The Shape of the World.

The story of man is a vast and complex thing.  It's the stories of countless individuals contained within the stories of several cultures, which in turn are contained in the stories of several lands, which in turn constitute the story of the species.  Every individual's story is subdivided into even smaller stories, and the stories of the species as a whole is just a small fraction of the story of biological life.  It is, to be sure, a self-similar object in the respect that zooming in to any one part will show you a segment that is similar to the whole- but at the same time it is a chaotic object in the respect that no two points are identical.  To add to this conundrum it is not even clear where one story ends and one begins - where does "his" story become "their" story become "our" story?  By no means is the story of man a straightforward thing, and by no means is any meaningful description of it going to be straightforward.

At some points in time we observe that man lives in a fully autonomous manner while in others we observe that man lives in highly organized societies.  Taking into account the continuity of the story in question, there must be a point between these two where society arose from a collection of individuals.  And since, as previous stated, this story is a self-similar one, there must be countless events dotted through history of societies rising from individuals- at all levels of scale- from simple individuals banding together to form a sports club to the merging of companies or the amalgamation of countries.

At all these points of amalgamation, a group realises that its co-ordination is overall more beneficial to them than their individual toils.  However the exact grounds on which this organization is to be formed is not so evident.  To many of those who realise the benefits of organizations but do not know how to achieve and maintain it a strategy of force and fear seems the only path, especially in cases where full co-operation is difficult to accomplish.

At several points through history, and even today, organization is established and preserved by means of a governing body wielding some economical or military force which then forces others into submission either by direct and violent confrontation or by methods of fear and coercion.  From schools which push children by threatening sanctions to workplaces which dangle the threat of termination over their employees to governments which threaten their citizens with incarceration this method of organization is evident in almost every facet of life throughout history.

Granted that in the past, when man was intelligent enough to the see the benefits of the ends, but not the proper implementation of the means, this approach was an unavoidable tactic which had to be employed for the greater good.

However, just as we moved from individual toils to organized societies so can our thinking mature from one pushed by fear to one pulled by aspiration.  Should a society be constructed appropriately- that is founded on sound laws which are derived from indisputable axioms using infallible logic- the several individuals which constitute the society need not be coerced. Rather they need be educated so as to garner the understanding of the laws themselves and so be driven to obedience not by fear but by the will to see the fulfilment of society's ends which in turn - if society has been correctly constructed- will fulfil their own ends.

That is not to say that there should be no response to the infringement of law, but rather that this response should be one that exists to educate the perpetrator and wherever and to whatever extent possible for the perpetrator to atone for his or her wrong doings by contributing over and above what is normally expected so as to compensate for the damage done.

Currently, the law is literally made up as we go along and sentences are not calculated but rather guessed by the self-entitled from their own little and subjective frame of reference.  What more, the "correctional" facilities serve uniquely as a behavioural deterrent and do nothing to contribute to the education of the impeached or the atonement of damage done.

What I am suggesting is no small feat, I am well aware of that, but as things currently stand the world is upside-down and it is required that we should turn it over.  Presently people are pushed by fear, but we must reach a state- or at least come as close to a state as possible- where people are pulled by aspiration.

I will not end on a closing note, for this is by no means the close.  We must begin a dialogue amongst ourselves regarding where democracy has failed and how we are to correct it.

The Case of Cordoba House.

Previously I have said both that nothing lasts forever or is sacred and that certain ideas are universal and unchanging. This seems to be self-contradicting so please let me elaborate further.

All physical things in the universe exist - meaning that they can interact in some way with the world around them. If they could not do so, then they wouldn't exist. Also, certain ideas never change, for example definitions and logical deductions (i.e. A circle is always a circle and 20/4 = 5is always true.)

Now let's take the very simplest of universal concepts, such as the number 4. You can have four of anything in the world; if you half that group of 4 you'll have 2, if you double it you get 8, add 5 to it you'll get 9 etc. etc. Basically the number 4 changes in the same way no matter what it's referring to. They could be buses, ducklings, Vikings, bullets - whatever. If you half the number in that group you'll have a group of 2.

Now let's take four ducklings as an example. With time those four ducklings will grow older, molt, re-grow their feathers, get scarred, develop drinking problems, open up Duck-Duck-Duck&Duck enterprises etc. etc. Although the number four has remained unchanged, what it is referring to has changed. After 15 years, double the group, halving the group etc. will still have the same result it had initially, for the number four is a universal concept and doesn't change.

Therefore, even though universal ideas in themselves never change, they are represented in the physical world by physical things and those things change. The same with much more complicated ideas like peace and freedom and so on and so forth.

Let me bring up the case of Cordoba House as an example. Nine years after the events of 9/11, an Islamic center is to be built very close to the site where the Twin Towers used to stand. Eight years ago, this would have been a joke. It is quite easy to imagine a stand-up comedian using such an event to lead to a witty remark about the government. Anyway, how does Cordoba house relate to the point I am trying to make?

Nine years ago, the idea of an Islamic centre so close to the sight of the WTC would have been unthinkable by the authorities. However, they have now changed their minds. Hence their opinion- which exists and is therefore influenced by demographic numbers, economic situations etc. has changed. The idea of what peace is, however, has not changed. The choice to go ahead with Cordoba house has made several citizens very angry with the authorities who gave the green light on this project. These enraged emotions have disrupted civil peace and protests have begun springing up.

The point? Opinions change but what peace is does not. If these politicians had the concept of peace in mind they would not have gone ahead with the project. They may have waited a few years for the people's opinions to change also, in which case the project would be able to come into realization without causing a panic, but they have chosen not to. Hence it is clear to see not only how the world has changed to allow such a project to come into being, but also how change can allow such projects to be feasible without having to disrupt peace. (i.e. waiting for the public opinion to change - or steering it to change)

To generalize the moral further; Universal ideas never change but the world does. Hence change may make universal ideas more feasible or less feasible (depending on the change which has taken place) and therefore must be taken advantage of in such a way as to make positive ideas more feasible and negative ideas less feasible.

Also; Everything changes, so rather than trying to create something permanent, trying to steer change in a certain direction is much more efficient and realistic.