terminal 0
unfinished
NEFX - Societal Blindsides of Being and Logic for Cudgelers In the general blindsides of societal justice, abuses by cudgeling classes are overlooked for the ways in which those within the blindsides are not only pre-conditioned, but also pre-expected to act in ways superficially threatening to the enterprises of the Blightgeist, particularly as regards enterprise ITSELF; and this is used to preemptively justify the overreach and arbitrary power trips of such cudgeling classes, revealing both the exterminating schemes against those of the blindsides and more broadly regarding supposed criminality in general. Though the inevitable keystone catastrophes of such folly can, by a confluence of atrocities leading up to them, become pivotal in the fight for being-as-such and justice of the wrongly exterminated or punished, still the bogey of societal “disruption” and “dysfunction” on part of the wrongly exterminated is ever-invoked, and the ensuing revolt of beings at large AS being only further reflects this. This further reveals the schism, the disconnect between those for whom a Terriorialist arm of the Blightgeist is preemptively meant and those for whom it is not; and Blightgeistian logic sets (even if by historical momentum, habit, and aftershock well after certain structural atrocities are ceased) the conditions for both the privation and structurally necessitated “disruptive” behavior of those not-meant-for and points to said behavior as proof of the failure to meet (if not actual failure OF THE VERY NOTION OF) comprehensively fair opportunity, and thus as either deserving (though it believes so preemptively for this not-meant-for set of beings, given that it is against being-as-such) or just factually “beckoning” of death or severe punishment that the Blightgeist, particularly its cudgeling class, brings — even where its dictates of law do not prescribe such punishment for the crimes committed. This is reduced vaguely and abstractly to notions of a “lifestyle” or “dangerousness”, eliding the ways in which subsets of beings are so presumed and thus vulnerable to the vagaries and inevitable errors of the cudgeling class (especially concerning the more severe situations for which the latter are called, in which subjects involved are more conditionally classified in terms of formally recognized threat level and thus requiring snap judgments to be made on, the cudgelers being the more blinded by a combination of fear, overly formal conditioning, and whatever inner vices may have compelled them to both become and develop over time as cudgelers). However, a societal thoughtform by which such blindsides are permitted does in the first place also harm its own (theoretically) accounted-for beings, as in a spectrum of degrees of shade or darkness in the society's view rather than in a set of closed off, absolute binary dimensions; and the darkness of (seemingly willful) unenlightenment is itself a component of bondage that remains the more the blindside is permitted if not acted for — even though this itself is the less immediately important or valuable bondage at stake. For even keystone incidents seemingly incidental to the collective consciousness of structural issues they invoke call attention to a longstanding brewing grievance at the historical Blightgeistian enterprise against being-as-such for which any general loss is immediately evocative — and this should give pause to beings, especially where it concerns subsets of beings who have, at the very least, been openly questioned for their value as beings-as-such for the mere relative limits of their participation and rewards within a territorialist domain (which nature as territorialism is inevitably and rightly also called into question in tandem). Such global concerns also call into question the validity of a cudgeling class which by continued cultural and structural development is more able to act collectively as both impromptu executioner and judge for itself, with tokens of supposed impartiality being granted in a way often only for concessions for those (often haplessly) involved in keystone incidents that the Blightgeistian territory in question more structurally accounts for. The mere acknowledgment of such issues and keystone events (if only vaguely as regards the tragedy or loss within them) by chief icons of The Blightgeist only further entrenches this dilemma, both in the social pressure and allure of the icon smiling down on and acknowledging their subjects, and in the displayed willingness to adjust the methods and degrees of the inherently suspect cudgeling class — which mere adjustment at all is often considered enough by said subjects out of desperation. Here token acknowledgment is given to territorialist knowns by which masses of beings can generally find their identity. A future process is also hinted at, which gains mass legitimacy by its familiarity and officiality. Yet such process is likely to, even given the sincerest of starting intention, be diluted by the committee, inter conflicting elements, and overall domineering and disingenuous (though convincingly propagated as being of the essence of freedom) nature of the system. Take a deeper look and stand beyond.