Posted by: Sk | February 15, 2009

3 There was void

Today I woke up with a mood as if something had been solved in my mind, after all these years struggling with mist and confusion. Perhaps I felt that kind of infinite peace that only comes from the series of words building a sentence in your consciousness that expresses clearly an undetermined mass of thoughts and experiences and feelings, something like a piece of wood in the midst of the ocean that may help to structure the past and the present, and perhaps even the future.It’s true that I laughed, perhaps, at the end.

Of course everything was as usual my mother’s fault, just because she didn’t give any kind of importance to what she did, first of all, so that, as the main pillars of my own thought were derived from her way of structuring words, they were always slightly covered by the veil of lack of importance, until it was far too late.It was not only her fault. Something in my own way of ordering reality revealed finally a serious default somewhere that I had not had the time to determine. That I spent my childhood and youth reading and thinking, in a world that was turned towards the inner realms with such conviction that the outer world would loose completely its importance, is part of the problem. Finally I really didn’t care about the outer world.

Much later I discovered that due to a functional disorder in thought, I didn’t even see it. Of course, the fact of not having to struggle for social recognition, as it being inexistent as concept, allowed deepest concentration on deepest metaphysical thoughts, and as early as at the age of 12 I was already discovering logical mistakes in Descartes and at 16 I was wisely considering the different result obtained in the explanation of the origin of the world if you considered there being a living principle (god) or not. At 13 I told to my mother that Dâniken’s theory of mars men did not explain where mars men had finally come from, and was consequently not sufficient to explain the origins of manhood.

To say that abstract thought was my passion and pleasure from then when I was very young, and absorbed by the conviction that everyone in the world was more or less the same, I tended to believe that all the rest of humans had the same definite and irreversible love for concepts and definitions. Even if reality seemed rather to want to prove the contrary, I stayed blind to evidence as not wanting to think I was living in an isolated almost autistic world, or to make effective the definite judgment of the futility and superficiality of the common people.As I had to solve many problems, I needed a lot of time.The patterns that govern our reality are suspended of inherited patterns, I discovered finally, as they are so abstract and formal that almost no one has the capacity of mind of thinking them. Inherited patterns are transmitted by family structures and do concern mostly national acquisitions as the national bodies do represent these very complicated terms through the organization in visible justice, administration and corps of order, education, etc.

My way of thinking must have been originally very Spanish, radically submitted to definition in identity and organization in semantic fields. As Spanish is also the transmission of a moral entity which is called ‘pride’, and which is actually nothing but the maintenance of the subjective identity through this very peculiar submission to identity, considering my complete unawareness of changing social contexts, I could still make fun with French allusive destruction of definition through identity, by just saying ‘they had no pride’, deep consequence no one would so easily understand, but which had the force of evidence to my ironical mind. Of course they considered my maintenance of reason in identity as ‘dictatorial’ and ‘tyrannical’.Of course I think that the roots of thought are moral disposition and that the clarity of vision is the pure derivation of a whole block of thoughts governing inner behavior. You don’t lie, you don’t betray, you don’t spend time with gossip, you don’t play with feelings, you don’t run behind apparent goods, etc., are to my understanding, among many many other, the foundation of the possibility of understanding a problem and find the proper solution. This implies that you don’t accuse anyone without the proper proofs.

My complicated life, a challenge to maintain my own identity as such in a growingly aggressive and hostile environment, where the negligence of thought did push extremely difficult and though invisible work to the borders of social deperishment, was in fact nothing but the realization of questions and answers, whose abstract consistency was to become visible in empirical contexts. And this, if possible, without loosing the moral entity, source of peace and happiness, of quietness and security.

May I thus accuse anyone without proofs? It took ten years for me to solve this difficult question, which I couldn’t but by accepting the hypothetical field of accusation, which is to say, facts as hints of a possible fact behind appearance. Luckily the unconscious and the intuitive are much quicker and prompter in response than understanding, and thus, while my understanding was still struggling for the moral justification, my whole behavior was already tending to obtain justice by other means, as, I seem to have evaluated very soon, there would be no response anyhow else.

