I couldn’t say I preferred classic literature over self-help, because there was someone who believed those books had rebuilt their entire life.

I couldn’t say I hated the rain, because there was someone who lived for rainy days.

I couldn’t share my favorite film, because I feared it wasn't worth sharing at all.

I couldn’t share my favorite music, because I doubted it was good enough.

I was terrified of myself, because everyone was afraid of a shadow inside me that I couldn’t even see.

I didn’t even know what I had done. All I knew was that simply existing felt like an attack on them. I didn’t know how I hurt them; I only knew they swore I did.

Subscribe

They wished me dead because I could solve a math problem. They wished me dead because I could write an essay on historical records. They wished me dead because I understood a lesson they couldn’t grasp.

And I believed them.

I learned that the more I bloomed, the more hatred they had for me.

So I stopped speaking. I stopped knowing things. I shrank myself, believing that if I became small enough, they would finally let me in. But somehow, my very presence continued to trigger them.

I didn’t know their names, I didn’t know who they were, yet their hatred reached me all the same.

I remember a girl falling to her knees, crying, telling me that I had ruined her life. That I was the sole reason for her failed attempts. That I had dragged her through hell.

And yet, I was just a nine-year-old child.

I was still watching cartoons, still sleeping with a soft plush toy. Somehow, I was the villain in stories written by people whose names I had never even heard.

I convinced myself I deserved hell. I punished myself daily - restricting my food, refusing to play, stripping away every small joy because I believed I was unworthy of them. I went silent for months, convinced my voice was something the world shouldn't have to bear. I felt I had no right to celebrate my birthday. To this day, I never have, because I believed the day I was born was a mistake.

Then came the realization: they were only projecting.

And I realized something really powerful, yet destructive at the same time: I wasn’t responsible for their feelings, and neither were they for mine.

So I stopped listening. I started asking questions again. I started writing again. I took back my voice, and I began taking up space without asking for permission. I allowed myself to exist, just to BE, without seeking approval or offering apologies. I refused to let them disrespect me any longer. I finally saw the truth: they were furious because they thought we were in a competition, but I had never been running their race.

Everything shifted. Respect followed. The very people who once reviled me began treating me differently - approaching me with caution, offering apologies, or desperately trying to find a place in my life again.

And I stopped apologizing for my ambitions.

I stopped apologizing for becoming my untamed, raw self.

Years later, that same girl laughed in my face. She confessed she had been jealous all along, bitter because I was everything she could never be.

The ones who made me feel like a monster admitted they simply hated the discomfort my presence stirred inside them, even when I was doing nothing at all.

I was right all along.There was never anything wrong with me.

But I was robbed of my childhood.

I lost those years because they told me I was too much, that I was inherently guilty. For years, the child who carried a plush penguin everywhere was also carrying a crushing guilt-the way a grieving mother carries her deceased child.

I let myself lose everything, just so others could feel comfortable in their own skin.

There is a quote:

And after all of that,

I shine.

I burn.

And I don’t apologize.

To me, a square is like a box that limits me. It is not fair that I have to work much harder than someone else, but we both get the same result. A square represents the life you were born into, which is not always fair. It is about people not being treated equally and having to deal with things that are not fair. It makes me feel like I am stuck in a place I did not choose. Maybe I should not be asking why squares exist. Maybe I should be thinking about what I want to become by trying to get past them.

Subscribe now

Squares are not about the life you were born into. They are also about how the world does not reward good people. Have you ever thought about why bad people get everything they want? Sometimes people who do horrible things are successful. Sometimes the kindest people you have ever known have to suffer. You can feel angry and alone thinking that you did everything you could. But, did you really?

The universe does not care about what’s fair. It cares about frequency. People who hurt you might not even feel bad about it. They do not worry about what they did. They feel happy and successful. They do not care about how others feel. All these feelings they have create an energy that doesn’t carry guilt and consequences of their own actions, and that is what the world responds to. If you let anger take over your life, if you always think about how much you want them to pay for something they have done, do not expect the world to be kind to you.

Some things in life are not fair. Some people really do have to work more than others. Some problems are real, and pretending they are not is not a solution. Maybe being wise is not letting the unfair things in life control you.

I still do not like squares.

I do not like the walls and the limits they create.

But I am starting to understand that the point is not to envy the person who never had to escape the squares,

The point is to discover who I become while escaping.

This essay is not an attempt to justify mass violence. It is an attempt to understand why people become convinced that it is justified.

Have you ever thought about the people who die at the same moment you take a breath? Do you know their names? What did they like? What were their last seven minutes like? And, most importantly, are you angry that they become nothing more than tools, mere numbers to people who sit in clean offices and sleep peacefully in warm beds? They are just numbers to us.

In Gaza, one person is killed every twelve minutes.

In Ukraine, an average of eight to nine civilians die every day.

Ironically, some of these people didn’t even have the chance to live out their last seven minutes.

While reading these words, did you feel anything?

