THE MONO OF MAKING _ X 

 

MONO X IS IN COLOUR, SO TRY DRAWING YOUR DNA.

 

The current zeitgeist since the turn of the Millennium is Meta-Modernism. A dynamic between Plato’s North-South, Love-Hate, Indulgent-Prudent poles of Metaxis from where the name derives. Today we stand at the epi-centre of hard and fast thinking as to where and how we will move forward within this court. There must be more than meets the eye in this aesthetic, cultural, neo-devolutionary paradigm. Once there was one, ‘Mono’: creation, then there was one and a half or a fraction of one, relative to one, ‘Sequi’: man and his child, then multiple, ‘Poly’: man and his subordinate repetitive creations.  Now we come back around to Monism, which explains all from the first look, so we return through devolution to one, and only one: 'Monism'.  Monism is essentially the first idea, the first execution, the very nascent, and insipient moment: Monouni.

 

We are coming out of a Poly-Modernist phase through Meta: opposites attract.  As we all are a part of this worlds development. Polly reaches for the kettle, from the famous children’s nursery rhyme. But who is Polly to us? In our more than immoral polyamory lives of many objects, many clothes, many opinions, many flirtations, and many oppositions, self contorted, and verbalised through cognitive dissonance.  We try to remain monogamous.  And monogamy is best in a world of Mono, that love of the first, of the split second one falls in true love.  You are theirs and they are yours: you are the only two people on this planet who understand.  Polly is an icon, a safe haven voiding the necessity for many partners, Polly is in fact our one and only true love for her unattractiveness is exactly what attracted us to her for her peculiarity.  We are led by free-radicals, to place, to journey and to conquest. ‘Rule Britannia, Britannia rules the Waves, for Britons never, never, will be slaves’. We are in effect searching for freedom, among our free-thinkers, and so dynamically join the band, get up on stage, and represent. Our opinions may still be harbouring Meta ideals: a form of lack of acceptance, but our evolution (devolution) creates new singular trade deals, new allies and one day will be ‘Polly’ idealistic, just her, just one, Mono.

 

Beyond culture, aesthetically we are seeing more and more free, radicals pop-up in our neighbourhoods. Death of authorship means they are sublimely personified by their immaculate attention to detail, and therefore all hold the Monist singularity of a new aesthetic dynamic; coined by their chain of thought in order to go over and over again the simplification of a simple answer to a by-gone context, leaving the free-thinker to produce a one-off piece. Confused? Think of it like this, life is a challenge, only because we make it so, the more we push for our vision though the better the result, that’s the Mono ideal of many great thinkers having the same heavenly aim, one world, one heaven, one God: Jesu.

 

To Poly means anything is possible, as we struggle to fight with our DNA to a new realm of virtuous exactitude, we become immune to our bad luck, universal tricky energies, and destiny of loss, through a lack of our very own Monist free, radicals, both bad and good is possible in health. If cancer is the biggest killer today, then we will Mono repair our DNA to defend ourselves from its inner destruction, and rise out of the ashes that have been, to a new responsive way of living responsibly.  However while mother stays calm, father must evolve to a health of evolutionary pride to be the man he always was, is, and wanted.  To make both him and his wife proud.

 

