Process

Everything that is anything is always already in process. None of us have ever known what it is to not be in process nor will we.

This is why it is so laborious to listen to someone speak with words strung together in ways that presume something none of us have ever experienced: the claustrophobic stasis of instantaneous anything. It is even more difficult to engage such a person regarding the matter as this makes for such burdensome conversation as they really do believe that should they say something with enough vigor or repeat the jist of an idea one hundred and twelve times in a conversation whatever it is that the conversation is centered on will simply come to pass.

We presume that if we declare hostilities over in a war zone that conflict is over. We believe that should we say our name and that we are addicted to something before every group meeting that the pattern of action we call addiction will dematerialize. We believe that should one agree with a list of sentences and say a prayer that hell is escaped and heaven awaits. We believe that implementing free-market capitalism and writing universal suffrage into the constitutions of fledgling nation states will somehow magically transform villagers into democracy-loving federal citizens and the village women into outspoken, blue-jeans wearing local talk show hosts.


One of the most emotionally taxing transitions felt in the corridors leading away from closed-loop foundationalism is the end of the simple stability that a bipolar outlook allows. Such a worldview approaches much of life as team sport; pick a team and fight to win. The functional advantage of such an approach is the rather simple course to determining who is in and who is out of the group you’ve chosen.

When the agents and motives, actions and outcomes that make up what is called reality are clearly sorted for your convenience into hermetically sealed packages labeled for individual sale it becomes more difficult to recover a taste for anything that is not branded by the corporate entities that process, package and distribute your identity.

There is a confusion, an inherent instability to a multi-polar outlook. There is something frighteningly real about the multi-civilizational world that forever stands against homogenizing group think.


To recognize the unarchivability of the kingdom is to begin to privilege our moment without the contrivance of heritage-grooming. There is a visceral loss played out in all attempts to structure the universal narrative for all people at all times. There is no topical index accessible to our species; no universal taxonomy to reference in our choosing to live.

– Dan Hughes