“The road to conflicts and wars is paved with good intentions”
The krow’s Existential Witness from 5.1 (the gist)
The Krow’s observation of Karl Marx’s grave and the ruins of modern wars (up to March 2026) suggests a cyclical failure of humanity. Human beings are "merely players," as Shakespeare said: they are playing with high-explosive concepts on behalf of adamantly empty sets. The world ignores the living "element" (the person) and only admires them once they become a "semi-empty set" (the historical figure=human memory dependent and) for purely convenience in all aspects of a SPECC system hypocrisy.
In terms of 21st Century "Wisdom": The krow first reports the world as "a little wiser" now after two World Wars, yet he ironically reports the "human safari" of Sarajevo and modern bombings to prove that the underlying grammar of conflict and war - the misuse of empty sets - remains unchanged. The old SPECC systemic humanity seems incorrigibly and irreversibly fixed on violence, killing, conflicts and war?
Krow’s vision 5 – part II (ground)
In this second part of the 5, the krow assists a profound dialogue between two intellectual friends, on what they – Alan and Bell, directly experienced and their logical and experimental investigations on “empty sets” (specially of Alan). Consequently, the diegesis mapping of the krow became more vivid than something reporting and narrating. Thus, the krow let the narrating processes to be freer and fluctual with Alan’s and Bell’s natural dialogues. Thus, anybody that read and consult this reflection might feel a long silence of the krow; but the real narrator is only the krow that convey without biases dialogues of two friends.
Dialogue between Alan and Bell - continue
The steam from the Italian mocha pot thinned into the mountain air, vanishing before it could reach the lowest branches of the oak. Bell traced the rim of his porcelain cup with a weathered finger; his gaze fixed on the valley below where the ruins of the SPECC systems are smouldering uninterruptedly (hundreds of ongoing dispersed conflicts and wars in the world).
Bell – Alan, let me evaluate and recap what you said until now. In this way you can tell me whether I’ve got the correct logical image. Well, your vision highlights a terrifying linguistic paradox: the most destructive acts in history aren't usually committed in the name of "Evil," but in the service of a specific, subjective filling of the Empty Set of "Good."
The Mechanism that you describe as “Good" and "Evil" as placeholders (“0”) is for me a powerful mathematical analogy. The Variable: Because the set is empty, it acts like a variable in an equation (“x”). The SPECC Filling: Political, cultural, civilisational and/or religious systems (SPECCs) provide the "value" for “x”. For an empire, “x” = expansion; for a sniper, “x” = satisfaction. The Error: The tragedy occurs when a group forgets that “x” is a variable and begins to treat their specific value as a universal constant.
Thus, human beings are completely convincing and continue to fill something they can never even think of. The only thing they’re good at is destroying and disrupting the flow of the game of each person– or, as they call it, the process of life.
Alan – (while sipping some hot coffee Alan answers) well, you’ve got the best logical image Bell.
Bell - You explained in the introduction of AAPA (Autocratic, Authoritarian, and Paternalistic Aggressions) how "Paternalism"- thinking "good" for others without their consent - becomes an explicit and evident machine or generator of violence. The Colonial Example: Your text poignantly notes how Western powers used "divine logic" (biblical monotheism) to fill the empty set of "Good" with their own image. By claiming to possess the "Truth," they transformed an empty set into a weapon of colonisation and to try a sort of political, cultural, civilisational and psychological sadism.
On the other hand, the argument on the Clash of Goods: Since all sides in a conflict fill their "Good" set with opposing elements, war becomes a collision of two "moral crusades." Neither side sees itself as "Evil" because they are both operating within the logic of their own filled set. Alan, now I have a question to ask.
Alan – Right, go on then.
Bell – If you move toward a "Conclusive Point" regarding whether these sets should stay empty – and if we accept that "Good" is an empty set, does that lead to a sort of SPECC moral nihilism, or does it lead to a passive form of tolerance like - no one has the right to fill the set for others? Consequently, then what are we in this flux?
Alan – well, first, I firmly stay with the stance of letting be everything in any SPECC system as they are – as they are reasoning by their own contradictory logics. I may describe this later. Well, we both know that the “universal flux” is indifference and absorbs or accepts only patterns in the flux (no ethics or moral good and bad). So, whatever human beings are thinking, deciding and doing good or evil doesn’t matter to the flux. On the other hand, if anybody is going to solve these they have to propose another “SPECC” system. This is not our intension at all. We both are simply enjoying the flux and nothing else.
If I were to suggest a practical solution for a more just and conscious SPECC system, I would start with my own position (standard) – Videlicet - I am convinced that we must move beyond certain words, concepts and logical frameworks and filled, obsoleted and corrupted sets such as ‘good’ and ‘evil’ understood as moral principles. Ethics, on the other hand, should be based only on human rights, duties and mutual respect not on sets of good and evil, nor on punishments and rewards.
(Alan looked up at the shifting patterns of light on the granite cliffs.) Well, concerning your question of “what we are” – I assert clearly that "We are the motion, Bell. My intuition tells me we aren't the containers at all. We are the flux. I am the flux. Everything we invent, every 'Good' we try to anchor, is either a ghost of a common memory or a sudden, new ripple in the current. If we (try to) stop moving (we cannot), if we try to freeze the empty set and call it 'Truth (we can do it and that what we do),' we cease to exist in the flux with a sense of freedom. We continue to play with empty sets generating unnecessary rhythms (memory patterns for our memories, conflicts, wars and violence). I repeat, there is only the Flux.
