Solidargemeinschaft | and Stuff

"Solidargemeinschaft" means as much as: Solidarity Driven Society/Community/Such; And it happens to be one term by which the german social idea, in context to our Legislation, is being described.

And I think it's ... something worth emphasizing. After all, as for what works in reality - already - it is a kind of socialism that does however work within Capitalism. So, Solidarity...ism. It's not like socialism or communism where ... . Well, thinking about it, they're kind of the same thing.

Socialism requires Solidarity - and without it, Socialism will fall apart into whatever kind of nonsense there would be without it. And with Solidarity - it doesn't really matter what our current system is. Because we at any rate strive to work together as to make the best of what we got.

And especially nowadays, with our Geopolitical situation, Solidarity is important. But I don't mean the kind where we have to be like ... showing Solidarity with Israel. That would be a way to twist the meaning into something ... 'less'. I mean Solidarity in the very same sense as the term 'Solidargemeinschaft' would imply. Except that the community is the global one.
I mean, it's obvious that if someone doesn't follow the rules, they won't and there's not much we can do about it. Other than ... asking nicely that they change their ways. Lest something were to happen that ... we may or may not be alright with.

And that's also ... a very German problem. I mean, a lot might call Germany or Germans 'toothless'. And I think ... a lot of us Germans prefer it this way. Being as toothless as we are ... comes with a lot of benefits. In the best case ... vibing with global peacetimes. Like so, we love to not have to worry about ... a lot of things. Things you'd think we'd have to worry about because we're so toothless - and some might impose themselves as the true reason why we don't have to worry. Like ... sure, the "bestest Nation in the World" ... the "big peacekeeper". Sorry if that comes accross as a little bit too cynical - but a case can be made for how some of the modern day conflicts exist because of them, and their interests. So ... not sure.
And also ... I don't really like the idea. It totally goes against ... what I try to preach here.

But anyhow. Solidarity and the USA ... it's like ... weird. I mean, the whole idea of taking care of your own self, to be responsible and do what you can etc. to make the world a better place is ... totally fine and awesome. But to the point where people vibe on rejecting any kind of aid to people in need? At least there's usually a lot of ... sour talk that comes along with it. And yea, we also have it here - except here ... we're overall more pro solidarity.

Working Spirit, Fascism and [oh Wonder]

Now, if you consider yourself (too) much of a centrist, you probably have a problem with the implications of fascism. Whether or not that works for you - is neither here nor there. I however don't find myself to have the luxury of turning a blind eye - and yea, that sure requires me to look both ways, twice, before I speak. Regardless ... there's as much as ... a ... well ... working theory, if you care to know, of what fascism is and does - in a lot of depth and with a lot of width and nuance. And while it seems like it very easily fits one side - and not so much the other - we can however still forgo trying to slap the label onto which it may certainly or not belong - and just work with the theory.

So have I recently Mentioned Hannah Arendt - sorry for misspelling her - and she expressed a pretty bold theory by which capitalism is implicitly breeding fascism. And I have to wonder just how that can co-exist with having any amount of ... 'working spirit'.

TO say that it can't - perhaps even with compelling arguments - is in my opinion however not enough to debunk her claim. They're a lot more solid than that. Though depending on what categories we think in, the solution to the problem involves various degrees of socialism.

In case you wonder: I have a great working spirit. And I might easily outperform whatever conservative nitwhit might think otherwise. Might ... ! But to more accurately measure, rate, weigh or such what I'm actually trying to describe, I present to you:

The 'Zombie' Scale

The Zombie scale is actually quite simple. Per workday I count 7 Slots: Getting up, getting to Work, Work part 1, Lunch, Work part 2, going home, being at home. Maybe more slots can be added, each slot possibly also needs a factor if we want to actually rate things - but for simplicity's sake: If your average workday constitutes 7 Zombie ratings - that is, you get up like ZOmbie, go to work like a Zombie, work like a Zombie and so on - for like 5 days a week (and whatever on weekends) - something's wrong. No, more than that! You should just stop! Stop and rethink your life's choices! The whole bunch. Especially those in command.

