Ich und Du

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

Man’s world is manifold, and his attitudes are
manifold…

Manifold: can mean ‘‘many and various or multiple’’

both answers and questions reveal the ‘‘many and various
or multiple’’… ‘‘What is the meaning of life?’’ and we
can see the manifold nature of that question…
and how can we humans, both so vain and uniformed,
possibly answer that question which clearly
has so many possibilities… we cannot…
thus, we simplify the manifold answers we have into
a duality… good vs evil, right vs wrong, up and down,
black and white, conservative vs liberal… with each duality,
with each new duality, good vs evil, for example, we
move further away from our manifold world…

Ich und Du… I and you… but the world is much more
crowded than just Ich und Du…much more complicated than
Ich und Du… being itself is included into our manifold world…
and where does being lie within Ich und Du?

I am, you are, we are… a common enough aspect of grammar…
Ich bin, du bist, er ist, sie ist, es ist…
but that is a fairly small listing of possibilities… and the word
manifold, begins to reach that list possibilities…
but we human beings, we are not comfortable with
possibilities, with the world being manifold…
we are happier with simplicity, with one choice rather
than two choices and far happier with two choices
than three or more choices…
the fact is that people dislike having many choices…
it forces them to decide between choices… and that
decision is hard… which of ten choices is the best one?
That requires hard thought and most people would rather die,
then have ‘‘hard thoughts’’ thus we human beings constantly
reduce our choices down to one or two possibilities…
good vs evil, right vs wrong, yes vs no… black vs white…
are all easier choices than having multiple choices…
which is why people rather have one or two choices, not
many choices… it is easier to make a choice of one or two
possibilities, rather than many, manifold choices…

and therein lies the tale of human existence… seeking
out having one or two choices instead of having many choices…
thus we can explain why many choose to hold in god, rather
than the many possibilities…
which is why people would rather hold to the choice of god’s morality
or ethics instead of working out the moral, ethical possibilities that is
manifest within every single human interaction…

I am fond of saying that the ‘‘situation dictates the ethics’’
this is why I believe in situational ethics… the situation dictates
the ethics, morals involved… which is why we have customs and
pleasantries, like thank you and excuse me… it is to remove
thinking about every situation… where the situation dictates the
morals, ethics… but we human beings like our choices to
be binary, one or the other… we follow god and are offered
but two choices… god’s choices are also binary…
heaven or hell… reward or punishment…
but the world itself is manifold… full of possibilities
and choices… why must we be reduced to one or other?
Good vs evil, right vs wrong, up vs down, yes vs no…
when we have choices, possibilities, is that all there is
to it, good vs evil, right vs wrong?

the simple binary choices offered by society neglects
the manifold nature of the universe… there is more in the
universe than is dreamt of in your philosophy…
and why? because the universe is manifold…
not the human yes or no or good vs evil…
and attempting to fulfill the terms of god,
heaven or hell, means we leave many choices, many possibilities
on the table… we are unable to work out what it means to be
human if we are leaving many choices and possibilities on
the table…for if the universe is manifold, so is the choices
and possibilities of human beings… for we are a child of
the universe… and the universe is manifold… and if that
is true, then we too are many, diverse and free to make
our own choices and possibilities… not just binary choices
right or wrong, yes vs no, good vs evil… but we are
of many choices, many possibilities… so, why do we
simple opt into binary choices when we can have a
multitude of possibilities and choices…
the point is not to reduce us to one or two possibilities
but to open us to the many, the manifold of possibilities
within our own existence…

To say yes to being human is to say yes to the many, diverse
possibilities that exists for us, as human beings…
to limit ourselves to binary choices is to limit us
as human beings… to say, there is but man and women,
with no other choices, is to remove our possibilities…
to accept that there is choices, be it straight or gay or
the manifold of possibilities that lie within the LGBTQ community…
to limit is to deny ourselves the choices we have as human beings…
to be human is to have choices… animals have no choices…
their biology dictates that… but we are not animals, we
have choices and possibilities that animals don’t have…
I do not cross dress nor am I gay, but I fully support those
that have made that choice… because by making that
choice, they have participated in being human…

choices is what make us human… not the duality of
yes vs no, or good vs evil, man and woman… but
choices of who we love or how we dress or what
books we read… to limit, to reduce choices is to
limit us as human beings… with every limitation,
with the removal of choices, we come ever closer to
becoming, to being animal…

