latest

Book/DRAFT.md

@@ -1440,16 +1440,25 @@ The arguments by Marx about the Species Being, or being as a being of the specie
 If we are to both envision that all humans are to be this species beings or components of Species Being yet are unable to attain their nature until they express their human life in this way, wherein they live their lives as and for the species (as man in himself), and that humans are able to impose a theory of knowledge dependent upon the distinctions which exist between man (as material or otherwise (culture, alternate expression, or otherwise - through the former is especially evil)), then, we necessarily indicate and require a process leading to the elimination of all distinction between men and for the state of life as a species being to be achieved (one can even liken this ). If this is still not yet clear, or the likely aesthetic of this in the face of human bodies and advancement of technology, then it will soon be made more clear after examining the same subject from the lense and reflecting from the corresponding historical event of covidism.
 
 ### But Fascism, not Communism
+
 One thing stood out to me right away when I first began reading "The Doctrine of Fascism".
 
 >"Fascism is action and it is thought; action in which doctrine is immanent, and doctrine arising from a given system of historical forces in which it is inserted, and working on them from within" - Benito Mussolini and Giovanni Gentile (The Doctrine of Fascism)
-- Fascism is action and it is thought:
-  - Action means practice and thought means theory. This is synonymous with Praxis, which is specifically the action that one takes as in order to do the work of Marxism.
-  - action in which doctrine is imminent: reinforcing that theory leads your praxis
-  - doctrine arising from a given system of historical forces: Marxist historicism dictates theory
-!TODO: delve more into the text and show more examples of how this is Marxism in its essence
+
+Action and thought amidst historical forces towards the immanent?  Perfectly analogous to Historical Materialism. Marxism is Critical Praxis (Theory and Practice) to achieve Communism as the solution to the "riddle of history":
+> "The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles." - Karl Marx (The Communist Manifesto)
+
+> "The unity of theory and practice, is the revolutionary core of this method" - György Lukács (History and Class Consciousness)
+
+Full quote:
+> "It is not the primacy of economic motives in historical explanation that constitutes the decisive difference between Marxism and bourgeois thought, but the point of view of totality. The category of totality, the all-pervasive supremacy of the whole over the parts, is the essence of the method which Marx took over from Hegel and brilliantly transformed into the foundations of a wholly new science. The primacy of practice over theory, or rather the unity of theory and practice, is the revolutionary core of this method." - György Lukács (History and Class Consciousness)
+
+They're essentially the same thing, but people get stuck on the Nationalist vs Internationalist distinction. The internationalist state of spontaneous Socialism void of contradiction and oppression would be the step after the perfection of the conditions at an international level, which would be akin to a superstate. And the Fascist state? Well it seeks conflict with other states until it reigns supreme.
+
+So, in effect, it too would need to become the super state, if ever the zenith of its ascension were ever to be achieved. At that point, the distinction between its dissolution ("withering away") or its eternal status as the perfected edifice may serve as the final distinction of each logical conclusion. That's not much of a distinction.
 
 #### Syllogism on Fascism
+
 The Question: can you have a collectivist undertaking which is not either Communism or one whose undertaking includes an aspect of Communism coming into being as part of the historical process of developing the Fascist state? We ask this question because, in practical terms, there must be some means by which to orient the masses which, in theory, includes differentiation of personality and opinion, regardless of whether there's a concept of an ideal formulation wherein those differences will have been resolved such as to place each member in perfect alignment. For this reason, some revisionists of Fascism have posited that, given the ideal of the state as an organic entity transcending the multiplicity of human beings, each participant's role, purpose and spiritual value are expressing some form of equality, and that this is tantamount to a more correct permutation of a common and perfected human existence, but that still differs from the concept of Communism either popularly understood or being presented in this book.
 
 However, there is something to be said in communist philosophers and communists themselves continuously assert that Fascism is dualistically-mediated component of the reality that they describe and acknowledge in that it is either a component to reality which drives the purpose of having to create the Communist endpoint, such as to evade the otherwise inevitable destination of Fascism, while fascists themselves, at least insofar as there have been self-declared adherents to an ideology of Fascism, have largely manifested as a reaction to what is otherwise perceived as being the development of Communism. There are some semantics to work out to fully consolidate the understanding of what Fascism is, both as a philosophy and as has been conjured up historically, as Fascism was borne of Syndicalism and is itself a progressive ideology, which is to say that it is an eschatology which develops through historical praxis but, those semantics aside, Fascism is largely understood of reactionary formulation and manifestation.
@@ -2841,7 +2850,7 @@ I contend that the collectivist pursuit of supremacy over the order of being is
 
 Regardless of which path we may be on, we must always suppose that it's taking us towards this abomination: a monstrous, blind and archaic corporate entity calling itself the people, for the people and for the good. A freakish beast that purports to know minds, and which threatens to replace real people and a legacy of beautiful culture with a decrepit and pathetic voodoo doll and childish taunts of a supreme infallibility.
 
-## 2-Spirit Negation Part II
+## Two-Spirit Negation Part II
 
 How distastefully ironic that after the elaborate commentary on the 20th century's dehumanizing practices of categorizing humans to enact social, cultural and absolute control over people's supposed identities, and indeed their lives, the state, corporation, syndicates and oligarchs are finding an ostensibly true humanitarian calling in imbuing the entirety of what they do with reifying a specification of what people are, as denoted by their material classification (that is, the classification of the matter of their flesh as the source of applying a meaning to the essence of their being). As we've commented on before, the irony is purposeful in that the system of critique which declares the need to categorize does so on the supposed need to counter the categories otherwise being wrongfully applied, and that it finds its way of doing this through the central authorities at every opportunity, which both empowers the psychopathological activist to wreak their manipulative tactics for their personal proclivity to reify their morally elevated self image.
 
