Mosaic Mirror of what defines the Left and Right

Mosaic Mirror of what defines the Left and Right

*This piece is meant to be read more than once. The first read reveals its form; the second, its reflection.*

“The Left and the Right are two sides of the same mirror, where the Right can only see the reflection of itself and judges the world based off of its own independent view of principles, while the Left can see anything but itself in the mirror, often conforming to what it thinks its views should be based on the judgement of those around it.”

While this may be viewed as a form of individualism vs collectivism, it isn't entirely as it simply runs much deeper, birthing and conforming to a static form of worldview that while it can evolve or change over time, doesn't always make it easy to achieve.

Trauma as the Mirror's Crack

This often needs an extreme form of physiological impact to teach itself what it lacks and what each lacks, often becoming a form of the other side of the mirror. These extremes are what define the individualization of the depth of what each and everyone is, often turning into a deep scar that plays itself out as a form of psychological trauma, causing the human psyche to reject or reflect what it was while becoming something entirely new as a result.

While the inherent natures of these ideological viewpoints, often resembling a form of feminine natures for one side, or masculine natures for the other, don’t always end up as a black and white form of either. They often pull from the two parallel extremes, creating an overlap that may blend together in a maelstrom of unified visions as the principle structures of both will co-align to define the principle scaffolding of what makes up a civilizational society itself.

The left pulls from a different side of the human psyche, often becoming more empathetic to what they see and hear, rather than what they line up as an assembly to represent. This empathy merges with sympathy and it begins to judge the rest of the world based off the idea of most harm vs most good, unable to understand the individuality of those because it lacks individualized form of principles that would be served to guide itself by, often leading into a giant yarn ball of hypocrisy that will burn the world down just to save a flower, only to not realize, that the flower too, also needs the world to grow.

In contrast to the left, the right, instead pulls from an instinctual nature of what it views right or wrong to be, frequently blending its own principle belief identity to its own spiritual nature of what it feels is true, while rejecting what it views as false often matching itself to the religious beliefs teachings of where it was birthed.

When one of these two natures has a dominant control over the direction that the civilization society itself moves, often as the monarch leaders or elected representatives of what the common views of society are defined as, they will walk down entirely different paths to solve the woes that the world may present.

Paths of Governance: Mercy vs. Equivalency

“To make us love our country, our country ought to be lovely” - Edmund Burke

Burke reminds us that true governance fosters affection through balance, not force or endless upheaval.

With the right, a viewpoint of what fractures lie within the society itself, often viewing it as what hinders its view of what keeps a society growing or stagnates it, understanding the depths of the cold hard realities that the world may offer, while taking the path of a forceful mercy to create a land of salvation; for the path of salvation must be held together with the iron grip of its own sanctified doctrine of the world

In this path, what is often seen as broken, needs to find a method of resolution, whereas the form of progress during this path would take what it views as systems that had worked once before so it can reintegrate them as a means of replacing what no longer works in the now.

While the left holds a viewpoint of perpetual equivalency that exists in the world, generating an unending cycle of grievances that may fuel its life's blood for change. A means of challenging a system that even when it is built for the purpose of equal standings for everyone, becomes an impossibility for those who are each individually independent for where we were born, what we are good at, how we can grow, and where our limits are.

In this path, what is often seen as inhumane, will always take what it views as a structure of the system that it feels no longer works, primarily due to the inherent inequalities that already exist, and must change it into something entirely new. The viewpoint from this is to view the past and see that where it is today, had inevitably come from a system that never worked, so instead of taking what once would have worked in the past, it must change it into something entirely new, something that has never tried before.

For salvation is a form of equality for those who only know how the world around their bubble feels and defines its own principle structures based off of that, while never being able to the reflection of what it becomes during the trek down the roads paved out of good intentions, but never the wisdom of those who paved that path before them.

*Authors note*

Both sides want to save the world in their own ways; however, both may give into the folly of the demons they may become by the methods used as a means to ‘save the world’.

The critical nature is a means to make those aware of the beast it may turn into while in the pursuit of its own utopia.