Poly is the much and the many. Poly is really just another way of saying the dotted voice, but all dots lead to one equation. The ‘united’ in the face of adversity, the reality that we all know what is good, and where we should be aiming to reach a united apogee, as a true reflection of ourselves, and the freedom, and thinking we believe in to make ours a habitable, fun, and safe planet to keep on enjoying. This is evolution; a desire and will to make life because where there is not it will come to rise, so as nature can begin to create a world of eternal life.  Wherever eternal exists, beyond and a given mortality of creation that allows for evolution as opposed to stagnant water that can only be drunk by one man or woman when the population of the World has quadrupled over the last 100 years, making the dilemma that a woman now has rights as dutifully she should, but men are outnumbered to understand all, if a woman finds the beguile of assumed contradiction in terms that maybe, just maybe woman was always here first, if not created, in order to carry and create, and so takes care.  Of him and the baby.  So he takes care of her and the baby.  The beginning of time.  Now X,Y, Z can be within three - four.  The beginning of twins and the pro-creativity of two children that allow an A vocation to arise as an answer to the phenomenon of X,Y, Z being contained, and all other things being dealt with by the male A vocation.  Not to be undiscovered as a personification, a sickness that will never end, until Jesus (Jesu), Lord almighty, states: 'Why am I here?, If only not to procreate.  Yet I have children.  Why am I misread?  Yet I haven't written.  Why am I here as me, and not you, when I only see you, and it feels ugly, to be mis-understood, Jerusalem or any?  So I must go.  When I arrive it will be fine.  So I will do a little dance.'  Is there true healing in a King James Bible?  From cave to fragment.  As a cartography of time.  It begins in Africa, and ends here for you are warring, but came from there when you were warring.  And so the fundamental of the mind, as we see fundamentalism rise as a mind peace for those not salvaged by the course of time, evolution, ahistory, and the urban development of the world as a system for living in, as if the modernists knew everything.  And so God was dead, History was dead, if only war was dead.  If fundamentalism means the will to evolve then it is a fundamental of evolution but not terrorism as an answer as if the world were a literal playground only to be built up and destroyed until a genetically modified product can take a hold of it, make it, break it, laugh at it, keep it, never ask it, never understand it.  And I hear the youngest just want to be people.  If the people keep themselves misguided by diligent searching of a truth that doesn't exist as if we were all, one, family, bred, and found here, then there will never be an understanding why I believe Jesus, as evidence, believes time began when he arrived, and he was here only to tell us that.  The terminology of 'time' as Jesus makes me wonder whether he was ever here, permanently to embrace us, or if it was mistrust that stopped a creator creating, and making something of the world as an object, precious to hold, and more magnificent the less we know about it. 

 

When we have all found our habitat of natural environmentalism that co-exists with a determinable price of quality, and we are suffice that a survivalists pre-occupation with nature, will only lead him back there as an isolated priority of nature, as if he were, like any 'god'.  [Maybe a madness that a word can fathom all, like a name.  Instead of a made up word, whether derivative or not.  And so language's evolution keeps creating a dogmatic world that satisfies us and the rest will put up with it.  And so we find there is no such thing as creation, god, and sanctity, if we are not mad.  The madness of God, as I say so many times, is merely a response to a given time.  'STOP REVOLUTION'.  The planet stops.  Next: God arrives.  But there is no arrival for God.  He's just everything, eternal, and no more, if we believe in him, we are lost to ourselves.  The self has no value, and we are in service to him, them and it.  If this continues, then there is no practical planetary answer as evidence of progress.

 

We have absolute knowledge, and similarly everything exists, and so we are complimentary to each other.  If we contrast we have not understood the fundamentals, of this statement.  And so fundamentalism makes the only statement that only a fundamental mind is all we have evolved into because we are so frightened of another fundamental mind, that the real fundamental is lost.  And so we are at a delusion.  If an Iraqi insurgent says I am here because I am it's history, it must not be interpreted as a conclusory effect to a devolved planet, but a set-up requirement that now I cannot connect GWI alibi on the ground in order to send tanks into the desert, deemed for oil, before an economy of grace and true democracy: the purpose of America.  CIA say they are not only an insurgent to understand and get over the past, through plausible means, but unfortunately when we step in, step out, and come to reason: the only answer is that the original formula of an intent to devoid a problem, [the true result putting it somewhere else], i.e. lets play a game says 'John Nash' a diagnosed schizophrenic, only to be revered for telling the world something that has always been known.  If I attempt to win I either bet everything, less than everything, or balance two ways, 50% and no more.  So they say never balance from that day forward and like all radical thinkers history is made.

