When man first existed we were tribal. Families who lived on the nearby mountain were the alien other. Empathy only extended to blood ties.
When we invented script religions emerged. We created a new fiction. We de tribalised and began associations with religious ties. We empathized with those who shared our similar religion.
Later, when the industrial revolution came we associated ourselves with imaginary nation-states. Loyalties are based upon complex energy communications that annihilate time and space.
I ask you, can you envision joining me on an island? A new island that has yet to be recognized.
If empathy can be associated to blood ties, then to religious affiliations, then to empathy based upon national identifications then is it much of a leap to ask of some present philosophers to place their empathy upon a universal unifying spirit of brotherhood in creation? One single human race writ large in a single biosphere? Can you join me on this vast and beautiful island?
Work is a universal act of creating.
Organized Labor can unify all peoples of all backgrounds.
Perhaps the reason for the topography is the lack of dynamic? And by that, I mean the most basic, apprehension of it, beyond an organisational one. Lacking would be at this level the more extended ones of affiliation, and dues.
Every religion has it’s dues, the hat passed around. Organisation as apprehended here, is what seems patent. There is no magical formula as in organised religion, no mythical figure to rally around. A jimmy hoffa, a Cesar chaves, but there needs in absence of a general dynamic, a figurative one, besides the literal description of a quasi religion.
None of the above… I’ve always tended to be drawn into a circle of mixed-heritaged eclectic types, as we found comfort and interest in each other I guess, and I am an absolutist.
Never never land my ass, they ripped it up after MJ died and turned it into parking space. It’s like saying I am on the dark side of the moon, without the NASA telemetry to prove it. So prove it.
