A CHRONICLE OF FUTILE SMALLNESS AND ITS REDUNDANCIES

 

Here it is in its magnified dimension. Smallness is an adjective of quality, of a magnitude of size. There is no presumption of diminishing a person or thing when it comes to this. Unless we are comparing and relativizing the state of something that, for centuries of learning and "obligation", should be greater. The little little one grew up. The small example turned into a giant wave of solidarity. The small aid managed to boost the context positively. The smallness of the attitude reaped Dantesque fruits in adversity.

We are all small in the face of the immense Universe. This is our smallness, but much more than that, the humility of this smallness indicates the comparison and relativization inherent to other dimensions. I have met people who were small, a matchhead, who did not even seek recognition when they helped in remote places, hidden by distance and where modern societies would never go, more than to thank him for what he did for that human group, to have a sense of these realities (out of sight, out of mind). And when we say this, we are touching on another greatness, the magnificence of the human being who works and gives himself to humanitarian services, giving his best to see other communities more satisfied, more hopeful in changing difficult realities that many of us are unaware of. In the intentions to restore balance and bring about a level playing field, in humanitarian terms. The subject who exchanges the ease of his daily life in a strong society of immediate consumption and will experience difficulties of survival to bring light, food, knowledge, health to the less fortunate. To those forgotten in contexts of war, of lack of essential goods. This exchanges its ease of paths for an alternative in the treatment of people or animals in harsher and more hostile panoramas. In English, we will say: the meaning of a life! When this adjective of smallness is associated with the impact that a single subject brings of improvements to an isolated community so much in need of the essential, it speaks of the greatness of the act, of the individual, of the result, of the difference, always using measures that serve us to think about the reality we live in, the majority of the social fabric. The examples, prototypes, qualities of mastery. Hence the illustration of smallness, in its smallest dimension. The big economic groups that aim to enslave us through consumption, creating more and more gadgets to make us addicts of the void, gain, with each passing day, more space, cohesion and power. We are talking about our poverty of intelligence, of smallness in the observation of the whole. We are talking about true blindness. Of the carrot that is placed in front of the donkey so that it walks in slavery to the pretension of corporations. 

 

The politicians who represent us, who can make a difference in social and economic inequalities and geographical hostilities, will add up to 10% if at all, in the involvement of people and goods, in real transformation and in the dynamization and commitment of their ability to really do more for the whole. It turns out that 10%, which is a pessimistic view, if we compare it on the scale of one hundred percent, falls far short of the effectiveness and results that could be achieved if societies were to be engage in such inglorious struggles. One subject in a thousand thus elaborates the smallness of the sample and reveals, in another order, the greatness of a single subject who surrenders to greater values of his conscience to make a difference and bring results. They are the exception. And their names are not and do not need to be known, their deeds are not seen and do not require projection, but they have changed and will continue to change the contexts to which they are proposed. 

In so-called civilized societies there is another sense of smallness that is much more projected into the whole, much more impactful, with names that are extrapolated to public knowledge and that profit ostensibly, as if we were talking about potential greatness. In these societies, what prevails is the ability to compete for indifference, for contempt for moral and ethical values, the minute of fame that projects them into a non-existent space, consecrating him immediately as patrons of the hollow, or less than that, in "stars" whose brilliance enraptures the many little ones and leads them, once again through the example of others, with the smallness of objectives they carry. The world has never been so superficial and empty of meaningful content. Never has it needed human uplifting content so much. Societies have become involved in the form, in the package, in the external, and they are walking in a scarcity of artificial light. And this emptiness, which is perilous and substituted by the media's measure of smallness, creates masses of equal subjects, with no notion of the true meaning of existence. Emptiness gains this greatness of superficiality and ephemerality and creates frustrations later on, because the star falls, it was falling, it spreads out on the ground of insignificance, of insipidity, bringing with it motives that will lead the subject to reflections that will lead him to greater purposes or, on the contrary, will leave him hostage to his own hostage to their inabilities, their insignificance and that ephemerality that will lead them to mental illnesses, in a less negative perspective, because in the common perspective, suicide will appear as a "natural" impulse for a confirmatory response and/or congruent with the frustration of the subject's expectations. The aurora borealis, eclipses, earthquakes and volcanic eruptions are natural phenomena and despite this naturalness, they do not happen with the frequency of catapulting the earth into the commonplace, nor of sameness, much less of exclusion or implosion. The earth does not commit suicide. It regenerates.  

With the subjects, it's not quite like that. The scale is similar, however, the ego, which is nothing more than the illusory social projection of what the other wants from me, is rooting this competition and consequent myths that that fame that transformed the anonymous subject into a rarity of light is positive, necessary and, however, is, on the contrary, tremendous in its ephemerality and mediatism. Our home, our territoriality, is the grand scale of the universe.

And if it is transformed by the adversities that societies produce in it, if the impact it suffers alters it, it is more than observed that it is unique, irreplaceable and does not enter into the buzzword of smallness. Thus, the smaller the goals we carry, the greater the consumption of social gadgets, the greater the fall of the various abysses where the subject projects himself. 

Mental illness is manufactured by society, but it is not in itself an entity from which we can demand responsibility for the damage that has been done to us, the social ignorance of the mass is knitted by the whole and we will have to have discernment and lucidity to exempt ourselves, isolate ourselves, turn inward and realize what is important and vital for each one of us. Emptiness cannot be anchored in successes and failures, in expectations and illusions, but in goals and objectives, concrete and individual causes and assessments of where we want to go and how we are going to do it. If, until now, we have produced garbage and diseases, hunger and wars, in this inversion of values production of the whole, it is by thinking about the whole that we will have to improve ourselves, in isolation, for when we are in these large groups that move contexts,  to know that we are treading the generalization of the common good, of collective health, of true interests to prevail over everything that is mediatic, superficial, inoperative and dysfunctional. The individual is the illustrative form of smallness in the face of the masses, however, it is from the individual and his family unit that we arrive at corporations, political, economic and social groups, which are living organisms with the capacity to alter the whole. And it can only be changed from the change of paradigms that takes place in each subject, in each being. If this is a La Palisse truth (s'il n'était pas mort, il ferait encore envie), we can understand that the extrapolation of mass (and I am not talking about the uniformity of being equal, because we are all born with different characteristics that must be assumed, because this is, more than the impetus, the intention of creation) only after individual change can you achieve goals that alter the mediatic, aggressive and dystopian realities that we have now. 

The world as a Universe will always be transforming. The big question is how we will serve as a fuse to improve it, what positive impacts we can add and how we can reduce the negative impact on our great case. Deprived of plan B, of the smallness of our principles to the magnificent smallness of being a detail that can alter the general context to another level of humanity. And if the union makes the strength, the detail, as well as the end point make all the difference.