109: NEFX - Adjudard

NEFX - Ensuffeuphys.txt ? Beware. ? Yet when a territorialist factions' official system is written about officially, this obsequiousness is officially required, and may actually come after the objective of explaining it (assuming it doesn’t also condition or influence it). ? Even the officially admitted or presented flaws of the system are attributed to the beings at large that partake in it or presented to salve objections under the guise of "objective fairness”. ? Simple and unsubstantiated romanticization of such figures only further ingrains this, even if the reverence inherent to them contains a good act vectored in the wrong direction. ? Even the positing of the structure as belonging to the beings it officially contains — symbolically and sentimentally presented largely in terms of culturally recognized figures like beings or places and scenes -- begs the question of not only who the "us" is, but also what the limits are of this belonging relative to that of other things officially recognized as belonging to the same beings, and why even there must be such a structure to “belong” to beings when there could not be one at all, let alone one that is imposed via multi-generational inheritance and custom. ? After all, even nominally representative systems are tacitly brutally exclusionary about the "us" that they discuss, again along generally distorted biological-geographcial lines. ? The enterprise of being-as-such will be the more illuminated (even if by mere contrast with its opposition) upon the more clear, detailed, and regular and constant view of its general present structural-relation and the opposition towards it by such structure and the Blightgeist in general, and can allow for the transcendence of despair through the intrigue and recreation of such participation in many avenues. ? The imbibement of a general guide to the system, notwithstanding (and so long as there is awareness of) its limitations and obfuscations, can be a turning point in the individual’s quest for optimal participation in the world-as-known for beings. ? The ease of doing so through even (if not especially) such an accessibly granted system of information and seeming empowerment only further belies its risks — yet it may be that the only way out is through, and that the net positive of pursuing the practice of world-participant can, with good and mindful intentions and forethought, make worthwhile the thorny quest. ? And would the newly presented range of seemingly empowering civic-functions being-by-being, such as the influencing, contacting, or seeking of official structural positions and their solutions stand to serve beings at large and being-as-such beyond the vale of both provisional necessity and the strengthening of the system that participation thereof almost inherently grants? ? Or would the fashion in which they are presented debar further critical investigation that would allow for their transcendence, barring ready-at-hand alternatives as even the sharpest present minds could barely and seldom conceive of? ? electoral), the location of pivotal structural deciding events and the significance of both said events and their location, or the system's officially recognized range of services, be sufficiently understood through this? ? e. ? Could things like, say, the various toll houses of official structural procedure (i. ? So here also we catch a glimpse into not only the system in its total nakedness, but in its general logic via its conception of itself, and must ask the question -- which lens would we look through to know it? ? Thereby, civic participation that does not fall within the approved bounds is at best the "apathy" recognized as no participation at all. ? In short, participation as such within the officially approved bounds is the means of securing freedom, regardless of the means or ends involved. ? The duty, it is said, is ever-present, and to “all” aspects of civic life as will be delineated (if indeed they are spoken of or officially meant to be mentioned at all). ? Here again responsibility as would be found and grappled with through the various “privileges” granted to beings within the territorialist domain is presented as a kind of top-down injunction, as that which is both freeing and demanding of fealty out of both gratitude and service to that "proper" freedom without which nothing better would ever be experienced, no matter the officially carried out or recognized cost (particularly and eerily conveniently against beings-at-large and being as such). ? The cheerleaders of the present territorialist faction’s official structural system, after all, would have it that the learning of its ins and outs further condition us to fealty towards it that it may be strengthened in its operations, rather than transcended; for the systems have self-obligations to “conceive" of themselves as operating at the end of history. ? The challenge becomes recognizing the nature of such gestures and even that there may be yet a portal beyond the current one among the most widely and officially granted, and to use such present portal into the other without letting the subsequent journey be tainted by ignorance found in the first. ? Still, even the apologists for such systems or systems in general as we find among territorialist factions may grant us portals into the underlying, generally unquestioned logic of said systems, and are technically right to urge us to harken and remember. ? Indeed it be a privilege for each being to be able to partake in the circumstances very unique to their own time, but not necessarily for a magically optimal set of structural circumstances supposedly generously bequeathed by likewise supposedly ideal beings, let alone through means of brutality often pre-emptively justified by being hollowedly connected to optimal conditions in general (generally to cope with the inner void of engaging in such brutality). ? The very duty of civi cawareness itself is couched territorially, and delivered with the most self-indulgently dripping soliloquys to the formative icons of yore, rather than fealty to beings at large or being-as-such as dwells in the world as known in the present. ? Furthermore, the generally inherited and enforced (or at least fearmongeringly urged) means by which this information is delivered to beings within the territorialist faction from their birth conditions them also to conceive of the degree of their awareness and rightness purely according to the rote memorization of technically correct points and the resulting officially recognized statistics that not only translate to the according official system of rewards and punishments but also gain face by the contrast with that of other