I am the one they call Chair; I rule these lands with a cuddly fist! c:
However, it has come to my attention that I decided to write this late in the day and I don't have much energy to think of something quite so intelligent to say. However come to think of it...
I just thought of something!
I'm an Autistic ADHDer, this means my existence is one of constant contradiction. I am only consistent in my inconsistency, and if I think too hard on that, it will melt my brain.
Personally I am proud of who I am, and yes, I am proudly Autistic, and proudly ADHD!
But, what am I actually proud about?
I am proud that I have been fighting an uphill battle my entire life, and now I am starting to ACTUALLY WIN! :D
If it wasn't already immediately obvious, I am endlessly passionate about advocacy, and I am willing to dedicate my existence solely to this struggle. Since, I personally feel like its my obligation, and seemingly a necessity in my view.
This does mean I have a certain level of ideological zeal to me, which annoys friends and family alike!
Which is where my communication barriers come in. My barriers come in the form of my intense special interests around this topic in particular. This may make me come off as 1 dimensional, or singular minded. But this is a misconception; I am just quite autistic.
I have many topics I am willing to discuss with folks! But in my personal understanding of social skills I tend to talk about something which I can relate to the person, situation, or discussion.
However... My primary special interest is political in nature, and in nature, everything is political. Which is a massive problem for my friends and family, because it means that I view everything else in context of my secondary special interests...
Like:
Notice the part how I said, "I view everything else in context of my secondary special interests". As in, that's the other lens in which I think about. Meaning that my primary special interest is a multifaceted monster which is my primary view of reality!
So that means:
Now, that may only be two dot points but I promise you, THAT IS A MONSTROUS AMOUNT OF THINGS!
Lets break it down shall we? :P
My worldview can be broken down into its components. Lets analyse them very briefly into their fundamentals!
This is itself an entire can of worms right here, but let me put it extremely simply: Contradictions.
In reality there are contradictions, which are represented by their manifestation in both material and ideal reality.
However, the most potent of contradictions are the contradictions between material and ideal reality. Have you ever heard the phrase: "In an ideal world", its basically the same thing. Where the wishes and dreams we have simply don't exist in material reality.
That is rather simple, yet this building block of the world is understood usually in merely a vacuum rather than systemically. But lets not forget that in an ideal world, there would be:
Everyone already knows these things. Not many people would dispute that this is what an ideal world would look like. But most commonly, when this rhetorical is used by people, they do not actually think that they are possible, or that they will ever live to see them.
Except... One key exception: Cancer.
People generally believe that a cure for cancer is inevitable, people don't have the same views as to if they will see the cure announcement in their life time. But there is a key reason for this which I will get into why after I explain why people are far more sceptical about the others...
Dialectical Idealism posits that the contradiction between the ideal, and how it is unfulfilled in material reality. Will inevitably result in the ideal taking hold with time, simply because people desire the ideal. Now once again this is a gross oversimplification of Dialectical Idealism, however, there is a contradiction here. How does the Ideal reality come into existence? Does it spawn into existence? Also how does an Ideal even ever take hold?
This is where Dialectical Materialism comes into the fold, and it posits a solution to the gaps which Dialectical Idealism had. Dialectical Materialism answers where Ideals come from... and where do they go?
If it hadn't been for Cotton-Eye Joe
I'd been married long time ago
Where did you come from, where did you go?
Where did you come from, Cotton-Eye Joe?
Although this did indeed start as a gag in my head, it is relevant somehow. Which surprises me.
The ideal of marriage is considered of cultural importance. In the classic song 'Cotton-Eye Joe', I presume a jealous or frustrated man is lamenting Cotton-Eye Joe for what he did. This could mean that either Cotton-Eye Joe shot and killed someone's lover, or Cotton-Eye Joe stole someone's partner. Given the context it is likely the former rather than the latter.
The ideal of the character singing the song, getting married, was prevented by circumstances of Material reality. It is also true that idea of marriage would never had come about had the character singing the song, had never met the partner he fell in love with.
From this we discover, that the ideal is only born in the material, and that the ideal exists at the mercy of the material.
So, we answered an intensely philosophical question, by analysing Cotton-Eye Joe... Žižek would be proud!
The reason we believe that a cure for cancer is possible, and the end of war and poverty are not possible in our popular conception; is because we actually understand what causes cancer to come into existence and spread. Although our understanding is not complete, we know enough to know that a cure IS possible. It merely for the moment eludes us, as we just need to advance medical science further!
So essentially what I am saying, is that the popular conception of cancer as a curable disease, has far more public awareness around it. So theoretically, if the public understood more about what causes:
Peoples opinions on the issues might actually shift towards a more optimistic view on these topics, because if you can analyse and understand what causes these issues, you could essentially create a world where the issues don't form in the first place.
That is what dialectical materialism is all about, it is about analysing the contradictions of material reality, and then positing the underlying solution to create a PREVENTIVE cure for the challenges we face.
This is why the prime instruction of Marxism is: "Seize the means of production."
Because the means of production - such as: industry & agriculture - being owned privately by an elite class of capitalists who are only beholden to profits; in the ideals of Marxism, this is a disaster waiting to happen. To the Marxist, no amount of good business owners and bosses will convince them that the issue is the owners themselves. The issue IS THE OWNERSHIP, of the means of production by an elite class of capitalists. It is merely a preventative cure, not a judgement of individual capitalists specifically.
Is capitalism causing disaster? Well that is beyond the scope of this particular section. Well... not really, I just wanted to move to the next topic! :P
