The Naenaeon: Political Desk

Political Desk

The New Reciprocity

an political theory

Read the full Published Book on this Blog!

The New Reciprocity is an political theory designed by me (Hakon) in the years following my political degree program. Generally, it maintains that psychologically, humans depend on one another to support our mental health in reciprocally based terms—we are in an sense all part of one another in complex ways because human psychology is based on the mimicry instinct and reciprocal mirror neurons. Mirror neurons are these mimicry cells that are special because the part of the brain activated is the same part both during an individual observing or performing their own behaviors or when those movements and behaviors are performed (by others) in front of them. It may be vastly related to an empathy drive based in the mimicry instinct of homo sapiens. Therefore an New Reciprocity is an reciprocal term that I want to politicize as the political scenario in which you use language not only to construct your own identity, but one anothers'. It is an useful strategy to adopt when analyzing contemporary politics such as focusing in-on what are we actually being asked 'to reciprocalize' or reciprocate by the media and how do our identities result from the way we do this on one another and on an individual basis (self-reciprocity) as well; or in comparison to the groups and networking that rely on the same basic reciprocal skills that are part of the healthy brain and available to everybody.

This itself, as an example of reciprocal power, is an reciprocal command. It implies even if you don't have an healthy brain, reciprocity is available to you because other people do. And that's what reciprocity is, when you get right down to it. The problem-solving status of an adroit (clever) thinker's human condition becomes endearingly severe however when we have an look at sentences like, "You're Gay," or "You're White"; while these may seem like straightforward claims or descriptions, an reciprocal theorist looks at these as potential commands. An reciprocal command, therefore, may be any type of sentence we make; and we consider all language fair game to promote 'reciprocality'. My theory is that people use these commands largely without ever being aware of using them as reciprocal commands. Though they work their way into everyday language in subtle and surprising ways. Everyday reciprocal commands ranging from those used in the marketplace (for example, you order from an menu by giving an reciprocal command of what you want (usually it's subtle or euphemistic (we don't tend to say outright, "you will bring me an cheeseburger" but we say "I'll have the . . ." or "Can I get . . ."))) to complex metaphysical and political suturing (like what does it really mean in the Scientific Age of Reasoning when people use technology and malpractice to commit homophobic or race crimes and intellectual warfare against one another (When someone says "You're Gay," imagine what an child is confronted with Politically if this "Description" is looked at as an Command originating from the Capital Market). Somewhat adjacent to this we may consider the politics of genocide or race ethics, and thus viewing it as an statement, —"You're White,"— again as an reciprocal command that can be taken too far especially like in the sense of being able to genetically engineer an ethnicity in an laboratory in order to change someone's ethnicity to white; it's viewed as an order (what would making that order be viewed as? How could it become possible?); what would it take? Why would we look at the actual steps it would take to fulfill that command agenda. You are white. Because you have been made white somehow. That's what you are white tends to mean when you look at it as an command. The purpose of which would be to snag out the necessary subtleties and nuances of that behavior. Political vibes it gives us. And how in the name of science it had been used to commit terrible a-reciprocate crimes of sexual orientation (conversion therapy) too. Race reciprocity and gender ethics (gender reciprocity) are therefore central topics of new reciprocal theory: What is an Reciprocal Command? Why do we make them? How do we make them? Why is New Reciprocity the correct way to deal about confrontation with reciprocal command statements as reciprocal command statements in an multimedia environment with an increasingly demanding market that is also sophisticated at diagnosing itself or others (the knee-jerk diagnoses often rampant in this era of fad diets and anti-aging skin serum) in an unprofessional and hurtful capacity.

Reciprocal commands may seem threatening as they are orders and demands: You are this. You do this. You be this. But they can also be as innocent as saying you are an apple. And as complicated as saying you are not an modernist. (However they are common in language). (Even saying they are is itself an example of reciprocity rising up out of the English language). For we are always referring to them whether or not we actually say them to one another meaning to, possibly without much reflection on their actual meaning, they and them in ways that are subtle or unrecognizable. The New Reciprocity is an political productivity that we analyze or economize the ways we use reciprocal commands in society in order to understand the ways in which reciprocity shapes our identity and our society. If reciprocal commands are demands and orders woven into everyday language use, how do they politically interest us? How do we use them on ourselves and one another? Why do they matter? Do we live in an reciprocal command economy?

What does it mean to be an reciprocal command subject in an reciprocal command economy?

