I loved boxing. It was, for me, an intellectual exercise, and my second trainer was in the military, and it was the way for me to figure out how power players mapped out their strategies by translating their business or political moves into fighting moves, and it was shocking how well I could accurately map it out, and then predict the success of their various campaigns by acting out their moves.
You could debate things needlessly using books, such as the Art of War, or journal articles. You could draw a rough sketch playing chess.
But the best measure of a campaign's success or failure was to get off your duff and try to box it out before going out in the real world and testing the conditions as practice.
Movement was essential to comprehending a situation. So was having a sense of humour.
Because the moment you do not see the comedy in people's seriousness was the moment began to take sides.
And a box has sides to confine you and prevent you from examining something from every angle.
For example, certain strategies are guaranteed to work, but you do not always want to employ them. It seems great in theory or when you are dealing with inanimate objects representing people, but once you humanized the strategy, there was no way that was the desirable way to do it, even if it was a sure thing.
For example, you can clear a path by destroying an obstacle. There is no shortage of war manuals that give this as an option.
You can map out the strategy in a game of chess and even go.
But if clearing a path means destroying someone's self-esteem and peace of mind, many people would gleefully do it and be proud that they had that power over people.
However, even if you are not sensitive or moral, you still have to realize that the rubble can fall on you and crush you. There will be evidence of your handiwork, and sometimes the structure you take down is attached to a more powerful structure that will return the favour.
It's why you have to be able to be able to navigate through problems on your own.
But like the concepts of Creating and Inventing, independence and individuality has been co-opted. No, dying your hair green and getting a tattoo like everyone else is not rebellious, independent, or express individuality. Armies, gangs, and prisoners used tats to create groups, not individuals.
It is a communal exercise to create and identify collectives, not individuals.
Which is one half the way people behave: their social side.
But when taken too far, the expense is the individual.
And unless we balance both and not try to use the methods of one to mask that we are neglecting the other, we end up falling prey to deceived.
And that we are now in an Age of Propaganda, that's precisely what happened.
Journalism destroyed itself. Propaganda took its place, and people chose sides, believed the distortions, and then believe they are critical thinkers who are informed.
And have been taken for a ride ever since.
There is a void of factual information with people making nonsense listicles with no common sense, telling people what comic book and antiquated books will tell people all about "modern journalism" -- never mind not a single one ever did the job.
Listicles are for followers so they know how they are supposed to march to Authority, not rebel against it to express their individuality.
And if we have authorities who were doing their jobs and not driven to be control freaks, they could have system where both sides of our personal equations could function with equilibrium without one side being sacrificed for the other.
Fear is the guiding force of an Age of Propaganda. People are afraid and are looking for TORTEEs -- they convince themselves that constricting their thinking makes them free, but all it manages to do is confine them and lock them in a cage of their own making.
Fear is boring. Fear is uninspiring.
And you cannot soar to better places when you are shaking in your cage, and your only solace is seeing that there is a group shaking in that prison with you...