Every day, while listening to horrifying news, I try to imagine how it will all end. Yet my mind offers nothing, no thoughts, no answers, only emptiness and shame, because I can't do anything about it. And just as my hope dissolves into a dark trace of nihilism, one moment from "Attack on Titan" appears in my mind: a crying child, the only colorful thing in that scene, is saved from falling off a cliff by strangers. They are all about to die, moments away from falling themselves, yet they desperately pass the child from one pair of hands to another, hoping that it will survive. That child is more than a child. It is hope itself. It symbolizes a new beginning, new energy, and hope. The act of protecting something new and sacred while you yourself are dying is what has always kept me moving forward.

Because I also want to be one of those people, to touch that child, to make their life just one second longer, even if I am dying myself.

^{From Attack on Titan: The Final Chapters Special 1, directed by Yuichiro Hayashi, MAPPA, 2023}

And because of that single scene, Attack on Titan is not just an anime. This is an anime that is definitely worth watching (there will be spoilers here, but I don’t think they will ruin the first impression for new viewers).

It all starts with the walls. Inside them, the remaining survivors live trapped, believing they are the last people alive. Beyond those walls lies a world they know nothing about, a world they fear. Eren Yeager, the protagonist, grows up believing that Titans are the source of humanity’s suffering. Like everyone else inside the walls, he dreams of destroying them and finally becoming free. But as the story unfolds, both Eren and the audience discover a devastating truth:

The Titans were never the real enemy. Humans were.

^{Commander Erwin Smith asks Eren Yeager, "What do you think the enemy is?" From Attack on Titan, season 1, episode 15, "Special Operations Force: Eve of the Counterattack, Part 2," Wit Studio, 2013.}

Beyond the walls, civilization had continued to flourish with advanced technology, medicine, and ordinary lives, while those inside were left isolated, deprived of their history, and forced to fight monsters, Titans created by the very people living in comfort. At that moment, the walls no longer separate humans from monsters. They separate those who have opportunities from those who have been denied them.

After learning the truth, Eren changes. I couldn’t even imagine what it would feel like to be lied to your whole life, only to have your illusions crack and shatter under the weight of a horrifying truth. Meanwhile, the people living beyond the walls continue their lives as if nothing is happening. They have been brainwashed into believing that the people inside the walls, the Subjects of Ymir, the Eldians, are demons, cannibals, beasts, less than human. These lies were invented by people in positions of power to justify their actions.

Subscribe now

After watching it, the thought of being lied to, controlled, and distracted by carefully staged spectacles became one of my greatest fears. Call me whatever you want, a conspiracy theorist, if you wish, but when you look at the injustice around the world, do you never question it?

How have we, as humanity, never truly made peace?

It has always been about power, and life was never simply about people wanting good for one another.

I've seen it with my own eyes, and perhaps you will too when you stand at a protest and choose to keep your eyes open.

Maybe when you watch your friends being violently beaten.

Maybe when you are terrified that people you love will be taken by the police simply because they refused to bow their heads.

Maybe when you starve, not for aesthetics, but because of someone else's inhumanity.

When, one night, you hear a knock on the door, wondering whether the police have come to take you away simply because you said something they didn't like.

As I mentioned, in Attack on Titan, Titans are just humans who were transformed into monsters. Outside the walls, in Marley, Eldians are treated as slaves, less as people than as things. They are considered dirty, dangerous human beings. They are forced to wear armbands marking them as sinners. But what did an eight-year-old girl do to deserve being brutally murdered and fed to hunting dogs for amusement? She was just a child whose only crime was being born an Eldian and wanting to see an airplane.

Does any of this remind you of Nazi Germany?

• In Attack on Titan, Eldians living in Marley are forced to live behind massive walls in heavily guarded districts known as Liberio internment zones. They cannot leave without official government permission. In Nazi Germany, Jewish populations were forcibly removed from their homes and segregated into walled, overcrowded, and heavily guarded districts known as ghettos.

• In Attack on Titan, all Eldians are legally required to wear distinctive armbands in public, with the color indicating their social status. Under Nazi rule, Jewish people were legally forced to wear identifying badges, most commonly the yellow Star of David, marking them solely because of their ancestry.

• Marleyan education and state propaganda teach that Eldians are inherently evil, calling them “devils” and “subhuman” because of their ability to transform into Titans. Likewise, Nazi propaganda portrayed Jewish people as Untermenschen (”subhumans”) and as a biological threat to society.

René Girard argued that instead of confronting the real causes of their problems, societies often choose one group to blame. In Marley, that group was the Eldians. In history, it has been Jews, Tutsis, Armenians, and countless others. Before a society destroys people, it first convinces itself that they are the source of every problem. For Eren, however, the people beyond the walls gradually stopped being individuals. They became "the others" instead of people.

The author of Attack on Titan, Hajime Isayama, drew inspiration from growing up in the town of Hita, surrounded by imposing mountains. He has spoken about feeling trapped and isolated, longing to know what existed beyond them. My personal interpretation of those walls is that, for us, they are borders. They trap us, limit our possibilities, and become monuments to broken dreams, because sometimes dreaming and working hard simply isn’t enough. Walls are poverty, unequal education, inaccessible healthcare, passports, class, race, and access to technology. They represent every system that tells us not to try.

That’s why I see the Titans as something created by those living beyond the walls. They build the walls, and then they create the Titans.

Why? Because we are not them, and therefore, in their eyes, we deserve to die.