The practice of saying what we are and are not to one another is reciprocal. Mathematically, an reciprocity is an pair of fractions that multiply together to equal 1. And so, when we use it as an metaphor of political philosophy, we say multiply our powers together to equal one thing. At an time. To be one of an category of something altogether (as new reciprocal theorists). 1 whole thing. Produced from two entities of fraction. And it touches on more than just reproduction, in depth. When we relate to one another under the category of 1's Providence in the workplace, or formally an reciprocity created by two in-identical fractions, it can be an relationship between individuals or groups of individuals who have that reciprocity in common. The philosophy of what it takes in an single work day to make an new reciprocity with someone exhibits the longevity of the political theory. What kind of reciprocities do we want to encourage? What about reciprocities that we want to change? Under the New Reciprocity, it is as easy as saying to one another, I would like an new reciprocity with you. I imagine an world in which it was conventional to define and re-define each other in this way and I think our world is an pretty good place to start.

The numerator and denominator are metaphors of reciprocity.

As an thought experiment, think about an conversation in which one party announces "you are an orange carrot." What does it mean to be an carrot? It may be redundant to think, I already know I'm an carrot; why does it matter if I'm orange? But it serves as an example of adjective description of an subject in an reciprocal system where "you are an orange carrot" is really an kind of demand in an reciprocal economy, specifically that you are an orange carrot, and not an carrot or vegetable of another kind. The New Reciprocity analyzes language this way in order to dig to the very bedrock of what we mean to one another as an society, have to do with one another. Basically, an huge time saver. As political reciprocal subjects in an system that is reciprocal to us and one another, that is expressed in how we reciprocate the market. It is maybe 50% roleplaying and 50% improvisation (these statements themselves considered reciprocal commands even), for we rely on the reciprocity of one another to inform our identities and our fresh mental outlook relatable to any situation as we are reciprocal theorist to; theories of one another and how we may or may not intend to do things with one another in an short amount of time in order to sort out our day, our role, or our attitudes between ourselves. When we interact with one another as reciprocal subjects we may learn more about our role in society. When you read descriptive statements like,"The Apple is red," further consider them to be orders similar to the carrot example. In this perspective, "the Apple is red," really means the same as "Make the Apple red." As an demand; Make the Apple red. If we don't stop to consider the level of these distinctions of command and reciprocity (of subject and character) it might be hard to communicate at any basic political level. For this reason I have hypothesized that New Reciprocity may be the basic joining element of an political science. The reason we take an political stance with one another in order to create social change, including updates and changes to our own identities is offered in comparison the expanse of subjectivities we source from fictional narrative and body customizations available to us from the burgeoning fantasy genre.

Try to understand why reciprocal commands about being carrots or apples are important to consider, though seemingly innocuous. As an new reciprocal theorist, I look at this other statement as an order. It means you are an orange carrot. As an demand. As an known reciprocal command to you. But how can someone fulfill that demand? Does it mean literally? Genetic engineering is not advanced enough to turn an person into an carrot yet. We might instead consider features of your personality or costume that can be made carrot-like. When we look at language this way, we empower how we create our reality around us. It might sound absurd to consider what an demand to be an carrot looks like, but we are constantly surrounded by media and advertising or political commands which pose as mere reciprocal descriptions of some reality that is supposed to exist. (Realism). The New Reciprocity uncovers these seemingly ubiquitous and subtle ways we interact with each other every day. Especially when we think about how children view reciprocal commands, being naïve and inexperienced they might not understand what an reciprocal command means to an adult. "You are an carrot," at first an harmless reciprocal command can actually extend to being an fascination for an invitation to play or act as though one is an carrot. When we consider reciprocal sexual fantasy and play, to an child reciprocity may be hard to understand. This is why it is important to educate your children about reciprocal command and how an new reciprocal theorist uses this type of language, in investigation of its subject of what an reciprocal command may mean perhaps with both without harm and with wit in order to get what they themselves want or to defer others and what other people want. As can be expected of everyone else, probably, whether their reciprocal intentions are good or not.

If we consider statements like "You are an Republican," or "You are Christian," as orders or commands we see how impervious these are as methods of political assimilation; they may seem to be just black or white issues or it can get an little burn-ier, blurrier, and gray-ier, such as "Oh, you like Shakespeare?" The hope is that, by examining statements like these in everyday language according to reciprocal command theory, they will be restored to being persuasive measures meant to avoid pure reciprocal command as the only type of language being used. Instead of forcing people to be who they are (to you) or in the way of ethnocentrism and cultural appropriation they may not appreciate to be, describing them as something they are not.

