The international socialist
First of all, the term is inaccurate because it is frequently adopted incorrectly. First, assumptions about the term “social” already vary; second, it is disastrous to run an -ISM because a doctrine is already implied; third, the term is not gender appropriate in all languages when it comes to a marketing strategy; fourth, the noun National Socialist is so rightly loaded that the logical cancellation of it in the International is not particularly noticeable and fifth, the term is so falsely slurred that it’s almost funny to see the functionaries waving their manifestos and party books without turning (shame-) red. For the record, I tend toward Max Weber’s view of the social perception as such. Although Ernst Bloch throws the cloak of reality more with the being and the becoming on the basis of the being-being and the being-should into wild conclusion-non-conclusions, which partly sound better than they are, in an unsolvable interplay of way and goal, of faith and religion, of consciousness and state, I rather stick to the daily news, entrusting in us humans that we could have prevented many things. To want to understand the human being in itself can be a nice life task. That we all, more or less, could make it by creating together, that is, in my opinion, never questioned. So why don’t we do it? Rationally. Within the framework of our action space, which we call life. Here intervening in the definition, the question of social relevance (family, neighbors, village, country, state, earth population) is all the same. The world has become remarkably small and fragile that it may still not matter if a sack of rice falls over in China, but the diplomatic world shits its pants if a stunted butterfly moves air in Russia. We all belong together. The advantage of not knowing everyone personally is that you are less worried about them but also that they are less provoking nervous moments. The fact is: they are there and should have fewer worries and fears if we all show solidarity. I’m not talking about a fundraising gala just before Christmas, although it serves its purpose because of who we are. Nor am I telling about the great redistribution of assets and, as it were, completely invalidating principles from evolutionary theory in order to drown in a provision mentality. I mean the growing realization that the scope of events has increased and a pragmatism here also means self-preservation.
I’m talking about moving heads and asses.