Analogy and analgous are quite a bit different obviously when it comes down to writing.
-
Are people essentially good or bad?

'Good' and 'bad' are relative things. And so, are you relating to yourself or some other thing? What thing could you possibly compare/relate with instead of yourself? And good and bad ultimately come down to intelligence although of course not intelligence in the simplistic IQ test way.

The end result is that over and over again, the smarter people are less happy. In part because more and more everyone else appears essentially... not so good. And they can't even say these things and in many cases really honestly even look at them because then they're an elitist for even thinking in terms of their selves as being smarter.
-
Nostalgia is a longing for return. Most people have nostalgia for their youth. I only have nostalgia for my youth in the sense that it felt as if there was this great hope; of unlimited possibilites. That hope was mostly not real. It is no more or less real than today. Life has slowly taught me how unreal it was.

All of my nostalgia is really just for the return of ignorance. Or at least a bad memory of the reality of the past. This does not mean that it is the same for other people. Other people I suppose had happy carefree childhoods and their nostalgia is legitimate and something entirely different from mine.

Not quite so far out on the chopping block lately but so busy. I've talked of veganism lately just because it can serve as a simple analogy. I don't want to appear to actually be being interested in talking about veganism. For some reason I really want to avoid writing vegan propaganda. It is just meant as an analogy for moral questions in general.

Hell analogies somehow work a bit for me and I've more on paper than in this journal. They circumvent my issue with pitting people against one another in this attempt at a somewhat escapist creative outlet. But why exactly? And will it last? Analogies end up becoming ridiculous as they go too far. Too many things end up needing analogized. And also they are just misunderstood anyway. Like Kafka's Max Brod; his very good friend who even wrote 30 books himself and thought so highly of Kafka yet, hadn't a clue that The Trial was something other than a statement against fascism.

The analogy is supposed to help us understand a thing better. To help us change ourselves. But knowing that the majority of people who read it won't get it...

Why do I want to avoid writing what might even be misunderstood as vegan propaganda BTW? Is it just because vegans are so disliked? Or because in it's most simplistic form as a moral question it's too obvious? Too beyond the pale?

Before I wrote music I thought when I finally did I'd write some songs about vegnaism. I never did and now the idea strangely disgusts me.

It is amazing how little I know myself. It is scary in that I'm pretty damm sure most people are trying a lot less to know themselves, thus they most likely know their selves even far less. And this means being a slave to our unconscious. It means being machines; automatons. It means potentially causing lots of harm. It means existing less.