Photo by Pedro Lima on Unsplash
Given the myriad of dystopian literature present in our libraries, one should take note of the oddity pertaining to the authors’ usages of such metaphorical ideals, given any norm of dehumanizing ideology; cattle, pig, such labels, when used in such contexts, serve only to bridge the connection between the contrasts of man and animal. Take the novel Animal Farm by George Orwell, for example. Why is it, however, that given such dystopian settings, we should scramble to compare ourselves to the likes of farm animals? Of course, given the structure of our current systems, the manner in which many cattle are raised would prove to be less than ideal; yet, having unintentionally shed light upon such matters, why should we continue to perpetrate such narratives? If we as a society hold cattle, as granted, to such low standards, with so little regard, then why won’t we revise such innate shortcomings? I’ve taken notice of such trends as of late; we as a society love to unintentionally (or not) shed light upon pressing matters of varying capacity, only to then abandon such rhetoric, and then to repeat such processes. Why?
It’s no surprise that, given any academically strident community, one should witness an uptick in the glorification of trauma, present under the guise of character development, or even cognitive function; the righteous, virtuous clarity of their well-endowed ingenuity should surely prove to be quite an excellent factor in the encompassing of their overall demeanor, shouldn’t it? Except, I’ve taken notice of many instances in which someone complains just to simply complain (which in itself isn’t necessarily a bad thing, of course), without taking any proper accountability to work past such harrowing measures. In any case, even if one were to traverse through the depths of hell and back, there still wouldn’t remain a surefire acceleration in the development of their character, much less improvement for the better, unless they were to take charge of their own fate. At some point, one needs to realize that, at the end of the day, you can’t blame the rhetoric oppressing you if you’re the one perpetrating such ideologies.
As much as I detest the usage of artificial intelligence (given its effects on the environment as well as one’s cognitive ability), for example, we can’t necessarily go around demonizing the usage and repercussions of AI when we were the ones who set that system up. Of course, we could (and absolutely should) do our best to reprimand and revise such measures, but it would be unfair to deem such technologies ‘evil,’ when, if you really think about it, we are the perpetrators of our own diminishing. The same goes for the concept of capitalism, or money as a whole. Money in itself isn’t necessarily ‘evil’; such rhetoric is solely dependent on the morality of the holder. Of course, there’s pretty much no such thing as an ‘ethical billionaire,’ but even given such ideals, having less money doesn’t exactly make a person more ‘morally sound’ either. Not to say that we shouldn’t detest or blame the system, but I feel the blame should moreso befall, once again, the perpetrators (which are literally us). Such fallacies, such little regard to act given shortcomings as innate as these stem from a point of victimhood; it’s always easier to blame the system than to force ourselves to take accountability. Knowing, rather than dissecting, such illogicalities is far from enough. Not to police or reprimand anyone given such rubrics, but one shouldn’t be granted the capacity to deem themselves ‘pious’ or ‘morally sound,’ if they haven’t got the slightest intent to even act (although one may find it harder to do so, depending on the scope of any given obstruction(s); in such instances, it should stand to reason that one should be granted some leeway).
Morality, moreover, shouldn’t be based solely on the exponential trajectories of one’s external experiences, but moreso on one’s innate capacity to shelter ‘good’ and growth. When speaking on the concept of morality, such concepts of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ are, in themselves, human constructs. Again, not to say that other various constructs (such as the patriarchy or the concept of capitalism) aren’t to be detested; I’m merely shifting the frame. Subjecting yourself to suffer through these convoluted systems doesn’t exactly make you a better person, nor does it necessarily mean that you’re inherently more prone to character development, but I digress. Our experiences don’t shape us. Our capacity to grow does. Instead of focusing on the demeaning intricacies of such systems, perhaps we should instead shift the blame; take accountability, and take charge of our own fates, as well as the systems that we have, in turn, set in place. We have the means to remedy such shortcomings, so use them.
Be First to Comment