Started work on two works: “The Epithet” and “The Totalitarian State”

I’ve started work (mostly for fun, for i’m an amateur and consider myself a literary hack), on two scripts.

The Epithet


The Totalitarian State

Stemming from my experiences in talking to myself, wherefore, a totalitarian regime tried to, and I quote “seize the means of production and create in me an artist, that will write and produce works of art”, the voices in my head declared me a neutral god, and attempted a coup of my faculties.

The epithet use, which is a movie about the loaded term, the n word, and why I’ve been called it my entire life, from the voices in my head.

Both of these films, if they ever even make it to production, which they won’t, are probably already opposed.

But I write for fun, and not for profit. So we’ll see.

THe fact is: I created them, and that’s art. I’m alright with that.

As the totalitarian state in my mind says “please don’t support our Artist. Leave him broke please. No to art.”

I’m an artist. and writing is a compulsion I suppose. Very Totalitarian of me.

Except im a left-leaning progressive.

Nobody home, as the voices often say.

Steve Mini from the 6.

my price, my upper limit: 10 mil.

I ‘ve always said that, if i had enough wealth, i wouldn’t even bother to make any more. I’d just retire and do what I love. Stay home, play video games, smoke weed, and read and write books. And of course, talk to the voices in my head.

One number comes to mind: 10 million bucks. It’s more than enough to last me over 50 years (i’m 41), and I’m certain I’d never have to work again.

For you see, my friends, i live off just 12 grand a year, or 1 grand a month. 10 million to me is a lot of money.

Some hoodies be flauntin’ 10 million dollars like it’s nothin’. No to all of that.

So, if being a telepathic mutant, self asserted, is worth anything more than 10 mil, i’m retired already. Front me a cheque, homies.

Steve Mini from the 6.

Update: Neuts should not be able to faction change to good/evil

After careful consultation with “the guild” (i.e. the voices in my head), we’ve decided that neuts should be neuts for life, and that they should never be able to change faction.

However, only neuts can decide whether or not they are currently supporting either good or evil, and tip the balance.

When the campaign starts, most neuts have whole-heartedly sided with evil, mainly to profit. Will Good mount a comeback, and convince neuts to their side?

Anyway, it rests.

“Neuts for life” I suppose. How’s that for a motto? Until I think of a better one.

“Neutral G.”

Steve Mini from the 6.

I suppose I have to answer the question: Just why am I supporting both good and evil as a neutral person? I espoused this tradition, this neutrality guild, this meta, as a joke to myself, as a joke to the voices in my head. I never thought I’d actually sit down and analyze the disposition, and actually agree with it.

Certainly therefore I am ill. note: Evil just means selfish, it doesn’t mean anything else. A CEO is typically evil in my world, which i’ve troll dubbed: “Gaya” or “Gaia”, because he probably stands to profit at the expense of, well, everyone else. Making a quick buck is seen as evil, because only you stand to profit, making it a selfish act.

Doc says I’m doing great. Better than ever. Passed my yearly course. Back in university finishing my BA.

By the way fellas, I have no criminal record, and don’t condone the use. I am ill.

See you next time.

Goodies and Baddies are diametrically opposed; Neuts side with either/or.

I suppose in this “game” or “campaign” of mine, Goodies are always opposed to Baddies and vice versa in a classic Good Vs. Evil campaign. (note: I hear voices. I often run a homebrew campaign of Dungeons and Dragons with the voices in my head as player characters. warning: If you hear voices, talk to your doctor. I’m also medicated and am managing my symptoms well – but i do hear bad voices from time to time. Gaming is a coping mechanism in my opinion).

Anyway: this is a classic two-faction war, Goodies vs. Baddies, Good vs Evil. Except there’s a third faction which tips the scales of balance: Neuts.

