(Five minute read)

Those of us who still want to live lives that we consider human, the word we is becoming a dangerous word.

In a world run by artificial intelligence, a world of disequilibrium and it is equilibrium, the assumption of equilibrium has to be explained. So it is quite wrong to start from we, because first we must understand the processes that lead to the social construction of this ‘we’ and to the constitution of our combined voice, that are now unbalanced, unstable by we who are without faces.

These AI voice, are becoming the crisis of not just capitalism but democracy.

For example:  Donald Trump a refusal to accept the truth of the untrue, a refusal to accept closure now running to take office.

We cannot start by pretending to stand outside the dissonance of our own experience, for to do so would be a lie.

A refusal to accept the inevitability of increasing inequality, misery, exploitation and violence is lacking due to the uses of AI.

———————-

To start in the third person is not a neutral starting point.

The ‘we’ of our starting point is very much a question rather than an answer.

It affirms the social character, but poses the nature of that sociality as a question.

The merit of starting with a ‘we’ rather than with an ‘it’ is that we are then openly confronted with the question that must underlie any theoretical assertion, but which is rarely addressed: who are we that make the assertion?

The fact that ‘we’ and our conception of ‘we’ are product of a whole history of the subjection of the subject changes nothing.

For the moment, this ‘we’ of ours is a confused ‘we”I’ already presupposes an individualisation, a claim to individuality in thoughts and feelings, whereas the act of writing or reading is based on the assumption of some sort of community, however contradictory or confused.

It is just that the negative situation in which we exist leaves us no option: to live, to think, is to negate in whatever way we can the negativeness of our existence.

What we feel is not necessarily correct, but it is a starting point to be respected and criticised, not just to be put aside in favour of objectivity.

The dissonance is not an external ‘us’ against ‘the world, inevitably it is a dissonance that reaches into us as well, that divides us against ourselves.

——————-

Society is, but it exists in an arc of tension towards that which is not, or is not yet.

To look at the web objectively, from the outside – we see all as blurred movement, that are predicting the downfall of the world, while accepting that there is nothing we can do about it.

Our refusal to accept, tells us nothing of the future, nor does it depend for its validity on any particular outcome.

How then do we change the world without taking power?

For example:

The problem with armed struggle, is that it accepts from the beginning that it is necessary to adopt the methods of the enemy in order to defeat the enemy, but even in the unlikely event of military victory, it is capitalist social relations that have triumphed.  #Israel v Palestine.

How many children have died needlessly since I started to write THIS POST?  How many since you began to read it?

We all know that Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank and Israel all live under various regimes of organized discrimination and oppression, much of which makes life nearly unlivable. The reflexive identification with Israel, by both US and the UK obscures the fuller picture of what’s happening between Israel and the Palestinians.

What exactly counts as a provocation?

Not, apparently, the large number of settlers, more than 800 by one media account, who stormed the al-Aqsa mosque compound on 5 October. Not the 248 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces or settlers between 1 January and 4 October of this year. Not the denial of Palestinian human rights and national aspirations for decades. Not the thousands currently losing their lives.

To be considered a political being you must at the very least be considered a human being.

Who gets to count as human?

We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly,” Israel’s defense minister Yoav Gallant said. Human animals?

How can such language and an announced policy of collective punishment against all the residents of Gaza be seen by Israel’s supporters in the United States or elsewhere as defensible?

Let’s be clear: Gallant’s language is not the rhetoric of deterrence. It’s the language of genocide which WE are condoning.

WHAT ATTEMPTS HAVE THERE BEEN TO MAKE PEACE?

Two-state solution:

An agreement that would create a state for the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip alongside Israel. Israel has said a Palestinian state must be demilitarised so as not to threaten its security. Now inconceivable. 

Today about 5.6 million Palestinian refugees – mainly descendants of those who fled in 1948 – live in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the Israeli-occupied West Bank and Gaza. About half of registered refugees remain stateless, according to the Palestinian foreign ministry, many living in crowded camps.

What continues to be astounding is that a regime recognised under international law as the occupying power, and as one that many human rights groups agree is imposing a system of apartheid, is trusted to relay information about its own atrocities.

The Israeli regime continues to dehumanise Palestinians as part of its tactic to sow seeds of doubt on their testimonies and to justify the atrocities it is committing.

The only solution ( put forward by the BEADY EYE is one Federal state with a written constitution. See previous post) 

I have seen images and videos that will haunt me forever.

The reality is that Palestinians have been dehumanised to such an extent, that even when they hold up their murdered children in front of cameras and display them to the world, there are those who will still say they are responsible for their own children’s deaths. But make no mistake, what we are seeing in Gaza is an unfolding genocide and Palestinians are showing the world what it looks like in real time.

Yet despite the plethora of pictures, videos and testimonies we the International Community have not thrown Israel our of the United Nations.

With a US presidential election looming, and with few signs that the Israeli conflict will ebb away any time soon, evangelicals could find themselves in a position of significant power in the near future.

This is what they are saying.

“To the terrorists who have chosen this fight, hear this, what you do to Israel, god will do to you. Despite today’s weeping, joy will come because he [god] who watches over Israel neither slumbers nor sleeps,”

In keeping with Christian Just War tradition, we also affirm the legitimacy of Israel’s right to respond against those who have initiated these attacks as Romans 13 grants governments the power to bear the sword against those who commit such evil acts against innocent life.”

“What will come soon [is] the antichrist and his seven year empire that will be destroyed in the battle of armageddon. Then Jesus Christ will set up his throne in the city of Jerusalem. He will establish a kingdom that will never end,” Hagee said.

Hagee, despite having a long history of antisemitism – he has suggested Jews brought persecution upon themselves by upsetting God and called Hitler a “half-breed Jew” – founded Christians United for Israel in 2006.

CUFI, (Christians United for Israel,) whose founder believes the presence of Jews in Israel is a precursor to Jesus Christ returning to Earth, God forbid he does because we the International Community are condemned to hell if he and it exists.

Finally:

Those who survive will grow up sad, fearful, guilty, angry, alienated and looking for vengeance – or at least, judging by past experience, many of them will. They will ask who killed their brothers and sisters, their parents, their friends, and why they did it. They will ask what the world did to stop the killing.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abue chucked in the bin.

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com