@@ -2868,6 +2877,7 @@ When it comes to producing rhetoric which supposes an oppressed status by people
 As we carry on in our analysis, we will examine the ways in which the state has employed aesthetic determinants to appropriate the culture and representation of millions of people based on the material characteristics of their bodies or their proclaimed experiences (as evaluated by the state)
 
 ### Rainbow Savage
+
 Motifs of rainbow:
 - Brilliant, eternal light
 - Transcendent completion
@@ -3074,25 +3084,59 @@ Though it's easy to assume that the dehumanizing behaviours emerge from those wh
 - Controlling the unknown
 - Seeing as lesser
 
+!TODO: Flesh out how those who push policy and use political advocacy to reify identity are embodying what is accused of others when the term "settler" is thrown around. They are colonizing and reviving the spirit of slave ownership as a means to building their world.
+
+!WARNING: This section might need to be split, with some of it assigned to "theory of collectivism leading to dehumanization", which is already probably spoken of (though labelled differently) elsewhere
+
+##### Collectivist Thinking is Dehumanization
+
 Through some combination of disgust, fear, pity and a need for self-aggrandizement, the true settler takes every opportunity to wield the wand which reifies some notion of critical identity. In designating the label of human types, proto-human types, subhuman types, and so forth, they paint a story which reinforces all their claims and places a weight of burden, in the form of promises, upon all of society. Promises which, when fulfilled, make their claims true.
 
-And when I say proto-human, I mean that literally:
+And when I say proto-human, I mean that literally, whether it's referring to roughly half of a nation's citizens as "deplorable", commenting on the vaccine hesitant, at the moment of the greatest social and political pressure to have everyone accept the injection, as being as being anti-science, racist and misogynist, or when referring to all those who vote for Trump as being Neanderthals:
 
 > "I know it’s not fair to Neanderthals, but by calling Trump one, we only insult ourselves, since we’re all a little bit Neanderthal – especially those who voted to put him back in office." - Peter Sahlins, Professor of History Emeritus, University of California (Counterpunch: Is Trump a Neanderthal?)
 
-After all, in all collectivist thought, unless one fashions oneself a non-human, the semantics of inclusion/exclusion serve as a proxy for defining who is truly human, or worthy of being a representative or propagator of humanity.
+During the Covid-era, there were many examples of messaging which promoted the attitude of gloating and mocking someone's death if they had not received the mRNA vaccine, these included jokes from Jimmy Kimmel about how ICU beds shouldn't be given to the unvaccinated, and a statement from Los Angeles Times columnist Michael Hiltzik that "Mocking anti-vaxxers’ COVID deaths is ghoulish, yes — but may be necessary", but perhaps a better example of this messaging which is effective in helping to popularize an attitude while employing a clinically chosen distance for plausible deniability, was the front page of the Toronto Star whose quotes, as captured in a photo with a collage of headlines, said the following:
+
+> "I have no empathy left for the wilfully unvaccinated. Let them die... I honestly don’t care if they die from COVID. Not even a little bit... Unvaccinated patients do not deserve ICU beds." - Toronto Star (August 29, 2021)
+
+Dehumanizing statements uttered from a standpoint which promotes collectivism isn't exclusively from those who refer to themselves as "left" or "liberal" (terms which I hesitate to use, given much of the subject matter in this book), but also include those who outright identify themselves as right wing collectivists. Though such persons are not as prevalent, at least insofar as they themselves explicitly label themselves as such (given that most claims of someone being a "right-wing Fascist" are labels being declared as a pejorative), they still can be found, especially among those who are promoting a Neo-Fascist worldview. A good example of this is Stephen Wolfe, who authored "The Case for Christian Nationalism", and who referred to "liberals" as "parasites on Christian civilization".
+
+It is worth mentioning, however, that it's more difficult to find clear, unambiguous and explicit quotes published in mainstream sources where a self-professed "conservative" or "right-wing" personality uttered a statement about their "liberals" or "left-wing" which was dehumanizing. There are some quotes from Ted Nugent and Rush Limbaugh, but it is difficult to use them as good examples because, for one, they don't identify themselves as collectivist, nor espouse collectivist principles, for another point, and particularly in the case of Rush Limbaugh, the statements are quite dated and mostly based on secondary sources commenting on his statements as heard over a radio, and lastly because their statements, especially in the case of Ted Nugent, were also directed to people claim to be "conservative" or "right-wing".
+
+Though there are many organizations, such as Media Matters, or the publicly funded "Anti-Hate Canada Network" which document cases of what they deem to be "hate", these often include lots of anonymous accounts that are unverified, or well-known political commentators who are being accused of being hateful for expressing criticism which isn't clearly dehumanizing based on the language used, but is accused as being "hateful" in the sense that the organization labeling it as hate considers it an act of hate to criticize the actions or statements of persons that it considers as belonging to an oppressed minority.
+
+This asymmetry in attempting to discover clearly dehumanizing statements which target people based on political orientation or physical characteristics from personalities or social media accounts that can be verified to be actual people is a sign of the times and though many would be tempted to interpret it such as to say "group A is hateful and group B is not", I would suggest that the entire purpose of this book is to help us understanding that the inclination to delusion and dehumanization is universal and that these temporally visible asymmetries shouldn't be expected to last.
+
+Again, though we might find good examples of individual psychopaths who are so caustic and resentful of humans that they would dehumanize others without the necessity of a collectivist mode of thining (though perhaps the "other" as a collective outside of themselves), the focus here is on combating collectivism itself which can bring absolutely anyone into viewing those outside of the collective as being less human. After all, in all collectivist thought, unless one fashions oneself a non-human, the semantics of inclusion/exclusion serve as a proxy for defining who is truly human, or worthy of being a representative or propagator of humanity.
 
 And this is the common theme because as soon as the argument has been made about the existence of an identity and a moral imperative arising from it as reality, you are now committed to that perception about an indefinite quantity of some form or another. The commitment is to a representation of the world which bears some meaning to the subject in question, yet it is also a commitment to swathes of humans; they are now constraints.
 
