Just because something’s not necessary anymore, doesn’t mean you have to change it. You’ve gained nothing by using your ‘new format’ other than having proven an extremely small point about the internet versus pen and paper.
You’re right that my comment is criticism so its focus is subtracting from your ideals, but considering the nature of them I’ve actually improved them by taking away from them. Your ideals are removed from realistic changes in attitude IN PRACTICE and they don’t cover the transition from what we have now to what you propose in a way that would properly appeal to everyone’s motivations. This is why it’s an atrocity of typical bourgeois abstraction and why I have to address it in such an urgent manner. Ideals need to be REALISED to actually exist.
So whilst you claim to practice what you preach, you won’t lead by example until you link everything realistically to other people’s real situations and real motivations that are directly linked to their means to produce their own life.
Anyway, enough of my taking away - now to address your accusation of my lack of originality, creativity and ‘adding to the dialogue’. At the end of my post you may have noticed my encouragement to allow flexibility and growth, which rigid sets of principles and ideals don’t allow… so in fact I’m encouraging a MORE original and creative approach than you.
Consider this: to whom is it preferable to NOT adhere to principles? It’s exactly the creative who create new ways to look at things outside rigid principles. You only support creativity in adbstracted word, not in realistic practice. Your ideals will do more to restrict mankind than to improve it. I propose change, rebirth and lack of boundaries - there, that’s my addition to the dialogue that you wanted. It is directly opposed to how your ideals would make their attempt to work in practice so you won’t like it, but there it is.
Those to whom the norm is not good enough and to those who’s bodies demand more of them than the safe and tolerating restriction of loving or caring for everyone equally until you have the atrocity of typical bourgeois abstraction of heaven for everyone, your heaven is hell. Phyiscal love IS unequal. The body DOES discriminate in order to stay alive in the most preferred way. Inequality isn’t just preferable, it’s essential and unavoidable. To socially advance, relativity says you must advance beyond another being who will, relatively speaking, fall behind. However this is not a bad thing - those who fall behind in 1 situation will find an alternative way to achieve and succeed out of necessity. This is the creativity that is born only out of inequality.
You speak out of naivety and the day that everyone has it equally good is the day that creativity dies.