Isayama was just a child who wanted to see what lay beyond the mountains, just as Eren wanted to see the world beyond the walls.

We also want to see what lies beyond our own walls, the truth, don’t we?

The moment everything falls apart is when Eren and his friends secretly travel to Marley. For the first time, they taste ice cream. But the scene is not about dessert.

^{Sasha Braus trying ice cream for the first time in Marley. From Attack on Titan, season 4, episode 28, "The Dawn of Humanity," MAPPA, 2022}

That day, Eren realizes that people beyond the walls have lived ordinary lives. They never had to endure the same suffering, starvation, or constant fear.

How can that be fair?

How can two completely different realities exist within the same world?

Why did fate place them on opposite sides of the wall?

Why weren’t we good enough?

That is when Eren begins to believe that violence is his only remaining option. He starts planning the Rumbling, a catastrophe that will wipe out 80% of humanity. He longs for freedom. He wants to protect his friends. He knows what he is about to do is morally wrong, yet he convinces himself that it is the price that must be paid.

After finishing Attack on Titan, one question divided its audience:

Was Eren’s Rumbling justified?

Leave a comment

But if we are talking about Eren, then we should also mention Hitler and terrorists. To understand them, we first have to look at what came before. Before Nazi Germany rose to power, the country had been devastated by the First World War. Its economy collapsed, unemployment soared, and millions of people were left struggling. Many Germans felt humiliated by the Treaty of Versailles and believed that other countries had taken advantage of their weakness. They were angry, desperate, and looking for someone to blame. Then Hitler emerged with his radical ideas, and many people supported him. Why? Because they, too, came to believe that violence was their only remaining option.

Terrorists often commit atrocities while masking their crimes in the name of freedom, justice, or religion. Some believe that the only way to make the world pay attention is through violence, even if it means sacrificing themselves in the process. In many ways, it reminds me of the choice Eren made.

And I can’t stop asking the same question: was there really no other choice?

And how does an ordinary person slowly become someone who believes millions must die?

^{Eren Yeager pointing across the ocean, asking if killing their enemies will make them free. From Hajime Isayama, Attack on Titan, vol. 22, chapter 90, "To the Other Side of the Wall," Kodansha, 2017, p. 45}

Psychology and philosophy have been trying to answer that question for centuries. Anthropologist Scott Atran argues that the most dangerous conflicts are rarely fought over money or resources. They are fighting over sacred values - beliefs that people refuse to negotiate because they have become part of their identity. Freedom was never just a political goal for Eren. It became sacred. The same can be said about the people we mentioned above. The Rumbling was never only about revenge, and Eren was never shaped by a single tragedy. He was shaped by every wall, every lie, every funeral, every reminder that his people were considered less than human. Friedrich Nietzsche described a feeling he called ressentiment. A resentment born not from one injustice, but from years of humiliation, helplessness, and accumulated pain. It transforms suffering into identity. At some point, Eren seems to arrive at a devastating conclusion:

I’m asking these questions because I once felt that rage myself. Every day after school, I passed by the café near my house. I could literally smell the expensive, tasteless cologne of the people sitting there, eating and laughing as if nothing in the world concerned them. They ignored the waiter’s bruised face: a twenty-year-old boy whose eyes were black from being beaten simply because he had attended a protest.

The night before had been horrible. People had disappeared from their homes. Some of my friends had gone missing. My parents wouldn’t let me go to the protests because they were terrified. Students stopped coming to school. My history teacher injured his eye while attending a protest. And the very next day, I saw people drinking overpriced coffee and eating desserts.

In that moment, I hated them.

How cold-hearted do you have to be to act so nonchalant after what happened in your own country?

How could a woman laugh after learning that someone just like her, the same age as her, had been assaulted by the police, forced to take off her clothes, and threatened? How could anyone be so indifferent?

For a moment, I caught myself thinking that maybe Eren was justified. But after months of reading, thinking, and returning to the same question, I realized that the Rumbling never brought anyone closer to justice.

Walking past that café, I wasn’t angry because people were drinking coffee. I was angry because, for a brief moment, I felt that two different worlds existed side by side. One world mourned. The other continued ordering dessert. Perhaps that is what Eren felt when he tasted ice cream for the first time.

Subscribe now

I felt sorry for him, but...

We kill those people, then what?

What changes?

Nothing.

The cycle remains unbroken, and millions are still dead. None of this violence has ever brought us closer to peace.

Eren was wrong. Hitler was a fascist. Terrorists are not protesters. They are murderers, and there is no question mark after that.

I’m afraid that, somewhere in the world, someone will find an answer in violence. Someone will convince themselves that killing is the only language left for the world to understand. But that is not the right path. It never was.

I don’t know how to solve poverty.

I don’t know how to erase hatred passed down through generations.

I don’t know how to tear down all the walls we have built between one another.

But I do know this: They are not born believing that millions had to die.

Somewhere along the way, something convinced them that they did.

Perhaps the real question was never why millions die.

Perhaps it is why we keep creating the world in which someone believes they have to.

The problem isn’t that we know it, but how this performance of looking mysterious replaces authenticity; as a result, we get a society whose members can barely define who they are. That's why I think the obsession with appearing mysterious reflects a deeper desire for validation, status, and belonging.

