Living the Good Life | Idealism & Self-Improvement
At our core, what truly drives us forward is the hope and dream of living a better life, a life that aligns with what we consider to be good and worthy of living. This isn’t so different from survival itself, as survival is also rooted in our instinct to elevate our existence from point A to point B. Idealism, progressive ideals, and self-improvement stem from this same desire.
Some dream big, some dream small, and some don’t dream at all. Those who once dreamed big may now flow with the presence of life, while those who never dreamed at all may now dare to dream bigger than anyone ever has. Mind, life itself, and our state of being constantly shift as we search for purpose, meaning, and the lessons that come with each experience or even within the experiences we long to have.
Here in the United States, we have a continent that is roughly two and a half times the size of Europe but about half the population of Europe. About 75% of the U.S. population lives in large cities. Because of the ongoing political tension that everyone is witnessing, I couldn’t restrain from doing my own due diligence and research and hopefully provide a more balanced perspective on such matters.
From my observation, a predominant fear in the political and socio-economic landscape, especially from liberals on the left in the United States is the implementation of Fascism through the rise of mainly public-private partnerships, in other words, corporations, non-governmental organizations, and governments that take the power away from common people like you and me, the voter, to penetrate in any level.
The term “fascism” is being thrown around loosely, with slogans protesting figures like Elon Musk (a thick-headed mule, in my opinion, especially considering that he’s skeptical of intelligent life beyond this planet, but that’s besides the point right now), and the current president, including his administration, as everyone has seen.
To say this is absurd, completely ignorant, and embarrassing, at least in my opinion, would be an understatement. Some have never opened a single book and are not fully aware of the complexities of political matters, but have no issue using the current political climate, at least in the US, as an excuse to act like criminals, vandalizing Tesla shops and attacking ideological opponents without even understanding the historical context of fascism. It’s 2025 and this is beyond embarrassing and should not to be taken lightly.
Democracy, Fascism, & the Bureaucratic State System
Historically, fascism often involved state control over the economy, violent suppression of opposition, and the close relationship between the government and large corporations or industries. The state, meaning not only the government (a group of people in power at a given time) but also the institutions, laws, and bureaucracies set up to manage the country. So the state, the system, and the infrastructure that holds everything together would impose policies that limit individual freedoms, centralize power, and restrict opposition.
Now there are liberals on both sides of the political spectrum, left and right. Progressive left-wing liberals who push for increased government intervention in the economy unintentionally walk a fine line, and we all know that. The more the state takes control over the economy, the more it becomes similar to aspects of authoritarian systems, fascist or communist, concentrating power and brutally limiting individuals’ freedoms, even if their goals differ, are more progressive, or welfare-oriented.
Given that the U.S. is considered the pinnacle of capitalist society, it is I guess somewhat natural to fear that fascism is on the rise, particularly from common folk or the left. But this fear is exaggerated. Not only is the current President a populist, uniting people against a powerful establishment, and even exposing lobbyists or the deep state, (a term relatively new referring to intellectuals with deep insight that act as advisors and have power and influence over political matters, including foreign policy) as he has stated before, but also against big corporations and rich politicians.
We also have liberals on the right who would not allow this to happen as they will always advocate for the freedom of markets and individual rights. The pendulum swings on both sides and balance is required from both sides. This fear that the government is becoming too involved with large corporations, leading to a merging of public and private powers does not equate to true fascism, as it involves a totalitarian government, violent repression of opposition, and extreme nationalism, none of which are present in the U.S. today, never have, and never will be.
Historical Contradictions & Progress
Historically speaking, when we look at the 18th and 19th centuries, Prussia played an important role, particularly for Germany, providing the foundation for German unification, which later gave rise to the Nazi regime. It was turning heads not just in Europe but also influencing U.S. reformers who adopted its blueprint in various forms, including the U.S. education system. It was known for its strong, centralized state with a powerful bureaucracy (a government that implemented and regulated policies through a complex system of officials and agencies) and military culture.
However, these systems created a rigid structure for obedience to authority over individual freedom that over time, these same reforms helped shape a more bureaucratic, state-influenced culture, prioritizing uniformity, compliance, and standardized knowledge over creativity and critical thinking, in other words training people to follow rather than think for themselves.
Though it helped foster literacy and basic education on a national scale, it also contributed to a more centralized approach to governance and social control, mirroring the same dangers that made authoritarian systems possible in other historical contexts. That kind of thinking still lingers in our institutions today, where many graduates in the U.S. come out influenced by one dominant ideology or the other, whether it’s left-leaning progressive ideals or right-leaning conservative values, and often without ever being taught how to critically examine both sides.
Rise of Authoritarian Regimes vs. Natural Law & Organic Evolution
The notion that everyone should have equal access to resources, that wealth should be shared, or that exploitation by the rich should be eliminated resonates with many, especially those who are highly disadvantaged and living in poverty. This is why some people continue to support communism in theory and its core ideas of equality and fairness to this day. Now this post is already too long and I don’t want to dive too deep into philosophical discussions of fairness and equality, as these are quite relative actually.
Authoritarian regimes of the past, particularly communism promised to end class divisions, poverty, and inequality. For many, it represented an ideal society where power is distributed evenly and workers, rather than a small elite, control production. Many still support this theoretical vision because they believe in its potential and revolutionary promises, overlooking and not fully understanding the negative consequences of how it was applied in the past. While many countries have attempted to build communist societies, all of them have faced major contradictions between theory and practice.
Marxist theory, which I regard as the theory of the mule, has proven sterile in practice and incapable of birthing the classless utopia it promises. This is due to one simple fact: you cannot force a classless society into being. Just as the mule is a hybrid born of two different species, a horse and a donkey, communism is also a hybrid born of two conflicting ideas: collective ownership and central planning. Not only does this theory appear the most absurd to ever exist, at least in my view, but it’s also the most backward and counterproductive and I’m sure I’m not alone in thinking this way.
In this ideal world, there would be no private property, no government, and no need for centralized control. However, not only does this theory contradict natural law and spiritual and personal evolution in all its meaning, but in all the countries that have tried to implement it, the outcome has been the establishment of a brutal authoritarian regime rather than a truly democratic and equal society. It failed to uphold the progressive values that it claimed. It never worked, it doesn’t work and we should learn from the past because it is clearly missing a key puzzle for it to come to life, if ever.
In theory, people would have to govern themselves without a state, but in practice, power struggles, complacent masses, economic challenges, and external threats have led to the centralization of power, often in the hands of a single party or leader. This has led to authoritarian rule instead of the classless, stateless society envisioned by Marx.
While I don’t want to completely rule out this theory, because who am I to say it’s absolutely unachievable, I believe it would at least require a massive social awakening and a profound personal enlightenment, rather than imposing one where people have to forcefully adhere to such an ambitious yet absurd vision. It would naturally occur through a real process of individuation, which at its core involves a deep self-understanding and personal spiritual awakening. It is the evolution of the soul as it is pushed to consciousness, where self-esteem is properly recognized, and where personal power is used consciously and constructively. And that is just the beginning. From there, it has to be a society where the common goal isn’t to simply live comfortably or luxuriously, but with a purpose above the monotony of materialism.
