TERRALLY POOR

Being terrally poor, to me basically means not living as comfortable as possible relative to the blessings of nature.

All other living organisms have the natural instinct of balance; i.e, living within the scope of their needs and actively or passively taking part in continuation of species and sustainability. (except when external forces- asteroids, comets and the likes, come into play). And even then, with time, things balance out.

This was so for the primitive man until he evolved. (Nature's probably most costly mistake). Man was ok, like All other organisms until their eyes opened. They became wiser and crowned themselves controllers rather than guardians (which was probably nature's idea for protection against these external forces) of the world. They did and undid, and now are shadows of the world.

Plants and animals have no worries and they adapt well to negative phenomena- floods, droughts, earthquakes, competition, volcanic eruptions and so on - thanks to the level of their IQ.

Although they may not be considered happy, but they are comfortable. And there is no law that states that attaining happiness is the height of a good life.

On the otherhand, majority of humans are poor and involved in unhealthy competitions. Now, being terrally poor is not about being broke and / or sick; that's not the point.

Scientists say that relative to the age of the earth, the evolved man is still very young and would still be, for as long as ten thousand years ( if the world "stops ageing" ) because according to universe today, evolved humans are only 200,000 years old and civilisation is just about 6,000 years old, when the earth is about 4 billion years old. But these so-called children (man), without tangible parents to guide them are undoing billions of years of nature's hard work in way less than one-tenth the time it took for everything there is, to be.

It may be something, that a few of us are beginning to understand earth and mature into "youths", but damage, some of which are probably irreparable have and are still being made.

Human beings are just starting to mature as regards a sustainable environment; though more than half the world's population still don't give fuck; and Africa, even if they are probably not complacent, can't do shit... They are the most useless in the equation...SMH... The poorest terrally.

Now, even as we mature, we still see earth as resource to be exploited rather than our life force; i.e, the foundation on which we can physically act at all. The typical thinking line of a terrally poor and parasitic population.

Human beings, in our immature way of life has been, and is still over-wanting; living beyond the scope of our needs. Its expected (probably even by nature). I mean, the higher form of life most evident in our thinking cannot be for nothing or without shortcomings, right? But now, it has developed into a problem with no end in sight- probably psychological. The problem of control and superiority (directly or indirectly) over all other life form. Problems caused by and evident in over fishing / over hunting, over lumbering, deforestation, endangering species continuity, disruption of ecosystems and so on...

Indusralization is not bad, it's the way we go about it that is the issue.

We forget that even at the highest level of technological advancement, we being biological would still need biological support systems - plants and animals as food, water... And if we advance to being completely artificial, we would / might need a source of sustenance and continuity. But we are at least a few hundred years from achieving that, without assurance that earth systems would be able to hold on long enough for us to reach that height.

As regards living beyond the scope of our needs, we cannot be at our optimum performance without understanding ourselves to a very reasonable extent. And this will not come without some setbacks; as most of the time, something must die or at least be disturbed before something more profitable can come forth. That is why living beyond the scope of our needs - food, clothing and shelter - has resulted in complex human issues of, and in economics, finance, politics, society, technology and so on.

And that is fine.

But these problems, I believe, have stemmed from low level understanding of leadership and followership. Or just wrong living.

The life of humans, unlike that of plants and animals, is not about being comfortable (which I believe is the right, yes right way of living) or being satisfied and having oneness of mind (such that we don't find stupid reasons to go to war for  and wreck havoc on each other and steal from each other).

To drive home my point, it is only in a terrally poor world that you hear of tech giants strong-arming smaller tech companies that have the potential to beat them; African leaders stealing from it's citizens, even aids sent through them to their citizens and promulgating unhealthy laws; Companies owing salaries or having a higher percentage of their staff being long term contract staff; Racism; Sociopaths, Psychpaths (and other -paths I've never heard of); Countries stealing other countries intellectuall properties; Years of countries dealings without coming to acceptable compromises; Taking loans to pay school fees; Terrorism; Refugee campings; Police brutality and so on and so forth... In one word, NONSENSE and all from being terrally broke.

We are not supposed to be involved in some sort of competitions like plants and animals for one reason; we think, they don't.

We relate or associate the wrong actions to survival of the fittest, forgetting that as "higher animals" (evolved beings),  the rules that guide our actions are more complex than those of normal animals and plants. In the sense that the stealing and fighting and killing each other we regard as survival of the fittest are actions we can very well control; unlike the same concept or relationship between a lion and a zebra or a jakal. The lion must eat! And it can't eat plants.

Although we aim for mastery in the process of competition and that should be all we do, but it isn't.

Now, while we continue down the terrally poor path of living and while we kill each other unreasonably and remain careless and irresponsible about our overpopulation and over-exploitation of resources; acting like children, I'm sure (and I know we know) that we risk being comfortable as well as our continuity. And in the end, our future would be majorly expensive both to us and the earth and thus a nearer time (if at all there was such time) for our extinction.

Then, nothing would matter...