They care too much about what other people think, and through valuing their own ego entirely through others, fail to be an exemplification of the most human qualities.
While fear of disappointing and failing others is an inherent driver in the most sensitive, the common person cannot see the difference between an actor who acts for the audiences sake, or the actors.
The “ambitious,” or psychopathic, rely on the most humane for their credibility and “christian” nature. Their nature insults the most basic humanity in expressing the most base character of a social creature: to manipulate others to its own ends.
The psychopath, the “ambitious christian,” serves a singular, good purpose: It is a dog to be trained upon society, sicced upon its most dangerous enemies with the expectation that it will die doing so.
Everything I look at is God. Everything is Godly, and is God manifesting in material form.
God is imminently present, and I love it all as a singular being. All of the inflicted pain is an opportunity to remind me that God is all things, and I am in Gods hands. All that I have thus far experienced, has put me into a place that I can feel this love for everything.
There is nothing beyond my grace; Everything is a part of me.
My whole experience is love: I would die for it all.
It used to be the opinion of historians that the mass of men do not enter into history as a good event.
A massacre, rebellion, an earthquake: The mass of men did not surface in our collective memory in association with anything positive.
What was good to a historian? The few and endearing who overcame the masses to reorient, reach out and pull the rest of society forward.
Now it is common to write histories of “the people,” the way they lived, felt, and resisted the tides of power. All histories are now histories of “peoples”, in the most collective and averaging sense.
What can be concluded from this development?
Very little. History is now a common practice for commoners. The great men of history are easy and cheap targets, now the common historian scratches at dirt and clay for something to publish.
“In the future, there will be one science: The science of history,” or so says Marx. How could that science, of all sciences, persist under such circumstances? That the mass of men participate so actively in history that they know themselves as history. The great person does not go unacknowledged and unrecognized, but is immediately remembered in its full context.
A better challenge for the truly great men: become a posthumous in such a time.