1) Ice hockey offseason 2025 and 2024 democratic capitalist society essays, made for laymen 2) Situations that think they're special
1) Treatises on not strictly *me* the Identitarian--it's on ALL OF US, the DCSers!
Closing In: Can Globalization Holdout Against its Own Global Peoples?
Considering what was goin' on from October 2024 to August 2025...
World order flashpoint, 2024: We didn't vote primarily to make the world better. We voted because it was seemingly the most fair thing we could do right then and there. Fitting, as a claim for injustice against “election integrity” was put forth by one side four years earlier. What if fairness is lacking? See the invisible hand of capitalism as also the driving force of the liberal electoral system: give the voter the room to make his or her political pick, and the upshot would seemingly trickle down to the commonweal. Yet if that society has an external problem--like the COVID-19 pandemic and its effects that ended two separate presidential terms in a row--the premise returns to the private moment a person has at the ballot.
But collective groups manage to factor in all of this, particularly the male demographic that was decisive for Donald Trump in 2024. They voted, for they had something hanging in the balance: their place in an increasingly professionalized workforce, with women now more ready to thrive in it than before. As with this particular figure from educationalpolicy.org, females went from 42% of college graduates to in 1970 to 57% today. Arousing voters on this very gender issue—turning to African American men, Latino men, and Generation Z men—was decisive in the Republicans offering their answer to the charges that the GOP can’t adapt to an increasingly diverse society. People draw battle lines in free society, but not each person is free from the potentially unintended consequences of such drawing—including Kamala Harris voters, somehow, someway.
Harris, representing the party already in office, was not alone in all this. Trump retook the White House as a part of a 2024 global backlash against incumbents that brought fed up people, from first time voters to Generation X members, into the fold. Wasn’t the 21st century—offering less war after 1989, extended life expectancy and yet still more technology—supposed to win people over, not turn them off? Maybe these listed feats came about in an unnatural way. What seems quintessentially natural—and prevailing as a societal force for today—is that which spared science from dogma: the Enlightenment. Despite humanity living in one physical world though, the Enlightenment’s ever-more setting of intellectual things apart results in people imagining themselves in splintered worlds. Assuming the role of a parent is one envisioned world that comes easily. This deep into the new millennium, however, such societal detaching has taken a life of its own. Juggling all these parts to play—being a citizen, an employee, a student, a voter belonging to a political party— it can make the role one is caught in like a struggle to gain agency over.
* * *
The subjects get frustrated in finding a niche, leaving with globalization with a bad rap these days. No wonder, because such a system is toothless to exactly strike back; there are no formal, planetary-inspired jurisdictions that could vote a leader out of office. But individual countries, size wise, are invisible districts—like an MP representing a constituency larger than another one. Specifically, these are states large enough to stack up successful elements like innovating green energy but have the iron hand to crush societal tension like dissent: China and Russia. Is the United States under Donald Trump, to bring up imperial power-ambitions like that over Greenland & Canada, warming up to this model? Unlike Beijing and Moscow’s steady, seasoned heritage of “managed democracy”, it has gone more back and forth in Washington.
The September 11 attacks stemmed from American under-imagination in implementing national security policy. In contrast, the Iraq War displayed over-imagination over weapons of mass destruction. The unintended consequence of George W. Bush’s invasion was his political demise, paving for the rise of Barack Obama. But the see-sawing wasn’t done yet—Donald Trump owed his ascent to activism regarding Obama’s birth certificate. And by now in the summer of 2025, could Trump himself be next to chafe from scandal stemming from the Jeffery Epstein investigation? Or could Obama again be sidelined by national conservatives, this time with Tulsi Gabbard leading the way? Whoever is next to prevail, count that it be the one that has bonafide popularity for just a hot moment. However, that all may come at a cost. By casting a lone vote in the game that is a presidential election, one must assume that he or she knows what’s good for millions—hundreds of millions--of fellow citizens and even more throughout the globe affected by the American superpower. But why be preoccupied on how that collective process plays itself out, when that American can be fascinated by their own milieu, developing an outcome-independent philosophy of life? This means a fixation on the journey rather than the destination--better fuel for a finite life than going back and forth over zero-sum political trophies.