The facts are the following: in 1991 my visa card is stolen in Paris, during my last year of studies. It was Christmas, I remember, about a week before New Year. I realized quite quickly, phoned to the corresponding place and know perfectly well that insurance is to cover possible misuse of the card. A month later the bank informs me that there are 300 FF debts on my account (about 60 USD) and that I should clear up my situation. I phone and write to say this is to be covered by insurance. There is no answer. As I hate red numbers, I start getting very angry and finally, having prepared the trip to Jerusalem since 1990 and thus knowing I’m leaving, I write a final letter to the BNP saying that ‘making use of clause that allows closing a bank account with red numbers through a letter if ever the fault is on the bank’s side, I close the bank account in question’ and leave.Perhaps I know now that I was unconsciously spitting on a system that had given to the banks the total power on someone’s life through the possibility of judging (10 years bank account’s forbiddance without judge, lawyer or fiscal, was a ‘common measure’) on a certain number of cases. I don’t know whether I was finally forbidden of using a bank account for 10 years, which is to say I know it but I never received neither a notification, nor a letter, nor was I told anything such. I just remember that I was lying on the ground next to a cave very next to the Dead Sea in Israel, looking at the red ravine in Jordan just in front, with the sky blue above my head, and the world seemed horribly difficult and I just thought: “Won’t break my pride, dears, I don’t give in.” And I built up a logical solution that may allow survival in the most difficult context imaginable.

Intuitively I thus was reacting to evidence which had no empirical counterpart and I knew that there was no way back. I wouldn’t even try. I learned about the existence of a metaphysical background that was hold by ancestral laws of survival, where you can still find some gypsies, a few madmen, and many accidentally arriving people. I hid myself there and lived a wonderful life at the borders of social existence. Of course I had to develop a perfect double language in order to distract the enemy, but how otherwise if I knew perfectly well that France was preparing a massacre in Balkans in order to sell two or three weapons and that I had to put into functioning all my intelligence in order to assure peace for others that granted my own survival.

You take a political positioning for different reasons. Sometimes you really believe something. Sometimes it’s just a good ally against your enemy. Even if I really couldn’t understand France’s obsession in making me disappear from the surface of the earth, I know that attempts to destroy my private, social, financial life were constant and insistent. (To say the truth, they made me feel very important, although I didn’t know exactly what my actual importance could be.) I wouldn’t survive alone against such a determination. Logically I became an ally with who ever may have looked as a possible ally, without considering very much who it was at that very moment.

In 2001 something broke, finally, and though I didn’t understand very well what, it was evidence that I had to find some kind of solution. Among the principles I kept in the depth of my heart was the utter respect of law and law as deriving from a national entity as a state in the context of interpretation of a given people. And even if my moral criteria were relatively strict (context considered), I did never make the mistake of judging socially someone for a supposed moral crime, as the acceptance of law of a certain number of behaviors and realities, made of the moral judgment a subjective and personal world that may determine at the most my liking someone or my wanting to become friends with someone else, without it though being a criteria for social evaluation.The problem arose through the confrontation with realities that were so marginal that they seemed to have forgotten law in the depth of the unconscious, and even if I’d never agree fundamentally with such ancestral behavior I was rather obliged to build bridges of communication towards them in order to assure my own survival. As keeping myself in strictest identity, I was though still dealing with several highly theoretical problems that were occupying my mind at University. I knew that a logical problem would necessarily affect civilization whole as it was inserted in the logical composition of computers. I knew also, that the weakening of rational boundaries left human understands in the hands of the irrational and that it would have further disastrous consequences. While working at possible solutions which implied the understanding of whole lots of irrational ‘languages’, I was using methods and logics that belonged to a world where law had to be respected at least in appearance.

Strangely, with time, the irrational languages I had learned, were used very effectively to transmit results belonging to a highly rational context of understanding and thus to lower possible tensions arising more or less everywhere. The fusion of both languages, it appearing as if irrationality could be some kind of rationality, too, provokes a peculiar composition of reality in which I move from 2001 and after.It is impossible for me to evaluate exactly what happened. Intuitively it seems as if my movements were followed by some ‘important’ people. Too accurate information concerning mainly Russia and Israel, and after, China, reveal such a familiarity with ways of thinking, that I couldn’t explain it otherwise but by the fact of having an outer determination coming from observation revealing common, probably national, structures of understanding as evaluating facts. At the end, I had some Hebrew words landing into my field of consciousness, which had the side effect of making me very angry, as I couldn’t rationally explain the whole, and I decided to clear up several things by traveling to Israel in 2003. The only thing I cleared up was that it was shocking to know so much about people you didn’t know at all, and consequently thought that these people should be a little bit more careful with the unconscious transmission of information.

It didn’t clear up anything at all, but I decided to take sufficient distances so as to be able to build up a rational frame allowing the explanation of such an incongruity.Of course it looks like a false accusation again. But with the given distance I’d say that France had pushed things so far so as to ‘alert’ other nations of my inherent danger. That Russian appeared in the configuration has probably more to do with my ’spy work’ in Serbia in 1995 and later, which was no spy work at all, but could be understood as such as I was building internal lines of communication among the people in order to avoid on coming war.

Now, my mysterious development of rational structures is not yet cleared up completely, which explains my jumping from one subject to the other without further apparent reason. What kind of link that makes to electronics I will have to explain in further confessions, but there certainly is. On top of that I’ll have to stop teasing Sask if I want to become a serious person. But do I really want to? 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: