rationality.

I can try all I want... but if the governed doesn’t consent, the barrel of the gun is all that’s left. It’s hidden in justice paraphrased, in holy texts and occupations’ pretexts. (Apostrophe goes after the s in occupations. It’s a plural!)

Is there a universal truth? To negate the universal is to negate truth. Is all knowledge socially constructed? What a joke.

Let’s assume it is that an idea is justification for itself. Those birds are all purple because we believe they are all purple. Those atoms really didn’t exist until we discovered them. That mass hysteria proves the existence of the mass hallucination. That the world was flat when we believed it was flat, and the pope is always right because we believe him to be right.

The truth can change according to what we believe? Nay I say, but it is the other way. What we believe must change according to the truth. Truth is a higher power than humans, and we can’t circumvent that. Humans are powerless against it, so call me a crusader whose cause can’t be defeated.

To attempt to negate cause and effect... to expect the food without growing it, to expect the effect without concerning oneself with the cause... is to either subjugate oneself to those who do understand and beg them for what is theirs, or die of starvation.

So back to the idea that all knowledge is socially constructed... what can we conclude? Socially constructed ideas are not true, but instead mass hysteria about cause and effect, in which the effect is attributed to some cause other than the mass hysteria.

So there was this one time, there was a gas leak at some school, and everyone found out and got really sick and puked and went to hospitals. Then they found out... no gas leak. Funny... they attributed the cause to gas, when in fact it was mass hysteria. But because they all believed there was gas, and the effect of gas was present, people assumed that the existence of gas must be true. They thought that the effect proved the cause. Backwards, eh?

It’s also funny how people do what the mass hysteria tells them to do.

Like when mass hysteria says that being American means eating hamburgers, so everyone eats hamburgers and believes in the cause and effect as true, when the causal factor is in fact the mass hysteria.

And trying to take advantage of that particular mass hysteria is at the heart of a whole lot of ideas floating around right now. Ideas that would crumble if people didn’t buy the mass hysteria that being American, or any other nationality for that matter, is an appropriate cause for whatever effect they want you to believe in.

I would even go so far as to say that you can’t even define a nationality without using social constructs. There is no basis in reality for a national identity. It always comes to a contradiction.

The fundamental basis of logic is that there is existence and nonexistence, and that you can only prove existence. You cannot prove nonexistence. I can’t prove there are no atoms, I can only prove there are. I can’t prove I don’t have weapons of mass destruction, I can only show you if I do. To believe a negative because it cannot be disproven is to accept simultaneously a billion contradicting ideas. Let’s say I’m standing outside a sealed room, and I know there is a light inside, but I don’t know if it’s on or off. But neither can be disproven. So am I to believe that the light is both on and off? Well sure, if you believe that inability to disprove something is proof of its existence.

And after all that, I will say that if you assert the existence of a something that separates one nationality from another, I would ask you to prove the existence of some definitive cause for the effect of someone’s given nationality. A reason borders are where they are.

And their existence is not a justification for their existence. I want to know what the causal factor is. If you can prove it without using a social construction, I will give you a dollar and my gratitude.

And while you’re busy proving nationalism, try to prove racism and cultural relativism. It’s just as difficult. You’ll find that the cause is always its own effect. It’s only true because everyone believes it’s true and no other cause exists. It’s mass hysteria on a global scale. Kind of like when everyone believed the world wasn’t a globe at all.

So what have we learned? That association is not causation... but I think everyone already knew that... so what else? That there is a universal truth... there is always a cause and effect relationship and existences that can be definitively proven.

Believing something with all your heart won’t make it true. Truth is fixed and universal, unchanging and eternal, all encompassing and infinite in scope. Sounds religious doesn’t it? Except that I don’t ask for a person’s faith in believing it. I would rather eat my kittens. I don’t need their faith. Only their rationality.

Which brings me to my next rant... there is a fundamental difference between those whose cause is furthered by people’s understanding of universal truths, and those whose cause is undermined by people’s understanding of universal truth. There is a fundamental difference between those who ask for your faith, and those who would rather... umm... eat their kittens. There are those who can prove what they assert and only ask you to listen and decide for yourself, and those who teach that nothing can be proven and ask that you do not ask. Let’s call them proponents of rationality, and detractors of rationality.

These detractors are aplenty. There are lots of people who would prefer you didn’t think. And there are plenty of people who would prefer not to think... people for the detractors to use as fodder for their own irrational ends. The contempt for the intellectual scares me beyond words... but so many people buy it.

Which is what makes mass hysteria such a powerful force. So who do you know who co-opts mass hysteria? Who do you know that hates when you identify it for what it really is? Maybe Mao? Maybe Osama? Maybe your friend Samuel and his llama Joseph Stalin? Maybe religious fanatics, maybe nationalist nut jobs?

And finally, I ask... of proponents and detractors, whom should you trust? Well I won’t ask for you to let me decide. I’ll just ask that you use your own judgment of that universal truth... and I’m confident that the more rational you are, the further my cause is carried.

You may ask why I wrote all this crap... well I wrote it to convince you to do the following... buy American, preempt the terrorists, convert the infidels, and clear the way for our glorious Aryan race to dominate the globe.

And if you demand rationality of those that have none, your answer will invariably is the barrel of a gun. Whose gun? Who cares?