Muacks, kisses, ####%%%% does not equal UP UP UP UP

Existentialism is not a way of life. The point of existentialism is the dialectic between two competing ideologies and between the being and a state. It cannot be harnessed from the point of knowing- which puts it in a state of acting "for itself".

It has become a hegemonic state insofar that the state of being is aware of the situation. This means that when we act like an "existentialist", we have become a state of "for itself". This means that for example, when we knowingly act in conflict with another fully aware of the implications- for example, I act against my boss fully aware that I am an existentialist- which means that I have become a "state", this means that I acting within the confines of an existentialist. This combination of being a "existentialist" and also acting in conflict with the status quo is really acting for itself- insofar that he acting for itself. This means that it is no different from being say a "male" or a man acting like what one does.

So long as I can put a word to the definition of an "existentialist", I can easily put in a state of "for itself". In this particular manner, this means that without full experience of being "in itself", the state of "for itself" is simply acting like a "man".

Some have told me that I can simply look at my past with blind ignorance and accept that everything before was a whole mistake and hence we can start afresh. That is true, but what they never ever realized that the state of "for itself" imposes on "in itself" in a manner which puts not at conflict but in harmony. Think about the state of risk or danger, most of us will simply collapse both together and that is when we achieve a harmony.

A hegemonic state can be achieved at the state level simply by putting the populace constantly in danger. Take for example, a newspaper cutting on the recent race riot in Singapore. This is a hegemonic state- simply because nowhere in the developed world has a police car been burnt down and such an orderly dismissal of a riot. The only person and ruckus that caused is the damage of several police cars and a few unlucky cars. This did not caused a state of panic and put the populace at an "existential state" simply because, it is so painfully obvious that the incident- can be put as nothing more than a "flash" in a pan. This means that yes, once again it is a siege mentality and not state of existentialism crisis.

The first reaction was to post everything on youtube and laughed and make it like it was not a "riot" but really just some drunken people. Some people are really not happy about the situation about certain things. Just accept it. C'mon man, once you accept it. Life goes on as usual- and you realized and everyone will realized that we are never what it seems.

That's what exactly what education is all about. A few years ago, I wrote about existentialism and risk. This means that the precondition of all existentialism crisis and for a new identity to arise every single time is to take risk. Some people might have take it to the next level as a somatic and endorphin inducing mechanism.

Let me lay out the cause and effect sequence. 1) I see something I don't like 2) I keep quiet if it is risky and do something if there is nothing going on 3) It continues 4) I reassess again 5) It continues 6) I go back to 1. This is not an existential dilemma.

This is rationalism. I am continuing to compartmentalize all cause and effect to the point of manageable pieces before acting.

It is also argued that the existential crisis comes when 1) One I cannot bear it anymore 2) It is not to my disadvantage to act. The action then becomes a whole in one. This means that we have achieve praxis. A source of action deriving from change and theory.

If you can look above, we have a riot in Singapore- the first in 40 years. property prices continue to go up. Everyone is coming to Singapore. Don't you think this is the real "existential" crisis.

But people go about doing their own matters like property prices will continue to go up forever. The argument was Singapore was a nanny state and I began to think that Singapore has become a "nannied" state that everything is sunshine and roses.

Anyway, I will leave it to these people who has the belief that they are nothing more than a speck of sand in the ocean. If they feel these things are out of their control, and then so be it. Just hopes that when the waves come, they will be swept in the direction.

P/S: I have every confidence in the Singapore economy and society that's why I am staying put. We have our own "pussy riot" right here in Singapore.