Hopepunk, explained: the storytelling trend that weaponizes optimism – Vox

January 14, 2019

hopepunk

In the framework of hopepunk, it’s neither. “Hopepunk is a radical call to arms for us to imagine better,” Slack said. “To embrace the fact that fantasy is not simply an escape from the world but an invitation to go deeper into it. That we must fall in love with the world that we so deeply wish to change.” Instead, he argues that love may be beautiful, but it’s also messy and painful, and far from being naive, it’s a conscious, hard-won and fully self-aware choice.

Source: Hopepunk, explained: the storytelling trend that weaponizes optimism – Vox

I think this not only sounds good, but is in and of itsself a good indication as to why #hope and #empathy aren’t just insipid concepts of naive “treehugger”-types. But a bold statement AND politcal action against the all emcompassing sinistry of the powers that be, that never tire to shove hopelessness down our throats. Well, not on my watch!

Advertisements

Warum Weihnachten alleine feiern absolut wundervoll ist › ze.tt

December 24, 2018

Source: Warum Weihnachten alleine feiern absolut wundervoll ist › ze.tt

Trifft voll ins Schwarze! Herrlicher Beitrag! (sorry, international readers – this one is in German. Maybe the big G’s translation service can make semi-sense of this…)


Menschen, Mindset, Meilensteine: Ein Rückblick auf 5 Jahre digitale Selbständigkeit –

December 23, 2016

In den letzten 5 Jahren digitaler Selbständigkeit habe ich so einige Höhen und Tiefen durchlaufen. Viele neue Menschen sind in mein Leben getreten, mein Mindset hat sich komplett verschoben und ich kann mit Stolz auf erreichte Meilensteine in meinem Business zurückblicken.

Source: Menschen, Mindset, Meilensteine: Ein Rückblick auf 5 Jahre digitale Selbständigkeit –


Where two oceans meet, but do not mix!

February 28, 2014

I wasn’t aware this existed – wow! A “liquid demarcation” line between two oceans. Amazing! Really, this planet is a bounty of miracles that never ceases to amaze me!


I’m a Member of the American ‘Used-to-Haves’ | Kathleen Ann

February 8, 2014

This one nails it for me! I’m a member of the Used-to-Haves’ in my country of birth and residence. And I couldn’t agree any more on what Kathleen Ann so eloquently says. We’ve gotten mugged big-time by the existing power-cartel made of (corrupt) politicians shaking hands with Big Finance, corporate CEOs and their henchmen, the lobbyists. But it isn’t only the former middle class who got robbed of their lives’ accomplishments: Pretty much everyone saw that happen to them as well. It isn’t only about the members of the “once had” class, it affects everyone else, too – minus above mentioned cartels of power. In one word: We – those, who depend on showing up at a job at least five times a week, not counting overtime – were abused! (Synonyms: Lied-to, exploited, used and tossed away, stripped naked, left-to-die in poverty). The former “American Dream” and each of their equivalents in other so-called “free countries” was the scam of the century in my book! But see for yourself.

I’m a Member of the American ‘Used-to-Haves’ | Kathleen Ann.


Philip Seymour Hoffman’s Final Secret – Esquire

February 3, 2014

Yesterday’s news of Philip Seymour Hoffman’s sudden passingpurportedly from a heroine overdose – gave me some unexpected and profound grief. I hadn’t known how much I had appreciated him in the movies he starred in – or so it seemed to me, when suddenly faced with the finite realization that I’ll never see him in another movie again.

“Going for broke”, is what this article by Tom Junod for Esquire offers as a possible explanation, trying to weave some consistency into the most diverse roles Hoffman played onscreen and the offscreen person, whom all of a sudden everyone feels entitled to know something about. That’s a pretty bold, far fetched stretch from where I’m sitting and it angers me beyond words to see the public apparently “owning” their celebrities as if they were nothing else than just another one of the many commodities our convenient, consumerist lives are taking for granted. At this point, we – the public – know next to zero about the person behind the actor. So we are left to speculate. And speculate we do and seem all too willing to offer special knowledge about his sudden and much too early demise.

Over the past five to six years, many of the “formative” celebrities of my younger years found an “untimely” death, in most cases brought about not by natural causes, but involving some form of substance abuse or addiction. Time and again, when this happens, the public echo seems to focus on the cause of death instead, immediately bypassing any compassion or even just mentioned piety in reporting. To me, this is clear evidence of the massive erosion of culture taking place on every level of our “societies”. It almost seems as if the greatest comfort for those left with the aftermath of a void never to be filled again is in wildly rationalizing away instead of acknowledging the more obvious in appropriate ways: We lost a fellow human being, they’re gone and won’t come back. And that’s all that should matter in the situation.

But there is one small aspect that gives me some comfort and seems capable of vanquishing my anger. Apparently, Hoffman managed to almost completely shield his private life – including whatever struggle he had with any substance – from his work. According to Doris Barr, mother of the late Hoffman’s brother-in-law, he was completely dedicated to his work, which was his passion, his calling from early on, and he seems to have managed – for the most part – to hold on to this dedicated work ethic. “Going for broke?” I don’t think so. Quite the opposite: I find grace, style and dignity in Hoffman’s consummate way of going about his career, that never seemed to allow whatever personal troubles get in the way. Until now. There is no farewell note or other information that may give a clue as to what lead up to this. I find it a great victory on his part that he’ll take most of the private person that he was to his grave, leaving us with his legacy of films he starred in. Well done, Sir.

R.I.P., Philip Seymour Hoffman.

P.S. And if by all means you can’t help blaming it on the drugs and his battle with addiction – which I take as a symptom for something running a lot deeper, b.t.w. – then treat yourself to some very pragmatic and potentially life-saving ideas as expressed from someone with firsthand knowledge, a recovering heroin user himself.


New Experiments to Pit Quantum Mechanics Against General Relativity | Simons Foundation

November 2, 2013

I’m not all sure, I want to know the outcome of that. If I read this right and if the outcome is what the scientists hope for, it basically eradicates the concept of intent and consciousness from a philosophical/anthropocentric point of view. It would make gravity the new “consciousness” as the defining ultimate ‘creator’ of all possible experiences, wouldn’t it? In other words: If their theories prove to be(come) accurate, those findings will then basically say that (quantum) gravity is the counterpart to superposition, forcing the latter to ‘decide’ for a definite state if (quantum) space-time curvature reaches a certain threshold (in line with the Penrose-Hameroff argument of orchestrated objective reduction leading to a collapse of the wave function, this ‘forcing’ quantum superposition to collapse into a definite state). Again: If right, there is no need for consciousness, intent or any of these concepts humankind has clung to for eons. It will then basically confirm what I’ve been thinking for as long as I have been able of thought: We are the random result of a quantum gravitational field. Dedicated believers, of course, will defend their position arguing: “Who” made the gravitational field then? I don’t know. But I don’t think that the existence of the field is proof or reason to believe that some”one” made it in the first place. However… you’re free to believe what you prefer as I reserve the right to trust my own intuitions. Agreed?

New Experiments to Pit Quantum Mechanics Against General Relativity | Simons Foundation. And associated with my above thought, this might be of interest, too: http://www.iep.utm.edu/lp-argue/#SH3b