Skip to main content

prisons of personal pity

We are victims of ourselves more than anyone else. Acceptance of that truism is the first step to personal responsibility. When we act on this truth, we are able to be that only Jesus that some will ever see, because we always have the choice to act in love. Sometimes that love is tough. Sometimes it means letting go of your own desires for the sake of those you love. It doesn't mean they aren't there, but you choose not to act upon them. And when you do that, it's fascinating how it seems to bring those desires back to you.

I hope it continues to work as such. Because there are plenty whom I miss. But I have to be brave. I have to move on, I have to see the beauty in the new as well as the old. But this is part of losing oneself. It means reaching out. It means playing with others. It means having the self-honesty to be myself.

I know there's a whole wonderful world outside, waiting for me, full of loving, wonderful people. I just have to engage it.

It's easier to feel pitifully alone though. It certainly hurts more, but it feels safer. I don't really know genuinely loneliness anymore though. Only very temporary, but repeating bouts of it. I think I still haven't quite accepted how much I enjoy my personal time, particularly to think and write. Or perhaps subconsciously I've felt guilty for choosing it, like some how I'm letting, well, I'm not sure who else down. It's actually a very fascinating prospect, the guilt that comes from the selfishness of isolation.

How many monks dedicated themselves to God who were actually just dedicating themselves to themselves? Going full hermit seems somewhat selfish to me, but I shouldn't rightfully know why. You can love reactively, and passively, you mustn't always be the actor. I've heard I'm a bad actor, but only the Great Mandingo, Lewmanchu, knows what that means. But Jesus went out and was. And so just should I be.

I am a Christian because I believe it is right to live for Love, but most others would more likely call me a heretic for the extent which I believe we should.

I think Love is a vector, it has a direction that each lover imparts onto it with force, and I think that's the way it can make the world go round. When the self is lost, the greater good becomes clearer because you learn to see how to find those who are either pushing our pulling you in whatever direction. And you get to choose where you want to align yourself so that your love is most pleasantly accepted and reciprocated.

I think I am in a position where I have to push myself into others fields if I want to find them, I know I have isolated myself. Only I will change that.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Taoist Christian Anarchism

The tension between individualist and communalist anarchisms is synthesized by the often paradoxical (but to me, far more elegant) mutualist anarchisms. I believe the source of that conflict is identified in the words of the most influential being in my life, a Taoist Jew who said: "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the reign of God." That particular Taoist Jew came to live for us, knowing we would kill him for it, so that He might show us The Way. He taught us how to die unto ourselves and be reborn of water and of the Spirit to best enjoy our lives.As a result of taking on the perspective He prescribed, you can live for others instead of insisting upon your right to live only for yourself. Trying to practice that perspective, you can see that the life best lived is the opposite of the often solipsistic "anarcho"-capitalist perspective. We must shift our thinking about property from "what's mine i…

A Democratic Pursuit of Anarchy

Addressing the juxtaposition of majoritarianism and horizontalism as natures of democracy, I think they are both accurate and both end up describing what's wrong with democracy as practiced. That is, systems only democratic in their vote-based system of government. Elections feel fair to us in a very simplistic way. There's nothing essentially just about making decisions about how people live by vote other than the one vote per person part of it. If we vote on how you ought to wear your hair, it doesn't change the fact that it's an intrusion (or invasion to use Benjamin Tucker's terminology). In Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Nozick creates an interesting analogy for society with a joint-stock company where we all own a share in one another that forces the reader to face what it means to vote on the decisions that shape someone else's life. Democracy, when indicating "shared power" exerted directly without State interference, is synonymous with anarchism.…

Electing the Tyrannical Man

These thoughts were inspired by a selection of quotes from Plato's Republic, in particular, his description of how democratic men become tyrannical men. "Last of all comes the tyrannical man; about whom we have once more to ask, how is he formed out of the democratical? and how does he live, in happiness or in misery?"
Our founding fathers and the history of our country has shown that we can apply Reason for the sake of Liberty. We have been flawed the entire time, but we were the first modern people to rid ourselves of the injustice of monarchy. In our Revolution, we rejected the idea of divine-right, of titles and nobility, and replaced them with the authority of property-right. Though the extent of some of those property-rights have been oppressive in their own right, the fact that we rejected the institution of slavery indicates to me that we can correct our property systems flaws. We're still capitalists, but at least our political process has evolved our leaders …