Reading and Writing

Once upon a time, people were used to writing on the Internet rather than posting pictures. That was a long time ago- about 20 years ago at least. Then the Iphone changed everything.

Writing has a place in this world beside photos and videos. Writing and reading is like watching foreign art film, you know that is beautiful in spite of you not knowing what they are talking because it fires the neocortex of your brain- the rational part of your brain. The effect is not instantaneous but if you have patience, the payoff is cathartic. Let us see what photos and videos does to you and how does it differ from reading/writing, and really eventually convincing you that reading and writing is worth your effort.

Writing is not instantaneous. It does not come from the limbic part of your brain where all innate fears and desires reside. That means that it does not immediately satisfies the most primitive part of brain. It requires you to use the neocortex of your brain to edit and to articulate your thoughts into intelligible language. But when you are able to connect the dots from disparate parts of your brain, that is where the satisfaction resides. It means when the brain is firing away, the satisfaction is not like satisfying your hunger or thirst but more of a lingering effect of a aromatic coffee. It is control coupled with desire to form a structure that communicates not just to yourself but others.

You can build empires in your head with writing which is something what videos and photos cannot do. It is because that part of your brain is pure chaos. Dionysius run riot while we watch videos and photos. This is because we satisfying are an hunger, a thirst. It is purely biological. We are satisfying an innate desire for pure emotions, the emotional need to identify with others, to form an social and emotional connection. It is embedded deep down in our primitive limbic brain.

But when engage in reading or writing, we are engaging our neocortex of our brain- which was developed later in our evolution. The rational part of brain. In order to articulate our deep-down desires and fears, we need to engage our rational side to bring structure to our otherwise chaotic and disparate primitive desires and fears and not rational thoughts. 

And when we form structure to our chaos, that is when we are able to connect the dots to these dormant fears and desires. We can discover the "why" question. Why do we fear rats or cockroaches and for myself, heights. Thats when your full brain is firing away. Apollo will bring order to the chaos and thats when that lingering satisfaction occurs 

Thats when an aromatic cup of coffee satisfies the thirst and the brain.

And thats why we should read and write, beside consuming the incessant videos recommended by Facebook and Youtube.

Give to Take more

 It has been more than one year since I have written my last post. Now that I have been married and have my own family now, my creative energies have been placed on the backburner. There re much more different priorities and it set me thinking on one issue and that is: why do we exist?

It is a big question for everyone but I am like everyone else has been evolving everyday. We seek meaning in our lives everyday, everyday that we lived aimlessly is a life lived wasted. So let us talk about what life is about and what does meaning means to everyone of us. Lastly how we can lead a meaningful life.

Let us talk in first person now, life is not just about Maslow's hierarchy of needs where first seek to fulfill our basic needs before seeking self-actualization eventually. Long are the days where our life is " short, brutish and nasty." Though there are of some of us who actually have problems meeting our basic meets, even in the developing world, hunger and thirst are quite rare with rapid production of food to meet the world's food needs. 

What we want in life is life lived in colour and not in black and white. We seek friends and family to catch up. We work in jobs that requires us to expand our mental capacity and not just done in rote. Ultimately what we want in life is a life that is "lived" and not "lived". We live in the now and not in the past or in the future and definitely not vicariously.

Meaning in this sense, means to be social, to be creative and to be in a community. We look for connections and look for feedback on how to live a "good" life. Another loaded word. On what is a good life, is we are at one with the community and the community is at one with you.

For myself, I seek meaning through seeking the truth. I am curious about how the world works and how to crack the code on how to live a "good" life. I am at one with the community because it gives me a feedback on to lead a "good life" and I can contribute to this community further. When the community thrive, I thrive with it as well. Likewise, when I thrive, the community thrives as well because I can contribute and form a virtuous cycle. Meaning comes in the form of all the social bonds that I forged while I work towards this "good life".

The "good life" is not just about giving, it is also about taking. It is about giving so that we can take more. The ego cannot survive without the "ideal/superego" and "infantile desires" working in tandem.

Some see this as a tension, I see this as a virtuous cycle. We wish to have more but we are blunted by our selfless streak. This is not a choice between the two but a counterpoint played against one another to play a piece of beautiful music.

Earlier in the post, I wrote that I can be prescriptive on how to live a meaningful life. I lied and that is the whole point. Had I not enticed you to read on, would you have continued to read on. Now having read this short post, do you know how to lead a meaningful live. I bet you do now.

Merry Christmas.

Eugene

CPF Life- Retirement in Singapore- How Risky is it?

I was reading an article on Financial Times and it was stating that pension payments are falling as bond yields are falling. This is simply because bonds no longer provides a simple matching for the pensions liabilities as bond yields begin to fall to below zero.

In Singapore as bond yields begin to fall, it dawned on me how then does the Singapore government guarantees the pension payment to us -using our CPF- which effectively our pension or retirement scheme. They would not be able to use our CPF contributions to purchase bonds upon retirement to match our retirement needs as yields is now close to zero. [ just to be sure, 10 year SGS bond yields is 1.8% as of writing ( 17/11/2019]  This means that upon retirement, the government would not be able to purchase a government bond and pay you the interest payment as your monthly payout while protecting the principal. This means that the Singapore government would have to take on additional risk to pay you your monthly payouts on your CPF retirement scheme. My question is that how then does the Singapore government is able to do that for you without jeopardizing our retirement money? It is my belief that the Singapore is taking too much risk in their portfolio to guarantee their monthly payouts for you.

In this article, I will define what is retirement for you and how much money is required for you to retire. Secondly I will explain how does the government grow your retirement for you and pay you your retirement payouts and lastly propose what the government can do to protect their money without risking your retirement money.

What is Retirement?

What does retirement means to you? It can be relaxing on a beach day in and day out without worrying about money running out. Or it can mean covering just the basic necessities without worrying like food, clothing or shelter- or just to survive. I would define retirement as having a decent standard of living while living your post-working years out. That would mean the basics as well as some measure of frills such as a short trip overseas twice a year.

In Singapore, a recent article in Strait Times state that at $1,379 per month would suffice in Singapore to fulfill the definition above.  And that is a constant amount without taking consideration of inflation every year.

If you have the full retirement amount sum (FRS) or $176,000 if you are turning 55 in 2019, you get payouts of about $ 1350 to $1450 per month on the standard plan.

How does the government guarantee the retirement amount every year

You have been accumulating your CPF contribution since the first day that you are working. When you reach to age 55 or 65, you magically want to get some money out or suddenly you have monthly payouts when CPF asked you to do so. How then can the government guarantee that?

Based on numbers above, if you choose the standard plan, your yearly payout is ($1400 x 12= $16800) on a lump sum payment of $ 176,000 which is a payout of 9.5% payout on an average life expectancy of 85 years or a 20 year payout life. The total sum comes up $336,000 or 1.9 times principal sum. How then does government guarantee you that when SGS bond yields is 1.8%. Even when compounded- the returns is only 42% after a 20 year period!! This means that CPF cannot invest your principal upon reaching 65 in Singapore government bond to guarantee you the money.

If they were to pursue this strategy, you would have to make up the shortfall themselves.

