The Nigger-Maker Economy is our NME
White Rock, August 31, 2001
Zeus: ... Emile, there you go again, ... an unnecessarily provocative title with powerfully loaded words that may turn a prospective reader away before he ever gets to the meat of the issue. You'd do better to mind your P's and Q's.
Emile: AHA!, ...so you've been looking through my web-files when my back is turned and seen my alternative title.
Zeus: ....what are you talking about? ... What alternative title?
Emile: The P's and Q's version of the title, ...'Divine Force: the Phundamental Phallus or the Quintessential Quim?'
Zeus: That just proves my point, your word usage is contrived for gratuitous provocation, ... the subject matter is purely secondary.
Emile: You're wrong there Zeus, ... the shadow images associate with dynamical geometries that are very important to us but which we often avoid because of their powerful affect. David Bohm in 'Thought as a System', not to mention Jungian psychology, suggests that in order to learn, we must 'go into the shadow' rather than running away from it.
Zeus: Give me a break!, ... in order to justify the use of loaded words on the basis of psychotherapeutic value, you would at least have to show their relationship to current issues, and there's no way that you can tie 'nigger-maker economy' and 'phallus and quim' to the same social issue.
Emile: Don't speak too quickly, Zeus, ... we don't always know what we don't know. So far in this dialogue your yang thrusts have been emerging from blind ignorance, their insubstantiality allowing them to be easily and quickly dissolved by the juices in the receptacle of your own experience.
Zeus: Very well, ... I shall await your usual labyrinthian logic in the tying together of these two provocative titles, but this time, I'm not going to let you 'derail' my thoughts by going into a tunnel of obscurity ahead of me and steaming out in the opposite direction on the adjacent track while I'm still on my way in.
Emile: I'll go as slow as you like and elaborate on anything you feel that I may have 'skimmed over'.
Zeus: Go ahead, then, ... but I'll be watching you closely.
Emile: D'accord. Well, first of all, I want to remind you of the main thrust of 'The Nigger-Maker Economy' comment in the Montreal Website of 'Independent Media', a copy of which I'll append at the bottom of this transcript of our dialogue. The principle idea was that every system must be 'framed' with respect to space and time and, like all systems, 'economy as a system' can be 'framed' in two different ways; i.e. 'non-relativistically' as is the standard framing of mainstream science and 'relativistically' as is often necessary, depending upon the nature of the inquiry. My point in 'The Nigger-Maker Economy' was that to reconcile with our natural experience, one cannot frame the system in abstract, rectangular x,y,z,t space because such a framing assumes that the constituents of space are enveloped in infinite, empty and non-participating space and thus the constituent can be regarded, abstractly, as an 'independent causal agent'. But the space of 'the global economy' or any economy for that matter on the surface of the earth or in 'the space of our experience', is neither empty, nor infinite nor non-participating. As Einstein says, 'space is a finite and unbounded participant in physical phenomena'.
Zeus: You call that a 'point'! I'd call it another one of your labyrinthian distractors.
Emile: I'm not finished yet. I haven't yet 'closed the loop' so that the 'point', ... a 'spherical point' to be sure, comes into focus. When we frame our view of a system within the finite, unbounded space of our experience, such as the spherical surface of the earth, ... when a constituent 'moves' or 'acts', he simultaneously, reciprocally transforms the enveloping geometry of space that constitutes 'opportunity-to-act'. When you 'act' so as to take the last chair at the dinner table, you simultaneously reciprocally transform the geometry of the enveloping space; i.e. the 'opportunity-to-act' space in a manner that induces transformation in the patterns of 'action'. The 'point' is, then, that in the more realistic space-time framing that reconciles with our real-life experience, ... we cannot describe 'an economy' in the sole terms of 'action' but must also, and at the same time, consider how the 'action' of a a constituent reciprocally transforms the 'opportunity-to-act' that envelopes the constituents. And as is clearly evident, 'opportunity-to-act', though it is the reciprocal to 'action', characterizes not only the 'constituent' but the 'relative' space-time relationships amongst all constituents so that the constituent's action, mediated by the geometry of space which is the source of 'opportunity-to-act', inductively or 'self-referentially' transforms the continuing actions of the community.
