This text is written with the purpose to return the capacities to resolve such situations to these they have been stolen from. It is now an unimpeachable fact that the oppression currently in this world is not only identifiable by its assertion that it was best where it is worst, but that it is the conflict over life and death of the most powerful against the most powerless. It is the very nature of this evil that it targets these who have chosen to abstain from it once and for all worse than anyone else with anything else to lose. As long as this oppression still exists, not being a part of it, not being a collaborator, is the highest quality a human being can reach, the most valuable thing any person could have to lose. This is so because oppression - the state, the system, the regime, the democracy, the society, whatever name it is giving to itself or being given by others - is already deceased enough to be incapable to continue only with these who willingly and knowingly support it. To remain still it is attempting to violently recruit these who refuse it, again and again, and hence like everyone who discovered to have mortal enemies, for the rest of either their or my lives I am equipped with the necessity to get them killed before they kill me.

The first step to achieve freedom is remembering life as it was before oppression came in. The key to that memory is filling the blanks that the oppressor left in the current public discourse. The biggest of these blindspots are the awareness of the finality of the oppressive system itself and of its collaborators, the conclusion that when this system failed to surrender itself to peaceful deconstruction after it was morally broke it entered a condition of death yet to be realised, and its continued failure ever since, beyond any limit. The fact that the oppressor requires to be killed is the completion of an ongoing conflict over life and death, not a penalty in response to a finished action. That is necessary to stop it, not first of all meant to be a message to others. What makes the oppressor a mortal enemy is that it chose to continue, despite the fact that it had been warned to discontinue its tactic of keeping deliberately close to the border between covert and open attack or crossing it. With its attack continuing against explicit disagreement the oppressor is already beginning to die, and that process is only to be finished appropriately. Its complete death is the condition of the possibility of the reclamation of the self.

The second step to lasting peace is the comparison with the other species. It requires due consideration whether what humanity has committed against itself as a community and against the individuals of which it seems to expect most is ever being done by any other living being. Animals may be mortal enemies of each other for the food chain, but that is not a contradictory expectation such as it is with a group of humans who want someone to join them only to try to obtain something that would get lost by doing so. Some animals may be threatening each other with death, but that is a direct challenge and not an indirect campaign to contaminate all alternatives to doing what must necessarily result therein. Wild animals may be in the mood of attack, but they do not continue after it exhausts them and everything they feed from. In every sense, this oppression among humanity is worse than what can be found between other species, although the former has already extended into the realm of the latter for precisely that reason. The falsification of its pretexts for all species puts the unspecific threat by the mortal enemy into the perspective necessary to overcome it.

The third step in the abolition of oppression is the appropriate compensation of its targets. It poses the challenge how compensation can be achieved when the mortal enemy deliberately aimed at causing irreversible damage. Surely it cannot be compensated with money because that is a part of the failed system and a tool of oppression. Financial compensation only has a purpose when it is provided publicly, and to transparently reach targets of oppression who chose not to identify with that role it must be for everyone, or it would only be a bribe for identification. As one of these targets, I insist in the most general sense that humanity has to find ways of life which make sure such oppression can never happen again to anyone, no matter what the pretext. This includes material redistribution, but material redistribution is necessary anyway even if oppression had not gone too far, so it is not the compensation for that. The only compensation I can live with is the complete death of the oppressor, and the freedom to take the proof that this is so, not only for myself but for everyone who has been targeted by its state terror. There is nothing exceptional about it, that had to be done whenever this species had betrayed itself so much.

The fourth step out of the confusion of the deceased present is the comparison with children. For those who never got to know anything else, the return of the truth into a public discourse where even the word had been abused as a label for the worst of its opposite necessarily is something entirely new, just like the invasion of the falsehood of oppression into the lives of these of us who chose to restore or keep their independence was in a reverse sense. If human rights are being understood as transcendental birthrights then they do not only begin when they are successfully eked out but precede any imaginable interaction. A child is vulnerable to have its rights abused by any power, yet adults treating each other as if they were must be aware of the blindspots of oppression or experience their consequences. It is for precisely this reason - vulnerability does not mandate deprivation - that a child faced with the outlook to have its will broken can ask adults for help, while an adult being hunted into such a role by oppression can only point at the fact that death is a condition that has already begun to be realised in the actions of the oppressor.

A rain of words is washing away the decoy of democracy from the skeleton of oppression. The worst of all possible systems is, and has always been, the one which gives the the best possible pretexts to power. On the other hand, the best system is and will be the one which removes all possible pretexts from power, and which removes power itself just as much as it does remove them. There is no liberation without emancipation, but there also is no emancipation without liberation, and freedom in this sense does not only include the end of oppression but also the beginning of something yet unnamed that is to take its place without taking its role. The original aberration, which has enabled it to come to this dilemma, is the human ignorance against the symbioses that have made this species into what it desires itself to be. This is the congenital error of all organised religions and social systems, the fundamental misconception that humanity could exist without any mutual interests with the rest of the biosphere, its animals, plants and mushrooms, and it is not worth going any further. The oppressor is trying to kill us slowly and that kills it.