Why is mystery attractive?

Humans are naturally drawn to what they cannot fully understand. When information is incomplete, our minds try to fill the gaps, because the less we know about someone, the more room we leave to imagine who they are. Besides this, we mistake silence for depth. We think they are smart because they say less, but it’s just our assumptions projecting onto them. Once mystery becomes associated with intelligence, depth, or desirability, people begin performing those traits in hopes of receiving the same admiration. But there’s another thing, too: in this social media age, we have no privacy. Everything about us is public, and by appearing mysterious, we create an illusion of control. Social media encourages constant exposure (reposts, notes, stories, Instagram Instants, seeing what your friends like and commenting, BeReal, etc.). Performing mystery becomes a way of reclaiming control over your identity. It creates the feeling that there are still parts of ourselves that remain inaccessible. But by doing this, people don’t regain privacy; they just feel like they do.

Subscribe now

Let’s use behavioural economics and psychology. In behavioural economics, people assign greater value to things that are scarce. Information works similarly. Someone who shares everything feels ordinary, while someone who reveals little appears more valuable simply because access is limited. This doesn’t make them better; it makes them seem more valuable. Here is an interesting fact: humans constantly send signals. Talking less or talking more also sends signals. Historically, in many cultures, powerful people didn’t need to explain themselves constantly. Think of kings, professors, CEOs, and generally older people. The person with the highest status often speaks less than everyone else, not because silence creates intelligence, but because intelligence and status reduce the need to constantly prove oneself. And social media reverses this

Can someone remain mysterious while voluntarily documenting their life online?

Yes, mystery can still exist. A person can genuinely be mysterious because they reveal very little about themselves; they don’t seek attention, and they don’t curate their identity for others. But every post, like, playlist, caption, follow, and comment becomes another clue. You don’t need to tell me directly who you are; your digital behaviour already does.

Privacy and mystery are different. Someone can be private without being mysterious. Let’s take an example: someone posts cryptic quotes every day, sad and nostalgic pictures with captions like, “Nobody knows the real me.” They reveal nothing factual. Yet they are constantly performing the idea that they’re mysterious. Ironically, this tells me something: they want to be perceived as mysterious. That alone makes them less mysterious. That’s why it’s a paradox: the moment you intentionally tell people you’re mysterious, you are already managing their perception. Real mystery doesn’t usually announce itself. Performance does.

I’m not judging anyone.

I’m trying to prevent a much more serious problem: performing mystery can become a way of avoiding vulnerability. Instead of expressing yourself through a carefully designed persona to create a certain impression, just express yourself honestly.

The main topic of my essay wasn’t mystery itself but authenticity.

Why are we so afraid of being ordinary, vulnerable, or clearly understood that we would rather perform identity than present our deep feelings and desires?

I remember once a girl told me that she wanted to be an introvert to be smarter and more mysterious. I was speechless because I couldn’t follow the logic of her words. But here is the truth: she wasn’t trying to become someone else; she was just trying to be someone she wished she were.

The mistake isn’t the desire to glow or to appear as something you wish you were, but thinking that inner qualities could be produced by outward signs.

The goal shouldn’t be to become mysterious. It should be to become honest.

Honest enough to stop borrowing personalities that would promise depth and begin developing depth itself.

Unfortunately, we are easily influenced. Someone who shapes how people think, behave, buy, and even what they consider normal is called an Influencer. They became powerful because ordinary people gave them attention and trust. That power created responsibility. But many influencers abandoned that responsibility by selling their voice, choosing profit and vanity over truth, and remaining silent during injustice.

• Who is an influencer?

  An influencer is someone who converts public attention into social, cultural, or economic power. There are 4 types of influencers based on their follower count: Nano-influencers (1,000– 10,000); Micro-influencers (10,000 – 100,000); Mega-influencers (1 million+). Often, traditional celebrities or top-tier internet stars are considered mega-influencers. Even though they come from different industries, celebrities and influencers are identical in terms of social power. They have power, an audience, and can control trends and exert psychological influence over millions of people. This influence creates responsibility. Every word they say, every idea, every trend is something that creates the atmosphere of today’s emotional and social climate. By writing “Influencer,” I mean every person who has a voice, especially those whose voice can be heard from all over the world.

• But who gives them this power?

  Us. We have power. We decide who we should give attention to. We decide who gets likes and followers. We decide who gets fame. We reward behavior with attention, and influencers are powerful because we made them powerful. They work for people. That’s almost like a social contract: the audience gives attention, influencers gain money and status, and in return, they offer value, honesty, and truth. This kind of relationship shapes social media.

But Something went wrong.

Influencers stopped speaking to people and started speaking for brands. They create illusions, make things desirable even when they are empty. For instance, they create content based on fake lifestyles. They post about unnecessary products, mask luxury as success, and consumption as identity. People begin comparing real life to curated performance. Everything becomes aesthetic: struggle, boredom, grief. As a result, we don’t engage with reality but consume endless stimulation.

