Possibilities of the impossible
11
Oct
The difficulties of going beyond the “possible” future, within the limits of the worldview and the popular 
imagination, put history in almost insurmountable limits, and a future right there on the corner that everyone wants: greater social balance, respect for nature, security , tolerance at various levels, education (in transformation is important to note) seem almost impossible, the result is an eternal return.
They return to the old models of nationalism (that of nation and national culture are important), of economic egoism and mainly of division and political violence, although only verbal.
The main reason is the ignorance that the communicational, sociological and anthropological factors have changed, although this explodes in the streets and demonstrations all the time, the exit of a safety region (of comfort is relative, because the discomfort is general) seems impossible.
This reflects in the set of everyday thoughts, elaborations and speeches, old buzzwords and rhetoric are back, but has nothing changed? I believe it has already changed, but it takes a new “world view,” one beyond good and evil, not with Nietzsche he preached a century and a half ago, he himself told his friend Jacob Burkhardt: “I ask you to read this book (though he says the same things as my Zarathustra, but in a different, very different way”, I think I would say even more today.
Turning now for 14 centuries, St. Augustine was turning Manicheism into an almost unrecognizable, ideological, two-sided Christianity: instrumentalization of the left and right-wing fundamentalist, I believe Jesus would say, “forgive them they do not know what they are doing” , contextualized yes, because the attacks are visceral and literally violent.
A synthesis of all this is possible, perhaps because we reject ideologically a pre-school Marxism in Frankfurt, on the other hand, a pre-Cambrian nationalism, the synthesis may come later as long as there is possibility of reflection, now there is no .
Fighting fires, avoiding a return to gloomy authoritarianism, circumventing fallacies of fake news, trying to establish a dialogue on essential proposals: security, education and health.
Self-criticisms, I think they are impossible for messianic discourses, it is necessary to look at the whole planet and reflect on this “eternal return”.
In my view there are no new models, there is no “new” thinking (no allusion to the yuppie news party) , I do not see new thinking, I do not see any new “clearing”, just old ideological speeches and religions that killed God, which has nothing to do with what they advocate to “arm one another.”
My exit, to return to being, in its being: the man in his persistent existence in this world, the being-in-the-world with its consequences and risks.
