Saturday, April 16, 2011


Hi, my name is Paul and I have a problem...

I care. I really do. I know it’s inappropriate in this modern age to care, but I can’t stop myself.

I go to work, but I am unable to drink the cool-aide. Unlike other employees, I can not reach that nirvana of a zombie-like state that lets me say things like “it’s not my job”, or “it’s somebody else’s problem” or even “it’s always been that way”.

If I see something wrong, I want to fix it. If I’m wasting my time with useless work, I feel bad.

I watch our society, steeped in unnecessary complexity, decay and shallow deceptions, but I am unable to turn away. I can not say “it doesn’t matter”, or “we shouldn’t help people who can not help themselves”, or generally just funnel money, power or opportunity to my friends, while others are left out in the cold.

I try to be more self-centered. I really do. But my delusions keep getting dispersed by empathy; by thinking; by caring.

Now I realize that I’m in a minority. Most people can find happiness by blindly following the herd; by refusing to question even the most obvious stupidity. They can just put their heads down and go with the flow. And they are happy. Happy redirecting their focus on little gadgets. Happy lounging around on the weekends. Happy doing meaningless work. Happy in the knowledge that is not their job, not their responsibly and they are doing what they are told even if it makes no sense, makes the world a crappy place, or contributes to an inevitable disaster. They are happy because they don’t care.

But I’ve decided to do something about my affliction. I’ve forming the IACA, which stands for “I Actually Care Anonymous”. It is an organization for those few of us afflicted with caring. Each week we can gather, and through group effort, we can learn to shut out the world. To blindly follow, and not question. To act without thinking. To turn off our compulsive need to fix things. We can chant things like “”That’s perfect”, “Yes, I want a Performance Review”, or “Wow, isn’t it great that I can re-do the same work many times over and still get paid”.

We can reiterate the lack of need for common sense; for things to be functional; for work to be have some real value. We can learn to be “pro-active” without thinking, or to apply wafer-thin “team-spirit” in place of results. We can learn to shut out that nasty reality, and narrow our focus down to something trivial.

Through a dedicated effort we can learn the ultimate power of sheep, and to blindly follow where no sheep have gone before. And that should make us happy again. Secure in the knowledge that whatever bad things befall us, they are not our problem, even if they were preventable. We can learn to take marketing literally. We can learn to believe even the lamest of executive ploys to distract us from that fact that things are dysfunctional and that we aren’t being respected. We can learn to be happy.

So, stop caring today. Join us in finding true and mindless happiness. Learn to baaaa like you don’t care. You’re only prolonging your pain if you don’t.


  1. Hi Paul. Joining you in this little support group here. :) I agree with what you say here generally, except I feel as though I experience it a bit differently. What I see is that people are very focused on the present, and are very utilitarian--"What am I going to get out of this?"--whether it be money or some desired emotional experience. I find that I can't relate to their experience, and that has made me feel wholly separate from the rest of humanity. It used to pain me a lot. When I was younger I so wanted to be able to join in that experience, but I found that I couldn't do it that well. I had to cover up too much, basically put on an act. Sometimes I'd see other people being very successful in endeavors that I wanted for myself, and I'd ask, "How did they do that?" I couldn't understand, because how they did it had a lot to do with interactions that happened on the emotional level. They had some skill as well. I gotta admit that.

    I have had brief glimpses of what it feels like to be a "normal person." I don't know how I did it, but I was somehow able to turn my thinking, caring brain off, and just feel and react. It lasted for a few minutes tops, and it's been very rare. It kind of scared me, too, because I felt like all of the restraints were off, and I was capable of hurting other people...more than I otherwise would be, because I felt like I was capable of doing anything that was in my power to do, whatever my motivation happened to be at the moment. Drinking a beer has sometimes helped me get in that state as well, though that causes me to become lethargic, which I don't like. (Hey, what do you expect from a depressant?)

    Generally, I want to expand on things. I usually don't just want to drift through the experience (though sometimes that's nice). I want my mind to be engaged, too. I want to see how things are connected, and analyze that, not just because I have a fetish about it, but because I value learning, and I've experienced it's importance, so I know it's value. And yes, that makes me care. Or perhaps I bother to engage in this because I care in the first place, and I think that doing this is the best way to be helpful, because helping without understanding can be not so helpful.