Zeus: Ok, Emile, I 'take your point'. What you are saying compares to what the skilled pool player says, that one must put 'shots' in the service of 'shape', ..... that one can't simply pursue 'actions' or 'shots' in the game of pool because the simultaneous reciprocal changing of the geometry of the configuration of constituent balls represents the transforming 'opportunity-to-act' or 'opportunity-to-shoot'. 'Opportunity-to-act' is thus in a natural primacy over 'action', and one must focus one's management efforts firstly on the geometry of 'opportunity-to-act', using 'action' as a supportive tool.
Emile: Exactly. ... And what this means is that 'opportunity-to-act' is the true 'currency' of the economy rather than 'action'. Like the poor pool player, the economist-manager who regards 'action' as the currency will infuse dissonance into the economy by disopportunizing or 'snookering' some, and disproportionately opportunizing others.
Zeus: But that's the whole strategy in the game of pool. One tries to sustainably opportunize all of the constituent balls in one's community-of-balls so that the can pursue their unique action-purpose - opportunity-to-act situation and all find their way to the 'pocket-paradise' of their choice. In the process, one 'disopportunizes' the action-purpose - opportunity-to-act circumstances of those 'other' constituent balls.
Emile: Yes, and this is why the 'real currency' of the economy is 'opportunity-to-act' rather than 'action'. The skilled players in 'the economy' recognize this. So even though the nominal 'plans' are all articulated in the currency of 'action', the real game is all about the trade in 'opportunity-to-act'. Those who monopolize 'opportunity-to-act', the common legacy of the global commons, such as large transnational corporations operating in large 'free trade zones', in effect, 'disopportunize' the constituents and become 'resellers' of opportunity-to-act. The 'price' they demand for access to 'opportunity-to-act', the rightful common property of all constituents of the global commons, is that one become a 'nigger' in their service so that they can continue in their monopolization of 'opportunity-to-act'; i.e. in their disopportunizing of the common constituent of the global commons.
Zeus: I see what you mean. It is a hidden game since the rules in our culture are all about 'action', what we do and what we 'cause to happen' and they say little about the simultaneous reciprocal effects of action on 'opportunity-to-act'. Our governments are elected on platforms of 'action' and our courts enforce laws based on 'correct action' and 'incorrect action'. By this misplaced 'currency' focus, we provoke a 'black market' in the true currency of 'opportunity-to-act'. Is this what you refer to in terms of the 'crony confederacy' in the article appended to this transcript?
Emile: Yes it is. One of the reasons that it is not 'discussed openly' in our culture is that it starts with the male-female relationship. In some cultures, such as the native north american culture, the women were the keepers of the land while the men were hunters etc. thus there was some balance in the distribution of 'opportunity-to-act'. But in our culture, the woman has depended upon the crony confederacy of man for her allocation of 'opportunity-to-act', ... the land to live on, the access to essential resources that the community protects; i.e. water, timber, wildlife, access to the trails and waterways essential to commerce etc.
Zeus: Ok, ... it is becoming clear to me now why you 'linked' the view of an economy to John Lennon's and Yoko Ono's 'Woman is the Nigger of the World'. The way we describe the relationship between men and women in our culture is typically in terms of 'what they do', and the black market in 'opportunity-to-act' is almost never discussed. Your point is that it is 'science' that is the real source of this 'bootleg economy' since science continues to insist that our reality can be fully described in terms of 'the actions of the constituents of space' without any participation on the part of 'space'; i.e. on the part of the enveloping dynamical geometry constituting 'opportunity-to-act'. Science, .. or 'pre-relativity science' insists that we can judge men and women on the basis of 'what they do', ... on the basis that 'action' is the primary currency of an economy. But what you are saying is that 'what we do' is over-ridden by our access to 'opportunity-to-do', something that is not even considered in the action-based laws of mathematical physics, all of which are 'framed' in rectangular x,y,z,t space terms where the simultaneous reciprocal transformation of the geometry of space, ... the 'opportunity-to-act', ... is not even definable!
