Who are We?
Friday, March 9th, 2007 | Posted in identity, self, unrestWe are those who will association.
Is there any Right for We to be?
No. It is simply done; an action varying in degree of violence against those who do not or will not associate.
We are not Them. But this does not mean our will to associate is against Them, although the will to associate is always against something. What We are against is something calling us nothing. What We are against defines us, though we may be against it.
Diseases are the names of the asssociations that fight it. We will be no longer when We take the right to be from the disease. Then We will be something like it was something. And it will be nothing like We are nothing. In those days afer the End, only the delight of memories of suffering will keep us together, reminiscing on the stoop under the twilight.
And night will fall again, the darker our isolation the deeper into the house of Right We will be. And in that house, which all have access to, we will clamour around the furniture, our memories the hard spots of former leisures. All will seek. But there will be some who in the darkness will despair – throwing memories at those who are all just ghosts to them. But then there will be those who will seek a hand. They will themselves not into further isolation, but unto association. In memory of those who confronted the Night before, We will emerge.
We who are emerging the house of Right, will risk in our errors to will repitition. We will repeat life under the light of day with our appeals made unto that living Hope whose being is our object.
March 11th, 2007 at 8:06 pm
We who will association, will freedom, freedom for one another, and the other. A freedom for, for alone we are nothing, isolated voices calling what cannot be heard with no ears to hear it. Dependent on none we become our own limits and we are forever bound by these borders. The descent into the house of Right is the desire of freedom from: freedom from Them, from one another, from the night. We enter the house of Right and become free from the association we first willed; self-contained, our house of Right soon can contain none but ourselves. Emergence is the movement of freedom for, for the one beside us and the Hope that is before us. We make our appeals at two trees: at the first where we cut the lumber from its branches to build our houses of Right, of Good, where we asserted our freedom from; and the second, where for Them, the captive and the diseased, all freedom was given – and restored.
March 13th, 2007 at 11:40 pm
And what if someone named Lucy Sez posted a comment on yours? Then it would say “Lucy Sez Says: I don’t know what to say.”
I shall abandon my experiment, it raising such matters of greater importance to investigate.
March 14th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
This is very confusing. Why are you guys using noun as verb… um…
“Who are we?
Engineers!”
– a quote from the chanting at the orientation for engineering frosh (freshmen.)
Hey Christo, are you going to the re-union?
March 24th, 2007 at 3:21 pm
Kenny: No. I won’t go to the reunion. Are you? And Kenny, what is it that gives an individual permission to say that they are part of something larger – that they are a We or an Us?
March 25th, 2007 at 8:44 pm
See… that’s exactly what I was talking about. I actually went and looked up the definition of We and Us in the dictionary.
I say an individual need no permission to _say_ that s/he is part of a larger group. Whether a larger group recognize an individual to be part of its group, or whether a third party recognize an individual belonging to a particular group… that’s another matter. But then… may be mere association doesn’t matter. May be it is the association with a brand, concept, ideology that people cares about. And now that you got me thinking about it, I thought of the instance of Hong Kong politics. In Hong Kong politics, people are generally associated to be either a democrat or a “loyalist” (to the mainland.) But that is not to say that all loyalists are against democracy (or at least they don’t claim that anyway). More interesting is that within each respective group, there is a spectrum of political ideologies (the classical liberal to conservative thing) within each group.