Well I’ve been away for a while, it was a sort of a break, I guess. I wouldn’t say a holiday or anything like that, it was just a “man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do” thing, really (bada-boom, bada-bing, eh, tony?).
If I ever want this blog to be anything I would have to be a bit more consistent with the weekly Friday posts. But fear not! I actually wrote a bunch of articles while umm…. nothing. I just wrote a bunch of drafts whenever I got ideas for posts. So I might post an extra piece sometime, but hey… hey, no I probably won’t, but I might. Going back to consistency is enough for now, right?
On with the show!
I guess to an extent I want the blog to be more serious and urban oriented, but I can’t seem to shake the comical tone out of my writing sometimes, and I hope you don’t let the tone disregard the ideas in the pieces, I’m not joking, I just like writing this way to make it fun. I do have other drafts that concern other ideas, but this draft started as a rant, and dammit I will rant about Amman and buses (read as “be-ooze-is” for funsies).
Oh and I really hope you get the joke in the title, I giggled at it for a good 3 seconds.
You know why we have a traffic problem? Because I would personally rather keep anyone I care about off the streets, where they would be endangered by rushing drivers or harassed by loitering drones misled by societal habits, or be left to waste time as they attempt to go home (I dare say) without a car. I think there are about 40% of the population who believe the same.
I think the authorities are trying to make people get off their cars, if they are not, then less-experienced fresh-graduates are more aware than they are (given that universities do teach about the importance of public realms rather than the mere “will” of a client). But I really doubt anyone could just not know things when they are in such positions of power, I think they know what needs to be done. Could they really not know? Am I jut being wishful when I say that? I just can’t comprehend the idea of people in power being ignorant, it’s just wrong.
I think the authorities at least know a bit about what they’re doing. Unlike many Ammanis, who always seem to think they know better than officials; who often overlook their own mistakes and cuss at others from behind their windshields (or fists if it gets really serious). Many in our society just tend to underestimate others, believing that their thoughts are the most relevant and correct, and that others (in this case: power figures) have no idea what they’re doing, when a lot of the time it just seems like baseless bashing, due to a lack of research. What I’m trying to say, is that many bash Jordan’s power figures, but why do you really think they’re so utterly stupid and villainous? Maybe the authorities are just out-dated, I really think so. Isn’t it time that the newer generations start running things along with the pas and mas? Or is it just out of the norm, that older, more experienced (and egotistical) people can be corrected by a potential-leaking youth?
Anyway, I think that to an extent, the authorities have an idea about what to do, this post is more about public transportation, not politics. Here’s what I think they’re trying to do:
- Make people follow the law by making it more risky to break it. Simple idea. Then again, how do you stop the traffic congestion from making breaking the law the best way out?
- Make it less feasible to drive cars everywhere, so as to make using public transportation more viable, which can be done by increasing the cost of gasoline. This, however, does not work if the public transportation is much less comfortable and unbearably unreliable, and has the clarity of a cup of coffee from a vengeful-looking coffee vendor, i.e. it looks dirty but you don’t know if it really is, I mean is it wet then dried dust or finger cheese on the handle? Why is the seat so black? Anyway, people just can’t put a price on their family’s safety/comfort, public transportation is just way too much of a hassle.
- Nope, that was it; that’s all that seems to be done. They did try making some street ads with a bus filled with “happy”, cartoony people saying that buses are better for you and your family. But come on, is that all?
Actions speak louder than words, and actions don’t show anything about improving public transit. Even the “Fast Bus” project (الباص السريع), in my opinion, is extremely wasteful and has was an unreasonable idea compared to fixing and organizing existing buses first. At least a bit of organization of the existing transit system would reduce some of the stress on the streets, and would make space for the damn “fast bus lane”, but the way it was about to be done near the Jordanian University just seemed like it’s an impatient attempt at fixing the whole problem instantly (impossible, don’t you think? It’s a lot deeper than that). Instead of wasting (maybe that’s a subjective choice of word, but I think it was a waste) all that money on a poorly studied attempt, they could have paid for more bus drivers to fill in time gaps, or to create settlements with private buses who don’t really have a schedule at all, to kind of get them on their side, maybe even provide service to areas with no easy/affordable connection to the city. But why didn’t they?
