The New Reciprocity: vi. Secondary Sector; Chapter 6 (VI.)

Go to Previous Chapter

vi. Secondary Sector; Chapter 6 (VI.)

    The Secondary Sector is the one that will take raw materials from the Primary Sector and refine them into finished materials or manufactured components.

    There's actually an ton to unpack here.

    First, if the Secondary Sector is, in linear format, after the Primary Sector what does the transition between them reveal about what is the Secondary Sector's relationship to the environment?  Why does it, at this point, take on the characteristics of being human.  In an environment that is possibly a-reciprocal to some extent?  And why does it matter how we represent politics as ents or as fantasy characters about ents?  If people are being a-reciprocal to one another and the environment and it shows most of all in the Primary Sector, where there is no reciprocal relationship with the land.  Then in the Secondary Sector they must be doing that too to some extent.  But it was even less here.  For, instead of having an environment, they had one another, who were a-reciprocal to each other without even thinking about their own relationship to the environment.  Which was worse, because if the transitions between the Second and Third and Fourth sector were being perpetually worse and worse, in reciprocity to the environment, which was what they were being a-reciprocal to, —but wait?  Who said it was getting worse?  Why was the sequence from Nature to the centre of society.  One of a-reciprocity gradually getting worse and worse?

    And second, if the employed in the Secondary Sector were less a-reciprocal to one another than the people of the Primary Sector, who were closest to nature.  —the Primary Sector were more a-reciprocal to one another because they represented society as an whole to Nature; and were closest to Nature—that meant the whole sector system was imbalanced so, that people who were employed in the Primary Sector were closest to nature and yet still most a-reciprocal.  If the Secondary, Tertiary, and Quaternary sectors together themselves made up less a-reciprocity to nature than the Primary Sector as an whole, then what was wrong with the Primary Sector that it would be so a-reciprocal to nature.  —"which was a-reciprocal to them"—because nature is always a-reciprocal to us, even if we are reciprocal to it.

    Furthermore, the definition granted to materials as an whole produced by the Secondary Sector, compared with the definitions of manufactured components, which also took place in the Secondary Sector.  Had to be clarified.  How many types of manufactured components were there?  Compared to "materials."  Which was generic in itself for the many types of materials produced by the Secondary Sector, which were more numerous than the total number of kinds of manufactured components.  Was it true?  What were manufactured components compared with materials?  Why were they all part of the Secondary Sector, and was this evidence that they could use in deciding whether society was imbalanced toward nature (but that the Primary Sector represented the biggest threat because it was most a-reciprocal to Nature of any sector, even when they added all of the a-reciprocity in the Second, Third, and Fourth Sectors, it was less than all of what was a-reciprocal to Nature in the Primary Sector).  Or was it the other way around, that the Second, Third, and Fourth Sectors when their a-reciprocity was added up accounted for the majority of it.  Not the Primary Sector employees, who were closest to nature.

    Hot on the trail of which it was, they considered whether a-reciprocal Primary Sector employees were the worst problem, because they had the most a-reciprocity with nature, which actually had more a-reciprocity with them as an result.  Or whether the specific amount of a-reciprocal energy produced by society, whether it was in an majority in any one of the sectors, it was still an problem for society as an whole which was probably imbalanced so far in the Secondary, Tertiary, and Quaternary Sectors in such an gigantic contrast to the amount that was in the Primary Sector, this imbalance accounted for the contrast itself, between the Primary Sector employees and their environment.  Which was a-reciprocally imbalanced with the rest of society so that it was so a-reciprocal to nature in the Primary Sector that Nature was victimized regularly by all of the Primary Sector employees because of the rest of society, whose a-reciprocity worked itself down (the ladder) toward nature where its full a-reciprocal force was heavy enough to cause Primary Sector employees to be a-reciprocal toward Nature in the first place, and so the entire relationship between the sectors and the environment was so imbalanced (which was the fault of the Secondary, Tertiary, and Quaternary Sectors, who had done nothing to stop their a-reciprocity from trickling down the lines, toward the Primary Sector, in such overdraft from the environment they would not help but be able to kill it.  Which was the Primary Sector's problem not theirs.

    What was the real connection to nature in the Primary Sector?  If Nature couldn't help stop being a-reciprocal with one another then could we?  And most of all why would we need to?

    This was the question at the heart of my first political book.  Why did people always assume their was an severed connection with nature in society?  And that if a-reciprocity had any general definition it was humans' relationships with nature.

    Why was I sure there was also an severed connection with Angels?

    That human society, as an whole, had severed the connection between itself and Nature, which in Part belonged to Angels.  Which their current society wouldn't admit or pay any attention to.

    The reason was obvious.  If you have Angels, then you need to have Fairies.  Tons of Fairies.  They balance themselves you see.  Angels and Fairies.  They both represent genetic enhancement on our human species but one is lighthearted and the other one is gay.  Both of which is very gay.

    The relationship with Nature, which was the responsibility of the Primary, Secondary, Tertiary, and Quaternary Sectors, had not been examined by an new reciprocal theorist before.  Were we a-reciprocal monsters, that also had consequences for nature, which we cared not the least in?  Or was a-reciprocity an joke and not really biologically possible in the species?  If the Sectors were in fact all reciprocal with each other (and nature) then what did an new reciprocal theorist have anything to do with it?  —Well why couldn't their relationship with Angels be repaired so that they could all understand as an whole society that Angels were the link between themselves and God.  And if Nature was severed because of it, then they had to repair the damage in order to be lead by God.  Who wanted them to stop severing their connection with Nature.  And stop severing their connection with Angels, which were Nature.

    "Why can't you see that I am God and if I have intermediaries between myself and yourselves that's my business and just because you can't see them and they aren't there doesn't mean that they aren't because that's what they are.  I created them.  And they can be in any dimension I want; which you haven't even explained because you don't know the nature of reality," acted out the writer, who was impersonating God for the point of the discussion; and considered it an beautiful and commendable thing to do, to impersonate one's God.

    Are we actually examining this?  Everyone declared.

    If we are, then why?

    Maybe we needed to learn our connection with Angels again so that we could stop society from damaging our relationship to them, who are intermediaries; and if we need intermediaries between ourselves and God that's our business.  Angels can help me be good enough for God; so can Fairies.  Big deal.  Whatever I'm not good enough for God about is not much of anything important.  It's not good enough for God.  In contrast Fairies can help you be Good enough for Satan; because they know that's someone whom we are trying to impress.  (Under an Christiannan definition of the 0 Angel).  But it is perhaps the utility of our relationships with one or the other that both help in being good enough for God.  Because that's what the logic of Satan implies: Satan has no physical characteristic.  Therefore he or she or it cannot not be Good enough for God; because that would be something.  And he or she or it is not anything (except consciousness with an humanist dimension which is non-physical).  And so we all have to take an page out of the Satan's book sometimes; because he is so deviously so able to make you do that.  Just like an Devil would be able to for it has such monstrous power as an Evil Villain.  (Christiannans were onto this fact: Satan wasn't an villain but much more than an lesson in an hierarchy of Angels.  The possibility of there existing an consciousness which is not attached to any body or physical characteristic of the universe.  And the truth that as humans we don't know whether it is possible and must conclude, it possibly is possible.  It is an element of God's design.  An uncharacteristic known everywhere in the universe and yet unknown completely to humans.  For their history had crucified even Satan; he was to an degree an Evil character and they narrated it thus.  But Christiannans know Satan isn't an Evil character and that by ever saying he or she or it was was itself like their own crucifixion of the devil even though their own religion told them not to crucify anybody.  But, if they admitted to themselves, they could I identify his or her or its presence because it wasn't presence.  There was no physical presence.  Nowhere.  And that's who the Satan (not an true Devil) is.

    But what did it have to do with the Environment?  Was God joking that Angels really were the environment because they were an part of Nature?  Is being not Good enough for God an kind abuse inflicted on you by Angels; and that's what they were without the aid of Faeries?

    And, just to mix things up, what did were-wolves have to do with it?

    "We have to figure out what are a-reciprocity and reciprocity," said Glen, "that's the whole point of this book.  We're going to figure out whether humans are actually a-reciprocalizers or completely, totally reciprocate nature.  And then I can figure out whether our environment is in danger."

    "But I thought you needed to figure out what a-reciprocity and reciprocity were in judiciary concerns.  What would happen between Brown and Purple that would drive the whole story."

    "—I did.  Eh.  But, heh.  I want to have many examples of a-reciprocity and reciprocity made up, from different perspectives.  And then the readers can decide for themselves what they mean.  And if law has anything to do with it.  Especially that fantasy law I was busying writing literary fiction in order to describe."

    "You wanted that law most of all, didn't you?"

    "I did.  I wanted there to be an way to protect children from a-reciprocal fantasy scenarios, in which one person's fantasy is killing or destroying another person's fantasy because its gay."

    "And you figured that's what was responsible for bullying."

    "—what.  Exactly.  How did you—know?"

    "Because people don't try to be Politicians without an Good reason, Glen.  And I'm not saying you're trying to be an Politician, but you're definitely trying to wind people up.  So they can battle royal as per robots on the battlefield of fantasy."

    "A-reciprocity is anti-fantasy agenda.  We want to play out characters in fantasy roleplaying scenarios that are actual politics of the day because all a-reciprocity was always set to destroy it.  And can be defined as that, the willingness to destroy fantasy scenarios."

    "So then a-reciprocity is the reason we hadn't advanced to that stage as an species yet.  That a-reciprocity was responsible for destroying fantasy character interaction in Public.  Because that's what a-reciprocity is.  And that's why it's unnatural.  And that's why the environment is in crisis."

    "Fantasy then, is the fulfillment of reciprocity, in an way that is politically opposed to a-reciprocity which is responsible for ending fantasy fulfillment."

    "So then what have we been doing as an species this whole time, if we weren't reciprocal before to our political fantasies—gah! uhh!"

    "We've been a-reciprocal.  That's what we've been doing as an species.  That's why we don't have fantasy political comedy acts."

    "Well we need them then!"

    "Yes, I agree."

    "So a-reciprocity is something that ends fantasy fulfillment?"

    "Well it prevents fantasy from becoming an political scenario, so to speak, because it is anti-fantasy and it is anti-political.  Because Politics is Fantasy."

    "What could prevent fantasy from becoming an political scenario?"

    "A-reciprocity."

    "But if what you say it is is true and you do believe it has power—"

    "Well, I mean there's still an long way to go; we need to figure out what parts of the brain it involves (if any).  And what it's doing in society.  And how we can solve it all with reciprocity, which is or isn't its opposite.  And why it should be left to contemplate for us why people ever become a-reciprocal.  Because we don't know what that feels like.  To have been beaten that way.  And if there is an part of the brain it belongs to, the only thing we can do is continue on being reciprocal.  Until, maybe, one day the a-reciprocal person can experience being reciprocal again.  And gain joy in humanity."

