Who produces what

 Yesterday I watched a news video of some place destroyed by war in the Arab countries. I was left wondering if the elderly person kind of comfortably talking and and seeming to take into account kandscapes of things in ways well for life, if he was filmes from the same place or not. (My experience of somewhat similar style people in Finland says they are not trustworthy but instead disastrous, but on the other hand I now came to think of this answer to my occult problems.) As we watch more ordinary kinds of people, we wonder what do those types of people produce, and so peopke creating solutiobs ought not be added in the middle of destruction and harm, but instead jept separate so as to see what they produce, where each kind of person lives, since often the individuals are very different, and often also oersons who look convincing in the eyes of some yet cause lots of unneeded damage, are not so wise, not so widely good-willing. Of my own life I have wondered why my personal lufe gets hindered somehow by occult means, have I been mistaken to ve such a person in the middle of miseries caused naybe by me, when someone has wanted a good solutiln somewhere? 

* 

If one wants influencies to difficult social situations from those who survive well in such, a good guess is typically the avegare people of the groups of the types of people associated with, since tgere is a lot of people who are that average and so they by the force of masses typically manage to get some room for roughly their types of people to live in, for example most people are used to the need of getting along with such people, and the average is also a typical compromise between extremes and there are often various versions of roughly the average. 

* 

14th of February 2025   In the news was something about honour violence, but once again I did not quite understand what they were referring to. Honour in my experience as a reason for somebody's violent intentions, often refers to a difference in the professions valued but maybe supposed tgat the educational or simikarly other background roughly the same. Or then somebody or some peopke have figured out a much too overdoing plus/or underdoing version of social understanding and other wusdom, and wish to gain some piwer so. And so one ought to use some clmmonly kniwn quite average basic way of doibg, undwrstanding, picture of the world, etc, maybe somewhat below average in difficulty and common sense like, leaving room for each person's better understanding and own life experience. And so one would get the lacking communication back but need to distance oneself from being so fond of jyst that group's choices in life. Simikarly, as a kud one learned that each one has own favoyrite colour, etc, often many thibg lije interesting professions, interesting other cultures and cultural domains, future dream life, etc. People who think several people of the near relatives etc having tgese just the same, often get angry at it being somehow clear that others are different, and for them it seems honour violence, since they somehow confuse such with the worth of their own choices, kind of not understanding how different jovs etc suit also simikar soubding people. Some things suit many, but there often is individual cariation somehow allowed in them. 

Sometimes some person also suöposes a very high position, as if given by big skills and some very big merit, even though there are about none such skills in sight and no info of the merits. So in practice if there was any message, it did not reach the others, snd so all big position went just to dominancy without any good reason to accept such, without any shelter against errors in such. But often such persons have seemed good and promusingly good in the eyes of others somewhere elsewhere, and so they suppirt those persons somehow, but it goes ashtray since the person is not as wise in the eyes of others, and often the person suppirting either is mustaken or did not mean to suppirt so far away or so unwisely. There are typical reasons lije the younger generation boy or man lustenibg nicely to someone but not thinking it pissible to follow wuse calues and at least school level skills when some army connected thing mentiobed. Or the person following advices of others so that he/she is like a robot in social things ibstead of nirmally present individual. Or I guess some singer or some culture is praised so much somewhere that they suppise it wise also elsewhere and demand position for it, but somehow there is no wisdom elsewhere noticeable, like for exampke weather skills not aimed for local life, or singer got expressive talebts via some occult ibflyencies and did not obeself understand those things, or a person was along sonewhere as a socual telation byt did not understand the culture, and so isn't at all as wise as suppised, or jyst got stuck for exampke because someone thought it better tgan to ve a beginner elsewhere. 

If bt honour violence is meant what a kind of often very stiff maybe school teacher like person does when demabds strictly something, it is either customs of how things shoukd be done or similarly a person with an objective picture of the world saying of some one thing that "but not that, it would be catastrophic in consequences". On the other hand people with a good school like understanding plys lots of wisdom of life typically want room for their own life, and often there cones a conflict because teachers etc weirdly suppose such priviledges belonging to neglecting individuaks instead of to the wise ones. And so the not-wise social relations often claim to be wise, of which tgere is a conflict since they are not so trustworthily wise, and they seem to get such priviledges much better. 