Emile: You've got it, Zeus. The nigger-maker economy is our NME and pre-relativity science; i.e. 'mainstream science and a university education in a scientific discipline' is its sponsor. We have seen the NME and it is us.
Zeus: Pheeeeuuuwww!!! That's a more provocative statement than before even! ... But, you're not going to slip away from 'our' issue that easily Emile, ... your charge in this dialogue was to explain how both the NME and the notion of the 'Divine Force seen as Phundamental Phallus or Quintessential Quim' tied into these issues. Let's hear it, now.
Emile: Very well, Zeus. And as I continue on, I want you to try to get back to your 'real' dynamical experience in space and think of your immersed dynamical relationships with enveloping others, rather than thinking in the scientific voyeurism terms of description 'from the outside' where 'place' is deemed to be 'homogeneous'. This approximation of space as 'homogeneous' that is imposed on our science but which cannot be imposed on nature and is thus refutable by our experience, is what allows pre-relativity science to describe things solely in the terms of 'action' (where the 'place' that envelopes the constituent's action is deemed to have no influence on his action)..
Pre-relativity science is the mainstream science in practice in all of our disciplines and is woven into most of the materials taught in universities. Relativity is by exception and the concepts are rarely put into scientific practice. It is important to note that 'nature' and thus our experience, puts the 'geometry of space' into the primacy over 'the action of the material constituent'. As Aristotle said in his 'Physics of Place';
"Now these are regions or kinds of place --- up and down and the rest of the six directions. Nor do such distinctions (up and down and right and left, etc.) hold only in relation to us. To us they are not always the same but change with the direction in which we are turned that is why the same thing may be right and left, up and down, before and behind. But in nature, each is distinct, taken apart from itself. It is not every chance direction which is 'up' but where fire and what is light are carried; similarly, too, 'down' is not any chance direction but where what has weight and what is made of earth are carried --- the implication being that these places do not differ merely in relative position, but also as possessing distinct potencies, . . . These considerations would lead us to suppose that place is something distinct from bodies, and that every sensible body is in place. ... the potency of place must be a marvelous thing, and take precedence of all other things. For that without nothing else can exist, while it can exist without the others, must needs be first; for place does not pass out of existence when the things in it are annihilated."
And, as Henri Poincaré says in 'The Relativity of Space', comparing the 'restricted space' of our experience with the abstract notion of 'extended space';
"...restricted space would not be homogeneous. The different points of this space could not be regarded as equivalent, since some could only be reached at the cost of the greatest efforts, while others could be reached with ease."
Zeus: So, what you are saying is that our scientific education and our scientized culture has got things upside down, and is modeling the world solely in terms of the 'actions of material things in empty space' thanks to the simplifying assumption of the 'homogeneity of space', ... the notion that 'opportunity-to-act' endowed by the 'potency of place' doesn't come into play at all. Meanwhile, to be consistent with nature and our experience, we must account for the reality that space is not homogeneous and that 'the potency of place . . . takes precedence over all other things'. This is the 'opportunity-to-act' that you have been talking about, ... the geometrical configuration that is simultaneously reciprocal to the relative actions of the constituents of space.
Emile: Exactly. As Einstein says in 'The Evolution of Physics',
‘[Relativity] forces us to analyze the role played by geometry in the description of the physical world.’
Einstein points out that in the 'curved space' of relativity (in our immersed-in-life experience we can only know our motion relative to the motion of enveloping others), we must take into account the geometry of 'reciprocal disposition' the geometry of the space between things that gates and modulates our 'opportunity-to-act'; i.e. the reciprocal disposition is something that is uniquely seen by each constituent of space and that, in practical terms, influences the actions of the constituent and the patterns of actions of the constituency. The manner in which the geometry of space transforms simultaneously reciprocally to the relative actions of the constituents underpins questions of 'sustainability' of action, as in our enveloping solar system dynamic. In order to understand the sustainability of the economy of the solar system or, for example, the economy of a mother dog and her puppies, one must take into account the reciprocal effects of, for example, a puppy taking the last teat at the 'dinner table' on the continuing system dynamic e.g. the sustainability of the system of dog and puppies. If we picture the dynamics solely in terms of 'action' we will speak of the 'survival of the fittest', but if we invert the picture and speak in terms of 'opportunity-to-act', we can visualize it in terms of the crony confederacy and the monopolization of the 'true currency'; i.e. 'opportunity-to-act'.
Did the 'casualty' of this system, the puppy who died, die because he was 'less fit' than the others? Or did he die because he was 'disopportunized' by the crony confederacy who monopolized the finite 'opportunity-to-act'? The 'disopportunized' view is a transcendent view that includes the reductive 'action-based' view but also allows us to visualize the 'geometrodynamical currents' of disopportunizing that are the general case. If we start from the 'action view' or 'survival of the fittest' view, we ignore the huge influence of crony confederacies that can be oriented either to sustaining balanced opportunizing as in the classic model of 'community' seen as a single system, or to sustaining selectively biased opportunizing and disopportunizing as is the de facto approach of modern community where communities no longer 'stand alone' but simultaneously interfere with each other due to the technology amplification of our faculties of communication and transportation. One might ask whether the so-called 'independent causal agent' survives because it is 'fitter' or whether it survives because it is not really acting 'independently' but 'has better access to 'opportunity-to-act' through its 'opportunity-to-act-monopolizing' crony confederacy.
Zeus: Ok, ok, ok, ... I am understanding more about the primacy of the dynamic geometry of space over the dynamic geometry of the constituents and 'the primacy of opportunity-to-act' over 'action', ... but I don't see us getting any closer to explaining the fit of your alternative title 'Divine Force: The Phundamental Phallus or the Quintessential Quim'.
Emile: Yes, ... well I think that the needed 'background' is now in place. If you look at the difference between the relativistic scientific model and the non-relativistic scientific model that we continue to impose on all manner of scientific inquiry, often inappropriately, you can see that when one models solely on the basis of the 'actions' of the constituents of space, ... everything must be explained in terms of the 'yang thrusting' of the constituents which is epitomized in the motion of the phallus during intercourse. There is a lot of humour in our culture that carries deeper meaning about characterizing everything in terms of 'phallic thrusting', for example;
"Man was endowed with both a brain and a penis, unfortunately he has only enough blood to run one at a time."
"A woman needs a reason to 'make love' while a man only needs a place."
In both cases, there is this notion that a woman is often more 'reasoning' about 'receiving' the thrusting of the male. Some explain this in terms of the ongoing implications of pregnancy and child-rearing that the woman must deal with, but these same general questions of 'geometry' we have been discussing seem to arise in a more fundamental context. In epitomizing a mechanical system, we picture a piston thrusting into an open cylinder that is 'passive'. In mechanical systems in general, the space into which the action agent thrusts is approximated as being 'empty' and 'non-participating'. In natural systems, however, 'the cylinder doesn't always open up to the piston', as is evident in the example of 'taking the last chair at the dinner table'. We could say that 'space seems to have the upper hand'; i.e. while the thrusting of the action agent 'only needs a place', ... the space-receptacle 'needs a reason' thus the pre-disposition of 'space' over-rides the thrusting of the action agent. Since the 'reason', in its most fundamental geometrical terms is the 'opening up of space' or 'opportunity-to-act' that emerges simultaneously reciprocally from the relative thrusting actions of the constituents of space, ... and since the dynamical geometry of the 'opportunity-to-act' equates to an 'encoded form' of the collective consciousness of the constituents, ... 'the reason' that 'space possesses' equates to the reason embodied in the collective conscious of the enveloping community.
