meritokratias
Resisting the Design – Arm yourselves with neutrality
Our social engineering has always taught us the civilian responsibility of standing up for the good and fighting evil. It sounds very correct, and this “correctness” is precisely how the common people are manipulated.
We have examined the effects of oversocialisation in previous articles, and how the social media are driving a godless theocracy onto us. And that particular sense of “justice” is precisely how we get manipulated, especially when Left-Right politics are nothing but representation of reframed justice for the oppressed and the rest of them representation of the oppressors. It is often a rhetoric coming from the socially manipulated to say that inaction against evil sponsors evil. It can never be more manipulative.
Before we go into today’s topic of neutrality, I should lay out the premise that we simply may never know if something is truly true in a reliable way, especially about something we have a distance from.
There are also always at least 4 answers for a true-or-false question. It is either true, false, indeterminable or irrelevant. The true-or-false question may include something you simply are not armed with the instruments to find out for real, and therefore it is indeterminable. It can either be true or false but we may never find out. The answer of that question would be “irrelevant” if the material you are given (for example news reports or articles) simply has not discussed the possible logic of the question you’re asked.
So it is completely a hubris to think that we understand everything and that we know all the truths. When we are given a stimulus to comment on an event of the political nature, a lot of the time we are asked the same question “Who is at fault?” followed by hatred and inventive methods of punishment outside the purview of the law, as if the common people now holds the justification to assert vigilante justice in their own pleasure.
“It is in our power to have no opinion about a thing, and not to be disturbed in our soul; for things themselves have no natural power to form our judgments.” – Marcus Aurelius
It is almost a delusion of the modern society’s fascination about “Freedom of Expression”. The Freedom of Expression, if you truly look closely to it, is a constitutional principle about how laws should be set up that expressing opinions even of the most offensive issues (like about religion back then), should never result in punishment by the law. But the modern perversion has made expressing an opinion to be the duty of every individual, that you must participate casting a stone in the manner of giving an opinion, as the representatives of the “Oppressed” would say if you don’t, you are apologetic to oppression.
As the logic demonstrated above tells us, it is actually possible to find things to be indeterminable or irrelevant, how shall we actually form the opinions of who is right? But because modern framing must put every conflict into the shoes of the oppressor and the oppressed, the true-or-false questions are deprived of their 3rd and 4th answers, that we are now forced to take a side of saying true or false. Is this logical? Is it scientific?
Neutrality is exactly what we need. We are not on the fence about things and we are not undecided. It is simply that we are allowed to be independent from the framed controlled oppositions.
For issues we have absolutely no stakes on, that we don’t even have the power to do something (for example not having the rights to vote in that country) or that they don’t affect us, it is simply impossible to even be invested enough in terms of knowledge and emotions to make the correct call of the opinions – as it is simply irrelevant whether we form the opinions or not. But people who actually benefit from the resolution of the issues will reap the benefits of your free labour – that opinions are shifted by the voices of the irrelevant.
Opinions are best reserved for the people at stake or the actually informed. And we should always welcome to be informed.