 

To understand why Nash thought only mathematics could resolve an economy when he was in complete isolation, and so his initial thought to isolate was the concept.  0 and 1.  Two individuals that can only be recognised when 1 exists and then relatively 0 exists.  Never to be created. But unfortunately through my fundamental history, as if I am responsible as a middle aged professional, without a care in the world, the extreme Left takes it as a political policy that can only be resolute if achieved.  So the warning is if a creative idea becomes a reality through trial and error of past relativism, then the doctor says we didn't really care, and so kept plying medication as if we were all disturbed.  The result is: isolation is not community bound.  To deliver social embarrassment, and to create nothing we are always wondering why.  To understand there is no God, no Money, and no life.  Then we can assert ourselves to establish a commodity in reality, not a planet, not us, not God, not a church, and not a torn life.  When we are healthy, making clean money, making clean technology through a premise as all modern eras go, and become.  When we stop after it is too late to ever go backwards, and to totally disregard our experienced examples of bad life, and totally systemic unreasonable suffering, as if Darwin was mad.  He was, but the whole is not unreasonable as an idea. And now evolution can begin, then we can make ourselves and our lives better as people.

 

Note:  DNA is the beginning.  A birth report.  And an understanding parent will answer.  If DNA is not a pre-cursor to why I see, then maybe there is no game in life.

 

 

Become a ‘Mono "free"-thinker’.

 

[DNA  =  the beginning, 0,1,2] [MAN = NAC _ WOMAN + CHILD = CAN]

 

00-1-11 [Hd,H2,HH]

 

H    H

  \  /

  oo       o = (ooo)

  /  \

H    H

 

World - owe - the New Internationalists.

 

‘Is that a smile I see ?

Well, maybe your not even

Looking at me

Cuz if you smile for no reason

The season is lost

But if your love is the rhythm

Ma rhythm is love’

 

Rhythm is Love Lyrics copyright by Keziah Jones. ©

 

The Zeitgeist has gone from,'Technology', 'Information', ‘Green’, to ‘America’, to ‘UK’, to ‘Enlightenment’, back to ‘Po-Mo’ (tectonics), to ‘Meta’, and now to ‘Monism’, which does not have credence solely in the itemisation of paired clarity, man and woman, brother and sister, or two children, but an initial of continuation, when you discover the maths just means the end was the beginning and the beginning was the beginning through belief that we wanted to be here.  For a long time there has been a belief in a twin mind, that makes a precursor to an existence that can only be clarified by way of latter creativity and an extreme past that is only deconstructed by elemental thought that makes the whole the only subject of an initial, a first, a true beginning.  The reason the twin answers is because he thinks laterally not because he is, for he has not evolved a spirit to discuss it with.  Therefore the history of spirit answers the idea exactly that if it did exist then a purpose is to go eventually and find out, when it is just a memory of what was before.  A literal devolution does not account for the state of people's real lives, and so we are all confident in our minds, to believe a real we make through context and given realities.  An answer I find interesting is the creativity if the whole that if we answer our own question we understand how we have evolved, not because we are thinking or feeling the past, but simply making a life of our own that relates to lots of things, i.e. justice through injustice, glory through none, and tragedy through a pure disbelief in oneself that causes no end of irreversible problems for all or any if found out what their true intention is.  My deepest concern is for poverty today, now we have peace.  If we are to dwell on others misfortune, then we will always be covering a truth of an evolved economy that does not reckon people have an intellect that will make them more human, until they have accepted that it is merely an opportunity.  If irreversibility is a crime of lack of intent but the only way a black economy can make people persist at hacking those quite innocently enjoying their lives, then we must come to understand.  The fundamental consequence of this lesson is thus:  An absolute answer is better than continual relative association.  Fame is not guaranteed.  Money is not guaranteed, but clarity should be.  And it is not clear when someone is not respected.  Either through product as art, or given virtue to attempt and complete a job of protection in order to allow the public to make a life safely with the humanity of themselves not the incursion of slanted talk, and common thought.  To assert someones pain through an economy is merely abuse, and like every parent if they have abused themselves, it is probably merely an assumption that a Childs upset is their own, and not an ordered responsibility of quite literally ownership.  When a child discovers they are an owner of their world, and property, then they can create.  So if ownership makes hazardous an equation for todays economy, then we will all be rapidly buying up everything until there is nothing left for what was an 80% hold of an economic purpose to substantiate that everyone could survive.  Now those deemed and actually wealthy keep asking what is an answer if I am deemed an owner of many because I have this bit of land.  I'm afraid the real result is to let go and accept that birth rights are not equally bound, but good evolution is, for we can never not be human.