* * *
Nevertheless, there is the duel between the nationalist right and immigrants in the West: is this town ain’t big enough for the both of them? Yet, if those like the AfD and National Rally were to win landslide elections on a local, federal or European level, that may not suffice for them. To fully curb immigration, they’d also have to affect the proliferation of the airplane that enables migrant travel. The media, as well, would need to halt being a promising pull factor to awaken foreigners to come to “a promised land”. Awakening them, which would thus release pent-up feelings accumulated in their home countries. This really centers today’s immigration issue to be on the past: the threatened heritage built over time by MAGA patriots in their homelands versus migrants fleeing their troubled backgrounds. In regards to the planetary economic machine behind all this, wasn’t free trade supposed to be mutually beneficial for both the global north & south? The promise of better, cheaper products was good for the individual in the developed country.
But good for that individual’s place in the world? Walter Shapiro in his essay on the post-Cold War world noted that “steelworkers didn’t want to become x-ray technicians, even if they could.” Perhaps there is not enough of an ideal offered by material democratic capitalist society, to motivate a professional over the hump. But for the here and now, aim to let no “past” of a particular individual involved here to intrude on that of another. Set sights on interactions that are marked by the participants’ clean slates: that is, social experiences unaffected by the memory of one’s own respective “bad apple” moments. This way, individual mingling by right wing populists and multiculturalists will involve as little baggage as possible, in turn mitigating the distaste that can individually spread and undermine the broader commonweal.
* * *
Yet the commonweal presses on with discord. To find effective ways to hinder an president of the United States, the strategy is clear: undermine him on the economy. It resonates, for to be accorded the trappings of the American Dream, one must participate in its market mechanisms. Shows when voters spoke their minds, America’s superpower status and how to use it came behind kitchen table issues like the soaring price of car insurance and taxpayer use for gender-affirming services for detained migrants. Indeed, each presidential election following the Cold War has been--except for the 2004 race overshadowed by 9/11 and the Iraq War--standard of living-first. Thus, naturally, the objective for Republicans to go after Joe Biden during the 2022 price spike. And now in turn, the Democratic opposition is quick to sound the alarm of what they think are repercussions over Donald Trump’s tariffs. Yet the trade consequences go off in unseen directions, demonstrated by the improbable center-left victories in Canada and Australia.
Could the economic direction be harnessed so that it’s win-win for both protectionists and free traders? Start by finding a way around technology: Democratic capitalism allows its nationals to be free. Subsequently, have citizen Y be free to develop his or her own quirks. Now let another subject of modern liberalism, Z, attempt to size her or her up. “OK, here I go”, says Z, and then whoops—Z gets a notification on his smartphone that his Amazon Prime box is going to be late. Figuring out exactly how idiosyncratic Y can be mobilized to serve the greater good thus takes a hit. Yet nothing may get in the way for artificial intelligence to process its results. With this hand impersonal technology already has in a cold, featureless market society, strive to attach more meaning to business transactions. As AI can provide intricate details of a certain subject but may lack insight into how that topic is placed in the grand scheme of things. Upon the rejections inevitable in such economic exchanges, don’t allow the loser here to succumb to the un-meaning forces of technology as a quick fix.
* * *
Even if that outcome is avoided, gadgets will be still laying around. In the 21st century, we’ve ushered in technological marvels like quantum computing and 5G connectivity. But merely convincing the other side of the political aisle seems to be more and more too formidable for us to pull off. It seems that the new century has found us to be divided—or are we really? Consider what Yuval Noah Harari once touched on that while Israeli and Iranian societies are ideologically at odds with one another, certain vocations in both places can offer common ground. Physicians, for instance, in Tehran and Tel Aviv would concur that using anesthesia prior to surgery as a shared principle in their respective fields. This is a far cry to the premodern, primitive remedies such as variolation and the local shaman to somehow pray the illness out of the patient. Interesting to note that while contemporary behavior of people everywhere is increasingly becoming similar, the reasons that justify such acts vary widely. Vary to account for a stance on abortion or decide from a multitude of consumer options on what to do for dinner.
A specialist-based society spawns this situation of diversity and choice; as a contrast, generalists like subsistence farmers would offer a more monotonous, precarious hand-to-mouth toiling. Yet pre-industrial communities have been intact for millennia; republics like the United States and France only postdate to after the late 18th century. How could these modern entities measure up in a World War III if Western nations are embroiled by Iranians and Israelis who further use their talents for war rather than peace? Look at the training source of the services sector of the economy: contemporary education and its division of labor-like nature such as a college major. Strive instead to aim post-secondary and onward intellectualism to be ultimately less for training geared for a narrow purpose like a 9-to-5. Instead, establish the criteria for learning to be more like this: can this subject I’m immersed in contribute to making my world safe for how I relate to others? Furthermore, aim to understand & connect to those who oppose your politics: this “know your enemy”—know your universe--mentality can peacefully drive the thirst for information, resulting in a live-and-let-live global outcome.
* * *
And the planet is counting on the leaders of the Anthropocene not to screw it up. Such humans, possessing the behavioral modernity lacking in animals, believe in ideas and act upon them. But the winds of the modern world blows in ways that greatly shape such decisions—shaping beyond any one person's control. To adapt to this, whole fields like marketing are geared to make customers to somehow decide in an enterprise’s favor. And then there were the consultants to influence the voters of Decision 2024. To make the best possible choices is to be responsible—and not make rookie mistakes while you’re at it. Yet to develop—whether that’s of emerging economies or up and coming kids—may leave something behind.
This “rookie mistake” scolding can actually walk away from a lofty “children” of God spirit: all of us acting as dependents bound together, erecting a Kingdom of Heaven on Earth. Either way, people are already tied and sustained by an entity; they do not all exist in a vacuum. Animals display this in how they live off their habitats; humans, in effect, live off their incomes. Our own universal “habitat”, in trying to derive from it ways to make a living, can demanding. Demanding, for instance, is demonstrated when seeking employment: two hundred job applicants can go after one opening. The rejected—99% of them—are left unhappy. Yet at the end of the day, the company, job board, and the resume filtering software successfully have filled their roles.
With that being said, as long as one consumer gets their fix, then the status quo system for how people support themselves will persist. So too will persist, is the adding of focus towards what the mission of life is. Is such a mission ultimately doomed by one’s own mortality? Aim to be independent of what the world around can do to you by this: reframing one’s own reality. Thus, seek an internal solution to turn the tide from a strained worldview by giving meaning to as many elements surrounding you as possible. Moreover in this story of life, cast adversity in a leading role; owe larger-than-life gratefulness to the existence of looming hardships you bounce back from. This presents the notion of acting out a rather shallow, parochial part in this narrative: at least that’s one prevalent role to bring to its decline, one “flipping of a political office” worth pulling off within a globalized society.
2024
Human Nature, as it Could be
Potentially Utilized, is on the Ballot
Commentary that rolls on through around 2K24, landing at the Trump-Harris debate
People, when it comes to election day, are making choices that involve other people—not choices that involve AI calling the shots. Irrespective of the need fulfillment a particular voter pursues via their selected candidate, political participation is still about relating to others. This behavior, coordinated by the marketing and media outreach of well-coordinated, slick campaigns, is as much a social function as tying the knot, attending a house party, or volunteering for a nonprofit. These are activities are all so, regardless if anyone is keeping score. Elections, like many bonding opportunities, are free for people to toss their hat into the ring. However, matters of raw geography can cut aspirants down to size. One example in 2024 was Nikki Haley, who secured a tenure as a governor and polled as actually being the more “electable” Republican candidate. When it came to the affairs of an entire nation, though, household names mattered more than her in the primaries. Similarly that winter, Texans had to bow down to the broad, federal law of the land—as interpreted by the Supreme Court--on the use of barbed wire on the Mexican border.
