The following is an excerpt from a post written by Jan Simson (jansimson.com)
“During our conversation, he mentioned that he was a rebel, you know, a disruptor of the status quo, someone who does the opposite of what’s expected or demanded, a person who resists authority or convention.(…)
Conversing with rebels is usually always interesting, because they see through the flaws of something, and they don’t want to be a part of something that is flawed. It does make sense. They’re those who question a lot of things, who love to live in the grey areas of life, and test the socially accepted boundaries of ethics. But not many of them are able to create a better alternative to a flawed system. Mainly because they’re blinded by anger and frustration, and they use their waking hours to criticize, say, the financial structure of the Western economy, justifiably so.
However, there’s a fine line that separates the rebels from the revolutionaries. That line consists of the ability to create a working alternative to a flawed system. But when I look at the current socioeconomic status of the Western culture, it doesn’t look like we’re fond of revolution at all, because we’re comfortable with our flawed systems. “Life’s tough, yeah, but it’s life and it’s supposed to be tough, right? The world isn’t perfect, so why try to make it perfect? You just gotta learn how to deal with it, man. Wake up to real life, kiddo, and get yourself a college education.”
My God, are we purposefully trying to kill the potential of revolutionary creativity?
Well, if that’s the kind of life you want to settle for, then go ahead. I bet we could have a great conversation about how much traffic sucks and tell stories about how obnoxious and noisy our neighbors are. Yeah, good times, bro.”
Filed under English, uncategorized
Tagged with a better alternative, jan simson, politics, Reblogging, resisting authority and convention, society, the socially accepted boundaries of ethics, the system is flawed, we need true rebels, western culture