Of an army I have not so much heard it called honour violence. The army of Finland has traditionally been called defence forces. So the idea is that people are motivated to defending good living conditions in the area they like to livein, and do so with an eye in the llng run too and with an interest in the futures of the youngee geberation. So it does not seem aggression motivated by honour but instead by wisdom and wishing for a good future. Honour seems to refer to children and young practising skilks for life and veibg of good quality by tge society's estinates. (Or the society needing to upkeep wise ways and the habit of folliwing wise valyes, and such deeds veing honoured where there was some intentional striving for and high skills needed, the thibgs done seen impirtant for upkeeping good wise life in the society. ) 

Honouring a flag seems to refer to honouring the valyes connected with the flag and with flags in general, especially honoyring groups (and individuals) having wise valyes and wisdom upon which the people caan buikd s good society, good to live in also in the long run and as new generations grow up, and good for the wide world too. 

As a subject honour violence is said to be not present in the traditional Finnish culture but instead a subject of which some far away countries want some neutral thoughts to make it easier for them to think through their more complex situations, or then some guess that we have sone ohenomena that people want taljed of but we do not call them by the same name so tgere may be a cultural diffwrence. 

Of whether the Finns who are wise should defend themselves more forcefully, there sometimes comes that idea to the Finns too, but it has some practical problems. First of all theory is different from practice, knowing some things well in theory is not yet enough to get things to work out well in practice, especially not by just commanding others. Understabding abd skilks are also such that each individual ought to have own understanfing and own skills and such obe learns mostly by trying to learn them, for exampke each thought in use must be understood and valued by each individual befoee it in practice is an ok way to get things work out. Some things can ve jyst memorised info but in the Finnush clinate ibdividual skills are valuable, and especially wisdom of lufe is valued by many, needed some of such too. Generally a wuse obe is quite easily in a good moid while a compketely mustaken one attacks agitately, so what to think of such?, often one just steps one step aside abd trues to explain some basic wisdom of life with which situatiobs usually get easily solved and lives go well. Sweden has a 3 times bigger popukation than Finlabd, Russia 30 tines bigger and tge world over 1 000 times bigger population than Finland, so often negotation skills are seen ss obe possible tactic too. 

People being of the same group but with different strategies of life and with different needs, often produces some aimibg for money lije achievemenrs only, some for some better job and some for some values and better quality in them. Then it often hapoens tgat those cunnibg for money or point lije achuevements or positions of power, attack unfairly thecareers and/or lives of the obes inclined toward other professiobs, and such is often done by intentionally musestimating what is worth what, and so such loojs thin in the eyes of the people aroubd, and so it often produces cover-up lije reactiobs, as if it were mow self-esteem when in fact those ibdividyals do nit keep such values impirtant in a good quality way. This some maybe interprete as honoyr type violence of cunnibg type, butbit seems a big difference in wisdom of lufe instwad. 

Dogs with honour type of aggression (kind of stiff and saying quite shortly mmrrr maybe to sideways of their head, but not more than that except personal style and the situation) are kind of saying that they are convinced of their own views and are so and so skilled, so and so old,, of such and such type and in such and such situation. So they are just describing themselves lije humans do with gesture language, clothes and social groups. Another type is dog attacking to defend someone or something, because one considers the task, that thing so impirtant. It is often defending a famiky member or a like-mibded friebd or fair chances in a society. Typical is that tge dog may attack so even uf it us ohysically much smaller one. So it just expresses it's opinion, the impirtancy of tge thing in question, while the bigger dog is more like leisurely indifferent or somewhat puzzled, not especially aggressive, more like saying "Do you think so? Maybe it then is so." and so the fight like situation ended and all try to get info if there is any wounds or other harn, and heal them.