-The notion of identity is always a cheap conception, and always suggests a fragmented view of humanity where we are ultimately trapped in silos and liable to engage in conflict. Though humans can have infinite variety of experience and be developed in myriad ways, to suppose that their identities are bound to something which isn't universally available to all humans leads to the questions of what makes someone truly human and what makes someone a better human. We made good progress towards falling into the trap of assuming certain presentations, ethnicities, cultures and classes of humans haven't value to offer and are unworthy of dignity. If we are to play with this idea of separating ourselves such as to make our claim to knowledge implicit through collectivist mythology, then we essentially give up on our own endeavour to better understand the world and overcome its limitations. The casualty is always our rich tapestry of different people with infinite variation and locally-tuned awareness is being supplanted with a model which stands for the state and which imposes a life by rule, and rule by law.
+##### Cheap Erasers
+
+The notion of identity is always a cheap conception, and always suggests a fragmented view of humanity where we are ultimately trapped in silos and liable to engage in conflict. Though humans can have infinite variety of experience and be developed in myriad ways, to suppose that their identities are bound to something which isn't universally available to all humans leads to the question of what makes someone truly human and or that of what makes someone a better human.
+
+We made good progress towards not falling so easily into the trap of assuming certain sets of phenotypic presentations, ethnicities, cultures and classes of humans haven't any value to offer and are unworthy of dignity. If we are to play with this idea of separating ourselves such as to make our claim to knowledge implicit through collectivist mythology, then we essentially give up on our own endeavour to better understand the world and overcome its limitations.
+
+The casualty is always our rich tapestry of different people with infinite variation and locally-tuned awareness, which is perhaps the richest aspect of life itself for a human being, and something which mostly all of enjoy when conditions are prosperous and we have the capacity to examine the world and ourselves. This is being supplanted with a model which stands for the state and which imposes a life by rule, and rule by law.
+
+When speaking to what I consider as being a cheap eraser, or the cheap erasure of actual people, what I find is a great example of this is the fact that the state has become engaged in declaring a few key identity categories for persons it refers to as Indigenous. Specifically, that it refers to Indigenous people as an original people of the land and that it refers to "Two-spirit" as an identity associated with the LGBTQ umbrella of categories which is to say that it is a Queer identity. It does this without providing deep explications, but by positing that the identity is related to both LGBTQ and post colonial discourses, which means that it draws on the rationales from each of these areas of thought, without committing itself to the semantics of either. Of course, Queer theory has already drawn from post colonial discourse in order to validate its claims about "Two-spirit" identity, which even drew criticism from Critical theorists working in the field of sociology who consider themselves intersectional Feminists and Critical Race theorists:
+
+> "I argue academics and activists need to be mindful that, even with the best of intentions, misappropriation of cultural traditions of minority groups is dangerous. This perpetuates historical practices that have silenced Indigenous experiences." - Dr. Zuleyka Zevallos (Rethinking Gender and Sexuality: Case Study of the Native American “Two Spirit” People)
+
+Though I don't agree with solutions put forward by this Critical theorist, who frames everything in modern Marxist interpretations and argues for their corresponding prescriptions, the fact that the state has gone forward with making broad, blurry and legally impactful classifications coded into their public messaging and policies of governance, and have supported the Human Rights Commission in updating their code to reference these classifications is shows how the state cannot resist new strategies for classifying and controlling the world within its reach to ever greater degrees, and this is a good example of how it will take not just good ideas but, in this case, bad ideas and create initiatives which make them even worse, just as Dr. Zevallos has warned.
+
+Any effort by the state to classify its citizens beyond equal citizens, by alleging difference among them based on history, race, sexuality, or otherwise, which inform their knowledge, morality and spirituality is nothing short of an abomination. It is obscene, tragic and evil that mankind develops concepts and systems with what's superficially presented as ever-greater sophistication to present, declare and elucidate its promise of a perfected human morality at the level of thought, which is to imply that humans are not capable of a morally robust manner of thought without intervention by the state. Presenting as the appearance and opportunity to achieve justice. Declaring itself as being the entity which can achieve something otherwise so difficult for humans on their own. Elucidating an explication of reality, experience, the substance of man, and the path to righteousness. Promising the fulfillment of our true needs and destiny.
+
+##### Citizens Who Accept Labels
+
+What can be said about citizens who accept the interoperable handles placed upon themselves and their neighbours? Is it something they really believe in? Are they just trying to get along to help with progress until such ways of thinking about their fellow countrymen are no longer necessary? What if they are to witness someone of a supposedly oppressed identity reject the label and the description of their knowledge and character?
+
+To think that any sycophantic busybody would actually acquiesce to someone else judging such things about themselves as being incorrect not likely to happen and, if they're radicalized to any degree, something they would vehemently oppose. If someone is invested in making use of the state's apparatus to elevate their moral status and attain power, there is likely nothing that will change their minds beyond a change in the means by which the power itself can be sought. That is, they will adhere to the state ideology as it changes, and at the speed at which its changes have affected their ability to manipulate their circumstances. Only the more passive, vulnerable, hapless peasants who follow through in giving their dignity, property and children's minds and bodies as fuel to the resentful flame of critical praxis, under a banner of justice, will entertain a non-conforming "oppressed" person's story in good faith. It will, however, cause cognitive dissonance and though that can help break some out of the cycle of continuously accepting a brittle mythos by which to derive a recipe for ethical life, many will simply look back towards the most popular and trusted sources to find a way to consolidate these deviating individuals.
 
-I think that the best term to refer to it is abomination, in that it is obscene, tragic and possibly evil that mankind develops concepts and systems with ever-greater sophistication in the sense of presenting, declaring, elucidating and promising:
-- Presenting: the appearance and opportunity to achieve justice
-- Declaring: itself as being something so difficult and unverifiable to suppose
-- Elucidating: an explication of reality, experience, the substance of man, and the path to righteousness
-- Promising: the fulfillment of our true needs and destiny
+When it comes to accepting the state's designation of who and what you are, we can't know for certain whether it's faith or fear, given that the proclamation bears significance on not just themselves but the entirety of mankind, but we can try to understand the plausible paths and mechanisms for each, and build our diagnostic tools to be employed whenever we detect the disregard for principles of freedom and liberty in exchange for the promise of our somehow being made whole through the state.
 
-To think that any sycophantic busybody would actually acquiesce to someone else judging such things about themselves is laughable and not likely; it is only the passive, vulnerable and manipulated, hapless peasants who follow through in giving their and their children's bodies as fuel to the resentful flame of critical praxis under the banner of justice. We can't know for certain whether it's faith or fear which drives them into accepting such an invocation upont hemselves and the entirety of mankind, but we can try to understand the plausible paths and mechanisms for each, and build our diagnostic tools to be employed whenever we detect the disregard for principles of freedom and liberty in exchange for the prmise of our being made whole as an entire superorganism or universal divine spirit.
+## Negation through State Mythos
 
 ### We Need To Seriously Disambiguate
 - 2-spirit
@@ -3104,71 +3148,116 @@ To think that any sycophantic busybody would actually acquiesce to someone else
 - sustainability
 - spirituality
 
-One of the first things worth mentioning which in some ways is the whole point of all this is the idea that the state can communicate that people, and especially categories of people, can have additional, greater, or even just different dimensions of spirituality from one another, and that having these dimensions signifies that the lives of persons within a category and the life of anyone else relative to them, can be understood in terms which describe their moral circumstances and challenges, their disposition towards any other person, as category or individually, and the degree to which or manner in which they affect justice and fairness in this world.
+In many respects, this specific aspect of collectivism is what motivated me to write this book. The idea that the state could even enumerate our beliefs as though it had an intelligent and nuanced reference as to what they may be. The idea that the state can communicate that people, and especially categories of people, can have additional, greater, or even just different dimensions of spirituality from one another, and that having these dimensions signifies that the lives of persons within a category and the lives of those relative to them can be understood in terms which describe their moral circumstances and challenges, their disposition towards any other person, and the degree to which or manner in which they affect justice and fairness in this world.
 