I find it strange really, especially since in recent years, and with the “green uprising” public transportation has become key in fixing existing social and traffic problems, I don’t get where the investment in the public realm is, it should be the best time for it, unless they’re just waiting for “security problems” to pass or something, such that their transparency about their plans would not mean more risk but more trust from the public. Truth is, nobody is going to invest in public transportation, the government has to do it for its own well-being, and it’s about time that government-provided facilities become cleaner and more efficient than privatized, over-priced, and polarizing ones.
Well those were my 2 groosh.
We’ll see what happens in the future, I guess, I’ll just assume and think about it until I find out if my thoughts made sense.
…Or perhaps I’m pushing so hard to put happenings into perfect sense, it’s just producing pretexts to poorly pondered planning policies.
Some things just don’t change.
Patterns. Patterns like: “go outside, play, talk, mock, hang out” become “go outside, smoke, talk, gossip, hang out.”
It’s like none of us really grow up after all. Growing up doesn’t really change you, does it? It just exchanges habits with other habits, that’s why it’s so important to grow up with good habits. Oh and please do excuse my using the informal tongue in this piece, but it just felt right. Right?
But yeah, we really don’t change much when we “grow up”, I mean as a kid I thought people talking about economics are boring (usually 20 or 30 years older than me), but it’s just really what’s “in” to talk about. It’s nothing new, instead of talking about new happenings on a small scale (your personal universe of school), you talk about news (politics, kids, don’t let it touch you).
You really just realize how small the world is, we really don’t grow that much after all the hype that adults build for kids, the hype is just concerning dirty adult jokes and alcohol (blessed be, alcohol, totally worth growing up), but it’s just like the the city is an expansion/extension of the school playgrounds. I guess that kind of highlights schools’ importance in setting the atmosphere for the rest of the city. I don’t mean it literally nor architecturally/design-wise, but by the people it produces and how they all interact with others. It’s no coincidence that all bad schools are in bad neighborhoods (most of the time), because the school itself (in my humble dumb opinion) produces the neighborhood.
Perhaps it all comes down to if the economic systems are ready for less trouble/less low-class people to carry out the city’s dirty bidding.
I mean I’m pretty sure everyone knows that schools are the basis of societal interactions, it’s not really a mystery, it just takes someone to point it out for you to gasp and say “I knew that, how didn’t I consider it as such an important factor?”. I just think that politicians do not see that the world is ready for 100% educated people, especially since (in Jordan) hard labor is seen as -I’m just gonna call it- icky. Calloused hands? Gross! Go study and manage people, be a boss! But truth is, we really do need to appreciate hard labor as much as the manager, probably even more, because they are the literal force that move the country’s economy, and the less you appreciate them, the more they’ll shift to other “groups” (maybe even cults) that give them more appreciation in one way or another.
I just think we owe it to some people, to appreciate them before they depreciate you (hah… Get it? Because they can literally depreciate your e-… never mind), but I digress.
Schools can literally drive your entire social system. A great example is how Germans teach their kids tolerance at a young age, and (while there are of course some deviants from the respectful norm) their society is pretty respectful and humane (and you know it). They’re also a huge economic force because of the fact that even a common “hard-laborer” is given the appreciation she/he deserves (through money, because that’s how you show appreciation in our time… no amount of feasts and coffee can sustain a family enough, unfortunately).
Schools are the heart of society, and everyone has to understand that. The school builds society, since it has the direct input of the government. While society can affect it, governments have a direct access to people through a school system, and thus must take advantage of that.
But hey… are you ready to be common? Are you ready to become as appreciated as those who do manual labor? Would you accept seeing them next to you in a pub, Amman? Do you see the value of others from your pedestal? Is it really something we hate, having so many people that are “lower” than we are?
Are you able to put your ego down to see others to discuss with? Or are you happy in our circle-jerk society? Believing they are better, and disregarding the fact that you are at a huge advantage when compared to others? Not considering the cultural difference, can you live your city the way someone who has nothing to lose does?
Would you enjoy living with carbon copies of yourself, having nobody to consider inferior to yourself? Are you educated enough to let go of your ego, Amman?
So I found this one lying around in my drafts, and I really do believe in its idea in one way or another, but I’ll just disrespectfully agree with whatever you think, if that’s what your mind likes. Sadly it has been writer’s block this week (especially since I get some nice and beefy poetic ideas, but then forget to write them down somewhere) so I just tossed myself into previous half-done pieces. It was that bad.
Anyway, I hope it’s thought-provoking and interesting to you as it was for me while I was tip-tapping it away on my keyboard. Have fun.