When you contribute to your CPF, they would have to reinvest the money while you were working so that they can pay you when you stop working. But you have to bear in mind that you would have to pay an interest of up to 5% on your CPF balances while also guaranteeing your retirement.

The government would have to give your money to various sovereign wealth funds that we have and also their own government income to pay you these amounts.

Recently the government have announced the Net Investment Returns Framework to ensure that the government can fund themselves. What this means is that the government is spending your future reserves to fund themselves and on their nation. And this future reserves is invested in equities, risky assets which sometimes returns are not guranteed. And this includes your CPF contribution.

They invest in private equity, risky debt, real estate and other risky assets in order to ensure that they have funds to pay you and other government expenses.

This article is not about how to run a sovereign wealth funds or raising taxes to fund our expenses so I will not go there.

But suffice to say that we have to savvy and sophisticated enough in the financial markets to ensure that the song continues to be played in Singapore. Now do you realize that our CPF funds are actually built on a house of cards.

How then can we protect ourselves?

The sovereign wealth funds have been effective in running our money on our behalf. Generating out sized returns over the years to ensure that we do not need to raise excessive taxes to fund ourselves.

I would suggest that the government stop subsidizing our retirement and allow our populace to plan retirements for themselves. Right now, based on records, the government is ensuring our retirements so long as we keep working during our working lives. I would suggest, half the amount that the government provide for retirement and allow the population to have better control over their retirements.

There would be people who fall through the cracks, these are people who need the subsidies and not everyone.

In this way, we can potentially reduced our tax burden and building for the future rather than subsidizing the middle class.

Similarly, in this way, we can build up our private financial markets, allowing for our population to participate in more entrepreneurial ventures.

Admittedly, this would be a hard sell to the electorate who have been so used to subsidized retirement. But this is a bitter pill, I feel worth taking. This would move the needle in the trajectory of our nation rather than little incremental changes.

In sum, I have highlighted how much risk the Singapore government have taken in our investment portfolio to ensure the population's financial security. And I would hope that the government would release the tight leash that they have over the electorate's purse strings.

What is a good country

Today, I had a strange thought about running a country. It is not about me running a country per se but rather my thoughts about how a country or even any organization should be run.

Very often, we start from what the objectives of an organization should be run. But many a times, we run the risk of being narrow-minded of defining what a "good" country or organization is.

There are myriad number of divergent interests within a country that defining what is a "good" country is highly contentious. Different people have different opinions on what a "good" country is and sometimes, some appears more logical than other's and other's more idealistic but many if articulated correctly each have their valid points. For example, in pursuit of democratic principles, some may have run afoul with more authoritative regimes. While on one end, one may complained of oppression, meanwhile on the other end, the state will state that they were being treasonous. Havng said that, this is not a piece on which type of regime is better but rather trying to explain that both sides have their story.

At the risk of trying to sounding in support of oppressive regime, sometimes, democracy is not the be all and end all of all political aspirations. Democracies is simply a means of which accomplish several political ends rather than an political end itself. If democracies does certain things, I am pretty sure that even states and governments will give the people some power.

Then very often, we will quote North Korea as an example of an oppressive regime which makes servants out of their own people. Now even North Korea is opening up given the recent developments. Perhaps we know too little of the hermit country to comment that the people are not happy, or wants what everyone else is having. China with it's powerful Internet control, does not have widespread demonstrations for democratic reforms given its exposure to the outside world. I wonder what makes you think that every North Korean feel that they were "oppressed"

And of course authoritarian regimes is never welcomed but what we view as authoritarian might be viewed as protecting national values or being patriotic to other's. Which means that there is section of people whom still views such actions benignly or even positively.

I am not in support of oppressive or authoritarian regimes that much is clear but sometimes, some "democratic" supporters feel every act that restrict them by the state as "oppressive" and they feel that they were victimized even if they know they were doing something illegal. Some people even feel that the laws were made to control them and not to regulate everyone but just applied to them

There are many ways by which a country is run and that is what a democracy is made of. If a country is run by a group of "enlightened" people, wouldnt that run afoul with democratic principles.

Sometimes, supposed authoritarian regimes practiced democratic principles, they talk to various interest groups of people, forms committees and action groups with divergent interests and take action. Just that they don't vote formally!!

True governance does not come from a system but rather the people, no system is better than a united group of enlightened, intelligent and motivated people.

People find a way, not the system.

System is malleable but the man stands upright.

Inequality

I have written on so many different themes and subjects on this blog that it is difficult to really ascertain where all my interests lie.

But I believed that beneath all these writings, there is an overiding thread. That is the belief in social justice. It is my belief that every man needs to succeed to its best ability and unhindered by social obstacles that prevents him/her from fulfilling his/her best potential. It is just in this world that everyone is accorded to his needs and merits.

Therefore I discovered that I get enraged whenever I feel that certain segments of people are treated unfairly and not given the sufficient opportunity to succeed in life.

It is therefore that I feel inequality is a subject that I would like focused on in the future. Not just economic inequality, but social inequalities and power inequalities. All these various inequalities are intertwined together and have made poverty, the "untouchables" a reality of life.

Economic inequality is not just a function of "have" versus the "have-nots". It is also how society ascribe status to each segment of people that perpetuate this order. It is also power relationships in society seeking to perpetuate this order rather than trying to make this an "equal" and "just" society.

It must be said that I am never against the rich or the elite but rather how some have succeeded by leveraging on this unequal relationships. This is not to say the rich does not merit their status but rather how some may have "abuse" their status at the expense of other segments of society.

There are some of us who say that these people have gotten to their position by the virtue of their intelligence, hard work and dedication. They did not break any law and neither did they do anything "wrong" or "illegal" to get where they are.

But what they never realise is that they have not done anything "illegal" but in my opinion, in certain circumstances, they have done "socially unjust tasks" to ensure that they get to the top.

Take for example, it is never "wrong" in fraternizing with "rich", "powerful" and "elite" in getting what they want, but they have done in a manner which their "interest" are taken care of and not because they want to influence decisions to help the "weak" in society. These are socially "unjust" acts where they swing decisions to their favour over other segments of society which does not have access to these decision makers.

Resource-poor individuals and organizations might not have the ability to influence these decisions as they do not have access to the major decision makers.

It is quite unfortunate that the plight of the "have-nots" continue to be neglected because structurally, they are denied from having their voices being heard.

It is therefore from this on that I have decided to focus on inequality in society as this will never go away.

 

Worthiness and Worthlessness

"Tactics in conversation- After a conversation with a person one is best pleased with him when one had had an opportunity of exhibiting one's intelligence and amiability in all its glory. Shrewd people who wish to impress a person favourably make use of this circumstance, they provide him with the best opportunities for making a good joke, and so on in conversation. An amusing conversation might be imagined between two very shrewd persons, each wishing to impress the other favourably, and therefore each throwing to the other the finest chances in conversation, which neither of them accepted, so that the conversation might turn out spiritless and unattractive  because each assigned to the other the opportunity of being witty and charming."