the world is manifold… let us remember that whenever
we make our choices …

Kropotkin

1 Like
2

many in our age, demand, DEMAND that we return to
god and his ways… but I deny that… to return to god
is to return to a duality… good vs evil, right vs wrong,
heaven and hell… the universe is not a duality,
but it is manifold… diverse and with possibilities…
we have choices that disappear with the acceptance
of god… for to accept god is to accept the dual
nature of the universe… and the universe is not
dual, but multiple, manifold…to accept god is to limit
oneself to right vs wrong, good vs evil, yes vs no…

to be human is to have choices, many diverse choices that
sometimes are hard to hold, hard to understand…
but no one said life was easy or had easy choices…
life is not unity, but mulitipicity… not just yes vs no,
or good vs evil, or heaven vs hell… it is the choices we
have that make us human… and to be limited is to
limit our own humanity…to say yes to god is to say, I
am willing to limit my choices to heaven or hell…
but this limitation, yes vs no, is not human, it
is animal… and I fully accept the possibilities
of existence… I make the universe manifold within
my own choices… what are your choices?

Kropotkin

3

the world is manifold and yet, many demand that
the world be unity, that it be unified into various
isms and ideologies… nationalism for example,
we are unified under the flag of nationalism,
or religion, or politics or society… to be unified
under any flag, that is the goal… but is that
truly what we need?

What the modern age has in abundance, is alienation…
we are alienated from each other, the state, the society,
the law, from god… and what is more, that we seem
to become more alienated every single day…
but why? with the rise of such isms as nationalism
and religion, we should become less alienated with
each new ism… and there is the rub… with each
attempt to deny the manifold world and turn it into
a singular world, one world with one ism and one god,
we have become even more alienated… it is the attempt
to become one, instead of many, that is what has
allowed us to become ever more alienated…
the path to alienation lies along the path of
turning to one ism… to force people into
the faith of nationalism or the faith of religion
or the faith of one nation under god, has itself
been the driver of alienation in people…
we are not meant to be one people under god,
we are meant to be manifold with god…
and nation and self… the path alienation lies
with forcing people to become one with, one with
the state, one with the society, one with god…
for we are not meant to be one with, we are meant
to seek out our choices within a manifold world…
many choices for many people…

you want to end alienation in people?
then you must allow them their choices, their
possibilities…to be whomever they want to be…
that is the path to ending our current nihilism
and alienation…and what is nihilism?
that is denying people their own choices,
to deny people and their own values… that is
nihilism… and to force people to accept values
and beliefs that are not their own, to force people to
accept a mono god, with mono values, with the disturbing
forcing of people into the barbaric choices, of either heaven
or hell… that is the path to alienation and nihilism…
instead of accepting the reality of existence which is
manifold and many…the path to healing us lies within
us allowing people their own choices… to accept or reject
god or to accept or reject nationalism, or to accept or to
reject the ten commandments… to allow choices is to
help end alienation and nihilism…

what choice you have, is your choice and by accepting that
choice, you escape alienation and nihilism…
human existence is plural, not of one…
and by understanding that, we begin to
heal as an individual and as a nation…
the path to healing is by the choices we have…
not the one, but the many… with healing we end
the notion of good vs evil, of right vs wrong, of
black and white… no more duality but accepting
a manifold universe and our choices within that universe…

Kropotkin

4

the path to healing, is allow people to become who they are…
and that is the path to healing thyself… become who you are…
if you are gay, become who you are, if you are religious,
become who you are, if you cross-dress, become who you are…

much of the stress and storm of today’s society stems from
us being unable to become who we are… we are forced
to become someone else… and that is the path to alienation
and nihilism…

Kropotkin

5

Ich und du… what is another way to understand this?

the best way to think of this is thinking what is the
relationship between the Ich/I and the du/you?
and relationship can be another word for connection…
what is the relationship or connection between Ich und du?

All of science, politics, history, philosophy, economics,
in fact, all disciplines are about the relationship/connections
they have with other people, things, objects, even reality…

virtually everything we do, we do to either increase,
decrease or remain the same, in terms of our connections
or relationship with the other… the other being whatever
the relationship or connection we are trying to seek or explain…

How do the trees relate to the grass around the tree?
How are clouds related to the weather?
What is my relationship or connection to the state/society?
All science is, is an attempt to understand the relationship/
connection various aspect of the world has with each other…
Philosophy is nothing more than the intellectual understanding
of the relationship/connection we have to the various philosophical
ideas… what is our relationship with knowledge? What is our
connection to morals, ethics? How do we understand metaphysics?
what is that relationship to us? Politics… the understanding of
our relationships with each other and to the state that
was created long before we were ever born…