And this geographic principle extends to other side of the aisle, as leftists are loyal to a location. There’s no way around this, as to focus on working within a specific jurisdiction on Earth is the way to the cherished programs of Medicare & Social Security; peace of mind in retirement does not just drop out of the sky. From a different perspective, Vladimir Putin promoted the Russian motherland—the place—to further mobilize his citizens to the frontlines in Ukraine. To brainstorm politically, could there be a Suez Canal-type shortcut around these particular, interloping turfs, to a home all people can claim? Try claiming an emotion, which by itself, is a human universal. So if the very notion of feeling is common to people everywhere, then it’s an exactness—a science, a one world order to be shared. Yet it’s more art for mankind to get there, as you may take a horse to water, but can’t make it drink.
* * *
Getting people to personally reform may not always be there. Yet in half of the planet in 2024, democracy is on the public ballot. When it is time for either leaders or voters respectively to rise up to the occasion and exercise their civic role, the private side of a person matters. That said, in dealing with politicians at the critical hour, will he or she deep down inside, put party over country? How each figure perceives public opinion—the “opinion” as emblematically existing in their psyche. Such a mind may hold steady and not differ if it weren’t subject to so many pressuring influences. Yet the goods and services that define life in market democracies are oriented towards meeting quality—and thus indeed meeting a citizenry’s varying preferences. Variance is especially featured in this context, as a good’s high standard is what makes a customer pick from an iPhone or a Google Pixel phone. Or have voters select between the diverging makeup of a post-Brexit European Parliament. The process of producing quality has growing pains—during postsecondary education and a career full of experience—that leave a negative mark on how “public opinion” gets developed. In order to shape a crisis-beset politician’s symbolic thinking, could the general public--with accompanying norms and roles--be completely reshaped in its own right? This outcome may have limited prospects. Instead, let these leaders find themselves moved by everyday, ordinary moments that lack public opinion. Moments that one “looks closer” at, like prayer need not be subject to party nominations or debt financing for it to be relied upon.
Voters, though, still can give a harsh assessment on the state of their society. Joe Biden’s economy can show progress in the statistical numbers—just, as it is often the case, not progress in the opinion polls. Why would him, plus other incumbents like Emmanual Macron & Justin Trudeau, not thanked by their publics following the post-pandemic economic recovery? For these moderates, their Enlightenment-derived liberalism may be backfiring on them. As a case study, take Thing Y and place it before liberalism. What if you were make Y fodder for an even greater good, such an employee giving a bribe to further advance his or her position? Such a practice of the ends justifying the means cannot always be permitted in a liberal democracy. Thus in democratic capitalist society, Y’s value is on its bottom line; the direct benefit, without strings attached, when a producer serves a customer. Yet this “bottom line” attitude on conducting business has been so standardized, so reduced to symbolic communication, that such assent come telegraphically, like the “Approved” stamp. This subtle sense of ordinary citizens exercising their right to “free speech” extends to them voicing their political sentiment, for Biden as a mere brand in the minds of Republicans can so rub them the wrong way.
