My Story: On Love and Fear

Only LOVE can overcome FEAR.
~Mikavelli~

Personal story:

As a child, I saw how fearful my peers were of studying; they preferred electronics and video games. I didn’t. I was drawn to the smell of fresh books and the unmarked innocence of new notepads. I fell in love with reading and writing, two parts of me that incidentally not many around me appreciated, nor had the patience to enjoy.

But I fell in love nonetheless, with characters, with planets, with words, with knowledge…I fell in love with the unencumbered infinity of time, space, experience. A place where there were no boundaries…

Life progressed, and innocence became a thing of the past as I slowly learned of the atrocities of which humans were capable; humans, this species I was indoctrinated to treat with respect. It was a respect I’d felt “they” hadn’t earned. Humans, the self-destructive, entitled, greedy evils destroying what was once beautiful: the planet, the lands, the seas, the people of the world…

Love had been overridden by competition, by aggression, by the anarchy that losing one’s innocence had allowed.

I learned, instead, to fight: to fight for what is right, what is true. To fight for justice. I fought for those who fought for me, and against those who detested me. I fought, until I realized that I had become exactly what I had been fighting against: FEAR. I had become… fear.

In fighting the fear, I realized that I was only fighting myself. And that the only victory was LOVE. I had to love myself. I had to overcome fear with so much love that I feared how much I could love — myself as well as others. I surrendered to my “self”, to the love that overcame fear.

The love of “self” does not mean to be in love with yourself.
It is in the wording: the love…of self…
self’s love, not self love.

So what if…just what if…we allowed someone to love us that exact same way…?

Love yourself, but let yourself be loved too.

Peace,

Mik

The Simplicity of A Rational Life

 

Our only limitation is that we don’t know our limits. ~Mikavelli~

People live with the attitude that the ONE life we have will last forever, but facts tell us that we can’t. Everything living comes to an end, right?

But LIVING is relative and subjective. The breathing and heart-beating (physical) aspect might come to an end, but legacies, thoughts, and ideas have its way of continuing to exist without necessarily taking a physical form. This is called “inspiration“.

Some people live many lives, and experience changes. The life that worked at 21 is not always the same life we want at 35 – in essence, we don’t just limit ourselves to one LIFE. LIVING is about exploring, experimenting, and experiencing. What we take from our experiences defines our character, and the more experiences we have, the more we know our limits.

However, until those experiences are had, everything is infinite. The importance of an experience is that it tells us what our limits are.

But what we take from the experience is how to accept those limits. As a kid, we are encouraged to go out there and make things happen. As a teenager, we try to make those things happen. As a young adult, you start to realise those limitations and why certain things might’ve been impossible as a kid.

Then comes enlightenment: to fight or to walk away. We reach that stage in life where we go beyond cognition, we go beyond the pros and cons lists we can logically make. We reach experience, and that is something which can’t be taught or transferred. Cognition is something that any logical person can comprehend by reading a book or an article. Experience is transformative, it’s something that you feel and then learn how to cope or grow.

We can never force someone to have an experience; force can only lead someone to understand a concept from a logical, formulation point of view. But to truly teach, educate, and inspire, we must allow others to have that experience for themselves, and allow them to experiment different strategies for themselves.

We can never tell someone what to think, only how to experience. And when the world reaches that mutual point where this can be experientially understood, then we’ll realise that every system ever created by man was simply to compensate for an insecurity that springs from lack of experience.

The more you read, the more you realise what it is you don’t know. The more you communicate, the more you see how others think. The more you travel, the bigger the world begins to seem – which means the more possibilities arise and you don’t feel like you only have one reality.

But the more you experience, the more transformed you become. And when you reach that point, you’ll discover what really matters – and none of these discoveries ever include lots of money or material items.

Everyone comes to that realisation in their own time, but step one is the same for everyone: get out of your comfort zone and make those experiences, because it’s your life and no one will live it for you. Those without experiences will, at best, understand you cognitively.

Yet those with experiences will guide you, because not know can they grasp your situation cognitively, but experientially. And people like that truly understand how to balance feelings and logic.

The reality of being rational: embrace both emotions as well as logic, and go with your instincts because your logic will fall into place naturally.