All we do in life is trying to work out our relationships
and connections to everything else in the universe…
Ich und du… what is that relationship? I and you…
that is simply the basic relationship we have…
I and you… how do we connect to each other?
do we connect by nationalism or by race or by the
color of our skin, or perhaps we relate by other means,
political, social, economic, philosophical, religious…

The entire question of existence revolves around this
question of relationships and connections…

The earth lies within the orbit of the sun, as does Jupiter…
but we don’t seem to have any connection or relationship,
with Jupiter… but in fact we do… it’s called gravity…
we are related, connected by gravity… we influence Jupiter
and Jupiter influences us by gravity…but because Jupiter
is so much larger than we are, it impacts us more than
we impact it… and that is another aspect of relationships/
connections… some aspects of the connections, relationships
are greater on some than on others…
we are not talking about equal impact on us in terms
of relationships or connections, because sometimes
the impact, depending on the objects involved,
the impact is greater from some objects than others…

As the social structure within my family is very small,
me, wife and daughter, we impact each other with
greater impact than say, at work, where I have a minor
impact on work, whereas the boss has a greater impact,
and the Deli person has less impact than either one of us,
boss or myself…

At work, it is an ever changing role of connections or
relationships… because different people have different roles,
they have changing impact on work and on myself…
The deli person and I may only have a connection in that
we work for the same company and have the same manager…
so, even in a different department, we can impact each other,
we can connect or have a relationship on different levels,
depending on the day…

All of life is about the connections or relationships we
have or may have already had, or will have with others,
people, places, objects, and even time and space connections
we have with others…

the study of philosophy is the study of certain relationships/connections
we have with ‘‘philosophical’’ ideas… such as metaphysics or knowledge
or with time…

what is the meaning of life? it is the relationships or connections
we have… and our life is spent on understanding those
relationships or connections…

Kropotkin

6

all questions of existence, all questions,
are simply questions of connections and
relationships with other things… people
included…

Kropotkin

7

I think this is the best topic of yours I’ve read here so far.

I also noticed it’s the first time you didn’t mention “IQ45”in your OP.

There are some really valid good points here. I’ll return to this thread later.

8

I see this as a choice, an attempt at simplification, at reducing existence to make it more easily understandable. The ancient and traditional division of people into good and bad, which takes into account neither the specific characteristics of each person nor the circumstances that dictate their behavior, but establishes an unquestionable moral standard, a “thou shalt” or “thou shalt not” that applies to any man, in any time and place, may be a symptom of spiritual poverty, but also of a spirit that prefers to divide the world of men into two parts, two factions that, although poorly represented and idealized, help some to move through the chaos of existence more or less comfortably.

I’d go further and say that ethics can only be situational; it can’t be any other way. Morality, yes, claims to be universal and Platonic, something hovering above our heads, but ethics is strictly linked to our actual behavior in the real world, in the world of flesh and blood, in the world where we must actually interact with people. This world, which is one of cause and effect, and also of plurality, does not admit a simplistic understanding of things, nor an inflexible ethics applicable in any case—you need to have an ethics adaptable enough to account for all those unforeseen cases, the contingencies, and the fact that your life can change radically from one moment to the next, and thus may require a new stance from you, which will often contradict what you believed until then.

Yes, as I’ve written elsewhere, sexuality is the most intimate, most inaccessible part of a human being, something that only the person involved understands, that concerns only them. Just as my sexuality is incomprehensible to others, theirs is also incomprehensible to me. But if I want to safeguard the space where my sexuality can be freely exercised, and it’s my own business, I have to try to respect other people’s sexuality. The logical limit for a rational person is: is that person within their limits? Are they trying to force a situation down my throat, or are they simply living their life? If they’re not affecting me, why should I care about what they do in bed? But irrational people can’t get that far; they contradict themselves because they claim that sexuality is a personal matter that concerns no one, BUT they still want to stipulate what is normal or abnormal in terms of sexuality.

9

Dear Peter,

I understand what you are saying, but I find a different metaphor more helpful. The light that enters the world behaves like a prism, splitting into the colours of the rainbow. I see human life in the same way: fundamentally one, yet physically and culturally diverse, and exploring the rich variety of expressions available to us.

This original unity of life calls on us to see one another as fractals of that primal light, and to live in relationships that honour this truth. Unity does not imply singularity, uniformity, sameness or monotony. Rather, it encourages the kind of experimentation and playfulness children naturally embody. However, like children, we can make mistakes, and these missteps may cause us to stray from our true selves, resulting in alienation.

You are right that alienation arises from rigid, inflexible structures with harsh consequences. Fear of others simply because they are different spreads, and security is sought only in sameness. In an attempt to keep out the foreign, we build walls, but in doing so, we estrange ourselves from one another.

As you pointed out, everything moves and reacts in relation to something else. As part of nature, we must understand our interconnectedness with all things. Similarly, people living together must understand their relationships and strive to harmonise the diverse tones and sounds of their lives — much like the varied instruments that make up a symphony orchestra.

‘Ich und du’, ‘I and thou’, ‘me and you’ — these expressions evoke presence, mutuality and relational depth, going beyond mere interaction or observation. However, you are also right that imbalances arise in unequal relationships, sometimes with grave consequences. Even the profound bond between mother and child can become distorted. This highlights the importance of self-awareness and understanding what constitutes a healthy relationship.

The duality that threatens us is symbolised by the yin and yang, or the taijitu. Yin represents the passive, receptive and dark aspects, such as femininity, the earth and introspection. Yang, on the other hand, symbolises the active, illuminating, masculine forces: fire, creativity and extroversion. Each cycle embraces both the moon and the sun, night and day, and darkness and light. Neither can exist without the other if life is to flourish.

Healing is not about choosing between opposites but recognising that they are two sides of the same coin, two halves of a whole. As with the dark spot in the light and light spot in the dark of the taijitu, nothing is purely one or the other. Every man has a feminine side and every woman has a masculine side. Imbalance occurs only when one aspect is suppressed.

Healing requires reuniting these opposites and addressing the wounds they cause. This means acknowledging that, although we all come from the same light, we all shine in many different ways. Love encompasses the various relationships between human beings, whether they are playful, flirtatious, erotic, passionate, the deep affection of friendship, the natural bond of family, pragmatic love guided by duty and shared goals, or selfless, unconditional spiritual love. All of these must be grounded in healthy self-love and acceptance of our imperfections.

A life that affirms itself embraces the paradox of unity amid diversity. It embodies coincidentia oppositorum — the union of opposites — recognising that the forces of existence arise from opposing yet related drives. Contrary forces fulfil one another in their complementarity. So, in essence, I am saying “Yes and no” to what you wrote, which is typical, I know.

10

Ich und du… the two stand apart… I and you…
but there is another step in between…
and there is another step in all, every single
human relationship…

and that word is Mediate…

Mediate: To settle (disputes, strikes, etc) as in
intermediary between two parties.. reconcile…
synonyms: arbitrate…

  1. To bring about (an agreement, accord, truce, peace, etc)
    as an intermediary between parties by compromise,
    reconciliation, removal of misunderstanding, etc.

  2. to effect (a result) or convey (a message, gift, etc)
    by or as if by an intermediary…

but there is another meaning to mediate…
something that stands between two objects, people, places,
things…

and what stands between Ich und du, is this mediation…
and what does this mediation consist of?
when I am face with another du, be it animal, vegetables, mineral,
is this mediation… and this mediation comes from my own
knowledge, understanding, experiences, education, and
theory of du… I cannot, no matter how hard I try, to make
sense of you/du without this mediation that comes from
my own past…

I have heard it said, to approach a problem with new eyes…
but that is literally impossible… we cannot do that and why?
because our understanding of existence, problems, du,
all stem from experiences and knowledge, education
and training…

I cannot know or understand anything without this mediation…
for example, let us say, I find an object in the street…
I cannot identify it without some ‘‘mediation’’ or experiences,
knowledge, education, or training first… I must have been
‘‘trained’’ or mediated to understand or know my universe…

take the Ich… I… when I am born, I have no understanding of
this I… as I grow up, I learn this Ich/I… from parents, teachers,
brothers/sisters, religion, experiences… I am taught to know/
understand this Ich/I… without this knowledge/education, I cannot
possibly know or understand this Ich/I…
everything we know, we are, in some fashion, taught,
or trained or educated to know…which includes the Ich/I…
and of course, the du/you…this knowledge, education, experiences,
training is the mediation between the Ich/I and the du/you…
I never face you with a totally clean slate… I see you, and my
experiences, education, training all stand between me and you…
so, in my reaction to you/du is from this mediation of stuff that
stands between me and you…

I stand in front of a tree… without this meditation, these experiences,
education, training… I cannot make sense of what a tree is…

one of the tools of this mediation, something that stands between
me and you, are isms and ideologies…take nationalism for
example… I see you… and you identify yourself as French…
I react to you from that nationalism meditation…
you are no longer a human being, but a Frenchman…
and I react to that… my response to you is through
this mediation of education and experiences I have…
and that is the point… I react to everything through this
mediation that stands between me and you…
One might think that I am reacting to you, but
I am not… I am reacting to the experiences, training,
education, isms that I have learned over my lifetime…
and through that, I react to you…

So, the real process of being human lies within this
mediation… I see a tree… I then, through this
mediation, react, respond to the tree… and I cannot
do anything else without this mediation between me
and tree’s, people, events, objects…

Existence is a three step process… me, the mediation
and then you, the object… there is never a direct
connection between me and you… it must go through
the mediation that lies within me, and through that,
I respond to the world…

and here is where we must understand how values
and knowledge works… my meditation, thoughts, beliefs,
values are a product of this mediation… my education,
my experiences, my training, all stand in the middle between
me and you… I see a black man… if my mediation, my values
and experiences will generate my reaction to this black man…
and here is where it is important to know or understand
the values and beliefs we hold…
If my mediation of black men is wrong, I might see
black men as evil, subhuman, lazy, pick your cliche…
I don’t see them as human beings… If our experiences
and education and isms are wrong, we will incorrectly see
people, places, events… we will see things in a
erroneous or false way… and that is why
we value ‘WOKE’’ because it helps us see and react
to people in a more honest way…
for people, by virtue of being people, deserve respect,
toleration, kindness, decency and understanding…
by doing this, we remove, our past experiences
and knowledge of others and react, respond to
people in a fairer way…
so instead of responding to people by our own
mediation, we respond with values consistent
with their being people…we respond to others
with ‘‘WOKE’’ values because they are also
human beings… that is our connection,
our relationship to them… we are both human beings…

I deal with hundreds of people a day, at Self-Checkout…
and I respond to them how they first react to me…
and 99% of everyone treats me with ‘‘WOKE’’ values,
that is with fairness and understanding and toleration…
and I respond the same… as I should…
my mediation or background/experiences are
that people for the most part want to do good,
they want to be part of being human… which
is the act of connection and relationships…
all human beings, ALL HUMAN BEINGS are
connected.. are part of a relationship by just
being human… we have a relationship by
virtue of just being human…I am connected
to you and you are connected to me…
that is a fact of existence… and we have to
obey that fact of existence… but Kropotkin,
I am me… and I cannot escape being me…
and I am not asking you to escape you,
I am asking that you see the interconnectedness
of all human beings…

or to say this another way… the idea of the other,
doesn’t exists… there is no third choice…
Ich und du… that’s it…

We exist within cities, states, societies and communities,
which is an acknowledgment of the interconnectedness of
human beings… I cannot exist or survive without this
interconnectedness of human beings… and you cannot
survive or exists without it either…

but what stands between me and you, is this mediation…
and that is where we must begin… to examine or
reevaluate our mediation, our values, beliefs, education,
training, ism’s… to learn to see human beings
as something than ‘‘other’’… we are human beings…
and that is a connection that cannot be change or
erased… but let us further examine this idea of
other…

Kropotkin

11

Other… that is what isms such as capitalism
and communism turns us into…
we are no longer Ich und du…
we become other… no longer Ich and du…
and how does that work?

by the use of capitalism and its endless pursuit of
profits/money, they negate, deny human beings
their value as human beings… their only value
is the means to increased profits/money…
and it is this ‘‘means’’ that turns people into others…
If my only purpose in existence, as capitalism believes,
that my only point is to create profits/money, then I
no longer have any value as a human being other than
the creation of profits… the same is true whenever
the ism is used to negate or deny people their value
as a human being… this nihilism is what turns people,
Ich und du, into others… any attempt to negate
people with nihilism is the attempt to turn people into
other…

I am denied my connection to people… because my
only connection is supposed to be with the creation
of profits/money… the only relationship I am supposed
to have within capitalism is with money… money is
the beginning and end of capitalism… capitalism has
boldly and openly said this.. this entire argument lies
within this work/life conflict that has been around for
a few years… to have a life, is to reduce the opportunity
to pursue or make profits/money… and this is why
businesses/corporations work so hard into having
us work and not have a life… to make us other…
by refusing us a life… this nihilism… is turning
us into other…

Communism does the exact same thing…
whereas we are of the state, for the state, by
the state…where is the duty to us being
human? to us having a life outside of the state…
if everything is subservient to us being citizens
of the state, then we are considered to be other…
we are the means to the state… and that
is nihilism and of us being other…

there is no longer Ich und du, if we are considered
to be working for the corporation or state, we become
other…and what relationship do I have with you/du,
if we are both considered to be other?

