty that would shift weight from my shoulders onto its and corresponds to all those duties I may have outside of my personal interests. At this basis I can install the matter of: "Wherever there are two assembled in my name I will be among them" into saying that without Secretary there will be no duties I hold whatsoever! If, and I'll just say so to get a picture going, that Secretary were overburdained despite me keeping schedule the point would obviously be the one that I'd either need more secretaries or more time!
OK, so - its naturally a long shot! That means that at first we cannot speak of anything of those sorts - we'll simply need to get going and see how things align. Naturally each individual in the boat would look to get into a position that would at the end get the whole thing working - but to get there, someone will have to make a start! That is: Planting Seeds so in time they will grow into Trees!
How this will unfold privatly - that is another story that isn't expected to work any other way either!
Stardate 55291.33175