The War to Come

Imagine a sexual act between a man and a woman. Two naked bodies in a room that meet their skin, saliva, and sweat. Let's take it from her carelessness, she's pregnant. For certain reasons during the time of the pregnancy, however, she is separated. Imagine that, as sometimes in similar cases, she leaves the baby near a garbage container and returns to society with the most morally and physically removed.

Imagine another thing: a man [banal mental explanation: one may also be a woman] in another room until she makes a rope ready to drown herself. And you kill yourself. A suicide suggests the free will of the suicide. Those who say that the <x0... So since there's no such thing as “Free will”, there's no suicide either. You can't say that this guy killed himself. Every suicide is actually murder. However, the imagined man died. And a child born of carelessness and beyond the allowed, is near a garbage container. Either die or survive. Weather issues.

On the first trill, we learn that in the love room, the couple also had company with them. Its allowed and forbidden. They violate the social body economyd in a certain form, making it an illegal child. The couple in question do with their bodies what is not permitted. Because bodies belong to society. On the other hand, the man who killed himself a few seconds ago also makes a mistake. He committed murder of the social body. He kills a body bound by the shackles of a power economy. Within three bodies on the trill is society. Certain levels of power. Started by family from now on. On one side, we have one birth and one death on the other. But both, unfair and punishable.

We can fake and imagine more complex occasions. But to consider a masterpiece of global literature, “Hamleti” of Shakespeare. In his famous dilemma, the Danish prince commits a serious social sin. He is reluctant to carry out the task society gives him, through a ghost, to the father/king who was murdered unfaithfully. Although he receives the evidence he needs after fainting his response to his new king/his uncle from an insinuation of a theatre show, he again hesitates to carry out the will of his inner society. A murdered king treacherously meant violence against the social body, which was attached to the king's figure in monarchical order. But Hamlet is the one that still goes beyond that body through his mind as many have labeled the character in question. To kill your father-king meant to be avenged, in the name of personal honor and society. But he can also think about not carrying out the task, and that does this great work. Let's not forget that the individual was manufactured in those ages, in the 18th and XVIst centuries.

Let's review the feelings of the sin-in-chief people that we faked earlier. All three experience the feeling of social hurt. Even so, Hamlet thought for a while that “is not”. The feeling of guilt is nothing more than a test of the other person's feelings.

Of course, warriors who have been crippled by such pain feel less hurt. Nietzsche says that its biggest people are being put in prison. And it's true.

It's easy to fight the other one when he doesn't carry any of yours. When it's completely different, completely different. You hit him, you kill him, you forget about hard work. Without the point of guilt, we'd kill an alien. But if they're in the next one, they're not only going to pieces of your dick, but the deepest ones, including the most intimate feeling, then the war is a painful mess. This is the situation of a child who is aware of the authority of his father and mother, and beyond, his family and tribe. This is a war that needs to be fought with nothing, otherwise you remain like one zombie. Every blow that gives him authority causes pain. But if you don't make a shot, then this kid loses his body. Forgive him. And take the prides of family, tribe, or nation, his intimacy, his weaknesses, and so on. Hamlet's deceit in his duty to avenge his father will shake his authority as king and father. Hamlet's drama well conveys the illustration I want to present: His father's authority does not die even with his physical death. His body is embedded within society. More in society than in his son's cause for political role.

In our culture we have the cradle*, as an illustrative tool of the effort that through the swing and occasionally even through the lullabys [like sirens that want to hypnotize Odysean] to put the minds of growing bodies to sleep. But it comes and is modified by means of other instruments so that the individual can be kept in constant contact with the family hearth. Hence, the children of this society still feel more familiar with their home than with school.

Let's take a form of commitment: attempting feminism to learn patriarchism and mysticism. Even here, it is impossible for war to become completely abstract because it does not produce any results. The first and most important war would have to be fought within their homes and families.

Imagine, today you see professors of philosophy swearing at others - political opponents - from a completely tribal position. This painful struggle against the cradle, natural for wholesome associations, is not happening. A few years ago, former Prime Minister Hashim Thaci accused Albin Kurti of having neither the support of his father”. See what habitality. To do something, you have to have the support of your father, mother, and other family members. Even in politics. While it is through this very familiarity that corruption of power extends. It promotes and even reinforces our corruption, our tribal culture, and our family. Families stay close to the corrupt, even when it is clearly identified that they are corrupt. In fact, the entire tribe is close to them as is done with the professor of philosophy. This shows a lack of war and deep sleep. It also tells of places that take place on a daily basis.

I admit I've won important battles. I am not proud of anything in which a sleepy mind boasts. I know you don't like nonmodestia, because I know the beast you keep in place: society. Even better.

I was cheaper to my father than my father to my grandfather. He did not have the opportunity to endure the suffering of his father, who was embedded in him as he struggled in the struggle to free an entire collective. Like many others.

As I said at the outset, it's not as hard to kill the other until you perceive it as completely different, even as non-man, as Serbs were often perceived. However, war or separation from the social body to describe belonging is more difficult. And that's exactly what war shortages are actually suffering. Our society is too busy in fighting another abstract, inconsistent, until they hesitate to fight against his own man.

People who don't suffer for any press ruining their family and society can only be spokesmen of social formation.

In Kosovo today we see various tribal and family formations in politics. We see the Haradinaj brothers and their uncle. Next, we see the brothers Moliqa, Thaci brothers, Pacolli brothers. And family relationships are multiple everywhere. This is sad because it shows an enormous amount of conformism. And it shows that it's plasma inside this social body the weakness. A weakness that scares people into becoming reformers of their lives.

* The baby's small pig bones, with their legs raised and two semicircular cymbal triggers, so that it can easily bend.