That said, if no one loses, or feels like they have lost, or that the “victor” has nothing which they wish to have, then victory has not been acquired by those who tried to claim it. Knowing this one might consider that battles, games, and competitions are determined by the losers who give the winners the right to say they have won—because without that recognition, then nothing has been gained by the opposition.
The glaring argument against this is the understanding that sometimes in war freedom is taken by force, and usually not given without a fight. Yet the victory paradox remains: in the event that victory is taken from an opponent, then the victory was not taken at all, but given from the minds of those who relinquished it.
In this instance of war, regardless of what physical objects have been “lost,” when the mind states that no victorious recognition has gone with it, then nothing has been lost. When it comes to the the physical world, items may leave one’s possession, yet in observance of freedom the same can not be said, because freedom does not live inside inanimate objects, rather, in the breadth and depth of minds of those who wish to keep it.
Living in Freedom is to never allow anyone to feel like they’ve defeated you. Without that, the opposition is just another person who wants what you have, which means you are now the victor, and with it goes the spoils.
Andrew T. Ramirez