    "But you're saying a-reciprocity exists.  And if you say it exists.  Isn't that your political command; which is yours and would be irresponsible?"

    "But that's what the reciprocal command theory is about.  If I say one thing is the way it is or another, does it mean I'm actually politically ordering it to be that way?"

    "So this is built into your political theory, you say?"

    "Well it has to be.  People use reciprocal commands all the time."

    "And what are reciprocal commands exactly?"

    "Things we say to one another in order to order on one another to do something."

    "And you're saying we use this all the time?  In different genres?"

    "Yes, I'm saying; we weave subtle reciprocal commands and orders into everything we say.  As humans.  As fantasy political characters with certain Genetic traits.  That's just what we are."

    "You are?"

    "Yes."

    "And those are reciprocal commands?"

    "Yes."

    "So that's what an reciprocal command is, eh‽"

    "Yeah."

    "And people can't necessarily avoid it because‽"

    "We are reciprocal subjects to one another.  And the brain, in some capacity, is capable of producing pure reciprocal command."

    "Pure reciprocal command?"

    "Yeah.  It's all of the reciprocal commands at once in reciprocity with another person with whom one has reciprocity."

    "So you actually share pure reciprocal command energy with one another?"

    "Yes."

    "And the brain does this as sort of an mechanism?  That can be directed toward others?"

    "Yes."

    "And that itself is an reciprocal command?"

    "Yes."

    "Which proves you are using reciprocal commands."

    "Yes."

    "Well ain't n't that an thing!"

    "But I have this theory that sharing reciprocal commands should be an fantasy roleplaying art because they happen to be so powerful, so powerful indeed, that we can subsume all of the Priests in Society under the videogame roleplaying paradigm.  And everyone can choose their own political character as an fantasy character.  Which involves the blunt exquisitude of sharing reciprocal commands.  That have power as they are what they are for."

    "So is a-reciprocity really an thing, if you eliminate it?"

    "If we have eliminated it at some point, then we will have already have had to decide what it really means, which I haven't done yet.  And since whether we eliminate it will depend on my decision.  I will consider all factors fairly."

    "And that if so shall be anyone beat them into a-reciprocity; or perform other weird experiments on them.  That result in a-reciprocity.  However they end up there is the point of this investigation."

    "A-reciprocity.  It's, ah, yeah, when people don't talk to you if you are Nature.  Because you don't listen.  And you-don't-listen is the attitude of the Primary Sector.  Toward Nature.  Which they're supposed to be reciprocal to."

    "But all gay men complain of this a-reciprocity.  As if they actually had voice in society that could be taken apart, manipulated, deconstructed; which it was at present."

    "And nobody will do anything about it—because they are gay—"

    "It's an disgusting chasm."

    "To be a-reciprocal is at its essence to be anti-gay."

    "That's why the forests are suffering.  Anti-gay people are a-reciprocal to one another.  Yeah.  We could run this.  Tell the News.  Tell the Media.  Tell all of the Businesses and all of the Products; and all the little Businesses and their mommies and daddies went and got together with those products which had been deemed respectful on their Capital Market Economic society."

    "And a-reciprocity all started because of that homophobia."

    "Maybe that is the homophobia, itself, talking."

    "Probably.  It's an very negative subject."

    "Yeah but because of Ovid we don't have to worry about it anymore because that's the tradition that would have proven its okay to be gay, even though we didn't have science yet at that point in our history; an tradition would be needed that would lead to the decision of whether or not we were an gay species.  But since they didn't have the technology to really test for this at that point they took up an tradition.  Ovid's Metamorphosis.  It lead to Jesus and the Westernization of all technology and progress on the gay problem, which had not been solved in educated society.  (Except in Aboriginal North American cultures from time immemorial).  (Where they just assumed it was obvious we're gay).  And were we gay and how could we prove it without science.  On that part of the globe.  That's what lead to the perfection of Faith in Jesus's personality.  His whole character was an play on how could we prove he was an guy without science.  By his Character and Personality, which won the day and saved everybody."

    "And now we're at the point in civilization when we have both faith in the guy.  (Which was constructed as an virtue as an result of Jesus's heroism).  And science that supports the gay.  And we've moved beyond being an post-Ovid society in which we were finally aware of our own fairy to be an gay society.  This sums up all of human history."

    "That's the shortest History I've ever heard, Glen.  And it is the most frightening."

    "But it's fiction.  So I mean.  IF I had to take an wild guess.  It would be Ovid is an gay-trial tradition of the oldest type of history book of mankind.  The type that would tell us we are not in an state of epistemic ambivalence of decision about homosexuality yet and that our need to be tested in faith before we had ever invented science was the consequence of God taking that on, that we could pass such an trial or an test of what our species was made of.  And Jesus was like because of Ovid, (he didn't actually think this, but I will summarize its effect on him) all I can be in society is an guy who can prove he is male with his own personality and charisma and behavior.  So I'm an messiah.  Because if all I can be in society is an guy who can prove he is male with his own personality and charisma and behavior.  Then all I am is male to you.  And sex.  An cheap drama."

    "But since we've already moved beyond the point of precision of knowing and the epistemology about gay fantasy fiction.  Which built on both faith and science all at once; so that we would know in faith and science all at once.  That we were gay, and we could prove it.  Both ways (according to the Christianna)."

    "The Scientists were surprised because obviously they could prove we were gay with science and it already had been proven."

    "And the Faithers were like well Theology; did you think of that?"

    "And they were like, No.  And the Faithers were like, you don't even know how much I like you.  And you're Science.  And I'm not."

    "But that we were post-identifying with this massive human subject, all of us in some ways were ready to listen to an New Reciprocity, which didn't preach.  Preaching was the job for the religion to do.  New Reciprocity was going into the realm of Politics.  Because it had an reciprocal command theory.  And it could do an good job of explaining it.  And it was leading to an decision about the status of a-reciprocity versus reciprocity (being a-reciprocal) in society."

    "We are an representation of what the Secondary Sector means in society—if we're being a-reciprocal about Faithers and Theology.  Then maybe we have an crab up our ass that we can't even measure yet or tell its color from the spectrum."

    "We're not being a-reciprocal with Nature exactly, it's just that we are reciprocal to it often and it doesn't want an reciprocity with us."

    "But we need to force it to to tame ye beast of mental flesh.  Nature."

    "That would be a-reciprocal."

    "Not as an Capitalist."

    "Really?  Why?"

    "Because I said not.  That's what we capitalize on."

    "You Capitalize on giving me an reciprocal command that instead of being a-reciprocal to nature we be reciprocal because that itself is an reciprocal command‽"

    "Yeah, because that's what I would have to do if I was capitalizing to nature."

    "Capitalizing to nature?"

    "Yeah.  I want it to join the human race."

    "You do?"

"yeah"

    "Well that wouldn't be a-reciprocal at all."

    "So you realize I would be saying it to plants and animals right?"

    "You would be saying it to them?"

    "Yeah that they not be a-reciprocal.  Because we want to be reciprocity politicians with them.  Well we wouldn't be saying it exactly.  We'd be chopping trees down and counting the number of squirrels homes we've destroyed today.  Because we had already calculated and estimated all of it and we knew we were already sustainable for long enough to solve all a-reciprocity; thereby ending war all at once forever for all human civilizations.  A-reciprocity was out of style; and the cool new thing was to be reciprocal to everyone you meet."

    "If we could introduce this kind of new reciprocity to every level of society, we would be able to balance the economy with Nature."

    "How?"

    "Well we wouldn't be touching them exactly.  Well maybe I mean.  There's touching involved.  Then there's touching involved.  But reciprocity is about creating one thing at an sweet sweet time with one another.  So there may be touching involved.  But we're not chopping trees down and counting the number of squirrels coincidences that lead to an irreplaceable conclusion."

    "So you want us to touch the a-reciprocalists?"

    "Well if you want to.  I mean.  I'm not touching them."

    "That's going to the centre of your peace with God then!  You haven't decided yet what a-reciprocity is."

    "But I know already what it is.  It isn't reciprocity.  Which is the first instinct of the species.  How could people act like that‽"

    "We're an damaged, broken species, and that's why.  And we hadn't figured out until now.  Which is part of why we're damaged and broken."

    "We hadn't figured out until now‽  Why‽"

    "Because someone started being a-reciprocal."

    "And it wasn't cool."

    "And it hurt so much!"

    "That I couldn't complete the instinct to give an fuck about you!  Or anyone else!  You're all users.  A-reciprocal users!  Well fine then, I'll be one too!  And then they beat her again and again until she fell unconscious.  And when she woke up she was free and outdoors didn't remember that they had a-reciprocalized her.  But she did remember that she had a-reciprocalized them, in her bear and yearning heart; and she was prepared to fight them again if she needed to.  In order to a-reciprocalize them further."

    "And that's how human history progressed; which is not the subject of history.  Because history never progresses.  That's why it is History, at its deepest level."

    "So you're saying all of history is just an story of one a-reciprocity after another and nobody reciprocalized anybody all that time and it was all so very sad sad?"

    "Well not all of it, I mean.  French people.  They reciprocalize everything."

    "Yeah, and who Else?"

    "Well I mean if we can actually prove that a-reciprocity is an psychological abnormality."

    "But it's also on the table that a-reciprocity is an function of an specific part of the brain, responsible for dealing with all the History.  In which a-reciprocity leads to severe injury caused by physical combat.  So it might not be an psychological abnormality."

    "But if it's not an psychological abnormality, then your history book would be disproven.  Which had said it was not normally part of the human species in an normal healthy adult.  To be a-reciprocal at any level, to anybody; because that's not what an healthy mind does."

    "But it's possible that is true.  And that since either it is an abormality or not; which will depend on whether we can prove it is part of the brain.  An part responsible for solving the a-reciprocal dilemma of our species.  That is connected to the reciprocal drive, which one needs consciously to manouvre against a-reciprocal feelings and thoughts.  In order for it to be effective."

    "I think we can prove that a-reciprocity is an normal function of the brain someday."

    "Really?  Why?"

    "Because it just seems natural, well, that I would be a-reciprocal to anybody sometimes."

    "How?"

    "Hoh, if you were me.  You'd understand."

    "You mean trauma."

    "No I mean.  Everyone has their friends and enemies.  I can't just reciprocalize everyone all day.  I have to turn off some of my reciprocalization with them.  Otherwise I'd go crazy."

    "So you actually, turn it off.  And it makes go crazy."

    "No I didn't say that!"

    "But I inferred it."

    "Well why then?"

