Uselessness - Equality, Modernity, and You:
    How Pedastals of Innovation, Agreeableness, and the Self, Degrade Innovation, Agreeableness, and the Self

{{{ Introduction

    To those who say they disagree:

    Sandpaper. To close inspection, it is bumpy and looks uneven; to the touch, it is unpleasant; to our senses, it is useless, becuase it is neither aesthetic, succulant, aromatic, warm nor comforting. However, it is through the
use of sandpaper and other abrasive surfaces that artisans polish glass, or wood, to make objects of utility and beauty; it is through the use of abrasion that parts of a machine are smoothed - through proper lubrication that a machine can function properly and without friction. In parallel, these abrasive or metallic surfaces are the self, and proper lubrication or polishing are of logic and discorse.

    If you rub two pieces of sandpaper together, you are almost always left with a pile of sand, and one or two pieces of useless paper; there is no level of craftsmanship nor utility in this. Similarly, if you take two pieces of unrefined metal, glass, or other crystalline ingots, and rub them together, the integrity of both objects will degrade, chips and chunks will break off, and eventually, you will be left with a pile of sand, or just rare dirt. If we are all beautiful, unique and have value, value cannot be derived from equality, nor coming together; refinement comes through the heat, abrasion, and careful subtraction of useless parts.

    In parallel, homogeneity, political correctness, and subjective value, are in fact degrading to the human self, and to society as a whole. Proper functioning of between these parts cannot come without hard fact, and the pruning of fruitless facets of ourselves. To say we are all equal is an understatement; to say that another individual or group of people are "better off" is a lack of perspective; the overuse of emmulation, ceases to be innovative, and has long since been a compliment.


    In 2019, popularity is valued over wholesum novelty, the facets of individuality are blurred with equality, the heights of innovation are razed with shortcuts and redundancy, and the deductive qualities of homo sapien are reduced by the blind acceptance of theoretical discourse. To those who don't strive to be better or otherwise are contempt with how they are, continuing on will be useless.

    This is a collection of challenges meant to inspire and shed perspective in a serious, but satirical way. It is a form of argument that is meant to show our differences in a way that proves hopeless. If you disagree with any of these points, I yearn that you come up with a better argument. This is more than a collection of academic ranting: this is useless argument against those who disagree.

}}}

{{{ 1. How Novelty and Beauty Ceised Being Different:
        To those who say they are novel and aesthetic:

    {{{ A. The Lack of Challenge in the Advent of Internet Challenges:

        I think most readers can agree: whether you grew up with the internet, or have learned to grow accustomed to it, it is an invention that has given new meanings to technology and social interactions itself. It is hard to fathom how individuals and society functioned without the ability to instantly communicate or transmit information and media that is accessible anywhere and everywhere (computers, cell phones and beepers all considered the InterNet here). It's obvious that groups and friends alike all interacted, organized and congregated without the use of technology, but this hyper-interconnectedness has given a new meaning to these lo-tech relationships and interactions. For music and other forms of art, this meant a way to show the world novelty. It became a new way for underground and avant-garde genres to become available to more individuals; things that were unique could be easily shared and distributed. Anyone could become their own modern Picasso, and everyone could be subject to new forms of Dada art; an artists unique perspective could be transmitted over this series of connected tubes to be accessed and appreciated by anyone who also found meaning.

        Most "hipsters" and other underground enthusiasts could agree that this distribution of novel ideas gives worthy candidates of artistic form a chance to become "mainstream". Isolated or underpreciated artists now had the abilitiy to have their work appreciated under through this new media of content distribution; seekers of novelty, and the impressionable young could now search for things that were different. In fact, it has become popular art forms to be unpopular. This is not to say that popular genres have no worth (but some are up for debate), nor that genres that go "mainstream" now have less meaning (even though copy-cats suck). It is a human tendency, no, a human need, to innavate, create, and otherwise do things that haven't been done. It was once argued, that if we all like similar kinds of foods, all have similar tastes in beauty, and all have similar forms of emotion, then we are all equal [1]. This can be applied to art forms as well.

        However, the internet itself has generated a new form of "art". Humanity has proven to itself, yet once again, that there is something new out there, with the advent of internet phenomena [2]. In one form or another, we all can say that we have been subjected to, and maybe even have found humor, relief or some level of enjoyment (in some sadistic way), to these forms of novelty. We have all seen them; we all know what they are. Fail videos, chain-letter spam, memes, hashtags, and internet challenges, the list goes on, has given new context on the Art of Failure, Deception, Cliche, and Farce. In a hypocritical way, these phenomena transcend the traditional avenues of art such as satire and expression, and have become a new class of Darwin Awards. Full disclosure: this condemnation is given hypocritically, as there truly is a certain humor and appreciable qualities after the first few days of being exposed to new manifestations of these phenomena.