Goodies often accrue more than enough wealth, and give the rest away to other goodies. Perhaps a percentage, say, 25-40% would be welcomed, sort of like a tithe or tax, to be given away to other players. Baddies are by far the richest by the end of the “game” therefore; having accrued more wealth than goodies and of course, more than neuts, who don’t accrue much wealth at all – though some neuts are comfortably wealthy, none are fantastically rich – or else they are no longer neut, according to neuts, for, If they earn too much, they’re forced to faction change permanently into either good or evil.

The strategic choice, therefore, might be to start as neut, learn the game, make too much wealth intentionally to trigger a faction change, and then decide whether or not you want to convert to good or evil at that point. And this is, in fact, always encouraged, so that starting players are usually neut – if not always.

But this is a video game i’m designing; and I need to design a fantasy campaign for Dungeons And Dragons and/or a few novels.

I literally play this by myself. “1 player map” as I often joke.

I want to mention that I’m “metastatic” as the “Neutral God” of the campaign; Which is a neologism I coined (I’m diagnosed with Paranoid Schizophrenia and hear voices, too; apparently I coin my own words, which mean whatever I want them to mean). Metastatic basically means that I can be anyone, anywhere in the world, and talk speak act and think like them, sort of like the agents in the matrix, or the gods in ancient Greece. (Note: This word already exists. I just gave it a new meaning).

When I “become” someone else, and talk to the voices in my head, which make up a plethora of dialogue, fiction, characters, heroes, and villians … they literally think i’m that other person that I morphed into, and I hear them react and talk and think like i’m that other person i’ve metastatically morphed into. (Like the agents in the matrix or gods in ancient Greece).

Go figure that one out: I didn’t: I couldn’t figure out the voices for a bunch of years where I was afraid. I’m now recovering well, still medicated, and finishing my BA.

Like I said. If you hear voices, talk to your doctor. I manage my symptoms enough to be back in University finishing my degree in English literature. I want to be a writer. I hope to inspire other paranoid schizophrenics or otherwise disabled people and their families. So here we are.

“Neutral G.”

Steve Mini from the 6.

Can Neuts accept wealth and remain neutral?

I’ve been writing a campaign where neuts side with evil and good, but espouse their own, middle path, called: Neutrality.

I’ve been toying with the idea that Neuts can no longer accept wealth, in exchange for becoming neutral. When they do, they’re either siding with good or evil respectively. Evil is fantastically rich, Goodies just make ends meet, and give a lot of wealth away if and when they have more than they need, and Neuts often decline to accrue wealth altogether – and when they do, Good or Evil stands to profit.

But, I hear y’all crying, how will neuts ever come to wealth, power, prestige and fame? Having no wealth for one faction will cripple an entire Neutrality faction, in my fictional world, which I’ve troll called: “Gaya” or “Gaia”.

Well in this fictional world, some of the most powerful people have no wealth, and espouse a neutral way. Judges, Lawyers, Executives of large Corporations – all of these people are wealthy, but not as rich as Evil people, and not fantastically rich, per-se.

I hear y’all thinking: Evil is the way to go. Since you can accrue wealth, not give a poop about morality, and in general, have a higher chance of making more money than the other two factions.

But that’s just the point. Evil often prevails over Good, and neuts often side with evil to make a profit.

Sort of like real life.

I’ll toy with this idea for a while and see where neuts stand – I literally run a campaign with the voices in my head as player characters. Sounds confusing? It is. That’s why I’m medicated. Talk to your doctor if you hear voices. I see my doctor all the time.

Your artist friend,

Steve Mini from the 6,
“Neutral G.”,
Creator of “Gaya”.

Selfless Good; Selfish Evil. A third option: Neutrality?

I have been toying with my moral compass. In a prior post, for example, I asked myself: am I a selfless Hedonist and lover, or a selfish one? Perhaps I am a little bit of both at different times … isn’t there always a neutral way, a way to strike a balance between Good and Evil, without being one or the other?

This, along with reading Tolstoy, inspired me ever to direct my thoughts toward a balance of things, to embrace my own moral philosophy of being neither Selflessly Good nor Selfishly Evil but rather, I espoused a third way: a way of Neutrality for myself.

