I offer these as revelations to purport the idea of soveriegnty between Westernization and Socialism.
Here is my thesis to define communist agenda:
Transcend what is theoretical or in a sense 'automatic' though not to become actualized as absolute, therefore, to breath a cognitive element of real sovereignty.
You are either communist by trade or you are not. You cannot use it as a superlative and sit on both sides of the fence. In case you are victimized (judged) of your unpopular beliefs look no further than the McCarthy era. McCarthy's watered down version of communism was meant as a threat to capitalist virtue. This is so typical of any kind of initiative against the corporate agenda that has segregated our global village as the face of Westernization.
There is no reason to speculate theoretically exactly what contorts re; Marxism. Marxism being far more complex and less relative than most care to realize. Communism is strictly theoretically based, whereas free enterprise is its nemesis. Marxism is a sophisticated aversion of capitalist theory. My point being that Marxism is seen as the foundation of all communist thought - but that is not necessarily the case. If the average thinker such as myself is able to profess how powerful a concept communism is we would see massive change in how the industrial complex is governed. That is the unconscious development of a world without communism - to theorize how capitalism has been fueled propaganda to brainwash an unsuspecting masses.
The very basis of what all sovereignty should otherwise dictate are stereotypes that model against the cultural self-serving norms in society. Therefore, rather than enable the power structure Westernization has historically had resulting in its globalization. The following excerpt from Oscar Wilde should be considered as the salvation of sovereignty as solution to our utmost unimaginative element.
“What art seeks to disturb is monotony of type, slavery of custom, tyranny of habit, and the reduction of man to the level of a machine.”— Oscar Wilde
"Transcend what is theoretical or in a sense 'automatic' though not to become actualized as absolute, therefore, to breath a cognitive element of real sovereignty. " - Marco Almeida, 2013
^Think about the communist agenda (democratic) in terms of
capitalist virtue (republican) - the ultimate answer should always lead to sovereignty in terms of deontological actualization as the very absence of capitalist free enterprise. Capitalism carries no agenda, and any sovereign type of ontological framework threatens it, which is why communism is not as sought after.
================
“That's what real love amounts to - letting a person be what he really is. Most people love you for who you pretend to be. To keep their love, you keep pretending - performing. You get to love your pretence. It's true, we're locked in an image, an act
- and the sad thing is, people get so used to their image, they grow attached to their masks. They love their chains. They forget all about who they really are. And if you try to remind them, they hate you for it, they feel like you're trying to steal their most precious possession.”
― Jim Morrison
-------------------------
Any given moment? Only if Foucault is himself involved as an authority in the logic of epistemology do I find a discrepancy. If Foucault is saying what I think he is then we are either living a lie or the plausibility of a culture is found without pure
discord. In which case I see a fallacy in language used to describe all things may exist within that culture, hitherto a flawed reality in which choices are manifested. This is to say that everything is preliminary on our radar, as if awaiting the next solar eclipse.
I am an existentialist and I wonder if Foucault himself is double dipping into the realm of existentialist thought or forgoing it as a realist. Foucault's rhetoric fails in its distinction to the core of this contradiction in terms.
“In any given culture and at any given moment, there is always only one 'episteme' that defines the conditions of possibility of all knowledge, whether expressed in theory or silently invested in a practice.”
― Michel Foucault, The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences
--------------------------
If you fail to read this you are a moron. My goal in life have been to be this honest with others as with myself. Here is a mind blowing entry for our consideration:
This is the philosophy of poverty = presented in dichotomy of an illustration between Nikola Tesla and Paris Hilton.
Are you prepared to realize how less exploited you are can somehow or other justify the meaning of your existence. That is the essence of violation. Feeling violated is an alarm that does not ring true to most people for this reason.
My point being simple: that you are programmed to feel violated on the basis of greed. If not true then replace that with another question and ask yourself what is the reality between correcting your behavior - would you agree it is a matter of prohibition. That what your only motive precedes is goal oriented. Is ambition the secret killer between your motive and what the world is telling you to become.
How does this not require consciousness. If you lie to yourself - you fail to even ask the same question and mistake it as a correcting measure. An insult to your intelligence. If you can establish the truth on such grounds, then you are in fact a genius.
If I program will and understanding onto my double how am I expecting to be treated.
--------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment