one and the same.

I found myself thinking of Tyler Durden and Hank Rearden.  Which path is better? 

Both end up telling us that living your life according to the whim of others' (regardless of the history of those whims) makes you less than you could be.  One seeks to bring it all back to zero to undo the story that man has a manifest destiny to march in to a bright new future of ever increasing growth and productivity.  The other is actively bringing about that future by being a slave to all the things that are suppose to make our lives happy.  But both in the end know that those things just don't last. 

The effect is the same, "Inaction is still an action."  We will have to pick a path or the path will pick us.  So do we just stop feeding this dragon it's tail or do we cut it's tail off so that it will starve.  Either way the dragon is going to die.  I can't answer for you (or even for me) but, I only pray we have the power of our convictions when the day of testing comes.