Skip to main content

What is Extremism?

The most radical extremist is the one whose personal understanding of self is incompatible with the mystic expectation held by the sum of thoughtless, unquestioning, and uninspired persons who comprise society. The most radical extremist is he who has developed an understanding far too complex and enigmatic to even momentarily halt the inertia of the ever-developing and familiar establishment of the institutional status quo. To challenge the status quo is to question the progress of mankind. To challenge the absurd momentum of illogical opinion is to make you a person, and no person shall trump the will of society. 

No person shall rule over society unless that person is to further the development of society and its agendas. Somehow the extremist is the one who remembers that the smallest unit of society is the individual, and that without the preservation of that individual, "social progress" is moot and self-defeating. The very mention of extremism or radicalism isolates those persons whom "society" identifies that way. The irony herein is nearly comedic but for the real and systemic consequences it causes. In cases in which systemic and institutional violence, coercion, and theft become the status quo, extremism is not only desirable but necessary to combat the more extreme evils of tyranny. 

Extremism sounds frightening because most persons tend to fail to realize the true extent of global diversity. Each and every person is extremely different, but we are so often molded and conditioned to think, speak, and act according to the socially-engineered expectation that we have become actors on this terrestrial stage of life. We know not who we are, but what is expected of us. Thus, we are normal. Thus, the one who steps outside of the snow globe to peer into the universe is the outcast. He is the slave to those who have already accepted the course. They are the slaves of those who have assumed power over them, and the self-defeating, unescapable cycle continues. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Kaepernick Craze: Exposing the Nation's Fools One Conversation at a Time

The Kaeparnick craze and other viral movements haven't merely pressured people into becoming simpler caricatures of their prior selves, but they have manifestly exposed people for how foolish and uninformed they've been all along. 



In his final year in the NFL, Kaepernick ranked 17th in passer rating and 34th the year before that. 

He played through an entire season in only two of his six years in the league, and his best full-season performance ranks far outside of the NFL's top-250 single-season passing performances in the league's history. 

For reference, the oft-criticized Tony Romo posted a career passer rating of 97.1, as compared to Kaepernick's 88.9. 

Romo's passer rating dipped below 90 for only one season of the eleven seasons he played, whereas Kaepernick failed to eclipse the 90 mark on three of his six seasons, a full 50 percent of his time in the NFL. 

In fact, Kaepernick accomplished this feat only once if we are to discard those other two seasons in …

America's Civil War: Not "Civil" and Not About Slavery

Virtually the entirety of South and Central America, as well as European powers Britain, Spain and France, peacefully abolished slavery — without war — in the first sixty years of the nineteenth century. 

Why, then, did the United States enter into a bloody war that cost over half of the nation’s wealth, at least 800,000 lives and many hundreds of thousands more in casualties? 

The answer: the War Between the States was not about slavery. 

It was a war of invasion to further empower the central government and to reject state sovereignty, nullification of unconstitutional laws, and the states’ rights to secession. 

It was a war that would cripple the South and witness the federal debt skyrocket from $65 million in 1860 to $2.7 billion in 1865, whose annual interest alone would prove twice as expensive as the entire federal budget from 1860.

It was a war that would blur the lines and jurisdictions between sovereign states, that would indiscriminately sacrifice the founding principles etched …

Institutional Racism: The Sasquatch of Political Folklore

A great confusion has arisen out of the clamor of political debate, one which presupposes that any dismissal of the merits of “institutional racism” somehow equates to one’s rejection of personal struggle. 

Whereas the struggle of any individual remains always and everywhere unique and wholly personal, his common bond of complexion with others who have struggled serves inadequately as the basis for any argument which regards this commonality as the cause, or as the reason, for that veritable struggle. 

To condemn the unidentifiable and nebulous abstraction, then, by castigating an unnamed institution which persists beyond our specific capacity to recognize its power, serves only to absolve individuals of their personal responsibility, to shift blame and culpability to a specter which exists only by the creative designs of our imaginations, which exists as the scapegoat for all outcomes popularly maligned as undesirable. 

This unactionable practice, then, swiftly and categorically excuses…