A REVOLUTION!! WHAT THE SELF NEEDS!

"Thus, the they makes sure of a constant tranquillization about death."

It is extremely hard to understand what the heck Heidegger is saying in lots of his writings, but when he was talking about the idle talk relating to death, I could completely see what he was saying (or I think so anyways. Likely that is impossible). For most people, and that includes me, death is expressed in "one dies," but that one is not myself because I am "no one." Death "must show up from somewhere, but...right now is not yet objectively present for oneself, and is thus no threat." This is entirely true about the way I think about death, and when somebody else dies. Death happens, but it happens to the other.

I haven't read anything else from Heidegger about idle talk, but I'm sure idle talk is not just to do with death. It is almost as if we exist in idle talk. Everything exists but relates to the other. The extreme hunger problems in Africa are talked about here as terrible, "something must be done about it," but not objectively present for oneself and thus even the other must be the one to do something about it. The they makes sure of a constant tranquillization about everything! Nothing must disturb the "carefreeness" that the publicness has "made sure of." And how true this is. Carefreeness IS the they. And it's masked by "emotion." If one talks with emotion about an issue, he automatically has concern for it. So all these people talk with emotion about how terrible Katrina was, and how awful the AIDS epidemic of Africa is, and how brutal the LRA disaster is in Uganda, and so they "care" about these things. And the they thinks that these emotionals care, and by agreeing with the emotionals, the agree-ers "care" also. But nobody cares. They're all void of care, void of love.

For me, I know that care requires an action. It has to. And by me doing nothing to help these people, I do not care about them. There is no way I can say that I care for them, I truly do not. And this is a terrible realization and a terrible thing for people to read, but 99% of people do not care alongside with me. And thus I have no love. I can't say that my sympathy for people is love. We are all mindlessly talking about bad things happening, and those who think they care don't care, and they are the they. People outside of the they do not necessarily care, but they know that they don't care and have to deal with that. The they refuse to acknowledge their carefreeness, and don't even know of their carefreeness, and suppose that like the rest of the they, not doing anything about it is still a form of caring; for they all wipe the dramatic tears from one another's eyes.

So for people who now realize they don't truly care, how is it possible to gain concern? It must have something to do with knowing God. Knowing God is the ultimate, the WAY for life. It would help with actually loving PEOPLE. But this is so hard because the person who actually loves people is bound to just not want to exist! Millions of people are dying, not just far away but right here in our own city and province and country and truly loving these people is an endless term of weeping for them! And one cannot help all! I feel completely overwhelmed even thinking about actually caring for people and their lives. Each single individual who as a matter of life and death needs my help but won't get it because I can't help everybody. But do I therefore choose to help no one? I can't help but see myself described almost completely in Kierkegaard's discussion of despair of necessity. I am the Philistine, spiritless and "devoid of imagination," lacking "sufficient possibility to take notice of God." I long for imagination, for appreciation of mystery, for possibility. That is where I am, I have lost myself and God.

What does it mean to become yourself "transparently before God?" That is going to be the greatest acquisition of knowledge I ever apprehend, when it happens.