In the past, television networks or governments dictated cultural norms. Today, influencers do it more effectively because they look like us. When an influencer does a “haul” video showing off thousands of dollars in clothing or makeup, they are normalizing the capitalist idea that happiness and self-worth come from buying things. The audience absorbs this worldview, accepting it as “normal life.” Antonio Gramsci, an Italian Marxist philosopher, explained this in his theory of cultural hegemony. He writes that ruling classes stay in power not just through military force, but through ideas, values, and culture. Does this remind you of something?

Blame is not only on influencers, because as Michel Foucault would explain, power is everywhere. It is embedded in everyday habits. Influencers don’t force anyone to do anything. Instead, they share “knowledge” (fitness routines, productivity hacks, “clean girl” aesthetics). The audience willingly adopts these norms, disciplining their own bodies, schedules, and diets to match the influencer’s standard. Power works because the audience wants to comply.

This is why I said it is a two-sided relationship, because power controls the influencer just as much as it controls the follower. This system creates for us an audience that sits in isolation, watching another “GRWM” video, where a person casually talks about their mental health and routines, and for a moment, it feels real. But it is a calculated performance; it’s edited and monetized. Guy Debord, the French philosopher and filmmaker, in his film “The Society of the Spectacle,” describes this reality. Debord argued that modern life has been replaced by a “Spectacle.” We no longer truly live; we just consume images of living. Reality has been completely replicated and replaced by performance. He says that the more the spectator watches, the less they actually live their own life.

We are what we consume.

We are what we see.

We are what we let ourselves be influenced by.

And ask yourself a question: Who did you let influence you?

It’s not about edited videos and makeup tutorials.

It’s about silence.

Subscribe now

People suffer, injustice grows, systems fail, violence happens, children are starving, some of them are fighting for rights, asking for basic survival, humans are dying on war’s fields fighting for freedom - and oh, you are not interested in politics?

Nobody cares about your “day in my life” or your outfits, but also nobody is asking you to become a philosopher and post about Kant, Kierkegaard, Russell, or Marx. We are asking you to speak up. We ask you to help us because we gave you the power of influence, and when you have influence, silence is a choice. Also, power without critical thought becomes propaganda.

So why are we letting them poison us?

In a world burning with crisis, endless self-documentation begins to feel morally empty. Influencers may not create injustice directly, but through silence, distraction, and normalization, they can help maintain it. We see war, injustice, and crisis; we hear and read about them and want to act, to rebel, and then immediately we scroll and see videos about hauls, skincare routines, and luxury routines. This is a distraction that can train helplessness and numb moral response.

You cannot say “I care deeply about justice” and in your next post, promote a luxury brand sponsorship that exploits labor. It’s a contradiction. It is narcissistic to not talk about what happens in the world and then post a self-image and validation-obsessed video of yourself dancing to a sound, showing a new dress. If your platform builds your wealth, you owe something back when society suffers.

We have to remind influencers of their moral duty. As we did in the past.

After the murder of George Floyd and global protests under Black Lives Matter, many influencers were publicly criticized for staying silent or posting normal lifestyle content. Beauty creator Bretman Rock openly called out influencers who stayed silent. “Black Lives Matter” became a kind of trend among influencers.

Some influencers attended demonstrations mainly to take aesthetic photos. One influencer was filmed posing in a gown at a protest for Instagram content. People said:

Stop treating protests like Coachella.

This protest had an impact, why? Because we were angry and we called out influencers. We weaponized our attention.

The same thing happened in 2024. During the war in the Gaza Strip, many users became furious at celebrities and influencers posting luxury content during humanitarian catastrophes. After the Met Gala 2024, TikTok users launched campaigns like #Blockout2024, celebrity blocklists, and the digital guillotine.

People’s message was clear: use your platform responsibly, or we will take away the attention that sustains you. It is called cancelling, and you have no idea how much influencers fear it. Their whole identity is based on followers and likes, and that is why. The same cancellation happened a month ago. James Charles mocked and berated a laid-off Spirit Airlines worker who messaged him a GoFundMe link. He recorded a TikTok calling the woman a “lazy piece of s**t,” and guess what happened after? His followers got angry, unfollowed him, and then he posted an apology video.

That is not the only case. During the war in Gaza Strip, many users became furious at celebrities and influencers posting luxury content during humanitarian catastrophe.

Many people say we shouldn’t force influencers to speak up, but I strongly disagree.

I’m not forcing anything on them. I’m not demanding that every celebrity become a political commentator.

I’m questioning what they choose to do with extraordinary influence when they continuously use that power only for self-promotion, consumption, and distraction. Even during moments of moral urgency, that choice deserves criticism.

I’m not angry because people post haul videos, skincare, outfit reviews, “what I eat in a day,” GRWM, or “spend a day with me.” I’m reacting to the disproportion.

Enormous suffering exists, and the same amount of attention is spent on trivial spectacle. The contrast feels obscene.

Celebrities and influencers participate in shaping public consciousness whether they acknowledge it or not, and we have built a culture where visibility is rewarded more than integrity.

I’m talking not only about influencers, but about society and what we choose to value.

It’s a critique of all of us.

For my whole life, I’ve been carrying some soul-wrecking emotion that didn’t have a name. I didn’t know what I was feeling, but I knew I had to be punished for it.