        While there is novelty in these forms of art, the value stops there. After a few days, a few weeks, or even a few months or years, these phenomena are no longer appreciable, and are literally appended to a list on Wikipedia. To see them reappear rarely spurs interest, and even causes feelings of disdain. The innumerable instances and permutations of these media does not flatter the original pieces of art. No one is truly given credit after a hundreth or, thousandth, reinterpretation of any given work, and the original work is rarely recognized. The only truly admirable aspect of this form of art is its simplety and its ease of conception, but no further value is found in these ilustrations of silliness. In the end, to say that this is art is degrading to art itself.

        Useless.

        Popularity of the various alter egos and pseudonyms (YouTubers, Tweeters, and others alike), rarely provide expression or insight when their content mainly consists of propogating these trends. To subscribe or otherwise follow the does not add to any wholesome aspect of society. To have them repeat what has already been done, does not increase its novelty. To attain popularity via proposed statistics of popularity (retransmission, views, or clicks) is literally masturbation of idiocracy.

        In fact, the popularity of internet phenomena overpowers the talent and true novelty of those who do create something new, or otherwise offer something that has true meaning, expression, or practicality over the mediums of the internet. It is no longer popular to express yourself, give insight, or display talents without resorting to shock value or incongruency. Puns, paradoxes, and satire have begun to lose their novelty in this age of internet phenomena, and have lost its place in the art world. It can be argued, that certain artists still retain their phenomenal qualities. However, they are droned out by those that don't have artistic talent.

        From an individual's perspective, the situation presented is hopeless. No one individual or organization is to blame. Novelty itself is at fault here. Due to the various motivations of the mediums and incentives of the methods of propogation, the only hope for reform and preservation of talent and novelty is abstinence. Complete abstinence from giving popularity or propagating any given instance of these trends. Abstinence from individuals who circulate this nonsensical "art-form". No individual is seen as cool, talented, or worthy of admiration, for distributing and showing, commenting, viewing, or otherwise popularizing these things. Retranslation: your friends don't care, you're not cool, you're not entertaining anyone by showing or sharing these forms of media. In the end, who ever you WERE going to show it to, will see it sometime in the future, if they have not already seen it, and have already gotten a chuckle. No further credit is due. Just give up on memes.


       For those that agree thus far and are otherwise not impressed, accept that the situation is hopeless. Art forms of expressions will always be art. Novelty will always be novel. Stupidity will always be rampant. Show your contempt by not caring. No one can take away from the humor shown by internet phenomena, and no can stop it. This being said, no one can argue that they will be less satisfied if there was less instances of any individual meme, hashtag, or video challenge. In fact, you might be better off. You might be more likely to stumble upon something that actually is relatable, something that actually has meaning to you. You might click a link that actually impresses you, or otherwise shows talent. Give value to that which deserves value.

       For those whose primary form of content is in fact novelty (those who this argument is against), this is a challenge. Do better. Don't be drowned out by those who are repeating the same concept or idea. If too much time has passed since the beginning of anything popular, it is best practice to not repeat it. No one is discredited for NOT repeating anything, however, your content is devalued for a bad reinterpretaition of something that was popular. Be different. Don't always appeal to those who consume your media. Be true to yourself. Come up with something that is funnier, more shocking, or otherwise better. If its it not inspired, its not art. Not enought emphasize can be placed on the value of not repeating that which has already been done in art.

       For those late to the show... nothing will be said if you don't agree.

    }}}

    {{{ B. The Loss of Self, Perspective and Wholesum Beauty in the Age of Selfies and Auto-biography:


    }}}
}}}





{{{ 4. How for Search of Truth has Been Blinded by Theory:
        To those who say they think:
    {{{ A. Of Origin and Our Special De-Evolution:


    }}}
    {{{ B. Conspiracies of the Other Side:


    }}}
    {{{ C. The Loss of Truth and the Droth of Noise:


    }}}
}}}

{{{ Conclusion / How Agree to Disagree:
    To those who say they want resolve:
    {{{ 1. How Sometimes Others Shouldn't Matter:


    }}}
    {{{ 2. Don't Over Isolate Over Disagreeableness:


    }}}
    {{{ 3. The Stars, the Moon, and the Planets - A Parallel to Population:


    }}}
    {{{ 4. Fear, the Feels, and Fallacy:


    }}}
    {{{ 5. Government, and the Governing of Opinion:


    }}}