Stop falling into the 21st century trap where everything appears to happen immediately. Remember that the first humans were not created in the 21st century – we have never evolved. We still live in caves (little blocks of personal space called a bedroom) and we still eat dinosaurs (birds – including chickens – DNA has been scientifically proven to be evolved from dinosaurs).

Humans appear to have progressed, but evidently it just meant denying human nature. Embrace your human nature and apply it in the real world.

That’s balance. And that, is called accepting our limits. Go and find out which ones you can push, and don’t force the ones that can’t be done. We can never shut off our emotions, but that doesn’t mean all of our reactions have to be emotional. Our actions will be rational if we experience our emotions, not analyse them.

If you want emotional analysis, talk to a psychologist – but on a daily basis, embrace the emotion, know where it comes from, and understand why it makes you feel that way. Then go ahead and feel it, express it, and keep doing whatever you need to ensure long-term happiness. (Hint: keeping up with the latest trends is not long-term. It’s just unnecessary stress to distract you from your real stress).

So go forth and make things happen. Experience the feeling, and apply it in your situation. It really is that simple.

References
1. The Experiential Learning Cycle (Alberton, 2013)
2. T-Rex Protein Confirms Bird-Dinosaur Link (National Geographic)

Tech-No-Logic

Smart people ask dumb questions to arrive at genius answers.
~Mikavelli~

Einstein is known as one of the greatest thinkers of mankind. He was a genius, a scientist, an inventor, and a narcissist. In his initial years, people viewed him as eccentric and almost crazy until he was proven right, years later. He once quoted, “It has become appallingly clear that our technology has surpassed our humanity” when he was working on the atomic bomb. Ironically, his efforts during the Second World War made him one of the contributors of modern technology.

However, his statement in the twentieth century was not welcomed by many at the time for technology was invented for the military. The majority of the generation’s new technology was designed for combat and defence. Einstein’s conjecture was made in realising how easy it was becoming to create great chaos – but also how little people were doing manually. The first computer was invented in 1822, but in 1947 the bipolar transistor was made, creating a link between the two computers. Einstein saw the conjecture: he realised that as the “computer” progressed, people would become less engaged in each other and more engaged in themselves – and what they could do with computers.

In his time, people did not respect him for these negative speculations – or they chose to ignore it on the premise of being superficially delighted by a new invention, not unlike children with a new toy. The general populous as well as those in power ignored the warnings of a genius, only to result in a modern twenty-first century of technology and laze.

Today, computers generate statistics – and we live by probability. Computers give us definitions – we categorise ourselves. Computers spread information – we can physically explore “thought”. Computers create gateways – we forget there’s a human on the other end. Computers are the reason this blog exists – or is it merely turning an idea into something concrete?

Regardless, Einstein was “only” a century ahead of his time when he made the statement, and people regarded him as the thoughtless idiot who was creative, abstract, and in the clouds. If only he were alive today, and could see the legacy he predicted.

And he predicted it because he was a part of it. He created it.

~Mikavelli~

Everybody-is-a-genius-1024x696

Technology is Destroying the Quality of Human Interaction

Being Human

We tell ourselves a lie and ignore every truth contradicting it.
~Lloyd Lowry~

* side note: This is a continuation of my previous blog Becoming Human and Society

The whole idea and habit (culture) of not asking for help on the premise that everyone around is too busy to make time, handle or even make an effort comes from a society and culture that is almost unable to balance their lifestyles.

Whether it’s the competitive Asian market; whether it’s the strive to be the best; whether they are traditionalist values passed down from generations of conservatives and fundamentalists; whether it’s having to catch up to standards of an ever-changing world. There are many elements which factor in to this strange culture.

Strange, because it defies human nature. Strange, because it eradicates our innate abilities. Strange, because it is a culture of suppression rather than suppression.

Strange, because every face I see is not the face of a friend or foe – it is the mask of a robot so heavily constructed and guarded that the real them is lost amidst a magnitude of hidden debris; concealed imperfections for the sake of face and reputation.

Truth is accordingly defined as nothing more than concrete explications: black and white, no grey areas. Which, again, defies human nature.

Humans are ambiguous and volatile, ever-changing and sometimes progressing. The fact that humans need to regress in order to progress is part of the process inevitably necessary to catapult into something stronger. Something bigger.

Something that will take you closer to being the best that you can be.