This essay does not support any political side – because politics are games of apes using “civilized” tools -, it merely points out facts and theories to be held over our society as a magnifying glass for an up-down planner’s view of our current situation, and those to come. The purpose is for better-understanding, and critical, deeper thinking before bearing sticks and phones for a demonstration.
After going through a “rough break-up” and the colonization, the Arab world has seen a range of scenes and historical moments in the last century that many other cultures/regions have witnessed over a course of centuries. Perhaps we lagged on a global scale due to our materialistic detachment from the fleeting, rough, yet constant land, or our attachment (emotionally and even physically) to our tribes, or perhaps it is due to our stability in the Islamic times, but we have managed to catch up industrially, again on a global (foreign) scale. Although we had a previous safe and booming nation, our technologies were not technologies as they are thought of in our time. Looking back at our marvels as an Islamic nation, we had green local technologies which worked for us and a society with its own mind and body, almost like a fantasy novel or the eco-friendly, peaceful elf tribe with a grand, majestic leader. But alas, this is being written with a foreign language, using foreign technologies; our ways were not up to par with other, more “advanced” societies. The mud and stone buildings might have been interesting but they were neither slick nor fast enough for the others. Inter-cultural communication was non-existent as most cultures were similar, and we were the second (after the Native Americans) to face the almost-peaceful takeover. The balance in the nation was disturbed, and while that was inevitable, the breakup of the country led to a large difference in resource availability, leading to inter-Levant communications as different powers with different agenda, political interventions, and foreign aids with different agenda. “Are we driven or driving?” is not the question, as we were driven into another direction. Just as ideas spill over each other to create new perceptions and ideas, as well as open and closed doors, being driven has turned our world around and has resulted in many good and bad results.
We were driven by the earth’s humble environment into our current situation, the earth was driven by the sun, the sun was driven… well, then we reach a line where people argue who put what where, so in that sense, it is something out of our reach, so it is out of question, but we are driven by default. However, even as humans, one can say that we are driven by our god or sub-consciousness, again, a “who put what where” situation. That is why, the only things we are (almost) sure of being in control of are our actions, due to our conscious act in most of them. Even though our environment has put our thoughts in our head, we do still have control over what we do with those results.
The thing about our culture (and many religions and regions, as it played a huge part of creating it), however, is that we accept the fact that we are not completely in control. Islam literally means, surrendering control. “Is it a good or bad thing” is up for debate. Then again since the appearance of democracy, or rather “Hollywood democracy”, through globalization we are no longer accepting the fact that we are driven. It is not an easy thing to accept, as we do believe that we are all loved by each of our gods. Nevertheless, breaking away from our culture or from religion in general, while driven by yearning for freedom (as it is fed to us in its glorious box) is seen as a relatively bad deed, as people without religion are seen as people lacking morals. Beliefs are not enough to hold people accountable or trust them as before, people are not becoming more honest about their faith (or lack of it) as we slowly open up to American ideas of freedom. To some it breaks our social fabric into cogs and screws which have no life but only work for a production machine, while to others, the fabric already is restraining, and the democracy brings freedom. One can safely say that the spilling of the idea of democracy is surely to shift the balance, and whole movement of globalization is shifting our scales, we are currently amidst a spill and mix of cultures, and it will take time for the mix to happen. The spill is driven by one side driving into the other, and it has its causes to do so; it is driven to do so by political agendas.
We are all being driven into each other and spilling, and the constant spilling is what gives us the meaning of existence; we are seeking to find the balance born of the war between ideas; to bring the present-at-hand to a ready-at-hand. It was once done with wars and now it is done with propaganda and ideas. We are all units, atoms, that help to make the whole a reality; indicators for the planners of our fate, the drivers of our city. Criminals are suspended so as not to throw the system out of control, the numbers of people and statistics are studied to know how to deal with the change of situation, the residents are provided with “food” and things to keep them motivated. It does seem negative, yet it is the nature of a city, it is even the natural behavior of mammals to stick together and members do their “jobs”. It sounds brutal to the observer, but it is only for allowing certain human tendencies to take control; while we like belonging to something, we also like to be individuals. This contradicts the contemporary products and media which push for special people who save the world and celebrities who have money and live the beautiful life. It motivates people, and the products help make people feel special, but what about the cold truth that we are part of a collective and only contribute simple parts that many can do?
