I wish life were better. I wish away all these people with their statistics and measurements, the ones who measure happiness-factors and one’s adaptability to a poisonous environment. Go to another universe, leave us alone, you number-crunchers, you SHOULD-people, you insane grey civil servants of a universe that is dunked into business goo and the idea of ‘everything can be measured’ and ‘we all must be an average of these measurements’ that are illusions. This defines new normality that has been called neurosis some time ago. Now it is normal to be self-centred, phobic, to sell your loved ones on the free market, sleep four hours a day and do everything to beat mortality by inhaling deadly health foods and thinking deadly limited thoughts, by starving yourself to death and believing you starve yourself to life. This is new normality. It is a cult of death masked as a cult of eternal life. So some of my past partners or lovers have become part of this, as so many middle-aged men (and women). Somebody told me this is their biological drive (fear of mortality equals lack of empathy, living for your own needs only, giving in to the urge of having as much [emotionally detached] sex as possible with as many people as possible, depersonalising the random objects of your desire [one storyline in tabloid New Darwinism: biologically men have to spread their seed randomly, therefore they need casual sex and extramarital affairs, while women have to take care of their offspring, so they are monogamous]). Luckily, offspring grows up, so women must be allowed (in populist Neo-Darwinian and other speak) to have as many sexual encounters as they want when older. Did somebody misunderstand Evolutionary Psychology?
In a hypercapitalist society the question arises if sex is a biological necessity, a romantic storyline or consumption of goods and exchange of favours with the guidelines that all interactions have to comply with market strategies and fit into a neoliberal worldview. Looking at political actions and social relations there seems to be a ‘biologically induced’ urge to defame or even destroy others, tribes, races, genders, species, the earth, planets and universes in the name of superiority and exploitation. Is there a biological need to cause demise (rotating around oneself [individual, ideology, interest, position and market value], the solitary planet disguised as star) and not to embrace the world (everything else and oneself)? I doubt it. One narrative is, ‘I (we) do not mind what happens with the world, as I (we) have to die anyway’, another one, ‘We don’t want anybody (offspring, other species, autonomous hybrids or machines) to replace us as we are working on our own (physical) immortality‘. Of course, we have the choice to interact, be social, ethical (in all its fluidity), utopian without being dystopian, socially conscious and less exploitative (I am a realist), to save the planet (or at least not destroy it), be kind and attentive to others and to ourselves, etc. Meanwhile, the universe will go on and it will end without humans and humanoids observing, interfering or killing (each other).
I ask myself, is this it?
La vie en rose, Grace Jones, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYkVtz6ozJE
Is this it, No Turning Back, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRLCwW0mCUc