We are not born in an innocent world. All we see is inequality, unfairness, suffering, and betrayal, and later we start to discover these feelings within ourselves. I discover envy, desire, restriction, and dissatisfaction in my dark, hidden self, which wouldn’t even let its guard down while standing in front of the mirror. Everything unravels, starts to make sense, because for once, you are not acting. You are just watching your true, raw self and realise that the ugliness which you have been seeing in the world, all this time, was yours. So this life is nothing more than a long, ironic cycle, where we are heading to another end of another start. Discover your shadow self, realise that it was always about you, then change yourself and change the world around you, because what is happening inside me is me, and what is happening outside is your soul calling and its attraction to this thing. This is when something significant happens - people create their pure version in their mind, try to wash themselves of the crimes and sins they have committed, hoping that they have never seen or heard of what they did. Pretending to be an angel, innocent and sweet, while demons inside are crawling back to you, begging you to return to the place where you were created - Hell.

This is life, the perks of being and experiencing being human.

What is innocence - the absence of darkness or the honesty to admit it exists?

Carl Jung is the Swiss psychiatrist who brought forth the idea that people have two sides: The shadow and the Persona. The persona is the mask you wear for society, your pure and innocent self. The shadow is the hidden basement of your psyche, everything we repress, reject and find unacceptable about ourselves. It includes dark impulses (aggression, envy, selfishness) but also untapped potential (raw creativity or interest) that we hid away to fit in. Here comes the traps of innocence.

Humans have a desperate desire to be innocent.

This is why we are attracted to something small, white, unprotected, pure, and sane, but why are we doing this? To maintain the illusion of innocence, which is called projection. This act would lead us to tribalism and complete blindness to our own capacity for cruelty. When we can’t embody the image of ourselves we had in our head, we feel guilt. Guilt of not becoming what we desired. But while looking outside of our perfect house, with freshly cleaned windows, we see the outside world. A world where people suffer, get killed, and starve. This guilt intensifies. Because while you were dreaming about being an angel, for your own benefit, you missed the chance to become the real one.

Subscribe now

Here, in your own room, you put your pink and white bows on things, wearing white, perfectly clean clothes, posting aesthetic photos, but who gives you this privilege? You want more, while some of these people don’t even have anything at all. Do you think they have time to dream? Time to want more than what they have? And here comes what we call Survivor’s guilt, because why us? Why do we have more privileges, and how is it fair to have the right to want more?

John Rawls, an American political philosopher, developed the theory of the lottery of birth. Nobody chooses their country, parents, genetics, intelligence, family wealth, and yet society often treats these outcomes as deserved. In his thought experiment, he explained “The Veil of Ignorance.” In this experiment, it is said that people under the veil would never risk creating a society with extreme poverty or systemic discrimination, because they themselves might end up at the bottom. In the end, we get two kinds of guilt: personal (”I want more”, “I have envy”, “I’m dissatisfied”) and social (”others have less than me”, “some people never had a chance”). Both of these kinds of guilt are created from ignoring the shadow. Jung explains the shadow of a person, and Rawls explains the shadow of our societal structures.

It is impossible not to mention our pull towards something unharmed, untouched, pure and innocent. Let’s take this whole “angel aesthetic” as an example. We would see a lot of trends about young girls presenting themselves as the one. Swan, deer, rabbit, bows - and mostly all of these things have to be white, because white is untouched by the evil, rotten world. Our yearning for these white, pure things proves the existence of something much darker and deeper inside us. We project our desires onto these poor, white and little innocent things because we didn’t or couldn’t become them ourselves. We put our pink dove on our bags, on our heads, and try to act like innocent little girls while knowing that last night we drank the blood of our raw, unashamed desires and wished the entire world to disappear.

Even a man likes innocence, a pretty little girl who doesn’t even know what a condom means or how reproduction works. They like feminine girls, because these girls don’t know how to open a bottle, how to protect themselves, or how to yell or scream. These angel girls can only cry quietly and sacrifice their wings because only a pure woman with a pink bow in her hair can forgive a man with green eyes. Both women and men are drawn to innocence, but for a different reason: women because this is the only way to hide their shadow side and pretend to be what they are not and men because they can find freedom and forgiveness, which couldn’t be found in themselves.

By this act, they cut wings as the final act to show that no human being was ever an angel to begin with, but still,

“Better to be an open sinner than a false saint.”

I was never scared, until I realised I was swallowed by people who never even experienced the pain of transformation. The pain of becoming someone better, and I get this unfair feeling in my chest - why can they live without feeling any moral responsibility, while the rest of us, people who work on ourselves every day, people who create themselves with bare hands without any help besides faith. Faith in a sane and deserved future kept me moving forward. I believed that if I worked hard enough, for once, I would eventually taste something sweet. I was watching how desperately people were trying to survive, but there was nothing we could do. No matter how hard we tried, the dark shadow above us would grow taller. People lost hope, and they grabbed a last piece of hope - survive, and this hell will end. Someday you will get what was meant for you, as they say, but

Will we?

I trusted this message until I saw how violently our deserved place was taken by people who had never had to lift a finger. And that was the day I realised that no one would give me something by me sitting and waiting for it,

I had to ask. I had to yell. I had to become more of that and take that place by myself because no one was there except me.