let us return to an idea that I have expressed before…
that of needs… we human beings, we have needs
that must be met if we are to survive…
I have mentioned many before…
bodily needs of food, water, shelter, education, love
health care, air… basic bodily needs that must
be met… and we have psychological needs,
of love, esteem, safety/security, of a sense of
belonging… the only way we are human is if
we meet these needs… and a denial of these
needs is to turn us into other…
working denies us the ability to meet our needs…
what does work care about us meeting our
need for love or a sense of belonging…
work doesn’t give a shit, all they care about
is profits… and this denies us our humanity…
our being human… for the basic point of
existence is to meet our bodily and psychological
needs…to deny our needs to make us into
consumers, producers, workers, or to make us
citizens, is to deny us our humanness…
if the society/state is not interested in us meeting our
needs, that is to turn us into other…and we lose
our connection to human beings… for to connect to
people, we must connect or relate with people
on a human level… which is to say, not based on
our wealth or our ability to create wealth/profits,
but based on connection/relationship to other human
beings… that is what matters, not our ability to create wealth/profits..
to be human is to connect/relate to other human beings…
and our connection to others is based on needs…
I relate, connect to others with love, with respect,
with honesty, with toleration… with ‘‘WOKE’’ values
is how we connect/relate to human beings…

If I engage with MAGA/conservative values, such as
hate, anger, violence, turning people into others…
I am reducing people into others…
I am practicing nihilism when I turn people into others…

there is no Ich und du, if I engage in turning people
into others…if I deny them their humanity, their being
people with needs and wants, I deny them Ich und du…
because Ich und du is about connections and relationships…
if I subsume you into a consumer or a producer or a worker
or a creator of profits, I turn you into other… not Ich und du…
if I deny your needs or wants, I turn you into other…

and the society/state cannot continue or last if we
turn each other into other… the state/society can only
last, go on if we are Ich und du…
it becomes how we recognize each other…
are you other or are you du?
that is the question…

and all of that comes back into our own understanding
or mediation of who we are…

so, who are you? what values and beliefs do you have that
allow you to see human beings as human beings or
do you see people as others?

Kropotkin

12

This aspect of turning human beings into other…
has two points to it… one, this other we talk about,
in terms of Ich und du, I and You, this other we call
it… by turning people into the other, we become
impersonal, other… it…

We can call this turning others into it, we can say
that it is nihilism… any time one is reduced into
other/it, that is nihilism because it denies us
as human beings, and it denies us our values…

and let us further seek out the other aspects of
our society that turns us into other/it…
Religion for example… to make our existence to
be the worshiping of god, of making god our
priority, we reduce human beings into other/it…
for our value is not ourselves but lies within the
seeking of god… that pursuit is nihilism…
the denial of human beings and their values…
we have a whole lot of nihilism going on in
modern day America… anytime we deny
human beings and their values, for example,
the search for god, the attempt to destroy
gays and trans people… that to deny others their
own identity, that is nihilism…
capitalism as I have already pointed out is about
denying people their own identity… as is
communism or virtually any ism is about denying
others their identity…
Let us take, as an example, Buddhism… what is
the final/ultimate goal of Buddhism? To no longer
be reborn… To return to the void… that void, is
more important than who we are or who/how
we identify with…

Now the right attack’s identity and yet, for all intents
and purpose, that is all we really have, is our identity…
the goods and material possessions I have, that isn’t
my identity… Identity comes from inside out, not
outside in… so, if I were to declare my own identity
as being gay or trans or liberal, that is really all I have…
my own possessions are, at best, temporary, even
illusions… What do I actually have as a human being,
if not identity?
identity politics is basically politics about
who we are as human beings…
if I were to allow society/the state to own my own identity,
where does that leave me? The state/society demands
that people the society/state identity, not our own…
so, the state/society demands that we identify
as workers, producers, consumers… we identify
in economic terms, and in doing so, we lose our
own identity… this is nihilism… anytime one loses
their own identity and assumes the identity of the
society and/or the state demands, that is nihilism…
and for the state to deny me by refusing to allow me
my own identity, such as gay or trans or liberal or
black, I am turned into other/it…
every single law that denies blacks, gays, trans,
liberal, identity, is a form of nihilism… for what else
do I have other than my identity?

so, conservatives/MAGA who denies identity politics,
is denying me, turning me into the other, into it…
my identity is who I am… and deny that is to deny
me as a human being… and that is nihilism…
so, this war on gays, trans, liberals, communist,
to try to limit or control our own identity, that
is nihilism… preventing me from practicing my
own identity is a denial of who I am and what I
believe in, and that is nihilism…

so, whenever someone demands the end to gay people, they
are practicing nihilism… the denial of human beings
and their values… of turning others into what a state/society
demands, or wants, that is turning people into other and it…
a denial of being who one wants is nihilism…