* * *
The president of the United States isn’t the only source of public arousal. Further controversy has emerged in the Israel-Hamas conflict, with global public opinion claiming their own horse in the race. Not even Bill Clinton presiding over a photo-op handshake between Yitzhak Rabin and Yassir Arafat could bring a lasting peace after generations of enmity built up by Middle Eastern Jews and Muslims. Yet, as a quick fix, both sides express their grievances through the press. Media coverage can help reach kindred spirits within a broad, global audience. However, to take one follower of the current events at a time, this practice lacks an equalizing effect: news access varies by income level. To bring up a hypothesized case within the Arab world, a Bedouin pastoralist may be less media savvy than an NGO worker in Dubai. Extending this global disunity to a grassroots level, divisions over Gaza persist—and this global spirit of discord has also found its way into the halls of Congress, where picking the Speaker of the House has become a battle royale. But what will it take to admit defeat? The Japanese and Germans in 1945, lacking echo chambers back then, were effectively brought to heel. This was the case, for they suffered a total defeat in a total war. Yet in a world so interlinked today, a total defeat sparked by the equivalent of Hiroshima or Dresden carries so many consequences—consider the mere accessibility of semiconductors tied to the status of Taiwan. Could even a further amount of slight instability be too much for the already gridlocked globe to stomach?
Of the bitter pills to societally swallow in the 2020s, inflation stands tall. It eats away at people's incomes--and raises may not be enough to make up for it. How is that when, according to the Economic Policy Institute, salaries for CEOs are up 1400% since the late 1970s rise of neoliberalism? Take the logic of the “imperial presidency”, with a potent leader before geopolitical challenges. Similarly, firms use that reasoning to compensate, in a likewise risky market, a strong executive. Pitted with this wage discrepancy, employees may not enjoy selling their labor power. Yet they’ll do so to remain middle class. Reversing, in order to correct the situation, how all people act on their needs is limited; such a topping of the GDP apple cart could risk more of a downturn. But people can reverse how they see themselves. As democratic capitalism is not really rested on being wealthy and free, but the potential of attaining that rank—the right to go after a sense of prosperous security. For the “potential”, whatever it may be though, is just a mental construct as self-regard—and stress and anxiety, as well. So, in the quest of an abstract dream, the door could be open by the latter two subtle factors to infiltrate one’s mental makeup, making the final product more uncertain. As a result, certain minds are less equipped for certain issues: entitlement programs in Western countries running out of funding, the target 2027 date for the invasion of Taiwan, and the anticipation of global temperatures to rise 1.5 degrees by 2050. What is certain, and what is not? The less modern unclarity that there is in particular mindsets, the more settled these psyches get. Correspondingly, with them spared of indistinct frustration, commercial interests can then exploit & gouge less. This may lead to concrete action for concrete problem solving--and an economy easier for all to bear, price wise.
* * *
The Trump-Biden rematch was not the epic equivalent to the Ali-Frazier series. As the winner of this Washington bout was poised to be the one who scares voters the least. It turned out that the fright got to the campaign within: Biden’s frailty and subsequent polling decline prompted social liberals to dissuade the 46th president to step down as nominee. To stem the panic, Democrats rallied around Kamala Harris to helm their party’s ship. But in the midst of all this, wouldn’t a society’s dynamism stem more from love, rather than fear? Such resilience of democracy during the 20th century world wars arose from the patriotic love of one’s country. Now the bad one in this political race is the one will make America crumble like Rome. Despite more at seemingly at stake this year, it’s still cut out for a candidate: act in an atomized society. One with people so on their own, that in having the free autonomy to formulate their political views, many have already decided whom to vote for. With so much preset in the electorate, isn’t it futile for democracies to carry on their billion dollar campaigns? Perhaps political races—and their politicians—might be less needed in a society made less complex. In that sense, more citizens’ disputes would lack authorities to intervene in—as it pertains to the latter, cutthroat black & white thinking that arises over the ballot can drop. Could we all share the same fate? If we are connecting the world economically, why not let go of strict decision making and do so emotionally?