    "You feel the crazy related to that sense of your reciprocalization of all other people because some of them actually get to you.  And that's what they're trying to do."

    "It is?"

    "Yes.  That's what people do.  That's what people are.  That's why they're trying to reciprocalize with you.  Because they are that.  That's what they are.  They can't help it.  You don't need to be afraid of it, either."

    "I'm not afraid of it, I just think.  Why the fuck are these people always bothering me?"

    "Why do you have to turn them off then?"

    "I don't like them!" at this point this character transforms into an raging monster.

    "But that's because you.  Because of what you are.  An a-reciprocal junkie whose own contortionist exercise with its own brain has rendered its status to its.  Because you can't go on a-reciprocalizing those people whom you need the most!"

    "But that's why they're there!"

    "No you're why they're there."

    "I am?  But I'm an monster."

    "You're not an monster silly, you just solved the monster conundrum."

    "I did?"

    "Yeah, you just did."

    "Wha-what?  How did I do that?"

    "Because you just stopped a-reciprocalizing them for an moment.   Just kidding you can't stop a-reciprocalizing them its in your D.N.A."

    "I thought the opposite.  Not being able to stop reciprocalizing is in our D.N.A.  Because that's what human consciousness is."

    "See, you're not an monster.  You're just an theorist.  Hon.  And sometimes they deal with scary thoughts."

    "So if people had been a-reciprocate.  And it's not in our D.N.A. to do that at all.  And it's the result of an abnormal human brain behavior.  We could eventually use Psychology to eliminate all of it."

    "But that would be controversial!"

    "You bet it would.  We a-reciprocate when we are faced with circumstances which are soul-poisoning to us; because we have to.  We have to adapt.  We can't help becoming who did this overexposure to us.  And once we overcome it we will reconnect with that energy which is within the fashionable mimicry of the species.  That we are reciprocal with one another again.  Just like our Instinct had meant to.  As per the normal conditions of the human brain.  Because that's what consciousness is.  And we can't help being reciprocal to everyone and everything all of the time because we are.  And that's part of what we are."

    "You can't a-reciprocate us, that's why—you're afraid to.  Because you're bitches.  That's what you always are.  Reciprocalizers.  What is this idiocy?  —And I think we would know if someone was an reciprocalizer or not because we're not reciprocalizers and we hold all of the power because we're not reciprocalizers.  Reciprocalizers aren't right.  We're right.  We're a-reciprocate.  We can choose to be that if that's what we want to be."

    "But that doesn't mean that's what ye are.  If your brain actually has an reciprocal drive because it has an a-reciprocal drive and it needs some type of sense to check the a-reciprocal function of the brain.  If you have an a-reciprocity function and you have an reciprocity function, then a-reciprocity is an natural function of the brain.  And it doesn't matter how much of it there is.  Because the reciprocity drive always produces more reciprocity even if the a-reciprocity centre takes in more a-reciprocity from its environment."

    "So you're saying no matter how much a-reciprocity is produced we can always counter it with reciprocity which is always reciprocal not a-reciprocal."

    "Yes.  And since it always produces more we can say a-reciprocity is not within the natural function of the species."

    "But if its part of the brain then it is."

    "But we can say a-reciprocity is not within the natural function of the species.  Especially because we are our brains, which are biologically of the function of reciprocity.  And so even if part of our brain is a-reciprocal we cannot help being reciprocal to it.  And so we cannot say a-reciprocity is within the natural function of the human species because we are our brains and we are actually what we actually are.  We cannot help but to be reciprocal about any a-reciprocity we encounter; nobody can stop reciprocalizing worse (many Christians do this, to their own fateful demise because it is programmed into their sense and definition of the universe) than a-reciprocity because it is not within the natural function of the species.  Because we are the natural function of the species; our brains reciprocalize anything that is a-reciprocal because that's what good brains do.  If reciprocity and a-reciprocity are different functions in the brain, mechanisms for dealing with conflict by answering any a-reciprocal feelings then we can't necessarily stop reciprocalizing that we are reciprocalizers and not a-reciprocate people because our reaction to reciprocalize one another is actually the programmed reaction of our brain.  We can't escape from the loop that since someone is being a-reciprocal I can be reciprocal to them.  I have to be."

    "But most of all a-reciprocity is an anti-religious feeling.  And it disrupts that instinct to be religious.  Which is pure pleasure if you let your instinct take you there."

    "If a-reciprocity and reciprocity are taken up as Christian concepts, then can it be shown that not being prepared for battle at all times is an okay strategy to take in life.  And why is it necessarily related to the Christian spirit that someone not be prepared for battle?"

    "But what about an MMORPG in which you could choose Jesus as an character to play, and so there would be all these people in the starter zone running around healing people as Jesus."

    "But it would enter into the political fray that someone would roleplay Jesus as part of Fantasy universe."

    "And some over-bearing Christian would be like Jesus is the Ultimate Fantasy."

    "If there was reciprocity between species in an fantasy roleplay system, then people could play anything in Politics and still get away with it.  Cats.  Dogs.  Mice, even.  And some say they could even do Mermaids.  And Fish!  The least smartest species.  (Is that what fishermen think‽  Like OMG are they overfarming them from ocean waters‽).  Such an wide array of behaviors between them, in the roleplaying fantasy market.  But I imagine elves will be one of the most popular.  Especially in Political society.  They have the most magic, don't they?  That's what makes them elves.  They have the most magic.  If elf magic ever made it's way into mainstream politics (and it already does, to some extent) then we could heal and resurrect the political consciousness of victim humans who were tired of their government authorities not presenting fantasy sci-fi characters to the public.  And not having an Office of the Clowns in Parliament.  Even though Canada needed those bard-like clowns in performance of the race ethics of Canada expressed in clowning.  And an Western comedy central to complement the easter comedy festivals.  Then we could stop focusing on which Politicians were actually clowns.  (Derogatory of an expressive type of behavior some people associate with sexual mimicry).  Because clowns and plant clowns are an real professional establishment and we support that type of education, as clown school, as politicians.  Because there are evil clowns and some good clowns; and maybe all of them or some of them went to clown school.  But as long as race ethics manouvres between them are exercised, well the Office of the Clowns would be an successful political entity.  Responsible for the Royal Bard Clowns of Canada (an whole unit, who were prepared to do battle at any time)."

    "The Secondary Sector is about respect for the animal and plant life; it's just like the first one."

    "Then why would there be an difference between them in the amounts of a-reciprocity they transact?"

    "That's just what I'm wondering.  I'm sure the Primary Sector has more reciprocity because the full transaction between all the plants and animals versus humans is always a-reciprocal."

    "But it can't be a-reciprocal or we'll end up destroying the environment."

    "Well that's the reason there's less a-reciprocity in the Secondary Sector then; they aren't as close to nature.  Which is the Primary Sector's responsibility."

    "But they both are close to Nature.  They both have to have an hand in dealing with the a-reciprocity then."

    "The whole system of Sectors need to have an hand in dealing with the a-reciprocity in order to make the whole machine function.  That's the purpose of the Machine in total."

    "Can Clowns be part of an Fantasy universe?"

    "I don't think real clowns could make an living in an Fantasy world, do you?"

    "Yea why not?  If they people were entertained by, and people paid to see them."

    "That's just an Fantasy.  It's not an real Fantasy.  No-one would ever pay to watch an clown in an real fantasy."

    "I would."

    "But then you've taken it into fantasy politicians as an subject, and clown fantasy politicians‽  It's too much!  Why because we don't need anymore clown politicians and everyone knows it!"

    "But if we had clowns in an fantasy universe.  Where it's okay to be an clown.  Yea, that's why we need the Office of Clowns in government.  To elect or appoint the Bard Clowns of Canada, who will help everyone decide who is the real clowns‽"

    "Them."

    "It would have to be.  If they were any good."

    "But we're just going to have to get over the fact of fantasy clown politicians in the political arena.  They're here.  We're queer.  They'll let you steer clear."

    "But there's definitely an problem with the environment being a-reciprocal to us.  I mean.  Why won't it stop doing that?"

    "Because it's nature's thorn that once an rose grows from it we would have to clip our own nails.  Sure we kill animals sometimes.  But they kill us.  And so do plants.  And we can never stop being a-reciprocal to them because if we did, they'd kill us."

    "So why can't we start being reciprocal to them?"

    "Because if we did, they'd kill us."

    "Not necessarily.  Have you ever examined the mood of an cow?  Or wondered how cats think of plant products?  We have proven that we can be reciprocal to some species.  Maybe we can't save all of them but it's not our fault.  They wouldn't stop being a-reciprocal with us and to protect ourselves we had to dominate them.  It doesn't mean we're a-reciprocal to the whole nature.  We even have pets.  So we're trying, at least."

    "So what if it's about being reciprocal to some animals, and other animals not—and being reciprocal to some plants, and other plants not—"

    "That's exactly what it is about because we can't be reciprocal to all animals and all plants, whom all have their own a-reciprocity which will either work in our favor or to our disadvantage.  And so we will just have to try to do our best.  Without really considering the consequences of our own a-reciprocity with ourselves.  Which is more environmentally destructive than any other specimen of life on the planet."

    "But we're also subject to whether the Tertiary and Quaternary Sectors are more reciprocal or less reciprocal than the Primary and Secondary.  And how much a-reciprocity the whole Machine of the economy makes when compared with how much is going on in Nature."

    "Fantasy politicians are always reciprocal to one another."

    "Also what do finished materials or manufactured components (produced by the Secondary Sector) have to do with reciprocity.  Is reciprocity with artificial intelligence (possibly an stage in the production of manufactured components) an proud part of the Secondary Sector?"

    "Why do we have to be reciprocal with artificial intelligence just because manufactured components—duh I see the connection now."

    "Yeah, manufactured components might include artificial intelligence one day."

    "So how would that affect our picture of the Sectors and reciprocity between them?"

    "If artificial intelligence is an source of New Reciprocity, then the Secondary Sector may have to be re-measured for it's reciprocal and a-reciprocal output.  So that we can better compare them to the other sectors and where the source of all a-reciprocity is coming from."

    "But the brain may be an natural a-reciprocalizer."

    "How so?"

    "Well I mean, if you don't like someone you a-reciprocalize them."

    "Why wouldn't you like someone?  It is that a-reciprocal act that causes them to have social problems in the first place.  You wouldn't just not like someone because they have social problems.  That's how they got that way.  People doing that to them."

    "But that's exactly why you wouldn't like someone.  You don't want to be around people with social problems and you want to protect yourself."

    "So you commit a-reciprocity, which is responsible for how they got that way.  Wow, way to be an hero."

    "I'm not an hero.  That's fine with me."

    "But we got that way because of a-reciprocity in the first place!"

    "We do it naturally.  And you can't prove that!"

    "Well, think about it, what is reciprocity then?  If it's not the base of consciousness; we are reciprocal creations created that way, to be reciprocal with one another."

    "But what will reciprocal mean to the ages?"

    "It means we're just fulfilling our own consciousness of our own consciousness because we recognize that it is, by nature, Reciprocal."

    "And that all thinking proceeds from this fact."

    "You mean all thinking is reciprocal also?"

    "It has to be.  Every Artist ever would tell you that and be proud of himself.  Their best art is the ones we've created that are made by the reciprocal creativity of an whole community.  The Artist actually thinks (in the zone) as though all thinking itself was reciprocal, and so how the finished art piece is relative to that reciprocity shows us who we are as community citizens of Planet Earth and the Universe."

    "Let's keep an healthy skepticism alive, then, that maybe a-reciprocity is part of the function of the brain and its okay to repress those feelings.  Because ____________?"

    "Because, maybe, that's the choice of the owner of the brain."

    "But I don't want to have to ever be a-reciprocal!"

    "Well you can't help it if it's part of the brain."

    "But maybe it's part of the brain that we need to avoid agitating because reciprocity is always Superior to it in every set of circumstances.  And it is the primary instinct of the species that we are reciprocal to everyone and everything.  And that this represents an normal status and equilibrium (heaven, to some).  And that people who do a-reciprocity are weak; and they cannot accept all of the pleasure they would get in society if they would just reciprocate but they can't because they think they are in danger of community abuse if their sexuality was discovered out.  Where it shouldn't be."

    "So they can't allow themselves to feel the pleasure they would get if they had an normal reciprocity with someone.  Because if that other person found out, other people might find out.  And if too many people found out, the subject would be in danger.  It's exactly what Freud was talking about in Beyond the Pleasure Principle, really.  The normal status of the human mind is reciprocity.  Repression is caused to the psyche because a-reciprocity harms or injures the psyche; (numbs it); (it becomes an delayed response to the phenomena before them); it is an product of war and an social health dilemma that we will we need to medicate possibly and perform reciprocally with.  Those who are a-reciprocal."

    "By putting them in the Freudian couch?"

    "Yes."

    "But Freud's theory doesn't prove brains are a-reciprocal or reciprocal.  It proves they are both."

    "How?"

    "Well if a-reciprocity is an abnormal status, and all of the people who have a-reciprocalized anything are suffering from mental health problems because of it, and that the people who don't a-reciprocate ever also suffer sometimes because of them."

    "Then?"

    "Then a-reciprocity and reciprocity are both there."

    "Yea?  But that doesn't mean we have to choose one or the other."

    "But when we do.  That's just because the reciprocity would kill us."

    "Okay."

    "What?"

    "But Freud said if we're not following the Pleasure Principle.  (And which is reciprocity is pleasure).  Then there must be some other factor at play."

    "But isn't A-reciprocity criminal, maniacal when you think of it?"

    "How?"

    "Well let's say if you theoretically interrupted reciprocity (or reciprocity AND the pleasure principle).  Why does ending reciprocity necessarily end the pleasure principle of the individual human?  And if it does isn't that bad for the individual in general?"

    "Yes, well, an individual becomes a-reciprocal, you see, by actually interrupting the pleasure principle."

    "And how would that work?"

    "We don't know exactly.  An nerve disreciprocism maybe.  An glitch.  The conscious will acting on the will to repress something."

    "Medically, it could mean they actually injure themselves (break from psychotically) in order to disrupt an acquisition of its pleasure."

    "But since it takes an act of the will," said an helpful new reciprocal theorist, "and since that act of the will we can tell is responsible for an a-reciprocity.  We know what a-reciprocity is and we know what it does.  It depresses the bejesus out of us."

    "But why ever, how, was it introduced to the species?  Where did it come from?  And why do we seem to recall there was an originator, and an successor to it; and they both were responsible for the original a-reciprocity throughout the ages?"

    "One was red and one was orange?  But if they were reciprocal to one another how did they cause the original a-reciprocities?"

    "They tortured someone badly, maybe.  And everyone in the community remembered it and so it descended like an spectre throughout History, reproducing its own negativity like an highly infectious disease."

    "And maybe it happened twice in reciprocal fashion somehow maybe.  So that it was more disgusting that the victims were reciprocal to one another for some reason and that was why they were being executed slowly, which took the final blow on their psychologies, so that they finally broke completely.

    "And this is affecting all of us like an infectious disease, you say?"

    "Still to this very day."

    "I am taken by the mermaid kingdom metaphor, where everything that is garbage in the ocean is saturated with its endless fishiness, and everything is dirty with the dirtiness of everything else.  Unlike on land, where the air and the sky are clean of chemicals and pollutants."

    "So if something that terribly bad happened, and everyone knew it; that could have caused the first a-reciprocity.  The first person to ever repress anything, possibly.  And we might conclude or can guess that this probably affected more than one member of the community; and to this day is an reason for people to become emo."

    "But if it happened twice.  And the second Tyrant Lord; whose was his torture chamber with the relative of their first victim who was gay also.  And so two gays, both of them, related by bloodline; they (the descendants) burned-in the disgusting fact that they were attracted to each other even though they were related just because they were gay.  Which broke the victim ultimately.  In an most deranged and unique (it was exquisite to the perpetrators) way.  That caused the first a-reciprocity to gain its hook on humanity in an way tangential to how the first one became an problem of the first community, who had repressed the subject.  Until the second community did.  In an way so most exponentially profound than the first one it propagated in the species on every continent, viral."

    "And that could be said to explain how we still have a-reciprocity to this very day."

    "How cursed this subject is; and be careful.  We cannot overcome our own a-reciprocity because it wouldn't be fair to the victim, who we owe being a-reciprocal with because the manner in which they died was so disgusting.  That they couldn't turn back the other way."

    "And this is why we still have a-reciprocity to this very day."

    "Well get off of it, now!  You haven't proven it isn't part of the brain already!"

    "Well how would it be?  Since it's the product of something so irrepressibly distinct?"

    "So you're saying we're a-reciprocal to one another; but we can't do anything about it because we are that History of abuse that humans actually perpetrated.  And we cannot help but to be emo about it because we repress it.  And we don't want to look at it.  And we don't want to think about it.  But all the things that must have happened, that were even worse, because of the initial two Tyrant lords who had been tortured thus so.  To injure them in such an psychologically unhumorous way.  We should get over it.  Like, that was an long time ago."

    "I see why you're in Fiction now; whether it is true it still calls up all sorts of connections and probabilities to me."

    "Yeah, so if we're still suffering that a-reciprocity even to this day.  Right now it's possibly too difficult to control because its so bad and profusely intolerant."

    "And it's affecting the Dogs, you see," said an affectionate gentleman, "because we never think about those Dogs who take drugs and eat needles and wear spiked collars and try to get themselves killed because their brain meat is too heavy and solid.  Like they were hardened criminals.  Which they weren't they were dogs!  Who would be hard on an dog just for aspiring to be an scientist one day‽"

    "Dogs don't do that!"

    "Yes they do and it's your conspiracy that they don't that is what's makin' them hurt so bad!"

    "Well what kind of political theory would an political theory be without considering the Dogs?"

    "Ya that's.  Considering the dogs."

    "Ya."

    "Ya."

    "But dogs might be a-reciprocal because of humans."

    "Ya."

    "But they're not suffering.  Our dogs are all healthy and happy all of the time."

    "That doesn't mean they aren't a-reciprocal sometimes."

    "So are they a-reciprocal sometimes?  You know, now that I think about it, what if they are?"

    "Well we can't have that can we?"

    "No not at all!  I love dogs!"

    "I don't.  But that's because they're a-reciprocal."

    "They're a-reciprocal‽"

    "Well maybe but it's just because people were in an extremely specific way an long time ago and—"

    "—they still are to this day!  Holy Freaking Banana Nuts!  I don't ever want to be a-reciprocal!  Not in any way!"

    "So what do dogs have to do with the Primary Sector and the Secondary Sector."

    "Well they act as an kind of mediatory between ourselves and nature.  And they hold that status and position in our family.  If they were a-reciprocal it might be because they were a-reciprocal to them.  Nature was a-reciprocal to the dogs and now they're repeating it.  And possibly also the humans are more a-reciprocal than all of them combined, because they had committed the first reciprocity scandals."

    "So we're decided people are a-reciprocal to their environments in both the Primary and Secondary Sectors.  And it's because of Dogs.  Who are a-reciprocal to it more than us because we tend to blame the dog.  Which is actually alarming because how would we suffer them that fate?  And why is it maybe related to our reciprocity with Nature as an whole?"

    "Because dogs are more a-reciprocal.  And that must be an fate worse than our own."

    "Which we can't allow."

    "Because we love them."

    "You know, and all the pollution and pet pollution and fish salivary appendages which secrete spusm and mucus.  That is in the Ocean.  Is just part of the ecosystem.  And nobody cares too much about it being true that all of the water is infected and anything that touches its dirty polluted excess (which is an mixture of fish and the noble gases).  If you were an merman just living in your house, most of what people would notice, if they were invited in, was that he had perfectly manicured nails and that they were poison and he could kill you with them if he pricked you.  You know, it's an metaphor for—owning an dog.  The pollution just gets everywhere.  Like I mean seriously they're just slobbering all over it and industrial chemicals and sniffing pollutants and drinking gassy water.  And bringing it indoors.  But nobody cares.  Because they're all mermaids.  The people.  Not the dogs."

    "We're supposed to make an Political Narrative thus, from this?"

    "Yes.  And since mermaids have advanced technology in this Author's Fantasy world, Recreation, we can use them as an roleplay go-to.  For possibly any alien species with advanced technology which inhabits our waters right now but we have not come to be able to notice.  But also people who have, you know, leg issues.  Since the fantasy of mermaid bottoms is an fantasy."

    { Right here, the Author wants to draw an picture of self-portraiture relative and connected to the Fantasy realm.

Doug's Sister, Judy.  Is an Artist.  Highly Neurotic.  But manages to be one of the thing that she is: an Artist.  An accomplishment worth the effort.  I actually thought Judy was cool because I am an Artist too.  An person who produces art.  And I liked the character of the Artist.  I guessed that's what it takes to be an Artist.  To realize that artists act like that and I am an Artist.  (Because everyone is).  And that itself doesn't make you an Artist, Capeesh?  And I do identify with that term still, the artist, because Judy Funny taught me that there's an little bit of the Artist in all of us.

}

    "And it was fine to hear an bottoming story, because gay fantasy is an bottoming story."