For example, the planetary constituents or 'action agents' in the solar system, when they 'look out at the dynamics of their enveloping others', are innately incapable of seeing in their real field of view that they and the others 'out there' are dynamically coupled by the mediating role of space. Thus the Earth 'sees' Mars as having a pretzel-shaped dynamic or 'orbit' because the Earth 'cannot see' that both itself and Mars are caught up in, and helping to co-create the transcendent solar system dynamic they are both included in. The nominally 'male' action-agent 'Earth' thus has a female aspect through its dynamic relative to the dynamics of enveloping others; i.e. it co-creates the sustained rhythmic opening up of opportunity-to-act into which it is itself penetrating. An individual constituent (i.e. in this example 'Earth or the 'Earth Observer') cannot 'look out' and see itself participating in 'opening up' space commodious to being dynamically penetrated by itself or others unless one utilizes one's 'intuition' or, in relativity terms, the curved space visualization approach described by Einstein, i.e.; 'bringing a plurality of real and imagined experiences into connection in the mind'. When one does this, one can implicitly visualize oneself in dynamical context with the enveloping system dynamic. Natural systems manifest action that seeks to sustain 'coresonance' between the balanced 'opening up of the space enveloping the constituents' and the penetrating action of the included constituents. So while the male 'action-agent' aspect of the constituent simply needs 'a space to penetrate', the female aspect seeks to cultivate its individual dynamic 'relative' to 'enveloping others' in such a way the the male and female aspect together will systemically sustain an ongoing 'opening up' and 'penetrating'. For the male 'action-agent' to 'act' without tapping into his natural consciousness of the reciprocal 'female opportunity-to-act aspect' means that he, like the poor pool player, will be disopportunizing his enveloping fellows.
Zeus: Wow!, ... what you are saying is that in nature, the action agent will not sustain his 'opportunity-to-act' unless he uses his 'relational skills' and co-creatively manages the dynamical geometry of space in such a way as to cultivate the opening up of balanced opportunity for his thrusting and that of his fellows, exercising his 'female aspect' at the enveloping level of 'community'. The action-agent of natural space must 'co-create its own openings', ... 'he' or 'it' must be 'female and male at the same time' so to speak, as in the expression 'the rainforest creates its own climate' the image being one of the forest constituents thrusting up into the nurturing space which they, collectively, are opening up for themselves. The collaborative community that opens up balanced corridors of opportunity for its constituents to sustainably penetrate into, as commonly occurs in nature, is a manifestation of the female aspect of a male aspect, emerging at two different 'nesting levels'. But the emergence of disopportunizing 'cronyism' in the NME would appear to be the degenerate case where the male aspect denies its female aspect.
Emile: Yes, we are taught to start off our inquiry focusing on 'things' and 'their dynamics' which is already too constrained a scope to 'see' the influence of the reciprocal dynamical geometry of space, the source of all opportunity for the constituent dynamics, and this more often than not puts the inquirer and his inquiry into a cul-de-sac. Research has shown that the child who is asked to solve a 'maze' or 'labyrinth' almost always starts from the central enclave or 'outlet' and works backwards to 'find their way up the inlet', i.e. the child starts from the receiving or 'female' side of things and works back to the 'male', while adults conditioned in inquiry that presumes 'the action of independent causal agents is all she wrote' start off by pushing up into the apparent 'entrance corridors'. Since the sustained 'female' receptivity of space emerges from the relative motions of the constituents rather than from 'motion' interpreted in the 'male' sense of direct, independent action, if we want to understand both the 'female' and 'male' dynamics in context, we have to start from 'relative motion' rather than from 'the motion of independent causal agents'.
Zeus: The constituents of space are 'hermaphroditic' then?