Emotions, though, still get out of control, as it showed at an attack launched at a Donald Trump rally on July 13th. Seemingly, the attempt on Trump’s life showed that the cycle of partisan rancor had gone too far. As much as the Democratic opposition had a dire view of Trump in power, the scenario of the fallout from that event’s bullet slightly changing direction was to them an even worse course for the milieu to take. Yet the tight campaign ensured that the political “temperature” would remain high. Even more so, the whole systemic individualism in democratic capitalist society does not exactly intend for all of us to be in it together. To allow Trump, in this apparatus, to relinquish his fist-pumping “fighter” persona would mean also relinquishing the entire mass media so a leader—any leader—won’t be magnified. Political parties everywhere take on the spirit of systemic individualism, as to zero in on the voters’ desires is to play to this premise: telling people what they want to hear. It’s a drive made into routine by technology, as a Fitbit can read exactly what a person seeks in heart rate and peace of mind. But to fixate directly into that which an individual “wants to hear” is bound to exclude what’s not “heard”. Thus to take from economics, a “free lunch” is lost. To reach out amongst the many diverse peoples of the world, will this orientation towards the precluding particular make it harder to respectively win “hearts and minds”?
* * *
Winning citizens over is not how it used to be. For the American duopolistic sides were once neatly classified into being center left and center right. Hence by now for the 2024 election, modernity increasingly is where the line gets drawn: social liberals wanting to ride its train, and populistic conservatives that are balking at it. The progress that the former espouses can get boundless. But it’s different to “modernize” the memory & traditions that a Donald Trump voter holds dear. As well, a matter of honor is in play: a national conservative bloc likens the Biden-Harris theoretical program of woke globalism—and track record of inflation—as a throwback to Jimmy Carter, the leader the last time they felt America needed this must “saving.” Tap into the notion of human sentiment as an entity that never sleeps, going across borders—and throughout periods of time.
The sense of shame that the emotionally charged populist right in the West feels about establishment figures like Olaf Scholz can fill their minds like totalitarianism did in gripping in the similarly aroused citizens of 1930s Germany and Russia. Charting the future of that last autocratic ideology in Marxism-Leninism was an unsure endeavor, as Time magazine’s Person of the Year issue for 1981 had it that the people could brace for the Cold War to “escalate dangerously in the decades ahead.” One less hazy forecast to muse: another bloody transfer of power in the United States come January. That act may constitute an existential threat to democracy for some; such perpetrators of an act, though, may be teaching the opposition that “they won’t get away with stealing the election this time around.” Maybe there’d be lasting agreement on both sides, if such a people held lasting focus, lasting interests. Yet in a complex, attention span-starved society, where is one with a sole, un-distracted priority to pull off such an enduring task?
* * *
Both Harris’ Democrats and Trump’s Republicans believe that the United States is “the greatest nation on Earth”; the former specifically proclaimed this in her convention acceptance speech in Chicago. As well, it may be inferred that each candidate, deep down inside, does not enjoy being wrong. But to solve that problem, how to pinpoint what exactly is “wrong”, how has a belief gone bad? Problem is, that this idea may be buried in one’s mentality--and it can too hard for outsiders to ascertain the inner truth through surface-level observation. What Harris does outwardly show to others is the pushing forward of the agenda of an infirm Biden, but through her own revived persona of an energetic, determined prosecutor. Republicans who would control respective chambers of Congress may not find that character very entertaining. As arbiters of these antagonistic camps, elections can still hold fast. As Trump eventually gave up his office following the Capitol riot—hours after vowing that he “would never concede.” The naturally fragmented electorate, after all for Democrats, can be a check on the MAGA national conservatives representing a wide majority of the people.
But electorally confining a side like the AfD, Fidesz, or National Rally can also, when their leaders are further caught in a struggle, make them miscalculate. As the issues outpower the individuals, no matter what side of the aisle they are on; the issues assign human beings to play the parts in history’s story, not the other way around. And more than ever, these masses of individuals are intricately involved--and harder to reach--in the wage earner world. Instead of a clearcut, specific war against what Hitler, Tojo, or Mussolini set forth, today it’s an offbeat deal regarding abortion clinics, swarming migrants and how to save at the grocery store. To serve the array of people vaguely involved with the latter few situations, who can detect what’s all on their particular minds? And by playing this type of game, how long can people keep living in their heads? Perhaps what could conquer these topics en masse is people joining together en masse. Aiming for such a one-worldism may be aiming for mere symbolism, rather than focusing for what’s for substance. Yet for this “story”, life is done in one take; with one’s instance of behavior that suddenly becomes a mistake, there’s no immediate way to edit out the bad memories he or she may acquire. Instead, truly actualized global cooperation in the spirit of Henry George has a goal to Spaceship Earth-style stage the events we’re all actors in, for fun’s sake—and our security, too. In an election with miscalculating losers, looking up to this narrative can be rather a win-win.