Frederich Nietzsche, Human all too Human

"To injure and to be injured- It is far pleasanter to injure and afterwards beg for forgiveness than to be injured and grant forgiveness. He who does the former gives evidence of power and afterwards of kindness of character. The person injured, however, if he does not wish to be considered inhuman, must forgive, his enjoyment of the other's humiliation is insignificant on account of this constraint."

Frederich Nietzsche, Human all too Human

The above are two excerpts from Nietzsche's thoughts on man in society. It talks about human relations and human emotions. The above hits home on people whom have negative view on human to human relations but claimed to live positive and force giving life.

The above assumes that all emotions are merely constructed and cannot transpire without human instrumental agency. This means that all our actions are directed only for their interest and emotions are merely a protection of self-interest and self-worth.

I used to have this idea that humans- both man and woman are capable of altruistic or at least spontaneous emotions. I have began to question this idea recently. I have began to suspect and realise that some sections of society subscribe to this idea of all actions merely reflections of rational and self-interested thinking.

The idea that self-worth is based on an actual debasement of the "other" was an idea I have thought on an intellectual level but never experienced viscerally. It had occurred to me that some people really have that idea and it was an idea that they had hidden covertly behind many cloaks.

What type of cloaks that one might ask? They have hidden behind the cloaks talked about above. Behind the idea of human courtesies, decencies and last bastion of human discrimination behind the conscious mind. Discriminatory words are never exchanged and they are taboo and against human decency. Discrimination is based merely the conscious actions differentiating one from the other class or segment or category. It is politically incorrect to even mention the idea of any form of prejudice and yet it cannot be proven. This is because no correspondence was written, no words were exchanged and yet the invisible prejudice exist within society.

Differentiation were based on your self-worth and how well you reflect these class and stratum differences. Even if you belong to a lower grade, you must reflect your "class actions" otherwise, you would lose your self worth within your class and even within the wider society.

Based on the above excerpts, it is based on the ability to how well you reflect your "worthiness" and ironically "worthlessness" to the gaze.

Take for example, a blue collar worker inability to demonstrate his low status such as an "penchant" for junk food, "obesity" and uncontrollable urge for not "controlling" his human tics is a reflection of his status as a person who is workhorse and one who does the "grunt" work. The lack of ability to demonstrate this traits runs the risk of losing the status as such hence his livelihood even.

Therefore related to the above excerpt, the lack of ability to demonstrate his debasement to his more "superior" white collar workers show his hostility towards them. Their self-worth is based on their ability to inflict injury to their more sedentary and "nerdy" white collar colleagues by showing their machoism. Hence if one has a faithful deference to "management" white collar workers, it is a mere demonstration of weakness rather than a strength in spirit and human character. This is accepted from both sides, even from the white-collar workers.

This instrumental view on human action and behaviour is very telling once you see from the eyes of their self-interest and self-directed interested behaviour. In fact, class and strata differences are differentiated on their ability to reflect their self-worth or even worthlessness.

Their idea of identity is tied to power and influence they have over each other. The inability to coerce the other party's acknowledgement is a demonstration of weakness and is therefore essential to their identity.

It is therefore paradoxical that on both sides of the parties, they are essentially locking themselves into the identity closets and throwing away their key.

Clever and even brilliant to the way that the system is maintained but it is really at the altar of what makes a human that such differences and differentiation can be maintained.

Losing a job

Today, my company asked me to go. They could sense my displeasure with my work there and have decided to let me go.

Normally and in most instances, I would be very depressed and upset about losing my job.

But through this ordeal, I found it heartening to be surrounded by people who were supportive and loving in spite of my setbacks.

My wife has been a pillar of strength as usual and my mom, for once, did not reprimand me for losing my job. In fact they seem relieved that I got rid of such bad company in the office.

Although, it was depressing to lose a job but all these little things made my day and at the end of the day, I felt much lighter rather than heavier.

The Economy of Sex [ Part 2]

In the earlier post, I have written about how workers interact with each other in the working environment. How then does the relationship between the boss or the business owner interact with the workers in the world the "SEX" economy.

Having explained how sex pervades in the workplace, how then does this economy of sex work when money is involved? Very easy, sex sells again.

Having been clueless to world of "sex" in the economy, I was the number one target for having the most "work" and the most "important" job of actually "working". Simply because I was the only "guy" impervious to the lure of sex in the working environment. The women are working as well- simply because they refuse to participate in these horse-trading of sex within the environment. They would instead focus of doing good while the men were doing the "bad" things. Ironically, in this rather ironic work, the women are actually the biggest "controller" in this system, since after all they are ones that are giving the sex. Therefore they control all the knowledge that is to be passed to the men. The women are "really messengers of God" as they provide the direction to these clueless men.

But of course within the men's world, there are these distinctions as well. These were explained in the previous post. To be honest, there are many permutations to these people in the men's world. But the concept remains. Control yourself and others, your status will be higher. It is as simple as that.

There is a Chinese story called Master Q. Master Q is a person whom is so foolish and so gullible that he would believe everything that everyone says. I am that Master Q. But the thing is that I do not believe everything that they say. But I believe that everything that they do is NOT related to sex. But ironically, everything they do and say is about sex. Hence I am that the Master Q who is so lost in his own world that he does not realise that everything in this world is about sex.

Related to the previous post, remember about the over-sexed worker. I am that over-sexed worker. However how smart I am, how hardworking I am, I would never raise above the status that of the person who controls sex or is controlling his own sexuality. I am easily led, or I am the sheep hence how then can I be the shepherd?

What I will always be the lowly worker always working under whims and fancies of the controlling people. I am even lower than the Bangladesh/ Indian worker washing my car everyday. That is ironic thing. Hence this will bring us to the part of the boss and the sex economy.

The boss is ironically very low in status within this distinction. This is because, he is so over-sexed that he set up a company and took the risk when all these people are controlling themselves are getting a salary every month. This is difficult to wrap your head around it right.

Ironically it is the women, wife or mother who is in charge of the business and not the boss himself. He takes all the instructions from the women and follows their orders. They take all the cues from them. Working like a mule, when they asked him hence making him lowly in status. He takes cues even from his own female workers and not himself.

The reason you might ask: why, what if the women tries to overthrow him? The ironic thing is that women being the beacons of God and good, are not capable to doing that hence they provide the lighthouse by which they steer the ship.

My boss has a bevy of women working for him hence you would realise how well-controlled the company is. He also has a very strong mother in which controls the company from behind the curtain like Empress Dowager. The idea then is the same as the general manager, he is actually "eating" all the women. This means that he would frustrate them to work for him and keep the company in good shape. The more over-sexed the women are, the more successful the company. Simply because, the women are working very hard to keep the company afloat so as to prevent mismanagement by the very business owners. It is very ironic, I know. The boss "eat" them by taking advantage of them, by forcing them to do "good" when doing "bad" would be the easier thing to do.

In order to keep this system going, some bosses would rather close their company down then to "work". That is the reason why, in spite of the poor business, unmotivated staff and lacklustre working attitude, they still would not actually "whip" their staff into shape, because you know why: they keep the business going by you guessed it: by "eating" them.

