I have a primal disdain for activism because I mistrust groupthink – of any kind – despite activists generally heralded as the morally supreme who in their most passionate incarnation use their own time and money to raise important issues affecting a disadvantaged swath of society.
It would be easy to agree with activists on some of the problems detected because by the time a herd discovers a problem it is likely more people have. Some of us merely decide to do nothing about the problem because it does not affect us personally today, or we do not believe a rally of people on a city plaza will usurp the democratic ignorance that got us to the problem in the first place.
But even when I can sometimes agree with the detection of a problem by activists, I invariably disagree with the proposed solution to the problem. You see, an activist is content with a nurse blissfully sending a patient home with a bandaid covering an open wound, short of the expert interpretation and analysis by a specialist of what caused the wound in the first place.
Avoidance of undesirable consequence leading to ignorance of cause.
Below A Sub
Most of the problems we face in society are the result of the consistent ignorance to cause, similar to the nurse correlary, so prevalent because we are afraid to ruffle any feathers and take ourselves on. Such fear leads to a compounding cascade of suboptimal consequences and complexity in which a pre-established ministry of power can retain mastery and control, with activists coming out of the woodworks only when the lowest and most apparent level of multi-level dysfunction and inequity has been reached.
In the worst-case scenario for the oligarchy, the activists win their case and helped by public support manage to move the normalization of the problem one level up in the hierarchy to cause, only to be followed by more cascading and more complex mediocrity from rapidly floating downstream another branch of suboptimization. The activists eventually grow up and give up, making room for new blood that attempts to fight the debilitating mediocrity even further downstream than its previous generation.
Proximal development, a process described by psychologists as learning slightly above comprehension level, makes clear many activists have not learned much from the genius of Albert Einstein. His credo, the theory determines what can be discovered, should have at least informed our bright-eyed and bushy-tailed leaders to look for answers promoting the excellence of humanity upstream, not downstream. For the theory of human excellence determines the excellence humanity can discover.
The theory of human gameplay is responsible for its outcome, including its failures. And humanity’s evolving normalization of truth, inducing the excellence of renewal of the human theory is responsible for the quality of outcomes.
The operating-systems of humanity, we so often put on a pedestal and manage to sell to the rest of the world, are in actuality correlated to false, outdated, or undefined truths, violate our current understanding of evolutionary first-principles, and thus are uncomfortably dependent on a massive delta of undesirable streams of unconsciousness steadily running dry. It does not need to be this way.
Nature has bestowed on humanity a meritocracy of evolutionary excellence, whether we like it or not. A meritocracy humanity, by falsifying the normalization of merit, violates at every turn thereby yielding systemic confinement of the fractal of human ingenuity and capacity. It does not need to be this way.
To summarize: the appreciation of activism leads to the depreciation of cause, and thereby popularizes finite downstream evolution over infinite upstream. And only upstream evolution of the operating-systems for humanity that determines what humanity can discover can remove the lies embedded at the base of our current fabrications and build the brave new world we deserve.