Conflicts

The need for this essay derived from the latest bloodbath in Pal****ne. As each word is expressed or deleted, more unaware Pale******* die from i**ael* bombs. It seems that regardless of the westernised ways of classification (e.g. civilian or terrorist), every Pale******* must be annihilated. 

Watching the news and as usual, Ham** is always to blame. Beyond the terrorism, there is something that regardless of the quantity of bombs dropped, can never be eliminated. That is the need for freedom from the plaguing nation and the daily terror Pale******* go through. To the washers of the crimes, this justifies the total annihilation of the population, since one can never fully eradicate an idea, a belief or purpose. All Pal***** are a constant reminder and remainder of a country that is being denied its right to exist. What about pal***** that live abroad? We are not aware of any disappearances but only of censorship. It is known, after the violent uprooting of the natives comes settlement and according to UN resolutions, it is made illegally within the Pal***** territories (ref). Even so, there will never be enough land to claim but with the various acts of terror, the aggressor makes sure to empty it from humans and any other living organisms, endlessly being burned from phosphorus until some freshly-made ruins violently turns them into ash.

Some will say we are anti-zionists or even anti-semites. On the contrary, as we have described elsewhere we believe and practise multiculturism as a principle for change. Ironically, to have any anti prefix on any thesis, presupposes an exclusion -of sorts, of the initial thesis it (the anti-) is being mirrored from. Fascism excludes the majority of the populace. An antifascist movement then must include those who are excluded. If a fascist regime falls and the crimes they have committed - the horrors humans can do to each other, are shown with disgust, all the supporters will lay low and once again hide their predatory behaviour. Until another opportunity will rise and they will again be able to express themselves in horrendous ways. In other words, a thesis needs its antithesis in order to distinguish and identify itself in this patriarchal world we recreate daily. An identity shouldn't be killed by another. 

Self-defence. Where do you set the line? Is there a need to dwell in this question? When one appreciates how vicious the cycle is between aggression and defence the outcome can only be death. 

Words like retaliations or retributions, should only be used in our conversations about the past. There is no room for the present to be filled with these sorrows. Even so, our romanticism will not stop the terror, but that shouldn't prevent us from stating our goals and the ways to achieve them. On the contrary, it is these silly remarks that may lead to new ways of socializing and coexisting. 

I would like to know, where do you stand on this? Not in a pick-a-side fashion but on the future of the world through the resolution of the conflict. There is no doubt your belief will have no impact on the massacres committed - even though your actions will, but it certainly does affect the future of us all. To visualize this, imagine a straight line indicating the passing of time. The signifier C shows the beginning of the conflict. The signifier I, shows each and every one at the present. Now, you are alive reading this text and the conflict is alive and kicking. Neighbourhoods erased at the blink of your eye. Then there is the signifier F, to show the beloved future that seems so close and yet so distant. 

-C----I-F-

To support this, we shall need to describe how the conflict is being assimilated into the I. That doesn't mean a resolution of the conflict nor its disregard from our existence. Rather it is an open wound that pushes away the future. There is no future in which people die unwillingly from the actions of other people! There is no doubt that a peaceful coexistence is possible. Where diversity is encouraged rather than being violently avoided. 

Bear in mind that life cannot be assumed in a line. Rather, life is full of these lines which are not really lines. Every point (or pixel) has it's own conflicts that affects the various Is consciously or not. Like a tree demonstrating gloriously life in whole. We are the farthest leaf sprouting at the very tip of the 4th branch at the 7th branch from below to the right. Can you spot us? 

The topic of this essay remains the various conflicts that haunt the present peoples and obscures human progress. How a person is undoubtedly affected by a past conflict or even massacred by its toxic present-day treatment. ADDED: It is the interconnectedness that tries to be justified in this chaotic essay. 