Emile: If you reflect on what we have been saying, you will see that the 'dynamics' of the constituents, seen in the nested context of the enveloping community dynamic, are 'hermaphroditic'. It is the constituency collective that co-creatively opens up by their 'male action', the 'female opportunity-to-act' for themselves, whether the individual constituents are 'male' or 'female' in their material structure. The anthropologist Mircea Eliade, in his book 'Mephistopheles et l'Androgyne: ou la mystère de la totalité' or 'The Two and the One' as he titled it in English, points out that cultures differ in their manner of relating the individual constituent with the enveloping plurality of constituents that we term 'community'. If we look at 'community' in purely materialist terms, it is simply 'the sum of the constituents', but 'community' can be seen in the transcendent reciprocal-dynamical context of the 'female opportunity-to-act' emerging from the relative motion of the constituent 'male actions', a view that accounts for the experientially validated fact that the actions of the constituents simultaneously reciprocally transform their enveloping dynamical geometry of space.
And, of course, conscious management of 'opportunity-to-act space' makes an over-riding difference to the vitality and sustained health of the community. It is in this recipro-dynamical view of community and constituent that issues of crony confederacies, biased or balanced opportunizing and disopportunizing come into play. Eliade's point was that, as in Goethe's Faust, opposites (e.g. 'good' and 'evil') cannot be 'absolute' but instead are 'interdependent' since God cannot 'redeem' his constituents unless there is something to redeem them from. The difference here is between visualizing things 'in their own right', and visualizing them in their relative or recipro-dynamical context at the enveloping community level. In a dynamical sense, we could say that 'God is good and bad at the same time', or that 'man is male and female at the same time' since, in a recipro-dynamical sense, and as in the solar system, 'the constituent is, at the same time, its enveloping community'. The relativistic recipro-dynamical view validated by our natural experience does not 'conflict' with the simplistic, abstract dynamical view wherein the constituents are seen as 'independent causal agents', but transcends it by providing information on how the constituent actions opportunize or disopportunize themselves in terms of sustained 'opportunity-to-act'.
One could substitute 'opportunizing' for 'good', and 'disopportunizing' for 'bad', in which case those within a crony confederacy that had monopolized 'opportunity-to-act', when they did 'good' for each other at the price of disopportunizing those outside of the crony confederacy would be seen for what it was in an overall systemic context; i.e. local trading in 'opportunity-to-act', the 'real' currency of the social economy, which can be 'good' and 'bad' at the same time, opportunizing as it disopportunizes. Similarly, genders cannot be 'absolute' in a dynamical sense since there would be no point in calling a geometry 'male' if there were no 'female' geometry and vice versa, ... one defines the other in a recipro-dynamical sense and it is the recipro-dynamical sense that takes precedence in the 'nature' of our experience. So, when one inquires in a dynamical context, it is an aberrant thought to seek to 'eradicate the bad constituents' as if they were 'absolute' or 'in their own right' since their 'badness' emerges from their dynamical relationships. What 'makes sense' or what is consistent in a systems sense, is to cultivate a 'rebalancing' of the recipro-dynamics so that the dynamical evolution of the community tends toward 'opportunizing' all of the included constituents as natural ecologies seem to tend towards.
Zeus: On reflecting, in the materialist world view, our habit is to categorize and label everything according to its physical equipment, out of the context of its dynamical relationships, ... according to whether it is white, black, red or yellow or whether it boasts a phallus or a quim, ... yet the codynamics of things and the enveloping geometry of opportunizing and disopportunizing that emerges from the codynamics of the constituents is, as you say, an over-riding influence on the dynamical quality of our 'common living space'.
Emile: ... Indeed, and here we come back to Aristotle's and Poincaré's points that the implicit dynamical geometry of the containing space transcends 'actions of so-called 'independent' causal agents' in determining the evolving dynamical geometry of the enveloping commons of space.
Zeus: Then it is the 'quintessential quim', the enveloping dynamical geometry of space and its 'reasoned' way of opening up to giving 'opportunity-to-act' that is the 'divine force' rather than the thrusting actions of the 'phundamental phallus'? But then, these are different aspects of the same thing???