Boredom doesn't count as Zombie though. You may count it as a Z, but you'd still have to evaluate it differently.

So, my average workweek barely has any Z in it. Although the work I do is eventually very repetitive and dull. And maybe I'm just young; So, maybe I don't know what I'm talking about; But the point stays the same.

To make more sense of it however, I have to go onto a little tangent:

The story of 'Duke Nukem Forever'

So, if you don't know who Duke Nukem is - that's OK. Duke Nukem 3D was a very popular/successful videogame once - and eventually, with the Internet becoming more mainstream, new started to bubble up occasionally. The talk was that id was working on a new Duke Nukem game; But it didn't come out in like ... Forever. And, apparently that was because the Devs were more into playing World of Warcraft than actually working on the game. Eventually id went bankrupt or something, Gearbox was it I think bought the franchise I think and then eventually published Duke Nukem Forever. And ... it was ... hmm. Now, I don't want to be one of those that just know the binary of "BEST GAME EVER MADE" and "ABSOLUTE GAARBAAAGE" - I played it for a bit and I had ... fun ... sortof. It was however ... uhm ... rather simple. Or like ... too simplistic. At the very least was the reception not so great - and it's not really a shame that nobody is talking about that game anymore. It's not like ... . Uhm. I mean, sure ... overall its legacy is that it's been trash.

We might read this as a cautionary tale then. That Video Games are bad. They syphon away our time - and so the story of DNF would be one woven with irony, by irony into irony itself. But I'd like to draw you a different picture.

Consider this: If the game we got was pretty much what id had worked on - after having scrapped some earlier ambitions which aren't of any importance to the picture I'm drawing - they could have known that the game they were working on wasn't worth the effort. Therefore them playing World of Warcraft was ... in the end ... only bad for those that insisted for the game to be released. And their own financial bottom line I suppose. Whatever.

But you get what I'm trying to say. Right? If so, I want to take it one bit further.
We humans - we do kind of, even if we rationally don't or can't, want to believe in 'gut feeling'. Because we have it. But I'm not sure if any valuable scientific studies have been conducted on the matter. But it also doesn't really matter. For ... I don't think that it works like we'd want it to. Like so - if we 'could' listen to it, we could analyzie it and possibly disagree with it. I think that happens a lot. And then it's kind of not really 'gut' feeling anymore, as we eventually get a 'gut' feeling about our 'gut feeling'. And so I'd rather like to describe this "thing" as: 'The will of the Universe'.

What it is, how far it reaches, whether it "goes around the corner" or not ... isn't all that important. For now it's just a semantic twist on the gut feeling - to speak of things that go beyond the individual alone.

Like so was I previously writing about how deeply broken our financial logic seems ot be - and within a few thoughts it perfectly aligns with a bunch of ... demographic phenomena. Like so: Dropping Birth rates. To say, it is almost as if we can sense that "the box we live in" only has "so much" space.
Those limits are different for nations yet in development. Possibly due to population density or urban development, but maybe also due to a shorter distance between where the food comes from and the plates it's eaten from.

This is similar to what people say that complain about the krass lack of Solidarity within the US Social Structure - to which I want to add that a decline in Birth Rates is to be expected, also, if we are to understand that our population is to cap off at a sustainable level. Without, however, the cruelty of Darwinian Survival Stuff.

SO, we can call it however. "Will of the Universe", "Instict", "Subconscious Collective Thought", ... "Gut Feeling" ... it may certainly be something hardwired into us - something innate to life. Something that no amount of arguing against Abortions and encouraging people to procreate can effectively work against.
I mean ... when a person that knows they're pregnant starts to consider belly-splatting onto concrete ... that's to me two failures on part of the "pro-life" crowd's reasoning. At least.

And still. I like to say that life starts with the first breath. When the being starts to exist as its own individual organism. Recently someone responded to that saying ... I don't really remember, but ... sure - that doesn't mean that we'd wait that long. For a mother to carry their baby for that long, she must (and I would argue for that to be a prerequisite) be willing to also carry it to term.
As for the 'heartbeat' nonsense: Think about this: Where to we draw the line between "Vegetative" and "[term missing]" life? What I'm saying is that 'Vegetative' life is a term we can use for a lot of forms of life - as opposed to whatever we are. Once born.