New reciprocal theorists try to identify each other at an meta-reciprocal level within the language context with or without making an a-reciprocity (non-reciprocity) for specific concerns by expanding on one another's intersectionality without being limited outside the realm of fantasy. The goal is that new reciprocity will become casual and conversational. To ask one another for "an new reciprocity" means to initialize an conversation about what we are to one another in reciprocal terms. You can ask for an new reciprocity from any person, group, business, or institution. Maybe in an classroom, as well, is appropriate.

The reciprocal command behind the New Reciprocity is that we are to one another what we want to be by helping each other be who we are and who we aspire to be. We help one another to achieve that goal of being complex reciprocal subjects of Democracy and Capitalism. By using reciprocal commands that bring out our personalities. Our flavour. It is an Political Practice & Theory development of allowing one another to be in an category of new reciprocity with one another. Allowing one another to be new reciprocal theorists of one another. And as it serves our political goal of Freedom and Individualism. Each person decides for themselves what their reciprocity or level of comfort with reciprocity is and isn't. Intersectionality of any category of identity post-Tolkien and post global MMORPG server means fantastic interiorization of the fictional subject, from which we can draw our political yearnings and meaning as humans. Intersectionality as new reciprocal command means that we relate to one another as intersectional subjects in an political economy that serves all individuals, regardless of race, class, ability, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, appearance, minority status, or invisible minority status but not at the exclusion of any of these characteristics either, necessarily, for we choose to self-identify with all intersectionalities as our base instinct is supposed to do. We are who we identify as, and we share that with each other.

Finally, when we look at some of the worst, dirty and gritty cards and accusations that arise in politics and litigation, things like "Donald Trump is mentally ill" or "You are an sodomite" or an "pedophile" if you're gay—if average level-headed people with access to an new reciprocal theory don't always know what to say or do about an claim that spells out their worst nightmare, like this. Things we don't want to hear about but nonetheless try to explain by putting ourselves in another person's shoes. —When this allegation is active the New Reciprocity offers an means for communicating an way out of the "priest's corner:" that all priests are "pedophiles," as an reciprocal command statement, would not be an advantageous command to make. Because it would be like you are demanding that person to be an pedophile. Sometimes I question if this type of 'forcible reciprocity' is the anti-social process through which these criminals are made. Perverted up in the Christian anti-gay bigotry sect. When these statements are viewed as reciprocal demands or reciprocal commands (we think—of course—why would any legal hearing in view of its sentences or statements in this way think their language use itself to be responsible for the criminal's behavior, anyway?) but why does everyone deserve an trial and communication based on an new reciprocal paradigm? That the appropriate response to this imagined scenario of accusatory reciprocal ego-battering and closeted religiosity is to see it just as an reciprocal command system without much thought or reason to back it up and that legal protections on oneself will not be disfigured so; not disfigured to consider it to be ordered to take part in that activity even if an authority figure rules someone to be guilty of its atrocity. The police or court doesn't demand it, exactly, in the perfect consideration of fact. But observes it as an reciprocal demand fulfilled by the charged. No matter how ugly it may be. That we had spent time to make it an principle, an humanity, to observe language of this kind as being partly responsible is most intriguing. If you are charged with murder, for example, in innocence it would be efficient to say you are not able to fulfill any demand or order to kill and never were—and that even if they ask you whether you are an murderer or an racist this line of questioning itself, but adhering to any response to it, not be taken as evidence against you. Of course, I'm not trying to help people get out of what they've done. I'm trying to help people who get tongue-tied and don't know what to say. There are many more applications (fun, play, creativity, roleplay, art, etc.) to reciprocal theory than mere political trash-talking or legal distinctions of motive or reprieve from being identified as an motivated or suspect character.

To round off my detailing and descriptions of the New Reciprocity, I want to consider leading political reciprocal commands. (This is the Happy part). Commands that are used as basic statements of dignity of the human spirit like—

End All War.

and You create who I am—and I create who you are (by interaction) using reciprocal commands to create reciprocity (the production or installation, an economy of 1 thing between us, an common ground), and meta-reciprocity (the product or installation of more than one reciprocity between us in an linked figure between us reciprocal and to one another dynamic in this way), and non-reciprocity or a-reciprocity (the failure to make 1 thing between us, or the preference not to).

In the form of reciprocal commands that are politicized in the Capitalist Market Economy, which are not featured as reciprocal fractions (metaphorically, people) outside the New Reciprocity, and that multiply their talents to equal one nature between us humans.

The Naenaeon

Political Desk

Featured Posts

No comments:

Post a Comment

Legal Fantasy Web Series 003: Justice in Session!

Labels

Blog Archive