Age of Ruin

Pictured: a art.

One of the most powerful mental tools I’ve ever learned to use is to carefully distinguish various concepts that people generally tend to run together. Doing this makes it easier to understand issues, and to find out where problems really lay, if anywhere.

A great example of concepts that get run together are the logical and emotional problems of evil. The former requires careful argumentation, and the latter is a matter of comforting the grieving and hurt.

Oftentimes, the deliberate blurring of distinct concepts is used to fool people into thinking a certain way. Take gun deaths in the US. About two thirds of gun deaths are suicides. Restricting access to firearms doesn’t curb suicide, but anti-gunners will often lump them in with intentional homicides to push their disarmament agenda. We can break the data down further and find out that the majority of intentional homicides are committed by black men under 35. By lumping together concepts, gun deaths and deliberate homicides in this case, great confusion is caused and used to the benefit of evil people.

Art can be defined as something meant to be enjoyed primarily for it’s aesthetic properties. Defining art in this way removes the obligation of art to be anything other than what it is. Just as Da Vinci’s “The Last Supper” is art, so too is a fat asian woman slipping in butter on stage. But just because something is art, that doesn’t mean it has any value.

Back before the THE CURRENT YEAR™ people made art that was nice to look at or listen to. Whether you personally care for the Baroque, Art Nouveau, Gothic, etc aesthetic is besides the point. The point is that everyone knew that art was supposed to be good.

The intent of the creator was also taken into consideration, and was used as a criteria for judging the quality of the art itself. Does this portrait really look like the person it depicts? Does this piece of music meant to evoke a feeling of triumph or dread really stir those feelings?

With the advent of modern art all that went out the window. The pretense of modern art is that any given piece isn’t supposed to elicit a particular response, but any response at all, and that all responses to art is equally valid. Thus, all art is equally valid. Though some art is more valid than other. The determination is usually made by wealthy, neurotic jews with nonsensical luxury beliefs.

Though this idea didn’t spring fully formed from the ether. It goes all the way back to the notion of Tabula Rasa, or “blank slate theory.” In short, Tabula Rasa is the idea that we’re shaped solely, or at least predominately by our experiences with very little in the way of in-born proclivities. Anyone can be anything they want to be if only they were given the chance, and the only reason for disparate outcomes is irrational learned hatred of the other.

What any of that means, exactly, is of no concern to you, dear reader. Wealthy, neurotic jews with nonsensical luxury beliefs have already been gracious enough to tell us that we’re racists for having doubts about what they’re trying to accomplish.

Discerning readers will notice that the explanation of Tabula Rasa conflates and runs together an awful lot of concepts. Genetic determinism, behavioral psychology, socioeconomics, etc. This is done to perpetuate a fraud, specifically to hobble and loot those who are better off for the benefit of the lumpenprole.

What tends to catch normal people off guard is that Tabula Rasa, modern art, LBGTP+, representation, community policing, etc are beliefs that are all adopted tactically and are generally not held with any sincerity by those able to understand the beliefs rather than just parrot them. Though parroting these ideas is also done tactically. As explained in the article about luxury beliefs linked above, the author explains that the lower classes seek to emulate the upper classes by adopting their way of being and demonstrate high status.

It’s easy to see how Tabula Rasa leads straight to the idea that all art is equally valid. Modern art is just the continuation of the obliteration of discernment. We see that the ability to carefully dissect conflated concepts allows us to arrive at more explanatory conclusions, and to more accurately push back against them and defeat them.