The individuality aspect that people yearn for shines through art and special commodities to display publicly. For the more fortunate it is custom-made objects that give meaning, while for poor people it is art (theoretically). Take Europe for example, where the most renowned renaissance personalities are poor and did their art in the streets or by barely getting by and having support, furthermore, they truly lived the city as a bourgeois never could; they were the “derive” of their time. In our region, collectivity is superior, and those seeking individuality are outcasts; like those with long hair or special fancy cars. The derive are marked as “nawar”. However, the nawar are low-class people with many of their ability hindered by their living situations. Back in the renaissance people could go by, and would not have that many expectations, such as “be a doctor/engineer/architect”. Jordan’s derive have no ability to express themselves, and must do what they can to help the collective and survive. The rest of the country’s classes benefit from having people lower than them to add drama to their lives and anecdotes for colleagues while they live their educated lives travelling in their boxes and avoiding confrontation. However there is the middle class who is currently creating life in the art scene and expressing themselves. While the people in the lower class can make a choice to create art, they are not given the push to create it; they are driven into the circumstances which force them to choose survival over art. Another possible situation that they are driven into is the fact that they do not quite know how to create art, nor do their families see art as something worthwhile as a way to bring food to the table or to maintain a shelter.
Maybe it is all planned, since it is possible due to much psychological, sociological, and scientific advancement. We do have a choice of controlling the drivers below us in the hierarchy, and working on that, we are able to do so. Although it is governed by a “higher power”, we do have a degree of control and responsibility in our positions. We are a system that works together, and we can use our knowledge to fix and add at the right spots in order to make a move in our system. Those who wish for change and those who hold the opposite opinion are two forces we need to keep a pulse fluctuating in the system. The lack of understanding creates a misinterpretation of people and their motives, our renaissance is now, but the mix of contemporary needs for survival and inclusion into society is preventing many generations in certain parts to be left out. The freedom/bohemian feel that we can use to our advantage at our artistic peak is where a huge investment should be put to put people on the same level, before we move into architectural terms to unite our beautiful mix.
Oh, Me, was that a long month, or what?
How about a post? Who’d expect that on a blog~!
Well here it is, a pointless post!
After drafting around every now and then for the past month, I really decided to put aside all my ideas and well, just improvise this one, like all the others are. Truth is I had so many threads of thoughts in my head for pieces to write or draw that I just ended up with a bunch of one-lined drafts and base-less illogical rants that need a fine link to make sense. I could not bring myself back to the zone I was in when I started discussing that idea with myself, so I pretty much could not see that link between said ideas again, not the way I thought I did, at least.
Hey you know what, that might be interesting to just like post and see what people think of different fragments of ideas and how they could correlate in each person’s mind.
Actually that really would be interesting. I kind of have the belief that you can find a process or “image” in anything that you see in front of you, and somehow relate to it. Kind of like some people hear Skillet songs and think they’re about love, then you realize they’re a Christian rock band and that they’re singing to their god, and truth is you just see what you want to see, or maybe not even that; you just see what you see due to factors within your mind. Anyway, I think anything could be given a huge meaning and could have it taken away (generally speaking of course, you nitpicking nerve-bags), mainly because people can find the oddest ways around things to avoid dealing with them, just like they could outdo themselves just trying to make something happen.
The Power of the Will, some call it, and I will do the same.
The power of the human mind, the power to ignore happenings to fight insanity, the power to harness everything around you to propel yourself forward.
Mind you, I am not writing this to offend anyone, it’s just interesting to think about.
I personally think that the concept of a god is just that; your mind, maybe even the subconsciousness (since we are not aware of its direct influence on our lives). We are our own gods, we are what hold ourselves back, and we are what push ourselves forward. Considering the subconsciousness as an entity kind of works, too. It’ is ego-centric because it’s not easy to ignorantly cling to your own logic. It’s all-knowing because it knows all about the depths of yourself. I guess you could fear it because it can hold all your past, and thus holds your weaknesses (which you could work around or be tackled by). It’s merciful upon you when you make a mistake, if you think it’s forgivable by your own standards, some people really can’t forgive themselves easily.
Truth is, every religion/person has a different concept of a god; an entity that runs its life in ways both conscious and random. I wonder if detaching that entity from the public is what makes it so political and less personal. Allow it to reside in a person’s mind and it’s a belief.
