The Butterfly Effect

                                    Thurston’s Thoughts

Identity Crisis

The Butterfly Effect

The Butterfly Effect is a snowball effect of an action which causes or impacts another occurrence seemingly unrelated. Events, ideologies, and behaviors are revolving seminal premonitions interwoven in the deterministic fabric of future possible outcomes. The results or outcome produced eventually differ from others from even the slightest deviation. Therefore, a minor conditionality of influence significantly affects a domino spectrum of instability or randomness preventing a methodical predictability. Chaos Theory can be considered both a cause and effect of the Butterfly Effect. It is a box inside a box which also contains the box which contains it. 

Classifications are much the same having a deterministic insinuation or connotation significantly affecting perceptions, opportunities, and considerations. Classifications are a linear understanding manifested in an applied perception or interpretation based on the subject’s and interpreter’s categorization. Localized or expansive ramifications are provisional to unrelated considerations created from conditions removed from the application but still influencing the applicator.

For example, two children experience the same occurrence but process it differently. The variation is in the individual lens experiencing it and the resulting impact. However, later in life that experience may produce vastly different dispositions. So, children who grow up in the same household and environment can develop diametrically opposed perspectives from many of the same stimuli but experienced differently creating different characteristics in each. The reason is often the separation of other experiences and influences aside from the commonly shared one respective to their individuality.

Another example is CRT influencing DEI with CRT emerging from GRT (Global Race Theory). This three arm pendulum swings creating a Butterfly Effect regarding social dynamics such as left, right, woke, minority, African American, white, or person of color designations. The definitions are fluid and essentially has no stable delineations which are not subjectively or divisively redefined altering their original meanings. This leads to the reassessment of classifications which have been used to separate, subjugate, or alienate specific groups as meaninglessly undefined by random stipulations.

The definition of social classifications become so diluted one should question the need for them even if it can be argued that they had any relevance in the past. Race, sexual orientation, religion, morality, cancel culture, and many more have no probative definition. What they do have is a subjective convenience of labeling where not only the goal post constantly are moved but the endzone as well. By the constant stretching and contraction of terms and concepts what is actually accomplished is the widening of their definition and thus their irrelevance. 

It also invalidates the criteria used to predict or, more precisely, construct a replication considering the intangibles and collaborative or oppositional circumstances culminating in an outcome or formation. Consider the greatest quarterback, slugger, or baller and the small variation which propelled them above others in the same category or skillset. At what point did it become evident prior to it becoming obvious? What about the fortuitous impact of unpredictable circumstances such as injury from existing vulnerabilities or chance occurrences, or even the impact of rules or teammates?

Many variables contribute to an outcome whose contributions were unforeseen, coincidental, or perhaps fateful. The full circle of materialization is a cumulative randomness. A distance runner whose bedwetting led to his champion pedigree by running home after school to retrieve his sheets from the windows avoiding embarrassment. Essentially, avoiding embarrassment was the unpredictive catalyst. Consequently, we are not defined by our classification, category, or subjugation but instead a Butterfly Effect where the biggest determinate is as unpredictable as the pendulum of life swinging in no certain pattern.

At best, what we do, what we are labeled, or our insufferable endurances are not who we are. They only contribute to what we become. so don’t get it twisted. The formation or reformation of our identity is a Chaos Theory of possibilities randomly determined but arising from the initial conditions formulating our foundation susceptible to random influences or chance occurrences. The declassification of many policies, practices, and designations of social taxonomies only established to serve subjugation and narcissistic hierarchies of control, divisiveness, and separation must be recognized and dispelled.

The identity crisis of social relegation is a pattern to produce a predictable outcome by a standardized method. Accepting other’s limitations as our designation confines the possibilities of our Butterfly Effect to an isolated principle of predictable stagnation. The possibilities are endless, random, and undefined, but, if not careful, so is the identity crisis. For incentive, rags to riches don’t care who receives it. Hopefully, this article will have a Butterfly Effect of clarification as a chance encounter catapulting you to a destiny of self-actualization.


Rippling Effect


  Thurston’s Thoughts

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Oh My!

Rippling Effect

Diversity, equity, and inclusion is defined as policies and programs that promote the representation and participation of different groups of individuals. DEI encompasses people of different ages, races, ethnicities, abilities, disabilities, genders, religions, cultures and sexual orientations. Its rejection is a concept reducing human characteristics to a monolithic selection ignoring the multiplicity comprising all social and human spectrums. DEI is a concept in practice which reflect a universal reality of existence, a unification of complimentary elements configuring the whole.