    I find that I often want to hide my desire to expand on things, because if I expose it, people will look at me funny. They can't relate to it. Their reaction comes across like, "Ew! Don't make me think, for god's sake," or, "Okay...That was weird." It instantly kills the atmosphere. It's seen as anti-social, even confusing. You have to admit, though, that a lot of people are capable of caring, but only on an emotional level. I've read you talking about this in the past. If someone else gives them a PR pitch, which appeals mostly to their emotions, that what they're doing is bad (never mind if the explanation is entirely rational or not), or that some tragedy has befallen someone or some people, and that they can do good by doing X, some of them will be motivated to do X, either out of their own sense of caring, or wanting to look good to their friends and be part of the group.

    A big part of this, I think, is I have an ego, and I am a little narcissistic. Yes, it's hard to admit, being a caring person, but I've found that the reason I care is that I feel as though I matter. I am part of the larger whole. If I don't act as if I matter, then the whole is diminished a little. I have the power to affect something, even a little bit. That's the sense of it. Also, I have a sense of independence. I can listen to what others tell me, but I am going to develop my own sense of what's going on, using the best rational approach I can muster. I also value self-control a lot, probably a LOT more than most people.

  2. Continuing...

    I think for most people in our modern society, they believe in specialization. They don't think it's valuable to be a "general" human being, a citizen, a sense that they are a member of a larger community. Everybody's got their "angle," that thing they think makes them valuable and unique to the group they want to be a part of, the industry they want to be in, the employer with whom they want their job, and it's all on this emotional-utilitarian basis--"I do it for you, and you do it for me." As long as that's going on, everything's peachy. As long as everyone's specialized, no one has to care if things are inefficient, and deteriorating. The let-down is when they get laid off. "I did what I was supposed to do. Why was I kicked to the curb?" They feel like lost, directionless victims, until, that is, someone gives them a new purpose. A new way to specialize, and be supported by others.

    I actually asked Alan Kay about this once, though what I said was in most social situations where I don't know the people, I feel really awkward, and I don't say much of anything, because I feel as though I'm going to be ostracized the moment I open my mouth. However, when I've been among intellectually interested students or professionals, it's usually been very pleasant, because they come at things the way I do. He recommended that to understand "normal people," I should study anthropology. What it suggests to me is that, "Yes, you are very different, though that's not a bad thing. To understand the people you mingle with, you should try studying them the way you study everything else," and there's a knowledge base about that already.

    Alan has talked about the idea of "universals," which is a notion that comes from anthropology. It's the idea that all human beings are born with a set of qualities which make certain skill sets and outlooks easy to pick up. These are things like stories, reading and writing, tribalism, etc. This is the reason why in the history of all cultures we see these skills and outlooks arise. Alan and some colleagues came up with what he called "non-universals," which are things like notions of similarities over differences, and outlooks of equality, democracy, mathematics, science, etc. These things are hard to pick up, because they don't come naturally, but they are necessary for maintaining our modern civilization. The key thing he tries to get across is *civilization is artificial*. The reason schools were developed in the first place was to inculcate these hard-to-acquire skills and outlooks, because their necessity was recognized. Still, they didn't always succeed in getting them across, and today schools (in the U.S., anyway) mostly teach the universals, even though they'll act like they're teaching some of the non-universals.

  3. Continuing...

    Re. the desire to fix things

    I know that feeling! The thing is, I came to recognize that there are situations that are beyond my ability to control, especially when I'm dealing with other people. So it's best not to get too frustrated that you can't fix something. One way to do that is to try to understand what's really going on. I've found that if you're just complaining about it, you recognize that there's a problem, but you don't have a full handle on how it's happening. Understanding the "how" is a good de-stresser, I've found, because you no longer feel like you are at the affect of some mysterious force that is beyond your ability to comprehend. You can see the phenomenon for what it is, and you can see its scale. You can excuse yourself for not being able to control it if it's too big, but you can also get a sense of what it's doing, so you can make intelligent choices about how to respond, and maybe even affect it a little. If nothing else, you can recognize what to avoid, but it would be better to recognize what is supportive of who you are. That's a challenging one that I have only begun to understand, and I have a long way to go.

  4. Hi Mark,

    Excellent comments. You get an automatic, life-time membership to the IACA :-)

    I definitely know that feeling of being perpetually on the outside, although for me it was always something I valued. I never felt like I had to belong, but I've always been able to get along well with most of the cliques I've encountered. I quickly learned to reduce my conversations to a comfortable level (weather, sports, cars, etc...), but I always yearn for more substantial discussions (a good person to read for more insight on group behavior is Clay Shirky).