But no, being a real human is tedious and painful. It is also beautiful and challenging. Yet I live in a society that doesn’t have time to take measures to contribute to a world with so much potential and capacity. The suppression of expression – as evidenced realistically by the Umbrella Revolution or (OCLP Movement) – shows the need for humans to break free. Truth be told, the only reason 2% of this city stood up to and against the government was the liberal education they underwent starting from 2007 onwards. An education which promoted internationalism and globalization; an education which encouraged expression; an education which enabled and activated part of their humanity.

And they broke free from the constraints and shackles of a conservative government – of a fascist regime so archaic no other nation in the modern First World follows owing to an internationalized world that happens to recognize that financial power is not the only way to progress.

Success is not defined by the money we make: it is defined by our choices.
~Mikavelli~

To break free from a constraining regime that they are completely unaware they are submerged in – a regime so strong and secure that it keeps this society in that bubble, that comfort zone they find so protective. That safety net in which they use precautions to stay afloat and stay “alive”.

No. They are not living. They are not being. They merely exist. This is not called being alive. This is called drifting. This is getting from Point A to Point B as unequivocally as possible without accounting for the Point Cs and Ds – unexpected turn of events, however emotionally intense – which would ultimately mould a real human.

A human. Not a person. Not a robot.
A human.

No. This is a society of safety measures, of rule-abiding citizens afraid to challenge stereotypes. Afraid to put in the effort to build a reality of their own choosing. Living in fear of change (or in the actual, non-falsified world), and accepting the sad, imbalanced, stressful life as their reality.

No. This is not reality. This is a construct. This is man-made. This is a defiance of human nature.

This is a defiance of our selves.

And this, all this, is one of the greatest detriments to society – that we tell ourselves a lie and ignore all the truths contradicting it. Those who expose the truth are penalized for it – challenged, critiqued and commented on by those simply can’t handle, for whatever excuse, the unravelled truth of their own insecurities.

Becoming Human

The eye is to observe
The mind to reason
The heart to understand
The life to be experienced
And the Voice is to express and be heard
~Mikavelli~

The modern world has constructed a reality of so-called “normality”, but being a social construct, the definition of “normal” should be ever-changing. However, in this day of fear and conformity, of precaution and preventative measures, the definition of “normal” is unyielding. There are, on the other hand, non-conformists out there who choose to challenge the regimes and boundaries of limitations set by a world trying to maintain afloat in this dog-eat-dog world.

These are the radicals.

Yet to the detriment of dreamers, the word “radical” too, has been associated with great negativity in this era. “Radicals” are supposedly the ones representing intense religious movements; “radicals” are supposedly the ones who force their definition of morality on the people of their reality; “radicals”, in every sense of this generation’s definition, can only (sadly) be used with a pinch of salt.

It is to this that I attribute the greatest challenge to the modern regime – definitions. If normalcy is a social construct, and radicalism has been understood as social destruction, then anything which defies the edifice of modernity (or post-modernity) is thus deemed “abnormal”, “paranormal” or “supernatural”.

Nonetheless, what if these “abnormal” traits and abilities that people have are no more than back-to-basics – of conforming to human nature rather than social construct? Of living rather than merely existing? Of being rather than performing? Those who are in touch with themselves and have life experience to carry forth into the real world are often faced with the challenge of knowing when to conform, and when to defy. The sad truth, however, is that the elements in which humans were naturally born with – the ability to swim as a baby, having an intuition, trusting vibes and gut feelings, sensing others’ presence – all of these innate human abilities have been eradicated by definitions, rationale and logic. Yet, the irony is that these definitions and so-called “logic” are all but rational.

“Logic” cannot be an absolute truth unless both ends of the spectrum are taken into account and analysed – but the attributes of human nature are often destroyed or underestimated by the human definition of logic and reason. But logic can be interpreted and deduced: true logic lies in knowing that not everything is black or white, and that not everything in life is a “model answer.” This is much like what Aristotle had said that “The law is reason free from passion.”

By interpretation, Aristotle argues that in order to rule mankind, one must thus eliminate any form of passion – any form of emotion, feeling, or “abstracts” in one’s mind. This is evidenced in any capitalist society, and being the capitalist era we live in, money is the universal language everyone understands, which then determines success as financial power; accordingly, the “cause” behind all success is the ability to shut off human emotion, defy human nature, and live a passionless and meaningless life.