Emile: It is confusing for us who are taught to think in terms of 'things first' and 'motion second' wherein 'motion' is seen as being dependent on 'things' since by doing so we ignore the transcending role of the relative dynamical geometry of space. Surprises can be in store when one shares these 'dynamic geometry' ideas with someone else who is deeply committed to either 'the phundamental phallus' as being at the bottom of it all, no pun intended, ... 'or' the 'quintessential quim'. That is, as one goes through the discussion, pointing out the validations of our natural experience, such as the transcendent dynamic of the enveloping constituency with respect to the dynamics of its included constituents in the solar system and other systems, due to the manner in which the constituents of the system simultaneously transform their enveloping dynamic that constitutes their 'opportunity-to-act', ... the validations and reasoning are strongly seductive. But as the 'sharing' proceeds, there may be a sudden 'awakening' where one's implicit hypothesis is shattered in one fell swoop, similar to 'awakening' in the film 'The Crying Game' where the seduction leads to a shocking discovery, when all the veils are off, that the 'gender' of that which had been seducing is not the expected gender. The explorer seduced by what seems like 'yang' reasoning and who had been expecting to find a 'phundamental phallus' at the bottom of it all, finds instead a quintessential quim, ... and the explorer seduced by what seems like 'yin' reasoning and who had been expecting to find a quintessential quim at the bottom of it all, finds instead a phundamental phallus. Since, in the dynamical view, the one is the reciprocal of the other, the one being 'invested in' along the seductive course of the exploration is a personal preference or a 'projective identification'.
Zeus: It seems then, that the question of the primacy of 'male' or 'female' turns out to be a phony question since in a dynamical sense, they are reciprocal aspects of a dynamical unity, the female aspect being 'implicit' as in the relational reconfiguring of the enveloping space dynamic and the male aspect being 'explicit' as in the action of a material agent or agents.
Emile: The fault is thus in putting the 'existential' view of the world into an unnatural primacy over the 'relative dynamical' view of the world. As the wise pool player understands, the big continuing 'story' of our enveloping supersystem of nature does not come from 'constituents making things happen', but instead comes from how the relative dynamics of the constituents transform the enveloping supersystem dynamic that is the source of 'opportunity-to-act'.
Zeus: Ok, I concede, ... there does indeed appear to be a reasonable connection between your titles 'The Nigger-Maker Economy is our NME' and Divine Force: the Phundamental Phallus or the Quintessential Quim?'. But couldn't you have found a way to articulate all of this while avoiding the 'loaded words'? After all, political correctness can't be all bad and we don't want to have to wade through environments flooded with pornography and obscenities.
Emile: As Bohm suggests, and Jungian psychology, words or pictures that are painful to us are rich in learning potential. Who wants to look at pictures of children being torn from the arms of their mothers to be put into the gas chamber during the holocaust? It is too painful and we prefer to turn away. But if we allow ourselves to engage with the material, we may learn something about 'ourselves' and our dynamical relationships with others that we had not previously learned. For example, we might learn that 'goodness' is not 'absolute' since 'good acts' within a crony confederacy may be opportunizing one's fellow cronies while forcibly disopportunizing and 'making niggers out of' others outside of the crony confederacy, a disopportunizing enforced and sustained or progressively intensified through 'public order programs' and the like. Things become only too clear by the time the extreme end-points are approached; i.e. would we say that the 'currency' of the social economy inside of a holocaust camp was 'action' or would we say it was 'opportunity-to-act'. Were the special teams that pulled their less fortunate fellows out of the gas chambers and put them into ovens properly seen as 'independent causal agents'?
If you were convinced that greater openness in the use of words and images that trouble us could lower the frequency and intensity of man's inhumanity to man and nature, ... would you then be for it?
Zeus: ... well, ...er, ... what would be wrong with 'HE is for Hermaphroditic Equilibrium'?
Emile: Come on, Zeus, ... ante up, ...
* * *
publiez vous-meme vos reportages d'actualite en audio, video, photo ou text/ instantly upload your audio, video, photo or text directly from your browser
new york capitol
san francisco bay area
satellite tv news
technlogy by cat@lyst and IMC Geeks