-For anyone to be regarded as having such an effect on mankind, history and reality is akin to a divine logic and application of divine principle. Even if statistics could show some iron-clad relationship that could never be undermined or challenged, it should still be rejected, as it can never make absolute sense, and because any reality of injustice would need, in actual terms, to be bound to the actions of people. There is no possibility of a true moral conflict occurring without an event pertaining to it with actual persons acting, observing and experiencing it and, regardless of what one believes about cognitive bias and false consciousness, there is no hope for any member of mankind without the perspective that logic and reason can be applied universally and that, for any generally observed patterns visible at the level of a socially-conceived identifier or evaluated motif, there remains always the possibility of exceptions and our expectation of the possibility of expectations is tantamount to, equivalent to, and even synonymous with the fact that identity categories are not causative. Even when great, unjust and violent measures are applied systematically by an official, authoritative entity to a supposed category of people of any kind at any level of scale.
+For anyone to be regarded as having such an effect on mankind, history and reality, not through some precise action, but through their having disparate forms, is akin to a divine logic, with the impetus to act to correct the effects of their disparate forms being an application of divine principle. Even if statistics could show some iron-clad relationship that could never be undermined or challenged, but faithfully demonstrated as a mechanism for making a perfect prediction, it should still be rejected as bearing any relevance whatsoever against determinations made about specific events and actions. That is to say, any reality of injustice needs to be discerned in actual terms bound to the actions of people. There is no possibility of a true moral conflict occurring without an event pertaining to it with actual persons acting, observing and experiencing it, having intentions and reacting in certain ways, and regardless of what one believes about cognitive bias and false consciousness, there is no hope for any member of mankind without the perspective that logic and reason can be applied universally and that for any generally observed patterns visible at the level of a socially-conceived identifier or motif, there always remains the possibility of exceptions. Our expectation of that there can be an exception, even for ourselves is tantamount to our intuited belief that identity categories are not causative. These things hold true even when great, unjust and violent measures are applied systematically by an official, authoritative entity to a supposed category of people of any kind at any level of scale, which is to say, they hold true even if oppression were "systemic".
 
 ### Queer Scholarship
- - Queer indigenous studies by Quo-Li Driskill
+!TODO: Possible sources to reference
+- Queer indigenous studies by Quo-Li Driskill
  - Asegi Stories: Cherokee Queer and 2-spirit Men
  - Spaces Between Us
  - Two-Spirit people
 
+!TODO: The next paragraph pertains to reactionary elements who choose to believe they have an oppressed collective
 I want to preface this section by speaking to those who would believe that the following circumstance only applies to one peculiar "group" and posit that this should be completely obvious short of ignorance and bigotry. I also want to compel the reader to extend the understanding that the capacity to ascribe queer liberation to any particular group might seem, in one sense, possibly because of the particular content of queer theory, but I contend that this is only because of the fact of that content being of a collectivist nature. So long as a group can be posited, a rhetorical structure can be edified to declare the necessity of a collectivist liberation for that group.
 
+!TODO: Reorganize to put all the Queer indigenous together
 With that said, we can focus on the manner in which a queer designation was imposed on the very idea of indigeneity.
 
 #### Theory is Systemic Designation
 
-It's important to make the assertion that indigenous, or any sort of person that can be considered as being queer, is not something to be ascribed to only certain persons (or members) of a supposed broader identity group. This is impossible as the logic applied only works through the presupposing of a systemic condition and, thus, must be also applied systemically; this is an explicit form of proposed systemic oppression as it is a constraint.
+It's important to make the assertion that Indigenous, or any sort of person that can be considered as being queer, is not something to be ascribed to only certain persons (or members) of a supposed broader identity group. The identity category is the difference between being a source of oppression or the sole component which resists it. Supposing the Queer attribute as only being inevitably purposed to a subset of humanity is impossible as the logic applied only works through the presupposing of a systemic condition and, thus, must be also applied systemically. Ironically, the demand of Queer theory is that liberation and designation as resistance to oppression must be the purpose of all beings, and this is an explicit form of proposed systemic oppression in and of itself.
 
-With this in mind, it should come as no surprise to see that the sources of force, as expected and inscribed in law, not only offer no resistance or even interest in providing a modicum of healthy skepticism, but form and set into motion initiatives to promote broad application, dissemination and means of verification of the adoption and promotion of understanding all persons in this way.
+With this in mind, it should come as no surprise to see that the sources of force, as expected and inscribed in law, not only offer no resistance or even interest in providing a modicum of healthy skepticism, but form and set into motion initiatives to promote broad application, dissemination and  verification for adoption of understanding all persons in Queer world view.
 
-This serves a general purpose for the state authority acknowledging, legislating, or mandating any piece of material or official communication which even so much as utilizes the nomenclature, taxonomy, or vernacular derived from the social critiques that were used to posit a systemic description of a category of people:
- - legitimization of power
- - legitimization of work
- - legitimization of description and statements relative to which these assertions exist as second-order logic
+This serves a general purpose for the state authority acknowledging, legislating, or mandating any piece of material or official communication which even so much as utilizes the nomenclature, taxonomy, or vernacular derived from the social critiques that were used to posit a systemic description for categorizing all people. This stands as the means of framing legitimization of power and work.
 
-To even allow for a previously secular and liberal state to begin making ontological claims about mankind and sub-categories of the human species such that it is said that there are additional dimensions of not just spirituality, but even simply experience, is itself an insult to good sense. It is one thing to entertain opinion or welcome its utterance in particular environments, but it is another to either pretend one truly has a form of spiritual experience, whether cultural or biological, which is necessarily not experienced someone else.
+To even allow for a previously secular and liberal state to begin making ontological claims about mankind and sub-categories of the human species such that it is said that there are additional dimensions of not just spirituality, but even simply experience, is itself an insult to the good sense of a liberal disposition. It is one thing to entertain opinion or welcome its utterance in particular environments, but it is another to either pretend one truly has a form of spiritual experience, whether cultural or biological, which is necessarily not experienced by someone else.
 
-It is ons thing to respect people's right to claim something like this which is to say to have the opinion that there are spiritual expressions or aspects that are unique to some and not others, and to respect peoples' right to perform and participate in practices which may presuppose this, but that is quite different from the state authority who must enforce laws.
+It is one thing to respect people's right to claim something like this which is to say to have the opinion that there are spiritual aspects or expressions that can only emerge from some and not others due to their unique form, which is to say the structure of their body and the manner by which that body is reflected by the subjects of this world, as well as declaring or believing that humans can or should respect peoples' right to perform and participate in practices which may presuppose this, but that is quite different from the state authority who must enforce laws.
 
-This alone means that the state must evaluate events occurring under its jurisdiction (or being contemplated by those under its jurisdiction) and make declarations and assertions based on that analysis which are to be regarded as true, just, fair, and universally communicable. Imagine communicating to all humans that they must consider that the share resources of society, and our capacity to acquire resources and nourish yourself, sustain your life and that of your loved ones must be disproportionately allocated because of a type of person who has dimensions of metaphysical significance that are different from you and this differences corresponds in an absolute sense with an ascription of moral failure on your part with your praise of the redistribution, to your detriment.
+This alone means that the state must evaluate events or expressions of contemplations about events occurring under its jurisdiction and make declarations and assertions based on that analysis which are to be regarded as true, just, fair, and universally communicable. Imagine communicating to all humans that they must consider that the shared resources of society, and our capacity to acquire resources and nourish yourself, sustain your life and that of your loved ones must be disproportionately allocated because of a type of person who has dimensions of metaphysical significance that are different from you and this difference corresponds in some sense with an ascription of moral failure on your part. In fact, you are even critiqued based on your praise of redistribution which is to your detriment.
 
-From another perspective, we can imagine someone of indigenous descent who is proud of their heritage and who sees it as a matter of culture, values, genetics, history, survival and so forth. They look on themselves and they feel like they are carrying the torch to keep an understanding of the nuance in human history alive and that they do this because of their strength and intelligence and that these faculties are necessarily inherited from the long line that stood before them.
+From another perspective, we can imagine someone of Indigenous descent who is proud of their heritage and who sees it as a matter of culture, values, genetics, history, survival and so forth. They look on themselves and they feel like they are carrying the torch to keep an understanding of the nuance in human history alive and that they do this because of their strength and intelligence and that these faculties are necessarily inherited from the long line that stood before them.
 
-They look upon their situation and they know that they'll keep knowledge and customs alive through teaching their loved ones and friends about the culture  and that doing this brings great honour and excitement for the future.
+They look upon their situation and they know that they'll keep knowledge and customs alive through teaching their loved ones and friends about the culture and that doing this brings great honour and excitement for the future; the immortalization of experiences, decisions and discoveries allows for the essence of truth and progress to rise forth and bring about a better world. These are things that we should all hope for, and they are the things that are maintained through an understanding which expects that knowledge is shared and accessed through universal means.
 
-The other thing that bears mentioning is that in bringing the category of indigenous identity into or under the umbrella of queer, we are now deciding to refer to all supposed indigenous people as an enumerant? or enumerable element of a classification system developed over the dimensions of human sexuality (and this is one where its seminal works have already problematized, blurred and obliterated - at least within the domain itself - the distinction of biology and sexually-related social construction), positing it along the lines of reproduction. This itself comes in multiple forms:
-- repressed reproduction by society
-- the notion that indigenous cultures are numerous and may have various social constructions borne of sex
-- the potential for varying degrees of accepting homosexuality
+The other thing that bears mentioning is that in bringing the category of indigenous identity into or under the umbrella of queer, we are now deciding to refer to all supposed indigenous people as an enumerant of a classification system developed over the dimension of human sexuality. The classification system, borne of Queer theoretical critique, is based on seminal works, like some referenced in this book, that have already problematized, blurred and obliterated the distinction of biology and sex-related social construction, and is thus positing indigeneity along the lines of reproduction. This development comes in multiple forms:
+- Repressed reproduction by society
+- The notion that indigenous cultures are numerous and may have various social constructions borne of sex
+- The potential for varying degrees of accepting homosexuality
+  - The idea is dialectical in that the criticism is that the social theorists, anthropologist will have been informed with a worldview which does views and classifies homosexuality as an odd behaviour, simply as it is not the default
+  - That there may be varying degrees of homosexuality within tribes is immaterial, as they are antecedent to a divine class and thus their understanding is a dialogical contribution to Queer ways of knowing and being
 
-One more aspect for which little regard is given is that the doors are left open to associate with the term 2-Spirit by means of sexuality, sex stereotypes, spirituality, historical legacy, mythology, tradition and culture.
+One more aspect for which little regard is given, at least among those in governance or education policy, is that the doors are left open to associate with the term Two-Spirit by means of sexuality, sex stereotypes, spirituality, historical legacy, mythology, tradition and culture. When the objective is a collectivist project of liberation, more assimilation is always better, and for any entity that is choosing to stake itself through promoting and associating a collectivist concept, it does so by presenting the collectivist mythos as something which integrates into its own worldview, thus implying that its own ideas and objectives are somehow congruent to the mission of liberation. As a result, any increased assimilation into the collective suggests acknowledgment of the legitimacy and significance of the entity and its objectives, creating a perverse incentive bias.
 
 ### Spirituality
-It's really difficult to put forward a universal concept of spirituality in and of itself, much less understanding an individual's motivation for declaring themselves to be spiritual (for adults, that is). But for children? You can get children to declare all sorts of things by simply prompting them with an opportunity to declare whatever it is you want them to declare, whether as a suggestion, a set of constrained affordances, and so forth. They will also declare a range of absurdities through impossible statements, be them assertive, imperative or otherwise, just on their own.
 