If you do not "eat them", you would lose the status of "controlling" them hence you will not only control of the business, you will lose all your customers. The whole system will collapse in your face. Hence the bosses' status are boosted because he is controlling all the "women" by over-sexing them. That is exactly why then the men would support them and respect them. Therefore he will get customers supporting them and buying from them.

How then do I feature in this picture: Master Q. Being Master Q which is the biggest fool that the whole world has seen. I maybe a fool but I am not stupid. In fact, I am nominated by the women in which they get the direction from. This means that the direction that all the men and my bosses take actually comes from me. This is because the women are really just "messengers" from God, and I am the mere interpreter. Although the women are doing good, they are not stupid at all. They know they cannot trust the men, hence they get one of their own to lead them. One which is impervious to the lure of sex in their language. One which is actually working and not the motivation of sex per se but is just interested to do an honest day job that's all. It is almost as simple as that.

And so Master Q has to work very hard to understand the workings of the world in the language of economics, philosophy, meaning and finance so as to interpret the world for the ladies. That is how I fit into the picture.

To the men, I am the lowest life form because I am working amazingly hard to understand the world when just working for sex or money will suffice. To the women, I interpret the world for them. Ironically the men takes the cues from me and hence from me. But once in a while, they will defy them because it is in their best interest to do so. This means that they will "abuse" me by making things difficult for me, controlling me or even removing me from my job.

Therefore my relationship with my boss has became ambivalent one since I realise all these. One I have absolute disgust for them as they engage in pervading sex in the office environment while having to take instructions from them. It has been a tenuous relationship since I came into realization of the above.

The economy of sex is predicated on one thing controlling the giving and withholding of sex. Sales and customers comes when the status is elevated when you known to be controlling sex and withholding well. How good your product is, is almost secondary.

That is the economy of sex and how businesses are started. It starts and ends with sex. It is the controlling and frustrating of the sexual impulse that dictates how well your business will do. It is the taking advantage of the altruistic impulse of women. However is biggest "eater" or player is the one holding the power. It is also how businesses starts and fails.

Godspeed.

The "SEX" economy

It has been some time since I have written anything here. About 2 years to be exact. So much have happen since I written a proper post or note.

Since then, I have got married, my wife is pregnant for 3 moths now and I am on the cusp of leaving my second job since the last time.

But with new adventures, comes new perspectives. For one, I am beginning to see that I am quite different from others. I got to realise that "SEX" is such a huge thing in so many people lives.

I used to have a schoolmate that told me that the most prevalent philosophy is sex. He was a philosophy student. Back then, during my university days, I brushed it off as just to simplistic and trivial. But looking back, I could not be so wrong.

But I have gained do many perspectives this few weeks that I have changed my mind on so many things. Even for those that seem to eschew sex, does not deny it but rather attempts to control it.

People actually alternate between money/work and sex. If they do not seek work/money, they seek sex. It was just a simple dichotomy. If they seek sex, they are actually willing to risk maybe not fortune but enlightenment on many issues. They have singular tunnel vision between the two.

It is my belief that we actually have an economy centred around just sex. For my entire life, I believe that the best man should always win. Even if the best man does not win, it was down to influence,omoney or lust. And not sex. There is a pertinent difference which I will explain later. The invisible hand is not capital/labour but rather sex dividing and allocating resources.

Take for example in my office right now. It has come to attention due to my observation that it is women that are actually doing most if not all the work. It was a big revelation to me.

I have seen male office workers harrassed and taunt female colleagues into doing their work for them. They do not it in a manner which is most despicable and insidous.

Firstly they make suggestive remarks related to size, number and positions and parts of the anantomical system- only have the female colleagues respond in disgust or simply politeness as negative emotions would actually undermine all working relationships. This is in spite of them putting up a poker face when suggesting it. This is not due to innocence but rather to prevent accusations of spewing sexual innuendo when it is plain for all to see.

Another manner as I have mentioned earlier is the difference between lust and sex. Lust means an uncontrollable desire for carnal pleasure. But sex in this case is simply the manner by which we can make each other work for sex or at least the suggestion of it. The man or person who controls the other person through sex is simply the "best"man/ woman or most "talented"person. Quite a prepesterous preposition, I know. But hear me out on this.

In my office, there were two male colleagues that had managed to stay the longest in the company. One was a fellow sales staff, the other was my general manager. Each "controls"each others through sex.

According to their theory, whoever that controls others through their sexuality is by far the most "sexy"person. This means that the person who is controlling and the most "controlled" is the most sexy person and by extension the most "capable"" person. Hence therefore, this will ensure their survival in the company.

Take my fellow sales staff R for example. R is a married foreigner. He is a smooth talker and a devout Muslim. But this does not means that he is a straitjacket. R has exposure in England and based on my conversations with him, he gave me the impression that he was "bad boy"while studying and working in England.

But he married about 6-7 years ago and has a kid whom is 3-4 years old now. He has been at the company for about 7-8 years now.

He is considered "high-class" in the eyes of many. This is because of his ability to control his own sexuality. This makes hime highly desirable and prized. Why is he considered high-class you migh ask?

This is because he does not "over-sexed"himsel when women "presents"themselves. This means he is immune to their "flirtation". By "flirtation", this means that he "under-sexed"himself when the women tries to "flirt"with him. By "flirting", could simply be asking a simple innocent work-related question which can easily "sexualized"in methods earlier.

How does he do it? Being a sales staff requires one to be positive. But he throws negative words to discourage himself and others so as to prevent himself from taking any "risk". This means that by discouraging himself and others, he does not need to "work" for sex and therefore giving the impression that he is control of the situation.

Because of this situational awareness, he is highly prized for his ability to control his sexuality and that of other's. Despite his inept sales ability, he has manage to stay in his job for 7-8 years. Having work there for 1 year, I have not seen him make a single successful sales call and yet he has manage to stay in his job for so long.

Let us talk about our general manager. He is a different ball game altogether but the rules are the same. The concept remains. The idea is to never have anyone control your sexuality such that you would act on their behest. This is regardless of whether of what your job entails- this means that even this prevents you from doing their job, you should never be controlled by others. You will lose your status, once you are "controlled" by others. This is even in spite of all the facts and realities flying in your face- the "show" must carry on even if there is no money to even pitch the stage. You must maintain your status.

The moment you lose your status, you are considered "low"hence you will be "working"and"not "controlling" others.

My general manager ironically does not attempts to control other's sexuality but attempts to overload it instead. He is the most hated among all the female colleagues because he "eats" people. This is meant metaphorically of course.

This means that he will take advantage of the situation so that he does not need to work. He does this by observing the flow of the office environment. When there are activities or movement in the office, he will attempt to overload the sexuality. He does this by frustrating the female workers by being "cheap". This means that he will cut into their conversation and demand "more" work to be done so that he can be "over-sex" them. In fact he always does this to "me". Just when I am at the busiest, he will load me with the most menial or even more work. This seems like a delegation of work if you think about it. But it is not.

This is because he does not delegate the most "difficult" job to the people he considered "high"like R. He asked me to go out in the sun while R is helping to transfer phone calls or pass messages. He will never touch them with "difficult" job but have the grunt work to people who are often "over-sexed" like my female after-sales colleague, XP and myself.