It’s all just different wording for the same thing. Religious wars are like arguing if a potato is a “potato” or a “بطاطا” or “Kartoffel”. In the end of the line, the “potato” is something you can make great food with. I take my potatoes just as seriously as the next guy, I taste what others make with them, I enjoy them fried, mashed, chopped and baked, stewed, you name it!
However, when this “potato” is shared, then many people can look at it and judge you based on it, because it is not personal anymore, but you are part of everyone who loves that “potato”, forcing you to compromise and play along with the others. This in turn means that your self-worth is not based on your own self believing that you’re worth something, but people, meaning it could create confusion between you seeing yourself as worthy, and others seeing you as worthless. That contradiction isn’t good is it? I like this specific way of cooking potatoes, why am I looked down on for it? It’s not like I opened up a restaurant and forced people to eat them, I eat them in the comfort of my home.
Aren’t “potatoes” meant to be a joy to eat at the end of the day?
Heh… Maybe I went too far, but if by now you don’t get it, I was making a point, and I think you’ll get it just fine.
Well I guess this post ended up with a point after all. I really wanted to post it as brain-rust or something, and just let loose, you know? i.e. I kind of wanted this post to be a trail of thought, but I ended up liking that idea I started discussing and got carried away. Which is good, right?
I know it can’t just be me out there who dreams, really. This entire generation has a big chunk of dreamers and hopeful professionals, and it’s absolutely refreshing after dealing with many who only speak negative things (not real, just negative).
I think our generation is going to be the most beneficial in a while, I really, honestly do. We grew up with the technology and are ushering in the Information age, yet there are many who still appreciate the spirituality and humanity in us, regardless of religion and beliefs; I think we believe more in humanity now than ever, and I think that people are wonderful things, and that our differences make us fit and help the world in one way or another. It’s impossible to have perfection, and the truth is, it is boring, and it will never be a goal. Change is constant, and a perfect balance is impossible; with every person changed, is a negative or positive being birthed as a reaction, and both sides serve the world in its constant growth.
How would we understand the pros if we did not experience the cons. Curiosity, trial, and error are the roots of all development, and there are always things that we do not know, that a negative side would show us. While I do believe sometimes these negatives are shown in order to push people to the other side on purpose (to create a controlled reaction), it all just goes to show how similar we are.
Nobody (with maybe a few exceptions, which could usually explained in one way or another) likes violence, violence is a bi-product of our primal instinct to fight for survival.
This really does explain why I am quite against parts of religious dogma, personally; I believe some sides of religion are humanly modified to create certain reactions, to force certain actions, and thus lead a mass to do and agree with a negative action. This is usually done with some cheap justification that appeals to the primal instinct of survival. That being said, there are always those who really make you see the good side of religion and how it was originally made to be a positive effect; sadly, not everyone is taught to consider the human logic behind ideas, but rather to follow; because it’s easier that way. A huge scale group loses its roots due to its need of fast expansion and its difficulty in control. i.e. The need to produce people who will carry on ideas overcomes the golden rule of consideration and respect.
But that aside, I think there is always hope in people, and I [surely, many people out there, too] think the world can be a positive place to be. There is just always a cycle of something bad happens causing for a good reaction, or a positive thing that gets pushed and abused until it becomes bad, such that a positive reaction is needed.
Sure it will be hard to change the world, but I believe that we are all born “good” (primal sure, but not evil; not knowingly hurting others in spite of another option that allows for a compensation, unless compensation means letting go of a huge part of oneself), and there are always things that push people to become “bad”, and those things in the long run (even if introduced later in a person’s life) make people forget who they once were. But we do need the “bad” to balance out the “good” and appreciate it. There is no “good” and “bad”, no “right” and “wrong”, but different perspectives trying to serve themselves to survive.
There are no obstacles between us and “success” but ourselves; there is no concrete reason to prevent changing a majority of people, unless people were implanted with the negativity for a long time, such that it becomes a second habit, and thus a comfortable place that prevents people from moving to other mental places and states.
I just don’t see the world as a completely negative place, and I’m sure many others don’t either. Not by making news or something, but by personally delivering a positive message to others, rather than relying on a hasted, mass-produced method of spreading it. Human contact goes a long way, really, it’s how many ideas started, and then once the idea was merely passed around rather than understood and convinced to others, it begins to crumble.
I just have to get these ideas out of my head.
If this was back in the day when people ransack a city and claim it in one way or another, I would understand, but there are universal and human laws that have been broken, it is just disgraceful to humanity. It is inhumane and unfair. Especially when people who fight back end up being called terrorists for wanting their homes back, since nobody else seems to serve justice. I try not to be biased to be honest, but it’s a horrible label, and it is not fair.