Humans are not born evil. Basically, an evil person is a reflection and product of the environment in which he was created. Biologically, the human brain has “mirror neurons” that help us feel what others feel. We are wired for cooperation because humans survive better in groups. But if a person is born with problems in the prefrontal cortex (which has structural differences) they might struggle to form a connection with others and be less empathetic. Evilness is defined by three core elements:

• Evil requires a malignant intent; it requires a conscious choice. The person knows their action will cause profound physical or psychological suffering to an innocent being, and they choose to do it anyway.

• Evil often happens when a person treats a human being as an object or a tool to be used. For instance, sadism is causing harm purely for the pleasure or power it provides. Instrumental harm - harming others as a shortcut to get what you want (money, power, status) while being completely indifferent to their pain.

• Evilness is the ability to walk away from the destruction you caused without feeling guilt or shame.

There are various opinions about what makes a person evil. Hannah Arendt was a German-American historian and philosopher. She was one of the most influential political theorists of the twentieth century. She argued that an evil person is the terrifyingly ordinary individual. The person who just follows orders, speaks in clichés, and refuses to think critically. Arendt wrote that the “evilness of a person” is often not an active presence of malice, but a passive absence - a failure to think, a failure to care, a failure to act as an independent moral person. In her writings, “The Life of the Mind,” she said,

“The sad truth is that most evil is done by people who never make up their minds to be good or evil.”

These destructive acts and choices of humans will create a bureaucratic shield, which, as a result, starts eating itself and destroys society.” Friedrich Nietzsche was a German philosopher who argued that the people society calls “evil” are often just powerful individuals who break boundaries and refuse to be tamed by standard morals.

Does this mean the more evil you are, the further you will go?

Subscribe now

We can surely say that evilness is not a cosmic devil or absolute sin. Arendt said that personal evil is born from a lack of individuality; according to Nietzsche, traditional “evil” is actually a mislabelling of intense individuality. We finally come to the point where we can draw an active and passive definition of evil. Active definition - evil is the active, malicious exercise of power to crush, dominate, or exploit the weak for personal gain or pleasure. Passive definition - evil is a profound moral failure. It is the total absence of empathy, independent thought and conscience that allows a person to either participate in or look away from horrific suffering.

While the world is burning, how can we stay sane? How can we survive? If the world turns into some kind of battle arena, where people would do horrific things without facing consequences for their crimes, where will we stand?

I became something I swore not to become. I missed the person I was. I missed the innocent, but more than that, I miss the person I could have become.

In this journey, while looking into the abyss, I became darkness myself and for what?

To earn my place.

New ideas are never introduced suddenly; they are built on almost-collapsed ideas, painted in attractive colors, and then sold to innocent people. There have always been stereotypes and myths about women, shaping even a newborn girl, who is taught what it means to be a woman in this society. If you tell a victim that she is a victim, she will continue living like one. For centuries, oppression has continued, and even today, whether we like it or not, we carry a mentality that forces us to accept weaknesses imposed on us and then fall in love with the one who convinced us of their superiority. Stockholm syndrome, I would say.

Maybe we don’t express it directly, but every step we take, every photo we upload, every bag we buy, every careless joke we make reveals what we think inside. We reinforce stereotypes ourselves. We let the system rot and distract us.

We also have to mention consumerism, the mechanism of control, and wealth as an artificially created identity, built through reels and illusions. It doesn’t belong to one gender, but it clearly targets us more than men. Why is women’s clothing more diverse? Why do we have more perfumes? More skincare products? Status matters too. A man is considered wealthy when he wears things without visible brand logos. For a woman, it’s the opposite, the brand must be seen, recognized. Our ruined self-esteem and self-respect are sold back to us today, decorated with feminist quotes.

The market’s main target is women. Why? That’s another discussion. Here, we focus on something more primitive: our desire to be controlled. “I’m just a girl.” Everyone remembers that trend. Misogynistic, disguised as humor. Why can’t you solve math problems? Why can’t you manage your money? Why can’t you park properly? Because you’re just a girl.

Then came “girl math.” Spending more, asking for more, justifying everything. Breaking your phone for a perfect picture, acting stupid to get what you want, sacrificing your needs, because that’s just girl math. Another destructive trend is “girl dinner”, the less you eat, the skinnier you become, and that becomes your meal, the measure of your beauty. All of these trends seem harmless, but in reality, they are just another way to diminish ourselves as intelligent human beings. We don’t do this consciously, and that’s exactly the point. We laugh it off while continuing to participate in our own downfall

Social media also shapes how we see relationships. “Enemies to lovers” is one of the most loved and glorified dynamics. He humiliates you? Punishes you? Scares you? Threatens you? Somehow, it’s romanticized. How can a man like that become the love of your life? By this, you prove the point of those who claim that women like to be controlled, that women act on emotion and destroy themselves because of it.

You cannot demand freedom, respect, or value from others if you don’t value yourself.

But you’re just a girl,

dressed in expensive clothes,

eating expensive food,

taking photos with a new phone to desperately show what you don’t have.

And yet, you’re proud, because you’re beautiful. Because you are just a girl.