Imagine if there is just an "over-sexed" individual and many "controlling" people, all the work will fall to the "over-sexed" individual and the rewards will fall to the "controlling" people. In this case, who will really "work"" in such a system or organization. And is this called "delegation"

Why am I exclusively talking about men only. This is because women are not complicit in this system. Women do not attempt to over-sexed nor attempt to control sexuality only for the purpose of doing good. If men wants to control, they will not attempt to control, if the men want to be over-sexed by them, they will let them.

This is because they are trying to do good. It is men that attempt to corrupt the mind of the women and manipulating them. This means instead that they are mere bystanders and objects to the men.

How do I know all these? Lets just say that I have a special gift. I am privy to many things that the women have to say among themselves. And I also observed the behaviour of both the women and the men.

Lastly you must be thinking how does my boss or the business owners let such blatant discrimination happen. Lets just say that they are all complicit in this as well. In fact, the whole business and the world of business is built around sex and the movement of it. I will leave this for another post.

Happiness and Mattel Barbie boxes

I used to treat people quite instrumentally. This means that I would only get closed to the person if he/she is useful to me or someone that I like. I thought that this was how the world worked- people make use of each other to get what they want.

As I began to grow older, I began to realise the importance of relationships. That sometimes, even though we have no use for each other, we should still treat each other with kindness.

Sometimes, I feel that if you do this because of karma, you are actually ruining the whole idea of treating with kindness. We must treat other with kindness with no notion of hoping to get something in return and that is when good things will happen to you serendipitously.

And as I grow older, I began to question the idea of relationships. Can you imagine if I married someone if I thought that this girl was pretty or is really rich or has the ability to bore me many children. What type of relationship would I have?

This means that I marry because it was the right time to marry and this particular person ticked all the right boxes. Or because social pressures to get married, we married the person simply because he/she was there and that's all.

I believed that many people married because they see all the nice pictures of couple living a life together and they want to have a piece of the nice and idyllic couple life- but how much do you know about your significant other and what have you done for him/her or what has she/he done for you?

They inwardly want to settle down so that they can enjoy the quiet and idyllic life of couple-hood or family life rather than truly being in love with person. This means that they have self-interested notions for the their significant other. If the significant other does not fit the bill, quarrels or arguments would ensue and things that take a turn for the worse.

I used to want to get married to this girl of dreams simply because she was really pretty, smart and graceful. I thought that she would fit nicely into my previous yuppie lifestyle of successful career, condo and car. But she dumped me and I thanked her for that. Simply because I wanted her to be my wife simply because of ideas of self-aggrandizement that's all. I wanted to enrich my ego and she fits the bill. I think she detected that and she dumped me for someone better- I better.

Imagine what would happen if we got married, I think we would be divorced her by now because I wasn't really interested in who she is but rather in how she can enrich my career or how she can enrich my self-worth.

But there are some whom are more interested in telling the "happy family" story that I believed that they got married and got kids simply to live this little dream of theirs. The significant other was simply the partner to live this dream of theirs. They have absolutely no notion of what the significant other likes or dislikes other than the fact that they checks all the boxes

They have an innate desire to be "happy" and hence they want a picture perfect "husband/ wife". Everything is planned carefully and they have no wish to deviate from their " picture perfect life"

We all want to be happy but it does not comes from an outward expression of what conventionally constitutes to be happy. And this does not comes from satisfying our own ego. Happiness comes from within and comes from sacrifices that you make not just for people whom you care for or loved but also for people who you have no familial or close ties with.

I just hope that people realise that happiness does not in Mattel Barbie boxes but rather with what you make of life that throws at you.

Have you?

I was reading a piece of online news on this NUS girl who said that she had preferred her priviledged suitor than her more working class boyfriend. Of course, there will be lots of brickbats on the girl for choosing materialism over good old work ethics. But this time round, I will focused on the guy.

You see, I was never either of the two. I was kind of quite lucky to get a car when I was studying as my grandma had bought the car for me, but I wasn't so lucky that I had lots of spending money to spend on girls then. I had to work in cafes for $5/hr and that was the going rate then, to earn some extra cash to spend on things I like. Of course, I wasn't so lucky to have a house in my name even before I graduated.

But I watched so many movies and shows on how people clamour for the attention for rich and successful guy who had everything. Car, condominium, cash, credit cards and some class. And so after working a few years, I was determined to be that guy. To be sure, I wasn't that sort of guy who would actually was clamouring for all those outward things in school. In university, I was always denouncing those who wore nice clothes- looking fine and dandy in school- as out of touch with reality as which student can afford all these things without daddy's money. I was calling these people bourgeois for being so ostentatious in demonstrating their class and status. I was always in bermudas and t-shirts while in school. [ Actually deep down inside, I just want to indulge in everything that would put me away for "harsh" world of working life]

But after I left school, when I started work- and I put off working as late as I could- I began to realise that it was time to grow up and faced up to the world. I had to be more realistic and practical and not always denounce all demonstrations of wealth as bourgeoisie- and stop being such an intellectual snob. I began to develop an interest in finance and even took another degree in finance to further my career and interest in it. I started in operations in a big Swiss bank and I began to see that the big money was not earned in operation or the middle office, it was in the front office- the client facing side of things.

 I then began to earned my strips by starting out as a fully-commissioned financial adviser in a financial advisory firm. My target was never to be so entrepreneurial but to work in a bank as a banker. When I learned enough from the place, I moved to a large British bank and that's when my career took off. I started with simply cold-calling customers and my time in the financial advisory firm put me in good stead as my customers were simply people that had to be spoken to. I broke the sales record the first month while in the bank and my boss took good care of me- always giving me good leads. I then began to feel like a banker.

I began to feel like the guy in Wall Street like Gordon Gekko in the movie always talking in millions and spouting financial data like it was second nature. In fact, I like the adrenalin rush of moving money fast- making good money for clients by simply moving money in and out of the market. And I was pretty good at my job. Most of my clients made money and they were happy for it. I was earning good money from my job, $7,000 to $8,000 a month for a 27-28 year world in 2000s is pretty decent.

I was becoming that guy that everyone loves to hate. I had a car- okay not the best car but decent enough one enough-, I bought a million dollar condominium at 29 with my mom as I had to share the downpayment with. I was earning good money with lots of disposable income and I could afford to pay for the $150/month gym membership, $200/ month car park at the hotel and a nice meal here and there, wearing $200 shirts and $200 pants with $ 400 shoes. It was nice- everything was nice. I was barely 30 then.

But I was working extremely hard, I was working seven days a week as my branch was a seven days week branch and I even had to go back and work during my reservist as my customers needed to trade and I couldn't trust others to do it for me. My bedtime television show was Bloomberg. Hence having talk so much about my journey going from the guy which everyone likes- one which denounces material wants to one which attain all forms of conventional material wants, I would like to say that being the guy which achieve all the material wants is really not as easy as it seems. It seems like they have everything but actually, it is a difficult climb.