-That a declaration can be read in an environment with, say, a facilitator, counselor, educator, administrator, and so on, who has come to believe that the purpose of their work is one of social change as broad, liberatory phenomena, means that the meaning of the children and their utterances is now something to be evaluated as per its potential to induce, cause, and proliferate change which, for queer praxis, takes form along an assumption that identities must be composed and presented such as to eliminate things from the world which might impose any sort of limit or barrier. Without even having to expand on the presumptions of such a practice, such as what constitutes a limit, particularly as it relates to reality and to the social experiences of human beings, the very possibility of being able to override the accuracy, context and reliability of a child's statement on the basis of the potential of framing its interpretation insofar as the capacity for social change can be effected is completely obscene and utterly abhorrent.
+It's really difficult to put forward a universal concept of spirituality in and of itself, much less understanding an individual's motivation for declaring themselves to be spiritual, and that's already the case for adults who have a comparatively developed worldview and the means to explain themselves such as to negotiate with the world for their survival and professional advancement. But for children? You can get children to declare all sorts of things by simply prompting them with an opportunity to declare whatever it is you want them to declare, whether as a suggestion, a constrained set of affordances, and so forth. They will also declare a range of absurdities through impossible statements, be them assertive, imperative or otherwise, just on their own, meaning that, given enough time, you or some activist can find the evidence of whatever it is they're looking for.
+
+That a declaration can be read in an environment with, say, a facilitator, counselor, educator, administrator, and so on, who has come to believe that the purpose of their work is one of social change as broad, liberatory phenomena, means that the meaning of the children and their utterances is now something to be evaluated as per its potential to induce, cause, and proliferate change which, for Queer praxis, takes form along an assumption that identities must be composed and presented such as to eliminate things from the world which might impose any sort of limit or barrier. Without even having to expand on the presumptions of such a practice, such as what constitutes a limit, particularly as it relates to reality and to the social experiences of human beings, the very possibility of being able to override the accuracy, context and reliability of a child's statement on the basis of its potential to be framed and interpreted in its capacity for social change can be effected is completely obscene and utterly abhorrent.
 
 ### Examples of Stories and Occurrences
-We can see examples in autobiographies such as A Two-Spirit Journey - Ma-Nee Chacaby Mary Louisa Plummer, but first I must mention a few things.
 
