With the current fervor for social transformation in the air, it’s a good time to cue an odd-sounding idea at the hidden core of the 1960s social transformation (click for link):
* * *
shakemyheadhollow
Conceptual spaces: politics, philosophy, art, literature, religion, cultural history
shakemyheadhollow 
Provocative Gary…thx for posting! Yes, the concept of enemies is so powerful in a negative way.
At this critical juncture in history, we need to be having these discussions. After all, respect for a range of human thought, as opposed to the absolutism some display today, is totally necessary for social progress. Being able engage in civil debates, as you’re doing with this blog, helps us not only solve problems, it also gives hope that a certain amount of freedom of expression still exists.
After all, a certain amount of freedom of expression – along with the ability to agree to disagree on particulars, helps many different people and subcultures feel free enough to find their own place in the sun without intimidation or social shaming. At the end of the day, this is often what most of us seek the most. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
You are no fun, Perry. I love a good debate with my readers, but I always agree with you 100%. In this case, it’s about the two approaches to social change — (a) utterly destroy the “enemy” on the other side, vs. (b) effect a shift in consciousness that brings humanity in general along with it, as we all sail the spaceship Earth together. Strategy (b) means treating multiple points of view in open debate as a good thing for the species as a whole, like maintaining genetic variation for a profitable evolutionary future. Strategy (a) means … well, just listen to the news or twitter or critical race theory or Trump or the idiot activists on either side of the deadening left-right spectrum to see stategy (a) in full cry. Luckily there are all those people like you and me who still favor strategy (b), albeit under the radar of mass media, academia, or the politicial superstructure 🙂 . The Harper’s letter is a good start at breaking the crust of that superstructure.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is difficult to say something about something that already says everything what one could have said. Meaningful word use, well written and enjoyable to read! Yes there cannot be enough conscious people doing the work of the mind in these troubled times.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Today”s street revolution appears much more cynical of human existence than what i experienced in the 1960s. No flower children now just outright warfare better races…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed. Despite the chaos of the 1960s, there was an inner optimism — that we really were brothers and sisters under the skin, that no one was born racist, that we really could touch an essential goodness in each other despite differences of skin color and gender. Today’s view of human nature and human connection seems much darker — that racism is intrinsic to white identity, that the hearts of those who don’t look like us are inaccessible to us, that the point is to define and crush the enemy since there is no shared humanness that allows us to shift the collective consciousness together. However, when I talk to my daughter’s 20-something friends, I find the kids on the street (with some exceptions) are not as beholden to this divisive academic philosophy as the woke minority would have us think. So I’m holding out for another generation of flower children 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Give this guy some credit; after all he has lifted the quality of fairy tales to a new height!
On a more serious note, if Trump wins there will b a revolution if he looses, there will be a revolution also! What is the solution, what are we going to do about it?
LikeLike