Introduction:

Finding a path to succeed within society in an effort to be heard presents us with one of the greatest endeavoring tasks that rest before the politically active and sociable individual. In turn, there is a rather interesting relationship that is created between the same individual and their respective governmental structure.

In an age where individuality has peaked due to the invigorating and liberating advances of modern technology, the role of the lone individual is redefining itself. In turn governments seem to be constantly concerned about maintaining control and regulating that same flow of individuality.

Counteraction is often met with governmental despotism and rifts are then generated within the societal infrastructure in question. Expanding on such a grandiose paradox is the purpose of this rather brief literary work.

Investigating the Bigger Picture of Human Civilization:

Finding a sequential pattern which binds together our everyday incentive to exist is celebrated by a mutual sentiment that rises to that challenge. All depending on the situational reality that prevails at the timing of a single setting, the very meaning of that challenge has the capacity to define itself into the context of the actual timeframe. Does this imply that our immediate state of mind will naturally determine what it is that we want out of life? These factors that immediately arise insist that some sort of inspiration must promote an individual to follow through with a real world action which acts upon that challenge.

As human beings, we constantly find that our worldview and interests will naturally vary depending on the individual’s orientation. If we find ourselves to be flanked by an insurmountable degree of individuality, then who will instigate joint collaborative action on a sincere level when it comes down to the bigger picture of the societal whole? Uncovering that foundation prompts us to think in entirely different capacities.

In an effort to have a concern about the general well-being of our societies, nations, and civilizations, we must first put our individual self in a position where can identify our needs, wants and desires on a first hand basis. On that note, we could almost suggest that collaborative forms of thinking and affirmative threads of action are not intrinsically influenced by our individual livelihoods as human beings. The more we feel a general shortcoming or lacking in that pursued individual bottom line interest, the more we retain a feeling insisting that effective threads of intervention can only be achieved when the solidarity of others retain the same stances, sentiments, fears, and concerns toward the same bigger picture analogy.

As human beings, we require the same essential resources which permit our survival; the same is uniformly true of any human being regardless of their geo-graphic proximity. It is this rather simplistic “instigating reality” that reiterates the universal implications that mutually impact our sentient personas on an individualistic basis. We often fall back on these similarities not only because we are universally human beings, but because we are left with a pinnacle that leaves immediate room for our ability to interact with each other as human beings which is then factored into the prevailing social situation in question. Any societal predicament requires a particular context in order to have any kind of sustenance for the masses. It is then possible for that same individual who represents the average stock of the masses that in some sort of capacity, they can challenge the wealthy industrialist or infamous statesman in a way that brings their universal human attributes into direct consideration by the upper echelons of society.

There is nothing that can refute these imperatives that analytically make us human; therefore, a platform is established in the process which mitigates between the people’s collective consciousness and the envisaged priorities of the body that depicts a major manifestation of societal authority.

To a certain extent, it can be argued that as individuals who fall under the capacity of the average or common classes; it almost seems that it is essentially instinctual to our intuitive societal senses to take a stand and this materializes beneath a fully-fledged perception of the socio-political system and the means in which this mechanism attempts to dissipate its authority to the public masses. As weak and frail as the individual may happen to seem, we perpetually maintain a powerful resolve to meet those individual bottom line interests, but before we put ourselves into such a situation where can proclaim an authentic display of comfort within our social systems and societal orders, we must first bring ourselves to a common realization insisting that we must first evolve, but in order to evolve our efficiency as a sentient and intelligent race of human beings, it becomes unavoidably necessary to build ourselves through joint collaborative intervention and publically minded forms of affirmative action. Rationalizing our needs with our situational struggles creates that beacon that morphs into an open inviting ground for all and any form of collaborative action.
 
The world of the twenty-first century has witnessed a sort of transformation that places a greater degree of emphasis on the lone individual. There has been no other time from the deepest depths of human history where individuals have been more free and liberated through mediums in which one individual can express themselves before their societal environments. This has arrived through the all empowering, endeavoring, and endearing force of modern technology. Despite the level of humanity that lacks to prevail as a resilient force against the plagues of corruption, greed, and manipulative deception, a singularity occurs when collaborative action collides with socially minded responsibility. The counteractive sentiments and forms of action that emerge should not work towards the full dismantlement of our civilizations, but the lone individual should be in a position where they can conduct civil minded diplomacy with the incumbent socio-political figureheads to achieve that desired peace of mind which harmonizes long term interests on both sides of the spectrum.

Manipulative Fear as a Tactic of Societal Control:

There is one quality which can strike a certain sense of fear and disarray within the individual consciousness of the lone beholder. The facets of manipulative control suggest that a sheer force of authoritarianism is at work which mutually seeks to prey upon the ignorance of the lone individual; ironically, this is a reflection that directly interchanges with the outstanding preconditions that reign within the composition of the observed society. The forces that institute power, control, and manipulative deception of the general public seek to create a control structure that insists on the creation of the all-pervasive status quo. The tentative qualities arrive in the slightest yet simplest forms of enlightenment; the basis of this clause does not suggest that the general public is perpetually concerned about their intellectual wellbeing, but must have just enough in order to justify their existence and place within their societies in addition to the surrounding world at large.