A Cure to some Poison

So, you should be able to understand what I was trying to say ... and for what's left to say ... it might take me some time for me to get there. I mean, conclusions are definitely a bit overrated, sometimes. At least in my mind. Or so, depending on what qualifies as a conclusion. And don't get me wrong: Conclusions are awesome! At least when correct!
But like with Sudokus, sometimes it takes time. So, each individual correct digit you manage to place is a conclusion; At least that should be the case - but not 'the' conclusion.

And so ... sometimes a picture is ... worth looking at nonetheless.

As for that - I also had to think about ... bitches. The stupid kind. Or so, a very particular mindset that I found ... irritating to say the least. Not that I can't handle it, or don't know or have a solution. But then again - conveying just where I'm at personally has every now and then been a bit of a problem nonetheless.

Now, what I mean by cure here is also generally applicative to what I've been writing here so far. The idea is that poison has a negative effect on the body - and the cure would ... hmm. Perhaps 'remedy' is the better word. TO say ... 'contrast' that 'contextualizes' the 'negativity' you're subjected to - giving you something to grow towards.
TO some it may be valid to speak of stopping to smoke. To me it's more like ... the occasional Orange Juice between a plenty a dish of junk food.

As for those "irritating types" now - me saying this, or whatever I had in store to that effect, might feel weird. To draw you a picture: There's ... let's call him "Mr. Smart". "Mr. Smart" has all these ideas that seem very legit and valid and all that ... to a group of individuals. At least a group in the abstract. "Mr. Smart" has a lot to say about what men are and should be - and what women want - and it sure has a very ... we would say 'patriarchal and misogynistic' bend. And so there are ways we like to talk about these things, certain habits have formed; But eventually - I think - that misses the point. Because ... I can totally say, to those stupid bitches, that ... I agree with them and that "Mr. Smart" is actually right! However ... not entirely. Or ... only a little bit.

Now, the thing is that I assume that what I try to argue for does sound to some like ... I'm trying to sell them on less. That they so have to give up this and that ... and "Mr. Smart" may have ways to re-enforce that. And beyond a certain point there's nothing I can do there. Especially since ... some amount of sacrifice is like ... always on the list.
However - as for ... 'the remedy' - the thing is that what I enjoy is larger. Sure, that's what I claim. So ... I'll double down on that.
So, to me - if the argument were that ... I secretly want X or Y, that all women are secretly bitches and stuff like that - that's trying to sell me on less. And the main reason 'it' is 'greater' is because it exists in greater harmony with the Universe - and/or what's within it - and so there is overall more 'place' or 'space' for things. Things you might not even ... consider. And whether you believe me or not ... well. May matter somehow. But once you experience it - you'll understand that ... it's stupid to make your whole life about "More" and "it" and ... "FOMO" and "YOLO" and ... or ... whatever - to then say no when the real deal is presented to you.

Sorry, it sounded smarter while it was just in my head.

Multi ... stuff

It's a way of saying something. Which seems to be ... important sometimes. And ... it's somewhat ironic that Conservatism is like ... inherently about choosing 'less' than what ... ever. ... "makes sense", "is good for you", "is necessary" ... because the only thing that matters is to choose less than what might possibly be too much. Except ... when it comes to bad things. We might call them 'the necessary evils to fend off common sense' - like, authoritarianism.

It is ... a thing. I've played it through in my mind ... and a very simple anchor point to this is, that conservatism nourishes familiarity. I think we can all agree with that. That, at least in this day and age, in a way that would also like to argue that 'non-conservatives' HATE ... ABSOLUTELY ... familiarity. Like we allegedly want to destroy Christmas and all that.

Like so is there the issue with Homophobia or Transphobia. Partially also Racism. Except that here and there the matters of Homophobia and Racism are 'countered' because acceptance of Gay people and coolness with stranger ethnicities have sunken into the familiar. Which leaves ... 'us'. The trannies.
And we ... apparently or allegedly ... want to destroy civilization - intentionally or not - whatever, as highlighted in what might just be the most absurd clown-stories ever told.
Well, I mean ... maybe not. Hard to tell these days. It's like ... there's a Clown around every corner. So ... what gives?

