thinking aloud – mil's page

when big politics and business make the customer a kleenex

three good things happened today: all related to how i perceive the world.

1. first, i do have a death wish: why, when i first read him, hemingway sooo immediately clicked with me.

2. however, i don’t want to be unreasonable or hurtful to others in my goal to achieve this outcome. i also most definitely don’t want support to ameliorate it. amelioration is the biggest wool-over-the-eyes of our western democratic time. i don’t want to be part of a process that perpetuates its cruelties.

3. my strategy — that is, only strategy — will from now on be as follows: i shall say and write about everything that i judge needs to be called out, in such a way that the powerful i will be bringing to book day after day after day will, one day, only have the alternative to literally shoot me down.

in order, then, to make effective the above, i resolve:

a) to solve the problem of my personal debt, acquired mainly due to my startup activities, so the only way in the future that the powerful shall be able to shoot me down is by literally killing me.

for my mistake all along was to sign up to the startup ecosystem, as it stands, as a tool for achieving my personal and professional financial independence:

• startuphunch.com (being my final attempt at making startup human)

as this personal debt is causing me much mental distress and, equally, is clearly a weakness i show to an outside world i now aim to comprehensively and fully deconstruct, as a massive first step, then, i do need to deal with it properly.

b) once a) is resolved, i shall proceed to attack ALL power wherever it most STEALTHILY resides.

that is, i focus on this kind of power: the stealthiest and most cunning versions of.

the ones where it appears we are having favours done for us, for example.

specifically, that is, big tech. but many many others, too.

what essentially constitutes the driving forces behind zemiology, loopholes, neo-crimes, and similar legally accepted but criminally immoral societal harm; all of which, as a general rule, is most difficult right now to track, trace, investigate and prosecute.

• crimehunch.com/neocrime

• crimehunch.com/loopholes

• www.secrecy.plus/law | legalallways.com

• www.sverige2.earth/example

this is why i have concluded that my natural place of work is investigative journalism. and where i want to specialise — in this aforementioned sector and field of endeavour — is in the matter of how big tech has destroyed our humanity. but not as any collateral, accidental, or side effect of a principle way of being it may legitimately manifest.

no.

purposefully; deliberately; in a deeply designed way, too … to mainly screw those clients and customers whose societies and tax bases it so voraciously and entirely dismantles.

to screw, and — equally! — control. and then dispose of lightly and casually, when no longer needed, or beneficial to bottom lines various.

and so as a result of all this, i see that having a death wish is beneficial: if channelled properly, as from today i now intend it shall be, then it will make me fearless as never i dared to be. fearless in thought and disposition. fearless even when made fun of.

not in order to take unreasonable risks with my life — or anyone else’s: no.

rather, to know that life doesn’t exist when the things i see clearly are allowed to, equally clearly, continue.

and to want deeply, deeper than ever in my life, to enable a different kind of life for everyone.

NOT just for the self-selected few. those who lead politics, business and the acts of pillage and rape in modern society.

not just for them.

a better life for everyone, i say. everyone.

because i don’t care about mine. i care that mine should make yours fine.

now do you see? this is what makes me feel useful. nothing else. nothing else at all. and certainly not finding personal happiness. that would only blunt the tool.

🙂

aside, definition, rationale

why write

someone asked me this morning why i write. i didn’t answer them.

maybe it was an example of new knowledge for me. my dissertation supervisor, a very brainy person, told me once that we should treasure those moments when we didn’t know how to answer someone: they were examples of new knowledge.

certainly for ourselves, and then again maybe for others too: a wider humanity. in either case, to be valued above almost any other lived experience. because the experience manifests itself in all our endeavours: a common denominator which is neither low nor common, tbh. in work; in academia; at school; in relationships; in a love at first sight … everything i tell you.

why write? not to be read. never. to write in order to be read is to almost surgically remove the very condition good and faithful writing demands to remain faithful and good.

freedom. that’s why i write. to be free. to remain free. to sustain a wider freedom. to ensure liberty remains a goal of all human beings.

you see … to be read is nice but dangerous. to be read is to enter into a dialogue. and in such dialogue we inevitably compromise, fudge, lose our trails of thought, forget the purpose of reflection — and, then, indeed, its power.

that’s not me. and after sixty years of trying to be a writer who is read, i realise it mustn’t be me. because my virtue is that i don’t enter into dialogue before i have my ideas.

actually, that’s not true. by writing, i speak to myself. and this, for me, is key: because it’s truer than true that without this mode of speaking with my being i never am able to know, until i follow the described procedure, what that being thinks.

so if i have to enter into a dialogue with the person who asked me this morning about why i write … well … i write to be free and find out what it is to be me.

is all.

enough?

i give no more.

except a video i just made and then a poem i just wrote this morning at breakfast in stockholm city, sweden.

♥️ 🇸🇪

“a poem on the sound of silent friendship” by mil

it’s not a condition

it’s not a redemption

it’s not a transaction of sexual reward:

i met you and saw you

and sensed kindred soul

beyond the blood that tied us down

and bound us with violence

as if sworn to some crown

it’s not anything like this

anything at all

it’s just that i found myself

that evening enthralled

by a person who was fun

after all was said and done:

a person whose brain

matched a beautiful way

of moving her body

without insistent degree

but just in that measure

i found recently to be good

in this place i am now:

a lagom of life and how

where we aim to deliver

on more than a brutish noise

the sound of silent friendship

between you and me

has become my go-to manner

of being a man on this rock

and i find in its steadiness

i need nothing more

than to know before i go

i was a good friend in the end

aside

thinking aloud is not the same as being allowed to think

i used to teach english as a foreign language and a second one.

i used a system with a process called ppp:

presentation
practice
production

i realised, as i shared my knowledge over the years, that it was a good process: for me, anyways. it replicated how i learnt what i thought about the world around me.

except the order, for me, was different.

in my case, when for example i thought-experiment or write, i produce first, and then — to myself — i present, often for the first time in my life. i only know what i know after i communicate it. because, in my case, i don’t know if yours, in its telling we have its act of creation. yes. literally this.

the practice, meantime, is meta: it never isn’t happening.

that’s my brain, anyhow — for me and my metacognitive outcomes: produce, and so only then be presenting to oneself.

and then not be not practising, ever.

in its making yesterday, the video which follows is a very good summary and example of how i understand what i am thinking deep inside my intuitive core.

and i am comfortable now with this series of procedures. and i think i shall continue to the end of.

meantime, as i write these lines, i am minded to discover something else about myself: two weeks ago i was in stockholm, sweden. i was alive, and comfortable.

since the 21st of february i have been in my homeland, becoming increasingly uncomfortable. you all love how you are: that’s your right. but i can’t love your way of being: and that’s my right.

from now on, i do business in respect of tech documentation with whomsoever values my services and capacity.

equally, not one of my tech projects will you now work on if you do not reside in sweden gladly and joyfully. or at the very least, once experienced, understand why i want nothing else.

tech can be fabulous and compliant and purposeful and societal and security-minded and defensive against a clearly common enemy — as well as supportive of the citizenry more generally.

and the third most innovative country in the world — a country of barely ten million people — is proof that if you ain’t got it, it’s because you don’t want it.

and so where you don’t even want to try, i don’t want you to try. but i don’t want your closed doors, either.

because i shall continue to do so: that is, to try where you do not.

in places where others also want to.

and a population of ten million and a half is much more than we need. in fact, to take the first steps … well … we just need two feet that want to.

so imagine what 21 million feet may do.