WHY YOU CANT FIGHT OPPRESSION THROUGH ART

Art touches us in ways we cannot see, touch, or hear. It reaches us subtly and dangerously. It brings changes to our hearts and minds; it can influence our reason and logic if applied astutely. It can deliver us from pain into peace and drop us off at the gates of beauty. But it cannot reach the locations required to shift life in our collective favor, in our collective unity.

There is a lot of talk about the painful distribution of oppression across the world, and we are all aware of its sheer size, the crushing alert that sits within us every minute of every day that we are forced to be on this planet and engage with its dualistic confinements, as above so below. Perhaps it is true that we are distracted by art; art seduces our attention, and in the phase of glaring upon it, we physically waste time within it.

Though art creates balance and encapsulates the cosmic presence of consciousness in its entwined phenomenon, providing us a resting place, whether it is a short-lived visit to an art gallery, a piece of music that stops us still, or a novel that unravels our deepest experiences and grants us safe passage to navigate the unmarked terrains privately, art still, for this very matter, cannot be the antidote to treat oppression. It is an antidote to raise the fire inside all of us. To change legislation, law, and systematic displacement within economic structure, sociological gatherings, and the order of the world requires force and strictly physical approaches.

What has art truly contributed to our struggle between the powered governments and the architects of law? Where, through art, has the burden been lifted? It has only contributed to the evolution of the individual's position amongst society, a sort of integration universally. Art has touched us on the individual level, and we have enabled great gains from it and learned to live in accordance with our unique natures, repetitively enhancing our connection to the divinity of our imaginative faculties. In this sense, art is powerful enough to shift perception and therefore allow people to move through the world in ways they perhaps never dreamt of. But it has not cut deep enough.

It has changed the individual, which chiefly could contribute to changing the fabric of the individual's world, but the individual is a node in a vast network, and our minds, as we swear by, are our entire world. We speak of the earth as reality and the physical world as everything that must be concrete in our lives. By this claim, we are subduing the tide of truth that is non-physical; our psyche is something that cannot be touched. It is both the bringer of our spiritual essences and a conductor that allows everything to pass through it. If we are to evoke change in the West, it cannot be accomplished through artistic endeavors; it must be met with aggressive rebellion.

The problem that poses a threat to the opportunity to rebel with aggression is that the time is ideologically possessed. The spirit of modernity is extremely attentive to the individual experience, and as individuals maneuver through their callings, they gather burdens themselves in collective chains, forward march to the future of silence. The most diabolical irony of this idea of collectivism is that the organizers of culture and this thread of individualism have oriented the herd to believe that they are making a change together through unity and being cut from the same cloth, so to speak. But what are they doing together that makes a literal change? The things they want to change are not the things that need to change.

It is time to draw upon the facts of reality. There are people who live within the shadows, and they are unknown for this very reason. Why would they need to come out into daylight? Why would they not remain hidden in the dark? Everything is orchestrated perfectly; on the economic front, there are no coincidences; all of the stock market crashes had been frauded, purposely driven to collapse. Everything follows a plan by some group that is unknown; there are only theoretical judgments on their identities, but as we see, they are not a modern group that has come out of the 21st century; they are old and have been working in the dark for quite some time.

I would assume that they see culture and arts as diversions and peasantry distractions. This is not to say that they do not admire great art; it is impossible for anybody too. Yet, it will never be enough to evoke a serious shift in their hearts because their hearts are aimed towards power, evil, Machiavellian instincts, oaths and ritualism, symbolism, divine endurance and the heights of experience.

Rioting could work in our favour on small time things; perhaps certain laws and regulations could be changed and tweaked, but only by the holders allowing it to be passed. Though the rational aims and motivations to riot for a cause may not be the thing that is life enhancing and beneficial to everyone within the society, and thus they may invite this cultural problem inward for the micro-resolution of the society, as a stabilization, the carrot to the mule.

They will never allow any distribution of power to anyone besides their own brotherhood. Violence is the only way to invoke permanent change; look back on history, every revolution created change and every revolution was bloody.

If we want change we must consider the possibility that violence is not only necessary at overthrowing government but essential.