16 Inference

THE CONTINUUM OF MAKING_ INFERENCE

‘In this stream of the poor, the element of irresistibility, which we found so intimately connected with the original meaning of the word “revolution”, was embodied, and in its metaphoric usage it became all the more plausible as irresistibility again was connected with necessity – with the necessity which we ascribe to natural processes, not because natural science used to describe processes in terms of necessary laws, but because we experience necessity to the extent that we find ourselves, as organic bodies, subject to necessary and irresistible processes.  All rulership has its original and its most legitimate source in man’s wish to emancipate himself from life’s necessity, and men achieved such liberation by means of violence, by forcing others to bear the burden of life for them.  This was the core of slavery, and it is only the rise of technology, and not the rise of modern political ideas as such, which has refuted the old and terrible truth that only violence and rule over others could make some men free.  Nothing, we might say today, could be more obsolete than to attempt to liberate mankind from poverty by political means; nothing could be more futile and more dangerous.  For the violence which occurs between men who are emancipated from necessity is different from, less terrifying, though often not less cruel, than the primordial violence with which man pits himself against necessity, and which appeared in the full daylight of political, historically recorded events for the first time in the modern age.  The result was that necessity invaded the political realm, the only realm where man can be truly free.’[i]

We have learnt here that necessity releases, is then released, and re-gained through democratic political movement.  Man is no less cruel in a riot than to a slave, through emancipating the necessity of work or poverty respectively.  Technology is the only system that can fully emancipate man from necessity in turn becoming necessary.

The continuum of history began when the Romans invaded England from Charlemagne’s Europe against the barbarians and Vikings.  The Vikings took all the pretty girls to Scandanavia and they slowly went blonde if not already and got used to the cold (so they say?).  The romans began their capital of England, ‘Venta Belgarum’, here in Winchester in AD 70 on the site of Oram’s Arbour; it means 'Market Town', so all supplies to be taken to the rest of the settlement of Belgae in Wessex would start here.

There have been numerous invasions from William of Orange the conqueror in France who came to pick up the monarchical position in England, through to in-fighting and revolutions such as Oliver Cromwell’s siege on Winton, then Venta, to take power to London.  England knows war, and there are of course in more recent times the 1981 Brixton riots, which spread across England just as the fires of the more recent London riots 2011, after unfortunately Mark Duggan, (as decided in a court of law) was lawfully killed 8 to 2 in favour.

There is another part to this story, the power struggles of the East and West, more particularly the Middle East, a holding ground for some of the most diverse and autochronous people, cultures and civilizations ever known to man, for which they believe passionately about retaining or in the case of Isis, possibly re-building as their war becomes an out and out dog fight.

In May 2011, someone was seizing minds to begin rioting to over turn a decent British government for revolution of an awkward sort, both to overcome poverty, mans attachment to necessity to work harder, and an ideology payed at all costs. 

This worked and back fired.  Worked because they did riot once Mark had been (at the time) seemingly unfairly shot, (let us not make that the focus of the content here), but they rioted from an opposing ideology.  It also back-fired when the likes of English culture start laughing at Ricky's ‘Che’ sketches, disability, and armed gang members being glorified as the new model man.  That is not to say any of them have been discounted but all were topical for their time to beat the cultural dilemma of how we can go about living in the continuum of history.

Inference

Inference allows us the tangible revolution of technology, form making, teaching and guidance but lacks 'eureka' revolutions when the enlightenment has been and gone.  Are we seeing a reduction in our attachment to necessity already to spend more free time with loved ones?

Inference means we can deduce progress is the best we can get, and that is normally what we do get, but without revolution we become stagnant.  Muddying the water to reach the pebble, just makes it muddier and harder to find.  ‘Ripples in the water, throw stones, make money’© leaves us less than counting but constantly paying in, for that hat, those clothes, those shoes, and maybe a new wristwatch.

Inference also means we do stagnate, and we must not at all costs.  We can re-write any script from beginning to end, more likely middle to end, as our tram of destiny stops we get off, join someone else’s, and make amends with ourselves forgetting about who we have just lost, and remembering where we are headed.  Family ties us down, and more importantly gives us credible responsibility.  Without it, we would not survive the evolution protocol of pro-creation and making money for our children to grow more and more without necessity.

Hypothesis

The hypothesis of deducing the continuum, is to constantly plunge further looking for gold, propelling everything in a wave from behind to in front, then get out of the water, and see from the drench on the floor, from what you left behind, what it is you want to keep.  Therefore the hypothesis is ‘future dredging’©.

We like to reference the past out of formality and politeness but it is all too murderous to repeat history, and so the evolution of the human psyche and its nervous system must change to one of understanding and love, a purity.

Signage

There are signs for all new ways of living, as the earth performs its most indignant of back lashes to brave us into the future from past damage of the industrial kind we know all too well, if only to emancipate us from past struggle.  Travel, food, housing, cars, shopping, film, music is all signposted, literally most of the time, and occasionally metaphorically.  The metaphor of signage is within us, to turn, to change and to steadfastly go where no man has gone before.

Signs tell us of old, and new regulating language, mediums, and tolerance of each other.  We are tolerant, in an ‘age of tolerance’©, making way for new life to be safely happy with themselves.

Art

There is a key to the inference through creativity. 

‘To mime, is to infer connectivity with machine and civilization, animal, and man, and take down virtual walls of indignation through fear of communicating to be “normal geist”© or, of a majority, and not to unbalance, or, be presumed for being unfairly misinterpreted.’

I would rather take a plunge!

When taking your plunge notice either through the hedonistic polygamy of drug taking, and boundless trance of everyday for those abstainers, the marriage with god that means the everyday, banality of building mass and repetition of window reveals becomes art itself.  The continuum is of a slight change researched, practiced construction, ‘same form’©, but new idea.

‘We still need peace, to reduce poverty, to look after the environment, to create organic music and food’©, and progress spiritually, but we must think creatively in our wilds.  To make modernity, technological advances fit, we need a retro-fit, when the production represented love, invented right the first time, if not for its sentimentality of where we have been.  To infer to make new we must see the art in existence, the common, and the everyday. 

Necessity of creativity comes back around this time as a new creative and caring world order.

‘A kind revolution’/ PW 2017. ©

[i] ARENDT, HANNAH, On Revolution, Penguin, 1963, London/New York.