Sure people may say that it’s fine they can go anywhere, but would you really just leave your house if someone illegally just took it over? Oh “it is the past, people should move on”, but it’s still unfair and – well – quite rude to do it as the world watches. If you ask me Israel is gonna take over the whole land, and Palestine is just gonna be erased from the earth because nobody is doing anything, and it annoys me to no end really.While I do know that people will never give up because many are aware, but I have a hunch saying that it become an old wives’ tale. It’s just going to be like, “Tough luck Palestine, you lived there and cultivated and you were peaceful, but you got attacked and screwed over so there you go, no more home for you. Bye”.
Just like native Americans, slaughtered and made into nothing but a minority to barely be considered.
People would remember and see how they got called savages and terrorists for fighting back, and then just give them a holiday to try and compensate for the humiliation and torment the generations had to go through.
We now see, as the curtain swings to a violent halt, the death of a people, later to be brainwashed by ideologies. Bashed in the ribs over and over until something goes to the aggressor. After all the “progress” the “developed” countries have made, they still have not developed a sense of justice, but rather a sense of material; the physical violence to spread ideas have become violent shoving of ideologies and a game of laws, loopholes, and illogical justification attempts (that work) just so someone can do whatever they want in their rampant position.
Politics is a dirty game. Each is in it from their chair, high above like the gods they once condemned and mocked, playing their game of chess, completely oblivious to the world, hanging below; small and pixelated, as digits in a matrix, lacking a story, and running like a toy. They rattle and wriggle in their chairs, calling others weak and laughing at their silly misery, crying over their egos, breaking each other’s dolls. They do not care, they can merely get more toys to play with.
It is never about those below, it never was. It was only a plan on how the big picture gets better. What do they aim for? What is it they want? Why is it there? Why did it start? Is it entertainment? Is it self-righteousness? Is it nothing but a battle of egos? Is it that they believe it is right? Is it for population control? Is it just trying to maintain their positions in power? What is the point of it all? Is it just a strategic point for the big picture?
Just why is it that the massacres cannot be stopped? Why would nobody step in for humanity? This is just a matter of humanity now, and it is just a testament to how far we, as a race, have floated away from being civilized. Naive and idealistic, it is, I know; economy is everything now.
The chapter closes on another piece of “history”, lost forever in its once meaningful existence, until it was twisted to be seen as a host of death. So the rest of the world mourns and moves on to forget it, to maintain the order that runs it, afraid of their own demise due to the system falling apart; afraid of the fear created by the egos via the media, the fears that dictate how the fall of egos is a fall of the country, even if they never were needed in the first place, the fear must be instilled to keep them there. The people live a life devoid of meaning as they serve the greater purpose, and nothing else, not because they lack power, but because they are unaware of their ability, and the ease of twisting a human around by controlling his life source.
What freedom could they have if their definition of freedom is defined by the oppressor?
Typical essay material right there, am I right? Let’s get to it.
Just a while ago (back when the Syria thing was the talk), was having a conversation with a friend about some politics; you know, the usual catching up on your politics through people you know are intelligent enough to think for themselves rather than gobbling up whatever the media tells them. And of course, as I do most of the time lately, the ending remark I have after hearing whatever news there are (even if I read them somewhere online) is: “Well, I guess we’ll never find out.”
But nope, everyone knows already! Out come a bunch of people who have no idea what to think, but each side tends to choose whatever works best for it (I don’t support any ideas):
“Pathetic right? Obviously Bashar has been a target of the US because his country was economically and independently stable!”
“Ohhh right… Bashar is clearly power-drunk and just wants to protect his current position! Oh humanity is disgusting!”
“Wait, I mean, oh of course the rebels are just deployed there by the Muslim Brotherhood who are trying to take over our world!”
“No… that’s not right… the “Zionists”(the people’s favorite and most successful villains) are conspiring to take down the Arab countries in order to take over the world!”
“Look at this poo-brain, dude everyone knows there’s nothing going on there at all!”
Seriously… If anyone watches the news, it’s only a matter of brainwash tactics and good coverage (aka. marketing) to make someone believe them. That’s if these people watch more than one channel for their daily does of news. Many just choose their channels based on chit-chat and word of mouth; relatives, friends, or co-workers. And there you go, a huge group of people with no idea about who to believe or who’s right and who’s wrong.