-I don't want to take something away from this powerful book. It's amazing that she has been able to tell a recollection of her life experience in such an intimate, raw and honest way. I don't think there's anything malicious about her sharing her life story and I find myself empathizing with her throughout, and feeling sorrow for some of the more difficult moments she touches upon. Her story of her experience seems to me to be told in as honest a way as anyone is capable of, but that has little to do with the point I am trying to make. The issue here is that these concepts and the language which has been adopted in more modern frameworks of critical theory/queery theory/decolonization and the terms that have been offered up in organized interactions which, having specific purposes whether in activism, education, and even simply recreation and community are simultaneously a means by which people are seeking to fulfill their lives and have a connection to others. These frameworks with readily accessible vernacular that also yield a dynamic of equivocable (that which can be equivocated upon) exoteric and esoteric understanding yield the following circumstance:
-- People can readily use the language in settings where they are likely to feel socially fulfilled
-- Being able to express openly in a manner which centers yourself and, by virtue of the implicit logic in the systems of discourse which make use of the terminology, elevates your social value and moral standing incurs the question of whether there is ever a point at which one wishes to limit being at the helm of a process which necessarily does such a thing.
-  - If yes, then how does one avoid engaging in the process without any consideration of pathology?
-  - If not, then would anyone of any category ever reach such a point?
-- Engaging in this can appear as a form of spiritual fulfillment
-  - The experience of person of category A bears an ontological distinction whose reasonable distinction is the fact of its having an instance of perception associated with it
-  - This consequently becomes the perception of the soul
-  - We are now evaluating the limits of people's souls whose substance and veritability can be completely disconnected from anything resembling a material existence, or the human life as lived by any corresponding instance of perception in question
+We can see examples in autobiographies such as "A Two-Spirit Journey" by Ma-Nee Chacaby Mary Louisa Plummer, but first I must mention a few things.
+
+I don't want to take something away from this powerful book. It's amazing that she has been able to tell a recollection of her life experience in such an intimate, raw and honest way. I don't think there's anything malicious about her sharing her life story and I find myself empathizing with her throughout, and feeling sorrow for some of the more difficult moments she touches upon. Her story of her experience seems to me to be told in as honest a way as anyone is capable of, but that has little to do with the point I am trying to make.
+
+The issue here is that these concepts and the language which has been adopted in more modern frameworks of Critical theory/Queer theory/Critical Colonial studies and the terms that have been offered up in organized interactions which, having specific purposes whether in activism, education, and even simply recreation and community are simultaneously a means by which people are seeking to fulfill their lives and have a connection to others. What needs to be noted, however, is that political activism has led to the formulation of some of these terms which latch on to concepts found in, in this case, specific cultures which may be expressed in various ways, but which follow some semblance of similarity in the sense of not wishing to limit the qualities associated with a man and a woman to people of one sex or another, and have then steered, framed and transformed them to become language which expresses the practitioner of Critical theory's worldview. By doing this, it posits that the culture and people associated with that culture serve as the evidence of the Critical theorist's ideas and claims.
+
+Consequently, these frameworks have imposed language and incentivized their adoption by people who might not necessarily understand the full significance of its use, but have taken to the readily accessible vernacular. This vernacular presents dynamic of equivocable exoteric and esoteric understanding which yield a circumstance of the language being used in a range of environments, including ones which are not just acceptable, but naively well-regarded, such as finding one's personal expression and seeking fulfillment in their interaction and understanding by others. But also in circumstances of socio-political import which assert the desire to seek to seize and distribute power which is already distributed, whether in the public domain or as it exists for enjoyment as one's personal and private property. It is used in undermining understanding of science, particularly insofar as such subverted efforts can be used to make claims about a child's identity, knowledge and agency towards matters normally reserved for adulthood. It is also promoted for use in radical sex identity advocacy in a manner which attempts to put forward the impression that those taking up its use to describe themselves are morally elevated, culturally astute, and personally liberated, but which takes on a more narcissistic modality by centering oneself and supposing that the self has greater purpose in the adherence to a belief of identity being referenced in the use of the terminology.
+
+#### Humbly Narcissistic
+
+The subtitle might rub some the wrong way, but this isn't a comment on the Chacaby's specific intentions which can only remain unknown, but one which is both about the hypothesis that can have separate forms of spirituality from one another, and that we would associate them to our material form in the context of Social Justice.
+
+Most myths and frameworks for spirituality involve some description of masculine and feminine, and so it makes sense that if one were to consider themselves as having a spiritual aspect that they'd be faced with question of whether it includes the properties of either (especially if one were to have a cultural heritage which considers it).
+
+In fact, one might say that both of them together would comprise a greater totality of qualities, and thus if one were considering a presentation of themselves, or something to which they are referential, that it might be more complete to conceive of it as bearing both the possible qualities to be the "complete" spirit.
+
+Now, that's giving people the benefit of the doubt, and there's certainly good reason to do that, but the other side of this is that one's spirituality is something which can't be expressed or given true understanding in material terms, and thus one might prefer to not attach a need to have others acknowledge or confirm it for you. If it's within a cultural practice, then maybe that's something different, but once it becomes a political endeavour then, IMO, it becomes sullied. It's difficult to consider that one would be approaching the idea with humility at that point, but that's just my opinion.
+
+Centering humans based on identity predicated on mythos of historical oppression means performing a ritual of celebrating and affirming to induce a sense of belonging of the oppressed. The rhetoric surrounding this practice is one which posits that the oppressed are already performing a courageous act by existing in a social milieu that has been informed by a history of oppression, and furthermore by the fact that they are willing to be centered amongst others which include oppressors, allies of the oppressed, and the oppressed themselves. This is due to the presumption of trauma and that they'll subject themselves to additional harm, which is the intrinsic effect of existing in the environment.
+
+The very idea of that there can be a spiritual existence brings into question of whether it is connected with one's human life, but this question is addressed under the presumption that there's no need to even consider the possibility of spirituality if it doesn't mean some path by which we might exist beyond the material world. Then the question becomes whether a spiritual existence which corresponds to the fact of our instance of perception having occurred is something which is unique for each being, which exists as a state that includes all beings, or whether, if separate, there are important differences between each state of spirituality that corresponds to a perception as had occurred in material reality. Would separate spirits or spiritual essences be themselves something which is hierarchical? Would there be a dimension of the inferior and superior? Or would such concepts themselves be completely irrelevant, and just an imposed artifact of limited human thinking that was tainted by its limited view and sensory apparatus?
+
+If something exists for each or all of us in a place beyond the material realm, then what would be the purpose in one's material form being recognized for it, unless the distinction of spiritual forms itself was something expected?
+
+With constant invitation to speak of oneself in order to receive praise, recognition and affirmation under a presumption that it is a courageous and morally empowering act, it becomes perhaps too easy to give in to temptation to engage in superficial activity which rewards the ego. In fact, as the idea of spirituality pertains to transcending material limitations, then it would stand to reason that expressing one's spiritual distinctions such as to compel the manner of one's being addressed when in material form would itself be affected by the limitations of material existence that one would specifically want to transcend. Expressing oneself, ostensibly in an open manner which centers yourself and elevates your social value and moral standing leads the question of whether there might ever be a point at which one would want to keep it as something for their own undisturbed reflection. If even we are to entertain the notion that existing in any environment is causing you to incur harm, and that you are courageous amidst all your trauma, even then still we must ask if one were to have some awareness that centering oneself as a saviour of the world who serves to pivot the trajectory of humanity towards justice and liberation might be something that you would wish to limit, for fear of the side effect of it being ostentatious or making one conceited.
+
+The naive normie might assume that applying a spiritually-indicative handle to someone is relevant because it indicates the unique experience they've undertaken and that this form of address more closely speaks to them as an individual. It certainly might seem that way, based on how language is used to rationalize the imposition of such terminology in order to attain an objective of political redress.
+
+In doing work as Critical praxis towards Social Justice, it is precisely the opposite which is assumed. That is, the meaning of the language used to describe behaviour and the purpose of having used it are not based on the manner in which people are individually represented or even affected, but in the way in the presentation of identity is used to transform the structure of power. The idea of the good and the virtuous is captured by the praxis and as soon as identity is in the context, no longer has meaning outside of distributing power according to identity in order to achieve Liberation. In fact, to undertake this will appear as a process of attaining spiritual fulfillment, which is further complicated by the fact of using specific identity categories which are based on an assumption that they bear an aspect spirituality which supercedes the relevance of life in the material realm.
+
+> "In Foucault’s terms, the soul is not imprisoned by or within the body, as some Christian imagery would suggest, but “the soul is the prison of the body.”" - Judith Butler (Gender Trouble)
+
+!WARNING: possible repetition in the following paragraph:
+For one to believe that a spiritual existence is possible is akin to saying that there is existence beyond what we observe, with the latter seeming as the animation of matter in accordance with instances of biological life. If one is to presuppose the possibility of a spiritual state of being as extant, then one could rationalize as ontological principle that that each instance of human perception correlates with the divine, such as a soul or a universal soul. Though this necessarily proceeds as faith and speculation, we are now pondering the limits of people's souls, or their very essence of being, whose substance may be completely disconnected from anything resembling a material existence, particularly insofar as verification is concerned. Nevertheless, for any being to entertain the idea that they may have a soul, they must also ask themselves if they are the only being with a soul, whether every being has its own soul, whether they share the same soul, or whether beings have souls that are inferior or superior to the souls of others.
+
+Though this may just be the author's opinion, it would seem to me that for a human to have a humble disposition about the question of souls, while also believing in the possibility of a soul, one would have to assume that, whatever aspect of being lies beyond the material, any semblance of a divine or spiritual existence that is made possible for oneself would necessarily be made possible for everyone else, and that any distinct instance of soul for one human would be equivalent in quality and significance to the distinct instances of souls available to others. That one has a "special" soul because they are special, or an "old" soul because they are magically wise, is a strange thing to claim from a position of humility.
+
+For Chacaby, the concept of having a two spirit identity is asserted on the basis her grandmother having told her that she is very special and has "two spirits living inside" of her. The author notes that this can be observed through an affinity for exploring the bush, fishing and trapping. It's interesting to note that the behaviours and sex-role stereotypes of one's material life are being equated to one's spiritual content. It's also worth noting that, especially as sex-role stereotypes are strongly assumed here, the inclination to attribute masculine traits to children in order to make them tough and resilient in the face of hardship makes it very compelling for a parent or grandparent to decide to express such an idea. Furthermore, on the subject of being special, who doesn't want to believe that they are a little special? To bear the burden and pain of existence and give meaning to atrocities one has been subjected to?
+
+Again, this isn't to knock on Chacaby, but to bring to a common level that is accessible the ideas and plausible thought processes associated with conceiving of oneself in spiritual terms, particularly when informed by cultural and human ideas, such as the idea of transcending human limitations, including those rooted in sex, and how this relates to an empowered perspective for dealing with the challenges of our lives, which can be tremendously difficult. That said, I struggle with the idea of approaching spirituality which, for me, is something beyond human understanding and human language. How one could attempt to maintain a grounding of humility towards the divine when championing identity which extends from the supposing of one's unique spiritual essence, in a political arena where its reference is utilized in evaluation of everyone's ethics and morality is beyond me. An evaluation of ethics, by the way, which extends to everyone, each bearing a differentiated identity, which is either of like kind or evaluated as per its ideological congruence to what is, in this case, a spiritual identity. For me, it always drags down and cheapens the notion of spirituality to use it as a means by which to make proclamations about the meaning of human beings in the world which we perceive as sharing and operating in through material forces.
+
+With the term having been introduced and into the inventory of Queer praxis rather quickly, if not immediately, the lines were blurred between what coincides concerning "Pride" and the tropes of the noble savage were embedded while many felt emboldened to associate themselves with the notion of a sacred, forgotten identity which the country's "predecessors" worked hard to eradicate.
+
+One of the complications of Two-Spirit as a term having been borne of an older concept of spirituality and divinity having been fashioned and formatted to fit the purpose of Queer praxis is that its distinct original content is necessarily, as all things being synthesized in eschatological cult collectivism, negated in order to make the motif suited to engaging the conflict of assimilating the social environment into the frame of Queer liberation.
+
+This can be seen as conflict between more traditionally-minded indigenous people who are often older (but not always), and younger generations who are immersed in pop culture, public education, activities, hobbies and employment that are captured with Queer and Decolonial activism.
+
+This is also visible among the Queer-identifying indigenous people who complain about white or allegedly non-native trans/queer identifying digital artists, furries and cosplayers who make use of, integrate and display stereotypes of indigenous and native culture into their artwork and hobbies even if it is sometimes done in the name of celebrating a traditional indigenous culture, such as making it in honour of "Indigenous People's Day".
+
+### Spirit and Nature
+
+> "The anger and grief we carry from the destruction of our lands and our loved ones is the fire that fuels our resurgence. It drives us to remake our relationship with the land, to live as constellations of co-resistance, rooted in love and responsibility for the earth." - Leanne Betasamosake Simpson (As We Have Always Done: Indigenous Freedom Through Radical Resistance)
 
