To love!

1. GENERAL APPROACHES

1.1. Dialectic difficulties of the problem and the general scheme

of the approach to its solution

As we see, within Plekhanov's antinomy, the problem of the role

of an individual seems unsolvable, because both determinist and

non-determinist heroic-contingent approaches are greatly erroneous

but still have some just points. From the determinist viewpoint, i.e.

if we take for granted that an ahistorical force (God, fate, implaca-

ble laws, etc.) exists in reality, it would be logical to consider indi-

viduals merely tools of history, which only help realize already ex-

isting potencies or, moreover, an initially prescribed program.

However, as we have seen, on the whole the determinists' argu-

ments do not withstand criticism.

Elena: God, fate and implacable laws, may not tell us enough about the undercurrent of forces determining human lives but trust in the human being as an evolving creature with a destiny can give a direction to abide by. If we are to develop democracy in our world, that is, the rule of individuals conscious of their social as much as individual responsibility, then we might as well put on the boots and gloves and get to work because we are still far from actualizing that possibility. We do not need to call upon the Gods to actualize consciousness in our world but we do need to actualize the integrity of our own humaneness for a positive evolution whether the sacred aspects of that humaneness are remembered or have been forgotten.

By ‘evolution’ I understand the actualization of ‘sovereignty’ not only in the social but in the individual sphere. That the individual can become the ruler of his life does not in any way contradict that the individual is responsible for the society that he and she belongs to and participates in. Individual consciousness implies consciousness of one’s rights and responsibilities as a human social being in both the private and the public spheres. It is within the individual that the responsibility to uphold the law resides. If the law has turned against the individuals, it is the individual’s responsibility to reformulate the law and re-elect its representatives.

What has fallen is the false “monarch” and with it, the “dictator” and with them, every false authority acting against the people: the pretense that power resides in the nomination. As the Monarch disappears, the individual is required to take upon his and herself the responsibility for his and her own destiny: the possible evolution of the human being.

The soldier must be mature enough to safeguard human integrity and refrain from killing civilians not because he is told but because he and she carry within themselves the ethos that while war may be justifiable in some arenas, human dignity is never to be bypassed. A soldier as a warrior willing to die for a cause, must uphold above everyone else the hero: the unwillingness to kill in indignity. Likewise, in every sphere of society, from the child to the mother, the student to the teacher and vice-versa, as much as in every other interaction, each individual must hold up to the law not because it is the law but because it is a human law. Inhuman laws are not laws at all but people who have usurped power and appropriated it’s sphere of action against the well being of the whole.

The question of sovereignty is the question of our times and the greatest question of all times. It is the answer to who, when, where and what as much as how and why we are to act. That We the People, We the People of the World, as legitimate individuals in conscious possession of our human status, claim the right to act and participate in the world as equals to each and every other human being. That the Earth as the planet on which we reside, belongs to each and everyone of us and that it is to be acted upon for its well being as much as for the well being of each and every individual.

That the preservation of national identity can be cherished as much as people of each nation are willing to cherish it but that no nationality is above humanity. That a nation’s power depends not on its ability to crush the people of other nations taking their resources with advantage but on the dignity with which it upholds the human in each and every transaction.

The markets, as much as all other transactions between people need to live up to the consciousness of our selves as human beings, all with equal necessities and ideals. We do not only have a right to eat, we have a right to exist. Even animals need more than food to survive and humans need to expand the whole of their being within their “culture”. The work that each individual does is sacred to his and her development and all are necessary. The distribution of who does what is to be carefully studied so that no one is left to do only the “cleaning” jobs. All people are responsible for their individual as much as social surroundings and all equally need to take care of them.  The present order of things in which some do the thinking, other the building and still others the cleaning is an aberration and accounts for many of the multiple maladies of our personal as much as social existence.

A more balanced society is a more balanced individual and the interaction between individual and society is vital to the development of both “sovereignties”. Governments and people in other positions of great responsibility, are not in themselves people with greater capacity than others and as such should not be able to amass greater fortune than others through "legal" or corrupt means. Every sphere is equally necessary and all should have equal representation in the overall decision-making.

If we can give the right “place” to the right thing then we can secure for our selves proper development. The crisis that we live in today is as critical for developed as for undeveloped countries and the worst crisis is not necessarily in the economic poverty but in the human poverty: the “depression” of the people in developed nations as much as the decadence everywhere. What we must be afraid of is not physical poverty with integrity but well to do people without a reason to live. “Life” is what is at stake in all nations and recovering a ‘raison d’etre’ beyond merely physical survival is as pressing for developed as for underdeveloped nations.

The sovereignty of being accompanies the sovereignty of life and a dignified life cannot be lived without love. Love for our selves as much as love for our people and our surroundings. Without love we cannot live or survive and will continue the destruction of the planet as much as ourselves as its inhabitants.

Our relationship with our Earth has come to the same point to which a human being comes to maturity and realizes that the ‘humble’ body that carries his and her existence cannot take one more abuse without declaring its defeat and humble as it is, its death implies the death of our own possibilities.

That we are One with the body, One with the Earth and One with each other is the consciousness with which we need to take responsibility for our future: the future of mankind. That in recovering that consciousness we can recover the lost dignity for each and every one in every part of the world and actualize in our acts the reality of that status quo: our humaneness.

Long live the Human Being!