Think in terms of cells, organs, DNA, thoughts, knowledge, weather, and so forth which function as a singular element contributing to an aggregate system in circuits of dependency, interaction, and stimulation. Even these elements are formed by a combination of smaller elements. So theoretically speaking, all existence is an expanded elemental representation participating in the combination of smaller definitive factors or parts interwoven into the composition. Therefore, DEI is a logical and rational function of existence creating a rippling effect of diverse presentations and configurations in a sequence of domino effects.

As a mathematical principle, the sum of the components cannot exceed its total. Considering DEI as the sum total of humanity, omitting any portion would diminish the totality and any collaborative value. An equation consist of a conclusion and the criteria used to calculate that conclusion. The reversal of an equation is usually the way to verify the equation by logic and objectivity. However, when both are conversely applied they produce fundamentally flawed conclusions of subjectivity. Commonly misunderstood applications of DEI is often reduced to race and racism narrowing its meaning and purpose from the endeavor of addressing discrimination.

So, the formulative equivalence and objective is a recipe of DEI diminishing discrimination producing impartiality of opportunity by access. To pursue or support exclusion exposes the equation to a defective process. It violates the humanistic and societal paradigms of life similar to some periodic table of elements like hydrogen being disregarded as a key contribution fundamental to structure, form, or composition. The broken circuit of reasoning and emotional subjectivity can then only be justified to destabilize or deconstruct efforts to eliminate discrimination. Discarding segments of society prevents social stability except by coercion and exploitation promoting greater divisiveness by omission.

Suppression and history applies the how of exclusion to the aligned objective of discrimination surrendering a cautionary tale. A profound fragility dependent on discrimination by any repressive means necessary to maintain power, control, and a socio-economic advantage creates a vacuum. The parameters of access or representation must be restricted accordingly lessening contributions while increasing the incentive and resentment ripe for dissidence of greater proportions to remove the barriers to autonomy. It essentially isolates the ideology of exclusion to a peninsula of antagonism imprisoning its practitioners.

So, DEI is an antidotal self-fulfilling prophecy of progression increasing contributions while lessening confrontation. Any policies of exclusion and exploitation of today creates the conflicts and crusaders of tomorrow. Again, by definition everyone belongs to multiple categories of DEI calling into question its dominant preoccupation with race while not opposed to other segments of DEI. Truth be told there are NOT MANY business entities, universities, or banking empires who DO NOT have many racial blemishes which directly benefited their injustice. For most DEI is an annuity escrow account for previous contributions of venture capital whose payment has been withheld especially regarding race. 

This racial application is the reason DEI is generally considered division by racial marginalization, bias policy, and prejudicial practice historically proven but contemporarily denied. But DEI would become obsolete by lack of its necessity and use much like antiquated hand signals to indicate vehicle turning direction. Consequently, from a historical perch of observation DEI is a detection system to correct discrimination and not a mechanism creating it. A surplus of delusion, cajolery, and deception to conceal the imbedded hierarchy of discrimination and social injustice is inherent as primary ingredients in the subsidy of anti-DEI rhetoric and systemic practices.

As far as anti-white discrimination based on the Fifth Amendment of equal protection under the law, where were and are these defenders when its violations were and are against Blacks. DEI is a remedy to the “unequal protection” under the law systemically practiced not only by exclusion but also racism, suppression, and  exploitation. This poses the question of when did “unequal protection” under the law for Blacks stop? DEI actually assures a meritocracy by addressing the arbitrary blinders of discrimination. Since overt racial discrimination was practiced, should not the remedy target the violation.

If exclusion by racism created the disadvantage then inclusion through racial access would logically relieve it. Seemingly, each according to their disadvantage by historical exclusion whether racial or not. But why is race always the deal breaker? Surely it is ridiculous to pay a person who has not worked the wages of those who did. So, DEI is not discriminative to those who haven’t suffered under discrimination to receive or prevent the “wages” of those who did. It is compensatory behavior and not punitive but corrective policy.

It is reciprocity for the restitution of advantages garnered by discrimination. The concept is universally accepted and practiced except when race is the point of contention. By definition and appearance this is the racial discrimination which currently justifies the need for DEI by the continued racial exclusion from social restitution. It is society’s debt which only requires sharing access to the rewards and opportunities plundered by discrimination. A meager accommodation to address the imbalances of equal protection under the Fifth Amendment whose marginalization created the disparities addressed by DEI.