Then BAM there’s a huge amount of people, with the same amount of brains and the same culture, who only disagree about their ideal solution to the many problems in the world; because nobody knows exactly what the truth is so that they could even try and convince people. How could they, really? There can be no concrete proof in our time; no concrete story; no real coverage of what’s going on. Hell, even if it IS a real/honest coverage, nobody would know if it is. Almost everything can be faked, and the only way is to try and analyze what exactly people (or a specific person) would do in such a situation. A rock-paper-scissors game between peoples’ minds trying to know what the other is thinking in reaction to their thinking’s thinking.
I would love to be an idiot who goes out to protest without knowing if it’s for a valid reason. There’s so many people who protest, it’s not effective anymore. It’s like going to the gym when you’re pissed; you let it out and feel better about yourself afterwards. A protest would never be effective unless it’s well-organized and people know exactly what it’s all for. Oh and if you knew everyone there by name.
I for one don’t take sides, but truth is, even if I had an opinion, I would not even state it, it’s a waste of time and energy to argue with someone when both of you have no idea what is truly going on.
“Oh but why? The truth must come out!”
Because, my brain-dwelling friend, even if you do have sources or whatever, even they can’t be trusted, because everything can be faked. With brilliant detail. Again, if they were right, nobody would just have a sudden realization and leave everything he/she was fighting for. Not to mention that governments know how people think and (based on something I read on the internet, go figure) could get people to disperse ideas on the internet and help make them more dominant. Even if they don’t, the fact that this idea is out there, could give people the ability to prove or disprove everything you read. Obviously you can believe or not believe it. I am completely indifferent, and that is after a long long time of tugging and pulling on ideas hoping to get logical reactions, but there is absolutely no true logic in a world of media and politics.
And then after indifference, I just ended up thinking that we should just breed empathy rather than politics and a set-track of thoughts and dramatic beauty to keep a thinker’s mind occupied. I think-… No, I believe people believe what they want to believe; sometimes you could even smack someone in the face with the truth (whatever the dickens that is) and they would tell you to stop insulting their intelligence. And in a world where ideas are passed around as carelessly as high fives, I don’t blame them; it could really ease your mind to ignore everything.
And there you have it, people arguing over dumb little things, instead of learning about different angles and tolerating. Although the future is bright, me-thinks. I believe it all just mixes up to make a balance, no? Does it matter? Well that’s a whole other piece of writing.
Side-note: People overusing perfectly imperfect is annoying.
*mutters* Stupid media spreading things without their personal value but rather shoving it into a million of values… Oh hey there’s another idea for a post!
I don’t mean to be a hippie, (but I really do, because I am, kinda) but I have to say, that the impact that technology has on our lives can not be denied; you can take it positively or negatively, but there are somethings that you just can’t deny.
Sure it’s positive, sure you can reach whoever you want whenever, sure you can keep relationships alive. But doesn’t that rid us of all the excitement that being apart brings? How can you appreciate something if you never lose it or taste the thought of its loss?
Doesn’t that make separation so bearable, such that people who are far away end up experiencing a part of each other that is born out of nothing but consequences (which are meant to disappear when reunited)?
Does technology and the comfort of communicating without a need of physical work not make us too lazy to talk to humans?
The lack of direct human communication, does it not make us weaker and more easily broken?
Does that technology not allow for people to take knowledge for granted?
Wouldn’t it be better if the knowledge we wanted was earned, such that we would be careful where our energies were wasted?
We would never waste our energy somewhere where it would not give us a benefit, but now we do because it “entertains” us.
When was entertainment a primary human emotion?
When did we all become so self-centered, such that we expect to earn without giving and interacting?
When did we become so pathetic, such that we fear for our children’s health when we let them play outside, but we do not worry about their future when we lock them up in a cement cage?
When did getting beat up by the local bully become a horrible thing? When did it become a standard, that we should have an unbalanced eco-system where it is all good, and life would be nothing but a pulse-less, dead, pig in the lawn rather than a raging bull in the heart of every child, wishing to explore and play outside?
When did ugly, bad environments become a disadvantage rather than a place where kids would play and experience their own strengths and weaknesses, and the advantages and disadvantages of having friends? Such that it even allowed them to understand what it is to have people you care about and people who care about you?
When did walking become a sin, and facing bad people become the threat we need to face for going through our lives, rather than a daily battle that never stopped us from doing anything and merely proved our determination and understanding?
