The Heart of Stalking???

Trying to change you though (make you something other than indifferent) is I think the main question of humankind. So to sit and ponder and ponder and wonder what miracle it would take doesn't seem to be really that much of a waste of time.

Would be good if I had some idea what the particulars are here though.

Do you know what suffering you're causing and just not care?
Do you think I'm not actually suffering?
Do you think it's some kind of bizarre trick and that actually I'm some kind of evil person?
Do you think there's actually nothing at all you can do to stop my suffering? I'm just nuts (go see a 'professional', you just need a happy pill)? Or that it would take waaay too much on your part to stop it?

Which one of the above errors, or which combination, are you making?

There are types of people that think when they disagree with someone, the thing to do is simply say nothing and suddenly cut all ties with the person.

Why?

Because they believe the way everyone acts is set in stone?
Because they project their own incredible closemindedness on everyone else?
Or because they don't understand what the heck is going on in their own head well enough to explain what it is they aren't liking/disagree about?
Because there's so many millions of people living in close proximity and yet at the same time conveniently shut off from one another that we can let a few float in and then pass on by and it really doesn't even matter? They're interchangeable? Concepts like community and friendship are so 16th century?
Because actually, other than a spouse, 'friends' today are just the people you work with for a year or so till one of you moves to a new job?
Because we really don't have any meaningful concrete connection? There aren't any crops we're growing together; no village we're defending?
Because they're evil?

All it would take is appearing to give a shit about the lives of your fellow human beings. Just attempting to explain whatever in the world you're thinking.

And what would it take for that to happen?

The assumption of good on my part. Not perfect. Making mistakes. But not meaning anything bad. Not trying at all to cause harm. The assumption that of course there is a worthwhile human being here.

With that assumption, then just simply having explained yourself in the first place, instead of what you did.

But that's not what you are, that's not what the world is. (You = World, symbolic. Like it or not, you've represented it perfectly). You and everyone else doesn't make that assumption. You and everyone else errs on the side of not getting taken advantage of. And the weaker and stupider people are, the farther they err in that direction. They find ways to suspect, to believe, the other is evil.

Or they find no way to not be indifferent.

And thus the world is a sort of dystopia.
---
And then there is punishment of the evildoer, etc, in a great big neverending circle.
---
My gawd my music kicks ass.
---
I went to work the other night despite my back being so messed up I could hardly stand erect. The first 8 hours were hell. Of course I got pulled to another unit for the very first time. I knew the evil god who's (or I'm Job) torturing me would make sure on this night when my back hurt so bad I'd get pulled and have a difficult assignment. Possible dilantin infiltrations, endless people with so many tubes coming out of them it was very difficult to keep it all straight. And I'm hobbling around like Igor. Perfect.

Then I drank a bottle of OJ. Regretably I don't hardly ever eat fruit or even drink fruit juice. I drank the bottle of OJ and within an hour I was walking normally without any pain. This after my back being so messed up for the previous 5 days. Hmpf.

Surely there was more to it than the OJ but it reminds me (yet again) that I really ought to make sure to consume a little fruit each day.
---
What was it? ? ? ? ? ? Ghost idealism

Imagine a large tribe of elves in the woods (by elves I mean 'good humans') that are defeated by an army of orcs (bad humans)(notice 'good' was in quotes but not 'bad', as it's maybe not actually possible for anyone to be good but bad is easy enough).

The elves are defeated and made slaves (because they're not as aggressive and being aggressive more than makes up for stupidity). The pretty elven women that survive exist as sex things. The people who survive in general are slaves.

But the orces are way too crude to not have a meritocracy. If you embrace their ways you can move up and someday be a powerful man amongst them.

Three elves. One on seeing the women raped attacks the orcs, knowing full well he'll be killed and indeed he is killed.

He's an idealist.

The second one sees it and is sickened but does nothing to stop it. He does as he's told and spends his life as a slave. Never attempting to effect any change.

He's a ghost idealist.