 

The human equation is to try by knowing through learning, and so school, hospital, and security is a given.  However if there is a cheat that a medicine, drug, problem, assumption, joke, or mystery can only explain the missing bit of everything then we must return to our belief systems not someone else's.  The individual stands tall, but is never helped by coercive group therapy that makes all consider a part of justice, and not evolution.  If justice is agreement I will wonder how all cases are agreed before ever arriving, but that is the human condition that talks like our heart talks to our mind.  And so for the purposes of our own energy we must predict an environmental respect that extends to our purpose as people, that we will always love one another.  If we cannot cope with that statement then we have definitely gone way too far, and it is my purpose to bring us back together.  That is evolution, not ill-considered ideas of our own for everyone.  Once God is established as an invention like all words, why there can never be ontology in the art of writing, only prediction, then I will embrace your idea as much as mine in the virtue of respect that national interest makes us capable of always being concerned and helpful to one another although we dent it.  So the reality of what we see, what we hear and our general senses as an organisation means we never see the truth, but know it exists.  To idolise and make an epitome of someones mind is wholly insane and will never make steadfast as a medium of artistic licence if we can never see all of our daily intrinsic patterns of survival.  Not for sustenance, but the evolution of a designer, who wants to make better a world as if it were once created.  Now the answer is to believe, and then we can make.  If the evolution of creativity, domesticity, and work environments is not successful, than our containers will be created as a response to this.  To contain is good, but we must go outside first to make the inside of the box, through a planetary love, as a movement not an untouchable idealism.  Then we are in love with the planet.  The outside of the box is only the same as the inside, because the very second fundamental says as we exist as if all history is all future through tense of time, then our presence must become the result of a keenness to be and create.  Our existence is worthy because I believe we all have a role that can only be determined by ourselves.  Once credence takes command we become and make.  When our vision, our experience is contained, we associate our lives, with all existing design and absolute answers before we step into a practical answer, whether art or art as function of use of space, and therefore utility as a reason through efficiency and aesthetic.  The 'evolver' always wants to fraternise over why there must always be an obsolete of function in order to create people, things and ideas.  There is money in form, but the random belief that there was no real purpose to the beginning of it, as if it just came about and no answer will ever suffice, then we have not really learnt the ethics of evolution are that we must make word civility a prime example of how the wild could not sustain our lifestyle.  Now we can design a lifestyle of balanced economics, and better mechanical synthesis of technological futures that make real answers to real problems not a supposed economy of mistakes, coincidences, and lack of responsibility for misgiven machinery that made the recent future a dark idiom that only I count at making ultimate happiness, by basically upsetting everyone else until accepted for the banality of the randomness of committing suicide not the physical statement of an intention to cope, but a voice of hearing.

 

It will go to ‘Containment’, to ‘Ideal’, and finally to ‘Ethics’ by the end of the Century, as we exponentially evolve.

 

The Spirit of the Age: Culture, Containment, Transcendentalism, and communication means we are just about to change to Monism.

 

A Monism of: Recycling: Reactionary, Relivable, Reductive.

 

A Monism of more feeling/ emotion, more vulnerable.

 

Love the body, love thy self.

 

Love the sub-conscious.

 

The key is not to be predictable.

 

Meta-Opposite, was predictable.

 

Indicative as opposed to feeling.

 

Vindicate.

 

We want something intrinsic.

 

This is your line up.

 

This is your total.

 

This is your time up.

 

This is your roll call.

 

Process and result are undivided.