    What I find interesting is that my frustrations with dysfunctional organizations has been growing with time. I used to find them funny, but lately their inability to change for the better has left me questioning the future. The best advice I heard when I was younger was to learn to "pick your battles". So most of the time I let things ride, but I generally focus on fixing a few small things, here and there. Another thing that helps is to vent it out to a blog, and then try to move past it :-)

    Along with anthropology, I find history very fascinating. The 'why' of things is often buried in a long series of preceding events. Knowing the why helps, but the deeper I go, the more irrational the explanation becomes. So much is based on muddled thinking and then slowly evolved forward until it is near functional, ebbing and flowing as it goes. That snail's pace is expected, but I yearn to know how to nudge things onto a better trajectory. If I have to wait, fine. But at least I get a sense that the circumstances are getting better, not just continuing to degrade.

    The idea of non-universals fascinate me because I wonder if they are related to time? That is, when humans first started messing with fire, it must have been a deep concept that was both frightening and mystical. Specialists no doubt arose to manage it for their social groups. At some point, that understanding propagated its way throughout our species, allowing the vast majority of us to be able to utilize it naturally. Thus, I suspect it went from a non-universal to a universal over a huge number of generations.

    That plays back into a notion I've had recently where I've been seeing our intelligence as just a form of hyper-evolution. A dynamic version of our static mutation capabilities. Thinking gives us the ability to adapt at a faster rate to our environment, which as we study the history of our planet in more depth, seems more likely to be a necessity for our species to continue to thrive. But if I follow that down, deep enough, it suggests that we are in a race between learning to leverage our intellect collectively and the volatility of the planet. Either we act at an intellectual capacity that is far higher than just an individual, or we miss this window of stability. That, I think, is why computers are so important to us (and spending time playing Angry Birds is fun).

    What I really yearn for these days is the ability to get out of the game. I'd like to find a way to buy my own freedom so I can explore more of what interests me. I wasn't lucky enough to get this from birth and I haven't hit upon a solution yet. Or perhaps I can just find my way back to seeing everything as funny again. Laughter is always the best medicine :-)

  5. I'm going to break up my comment again, since your blog has a length limit.

    Re. relating to cliques

    That's never been my strong suit. I think the reason I didn't fit in well is I found the small talk others engage in boring/mundane. That's another thing I forgot to mention. I've seen lots of people get very excited, sometimes to the point of hysteria, about sports, music and dance, just the act of meeting people at parties, carrying out business transactions, etc. When they really get into it, they can lose themselves in those experiences, and seem to flow with it. I can see the value in doing that stuff, but I've never been able to get *that* excited about any of it. I don't look forward to it the way other people do at all.

    I've been able to "reduce" in my conversations, but when I do that I always feel like I'm pretending, holding a LOT back, and it's actually *work* for me to do it! Maybe I have an addiction to stimulating my mind. If I'm not doing that, I get bored and I feel like I'm wasting my time.

    Re. dysfunctional organizations

    Huh. My first response has been to get alarmed, because I can see the implications of their dysfunction. Though I have found them funny in a "Dilbert" way; laughter at the absurdity of it, mixed with dread of what they're really doing.

    A movie I like re. this is "Idiocracy," made by Mike Judge, the same guy who made "Office Space" (another favorite). "Idiocracy" went straight to DVD, so I hear, because it contained some offensive material, and Judge never got permission from the establishments he offended.

  6. Re. widespread deterioration

    I'm seeing the same thing. In terms of doing what you can, I think Alan Kay is on the right track. It's something I've been considering, but I haven't taken seriously yet, mostly because I'm still trying to figure out what I'm doing... He went into researching how to improve education, using computers as a "mind amplifier." This goes back to his anthropological perspective. Even so, he's had limited success with spreading this. He's worked with the Open Charter School in Los Angeles since about the 1980s, and a few other schools, but those are the only inroads he's been able to make. Most schools don't understand what he's getting at, and so they tend to reject his ideas.

    It's not that people aren't learning skills. It's that the way they see the world is through the lens of the "universals," for the most part. I don't know much about universals vs. non-universals at this point. I just have a feel for them. You can see the development of universals and non-universals in time, but we can also see them in our current context.