(The krow shifted on his perch. He had seen the empires rise like heavy dams across this river of space-time, trying to hold back the water, only to be swept away by the very pressure of the life they tried to contain).
Bell - That’s interesting, Alan. I like your practical approach, which goes beyond concepts such as transcendence and related fantastic (human efficacy) concepts that spring from the human mind to defend from SPECC system fear. Videlicet - If Good is an empty set (), then Evil must also be empty (). They are perfectly symmetrical. Conflict arises when humans try to "break the symmetry." They fill their own set and elements with "Good" and project all the "Elements" they dislike into the other's set of "Evil”. Alles klar! So, to play with an empty set is to acknowledge the river. To fill it is to drown.
Alan: Precisely Bell! We both see the picture others cannot imagine because they are looking at the frames, not the light passing through them. It is useless to describe the colours to those who only want to own the canvas.
(A single, dry Fir needle fell from the canopy, landing silently on the surface of Alan’s coffee. It didn't sink; it simply drifted in the dark swirl; a tiny element caught in a miniature vortex. The two intellectual friends sat in a silence that was not empty, but full of the unsaid).
FINAL NOTES (conclusion)
Final note and important warning of the krow
One may judge this reflection as a provocative and intellectually sharp piece of writing. However, what the krow has done is nothing other than simply reporting and narrating actual facts in the world from his point of view (krow’s vision). On the other hand, these judgments are inevitable in a context where the world is deliberately targeted by AAPA (Autocratic, Authoritarian, and Paternalistic Aggressions) strategies. Videlicet, AAPA strategies always try to flatten the world's common mindsets, limiting them to official cultural, civilizational, and listed professions and related professional formations (family, school, higher education programs, professional institutes, etc.).
Further, AAPA with SPEC systems knows how to keep the masses under control by using all mass media, sports, and all sorts of arts (= Greek term “technē”), and especially through maintaining the forced and strategic concept of the “family” nuclear trick with the direct help of monotheistic religions and their fantastic reward-and-punishment moral systems. Consequently, for millennia, common mindsets have evidently shown themselves to be confused (with real and placed) and, to some extent, all equal. The mass, in its turn, thinks of this tricky, strategical, forced, and fragile dynamic as something real, inevitable, and necessary for their so-called “life.” Each single person identified his/her life with this tricky, strategical, forced SPECC dynamic. Thus, they follow this tricky line of dominion blindly, willingly and convincingly. In such a tricky and strategic dogmatic slumber, a writing like this becomes naturally anomalous and challenging. But as the krow indicates adamantly, the world has to awaken from this “tricky and strategic dogmatic slumber.”
Manufactured Normalcy
The krow called this reality as "manufactured normalcy." It suggests that human perception of reality isn't a natural evolution, but a by product of structural engineering of AAPA (Autocratic, Authoritarian, and Paternalistic Aggressions) and SPECC (Socio-Politic-Economic-Cultural-Civilizational) systems.
The krow argues (with Alan and Bell) that the main functionality of systems of power is necessarily finalised in attempting to "flatten" or “uniformize” human experience. By funnelling individuals through standardised “lists of professions” and "professional formations" (schools, high-education programs and training institutes for listed professions), the system ensures that everyone speaks the same conceptual language and values the same outcomes. This effectively kills individual freedom of thought and freedom of desire, originality and creativity - the very things that drive genuine evolution and dissent.
Another strategic trick of AAPA and SPECC systems together is the “Nuclear Trick" and Strategic Moralism. Videlicet - the critique of the nuclear family as a "strategic concept" suggests that by isolating the human experience into small, manageable units (the nuclear family) and reinforcing them with "reward and punishment" moral systems (via religion together with SPEC systems), the state creates a “self-policing” society. People are too busy maintaining the "fragile dynamic" of their immediate lives to notice the "line of dominion" they are following.
This reflection can be judged as the krow said at the begging of this conclusive note which he is narrating – the role of the "Anomalous" Voice. The reflection posits that in a world of "dogmatic slumber," any writing that reports facts from an outside perspective is seen as "intellectually sharp", "provocative" or “damaging” simply because it breaks established, strategical and tricky uniform silence. But the krow isn't necessarily inventing a new world, system, or reporting an armed revolution but exactly holding a mirror to the existing one.
Further, the goal of the krow’s reflection isn't just to challenge the AAPA and SPECC systems, but to break the "tricky and strategic" trance that makes the masses view their current existence as "inevitable", and the unique “lifestyle” to follow blindly and joyfully.
Cultural "Technē" as Control is another important fact that the krow is reporting. The mention of technē (art/craft/skill) in relation to mass media and sports suggests that even the masse’s leisure is a crafted tool. When entertainment and culture are standardised, structuralised and put under-control, they serve as a sedative rather than a stimulant, keeping the population focused on the "spectacle" rather than the structure of their own captivity.
Well, this reflection necessarily challenges the conscious and open-minded intellectual reader to ask: Is my "life" a choice, or a listed profession within a SPEC system? It’s a call for a radical return to raw observation over conditioned interpretation.
With a single, rhythmic beat, the krow launched. He didn't fly toward "Good" or away from "Evil." He didn't carry a message or a manifesto. He simply enjoys the Flux, becoming a single, dark point of consciousness in a universe that was, for the first time in his vision, finally allowed to breathe.