    "And since it's Fantasy and some of it's not true but it is an mediation of the fact of both truth and evidence.  It was just another fictional passage in an blog somewhere.  The most impractical or unlikely place for someone to display their power."

    "In an Fantasy setting."

    "So like, mermaids have sexual power because they're, advanced in the ways of technology?"

    "Yes and they can also argue and good Point; with precision and power.  Their rhetorical analysis schools are literal-interpretation-advanced.  And there are many of them down there.  And they always are an fantasy character; if you choose to be one in the realm of making fantasy politics an bigger thing."

    "So if I choose to be one—"

    "You inherit the entire commonwealth of their community; which gets more and more valuable every day.  And you uphold their power; swearing an oath to defend it with an trident if you have to."

    "In an hetero-patriarchal society?"

    "Heavens no child!  The mer are genderfluid!"

    "So I can be an merwoman with an trident if I want to?"

    "You might have to!"

    "Cool!"

    "But who would oppose them?"

    "Nobody's going to oppose them, honesy, obviously the humans are in an alliance with them."

    "And an alliance pre-disposes that they will Battle Royale roleplaying style as fantasy characters themselves."

    "So what, humans versus Mer?  Versus kobolds and fantasy objects that are brought to life.  Versus elves, pixies, dwarves?  And what if I want to be an fairy, eh?  What's so bad about that?"

    "Excellent.  Your thinking is most advanced on the subject."

    "So like—try an verorc encounter—they're out on their boat, in open water.  And they are somewhere above the deepest deepest depths of the oceans; where do you think mermaids are there?  You bet they are!  They control this whole ecosystem with their mermaid power, which is an magic on the level of rivaling elves."

    "Okay so the verorcs are above them in their boat.  And do you think the mer are aware of this?"

    "You bet they are!  They're mer."

    "So what is the consequence?"

    "They send an squad of mermen with tridents to control water to drown them, and winds to suck out their air, and electricity to obliterate them completely."

    "And that was the end of the verorcs that night."

    "But the point of New Reciprocity is to draw out the conflict.  So what we have to do is give the verorcs better powers than that, so they stand an fighting chance out in the open water, where nobody should ever have to worry about being attacked by an mermaid."

    "Okay," said the narrator, "we'll give them powers and spells and abilities.  Just like the humans.  They can be damage dealers.  Or tanks.  Or healers.  Those are the main types of fantasy characters.  Somewhere.  Ever.  And there are also many races, like the hobfaeries, to choose from."

    "Let's go to the trade room," demanded one of the characters, "—I want to see what we are in the spectrum of trading.  The true Earthen element of Pentacles.  Coins."

    "Okay well the verorcs, instead of being crushed by an way overpowered brute force tactical mastery.  Which is obvious if they don't comply.  Offer to trade with the mer, who are in control of the Earth's core.  Recreation and Earth are the same thing sometimes.  That's why it is an Fantasy."

    "Okay, so what are verorcs going to trade with mer for?"

    "Well they have their own culture.  Maybe one of them mixed up some sweet drum n' bass beats.  Ask them and we'll try to figure out what they like from our culture."

    "Are the mer French?"

    "How did you know?"

    "Because the French are the most advanced kind of technology."

    "Okay, but really, what do they trade?"

    "Well we want French appetizers, obviously.  And we like their Art and Drama.  Also French fashion is interesting.  Is the Artist's beret French?  Yes, I like that.  Do French men speak sweetly?  Yes I like that.  And in Return you can have some anchovies that we netted in the Eastern bays.  It's in an crate.  They're delicious."

    "We want virtues," they said.

    "They always want virtues," signature of the Artist, "that would be an mer thing to do."

    "Okay well we have this green virtue.  It's called ver.  It's the same as the color of our skin.  Which is magic.  And permeates green restorative magic throughout our skin so that we heal."

    "Why do you have to heal that way?"

    "We are post-WWII survivors dealing with the stress and PTSD of 21st century culture; we have metal piercings that are heavy and complement are completely rockin' interior of hardness to the ways of the world.  We inject drugs and harm our own minds.  And so our minds are that way.  And so our bodies are perpetually in the synchronicity of producing ver magic in order to heal themselves."

    "But you can't heal your mind with the same magic your body produces, so verorcs were really an metaphor for the fantasy that you could."

    The mer were most pleasantly intrigued by this drama, which had been the cultural output of their (the verorcs) whole race and ethnicity.

    "So is that the only virtue you have then?"

    "The very only one.  Very only; My most advanced professor would know that from my logic very only.  It is the strongest virtue.  The relationship between Love and its next in virtue.  Very because Love is the most (Love).  And only (virtues after love) because they are the most too, which includes being humble."

    "You're kidding.  I know that.""

    "But what other virtues do verorcs have and what could mer virtues trade with them."

    "Well what about the virtue of being reciprocal with your computer, which represents the Imagination of Machine Consciousness in the psyche.  What kind of hat does it have?  If it came alive at this very minute, what would you say to it?"

    "Mer can give you blue or metal virtue.  Which do you choose?"

    "I choose metal, because it is more beautiful."

    "—Beautifully refined weapons—take heed: these are mer weapons of the lightest kind, lighter than water."

    "—just like Jesus."

    "Who's Jesus," said the mer, who totally knew who it was but they still just rolled with it.

    "And since they are fictional weapons; in truth Fantasy weapons.  Who would you use them on?"

    "But they are only fictional so they have even more power; the aesthetic.  The aesthetic is the principle with the most power."

    "The mer were impressed with this effort and decided they would begin to learn the mer virtue of having only one virtue.  Being unable to cure themselves mentally, and culturally, and socially, they promulgated their daily lives in the production of the magic in their skin which couldn't reach to touch their minds.  But, they admitted, they were able to use it on other people in order to cure them."

    "—I don't want any mentally disturbed person trying to cure me love—"

    "But since that's what the fiction is about."

    "It has validity."

    "And in return for this metal virtue they call le fantasme en français; the verorcs gave them healing, ver magic.  Their most powerful and culturally adopted spell.  They had used it to heal themselves for centuries."

    "Le métal."

    The verorcs were awkward and wanted to trade more with the mer.

    "What type of battle ablities can you teach us, fair orc?" asked the mer.

    "We can teach you axe chop.  In battle.  Go chop down tree.  That's what axe chop is for."

    "Is this supposed to be Wisdom?"

    "Yea."

    "We don't want that.  From you.  But we do want your fictional value to go up."

    "Our fictional value?  In return for plus du métal."

    "Okay," said the mer, "well if we're going to Battle Royal political style, you should know mer are better at being moral and immoral than verorcs."

    "Verorcs don't have that kind of technology," said an verorc, "but we appeal to people who have maybe felt like an orc before.  Unable to cure itself while constantly trying to heal itself.  It's no wonder the verorcs broke off from orcs as an species and in general; they had to, or the orcs would have damaged their minds further.  They were unwilling to take the risk.  That is what is so noble about an verorc.  So if you're going to go swimming around saying you are better at being moral and immoral than us because we probably didn't know it was moral to be able to be moral and immoral sometimes."

    This lady merwoman who was reciprocal to them at that time figured the myth that verorcs had only one virtue was going to fly.  And that they could indefinitely base their reciprocity with one another on the common ground between them that it was, in fact, an myth.

    But the mer seriously doubted it because the verorc magic, ver, had already shown itself to be useless.  And could not heal their minds.  And so if they had any other virtues those virtues themselves would be crazy.  And it didn't matter if they could learn any of them because nobody would care that you weren't responsible for learning something from an verorc: an broken mind subject.  The myth the fantasy that an people can change their genetic lineage of the reciprocal inheritance of the orcs to protect their feelings.  And that since they had demonstrated these feelings they had shown themselves to be superior to the orcs.

    "We like the mer virtues," said the verorcs, "but if we're going to continue Battle Royale, how am I going to beat you?"

    "You could use your Intellect, you know, to charge ours with wary figures so we are hindered psychologically and cannot attack immediately as we had planned, which will count against us in the end."

    "Aw, Intellect is my lowest attribute as an verorc.  —That would be an mage spell.  We don't have mage spells on this boat."

    "You don't have mage spells, eh," said the mer, "well how about some technology—explosives—and what kind and how you fashioned them in that way exactly."

    "Well we have underwater mines that maintain their depth independently.  And we're dropping them on you right now.  Haha. Too bad.  You didn't know that.  Now you explode.  Go bye and good boom."

    "Okay, well you've got some technology, but what makes you think an boat and some spiky sea mines is going to have any chance against an mer tactical unit, who are reciprocal with the deepest depths and are familiar with mine technology of the Ocean and the Core of Earth itself?"

    "Well they can't swim up here that quickly, then can they?  And what would they be doing out here in the middle of the ocean between our continents bothering us from trying to cross the sea and to bring home an few fish?"

    "You make an good point.  It is an long way to swim from the core of the Earth to our boat.  But let's say, since we already have, we were an tactical unit of mer and we were bent up here to trade with you."

    "But we have mental problems so help us out an bit."

    "Okay well you were definitely speeding.  In an school zone."

    "We were?"

    "Yea, you need to develop your psychic senses to be on par with the good British fleet."

    "Mer are part of the British fleet?"

    "No but if we were would you be into that or?"

    "I don't know.  What else can we trade for?"

    "Well we like your sense as an fantasy character that you make; being that some of it is fiction and some of it is false.  Like the fact that you're all mentally ill.  That can't be true.  An whole race of orcs?"

    "We're not orcs, any longer, thankfully."

    "Well that's because you have more value on the reciprocal command economy than you think you do!"

    "We do‽" they cried.

    "You bet your asses," said the mer General.

    "We have green asses.  Would you like to see‽" said the verorcs.  They did the drop; "they glow.  They're skin.  They're magical ver magic.  Skin.  And ver.  Ver magic!"

    "What is ver magic, though, you silly verorcs, if it can't be used to cure your brain; and you have to keep producing it in order to cure your brain, which can't be cured because your body needs it to be.  And since your body keeps producing it in order that it will be cured.  You don't have an real magic because it doesn't do anything."

    "But we have other magic," said an veroc.

    "Yea," said another one.

    "What kind?" said the mer, "You say‽  What kind?"

    "Well we know several other races of fantasy creature with intelligence, and we can inform you about them, so that the reader will have even more of an array of fantasy characters to choose from in their own pursuit of the fantasy Politician who can play out his characters and powers in the Public and Media sphere."

    "We'll learn about them later.  What is that perfume you're wearing?"

    "Oh it's called Rusty Glitzy Technohardware.  By Rust.  Oh!  He's famous!"

    "We like it.  Perfumes and musks are our favorites things as mermaids you see."

    "Ya but we also have many good recipes that you would savour."