Kropotkin

13

I have brought up three different aspects of
this, One is Ich… I… the second is du… you
and the third one is the other…es…

we have suggested that the state/society can
encourage us to be one of those three things…
it can allow us to be Ich… I.. it can also allow us
to be or practice du… you… but the third one,
es… that stands outside of either Ich or du…

and what of the three aspects of existence,
Ich, du and es… what does that bring us to?
we have, as I may have mentioned before, needs…
and the Ich, the I, has many different needs…
both bodily and psychological needs…
and I remain an Ich as long as my needs are
being met… and du, you are du as long as
your needs are being met… but what of es?
to become an es, an it, it means that one
or more needs are being unmet…

conservatives/MAGA types claim for themselves,
that all their needs must be met… regardless of
your own needs… thus, they deny rights and values
of others, and only accept rights and values as long
as it is their needs and values being met…
one area of this is within free expression…
the right allows themselves to have free expression,
to verbally attack whomever, they please… but
deny free expression when it conflicts with their own
values and needs… the recent Charley Kirk death
has shown us this denial of free expression…
I point out the number of people fired for any type
of anti-Kirk expressions… and I point out this
double standard in the recent firing of Kimmel…
freedoms for me but no freedoms for thee…

One of the primary needs of human beings, one
of the psychological needs is expression… all human
beings, ALL human beings have the need to express themselves,
in whatever manner they can…if even by grunting, that is
a form of expression… I can express feelings and emotions
simply with facial expression, or hand gestures or the act
of emotion, be it anger, or by tears or by stomping on the
ground… we have many, many diverse means of
expressions… and all of them grounded within
our need to express ourselves…

So, when the GOP/MAGA party forbids expression,
they are denying us one of our primary needs as
a human being… and it turns us into an es…
an it, the other… we are no longer Ich or du,
but we, by the denial of expression, we become es…
the other… a denial of needs turns us into the other,
es… and this is the entire agenda of the American
conservatives/MAGA party… to turn some into es,
other…by a denial of needs to express…

but what are some denials of needs that I speak of?
the attack on gays, trans people, the silencing of liberals,
the attempt to remove valid needs of people…
One means of expression is via dress… to deny
cross-dressing is a denial of needs, to deny gays
their freedoms based on their being gay, that is turning
them into the other… es…
the movement to deny gays marriage, freedom for me,
not for thee… that is to turn human beings into other…
to deny people rights based on the refusal of their needs,
that is turning people into other…
but we run into a problem… on what right do gays
have to marry or to love? the argument is based on
natural rights… we now turn to a question of natural rights…

Kropotkin

14

the entire question of rights is basically this…
what is the justification for our rights?
are rights justified by, as the founding Fathers thought,

""We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men
are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator
with certain unalienable rights, that among them is life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness’’

Endowed by their creator…this is a flat out theological
explanation of rights… but we can have any number of explanations
of rights… the fact that we are human, is often considered to
be enough to justify or warrant our rights… and we have
legal rights, as well as moral rights… we can justify rights
by either the law or by morality…

let us take slavery… on what basis was slavery legal in
the U.S? to a very large extent, legal slavery was
also based on theological grounds… it was in the bible,
weren’t the Jews slaves to Egyptians? and slavery was well
defended in the bible… and of course, America is/was a
Christian country… (another lie my teacher told me)

So, on what grounds can we justify slavery?

let us think about this…

Kropotkin

15

AI Overview

Justifications for slavery were based on flawed racist beliefs in the natural inferiority of certain peoples, the economic necessity of slave labor for agriculture and wealth, and interpretations of religious texts like the Bible that were twisted to sanction ownership of enslaved people. Other justifications included claims that slavery was a social good, providing care for “inferior” people, and that it was a long-standing practice found in many ancient civilizations and thus acceptable.

Economic Justifications

Proponents argued that slavery was essential for the Southern agricultural economy, particularly for cash crops like cotton, sugar, and tobacco, which fueled the entire economy.

Slave owners viewed slaves as property and believed they had a right to own and benefit from that property, similar to other forms of capital.

Some argued that freeing slaves would lead to economic collapse, widespread unemployment, and chaos, posing a threat to society as a whole.

Racial and Social Justifications

A core belief was that Africans were naturally inferior and suited to be enslaved, lacking the intelligence or capacity for self-governance.

Slaveholders presented slavery as a benevolent system, where they provided care, food, and shelter to enslaved people, who they believed were childlike and incapable of surviving on their own.

Some argued that slavery created a stable society by maintaining a clear hierarchy, ensuring that free people could enjoy the benefits of slave labor and avoiding the perceived social unrest that freedom might bring.