    One example that Alan gave was that humans are hierarchical beings. In families as children, we look to our mothers and fathers as authorities. In tribal cultures this extends to the tribe leader. In monarchical societies this extended to the king and/or queen. In more modern autocratic societies, people look to whoever is the dictator. He pointed to the Constitution in the United States as an example of a non-universal concept. The Founders here said, rather than making the person the king, let's make the law the king. This is a difficult concept for a lot of people to understand, even today. We're naturally wired to seek authority figures, and to follow their dictates. It's quite another thing to ignore that, and instead look to ourselves as our own masters with constraints (both our own morality, and the law, which should encompass that morality). It is the idea of self-government. It was recognized, though, that not everyone is capable of doing that all the time, and there are some things that people should *not* do themselves (such as catching and prosecuting criminals, negotiating with other political entities, etc.), in a peaceful society, so governmental entities were seen as necessary to enforce some constraints that were arrived at more or less by consensus (though they're arrived at contentiously and by compromise), through a system that has constraints on itself. These constraints are enforced by a government whose mission is, in part, to enforce those constraints, both on us, and on itself. In some cases we need to impose restraints on it when the government won't restrain itself. That was also anticipated. It's complicated, and it takes education to understand it, but it's one of the preferable ways to live.

  7. Re. Angry Birds

    I checked it out after you mentioned it. It does look fun! :)

    Re. Wanting to get out of the game

    I don't have any concrete suggestions for that. I've looked around a bit for opportunities to "get back in the game" in a way that would satisfy me, but I haven't found it yet. One option I looked at was checking out some universities I've heard about historically, but so far, nothing yet. I wonder if maybe there are some opportunities for you at universities in Canada, or perhaps in Europe. I haven't looked in those places yet.

  8. Alright. Something's going wrong. I tried posting, and then re-posting a couple parts of my response, but Blogger ate them! So I'm just going to quit for now. Maybe they got stuck in your spam queue?


  9. I'm going to try making my individual comments shorter, and see if that helps.

    Re. the muddled thinking that led to the present

    I suspect that's because most people don't have an idea of what "the end game" is. They're just dealing with the current circumstances as they exist. Look at us talking about the state of deterioration we see. Our natural inclination is to just assume that it will continue. What I keep in mind, though, is that before World War II, and to some extent before the Soviet Union launched Sputnik in 1957, the U.S. was in a state of decay with regard to maintaining our understanding and development of mathematics, science, and engineering. However, those events prompted us to "get on the stick" and do the hard work of developing those skills. You see, when it came to defense against a technologically advancing adversary, people could see the need to invest time, energy, and money in those areas. Once that went away, people felt they didn't need it anymore. That's what I've been seeing. Most people don't see an inherent value in those skills. They're seen as a means to an end, and once the end has been reached, the means are no longer important. Never mind that there are still urgent concerns where they can't see the connection to the means for solving them. So instead they cope with the problems, and see the situation as "that's just the way it is."

  10. Continuing...

    People take things for granted, particularly in a wealthy, technologically advanced society. They get comfortable with the way things are, they cope, and don't want to do the hard work of maintaining it. They'd rather do the hard work of making money from whatever perceived demand exists. Perceived demand is not always that good a barometer of what problems need to be solved, particularly with our society's lack of understanding of science, and our own technology. Most who have the power to do something have been convinced through economizing and the work of crafty engineers that they only need small, incremental fixes to problems, and that will be good enough. Just patch here and there, or add on more systems. Since everyone else is using the same strategy, there's no gaping disparity perceived. The idea of looking at the design and seeing how that's making their goals difficult to achieve isn't even considered, because most say, "I don't know what's going on, and I don't want to know." That's another way of saying, "I don't want to do the hard work of understanding it." If people don't see problems (or don't want to see them), and that there might be solutions, then there's no use in spending time and money to fix them, is there? The idea becomes, "Just deal with it." The expectation is set that everything should be easy, and so people don't have the patience to take on hard tasks, or they're so distracted by taking care of what exists, they don't have time to reflect on possible solutions.

  11. Continuing with the Charlie Rose interview...

    CR: What's the danger of all this?

    CS: There's two kinds of danger. One is what I just talked about, that we've arranged a society based on science and technology in which nobody understands anything about science and technology. And this combustible mixture of ignorance and power sooner or later is going to blow up in our faces. I mean, who is running the science and technology in a democracy if the people don't know anything about it?