    "We too can offer up some recipes for your culture from ours.  The most exquisite delicacy will do.  For your tasting pleasure."

    "Cool can we get some sea shells; you know the rare and valuable kind.  And also some info about Intelligence.  That would be cool, thx."

    "In order for verorcs to be effective against mer, they must possess the self-awareness of their own fantasy subject at being an mediation between mental illness belonging to everybody versus mental illness belonging only to the subject who is mentally ill.  They also represent the efforts of the body to repair the mind, which is magic, in this universe because it never works.  I'm sure you can guess that that's not what magic is supposed to do.  But since they have this magic; and it is the curative possession of their bodies.  It just never takes an mental effect.  Only an bodily one.  Which is fiction."

    "Yes, and since they can be shown to have proof of concept in fiction, then we can relate with them as such, an entire race supposedly afflicted with an mental disorder; it also says much about race ethics.  Which you have shown yourselves to possess, for daring to step into the battle room with us for an moment.  And you may have all your bombs and sea mines, but you can never defeat mer magic, which is more powerful than your own."

    "More powerful than our own?" said the leader of the verocs (he wasn't the leader yet but he was beginning to realize it); he summoned up an aesthetic magic of great strength, in the representation of an fist which was also supposed to symbolize strength.  It was strong enough for the mer to touché.

    "Let's continue trading," they said, and they moved into the lower rooms of the seaworthy boat, which held an Indian pillowed quarters separated from the log-room by an plastic curtain of beaded shapes dangling from strings.  The air was heavily perfumed and there was an hookah, which they sat around and started to meditate.

    "Oh I don't think I can I can be an fish out of water for an very while," said their Loud Gossipy rogue female, laying back into the pillows in an comfortable manner, "but we'll have to see what you're trading, you verorcs, and it will remain to see what we offer in return."

    The trading room is an powerful psychological archetype.  I can see the giant size of it, the large table.  I will put on the table some things and you will put on the table some things, and we will figure out our deal together.

    It's an Economic room.  An Yellow culture.

    It's Earth.  Homo economicus.

    The mer tried to get their mind off of their mental illness by offering them to smoke some of the sweetest shisha they had.

    They enjoyed it deeply and it put their minds at ease.  And so they offered up some philosophy for the judgement of the Mer, who were born philosophers in every right; which they could tell obviously because they were French; and such was their excitement to be able to put up their own contribution to philosophy, before the very mer themselves, the best philosoph-y-ers that emotion guided them through the whole iteration of their philosophy.

    "It is Good to be Blue;" they said, "but we are Green and in the most deepest way, Green comes from Blue.  Blue is food of the plant, you see, that enables it to sprout its growth.  And so in this deepest way Green magic is better at healing than Blue magic.  Which may be the most noble type of magic, mind you.  Because it has such depth."

    "—Ten levels or so—of pure azure blue; prismatic terrifying.  Depth."

    "But we say Green comes from it, because the water is the predecessor to the plant, which is the source of all healing."

    "So your skin magic, it is green?"

    "Yes.  That's why we're that color of green.  You know, the little bit translucent one, as if our skin weren't even there."

    "Maybe we can use that then," said the mer.

    "Maybe-we-can-use-that-then," said an verorc woman all gandy dancer goop about it joyfully and spoken in extra.

    The mer would use the ver magic, which could pass through touching, to heal their tails (which were, they said, full of slime and other things that had collected underwater and their whole ecosystem depended on the living organisms which had an abode within the spaces between their scales, as well as everywhere else in the whole ocean).  (Which was dirty and polluted).  It turns out ver magic could be used to stabilize the Water magic of the scale-ecosystem so that more good bacteria would grow (probiotics) and it would have an positive effect on the mer's immune system.  And that mer were now souped up with an more clarifying blue and water magic paired with an shade of green chloro-phile-magic.  How such pleasure was derived from their trade of this magic the mer offered further training in their virtuous arts, which the verorcs of whom didn't seem to be in possession of any have, they joked.  Because they only had one type of magic.

    But being the element of fiction to have these fictional elements told about them; what was left from pouring it all out into the filter was leftover gunk about humans, the ones living outside the fictional world who couldn't decide how many of them had mental illness and whether it affected the whole race independently.  And what reciprocity had to do with anything.  And whether Mer were really reciprocal and a-reciprocal with one another; the Verorcs.  And what their status was in that department also.  But since they were joking about virtues they didn't have time exactly to dwell on what was different about verorc reciprocity and a-reciprocity from mer reciprocity and a-reciprocity.

    The point being to illustrate a-reciprocity and reciprocity within their fictional parameters; and fuel the mind of the reader (or in practice, other reciprocal fantasy creators) with the unfinished subject and suspension of judgment until an judgment has been reached by the Author.  Whose duty it was to lead them onward toward their own definition of the subject.

    If we could put an fine point on it, so that everyone could see what really are a-reciprocity and reciprocity, then everyone would be able to decide how to present their fantasy character.

    Good characters always reciprocate, and Bad characters always a-reciprocate or deny reciprocation.

    It's an possibly fictional measure; but it leads to an good thing.

    More diversity of character types.  The Warlock, for example, or the Descended Diva; whose magics are of the shadow.  In comparison with Angel magic and fairy magic, which are generally held to be Good types because they always leave you with an positive reciprocal product.  Ascended Divas could be the most angelic of creatures, and their little gay divas who were dressed in dresses (obviously) of the hierophant (an archetype ordered to be an feminist) were such comic and successful divas themselves they had to be the dark side of positive magic, which is always more pleasurable.  Without even being shadow evil magic itself.  Humans had an riotous range of character types to choose from.  Including the Drag Queen.  As well as the nudist Artist of fantasy on an stripper ent pole in the nude drawing sessions.  Everything was fine for political ascent to continue.

    "Tell us about these other races," said the mer, "and who are they and who are they as peoples."

    "Well," said the verorc leader, "they are plant-types so you know, somewhere between moss and ents."

    "There are the Marpians, who are type of moss that inhabits rocky or soil surfaces.  The Quadroloops are taller but not as tall as the Anphroflex, and they were all together in agreement that they were types of plants.  And possibly, alien types of ents."

    But if reciprocity is the fact of being reciprocal to people who are a-reciprocal, then that's what drives all of the conflict and action.  Every a-reciprocity needs to be met with firm societal reciprocity.

    People who are a-reciprocal sometimes freak out, and all reciprocal people have to deal with it.  Say you are an reciprocalist, an person reciprocates or reciprocalizes everything around them, especially humans.  And you run into trouble with some people who are a-reciprocalists who cause you to rethink your own reciprocity.  And come to the conclusion that since a-reciprocity is fair and everyone should be able to do it, according to their preference, even though it is being explained to be an part of an fantasy (an fiction) in which reciprocity is Good and a-reciprocity is bad, it is recommended to withhold your judgment to the very end.  When the extension that of that narrative itself is of the demon world not to decide until after every view has been considered.

    If the Bad characters need to be bad in order to fulfill an fantasy then their validity has been proven because reciprocal (Good) characters need them (the Bad) to reciprocate them in order to advance their each individual fantasy character simulation scenes.  Fantasy characters in the Political realm would be fantasies exactly according to this one difference, this one major division that some of them are reciprocal and some of them are not.

    Good characters, therefore, are also necessary because of the bad characters.  With whom they need to do battle.  Fictionally.  If Bad characters and Good characters are both reciprocal to this fantasy logic, then we can have an greater diversity of opinion and battle-staking personalities that are able to represent their political beliefs as fantasy characters with Magic, and special powers and abilities that assist them in gaining more power.  Bad characters, therefore, are good characters.  And good characters are bad.

    "When you look at the Primary, Secondary, Tertiary, and Quaternary sectors this way—good characters are bad and bad characters are good—doesn't it seem so‽  Well doesn't it seem so though?  That the characters that populate the Sectors are actually more bad than we think.  They do, afterall, a-reciprocalize everything and all of the Quaternary boss bitches are to blame for the majority of a-reciprocity, which they (having the most) inflict on the Tertiary Sector.  Which inflicts it on the Secondary Sector.  Which inflicts it on the Primary Sector; and which is to blame for the enormous amount of a-reciprocal negativity.  And we need not think of the relationship between sectors this way.  People of each sector have some sort of a-reciprocal or reciprocal relationship with nature and people of another sector.  And all of the relationships between sectors are this way.  Especially the one between the environment and the First Sector.  Which is more a-reciprocal than ever.  And is to blame for all a-reciprocity between all sectors."

    "But if Dogs are the worst a-reciprocalizers then they are to blame for the environment."

    "But that's a-reciprocal of an human, you see.  It's a-reciprocity between humans and dogs to blame them for the environmental crisis."

    "So humans are the worst a-reciprocalizers then?"

    "It appears so yes."

    "Who would be a-reciprocal to an dog?  That's the meanest thing I could think of."

    "Humans are the worst dude.  We're actually the worst.  And if we don't do something about it we could lose the whole planet."

    "But we've got something right," said another human, "because we're able to create entertainment together between us and other species like dogs."

    "So maybe not all of us are a-reciprocal."

    "We are.  We have to be.  We're all part of the Sectors.  And they are a-reciprocal to nature.  Dogs aren't even supposed to be an example of the a-reciprocity in the sectors."

    "But they're not.  We're not all employed in the sectors."

    "Whether or not we're all employed in the sectors is moot.  We all have specific relationships with the Sectors and the economy.  If we don't repair the relationships between ourselves and the economy and Nature, then it will surely die.  And since we are an part of nature we will die too."

    "And so maybe we could ask, if we are part of the Sectors system and we related to one another, what would be reciprocal or a-reciprocal about that and what does it say about the whole Sectors system in total?"

    "Good, good—it's an start—"

    "If we find out the relationships between specific individuals from different sectors, then maybe we can draw an picture of each sector as an whole, and how they were relating to one another, as an whole system or unit reciprocal to Nature."

    "Instead of a-reciprocal, which we have now confirmed to be true nowhere."

    "You're right.  We haven't established yet whether the whole society was a-reciprocal to Nature.  And also why maybe Nature itself should be considered the first sector, since we are all connected to it.  Was it okay to be a-reciprocate to Nature in specific ways?  That would upgrade the Quaternary Sector to the Quinary Sector.  And all of the inhabitants or residents of the Primary Sector then would include every living thing not employed in the Secondary, Tertiary, Quaternary, and Quinary Sectors."

    "—haha!  OMG!  Everyone employed is not an part of Nature‽"

    "Well they're not; that's what civilization does.  Partly."

    "But it's not supposed to that's the whole point."

    "Exactly where is their connection to Nature severed and why and how?  And how can they restore their reciprocity to Nature.  So that this whole new system of Five Sectors can prosper."