-The concept of someone having a true spirit identity is something as simply asserted on the mere basis of one's grandparent having told them that they have a mode of existence that somehow bears some characteristic, which in this case is the mode of having both a male and female spirit, and that this makes them special. Who doesn't want to believe that they are a little special? Or a lot special? How about to deal with the pain of one's existence and to give meaning to the atrocity one has been subjected to? Doesn't it make sense that you bear the worst of pain and might wonder what significance it may have, if only even to the end that it has induced changes in you which have a contextual association to the world in which you inhabit, or to take it a step further that they might yield insight that can be useful in that world (we don't need to get into deep metaphysics, or far less theological beliefs in order to think about these things). And so, then, the Rainbow Cult activists think they understand and champion any double gender identity held by an indigenous person, and that they can reference this in their advocacy for themselves by assuming that their goals and experiences are the same thing, or somehow related. Are there 2-spirit identities based on animals? Would that work for Rainbow Cults? You can most definitely bet on it.
+The trope of the indigenous manifesting rage and anger to fuel decolonization as a means of both their rebirth and the restoration of harmony with nature has become deeply embedded in western culture. Though first outlined in cultural interpretations of historians and philosophers of antiquity and medieval times (Tacitus, Hesiod, Michel de Montaigne), it was the work of Rousseau, whose incorporation into Hegel and German Idealism to become a foundational nugget in all modern collectivist thought, which really crystallized the motif which is plausibly cognized by all westerners when presented with the notion of decolonization as something which ascends beyond cultural preservation and hints itself as a form of natural conservation and Climate Justice.
 
-When the very broad term was introduced into the inventory of queer theory praxis, specifically when being adopted by and used by people who consider themselves based, not simply on the social vernacular which begins at the level of common pop culture, but those who see it as a pursuit of social justice, and who see a clearly identified target to be critiqued, transformed and negated before any sort of acceptable societal configuration can be found. When such people, who call themselves queer and see queer praxis as being a necessary and essential political praxis and wish to embed it into the very essence of themselves (or see it as sourced from their essence), see the use of the queer indigenous term, or the indigenous people which they imagine as being indicated by this terminology, what should we expect they might have been experiencing (whether 2-Spirit, indigiqueer, lesbian native, and so on)?
+Though there are, of course, many true believers who see this as the legitimate path to a continued human existence in the face of the chaos of nature, regardless of any degree of corruption of nature by man, the incentives for state control and the implications for a common view of universal ethics among human beings are an unavoidable complication that needs to be contended with in the face of technologically facilitated totalitarianism. As mentioned before, having the goals of sustainability and equity made mechanistically approachable by methods the elaborations of which interface with people such as to appeal to their egos, aspirations and hope for transcending physical limitations, particularly in a format which is intellectually stimulating and causes one to suppose their agreement is an indication both of their high intelligence and as a social signal which maintains not just their compatibility with the social environment, but their deserving of a high status placement or placement of operational significance within its structure facilitates one's acceptance of narrative which delves into the mystical and the spiritual, even if done so in a manner which is incompatible with their stated beliefs, such as atheism. The reduction of resource usage under a circumstance of ensuring vital essentials will be preserved for priority usage is compatible with one's belief that their reaction to such messaging is one which announces their reliable, obedient and highly capable characteristics which are congruent with both state ideology and its operational framework.
 
-They must necessarily see this as something sacred, as colonization, and the tropes of the noble savage must remain for any western person. A sacred, forgotten identity which our "predecessors" worked hard to eradicate.
+For the state to posit a type of citizen whose essence is harmonious with nature invokes the desire and objective of a utopian paradise and the fact of its not yet having been manifested. As one type of being is presented as already harmonious with nature, it implies that the remaining portion of inhabitants are not either through having prevented the harmonious occupancy and integration of the former, or by some combination of inducing dissonance or having fallen into apathy and complacency.
 
 It is the connection to a relationship with nature, and the vision of a utopian paradise where the instincts are fully satisfied while one transcends the mortality problem.