    And the second reason I'm worried about this is that science is more than a body of knowledge. It's a way of thinking, a way of skeptically interrogating the Universe with a fine understanding of human fallibility. If we are not able to ask skeptical questions, to interrogate those who tell us that something is true, to be skeptical of those in authority, then we're up for grabs for the next charlatan--political or religious--who comes ambling along.

    CR: The point is made, and maybe by you, ... It is this notion that science is not of great interest to us in some sense. That somehow we don't want to learn.

    CS: You see, people read stock market quotations and financial pages. Look how complex that is.

    CR: Because they know the direct connection to their own ...

    CS: ... There's a motivation, but they're capable, large numbers of people. People are able to look at sports statistics. Look how many people can do that. Understanding science is not more difficult than that. It doesn't involve greater intellectual activities. But the thing about science is first of all, it's after how the Universe really is, and not what makes us feel good. A lot of the competing doctrines are after what feels good, and not what's true.

  12. Argh! Okay. Maybe it didn't like a link I used. This was supposed to come before the part just posted.

    I meant to say that the goal Alan Kay has had, as Seymour Papert had before him, is to teach children how to solve hard problems, and have fun doing it.

    Re. complexity of society continuing to develop

    I've found it fascinating that there were a few people around years ago who were sensitive to this. One of them was Doug Engelbart at the Stanford Research Institute. This was why he embarked on his project to develop his NLS system in the 1960s. His goal was to make it possible for groups of people to work on complex problems together, using the computer's modeling and simulation abilities to make complex problems scale down to something our brains can handle. And he tried to do this in an era when the idea of interactive computing was an alien concept. He's still working at his own Doug Engelbart Institute at SRI.

    Carl Sagan talked about this, too, in his own way. I've quoted his last interview often, where he talked about his book, "The Demon-Haunted World." on Charlie Rose. I've read his book, and ironically I did not see him get into this nearly as much as he did in this interview. This is from 1996:

    CS: We live in an age of science and technology with formidable technological powers.

    CR: Science and technology are propelling us forward at accelerated rates.

    CS: That's right, and if we don't understand it--and by "we" I mean the general public--if it's something that--"Oh, I'm not good at that. I don't know anything about it."--then who is making all the decisions about science and technology that are going to determine what kind of future our children live in? Just some members of congress? But there's no more than a handful of members of congress with any background in science at all.

  13. Alright. I think everything's finally posted! I got everything in I meant to say, though it looks a bit of a mess...

    It was weird. I would post a comment, and it would appear along with the others right after I hit "Post Comment" the second time (after a preview). Then when I'd post the next part, or just refresh the browser, the comment I had posted previously would disappear!

  14. Hi Mark,

    Yes, six of your comments ended up in the spam bucket (I didn't even know this site had a spam bucket, and there doesn't seem to be a way to tell it to stop).

    I can set them to not spam, is that going to make things messier?

    This is such a great conversation, perhaps we should move it to somewhere a little more durable like Google Groups? I could create a IACA group :-)


  15. I think Alan's on the right track too, although I would phrase it as a 'knowledge amplifier'. In that, when we get there, it would give someone the ability to utilize not only their own understandings, but also those of a wide range of humanity. No doubt that would lead to a few better choices :-)

    I do, to some degree, accept things as the way they are, but I sense an increasing need for us to get off this current trajectory. It may just be hubris, people have predicting the end of the world for centuries, but we keep lagging behind our technologies at a growing rate (the lag is probably shorter, but the technologies are coming faster now). At some point that has to give, although that doesn't mean it will be in my lifetime, or anywhere close to it. Every decade we get closer the outcome in Vonnegut's Player Piano.

    What I guess I am looking for is a way like marketing to make a positive shift. One that doesn't lose its focus, once it's adopted by the masses.


  16. Well I already got posted everything I wanted to say. So marking them as not spam would post some stuff redundantly, I guess. The only part that got messy was posting the second part of Carl Sagan's interview before the first part. :P has had some bugs in it for a while. I remember when they first imposed the length limitation on comments. The reason they did it was technical. There was some latency with their database, and/or network (I forget), that only happened with comments above a certain size. But rather than fix the architectural issue, they decided to impose a limit on the size of comments. I guess they fixed that, because I didn't notice this behavior here, but I remember that even if I didn't hit the length limit, but just got close, I would get a server error message when I'd post. It turned out the comment still got through. It just didn't look like it. So sometimes I'd repost stuff, and it would show up *twice* (argh!). The only part that seemed buggy is the stuff that ended up in the spam folder initially showed up on your blog, but then disappeared once I posted something else or refreshed the browser. Still strange stuff going on...