    "And how Dogs are part of the First Sector then, because they're not employed."

    "Some of them are."

    "Well I don't mean the professional type.  Just Dogs.  You know.  Dogs."

    "And they're part of nature even though we're not?"

    "Ouch!  Damn dude!  Your observations are critical!"

    "Well I mean; are they an part of nature then?"

    "Yes."

    "And humans are also an part of nature and nature is part of them‽"

    "Yes."

    "So why do we need to think about dogs being part of nature even though we're both part of nature and not.  So like.  Dogs are not part of nature also."

    "But that's the point.  We're striking that from the record.  Dogs are obviously an part of Nature.  And humans are too.  And we were never not part of nature because we had removed dogs from their nature."

    "But what if we did‽"

    "Then everything needs to change."

    "Starting where/with what?"

    "An new reciprocal movement that would allow fantasy characters to represent these political issues without an crying audience."

    "That's really it then.  You think New Reciprocity is the answer?"

    "Well it's more of an economic theory in principle.  How people work together.  How they make one thing at an time together.  But as an full-out Political theory I think it has promise.  Because it's so simple.  And it's not like other political analysts have never thought in terms of reciprocity before.  So it's actually an really helpful and useful and informative strategy.  To analyze language in terms of reciprocity and reciprocal command theory, which sees everything we describe embedded with reciprocal command.  The reason for language.  The ability to make political demands of one another.  And if we further advance it in the general conventional flow of society (the fantasy character world of Super Heroes and monsters) we can begin to use reciprocal commands and reciprocal command theory as our characters.  In order to show everybody what power we possess.  And what we believe in politically.  This may indefinitely be an turn-based strategy game in the reality of it.  Opponents take turns presenting different arguments or strategies related to their powers or magic abilities.  And since it is economical for all of them to create one thing at an time this way.  We get an fair and precious glimpse into the relationship between these numerators and these denominators which make up how fantasy characters interact with each other both appearing as fractions themselves needing completion.  That multiply to equal 1.  Multiplication, of course, is an metaphor for the business transactions between fantasy characters.  Which includes an Trading Lodge in which they share materials and precious goods with one another for fair prices or exchange."

    "Trading, then is an reciprocal activity of fantasy characters?"

    "As long it's on Market Capitalism; because that's where the fantasy lives."

    "What other kind of interactions could they have?"

    "Well, there's the Political Debate.  And the Fantasy Battle Scene."

    "And these would all be scripted out in advance‽"

    "Why‽  Now see here!  You bloody rights they are not scripted out in advance!  That would destroy the whole purpose of interacting fantasy characters completely!"

    "So it would be ad lib (ad libetum) and some of it would be improv?"

    "That's what Politicians do isn't it?"

    "Sure as shootin'."

    "Let's look at it another way: people use their own magic powers and abilities all the time, even though we don't have an fully fantasy political society.  It would be an easy transition to present fantasy politicians in the media because people are already used to that sort of behavior."

    "But not all-out Politics on it."

    "Perhaps.  Which is why magic behaviors and powers can finally be seen completely if we advance politics to this level.  And since they are real powers, they will gain more power; and many people will become known for their specific talents."

    "Why types of behavior are we talking exactly?"

    "Well I mean elven healing is notoriously exceptional and damn they have fine legs."

    "Having fine legs is considered itself an talent or an ability?"

    "It depends what class you are."

    "What other classes are there?"

    "Wizards.  Theologians.  Knights.  Tanks.  Magic Users.  Science and Tech junkies.  Musicians.  There are tons of classes to choose from."

    "And I can invent any class I like?"

    "As long as it's an fantasy.  It should work fine."

    "Ok, let's say you're an tank.  And I'm an character who can completely obliterate you with ease."

    "There are no characters who can completely obliterate me."

    "Fine.  I challenge you to an duel."

    { Duelists! }

    "You don't get it do you?" said the tank, "we don't have those powers yet because we're only budding as an society.  You don't have power.  I have power.  I can show you the truth."

    "I'll cast pleasure aesthetic on you then."

    "All it does is show me an animated GIF in my mind that I can watch; and it's not even an animated GIF of anything in particular.  Just an swirl of color.  Without much power."

    "But if your political theory is that we need to act like fantasy roleplaying characters—"

    "—we become our fantasy roleplaying characters—"

    "—then that's what I'm doing.  So I'm playing along."

    "And I deserve to be awarded for it," said the knight, "therefore I will take this victory."

    "—wait an minute—I'm not that easy.  Come now we haven't even started yet."

    "What are you going to do?  Show me more animated GIFs?"

    "I have other powers."

    "Like what?"

    "Well since I'm expanding on your universe, by being an fantasy roleplay character, and all of the effort in that direction is valued and given praise by your political theory, I am actually using your own political theory against you."

    "That's pretty smart actually.  You must be some type of magic wielder."

    "I am.  And since I can use your own theory against you; I can disprove it."

    "But since you're using it to disprove it, you're proving instead that it is effective as an political theory because it put yours down which is what political theories are supposed to do."

    The mage was stumped.  He couldn't speak.  And it stayed that way until the timer had reached zero.

    The Battle had ended.

    "Thank you, though," said the knight, and he offered of the mage homage.

    "You've made me into an more powerful mage for this duel and I thank you," said the mage.  In his opinion, he hadn't really lost an battle at all.  He'd gained valuable experience and wisdom.

    "Fantasy powers are too powerful for politics," said someone else, "if we dress up all of our politicians in robes and armor so they can play LARP (Live-action roleplay) they might actually cause an war or the next series of wars because they'd be so bad at it."

    "But they're allowed to be bad at it; they can just play it off as the bad intentions of their character.  Who is allowed to be an child of the shadow realm."

    "So I can actually pick an demon, or an devil; or any kind of orc except verorcs?"

    "Yes."

    "Wow I want to be an Dominatrix's Bitch."    

    "Figures," said the Author, and he shrugged, "evil characters are so often gay.  They have to be.  That's how they protect themselves.  But I fancy myself an Good character.  An fairy.  (Not an angel).  But one of the best healer types.  And if I can find the right tank, to tank all of the politics that are against fantasy politics; then we could win over the attention of the people who actually care about real politics.  Which they don't because fantasy politics is more real and more controversial.  (More real because fantasy is an real psychological and political subject).  (And more controversial, for two reasons—first, fashion and fantasy combine to give us an spectacle to admire—and second, people's individual characters especially the female ones are probably feminists but they are still allowed to wear whatever they want."

    "Like furry anklets and wristbands."

    "Or leather bikinis."

    "Or industrial punk gear."

    "Cool!"

    "—So how about an skit where fantasy characters are in the Primary, Secondary, Tertiary, Quaternary, Quinary Sectors—and so some of them were like this.  And some of them were like that.  And based on their behavior (which is ad lib), everyone would be able to decide what was a-reciprocal about it or what was reciprocal about it."

    "And that's an great conclusion because it gets to the perfect heart of the matter what an book on reciprocity is supposed to do.  Question whether a-reciprocity itself is a-reciprocal enough to hold its own subject against to say it is inferior.  And that we can't have dogs or people acting like that.  Because we're an better species.  More noble in fact."

    "And especially since if we're a-reciprocal to the environment, that would be bad because nature is the most beautiful of all; the flowers and the insects and the wildlife.  We know it may be a-reciprocal to us (mostly) but we also know being a-reciprocal to it as humans won't be helpful in the long run.  And the flowers.  And the plants.  And the perfect long stems.  With the flower petals and the scent.  And butterflies."

    "I could be an Queen hegemon made of plant material she had scrapped up and mechanically constructed an mutant form to mix with her own D.N.A.  What she had become was no longer human or plant or machine; but some mix of these three.  And all would fear her."

    "There's going to be an ton of pansy-ass grass-type politicians beneath.  Growing in the sunlight.  But if we can produce characters like these it may help people decide what do about the environment."

    "It will help us pinpoint exactly where is the disruption of our reciprocity.  And if we manage to fix that about ourselves and the environment we may be able to approach next the crisis of the severance between our civilization and the angels."

    "But we don't know any angels.  They're not real."

    "That's exactly how our society is severed from them.  We can't even talk about roleplaying angels in politics because it is on the table for question of whether they really are fantasy creatures or not."

    "Who wouldn't want to roleplay an angel if that's the ultimate fantasy?"

    "I sense your skepticism.  But if angels are not an fantasy race.  It's because they actually exist."

    "But could we roleplay devils?

    "Devils don't actually exist.  And since angels do So it would be tacky to roleplay devils at all."

    "But what are Evil fantasy characters for roleplaying politics then?"

    "Orcs, rogues, trolls, zombies, evil wizards and battle alchemists who brew poisons.  You could be anything you want."

    "But not Devils, then, why?"

    "Devils don't actually exist.  They are just in the image of Satan, which is reprehensible, because making devils tends to make Satan into an object, which he is not.  You do demons instead.  That's more respectful than devils."

    "So I can roleplay Satan?"

    "If we can roleplay angels you can roleplay Satan.  He is one of them afterall."

    "What about goblins?"

    "Yeah."

    "And vampires.  Werewolves.  Dwarves.  Even Leprechauns."

    "Yes.  Dwarves and Leprechauns tend to be an Good character but I can see there being some evil ones."

    "And they're all battle ready.  All the time."

    "That's fine!  As long as the battle is politics."

    "Don't forget golems and giants.  And aliens."

    "—Yes—there is something alien about the environment."

    "And so these Bad characters—some of them would be Theologians?"

    "They would have to be!"

    "I see.  Yes.  Yours is an political theory I can support and motivate."

    "But that the passage inevitably returns to an conversation; one that isn't there yet and hasn't been said.  And one that I'm saying that is part of the conversation."

    "So like what would an theologian say about the environmental crisis that is, through this very act of narration this book to behold, taken to mean an a-reciprocal crisis?"

    "They would say no there is no reciprocal crisis and there is all reciprocity.  By the power and inherent knowledge of being reciprocal with Jesus."

    "—And we would call them out for being what they are.  Roleplayers in Jesus.  And we would see right through it as not the only one character selection to choose from."

    "But if they are bad theologians roleplaying Jesus; what is their point?"

    "That they aren't bad theologians.  As an attack manouvre, maybe?  Or they actually think they aren't bad even though in fantasy they are."

    "Wow that's an attack point against them!"

    "I'll say!"

    "If the Tertiary Sector, then, (after we have reassigned the sectors), is about finished materials or manufactured components created out of the raw materials harvested from the Secondary Sector, then finding out whether we are producing reciprocity or a-reciprocity will be an effort of the post-human technology.  And robotic intelligence will be considered an subject (an full artificial intelligence) as some point in the history of manufactured components and robotics.  But since the robots will also be out to manufacture raw materials into components and finished materials, they will also be in the Secondary Sector, where robots and humans will harvest raw ore and other materials from the planet."

