How many ways are there to fuse? Hermeneutic fusion: Mariage.


To achieve a global stability we must realise that our own self interests will be best served within the interest of all of us. Self interest and Global interst are completely compatible. They are one and the same. We must be allowed to be, but our being is part of being-in-the-world. The being of the world is realised through our being. There is a way whereby our being does not involve a being against, but a being within, a being through. And what is so astounding is that if you should not agree and were to analyse your disagreement, you reasons will always project from a desire to destroy, a desire to gain little at the expense of much. That is bad economics, that is bad selfishness.


Without becoming our image of termites and ants and bees we can deploy our creativity to further the fulness of the world. The sacrifice is important, but it is not a sacrifice of ourselves that is required. Nor is it the sacrifice of others, of scapegoats and the guilty, of the lesser and the different. The sacrifice entailed is the time needed and the quiet needed for the search and the maintenance of the desire for such things. I am not merely being vague and idealisitic when I say that we must all have a place. It is an imperative. Only when we all have a place will the structure of our society with regard to its place in the world become stable. It is our tendency to attach signs to consequences that identify scapegoats.


Stop me from being a white man. Only you can. By killing me or by simply calling me a man. If I want to be a white man then let me dig and see my whiteness for what it is: an architecture of climate, for the rest, an inflated antithesis. A paradoxical claim whereby my claim to superiority claims only ignorance. Let my manhood not offend women. Remove it if you wish, but you will be the fool. Instead allow me to be a human being. Do not set me above the animals. Either by allowing animals to rule me, or by acknowledging that we cannot live without them. Do not ignore the air and the stones. I cannot live without them. I am part of the world i live in. My being does not stop at the surface of my skin. It needs to be in the world.


There is no relative value. There is no sense saying I would rather lose my arm than my liver. The choice is absurd. If you are presented with a Sophie’s Choice the man who makes you choose is always wrong and does not know there is another way.


It is not true that scarce benefits polarise society. We have come to a point where we can no longer move the problem. I am very optimistic, now that we can no longr move the problem we will have to deal with it. Wars which always move problems will not be possible for long. Disolve the enemy by helping him.


Do I want peace? Is that a useful question? I want real intelligence not just in the ruling but even more in the ruled. I want men to know that they themselves are wonderfully served by treating the world well. What about killing other people? It is always wrong and it is always. I am speaking of a society where respect is ubiquitous and unto the being of every thing. The president is repected because he is president  and because he is a man. He gets more respect if he is a full man. What is that? A man who lets the world speak to him. Who can absorb sides, disolve them. But what if one man imposes on another. What about noise and pollution and greed and altruistic selfishness and selfishness and all those things. They are all manifestations of the idea that man can be alone among people. He can be alone but not among people.


Factories who think they are alone among people are mistaken. They must clean up their act. They are not bad. They are becoming good.


Selfishness is best served by making the selfishness encompass the whole world. You must realise that you are of the world.


One man will lead another, but there must always be a place where any man can be alone. His privacy is necessary. His public ease is paramount.