I don’t know. I’m pretty damn selfless, rarely act out of selfishness, and might score, on my own morality “test” as a Selflessly Good Person.

But I’m adamant. Sometimes, I feel like I’m just a neutral guy, who makes selfish decisions. And that’s alright, too. Siding with evil for a gain, sounds awful, but let’s face it: most people only act out of selfish self interest i.e. profit, and siding with them to make a quick profit isn’t exactly a bad thing: That’s neut. It ain’t good or evil.

By the way, that’s just an example. I don’t often make a quick buck. I don’t make much money at all (But that’s another article for another time).

And I don’t really “side with evil”, as I say rather poetically. Often, I’m opposed to selfishness in others.

I think to clean up this essay or theory, and talk about a moral compass which has led me to neutrality, I would have to define just who or what evil truly is.

So far: I’ve defined Evil as anybody who is out to make a profit. That’s it. You want money? You’re evil. You act selflessly? You’re Good. Selfish? Evil or Bad.

But this falls apart when, Goodies stand to profit, and Baddies act selflessly for personal gain.

Still, I think it’s a pretty good working model of the condition of life, and I prospect often and place my ideas in the public domain for y’all to comment on and test the waters.

Let me know what you think. My “essay notes” are coming along, even if they’re just dumb ideas and/or rough drafts right now.

“Neutral G.”,
Steve Mini from the 6.

Good, Bad and Neutral Hedonism.

In a dating profile, trying to define who I am, I stumbled onto Hedonism, which is, for lack of a better definition, placing a value on pleasure, and avoiding pain and suffering. At least, that’s what it means to me. I have not read the literature out on Hedonism (yet). These are rough drafts; where I get to be creative.

In trying to explain myself to a potential lover, I realized something. I espoused my method of morality and tradition, namely: that of being neither Good nor Evil, but rather, a Neutral person; And realized that hedonism fits right into my lifestyle choices.

But not just any kind of Hedonism, for, I rarely seek out pleasure for pleasure’s sake. But a different kind of Hedonism. Two or three different kinds, in fact.

Now that we’re on the subject of being neither Good nor Evil, but rather Neutral in my morality and moral decisions, let me explain my two different strains of Hedonism that I espoused, to impress the opposite sex (Why else would you claim to be a Hedonist, if not to impress the ladies? But I digress).

Good, Selfless or Ethical hedonism, is a particular kind of hedonism, which I espouse, which places a premium on other people’s satisfaction and pleasure, potentially above yours, or at the cost of your own. Want a woman to orgasm? You want her to recieve pleasure, and will do (presumably) anything and everything it takes, even if a little inconvenient, for her to do so. That’s selfless hedonism, and I might be one of the few men out there who espouse it, and want my woman to orgasm. But I digress.

Then there’s Bad, Selfish or Evil Hedonism, which sets you out to be the villian of this here tale, just like in that movie commercial. Anyway, you want pleasure, and don’t care at what cost – even at the cost of suffering of those around you, including your partners. Sadists usually want partners who are Masochists: They derive pleasure in their partner’s suffering. That might be Selfish Hedonism or ‘Bad’ Hedonism at play. Another example: Sometimes I am selfish, and want two love slaves, and polyamoroy. In fact: I recently told a woman interested in me to keep an open relationship with me: I can see other women, and she can see other men. This can be either selfish or selfless; which brings me to my point.

I’m a Hedonist, but sometimes I’m a Selfish or Bad Hedonist, and sometimes i’m Selfless or a Good Hedonist.

And that’s why I espouse a “True Neutral” Hedonism gambit, one on which, the future of my woman’s orgasms are at stake. I proclaim a neutral balance, a third way, between good and evil, where you’re either selfish or selfless, but probably a little bit of both – or neither! at times. This is where you strike a balance, and decide that you’re neither good nor bad at all times. This is probably what most Hedonists are. But I haven’t polled them and wouldn’t know for sure.

I do remain, your selfless hedonist in art, rather selfish at times, and neutral, neither good nor evil, on the moral compass of my own imagination, rather,

Steve Mini from the 6: “Neutral G.”

Want more? I’ve promised a collection of essays, and one on hedonism might be viable, especially once I’ve studied it a little more. I’ll get back to you with a collection of essays, probably on amazon, for pittance someday.

For now, feel free to contact me and ask me any questions. Ladies, chat me up. I’m perennially single in Toronto, Canada.

In response to Tolstoy’s “Non-Resistance” & Theories …

On a whim, I decided to read Tolstoy’s magnum opus, so to speak: “The Kingdom Of God Is Within You”, which asserts non-resistance and etc. which inspired the likes of Martin Luther King Jr. and others.

This book profoundly influenced me, though I have already refuted many of it’s arguments, mostly for fun. (I’m still reading the book, but have much to say of it already)…

I suppose that, after I’m done my BA, (in four or five years – I’m a part-time undergrad), that a book of essays should be published. If such a book of mine occurs, probably self-published on amazon and quietly dismissed, I should think that Tolstoy’s work might be a galvanizing work which inspires me to write, and possibly respond to, his own work.

I ain’t no Tolstoy. I consider myself a ‘literary hack’. But even I can refute these seemingly childish and simple claims, possibly because, over 100 years have passed, and life is so much different now. (note: as I kept reading, I became more and more inspired, and less and less refutations occured. It truly is a remarkable little book. Check it out for free. It’s on Project Gutenberg).

I just hope they don’t burn my responses, they way they burned his work. (Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe they never burned his work, either. Sorry to the literary historians in the audience. I’m a literary hack and don’t give a damn – for now).

In fact, when called upon to serve the military recently, I might have responded directly from Tolstoy’s work: that it is Christian of me to oppose. How’s that for Tolstoy?

Get bent, Greece. Anyway: I’m Canadian. Leave me alone to my writings and theories.

Steve Mini from the 6.


I really underestimated Tolstoy and thought the book was a farce of a joke for a few pages. However, I can’t understate how deeply inspired I am by this tiny work. It has inspired me to write my own theories and essays, if only to modify, review or refute some of Tolstoy’s claims.

For a work that is more than a century old, it predicts future world wars, espouses pacifism, and rejects the traditional churches, all in one go, all the while inventing it’s own Christianity, inspired by the gospel and non-violence.

What a remarkable work. And here I thought, as Tolstoy opposes, that Christianity was past it’s time and that it might be time to embrace a modern and secular condition.

He’s changed my mind a little. Maybe his “version” of Christianity has something to say to the modern man, who thinks Christianity is positively archaic.

Check out the book, it’s free because it’s so old. I found it on Project Gutenberg. I might look up other authors and read their theories. Some of the oldies must be great.

The Human Volatility Index: Between Good and Evil.

I’ve realized one thing, from a life of selfless servitude. Nobody, not even me, is a good person, not whole-heartedly. In fact, according to my definition, which I shall enshrine further below, in this essay, I claim that not one in a hundred people are good. Good people are so rare that they no longer occur. The vast majority of people are evil.

You can see this all over the place. I don’t just mean vigilantes robbing, shooting and stealing for pennies on the dollar, or for no damned reason at all. I don’t mean senseless and violent crime.

I mean run of the mill, you and me, “good” people, acting in selfish and morally detestable ways.

Perhaps the entire boomer generation was evil. Perhaps younger people are more sensitive to the issues at large, and will elevate themselves to a selfless trajectory, one which does not doom all of mankind to a violent end. I’m talking, of course, about environmental issues, which many young people at least worry about.

Here’s my definition of a baddie or evil person. Someone who wants to acquire wealth. That’s it. That’s all. Want money? Then you’re evil.

Money is evil, friend. And wanting money is inviting evil into your life.

Instead of wanting money, I propose a new way of thinking: Living selflessly, and moderating wealth until you have little or none of your own.

I myself live off the very lowest amount that I can live off of. About 10-12k Canadian per year. This places me, according to statistics and the government, well below the poverty line in Ontario, Canada.

In addition to part-time work, I also take care of two elderly people at home, for which I am not paid. My family, in turn, takes care of me. I live in a selfless vacuum, in which several moderate people help me, and I help them back.


But wait a minute, you think. Money can buy you a lot of convenience, and liberate you from work, and buy you life-saving medications and healthcare services. Money can save your life. Just how and why is it evil?

To this I respond: Make as much as you need, and nothing more. Take the very lowest amount back for yourself, and leave the rest to others. Live selflessly.

If all of us lived off the lowest amount necessary, all of us would be rich. Instead one person has more than 100 billion dollars, and the rest of us are poor.

And don’t believe the fairy tales, carefully crafted and marketed, that that person is a self-made man and that’s his own wealth. If you believe that, perhaps you’re a little too naive for your own good, friend.

That’s where government comes in. Why do we have one, if everybody is broke, rent is too high, and wages are too low? And the last thing we need is another space bail out or car company tax relief. Down with government I say, and yes to post-left anarchy. Let G-d sort out all these politicians. Why don’t they earn minimum wage, the way you and I do?

So, my friends, we’re at a crossroads. And we need to live selflessly, and care for one another. Two examples. One is our aging population. Who will take care of us in our ripe old age? The numbers don’t lie. The way things are going, every young and able body should be assigned an elderly person to take care of. And even that might not be enough. For, elderly people will far outnumber young workers in the years to come. I myself already take care of two people who are in retirement, and might take care of several others after them, if I am still able to. (note: They take care of me, too!)

The second is the environment. These billionaires want nothing but more wealth. For, you see, my friend, wanting wealth is a tell-tale sign of being or becoming evil. And the more you have, the more you want, the more you lie, cheat, and steal your way to the top. What do you think they teach at these business schools? It’s not Shakespeare, it’s things like Machiavelli’s The Prince. They teach you to be cold, callous and calculated. If you could eat your own head or that of your child’s at a profit, then you would probably do so.

But that’s exactly what the environment is. Betting against the future of civilization, the end of young people’s right to life, for a sizable sum to a private individual(s) who probably do not even need it.

Just how much money is too much? If you have a second home you don’t live in, you’re part of a growing problem. Many people don’t even have a first home. But before they buy one, it’s already been sold by several enthusiastic bidders, who have wealth. By the time you buy your condo or home, it’s already been bought and sold at a profit and the price upped by a sizable chunk. Why? Because somebody profited at your expense… because money is evil.

So what’s the solution? Just buy several homes if you have money, and who cares about the little guy, trying to put a roof over his head for the first time. And then they claim  that I am ill, and you are sane. Though I do remain, your paranoid schizophrenic friend, I do not even own one house, in this market of million dollar, fifty year old bungalows in the ghetto, I cannot, and will not accept ever owning a home, which is a luxury I cannot afford. I also never drive a car, partially because of my disability but also because of preference. And I recycle everything, keep a low carbon footprint, and want to offset my emissions with life insurance when I die. Perhaps, you might claim, I am selfless. But no friend, I want money just as much as the next bloke, I’m just not very good at making it. I’m a writer, and instead of becoming commercially viable, I post my rough drafts in the public domain, and do myself a disservice. Why don’t I chase the bag, so to speak?

Well, I leave that to your intuition.

Best of luck with that. And no to money from me.
I’m poor and live with a disability.

I’m a bum. I’ll always be a bum. And that’s alright with me.

“Steve Mini from the 6”.

note: This is a rough draft and/or notes updated sometimes. It’s just an idea.
I’m inspired by the likes Johnathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal”. None or all of this is fiction and sarcasm. Leave me alone.