Anyhow. I'm ... on the verge of moving beyond the contemporary rhetoric concerning all that sexuality stuff. So, starting with "the social construct" - for instance - I might from now on rather choose to use terms such as 'cultural fragment'. But ... not sure when. However, what's important to me right now is that there are ways to simplify all the apparent "gender woo". I mean, that it sometimes seems ridiculous doesn't mean that it isn't correct. It might be impractical, but ... we are, the spirit is, multi-facetted enough for a lot of crazy be actually ... not that crazy.

Regardless ... to keep it coherent let me phrase out some thoughts I had. There is the 'accusation' - at least against us Trans women - of 'autogynephilia'. Basically it means as much as that ... once we enjoy our femininity, that makes us perverts because it's a Kink. And yea, it should sound ridiculous because that's what it is! You might juggle with some words to make it sound more reasonable than it is, but the statement in the end would still stay the same. TO say: That "because we are men", "enjoying our femininity in a trans way" ... is a Kink and therefore we're perverts.
SO, there you go. I made that one as solid as it gets. "For you".

And there are two angles to this statement. One is the argument that we 'are men' - and the other is the argument that transsexuality is 'a kink'. But, as I will attempt to demonstrate, both "accusations" are entirely baseless.
Well ... "what is a man"? If by man you mean: Biological organism with certain sexual prepositions and subsequent preferences, you're implying a hypothesis that reality just doesn't confirm. That's like ... the whole point behind terms such as 'Queer'.
Sure. You might therefore try to say that we're lying - which is also just an assumption. Which is the other side of that argument. Saying that trans-sexuality is a Kink, does assume a whole lot about what's going on inside of us. And yea, if we don't like that - you might just say that we don't like to be found out and so the circlejerk continues. A look into nature, you should have heard by now, however tells us that homosexuality and even trans-sexuality are ... in fact ... natural occurrances.

And ... to 'do' think about the Children, I'm a bit torn on the matter of gender affirming care. And I think it's more complicated than the contemporary discourse is capable of processing. What I think children need - who come out as trans to their parents - is ... care. To not say 'support' - although it also fits. I think what a child needs is the affirmation that they're not left alone with their issue. They need to know that their issue is registered ... such as to feel comfortable about their existence.
I am also under the impression, that the harsh polarization of today - possibly amplified by the internet - procures a very black and white image. ANd sure, often it's the children that are left out of the discussion ... it would seem. But to not be pedantic about that for a sec, if getting on Hormone Blockers is the one singular thing a child can hold on to, of course they'll want it. And to be pedantic, I'd argue that them wanting it so badly is a strong indication of what's going on inside of them. Which can at times however also be ... a delusion.
ANd so, detransitioners also have a hard time I think. Because they're like caught up in the crossfire. Either side wants their voice to speak for theirs. ANd it's difficult to think clearly if every word is put onto the most sensitive scales imaginable.

So, a family should work together - towards a comfortable conclusion. And when the child is too old for that, so - not a child anymore - it's whatever. I mean, there's a case I've come to learn about. She was like told that she'd make a great dude - and herself possibly being ... indetermined enough thought "OK" and started to transition. Eventually she lived as a guy, but then realized that ... nope. Life as a man isn't hers. SO she detransitioned again. Leaving her voice in the depths.
It's stories like these, real or not, that coined the term "trans-trender". And the critical bit to me is that ... nobody but yourself can tell you who you are! Attempts at doing so is a form of pushing a social construct - or cultural fragment - onto someone.
SO, "this is masculine" and "that is feminine" ... "therefore you are/must be [X]" - is ... "faking someone into something".

In closure

Same goes for work. I had to learn ... a lot ... before I could use my skills in a way that conjoined with what we may call 'working spirit'. To do good labor is an ambition. And ambitions must be born from within.

And that's that. For now. I'm off to playing Videogames ...