Religious Justifications

A widely used interpretation of the biblical story of Noah, this argument twisted the curse on Ham into a justification for the enslavement of people of African descent.

Slaveholders selectively cited biblical passages, like those in the New Testament where enslaved people are told to obey their masters, to argue that God approved of slavery.

Other Justifications

  • Tradition:

Slavery was presented as an ancient and time-honored practice, accepted by “great civilizations” of the past, and therefore acceptable to continue.

Humanitarianism (Ironical)

Some argued that slavery was more humane than other alternatives, such as genocide or allowing people to face harsh conditions without any provision for their care.

Arguments in favor of slavery include deference to the Bible and thus to God, some people being natural slaves in need of supervision…

Southern slaveholders often used biblical passages to justify slavery. Those who defended slavery rose to the challenge set forth …

K: this is an AI justification of slavery…
the interesting thing here is that the current administration
has used many of these same exact arguments to both defend
slavery and remove or whitewash exhibits about slavery…
including the Smithsonian Museum…

clearly slavery doesn’t hold to the Ich und du relationship,
it is Ich und Es… people are no longer people, but become
objects, things, property, other… and what can we learn from
this?

That a relationship between Ich und du is a relationship
between two roughly equal persons… the relationship
between Ich and es, that is an unequal relationship…
Hegel called it a Master/slave relationship…
which is an unequal relationship… it cannot even
be considered too be a relationship as an Ich und du
relationship is a true, honest relationship between equals…
Ich und es is an unequal, dishonest relationship that
cannot survive outside of that dishonesty, that unequalness…

one might think of it as the golden rule… he who has the gold
makes the rules… which is a sign of an unequal relationship…
and it turns people, du, into es…other…
and that is the point…

are we trying to become an equal society, a society/state where
the relationship is Ich und du or are we trying to turn some into
Ich and most into es…other?

Kropotkin

16

One of the more interesting aspects of this
Ich und du… is the spiritual one…
is our relationship with god, Ich und du or is it
Ich und es… and we are the other…

Read the Old Testament… and notice as I have,
that god and the Jewish people have an Ich und du,
relationship… the god in the bible, the New Testament…
has a relationship only with the Hebrews… it is not
a universal god, but a local, specific god to a local
specific tribe…and in the Old Testament, god is seen
as Ich und du… We read of the prophets who
‘‘wrestle’’ with god… that is only possible in an Ich und du,
relationship… In the New Testament, the relationship
that was enjoyed by the nation, has been reduced to
the relationship with Jesus… not with god…one
can only reach god through Jesus, through the words
of Jesus… through the forgiveness of Jesus…
through the acceptance of Jesus as my own
‘‘personal’’ savior… in the New Testament, the
relationship we have is Ich und es… and we are the other…

and today? as our theological relationship is mediated through
Jesus and through acceptance of the words of Jesus,
this meditation, is not about Ich und du, but about Ich
und es… we are separated from god by several levels…
Jesus, the Church, priest, the Pope, and all those rituals,
all stand between god and du… that is why we are es
within modern theology… there is no direct access between
god, and Ich…and that makes us es… other…

the modern theology question becomes this,
how do we go from Ich und es, to Ich und du…
with god being the du…

Kropotkin

17

If we are doing gods work or we are god’s servants, we are
not in a Ich und du relationship with god, but we are
Ich und es…for us to hold an Ich und du relationship
with god, we must/have to be more equal to god…
Ich und du is a relationship between equals,
Ich und es is a relationship between people who are
unequal…

so what relationship do you have with god? is it Ich und du,
or as modern society/state has it, Ich und es…

Kropotkin

18

It has been counted that god in the bible, killed
over 2.2 million people… all of which was to
promote or protect the Hebrews…
but that brings us back to the notion that the deaths
of 2.2 million people isn’t an Ich und du relationship…
but is an Ich und es relationship with god…
sacrificed to bring about Hebrew success…
people being used as a means… and that is a
Ich und es relationship… to make people other…

I am not interested in a god that practices Ich und es,
a relationship where people are the means of god’s
will, not as equal to god… Ich und du…

as I am not interested in any state or society, that also
practices Ich und es… turning human beings into other…
people as a means to an end…

and what am I/we to do about this?

Kropotkin

19

The question has been asked, what am I to do about
a state/society that practices Ich und es… such as our
current American state/society… and why…
as always, we must ask, why?

we seek out explanations via the two most common
isms of America, conservativism and liberalism…

and what about that point?

Kropotkin

20

.
I prefer Du und Ich..