They make it look easy as it is really part of job. It is all part of the charm that makes everything look effortless so that they can attract people to what they do and it is not easy. It is like the gymnast who practice hours and hours just to appear graceful in front of everyone just for the few minutes. The only difference is that we have to keep doing it the whole day.

We make it look easy not because we are flaunting it but because we had do the difficult part away from the public eye. For those that think being the top of the game requires luck, think again, you need whole lot more skill, guile and effort than you can imagine.

For those that really eschew materialism, you might want to think again why you were never successful materially- perhaps it was not because you were not lucky enough, perhaps because it was that you did not put in sufficient effort. Perhaps, you were too afraid to come out of your comfort zone and lose your friends that you will comfort you when you were lousy but never contribute to your building up as a person or maybe you were busy criticizing people for being materialistic then to look at your own situation. Or even maybe, you have never taken a risk in your life in achieving your goals and that's why you have never even taken the first step.

Now is the time to curse the bankers, the people who sucked money out of people, but being on the top of the game requires a whole of intelligence and background work. It also requires of manicuring of the image to look successful and knowledgeable to sell the idea to the clients. It is really the whole package.

Take it from the guy who went from bermudas and shorts to expensive suits and shoes, it is a hell lot of more difficult to appear successful and appealing than to appear "normal" to people. I know it from experience that denouncing being rich is quite easy, but being rich is really kind of a much harder- and based on your own effort is hell of a lot harder.

Hence, let us not be fast to denounce that successful person that seems to live in another world from us as being out of touch of reality, as it is really much harder than it looks to look successful, knowledgeable and powerful all at the same time. It is really a much cultivated image that requires so much pruning from the mannerisms to what you wear, to what you talk and read about.

But now, I am working at my father's place for less than 1/3 what I used to earn and I really quite happy for it. I am happy because I am trying to build a family business rather than helping an outside business grow bigger and bigger. All my expensive shirts, pants and shoes have become useless because now I wear jeans and polo tees to work and I have graduated from looking rich and successful to trying to be actually "rich and successful."

Some of those things I learnt from my banking days is still useful such as the salesmanship and looking from a business perspective but now I realise that it is not just about myself, it is also about everyone else in the team. It is about getting my colleagues to work together and to ensure that the customers are served correctly and well.

I do not have as much disposable income but I still have my house and I still have a company car to drive but I am investing my time and effort to the long term growth of the company. I still want to be successful but just that my definition of success has changed. It is wider now, and I want everyone around me to be successful and not just myself. But there are some whom eschew success, thinking that it is linked to materialism, but I think they just scared to succeed.

Therefore don't hate the banker, think about how the banker can and will grow to another person. At least he had the guts to chase for what he wants. Have you?

Trip to Dubai

I had written before on Islam always othering Christianity in pursuit of their identity. I am not going to pretend to be an expert on this issue but from what I understand, Islam arose from the needs to provide an alternative to Christianity in the Middle Eastern region. How it arose to prominence seems to come from even secular reasons due to geo-political exigencies.

Recently I develop an interest in the Middle Eastern region after a visit to Dubai last week. Very often, we paint the Arab Muslims as living in another world with the beards and often traditional clothings. When I went there, I began to realise that their traditional clothings have quite practical uses. It was extremely hot there, up to 50 degrees in the open sun, the loose fitting clothings meant that it was not as inconvenient to wear in the extreme temperatures. But the women clothing were something different. They were in black and covered from head to toe, and it seems extremely uncomfortable in the hot weather, but I gathered that it is due to their traditional readings of Islam.

I read up abit on Middle East over the course of the last few weeks and began to realise, it is quite a diverse region. Saudi Arabia is considered to be an area where more traditional readings of Islam is being followed. Women must be appropriately covered and are not even allowed to drive. But nonetheless, the government is trying to modernize the economy and diversify from oil revenues and trying to build various sectors of their economy. From property, tourism to banking, they are trying to move away from their reliance from oil

Other parts of Middle East are considered to be liberal, and does not impose such rules on it's people and visitors alike. UAE where I visited, is quite liberal. I don't see any difference living there and any part of the cosmopolitan city like New York, Paris, Hong Kong or Singapore. What you can get in these places, you can get it in Dubai as well.

Talking about Middle East, you cannot avoid talking about IS- or Islamic State. What I saw from Dubai seems to be quite far-fetched from the world of IS. In fact, they seems to love American cars and brands more than anywhere else in the world. The strange thing about Dubai is that there almost 8 foreigners for every local here hence it cannot be representative. I did not really meet any locals when I was there but what I can see is that people are prospering there. Although, I find that some things are somewhat over the top and I am not sure whether it is last after the novelty factor wears off but I have no doubt that they are trying to emulate the western concept of capitalism.

Although, they are very modern but you will find restrictions on certain days or regions. Like some restrictions during praying times on Fridays, they still cling on their beliefs. There is no attempt to impose any form of caliphate in the region. They are welcoming to foreigners insofar that they bring in the tourist dollar or precious skill to build the economy.

Maybe I have not visited the traditional parts of Middle East and do not see how they lived but when I read a little more about them, I began to realise that even though most of these states are autocratic in the sense that citizens do not have the right to vote, I see that the rulers also care about the welfare of the people. During my visit there, there was an Emirates plane that caught fire and a fireman had died during the blaze, the emir of the state actually visited the family of the fireman whom had died in the blaze, the newspaper had reported. There was no need for him to do that as he was actually the head of the state.

Sometimes, I begin to wonder whether systems make men or men makes systems in such cases. You don't necessary need politicians to fight for votes to show their human side, sometimes such acts can also come from the heart.

Sometimes, maybe the western media "other-rize", "exoticize" and "demonize" Muslims so much that they seems to come from another planet but it seems that they have quite similar concerns from us. It would be good if some of us would try to have some interest in the less-often  visited region of the worlds and try to come to terms with in our terms rather than see them eyes which could be biased from the start.

Travelling

I think travelling is over-rated. It is true that every time one travels, one tends to get new perspectives when they come back but more often than not, it breaks the routine of life so much so that the things that you have been training for or saving for the whole year gets wipes out within the few weeks that you spend overseas.

Actually I enjoy the act of travelling which means that every time I enjoy, I get to sleep in hotel beds and not make my beds and someone will do that for me. I like the fact that I get to try all sorts of different types of food and sometimes, over-eating comes with package. I also get to see how different people lives and how lucky we are in Singapore.

But the difficult part of travelling is getting to the routine that you have been trying to trained yourself for. Take for example, you goes to the gym on Mondays, Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays. And just for that 2 whole weeks, you skipped gym because it's travelling and travelling should be relaxing.

You lose the momentum for the entire year just because you put yourself on relaxed mode for 2 weeks. And when you switched off for the 2 weeks, everything else gets looser as well. The marathon that you are training for gets switched off. And based on experience, after switching off for 2 weeks, getting back to your normal training mode takes at least a month, which means that you lose one month.

At the same time, the financial goals that you have been saving hard for as well, can go in a flash, as you want to experience memorable moments, you spend as well on things. Just because you are on holiday, your purse strings get looser and suddenly, you begin over-spend. And at the same time, your weight goals goes haywire as well. Faced with a full-on American breakfast everyday for 2 weeks, who wouldn't put on pounds that you have been desperately trying to shed the last few months. You gained back whatever you shed and more within a matter of weeks.

