"I guess its like free trade," said Heather. "Free trade is now enforced by law to enable us to exploit other nations freely. That's rape. We exploit the desperately poor nations, who are willing to sell their populations into free-trade slavery. That's rape. Then we take their cheap products and wreck our own economy with them, by throwing our workers on the scrap heap. That's rape too. The economies of the advanced societies have a large array of social infrastructures to support. The cost for that is built into the pricing structure. The importation of slave labor products wreck this system that maintains a population. All forms of forced trade is rape. It's unfair trade all around. It has to be forced by law, because it is unfair. It's immoral. Free trade is trade free of fairness. Truly fair trade doesn't need to be forced. If it is for everybody's advantage, everybody wants it. The key is fairness. No rape happens in this environment."
"Fairness is an active principle that enriches everybody," I said in total agreement. It unfolds from a higher level than morality. The Principle of the Advantage of the Other incorporates fairness."
"Maybe that applies to sex too," Heather conceded, "where they key factor has to be fairness. As I said, if trade is fair and to everybody's advantage, everybody wants it. I can see this applying to sex too. This means that we would actually have to sit down and explore what is to everybody's advantage. What a novel idea! It would have to be on a platform that enriches all concerned, whether it be between spouses or otherwise. They key then isn't marriage, but fairness, the active principle of fairness. And to make that work, Love would have to be written in big letters."
"That's not a simple challenge, is it?" I interjected. "For Anton sex has become a major impasse that holds back the flow of her love and her life, similar to a great dam that holds back the flow of a river. She wants the river to flow, but she can't deal with the dam. There shouldn't be a dam on her river. It fulfills no purpose. In civil engineering a dam provides many benefits, such as electric power, irrigation water, flood control, improved navigation, and so forth. The dam that she created only provides an impasse. It shouldn't exist. It's to no one's advantage. It doesn't allow the waters to flow. I tried to help her with that. If sex has become that dam, maybe it can be removed with the principle of fairness. But I agree, that's not an easy thing to do."
"Your analogy applies to us too," said Heather. "Sex has become a dam that resulted in sexual isolation. The dam might also be the general marriage doctrine that forces social isolation, and not just along sexual lines. That might also be at the root of our impasse, even though the marriage of Ross and I hasn't happened yet. The isolation that neither of us wants exists nevertheless. Sex appears to be at the root of both dams. Because of it, the normal flow doesn't happen. On the other hand many marriages have broken up when people poked holes through the dam and allowed the sexual flow to unfold."
"That's what happens when we make marriage dependent on sex, and sex on marriage, while the real need is to develop the principle of both independent of the other and then let the results merge in the universal domain. The problem is that we feel we can live and prosper without universal principles. The whole world does that, and not just socially. Politics is a mess because universal principles no longer mean anything. The President rips up the Constitution and says it is just a 'goddamn piece of paper.' He rips up the laws of the land and the principles of international agreements and gives himself the power to torture prisoners all over the world. That's how America dies, just like Rome died, because the principles that both once represented have been stomped into the mud. The Principle of the Advantage of the Other doesn't mean a damn thing anymore. Rome died when this happened, when it ceased to be a republic representing universal humanist principles, and that happened quite early in its history. America is on the same course now. We are about to loose the republic. Socially we never had a republic built on universal humanist principles. And maybe that is why we are failing in the political realm. The best we managed to build in the social domain was a moral platform of passive living precariously located at the near-zero level on a scientific scale, where universal principles are still far out of sight."
Our discussion was interrupted when Ross joined us on the beach that afternoon. He appeared as if out of nowhere, bearing a bottle of Champagne, while Heather and I were sitting on a log exploring the world of universal principles.
"What's with the bottle?" I asked Ross.
"I've come to invite you to celebrate with me," he said.
"Celebrate what?" I asked.
"You ask what? Are you living on the moon? What's the most critical issue of all modern history, that is coming to a head right now?" he said and put the bottle on the log beside me and sat down too. What's happening in the world right now that has become so critical that we are nearing a moment of crisis in which the continued existence of our nation is at stake, and may depend on some clear understanding of key principles? That understanding doesn't appear to exist sufficiently among the key people into whose hands we have entrusted the welfare of the nation."
I shrugged my shoulders. "You lost me my friend," I replied.
"What is happening right now that is truly a matter of national security, that is a situation in which we have all the conditions in place for losing our civilization? What is happening right now, Peter, in the coming few days, that could be so described?" said Ross.
I shrugged my shoulders again.
"You are pathetic," said Ross, "It's the Alito nomination to the Supreme Court. It's the most critical battle in the history of our nation, the battle to prevent the 'Unitary Executive' doctrine from taking over the Supreme Court of the United States of America. The battle is about our country surrendering to the President who demands the freedom to disregard the law of the land at his whim and trample on the Constitution in the name of fighting terrorism. He wants the right to be a terrorist to fight terrorism. He wants this right confirmed in law. The great fight before us is to prevent the American government from formally becoming a fascist dictatorship. It's about preventing a new architecture for our nation from being put in place that was designed by the very architect of the Nazi Empire laws and rewritten for America. It's about stopping the confirmation of the fifth Nazi that has been nominated by the President to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court of nine judges. By having five out of nine judges openly committed to supporting the same key Nazi doctrine that established Hitler as the unchallengable dictator in Germany, we put the conditions in place for loosing civilization. We can't have that. But we are close to that happening. We are so close that it might happen tomorrow or in the next few days, when the vote is taken in the Senate. The way things look right now the nomination might be confirmed by the Senate, and the voting might happen tomorrow. That's the situation. The pending confirmation by the Senate would create a second Hitler in the world, with nuclear weapons in his hands, and you sit here and shrug your shoulders, and say that you know nothing about it? Where are you living, Peter, on the moon, or are you still living in a rut?"
|| - page index -
|| - chapter index -
|| - Exit -