This, according to modern society, is the most secure survival method, and to revert to human nature and defy those who walk away from it is called “breaking the law” and “becoming radical”.

The paradoxes and harshness of reality leave most at a standstill: at any given point in life, absolutely anyone can have a certain amount of power to make a difference – but standing alone and fighting for what you believe is draining and tedious. Very few withstand the shrapnel and shards of broken glass that conformists swing at them while trying to shape and mould a “model citizen”, but the ones who do (and can) are ultimately the non-conformists. The radicals.

The ones who change the world.

The ones who society calls “antisocial”, “delusional”, “crazy”, “emotionally unstable”, and so forth.

The ones with a power so intense that conformists who recognize it try their hardest to suppress and fight; to water-down and abridge.

We are the radicals. We bear the responsibility of the rest of the world simply on the premise that we are able. But the world is not ready, and brilliant ideas always take the longest time to manifest into reality for they are waiting for the world to be ready.

To be radical, use:

Voice JPG

Analysis on the Umbrella Revolution

CartoonWhat is the Umbrella Revolution?

The Umbrella Revolution is a revolutionary protest organized by students, educators and civilians around Hong Kong to fight for democracy. The name was coined during the final weekend of September in response to the publically deemed “excessive force” exercised by the police when they launched tear gas at unarmed civilians. The police justify their actions by claiming to have been outnumbered by a ratio of 7 angry protesters per 1 cop.

 Why is the Umbrella Revolution taking place?

As per an agreement made between Britain and China in 1984, Hong Kong is to exercise a One Country Two System policy until 2046. This agreement was made to ensure that Hong Kong is entitled to its capitalist free market and independent government. However, in the recent years, China has begun to appoint pro-Chinese government officials to the Hong Kong “Cabinet” so as to secure their hold on Hong Kong before the final handover thirty years from now.

 The People of Hong Kong are now standing up to this government and challenging the ideologies and expectations set out by the Chinese government. Two of the largest issues raised during the protests are universal suffrage and censorship. On Thursday night, 2nd October, Hong Kong’s Chief Executive CY Leung announced that he would grant Hong Kong five million votes for the 2017 election. Hong Kong is unsatisfied with this response, claiming that it is not the number of votes in concern, but rather who the candidates are. “Giving us the selection of A) Bread with ham and cheese, B) Cheese with bread and ham and C) Ham with cheese and bread is not a real election!” claimed one of the leaders at the Central protests. “We want a true election!” echoed the crowd.

Click here for the definition of True Democracy in Hong Kong.

The realities behind the protests:

All throughout history, Hong Kong has always been a popular hub for international traders. The Imperial Era recognized Hong Kong’s tea, pearl and salt resources, and thus began trade. The Colonial Era then acknowledged Hong Kong’s geographical location, and used Hong Kong as a port between traders. Over the years, Hong Kong has always caught the eye of many stronger civilizations. The 1800s marked the beginning of Hong Kong’s existence under colonial Britain, but by the mid-1900s, Hong Kong’s paradigm was challenged by Japan. The Japanese managed to occupy Hong Kong for just under a decade before Britain took full control in the 1950s.

 1984 was when the Sino-British Joint Declaration was signed, permitting Hong Kong to function with two policies until 2046. 1997 marked the “Handover,” which was when Britain “returned” Hong Kong to China under the terms and conditions listed out in 1984. In 1996, Prime Minister John Major promised Hong Kong that “If in the future there were any suggestion of a breach in the Joint Declaration, we would mobilize the international community and pursue every legal and other avenue open to us. Hong Kong will never have to work alone.” This promise was evidently disregarded in Hong Kong’s fight for True Democracy, but the reason being that the timing within the international arena is not ample.

How timing is severely affecting the outcome of this revolution:

Many sources have made various claims that this plan was set in motion within the last decade, albeit these claims are heavy, but not necessarily inaccurate, conjectures. Democracy has always been a threat to the Chinese government, but Hong Kong has always been open to democracy. Therefore, superpowers who are engaged in spreading democracy can easily use Hong Kong as a hub or pathway into China. However, the timing of this revolution is the greatest weakness of the revolution itself: considering that most of the international focus is on defeating Isis, most superpowers feel that their resources are better spent ridding the world of a concentrated religious paradigm rather than supporting a small city that is one of the top ten contributors to the global economy.

