In terms of mastership it did not have to be the Hegel of old. and, anyway, even if old Hegelian Negativity were composing traditions of monarchs and privately willed lawyers for the control on Contracts of the Masses religion did and most of the time still has the power over governing ritual and shear mechanism of self-conscious defeat. Perhaps God doesn't exist, perhaps God just doesn't care. The concept of God is irrefutably gnawing at the leadership of many nations; I mean there are the "pierestroika" Nations like Ukraine and Lithuania, and Georgia and Armenia, whatever; Boston wants it's sedition and I'm just a mailman. In any case for the social wisdom of the western idealism of the demise of God, I believe there is something to regarding the Subject side of human honour and piety as from beginning to end a Pragmatism going sour. It seems t began with the sovereign control over land for property, and ended with honour as the control of the vestibule of the power of religious (religulous then) for the pure valuable development of democratic institutions. Really this is the same loss of control over property, without a decided difference of Good and Bad. Beyond good and evil is the power over the equilibrium per the status of various classes in the literally community. For the beginning IS the end ideally for what the religions conclude, and how we believe in God is a matter of upbringing and preference for the cultural tastes of the times of impersonal America. Thus spoke William Barret. Is God worth believing in? That is the essential case that there is no such Thing up there or here on earth. What exists is a kind of gnawing Need with and for the Nature the way it or 'she' Exists. How we conduct ourselves is all a matter of taking up the "way" to mean that honour be an apology of the West at Islam and Judaism. I really think so. The essence precedes the existence in the Object of the Religions of the World.:bobby:
sovereignty is of course itself an abomination. there may be wonderful unseen things, but humans invented sovereignty for reasons unrelated to either spirit or morality.
Sovereignty was invented by the essential determination to establish land as the form and undetermination of the possession of the wealth for sharing or non-sharing. There is the prophesy and the land for the prophesy. One man is the decider between what there is to do upon this region of Earth for working with property. And eventually such decision was government. The question remains to this day, is that an enslaving of the work on the land, or is that a commonwealth for distribution of the responsibilities here with?
Neither. It is pure contention. The propriety model is an extension of fearful thought. A mind without anxiety is kind.
i work to free the land . to begin with , where-ever i stand is unowned . i'll sleep under any beautiful tree . the feeling that develops with this willfulness is that i am protected . now , sometimes i do receive a challenge from authority . i know psychically when they are coming and am prepared . i am awake when i should be sleeping . i am smoking a cig and talking at the dog , ' shh ... beastie ... bark i spose you will but nay don't bite'm . rainbow peace doggy is your name '
Nevertheless, the substantial consequence for usage, land usage, if you like, are of undetermined knowledge. The religious message came from far and wide in the millitariiy comparable notion for the evolved status of owning and development. Anyway, I just wanted to attache a compromise for Landowning lordship. Really the pope wasn't necessary for all defined organization of communicating the ways to trust the sharing of agriculturally developed land for becoming industrially progressive wealth. In feudalism it was some sort of peace settlement, as easy as one could dream of: per the Right to Happiness overcoming the RIght of Might.
OK, so what you're saying is that the undetermined nature of knowledge is the consequence of religious land usage by substantial landlords compromised by a peace settlement agriculturally developed by the evolved military status of the necessary pope. I've always thought that. I just never knew how to say it.