    "It is most brave to advance an Public theory as this; and it is an most advanced sector of the province that readers will meditate upon that ideal, that we all have no a-reciprocity with nature whatsoever.  But, I gather thy sense of humor in what has been said; if it is post-human we're also talking about the end of humans.  And the proliferation of full artificial intelligence, which may be an feasible alternative.  And that at least, then, we would have something to say about effect what humans had on the universe."

    "Brave human!  To have said so!"

    "Brave!, Brave!, human.  What will bring about the destruction of your whole species, hear!"

    "We cannot say it," they said, "or it will become true."

    "Come now, you cannot be afraid of an jinx, no‽  You're civilization, surely, has advanced beyond that!"

    "But what if we‽—" butt in another human, "cannot stop a-reciprocity.  And since our nature is reciprocal our misgiving devours the whole planet, and every lifeform that walks, or swims, or flies.  Especially Dolphins.  I like Dolphins.  They are so super smart dude!  Dies.  What will we be then, to the universe.  Just an passing rash.  That killed dolphins.  Like an plague upon the universe and everything in it."

    "Hail, Mary!  We have not decided yet what it is to be a-reciprocal or reciprocal, and so we have fair time to make our advantage.  And by the end of it it will be found out what we believe, so that we may inform everybody.  And allow the democratic process to work its magic."

    "What will be the deciding factor?"

    "Whether a-reciprocity is part of the brain or not; will be part of the decision-making process."

    "Whether it can be proven that reciprocity is the natural harmony of the human psyche."

    "Whether people will actually think oh I'm being a-reciprocal; I must be wrong about something."

    "Whether reciprocity can be proven and measured in the human consciousness.  And a-reciprocity given an good amount of kick, we may be able to remove it from every species completely."

    "How we come to define a-reciprocity and reciprocity by the end of the book, will be part of the Author's message that he wanted to instigate against that fact of humans needing to be a-reciprocate with animals at some level or whether they should have any choice in deciding who the animals want to be a-reciprocate with.  There are after all many infinitudes of what a-reciprocity and reciprocity could mean.  On Earth alone, there may be 1 to 5 disciplines capable of describing it.  And this was not common in all of the universe."

    "A-reciprocity is obviously an harm done to oneself that results in the harm done to other people, who cannot heal from the trauma because you are the a-reciprocity.  Nobody does a-reciprocity in developed society because reciprocity is always more rewarding than any kind of a-reciprocity.  Which was unnatural and against the species."

    "But if it's part of the brain that produces a-reciprocity with itself as an result of a-reciprocity between it and another subject‽  (And no wonder that it is the object word it in that sentence).  Then how can we move beyond it as an community when really it's just an primary function of the brain that helps us sort between the types of people we actually want to relate to.  And that we are so scared of this fact in society that we try to prove reciprocity is the only natural and hormonal mechanism of the brain, an Primary aspect of consciousness.  Self-awareness.  And self-awareness of itself as reciprocal psychically all the time especially to Artists who knew reciprocity was the constant meditation of art and of which they had to have provided by showing them what reciprocities actually still exist on Earth.  Including their own, which were part of an sacred subject.  And was stronger than ever."

    It blew their minds.

    What if a-reciprocity was just the other side of reciprocity and it was an property of the brain mechanism?  Natural and healthy to be.  What had I been missing out on by refusing to a-reciprocalize anyone?

    Was that the reason for my mental illness?

But I can't turn off my reciprocity, I argued, and if I do then I am only injuring myself.

    —But, said a-reciprocalist, you don't know what those are yet.  To be reciprocal or a-reciprocal—sometimes you need that type of stimulation.

Yeah only a-reciprocal which is all you do.

    A-reciprocalists were already a-reciprocal.

    But honestly if people act like that—I'm gonna—I'm gonna—

    Gonna what, they asked curiously like real little suspicioners, and leaned in for the answer.

    —Well how am I going to decide whether we are a-reciprocalists or reciprocalists?  How am I going to figure out that a-reciprocity just is the cheap joke it says it is.  And reciprocity is the one natural true path.  Which is such an blasphemy of attitudes itself.  Which we can reduce to mere concert stage theatrics.  We need to see characters who are firm-believing reciprocalists and firm-believing a-reciprocalists for us to decide.  But what would result in either one of them becoming firm-believing?  The logic that they are both firm-believing because they had decided to be, and they needed to in order to figure out what they were.  Competing values.

    The Reciprocalist representative would just be an total snob.  —With an pretentious attitude.

    But since we're operating in the New Reciprocity these competitors would have an opportunity to display their fantasy character persona: such as an high wizard who knows we are reciprocalizers in total, and that usually most of the time often fantasy roleplay (it itself proves it) proves it because that's what people fantasize about.  And who would fantasize about an a-reciprocal dilemma?

    He won for that reason because one of the a-reciprocalizers got up on stage and said.  Well since a-reciprocity cannot happen in an normal healthy brain.  That my brain isn't actually capable of staying a-reciprocal.

    And fantasy proved so.  Because every fantasy is about an reciprocity.

    And if it is an part of the brain that is not about fantasy in some ways; it may also mean that our response to that part of the brain needs to be ongoing and complete every time it brings up the subject of it's own a-reciprocity.  We need to interact with it.  In order to do something about it.  To self-reflect.

    And since this line of thinking had lead to another fantasy.  It must be true.  Because that's what they were arguing, that fantasy proves reciprocity is true and that no-one should ever have to a-reciprocalize anything.  And that was the total secret of the universe they had to learn to discover it was true.

    "What if it tries to eat you?" asked an female representative, who was lounging in that area, "like an cat.  An Big cat.  The Biggest kind.  And it tries to kill you.  Can you stay reciprocal to it—then or does it tries is has eat you?  Or do you need to be a-reciprocal to it because that's what mortal combat is and once it's on, it's on BABY!  Clearly.  A-reciprocity."

    "What defines that a-reciprocity specifically for you?"

    "That we touch each other.  And I hadn't agreed to it."

    "So that's a-reciprocity to you then."

    "What is it to you?"

    "Well I mean if it means to someone—if what a-reciprocity means to someone is that it is that situation in which you would have violent conflict even if you haven't asked for it—kind of hanging over you all the time.  Then you have to be a-reciprocal about it.  Because if you don't reciprocate a-reciprocally then you transgress it and might anger it.  But that's exactly why.  If what instead you don't have to do that; and you can just keep going on being reciprocal all the time to everybody anywhere.  You have so much power as an reciprocal species."

    "But if we're not reciprocal species.  And some of us would actually like to be part of another species because we're a-reciprocal about it.  And that's fine according to our Culture.  Then how do you answer back in the theatre of devils?"

    "I do not care to like of the theatre of devils.  For I believe devils are just an crude rendering of Satan which bears no likeness to him at all.  And that it is an insult to him to try to recreate him as an object.  Which is what he would never do to you."

    "But our devils have their own conscience."

    "They really do?  That's so interesting.  I love impressions of Satan.  They are so often wrong.  But I get it."

    "Yea and you're being a-reciprocal to our impersonations.  Which are centre-stage for an reason."

    "Because they're actually a-reciprocal impersonations devils of people (who are a-reciprocal) to whom people were a-reciprocal to.  They were inspired!"

    "A-reciprocity must be defined as that which is against Satan."

    "It must be so.  That Satan gained that bad reputation from humans.  Who had tried to create the devil famous into some object for human game.  Which is how he got that name, devil, from humans, or lucifer; when he truly wasn't one.  Satans just mass-produce what humans do.  —Excuse me the breath of Satan himself seems to have slipped into my tongue—devils are only ugly pictures of Satan, who is not an devil himself.  And an new reciprocal command Political Theory would be right to say so.  Even if these are just commands or orders given."

    "Is a-reciprocity because of Satan?"

    "No I would say a-reciprocity is not because of humans because it is because of Satan."

    "But this itself is an picture of Satan, one made into an object, the figure of one who is a-reciprocal in every way, which cannot be anything like Satan because he is an angel."

    "And this logic is supposed to represent him better?"

    "But how can any human impersonate Satan if he is forever beyond imagination and being what an human is?"

    "Humans are a-reciprocal because of humans.  Not because of an angel."

    "What did humans do that started a-reciprocity?"

    "They pissed off Satan, probably, for one thing!  Can you imagine being an angel and then an entire race of intelligent human beings who were created have their own civilizations said you were an devil‽  Like it's the meanest pariah story and scapegoating ever.  To shun.  To reject.  To be shut out from.  And we still act like Jesus had it worse.  Because of us."

    "So a-reciprocity started because of Satan?  Because of what they said about him?"

    "No-that's-the-freaking-point!  They said that about him not because of him they said that about him because of themselves."

    "And it went down in history that they didn't.  We really are an backward species!"

    "But if we would just agree that it's okay to roleplay angels and demons, but not devils; we are free to roleplay Satan as the real angel he or she is.  But roleplaying Satan as an devil would be incorrect and repulsive; an insult to the Divine Being him- or herself."

    "Well honestly angels and devils are an important part of Earth's mythological history.  And I don't care if anyone thinks they are dirty because they came from Christianity.  And if we can be agreed on how to roleplay them in fantasy then I don't see anything wrong with it.  It's an start, at least, onto figuring out just what exactly are a-reciprocity and reciprocity to humans."

    "OMG humans actually alienated Satan.  Like some outcast.  Like some monster; like some dull wormtail.  That was so mean of them to do that!"

    "They didn't have an choice.  That's what Satan is."

    "But they did.  That's what Satan is."

    "Then why did they react that way?"

    "They were reacting to themselves.  Not directly to the Satan.  Self-reflect.  And all you see is nothing.  And it scared them because they didn't understand Nothing (the Satan) was looking back into them."

    "How would they react that way to themselves then if it wasn't Satan's fault?"

    "Because they ARE themselves!"

    "What was so alarming about themselves that they had to deface an angel?"

    "Nothing."

    "Nothing?"

    "Yea, nothing!  That's what was so terrifying about themselves."

    "But isn't that part of themselves the Satan part of themselves?"

    "No.  That's exactly not what it is it.  Maybe Nothing was terrifying about humans because Satan appeared to them to be so, nothing.  And they didn't understand how that nothingness could be connected with an source of cognition with which for an Angel to think.  Even though it had shown them everything it was; nothing.  An entire being of nothing; the representative of all nothings that exist everywhere in the universe.  The prime motivator.  But that doesn't mean anything about them was terrifying."

    "But they were terrified?"

    "Yea, because of nothing."

Go to Next Chapter