When did a 20-something year-old know this, while parents cowered in their bedrooms?
When did people write their thought out in public, hoping for praises rather than a discussion?
When did people hope to change the world by not doing anything?
When did we lose respect to older people?
When did older people lose respect to our instincts and the process of growth, which they had and lost?
When did we become slaves to everything around us, and lose control of our own lives?
When did a community with the same ideas signify life, rather than a society that has its many different faces and curses which end up complementing its personality?
When did we lose our balance?
For the sake of not being too dull, I came by this term while looking up some architectural theories. Simply put, I would define “Hegemony” as rule via implied power, rather than direct force. Sadly, there was no Wikipedia page in Arabic for Hegemony.
Wiktionary defined Hegemony in a more cultural scope (wiktionary source):
“Dominance of one social group over another, such that the ruling group or “hegemon” acquires some degree of consent from the subordinate, as opposed to dominance purely by force“
And another sociological definition of hegemony I found was this (source):
“‘Hegemony’ in this case [cultural hegemony] means the success of the dominant classes in presenting their definition of reality, their view of the world, in such a way that it is accepted by other classes as ‘common sense’. The general ‘consensus’ is that it is the only sensible way of seeing the world. Any groups who present an alternative view are therefore marginalized.”
Interesting idea, no? Anyway, this is such a defining idea of how our lives are being run right now, and probably quite easily so. It kind of makes you reconsider everything you know and what created it, especially the current state in which Amman’s culture stands. In Amman (the way I see it), we have two very strong contestants for the title of “hegemon”. The very conservative, and the very liberal, and then there are those swept by the flow who are just everything in between. Thus, there is no king and slave, there are just contenders; two sides who have a different agenda for what the “culture/common sense/right path/truth” should be. Discipline vs. , security vs. risk, coffee vs. beer. It is like the mess before everything settles down, and a common culture is finally born.
And if you read the second part of the last quote, you can find that it can be applied Amman’s society that is marginalizing the other part. The “nawar” who are uneducated and prevent our growth are marginalized by their fellow countrymen, and the “fafi” who are ruining our culture as Arabs are also marginalized by their fellow countrymen.
If you think about that even more, you realize that each of these groups are led by some other “hegemon”:
The “fafi” who are led by western brain-numbing media and blindly follow the newly developing trends within the constantly growing globalized culture, via the internet and other media.
The “nawar” who are led by brain-numbing extremist preaches and blindly follow the laws within the rigid constant, time-proven framework of a long-surviving dogma.
[Disclaimer, I am not trying to say I am with or against any side, I am merely trying to organize them such that it’s easy to understand the perceived extremes]
“According to Gramsci’s view there are on the one hand the dominant classes who seek to contain and incorporate all thought and behaviour within the terms and limits they set in accordance with their interests. On the other hand there are the dominated or subordinate classes who attempt to maintain and to further the validity and effectiveness of their own definitions of reality.” (source)
Thinking about the subject actually, the divide and conquer strategy could also be easily defined via reference to Hegemony. A place/country without a hegemon is more easily controlled (just like that straws-banding-together story from when we were kids) due to the lack of stability in culture. That, in turn, allows those who struggle to become the hegemon in that country’s scale, and those who await the resulting culture are the subordinates; i.e the struggle itself is the hegemon, and the subordinate is peace. This then creates a confused society, in which the struggle to survive is the norm that the culture is defined by, since no side wins and gets to create a solid ground for a consistent culture. Selfish thinking hoping only to survive, and greed when it comes to wealth and materials due to the inconsistency. Sound familiar?
It’s the war economy that dominates such a place. The fact that it is an economy pretty much points to a designed system. And that’s how you divide and conquer; give them weapons, allow the culture of struggle to sustain, and prevent the growth of peaceful thoughts. Then give a facade to the rest of the world to assure them that they are doing their best and that they should not worry about such “god-forsaken” lands, and that it’s out of their control as petty, money-less pawns.
I think that is exactly what confuses/bothers people and prevents any small itch of rebellion to rise. The countless facades that exist, the many that are revealed, and those that are not. People do not know what to believe anymore, further breeding apathy and helplessness.
Well anyway, that was just a small rant that came to mind after reading a bit about “Hegemony”. You could choose to believe that the world is run by people or that it is just a free-flowing system just like everything in nature. But whatever you end up thinking it is, I disrespectfully agree.