  17. Heh. Thought you'd like this. It's a parody of Adele's "Rolling In The Deep" featuring Angry Birds. :)

  18. Yes, that's funny :-)

    I've lost my Angry Birds addiction, now it's Tiny Wings (which is the most annoying game every invented, but I simply must see what is beyond the sixth island... :-)

    Any topic suggests for this blog?

  19. Hi Paul.

    Just saw your last comment. The only topic suggestion I can think of right now is how universities at the undergraduate level are focusing more on career training, and are getting away from their core mission to cultivate "good sense, sobriety of thought, reasonableness, candor, self-command, and steadiness of view,” and, “[the] force, the steadiness, the comprehensiveness and the versatility of intellect,” which would enable people to enter “with comparative ease into any subject of thought” and take up “with aptitude any science or profession.”

    I got the quotes from an article called "Mission Lost," by Bruce Thornton of City Journal (at I thought the main thrust of what he was trying to get at was very good. He unfortunately tainted his argument by diverting into talking about a program for helping children of farm laborers get into school, saying it was all about getting Mexicans to enroll, but he didn't back that assertion up with anything. In my view, that's a pretty simple-minded, intellectually lazy point to make. Otherwise I thought it was a good article, if you can avoid the distraction. Anyway, that's my topic suggestion.

  20. Hi Mark,

    I didn't realize the wonderful blogger spam stuff was picking on you again :-)

    Yikes, that article was kinda scary. It's not just education, it seems to be some viral attack on reason and rational thinking. Everything has become shallow spin and marketing designed to sell stuff, rather maintain or enhance. I've got an upcoming post about some more lunacy in Toronto, I'm just waiting for the local newspaper to punt it, before I published it. Maybe after that I'll follow up with a rather long discussion on complexity and muddled thought. In an age of outrageous complexity many people have retreated into shallow optics, rather than face our ever growing challenges. Why? I think they'd prefer a quick fake win, over a long hard fight....


  21. Hey Paul,
    Beautiful post and it hits the mark perfectly.I feel like I live among zombies.That's what is happening to this modern techno-iphono-twitto-fbooko-xboxo-generation.Even the ads have stopped being creative.
    Sign of the times.sign of the times.

    Also, the point you make about caring is very precise.I do that a lot to the point of hurting my normal functioning.This has to stop.I will gladly be a member of IACA.

  22. Hey Paul., my name is michael... your writing is very open, not hiding much, which is nice. Would you like to join iasa? - reminds me a lot about the scene from the movie the MATRIX = "do you want to take the blue pill" , "or the red pill" one to take you out of never never land to find out just how deep the rabbit hole does truly go, - or the lullaby pill, "what you don't know, can't hurt you"... which compares very well with the fantasia we currently call home. - those who opt for, the "Ignorance is bliss" pill, need also to jog their memory back to the movie _- ... his choice if you remember it, - was short lived.

    White Rabbit _- Computer Screen -_ and the “Choice”

    Blue Pill – Red Pill , Decide…, or know it all.

    However you Slipstream through this world – you’ll still be in the matrix. However much you think about, deliberate, or ponder over, - “how to” , “what to”, or “why”, won’t change many things..

    What can is taking the right pill, so that to begin with you can see the truth of this unreality, as seen from the outside. (the inside scoop)

    Email me if you would like to know the truth
    – viewpoint – can motivate

    BUT you must take 2 initial steps…

    1. follow the white rabbit
    2. take the right pill

    The underlying sediment that motivates people toward zombie-laden IASA, will, just like the matrix, not be around for long. And thats good news to lovers of truth.

    Follow the White rabbit, “I am on your computer Screen” - Or
    continue to face this world with the rose-colored glasses of your choice… it's up to you

    The possibility is - definitely actually, that all such pessimism about fitting in with the illusion, for laxity , with this world will fade. As you will find a real world which will far surpass all remembrance of the IllUSion for Grandeur which we currently call "LIFE"

    - EMAIL me at

    - but just like the movie, if you feel you already have all the answers, your freedom, however limited, does allow for it... it's - up to you.

    my name is mike. - and no,,, i'm not crazy.

    1. I think I'm addicted to those annoying red pills, so far they're not helping. Blue pill please, or perhaps a cocktail of both, plus a dozen or so other drugs. What the hell, if you're going to alter your reality, you might as well do it with style ...