Eminent Hipsters (third version)

“ …if a President Kamala Harris’ party doesn’t control the Senate, she may not be able to get federal judges confirmed or pass Supreme Court reform. Winning both houses of Congress is essential … “ Vance, Joyce

The whole original Idea of this country was rule should originate in the People. Do “the people” challenge oppression? Doubtful, and nor does Kamala Harris, or the Democrats.

M E T I C U L O U S O R G A N I Z I N G, Inc.

We believe in full disclosure. We are a company. Our impecable standards are always available for rental. Six days a week you can experience our impecable standards. Whatever they were.

And yet the above organization has the nerve to call itself a company. With standards.

It is not some kind of defect if we find everyone to be doing the same thing. The decision to comform can be a valid choice. Sometimes behavior is imitative, in which case everyone is doing the same thing. That’s normal. Members of a particular species are nearly 100% imitative. It could be that, even for humans, sometimes this works better, so fine then. We should not criticize other persons for conformity. It is sometimes a social function of the human group or human ethnic group to all dress one way, and since each of them are doing much the same think (e.g. playing in a Mexican orchestra) they dress the same even though one is the drummer and another plays the bass and so forth. Everyone may seem to be doing the same thing with no variation as far as anyone can see. But the function is there, it is fine. There are positive social functions that require uniformity. The situation where everyone is acting alike has many uses. They may dress alike and as we know they will speak the same language. All of this is perfectly normal and they should be tolerated. The other extreme is to instruct them to think for themselves, or eat yogurt or something.

My point in saying this is that, even under conditions of extreme “conformism,” they have their own individual uniqueness and worth. And then there are also those who are not conformists of course. This is at the other end of the scale. Here is the creative individual, and he is different. Something is different about him? So what about the creative person? Should he exist? Or does he need to get in line and conform? In the end, he may go off by himself, not for any positive reason but because this is his only course of action. At some point it becomes inevitable. He does not like the other people in the group. He has to split off.

He is trying to come up with a unique solution to the problems of the world.

The innocence of this individual changes when we are devoted to making an ideological society. Only in the ideological society does such a person become a problem. A group splits off from the rest of humanity. They adopt the policies of a fragment. They follow fascists. The creative individual? Of course society wants him gone, for good.

There are two elements. These two elements are distinct and yet they should not be alienated, mutally exclusive, separated from one another. We need them. It is a dialectic. The two elements both of which are necessary ingredients of the present situation are ideology and creativity. They must not try to merge, however. They are different. But what is the exact distinction? The exact distinction is unlear. What is clear is that there are two different things. We definitely need creativity and there are times when one cannot get by without some aspect of an ideology.

Let’s take the example of a typical person who thinks. Any person, whomsoever -- they think. So then we consider that all persons must think, but this is not precisely the case, since we also generalize when we say that all persons think. Because in that case, then we must consider the ideological problem that they are all going to be thinking the same way. The ideological person copies; All persons think but some mostly copy. What those person do is mostly to copy the current thinking. So they first check to see what everybody else thinks; and then that person copies. Actually, not everyone is thinking.

It comes down, within these considerations, to there being two ways of having thoughts: The methodologies of thought are that they can think in an ideological way, where they are first checking what the ideology is, and then comforming as close to it as possible. Otherwise they could be a little more creative. Past a certain point we must acknowledge that persons can think in the creative way. That means they create original ideas. The latter one expresses the more “creative” side. We all think, using either approach: the ideological or the creative approach. This is not to say that the individual always makes a conscious choice between those two things.

Of course, it is difficult to be creative all the time. At those times when the creative person who uses the creative approach cannot come up anything good the argument will will swiftly be offered as to how it might be better to just rely on the ideology, which is always there at hand, being formulated by only a few ideological leaders. The argument can be offered that, had he adopted the ideological option, he would have an answer to whatever the current problem is. The creative person should resist here. Even if it is not a real answer, it might be pointed out that at least he would be able to make a living.

And of course then no one would ever be able to hear his poems. But we do sympathize with the creative person. So, we need them both and it is a sort of tragedy but we still need to think ourselves out of this one. We need to preserve our freedom from “facts.”

Opening yourself up to all possibilities is sometimes glamorized and credited to creative thought. It is not the Fact World side of it but definitely extremely creative. So, I am saying: good for you artists. Most of these ultra-creatives, however, come out scarred. The real geniuses have such important and unique skills. You have got to hand them that. Then they market it. I accept this as being inevitable.

Once you have a genuine skill marketing is the price you need to pay and you will of course seek out a broker or manager. This gives the artist representation and the day comes when in an overly-ideological world you need the dollar bill only because no one likes you or cares about you. So here is your artist-representative or broker who is emodied and empowered to divert your produce to the market, with no goal than the payments you hope to receive from grateful clients. That is the hoped-for outcome: that you, and the representative or gallery, be paid in this fictional way. So, then, you may well ask: “what is the market.” That is a fiction, too. This is where you get popular and people say, “Ooooooh this is good” and then you get to impose on them so you say they need to pay $300, or $3000 dollars, whichever the fictive “price” is in money.

So the two options again once again be summarized. This reality may be summarized: One may think in an extremely narrow way, or, one may join the circus. It takes the from of a choice between a creative path versus an ideological path. The ideology is now exposed as a total mistake. We are sorry; now we have to save the nation. There is no way to say which is the better one, and with creativity crippled and the children incapable of taking over any of the fine arts, the country has no choice but to follow the most henious of ideologies. One path in life is creative and the other is Trump. The Trump path is narrow. One person, the creative one, is doing whatever comes to mind, acting like he is in the circus. It is an experiment in freedom and the other side is being safe and predictable and doing the same thing every day. I know which one I favor. But we should not say one is right and the other wrong because we do not know. And, in particular, I am not sure that the safe and predictable person is wrong. He must be found to be wrong. Now in former ages, e.g. prior to the eighteenth century, it was the opposite: the safe and predictable person was considered “pious.” Creative people often got thrown into prison. So nobody is right or wrong. This not the right way to think and we must do everything we can to get off that bus as soon as possible.

People who are creative should not prosper for themselves. Understand this: it is time to serve the community.

This is my belief. I am one of the eminent hipsters, in favor of the flexible concept, and not the so-called “facts.” For me, there is virtue in being flexible.