It is easier to lose sight of your goals when you are travelling because it is justified by "because you are travelling and so you must let loose mentality". This is regardless of whether you are travelling for leisure or for business. To compound the matters further, you are always in different time zones and therefore the routine that you have build up over the course of the year to build up to something get screwed up as well- putting jeopardy to your best-laid plans.

Well, I don't know about you, the last few times that I travel, I have made sure that the hotel comes equipped with a gym. And I make sure that I visit the gym at similar intervals as what I would have done should I be back home. And if the gym is not well-equipped, I still try to make sure that I will get the similar amount of activities on other machines should I be back home. In other words, no treadmill, means cycling for the same amount of time.

When faced with buffet after buffet of food, I always take everything just to make sure I don't missed out on anything. But I take lots of vegetables, fruits and fish and a small portions of other food. Drinking is almost unavoidable but I just drink for the occasion- like a gala dinner or so, just to show that I enjoying myself to the host.

When it comes to spending, business travel means everything is paid for. This means that you can avoid spending on food, hotel and air tickets, and means that your spending is minimal if you can avoid buying big ticket items like handbags for girlfriends or wives or liquor at the duty-free. What's more, the more liquor, you buy, the more you drink hence the less you buy the better. If it is more leisure, I am very upfront with my guest that I can spend that much especially when it is coming near to the end of the trip.

Some people save money on trips just so that they can maximize their enjoyment when they are overseas hence they maximize everything when they travel- in terms of food or experiences. What they don't realise is that this mentality will result in the "let loose" mentality which means losing their important cultivated habits in pursuit of goals. This lost in routine is really quote detrimental in your pursuit of long term of goals.

Hence the next time, you travel, try to keep your routine up otherwise, making up for it when you come back home is going to be one long hard slog.

Being nice or being "nice"

Should we be frank or should we remain supportive, these are some of questions that we ask ourselves when we communicate with each other.

There are some whom believed that being frank, outspoken and opinionated reveals a tinge of authenticity that gives us some form of credibility when we talk. This makes us more believable and persuasive when we talk.

But always being in your face makes us sometimes unmanageable and anti-social in the sense that even though we know it is the truth or your true feelings, this eliminates the hopes of things changing. The negative vibes given out in itself can be a self-fulfilling prophecy in the sense that the worldview will result in exactly the same thing that we are actually trying to avoid.

Take for example, when we find another person that we do not like, we gives out exactly the same vibes to this person, this other person might exactly reciprocate in return, also not liking you- since you do not like me in the first place. But if we approach the person in a neutral or friendly manner, we might turn a potential enemy to a friend simply by not pre-judging the person.

On the other hand, if you are the type of person whom always say supportive things and positive things, you will attract all the right people to you. All the people will reciprocate in kind as well. Saying all the nice things about you and to you as well. But on the other hand, there is a chance that you will  never hear the truth about you. Granted that sometimes, we will need to hear the truth sometimes; if no one tells you the difficult things, will you ever improved. If someone tells you the truth, the earlier that you will know your flaws.

As you can see, I am actually leaning more towards a positive attitude towards each other. This will breed a virtuous cycle towards each other. We can actually tell each other flaws in a nice way- without offending or putting down others. The important thing is to consider each other feelings.

I used to be a believer in being authentic and telling each other the truth as I felt that this would mean being honest with each other and that is the basis of a fruitful relationship. But I began to realise that not only that I might be wrong in my views, I might also hurt the long term relationship. I even think sacrificing the relationship in exchange of honest opinion is an act of sacrifice which should be respected.

I might be wrong but sometimes, an urgent matters, an honest opinion is better than a sugar-coated one but if it is told in private, it might work much better than to create a whole scene or drama over a difficult conversation. We think that outright antagonistic behaviour would provoke a sometimes a positive reaction from the other person. But a calm and plain conversation with a friend about the flaws or downsides might work much better than talking "plainly" or "truthfully". Trying to prevent it from being emotional might actually work better than being just plain rude. The point is to focus on the facts.

But I also used emotions to provoke some form of reactions from people as well before. I think it got the message across but it result in an utter destruction of the relationship. Maybe I was ready to let go of the relationship as well and that's why, I considered it as a parting gift to a friend.

Whatever your communication style, I think the intentions is very important. If your intentions are right, I believed that in time to come, the truth will unravel itself. Whether your relationships will return to normal, remains to be seen though.

Doing good or "doing" good

The last few weeks of travelling have brought about some different perspectives. One of the things is that I realise that there are two types of people or ideal types. One type of person aspire to be good which means that they want to do only good things regardless of the consequences- believing in divine intervention in the course of live. Another type of people aspire to be useful. This means that they are agnostic to beliefs and believed that being useful and utilitarian in their belief should be a way of life. That means they disregard superstitions, traditions and culture and believed that the furthering of human good should be the only criteria. To them seeing is believing.

I used to belong to the latter group. This means that I have almost no regard for norms so long as they useful for myself or for the general good. I am not narcissistic in the sense that I only care for my own welfare but I also consider the general welfare or good of other's in general as well. Take for example, I would sometimes put my relationships with other's in jeopardy if I feel that telling them in a strong way would have a better effect than a soft approach.

But as I grew older, I begin to realise that maybe I was wrong in assuming that my point of view would be the correct one. And I begin to take a softer approach. I would begin to be more tactful in my ways and do not assume anyone who does not see my point of view are simply dogmatic in their ways.

At the same time, my belief in myself as the controller of my destiny began to be questioned in that I began to see that there are certain things not within our control and sometimes, the world can conspire in a way which would reward those who did good and punish those that have done bad or evil things. These are things that we cannot see nor foresee and the universe has a way of making things right and I began to believe in "divine" intervention- not that God has a hand in the things but rather the universe has it's way of righting the wrongs and rewarding the righteous. This was something that was not knowable to the human mind.

But such an approach was such a passive one that it leaves one quite not in control of one's lives and leaves one quite out of touch with reality sometimes. At the same time, having approaching things from the perspectives of working for my rewards, at times, it goes against my instinct of working for things. But at the same time, I begin to realised that my life has been cleansed in the sense that life was much less complicated and I do not chase for the material things that I was so used to be going after. I can feel the effects of both sides.

I think the lesson we can take away from this is that for the intelligent, who believed that self-hood is the one only way to good, one might take a step back and see that sometimes, simply doing good is simply a direction towards self-enrichment. To those that thinks doing good was the only way forward, perhaps seeing alternatives would already be a way of doing good in itself.

As for myself, I am still trying my best to internalize both perspectives and hopefully I can come up better out of this.

Inside Out

It has been some time since I have written anything as I have been trying to get back to the groove of things after being away for two weeks. I was at the bookshop on Saturday, trying to get some ideas on things to write today when I realised that every time I learn something or I write something down,  my perspective changes and along with some parts of my personality. This means that I am no longer the same person every time I encounter something new- for better or for worse.