The third elf embraces their ways. He seemingly learns to think a bit of rape is all in good fun. Slavery's just how life is, etc. He becomes a powerful man and enacts some few rules regulating slavery.

One could say the first man was a coward; that he couldn't bear to continue living. One could say the second man, the ghost idealist, is another type of coward; by being an idealist he is making himself partially not really here at all. He's making sure he'll never accomplish anything and actually need not even ever really try. One could say the third man is the one responding the best.

One could look at it all another way whereby this makes no sense.

One could instead make the pragmatist spend his life in a most awful way where every moment is horror just to in the end see himself and his race die out.

It's a question of degree but humans don't really do degrees well. Should be some kind of way to take questions of degrees and respin them so that we can consistently hold on to highly nuanced positions over the long term and even in our 'reflex' thinking.
---
What was that? ? Ghost Idealism and what was the other? ? I imagine it was some really amazing thing. But I remember that it wasn't actually. It's really just I have nothing to say and I'm saying it (the entire blog). But this one bit that was forgotten has such mystery now. I can put it on a pedestal as a great thought to worship. To love.

The closeminded people with certainty in their hearts see the actions which they cannot understand, the actions which are something other than the idiotic and acceptable conformities of our corporate owned society, and they label them insane.

Anything that dares to question the mindless conformity, anything that goes against the corporate social norms, is simply dismissed out of hand as the reasoning of an unbalanced mind.

And everyone's social norms are the corporate social norms, whether or not you even watch TV, as the vast majority of people are watching, and we all are having to deal with such people and we all are having to make sure to appear 'normal' and thus we all are following the corporate social norms. The ultimate goal of which is to not think too hard, don't really question what is going on around you. Just go buy more stuff.

Van Gogh was a stalker. He sent a woman he loved a 'present'. Such was utterly beyond the understanding of our norms. He was said to be bipolar, schizophrenic, even perhaps to have had an ear disorder. The reality is simply that he was an artist who dealt in terms of symbols and who had fallen in love with someone that was utterly indifferent to him in return. He wanted to express to her how badly she was hurting him with her indifference. He did so quite grandly. Of course, not understandable to the average person, and simply dismissed as insane. And also can be dismissed as an evil stalker who should be locked up of course.

The problem with politics is that if you're outside of the extremely narrow boundaries of allowable opinion, you just don't even count. If you're getting all your information from the mainstream media you probably won't be outside of this narrow range. But if you are outside then nothing you do is going to change anything. All your political actions are pretty much futile.

You're not going to stop any wars. You're not going to stop international monetary fund structural adjustment loans. You're not going to cause a socialist democratic revolution. You're not going to cause a restructuring of our mainstream media. It will continue to be owned by billionaires who will in turn decide what the vast majority of people are going to think.

One thing that's nice about Edward's Free to be Human is that he takes what was to me basically a political thing (Herman and Chomsky's media propaganda model) and suggests a way that any two people who recognize it's existence should be able to just in how they interact with one another, perhaps make some positive differences.

Maybe.

It's too abstract though.
-
Dreaming of fame. Sadly I feel more creative when I do this. Although rarely do it anymore. To dream of fame is like dreaming of being the/an alpha male. It's unfortunate to realize how much of creativity can be tied into such things. I think. I guess. But if one truly took away all such crude absurdities, would there be anything left?

There is perhaps some other way of looking at it. Fame doesn't necessarily equal alpha male ape at all. My thinking has been too crude. It could equal having the power to make positive change for example. Failure after failure. Not thinking well. Recognizing how haphazard my process is.
-
Ate a huge meal. Haven't fasted last few weeks because it was problematic with two hours runs.
-
Need to not forget to write about issue of stalking. What percentage of stalkees bear some responsibility? (Which isn't to say the futile activity of stalking someone is justified.) How come all I ever hear is stalkers demonized, said to be mentally ill, etc and no one ever speaks up to say that the situation can be more complex? Surely people realize it can be more complex. I think people are afraid that they'll be suspected of being a stalker themselves if they attempt to add any complexities to the issue. So instead they conform and shut up.