It does not diminish opportunity, instead it expands access and the resulting contributions. Only a narcissistic psychopathic mentality would deem a socially level playing field as an inequality to them after benefitting from their inequality to others. Thus, the perceived social equality threat remains the elementary objection, not DEI. So, to the periodic table of fear and ignorance we can add diversity, equity, and inclusion. Oh my!

P.S. Things in the rearview mirror may be closer than they appear, but so is discrimination.


Democratic Apartheid

Affirmative Action

Democratic Apartheid

Apartheid is generally defined as a policy or system of segregation or discrimination of a supposedly “minority” or “inferior” group based on race. Apartheid more deeply explored is actually the principles and ideologies architected for exploitation and abuses securing power, control, and narcissistic stature. Still, what are the doctrines of apartheid when the barriers are just as impenetrable as they are sustained by other ideologies camouflaging the intent by the method or justification? The ends often are justification for the means and the elasticity of morality allowing humanitarian abuses.

Although the brutally violent assaults on ethnicity are now usually the last resort, the subtle initiates of its replacements achieve the same results. It is not only a period in African history ending in 1994 but an act throughout American history expressed as an affirmative action of policy, society, and practice reflecting the subjugated delineation of a people to be dominated without violation of the perpetrator’s consciousness, religion, or morality. It requires a declassification of others humanity below the pedestal of a self-aggrandizing self-image of superiority or larceny of opportunity and resources.

This counterfeit social status is a construct of a narrative so propagandized to replicate the delusion as an entitlement associated with a biased concession by oppressive division. It prognosticates the separation of opportunity or rights enjoyed above those rendered. This very act of identity isolation is an allocation of humanity subsidizing the restrictions and tolerance metered out to maintain dominance by exclusion. The racially rationalized advantage of apartheid to the benefactors is now a discrimination against them when it is no longer the modus operandi of societal norms.

So, in essence any measures taken to offset the ill-gotten advantage is unfair to their continued abuses. Consequently, theoretically speaking by this logic any exclusion of a group based on expanded access or a “set aside” for another group is unfair despite the historical context or remedies sought thereof. Therefore, would not military service be such a “set aside” of unfairness to those who did not serve? There are many such “set asides’ such as job seniority, union membership, family legacy, senior citizens, adulthood, and virtually every societal absolution fits the exclusionary definition.

The only difference is not the act of recognition but the criteria of selection based upon a determinate such as the word “race” which makes it unfair. In the context of “race” it is not selective but corrective. If one child eats all the cake from the other child, would it not be fair to the child who has consumed more than their fair share to be curtailed from excluding the other’s consumption as a measure of DEI? The concept of DEI has its faults but not as many as the history or policies it seeks to remedy. Actions to perpetuate  social, economic, and political underclasses appeases a serenity of privilege but agitates the capitulation to injustice.

Injustice by coercion eventually is unsustainable and does not invite tranquility of society but instead sustainable resentment to subjugation. Ethnicity, gender, economics, and opportunity are measures of segregation restricting fairness but in all distorted fairness is promoted as having no disadvantage beyond the advantages not received. There are those hindered by the oppressions which others cavalierly dismiss as non-existent or discontinued. However, the advantage survives the gap created from its presence. The ideological virus of segregationist policies and practices infects the ascension of humanity by stifling contributions as an affirmative action to promoting confirmation of its unfair privilege.

The accusation goes from woke to radical left to Christian conservative values instead of subjective strongarming of ideologies beneficial to a biased agenda. So, affirmative is a conformation. Action is an activity taken. Democratic is a consensus. Apartheid is an abomination of humanity’s sovereignty. Combined they are a confirmation of activities agreed upon to execute an abomination against the sovereignty of a segment of humanity. When the moral check is due from the feast of oppression, the bloated diner cannot skip out on the bill or complain about its payment for a meal they consumed and thoroughly enjoyed.

It is not unreasonable and certainly expected that the provider is entitled to be compensated for the services they provided. There is no dispensation of self-determined nonpayment to avoid settlement or criminal culpability. By the way, it is also customary and expected that a tip accompany the payment. Absent reparations surely affirmative action, DEI, or other corrective measures to discrimination are a smaller domestic cost or social escrow than the billions sent abroad for foreign wars. What about an affirmative action towards funding the domestic war on the historical racial exploitations of America’s democratic apartheid of biblical proportions?