Going further, I begin to realise that how little some people have changed over the years in spite of so many impending changes in their lives. They seem to have remained the same person over the so many years. Are they resistant to changes or are they simply dogged in their perspectives on life.

I was watching the cartoon " Inside Out" on cable the other day, and it shows how people have changed as they begin encounter different emotions in their life, how certain memories are destroyed and then rebuilt again into more beautiful "islands" again coloured by different emotions of both "joy" and "sadness". It then dawned on me that could these people be simply coloured by the same emotion all the time, unwilling to let "negative" emotions into their lives and make their lives more colourful. So much so that their lives have remained the same all these time.

It is my belief that there are some people whom are so dogged in their beliefs and so set in their goals that they are incapable of a range of emotions that would have made them more "human" and their lives more colourful. It is as if their blunt tool of facing everything with positivity made them a cartoonish personality which are incapable of complex emotions. In pursuit of their goals, they are willing to forsake imbuing meaning into their lives. It is like their pursuit of outward and material rewards have made them less "human" and more two dimensional.

Maybe, I have not spoken to them in years, but my impressions of them online and brief encounters face to face gave me an impression that they have not changed over the years. Overpoweringly positive, almost devoid of human emotions. Or maybe, they prefer to keep their negative emotions out of the public eye and keep to themselves in private but what mental conditions would have arise should they keep such private/public divide so distinct.

I have learnt over the years to keep some of my negative thoughts and emotions out of the public eye as they might negatively affect someone but nonetheless, I have always acknowledged them and aim to overpower them with positive thoughts. But this is not before experiencing a whole myriad of emotions and displaying them quite overtly. This meant that I have experienced a whole lots of negative thoughts before I decided that some of them should be kept out of the public eye. I have a range of emotions but for some of them are simply suppressing their emotions just for the sake of portraying a positive image to everyone.

We should embrace these changes in our lives, acknowledge our fears and biases and fully experience what life has to offer us. We should be positive but not before acknowledging the facts in our lives and that we are emotional creatures as well.

I hope for those whom embraced a positive way of life to also try to include those negative emotions in their life. Embraced them and make them a positive force in your life. 

No Post for 2 weeks in August

Hi all,

I won't be writing any posts for the next 2 weeks as I will be travelling.

I will be back on the third week of August.

Cheers,

Eugene

On War

I was reading one of favourite authors, Frederich Nietzsche and his thoughts on war and the state. I have to paraphrase this as I don't have the book with me right now. He goes on to say that war makes victor stupid, and the vanquished malicious. Man emerges from it stronger for good and for evil.

Very often, we avoid war/conflict at all cost but sometimes, we can be made better from it. We avoid conflict/ war simply because we tend towards peace and the fact that it brings us a level that is business as usual. We do not wish to deal with aftermath of a war that it brings.

War/ conflict brings out the best and the worst in everyone. War smoothes out the rough edges that was present before conflict happens. It has the ability to bring to fore the polarizing sides of an argument in plain sight and finally settle once and for all, who has the upper hand.

But as another Nietzsche quote goes:" He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster." This is a cautionary tale where when one is fighting someone or something, he/she while in process of fighting the enemy becomes exactly the enemy. Vengeful, malicious and evil. I noticed that a lot in politics.

It is my belief that we should not punch a person out till he/she has no ability to get up. But I have began to notice that the vultures surrounding Donald Trump, he is receiving no help except the closest allies and he almost appears to be the victim now. During the Democratic National Convention, every known speaker took his turn to knocked him out. Delivering blow after blow at him as a candidate.

But conflict/ war must be considered and should not be put off at all cost. This means that peace is not necessarily the be-all and end-all of all politics. If we do not consider war/conflict as an option, we are only postponing the need to have one as one's enemies might pressed against you. To not consider war/conflict is an absolute mistake.

If we stand firm against our principles, the aftermath of a conflict/ war is often an reinvention of oneself. As my first quote suggest, we emerge from a war/conflict very often stronger in good or evil, and it is my hope that we choose good.

Before Sunrise

I am not going to write in structured manner for this post. I have always written like this to avoid getting out of hand or saying too much that is unnecessary. But for this post, I am going to go light and unstructured. This is line with the screenplay I read on one of my favourite movies: Before Sunrise.

This book reminds me of the bluster and fluster of youth. Of the chance encounters that we so often experienced when we goes in head first during the heady days of our younger days. Of the heady idealism and constant intellectual musings that we seemed so intense when we read a great book or chanced upon a brilliant idea. Of the light and fluffy conversations that we often have with ourselves when we think of the future. The only difference is that it is based on actual conversation between an actual couple. This is coupled with one long take of movie with a no cuts at all of a film. The constant flow of intelligent conversation seems to flow like champagne overflowing out of a bottle.

The serendipitous nature of the chance encounter of an American writer and a French student is something that as a young university student we all wished that we have. They even meet a poet in the middle of street who wrote a poem spontaneously for an unsolicited fee and coupled with a fortune telling gypsy that they tell them a fortune. This is not a cliché, this is what sliding doors is about and serendipity should be about.

Of course, in Singapore, I have no illusions that such encounters would happen, of meeting a jobless poet writing a poem on the street or gypsy telling my fortune or even watching a German film with deep intellectual musings, but the spirit of the whole encounter gives hope that in my not too distant future that something serendipitous would happen to me.

Of meeting someone who is my intellectual equal and then spontaneously some feelings will blossomed out of this rather chance encounter. Someone out there is some girl who thinks like me and who is really smart, pretty, eloquent and somewhat neurotic.

Meeting someone like this would be a dream to me and I think deep down inside me I think I still hold that dream but life has told me that I was creating my cliché as well and sometimes a fantasy is really just a fantasy.

Meeting girls was the easy part and holding onto them was the difficult part- and that was one of lessons that I learnt in life. But as I begin to fade away from this fantastical future that I created in my youth, I have began to realise that there were more to life than love really.

There was much more things left unexplored that somehow parochial youth can be- it is almost oxymoronic to say that really. Youth seems to be about boundless opportunities and exploration but really we were indulged so much in that world-view that we did not realise how narrow-minded our point-of-view. Everything was about love, sex, travelling and exploration that we forgot to look in ourselves for exploration.

There was no need to go exploring to find ourselves, there was a lot in our backyard worth exploring that we simply overlooked while in search for excitement. But really, what we want is excitement and not about discovery. It was not about finding ourselves but about fulfilling some fantasy that we harbour. There was something more "real" that we leave behind that lots of movies, music, books and magazines do not tell you.

As I leave behind the light-headedness of the screenplay of Before Sunrise, I began to realise that even though, my fantasy never did get fulfilled literally [ but in reality, I got quite close to it], life did not dealt me a heavy hand, in fact, they dealt me a hand which gives me a surprises. It was surprisingly more fulfilling than my fantasy, there is an indescribable satisfaction that I have right now, rather than chasing some dream that I made up years ago that was manufactured for me by the media that I read, watch and listen. It was not light-headedness, it was lack of for a better word: just "there".

I hope you reach that stage too.

No post today

I won't be writing a post today because I was too tired to do any reading yesterday. Will be back tomorrow to make up for today.