*
And one to grow on:
--"Our days might not be any longer, but they can sure be better."
--"The match ... fans, we gotta go to a break. I have no idea of what to say. Stay with us."
2) When Identitarian living gets ad hoc-ish
I
+ Talk about something to rule itself? Like the Constitution rules the United States?
Identity gets to the core of it. As it gets invoked for both an individual person or a entire nation.
Since I use--confusingly so, to others--countries as a metaphor, this identity thing...
...sounds appealing to name my "Identitarianism" after.
But see what identity is NOT. Like don't deeply heed ^the unknown^ into forming your sense of self!
Building your life around the Kosovo model helps. Here, when ^the known^ is found, it gets subordinated to the aim of...
..of further action.
As to mobilize against the ominous air raids, a thing just can't be an end in itself.
Plus connect one known to another--alike with the Latin idem "the same", as the root of identity.
And get uplifted to face the fear of guerrillas--experience is knowledge!
+ The laws of chemistry make for an ^inevitable^ synthesis.
Why not expect similarly, for the rest of life, when thing A ^inescapably^ encounters thing B?
Bring up, from the last thread, of conventional war--and that the technological power tends to prevail.
What can you as...
...the Serbian role player, REALLY react to NATO infantry liberating Kosovo by force?
Do nothing about it and like it.
Well, here's the "liking" part: go down swinging. When inevitability (will) back you into a corner, psychologically take yourself to the history of urban..
...warfare--its fortifications!
See the 1990s Chechens: ^contact is finally made with a stressor^?
Immediate cue for idEnt tips to pop into your head. Like ^a booby-trapped door going off^ in a Grozny building.
"Everything that was meant to happen does, eventually." -- Angela
+ "The world is simply too varied... for even the most knowing leaders to control everything effectively." -- Time mag, 1986
But telling #AsCon combatants that time’s up for "controlling" is hard.
Ask that to Lyndon Johnson over Vietnam. Conventional wars, though, have clear...
...clear victors. And DRAW from them: some crises in life come *straight at you.*
No deceptive surprises, like with guerrillas.
Like my certainty of an agitated flight. Or a nervous first day at a new job.
So play out a ground invasion thru this:
Invading Kosovo: A Battle Plan
https://www.newsweek.com/invading-kosovo-battle-plan-166880
..IRL Serbs, rightly so, succumb to NATO's high tech mobility.
But similarly 🎮, YOU will succumb to the power of the high tech material world.
Yet sustain ^your identity^!
"(Lester) may have lost everything by the end of the film, ^but he's no longer a loser^." -- Roger Ebert
II
+ What is key in pursuing dreams? It's about ^believing in yourself^--or a lack there of.
That you say on the public record can be, through cognitive dissonance, can be dismissed by the state of ^inner faith^.
And at the core psyche, is big ambition to make up for big loss.
...Tell me about it, when I apply grand goals to ordinary behavior. See this: I earn a necessary salary for my work.
And I also add the aim of my production to help the E.U.S. 🇪🇺🇺🇸.
Yet similarly offering an act that has one purpose to Person A, and another purpose to Person...
...B may be lose-lose. Each person wants their own need met!
When this individualizing of niches halts ... is when no more streaming platforms get added.
But take "these added goals", even unrealistic ones, and see how they are CHANNELED.
Have you hit life's center of gravity?
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.