We are born with nothing inside us, are we? That’s what I want to understand. The famous concept of “tabula rasa” says that humans are like white boards when they are born and later everything around us affects us. We need to understand why people feel the need to prove themselves and where ambition comes from. Psychology says low self-worth is the main cause, when someone feels small or invisible, proving themselves becomes a way to repair identity. Alfred Adler, an Austrian medical doctor and psychotherapist, observed that people can develop an intense drive to be “above” others as compensation for feelings of inferiority. Sociology suggests that in competitive economies or unstable political systems, achievement becomes a survival strategy. You work harder because the stakes are higher. People feel they must climb higher because staying in the same place may actually mean falling behind in a competitive system. We also have to mention that cultural norms matter, some cultures prize collective harmony and downplay individual ambition. Others celebrate “self-made” people. That shapes which ambitions are encouraged or thwarted. Even though people are born in the same household and country, we get different outcomes. These people, the ones who don’t feel a constant obligation to achieve something, in fact, to matter and survive, why? Genes and temperament matter a lot, as well as different interpretations of experiences. For example, one kid takes criticism as a challenge, another one as proof of failure. Social networks and role models play an important role, access to mentors and peers can change direction and opportunity.

Ambition is a beautiful word. “Relentless pursuit of exceptional goals driven by determination, aspiration, and the hunger for achievement” - they say. I would never understand “ambitious but lazy” allegations. How can one be ambitious but not do anything? It is hunger. That kind of hunger you were born with and what’s worse, is that it can never be satisfied. If you don’t act, it will eat your brain alive. There are two types of ambition: intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic ambition is driven by internal satisfaction (enjoyment, curiosity, mastery). They would continue even without rewards. Extrinsic ambition is driven by external outcomes (money, status, admiration, power). The goal is not the activity itself but what it gives socially. We have to separate (even though these are not separate scientific categories) ego-driven (extrinsic) and calling-driven (intrinsic) ambition. The main difference is that ego-driven ambition is motivated by proving superiority, validation, competition, and calling-driven is inspired by purpose, curiosity, a sense of responsibility, or mission. People feel like they are meant to do something. Here is the main question: Where does calling-driven ambition come from? Research suggests several sources combine: Temperament - some people are naturally more curious, persistent, and sensitive to meaning. These traits are partly genetic; Early experiences - discovering a field that fascinates you, meeting a mentor or role model, and early success that reinforces identity; Strong identity - Some individuals form it when they start asking existential questions during adolescence; Trauma - sometimes, calling comes from a problem someone wants to solve, and pain can transform into purpose. Are people with calling-driven ambition different? They are still humans and share traits such as high curiosity, strong imagination, long-term thinking, and persistence. Many people do not develop this drive because they prioritize stability, lack exposure to inspiring opportunities, and are satisfied with balance. Why are you not?

“Ambition doesn’t suit women, it isn’t feminine enough.” - This is what we have to face every day. Every man supports equality until there is a woman with big goals and vicious rage and ambition, willing to sacrifice everything to get what she wants. Everyone is there for you, until you decide to do something that can’t be fathomed by their closed mind. They would judge you, tell you that you are a narcissistic, egocentric person who can’t even appreciate what you have. Staying where you are is the cruel punishment for us, cutting our wings while flying, and making us blind by your rightful right. Women had always been punished for wanting much more, they were forced to stay small, while men, who are also the victims of the system, were forced to play big. Research and social observation show the same assertive behavior is often praised in men (”Leader”) and criticized in women (”bossy”, “cold” and “unfeminine”). For instance, Cleopatra is portrayed as manipulative, rather than strategic. Her intelligence is ignored. Marie Curie shows a different type of judgment. The media shows her as immoral rather than brilliant, because she was too focused on work. In this case, ambition is judged as unnatural or threatening, even though her works were beneficial to society. Lady Macbeth represents how society imagines ambitious women. In the play, she pushes for power, rejecting traditional femininity. Literature reflects the fear of ambitious women by turning them into villains. If every ambitious woman is morally corrupt and destructive, then why are men with the same traits powerful and glorified? Why are we not man enough?

Ambition is wounding and calling at the same time. It can be very dangerous when it is fueled only by ego, domination, and the need to prove your worth. It must have a higher mission, go beyond yourself to serve others. Throughout history, the same force that pushes individuals to prove themselves has also pushed humanity forward: scientific discoveries, political revolutions, and artistic achievements were often driven by people who were not satisfied with the world as it was. Our ambition won’t let us stop. Why are we never satisfied? Hedonic treadmill, as psychology names it, progress raises expectation rather than ending desire. There is a cognitive reason, our brain perceives possibilities more clearly that something greater could exist: a better idea, a better society, and higher achievements. Most of the time, this act is often seen as ingratitude, but this was never about what we had and what we could have. It was our imagination strongly linked to responsibility.

Ambition is part of yourself, which shouldn’t be shamed and punished, but to be understood and guided. Keep in mind that you must fight and continue pushing forward, no matter the struggle or sacrifice, to reach the stars, but also to learn how to fly, to feel hope, to breathe freedom, and to spread that hope to others. And to make this happen, you either find a way or create one.

Subscribe now