I'm Watermark
Diabetic
American thought has two primary expressions of its common sense: The religious and the secular. The religious, which turns to divinity to answer questions posed in the material world, is incapable of properly dealing with the dialectic process - or anything where it's faced with a contrary force/thought process.
The secular, however, is no better. It presupposes that we live in a world made up of rational voluntary and involuntary contracts, and that this world can be correctly altered by working within it's confines. The latter, as you may know, is simple to argue against - given that all of the major thoughts on social organization have been dismal failures. The first is largely true, but is subjective and one's perception of the roles of contracts can be controlled by those in power. Thus, the only way to address this is, as the Americans ignore, is to discard our idea of morality and rationality within the contract, and to attempt to evacuate contracts of their current power dynamics.
The secular, however, is no better. It presupposes that we live in a world made up of rational voluntary and involuntary contracts, and that this world can be correctly altered by working within it's confines. The latter, as you may know, is simple to argue against - given that all of the major thoughts on social organization have been dismal failures. The first is largely true, but is subjective and one's perception of the roles of contracts can be controlled by those in power. Thus, the only way to address this is, as the Americans ignore, is to discard our idea of morality and rationality within the contract, and to attempt to evacuate contracts of their current power dynamics.
Last edited: