All Men Are Created Equal Minus the All

The United States. The Declaration of Independence. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal...". This statement's authenticity is only up to the point that it was, in fact, written in a document by our Founding Fathers in 1776. I can't deny that we have come very far from where we were hundreds of years back. White supremacy, slavery, sexism, and oppressed minorities. The list goes on. Those issues were prominent in America's history. However, after the Declaration of Independence was adopted, discrimination was supposed to be diminished, if not put to an end. Blacks were still on their plantations and women were still cooking in the kitchen. This may sound extremely cliche, but those images were actually what was self-evident to everyone. Now fast forward another couple hundred years, Black men have been granted their sufficient rights through the Fifteenth Amendment. Not long later came the movements for women's rights. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, along with other female activists stood up for a new set of rights. Even after fighting long and hard for what they believe is right for this country, oppression did not cease to exist.

Yes, black men were able to stand on part of the ground in the political world. Yes, women were able to integrate into the workforce, alongside men. Today, there are numerous opportunities for blacks and women. People of all sex and race are able to collaborate freely to come up with breakthrough after breakthrough. But this leads me to a question. Will there ever be true and absolute equality among the people? In all honesty, probably not. Sure, millions of people may believe in absolute equality, or not. However, it is those several people who disagree and are stuck in the traditional views of social hierarchy that leaves us stuck in the mud. With a little disagreement, it can disrupt the flow of a set of similar opinions to become a big mess of confusion. To accommodate those opposing views towards equality, changes for a "better world" are barely made. As a result, our country hasn't been able to back away from constant discrimination and oppression. Some issues aren't brought to the table, but they do exist and we all know they do.

Define great pls

In Vowell's The Partly Cloudy Patriot, she says, "It took me a while to figure out why I guiltily slid the flag into the recycling bin instead of taping it up. The meaning had changes; or let's say it changed back. In the first day or two the flags were plastered everywhere, seeing them was heartening because they indicated that we're all in this sorrow together. The flags were purely emotional. Once we went to war, once the president announced that we were going to retaliate against the 'evildoers,' then the flag again represented what it usually represents, the government. I think that's when the flags started making me nervous." You may see the flag and think unity, independence, and freedom. However, America doesn't have absolute freedom. Even the meaning of a major national symbol could be tarnished for the way of the government. So exactly how accurate are words coming from the government? "All men are created equal" Think again.

Fact is Fiction. Fiction is Fact.

Are the words I have typed on this post black? Are colors you see in the background hues of blue and purple? I'm not even sure if I can give you an answer to those questions. For all I know, there is somebody out there who might see the colors on this page as gold and white. But if I firmly make a statement on what I see, that the text color is indeed black, and the background is a splatter of blue and purple, am I writing some sort of fiction to those who see differently?

"...If Our Eyes Aren't Real." What does that even mean? I believe most human beings have two spheroidal structures with a retina, shelled with the sclera, which is shielded by a transparent cornea. They are fully functional, despite the varying degrees(considering the degradation that occurs with age). Hence, we, humans, are capable of seeing things through our own eyes. However, the question is how we report what we see. With two or three accounts, an individual's theory could become a center of mockery or a well-written piece of fiction. With this in mind, it is fair to say that without the truths that people assert on a daily basis, there would be no such existence as fiction. Since there are so many "truths" on a same idea, would they still be considered truths? They are more like a perspective of the truth. At the moment when you register what you see, thoughts and words come into mind. There would be no surprise if the nouns and adjectives circling your head differs from the person next to you. 

Now I'm going to try to make a connection that may make perfect sense or no sense at all, but here it is. Let's take a globe, for example. The Earth. Pretend there is an invisible layer that covers the Earth to make a perfect spherical surface. Take couple hundred or even thousands of people and place them on the globe standing. 

Thank you shutterstock:P

Everyone is standing on the edge of the Earth. Everyone's feet is planted on a spherical surface. Everyone is the same distance from the core of the Earth. What's different? The angle, or the perspective, in which they are standing at is what's different. Some are probably craving some ice cream under that 90-degree weather. Some are probably running from an incoming tsunami. Some may be hibernating in bed through a dark snowstorm. It seems like they are all standing under same conditions with no additional variables, but once you enter their perspective, what you see is entirely different. 

__________________________________________________________

The line between fact and fiction can also be seen in the book The Things They Carried. Tim O'Brien broke the barrier between fact and fiction. He drew readers into thinking his novel is a true story by making such realistic actions and a dedication that reads, "This book is lovingly dedicated to the men of Alpha Company, and in particular to Jimmy Cross, Norman Bowker, Rat Kiley, Mitchell Sanders, Henry Dobbins, and Kiowa." But in the title page it clearly says "A work of fiction by Tim O'Brien." He did inform his readers that what they will see is a complete work of fiction, but at the same time, he wanted his readers to feel the reality of war. O'Brien masterfully executed his fiction retelling of a true war experience. 

It's fiction that it's a fact.

It's a fact that it's fiction. 

Who knows? Maybe 1984's Oceania is right about 2+2 equaling 5...