Power and control present us with two qualities that are essentially abstract; similar to the definitive qualities of mathematics, a distinctive value must be presented brought and introduced into the bigger picture in order to eliminate that abstractness. This does not always mean that the applied variable (the definitive contexts varies when observed) will eliminate the outstanding prevalence of abstractness, but the same substance can be eventually decreased and this is only done once the individual force increases their comprehensive knowledge of a particular matter.

A truth can be applied to a point where the people will be able and willing to acknowledge its outright relevance when brought into the real world stage, but an abstracted series of doubts which then interchanges with uncertainty emerges and throws many into a state of disillusion. What may be considered to be moral or immoral changes from timeframe to timeframe; in the world of the early twenty-first century even the death penalty has been disbanded when only a century ago on the spot executions were conducted and sponsored by many dictatorial governments that had once reigned not even one hundred years ago.

At the beginnings of the twenty-first century, any observer will be able to soundly conclude that the vast majority of the world has freed itself of such forms of politically motivated behavior; however, the underdeveloped world maintains such a primitively barbaric tactic simply because the corresponding control structures which administer their subjects channel an entirely different message to their respective populations. In societies that are controlled by individualized minions of despotic governing structures, the free flow of enlightenment and information is essentially derailed and the people are kept in a state of utter ignorance in order to directly embrace the qualities that prevail in the underdeveloped world. In turn, these qualities are then portrayed as collectively normal in an effort to maintain the same cycle of despotic power and control. However, even racially motivated atrocities, immense amplifications of government corruption, and the widespread deterioration of state infrastructures vibrantly occurs in the developing world in a fashion that interchanges with the very notion of the underdeveloped world.

Many are under the impression that these qualities strictly confine their prevalence to the underdeveloped world, but to our dismay, we find that many of the greatest offenses that mirror the previously stated vices set new standards to the very cause and effects of such a horrendous display of social degradation within the state. The most cunning display of clandestine activity will understand that hiding an underwritten objective in plain sight presents us with one of the most powerful and resilient ways to control the interactive cognition of the public masses.

The age of the post-modern world has created such a profound emphasis on individuality while we have nearly forgotten what it means to be socially, morally, economically, and politically whole. The adaptation of such a modern standard does not only present itself in a manner that uniquely interchanges with the implicating challenges of the twenty-first century, but the notion of modernity and all of its encompassing aspects communicates a series of subliminal messages that signals a focus on the egotistic self; when the masses are lead to believe in one reality when in fact every thread of truth walks in an opposite direction, then the work of the deceptive societal tactician has declared an underwritten thread of success. Simply stated, this is the recipe that is used and counteractive/preventative forms of collectivized social action must act one step ahead of such a deceiving culprit.

Procuring, producing, and distributing social modernity is not enough to satisfy the uncertainties and lack of distrust in which the vast majority of the masses direct toward the institutions that insist on the premise of manipulative societal control; this is not a quality that is immediately acknowledged, but it eventually becomes obvious to see where the distorted truth originates from and where the aspirations/agendas of such forms of statecraft rests. We fear the uncertainty of the future due to the sentimental desire we have toward our own self-interest. There is also a great degree of disarray that emerges once we attempt to sift through the convoluted filth in which control structures of the elitist stock put before the general public.

Human wholeness can only be achieved if we use the enlightenment factor to work against those manipulative, corrupt, and elite interests that prey on our ignorance and subliminally confine us to our own societal spheres of imprisonment.

Conclusion:

The configuration of societal equilibrium speaks a rather dense language that can be easily misappropriated by the three following categories: the individual beholder, the collectivized masses, and the connecting governmental structures. The theme of equilibrium was not the emphasis of this brief literary work, but presents us with a substance that can be used as a way that can mediate between the needs and wants of the people and the aspirations of the incumbent government. It must be realized that the generic role of any governing system must be reformed to serve and not control members of the general population. Governments would not exist without their people and civilization would not exist without the stratum of government.

Mediating in a way that finds common ground that factor in fair and equal bondage which makes greater strides toward humanitarian progress can serve as the ideal theme that can be utilized in an effort to better the conduct of government and the responsiveness of the general population. Governmental systems must transform from the top down and various forms of legislation should ideally emerge from the grassroots level. Otherwise, if a governing structure insists on totalitarian and authoritarian control, the people will never retain a genuine sensual display of affection toward their incumbent governments. This will generate uncertainty and imprudence on behalf of the people, but is not enough to avert corruption and the distorted dissipation of power within the socio-political structure that forms the backbone of the nation and its connecting civilization. Thus, the people have a responsibility to generate greater threads of comprehension about themselves and their corresponding socio-environments before the servitude of equilibrium between these two forces (the people and government) can be distributed.