beings, separate from the possibly intrinsic value of such information or information in general. ? As it stands, the aforementioned technically correct necessity of civil awareness is nonetheless put forth by that same system as a top-down injunction, a toxic shaming, a solemn duty independent from the actual possibilities; for such system must by nature of self-preservation foreclose such possibilities, and in the first place present the height of civil-structural possibility as being itself, and conditioning and brutalizing those born within the imposed territorial (usually distorted biological-geographical) domain to adhere to it. ? For the nature of the Blightgeist is such that it seeks to both condition and punish the general ignorance of its whole structure and nature by its very ingrained contempt for being-as-such and, by extension, beings at large. ? It can become a point of consciousness to recognize and thereby (at least to a degree) transcend the ways in which the already laid-out system can subtly structure one’s entire known reality, ironically when its effect (if not ultimate design) is to continue to do so undetected. ? the importance of “knowing” the system in which one dwells — various means exist by which to ably, willingly, and, perhaps what's more, naturally absorb, reflect, and act upon the reality of such system and by renewed enjoyment evolve as a being. ? e. ? Overall, the subject is generally viewed as one of dread, yet nonetheless enforced despite (if not precisely for) that reason under the technically true but distorted pretext of at-least provisional necessity, i. ? Specifically, it is delivered in generally coercive fashion concerned with the efficient behavioral conditioning of the pupil and (perhaps moreso) the material benefit of the sub-system that delivers, officially stands by, and even enforces it, which generates a general pool of beings conditioned to it either in terms of slavish devotion that accepts the terms of the information's delivery on one hand, and on the other hand resenters who are thereby the more disengaged from the full richness of the subject. ? The tragicomedy of the importance and nature of understanding such aforementioned systems as they (however obscurely) structure the existences and experiences of beings at large is that this is inevitably, by that system’s very logic, inherited by most beings — in the range and manner of information presented, its presentation, and the context in which it is presented. ? Here too the student of such systems (which is not necessarily {let alone hopefully} to say a disciple so much as an outside observer for the ultimate betterment of the enterprise of being-as-such and, by extension, beings at large) must be clued into the general scheduling system by which this societal structure operates, and the degree to which the many abided rules are or were meant to be applicable in their present context relative to their origin that they may be so dogmatically followed by; and the student’s own individual stake in these scheduled happenings and decisions. ? Certain names or functions of the officially recognized system (that is to say, the officially posited umbrella logic of the territorialist faction) as may occur across contexts and especially official ranks (especially near the top of such structural power pyramids) can also elide the ways in which they are at least ultimately or officially meant to serve a function that is recognized more broadly in the lower levels of its operation (such as, say, cudgeling classes). ? This can on the one hand include the overriding of the power of the culturally recognized figures and yet further reveal the incongruities and phantasms of that system if not such systems themselves generally (or even governmental systems in concept). ? The aforementioned memorization system can serve as a hub to newer, more focused and clear-minded inquiries about the nature of such system and its many parts and members as in a rigid structural or hierarchical arrangement that is not always (and perhaps generally isn't, at least officially) linear, such as who of what position may rank highest in what branch, how, and why (both according to the system's own at-least nominal logic and by universal logic itself). ? Culture regarding of icons in particular bears keeping in mind when considering the actual functional range of each part or member of a system as may be eclipsed in the general public consciousness by such icon (which can be a place or object as well as a being), which may itself be part of the system's design either in root or in current practice, such as would critically decide major tides in structural-societal arrangement with a single action or officially recognized cast decision. ? The historical exceptions under such systems to general "knowns" or “givens" also (at least should) call to attention the general limitations of the given structure (at least in granting general trending or expected results), the changes to the system across generations (often at least seemingly or officially according to the very logic the system set out), and the limits to the range of possible changes to the system (at least by the system’s nominal logic or overall official recognition, which itself is questionable). ? What’s more, the keys to the more esoteric or simply obscured methodologies for the development of societal systems (especially in remote time or place) are more honed in on and emphasized, such as the numerological method for the allotment or limitation of personnel for a particular station. ? Here too the specific and often colloquial meanings of basic functions or terms for the structure bear investigation, and at the very least the aforementioned simple system can aid in even just the recognition of that fact and their importance (especially if we trust the provided memorization system's "judgment" regarding what is most important). ? That is, certain of these functions become so associated with other parts of the societal structure by mere association, optics, predominating trend of official presentation of the time, etc, that the actual underlying logic, ramifications, and problem-solutions lay in plain sight to be recognized as a means to total net progress of beings. ? The contemporary hollow handed-down “givens” of structural societal reality can often shroud the actual nuances of what aspect of such structures serves what function, and both warrant the creation of simple, concise systems of remembrance and yet contribute thereby to the further obscuring of those structures' natures — such as regarding which aspects fo a territorialist faction determine the at least officially recognized conflicts in the world as known.