 Further analysis and outcome of responses indicate that Western Superpowers would put more effort into supporting the ideological paradigm had the emphasis not been so heavily concentrated on Isis, but also that the involvement of Western Superpowers would be from a diplomatic standpoint, and not military warfare. China is currently one of the strongest economic powers in the world, and considering that those whose armies are reliant on Chinese money, it is unlikely that their armies would take on the Chinese government in the first place. Conversely, the Chinese government is a threat to Hong Kong’s democracy, which essentially threatens the independent free market on many levels. This threat is partially what is attracting attention in the global arena, and this is the reason why Western Superpowers are even marginally involved.

What will happen?

What the media has failed to accurately portray is that this revolution is not a fight that began just ten days ago. This is not just a “protest by bored people who want to change something.” And the fact that protesters are leaving the scene is not a sign of boredom or defeat, it is a sign that Hong Kong will continue to maintain its solidarity and together, we will come up with a new, more feasible and more realistic method to achieve an outcome. The protest was needed in order to arouse international and national attention, and now that we understand which Superpowers are in unison and for what reasons, perhaps all we need is the correct timing. Whatever happens to this protest, this Revolution, it is evident that these ten days are just the tip of the iceberg, a taste of greater things yet to come. Greater, regardless of the ideological or paradigmatic shifts, but greater in the sense that very soon, big changes will take place in Hong Kong, and these changes are all dependent on how strongly China values their reputation in the International Arena.

This volatility of China is the greatest threat to Hong Kong.
And Hong Kong’s independence and social progression is the greatest threat to the Chinese government.

So, what now?
Click here to read “The next 36 hours could determine the future of Hong Kong.”

McGordan

Perspective

        We like the idea of possibilities, exaggerating our own capacity and live like we’ll live forever. The common colloquial term “you only live once” has been adopted as a commonly known slang in today’s generation, and though we are well aware that none of us will live forever, we perpetually choose to live in the moment and make impulsive decisions for the sake of momentary happiness. Our ego renders a superiority complex, believing that our strengths are above others’ weakness, and then idealise others to compensate for our own shortcomings. We feel an unjustifiable amount of disappointment when they can’t meet our unreasonable expectations, and rather than questioning our judgement, we nitpick and pinpoint flaws which reflect our weaknesses.

        Optimists dwell on positivity, even when the positivity is irrational and goes against any evidence refuting this rationalisation. Idealists dwell on possibility, telling themselves a lie and disregarding every truth contradicting it. Realists dwell on strategy , working around every paradox within the idea. Pessimists dwell on the negative, diminishing any hope that an idea can be executed. Cynics dwell on the harshness of every flaw, critiquing every concept which idealists believe will revolutionise society.

        Perspective plays a large role in how we relate to the volatility of a changing world, and yet once you’ve gotten a firm grasp of reality, you learn to work your way up on the chain of reaching your own potential. You aim high, and even if you fall, you find a different ladder and move in a different direction to achieve a goal. Accounting for variable change makes a difference to how we respond to change and progress, and thus accepting every challenge which comes our way only motivates and strengthens us to excel. Some of us don’t always know what we want; the rest of us are simply never satisfied, simply because our world is buoyantly intensifying.

        Having a firm grasp on reality doesn’t necessarily mean figuring out then and there what we want: it means accepting what was, what is and what can be, and moulding our journey from there. Perhaps it begins from within, perhaps it begins with an external push, catapulting us into moving and growing. Basic development is nothing more than accepting and adapting to change, knowing that we can’t live forever, and believing in what we do. If you can wake up in the morning and know that what you plan to do that day satisfies your desire deep down, then you’re living out the meaning you’ve romanticised; if you can go to sleep at night, knowing that you’ve had an impact – however great – on someone’s life, you’ve satisfied a destiny you may not even believe in. But it’s there, and it’s real.

        We are what we are not by definition, but by the choices we make.

        The key to success, is to love what you do, and ultimately love yourself for doing it.

~Mikaela Gordan~

“One has never said better how much “humanism”, “normality”, “quality of life” were nothing but the vicissitudes of profitability.” ~Jean Baudrillard~