Conflict is being encouraged. The western domination was established through violence. It has set the standards on how nations can thrive. The monetization of war is still the most precious industry as it ticks a lot of boxes. The war machine keeps turning from the unending production of bombs that will later massacre primarily non-christians. Capitalism and all fears of Other peoples are being fulfilled. With our own produced kill machines, we let them annihilate each other and diminish their numbers. Or we shall use drones that do not require men on the ground and allow for an effective annihilation. After lots of kills in the virtual world, all screens feel the same and the act of killing through it, has become the norm. One may momentarily forget that the green figures flashing on the screen are real people and that the heat that fills the human figure is life within them. Probably, that is how one manages to press the button. 

This is beyond cruelty. What lies beyond cruelty? It may be apathy. Not felling anything, not even cruelty. Killing out of boredom shouting that life is meaningless...

how to change the world vs. the world is changing

 There is no dualism. Only life in motion. 

At the very root of it all, the world can only change when we change how we use language. Any language we use to communicate our selves to each other. The phrase to change the world cannot be reduced to a mere moment. Since life itself is best described as life in motion, change must also follow suit and become changing. The world is always changing. To change the world must then mean to acknowledge the changing process, and guide this motion into what you subscribe to. Since we were born in this ever-changing motion, we are part of the movement even in moments of stillness. As long as there is life within us we are actively changing the world. 

To generalize further, it's our actions that foster and recreate the world we all live in. For example, a world without violence isn't being realized through violent actions. Conclusively, language-in-use, is just another human activity that we have chosen to focus on in this essay as a (ironically) revolutionary medium we need to reclaim from the sketchy figures of authority. 

It is of no importance when these old figures have acknowledged the power of language in their quest for validation: To feed the people with certain moral values and later, the same well-fed people, will find solace and accept their authority unquestionably. Similarly on the receiving end, the language one uses shows the moral values they support. We do not believe that the effect of propaganda lies on the ballot turnout, but rather on the lives of the people that fall for it. Language-in-use, from the top to the bottom of any society, instructs the content of our conversations and obviously our thoughts. If for example, the state-owned tv stations regularly presented the various schools of thought that emerged in different epochs of the human civilization on - let's say, political economy, the political dialogue between the citizens would be a completely different experience. 

It is important to know why these silly fundamentals are not promoted to and by the general public. It is a toxic relationship that one needs the other to justify its own existence - or in this case, non-existence. Simply, if we did critize, we would surely take away their status of authority. For the religious, that doesn't mean elimination but rather the exclusion of the religious leaders from the political. When freedom to exercise one's own beliefs are guaranteed, and the concerns of the followers are dealt with utmost care, there is no space left for the involvement of the religious leaders. 

a changing world is the context of the content of our lives. 

...

It is the same old story. There is always a glass half filled or emptied, with water. The importance of it lies in the different beliefs human maintain about the same object. In a similar manner to the pessimistic and optimistic generalizations one can deduce from the observers and their attitudes towards the glass with the water, we maintain that phrasing ourselves differently, also recreates the world that the glass belongs to.

Being aware of the shared experience is a celebration to the evolutionary history. We are not aware of a response to the above question such as the following: with joyful tears and celebrations for their ability to create this situation in which they share this sensory experience and can duel in theoretical conversations. Similarly, you reading this text is also a celebration to the wonders of the human intellect and civilization. 

Not for a moment we forget and separate humans from nature. Evolution has provided for this. Mastering, exploiting and then raping our own first nature to create societies will always be an  undoubtable fact. Even so, we must not fight to return to previous stages of human civilization. Instead, we take full responsibility for continuously exploiting the earth and each other which have allowed us today to enjoy breakthrough individual technologies. 

we need to heal our relationships with nature and each other. Conclusively, the social structures and the reign of domination that has penetrated deep into our individual beings. Innocent expressions or realities (attitudes, perspectives) echoed from the depths of the history of patriarchism, only show how we unquestionably accept the current state of affairs - capitalism and neoliberalism, as the basis of our own lives and in essence our vocabulary: The content of our thoughts and even the flow they are generated. To bring up the contradictions and duel in self-reflection - for example, on the outdated cringe expression you said patronizing homosexuals, can only be achieved with the same language. Not necessarily to learn new words but to form sentences with the already known ones in helpful ways.

We created science searching for answers. Instead we got more complicated questions fuming out of the catastrophe we created. First out of ignorance then out of profit.  

..