Last anachronistic bastion: Person-centric loyalty
Audio version:
As was said in the initiation of the Christian Era (C.E.):
If one took Jesus as an avatar for a new construct of social logic, then family and
other social and cultural loyalties couldn’t and shouldn’t be superordinate to more
cogent and logical propositions. Yet, 2000+ years later, social and cultural themes
still celebrate the ‘blood ties’ and ‘blood bonds’ as not only the ethical standard,
but the moral standard for human interaction. And concurrently the rise of
transnational entities, let alone transcultural themes reflect the move from the
more blood and locale related centered to the more abstract and extrapolated
constructs of their biological and social origins.
other social and cultural loyalties couldn’t and shouldn’t be superordinate to more
cogent and logical propositions. Yet, 2000+ years later, social and cultural themes
still celebrate the ‘blood ties’ and ‘blood bonds’ as not only the ethical standard,
but the moral standard for human interaction. And concurrently the rise of
transnational entities, let alone transcultural themes reflect the move from the
more blood and locale related centered to the more abstract and extrapolated
constructs of their biological and social origins.
But this bastion continues in evermore fierce insular to incestuous rationales for
its continued private and PUBLIC maintenance, as it members become the fodder
and disposable tools for the transnational and transcultural entities as those entities
fungible, cannibalized components. More and more on the local level, the human
components are coming to the realization that these entities have little-to-no ethical
or moral loyalties to the people as they have among themselves for each other. The
trans-humanistic ethos of corporate profit or institutional standards used, if not
having perceived the humans as widget-commodities that were their economic and
political, expendable “captives” of both their self-imposed, local and their
provisional, parochial mindset.
its continued private and PUBLIC maintenance, as it members become the fodder
and disposable tools for the transnational and transcultural entities as those entities
fungible, cannibalized components. More and more on the local level, the human
components are coming to the realization that these entities have little-to-no ethical
or moral loyalties to the people as they have among themselves for each other. The
trans-humanistic ethos of corporate profit or institutional standards used, if not
having perceived the humans as widget-commodities that were their economic and
political, expendable “captives” of both their self-imposed, local and their
provisional, parochial mindset.
What was a kinetic advantage for ages by those of human-centric loyalties, they
now are seeing its limitations of options when faced with constructs that operate
with amoral impunity, that is prospectively indifferent to the social or cultural
consequences of its operations. Much like the indigenous people encountered by
the immigrants from Europe in the 16th and 17th centuries, these latter-day
indigenous populations are seeing their way of life disappearing and taken away
by these, effectively de facto hostile entities.
now are seeing its limitations of options when faced with constructs that operate
with amoral impunity, that is prospectively indifferent to the social or cultural
consequences of its operations. Much like the indigenous people encountered by
the immigrants from Europe in the 16th and 17th centuries, these latter-day
indigenous populations are seeing their way of life disappearing and taken away
by these, effectively de facto hostile entities.
This IS the reality since these entities are not limited in their expression to inertial,
emotional aesthetics, but they exist on the logic of potentiality. As such, the
aesthetic of emotional bias are more based on the effectiveness of the
instrumentality on meeting its designed ends, than any consideration of its effects
beyond those parameters.
emotional aesthetics, but they exist on the logic of potentiality. As such, the
aesthetic of emotional bias are more based on the effectiveness of the
instrumentality on meeting its designed ends, than any consideration of its effects
beyond those parameters.
Since person-centric loyalty’s foundation is emotionally and inertial provincial to
xenophobic, the alternative of some pluralistic tack for a solidarity with other
social and cultural entities facing the same vulnerabilities and threats is less of a
probable outcome. That being so and much similar to the fate of the indigenous
people their progenitors encountered, this form of social organization will find
itself in the neoreservations of economic and political captivity of forces
reflecting the thinking of amoral logical potentiality than any humanistic, communal
ethos.
----------------------------------OP's solicitation-----------------------------------
Your donations of appreciation for this work may be done
by making a payment to this link at my PayPal account
(http://paypal.me/j2e595)
xenophobic, the alternative of some pluralistic tack for a solidarity with other
social and cultural entities facing the same vulnerabilities and threats is less of a
probable outcome. That being so and much similar to the fate of the indigenous
people their progenitors encountered, this form of social organization will find
itself in the neoreservations of economic and political captivity of forces
reflecting the thinking of amoral logical potentiality than any humanistic, communal
ethos.
----------------------------------OP's solicitation-----------------------------------
Your donations of appreciation for this work may be done
by making a payment to this link at my PayPal account
(http://paypal.me/j2e595)
