Chapter 1: The Death of Terminology

The death of the internet is something we all revel in. It is, however, strongly connected to a funeral of another concept - the terminology. Terminology is the very foundation of every language strong or weak. Over the centuries, as our organizational and understanding structures rusted, our terms have to structure themselves, though only to some extent, as well.

Today, this is hard to accept, but in the 16th century, when Gutenberg introduced the printing press, essentially a way of really big spring for terminology, people were celebrating the miracle. Mass communication had arisen. Uniting everybody into one community more than ever before. The trouble, however, was that this miracle was not everywhere applied - English, the worldwide language of the 19th century, has Switzerland, Ireland, Wales and Scotland as parts of it, as well as Papua New Guinea, South Africa, India and several Australian states.

News has always traveled slowly. For most of the history, it has usually traveled in troops. Rapid communication, has not been developing much, but then there have been many barriers to communication building. The development is, however, apparent - we transmit cartoons and selfies via smartphones.

When first implications of mass communication, the two-way radioed chains of information, were created, town councils established schools to tell working people how to use the new thing - it did a lot of good. There has a lot of distrust that the general public should be educated. Always, the middle-class had the upper hand - they could not bring each other to the beginning of it, so they needed teachers.

We are, however, at a fork. With the help of digital book printing and terminated magazine sales, one can argue that the middle is gone forever. With the internet, the old guard has lost their old power, knowledge - they feel helpless and insignificant.

They look at the young, who have a vision on the new and novel concepts, and they envy its power to undermine them. And both sides should admit that in company with more power from an alliance state and a new capital of the globalized world, the situation has completely changed.

In the last decade, technology has ruined the balance of security, fear, uncertainty and greed on the psychology of Nicomachean ethics. Western philosophers in the 18th century have defined features and characteristics of a good society with honesty, the authority of the protagonist on his people, equal rights and well-being.

In the beginning of 20th century, two ideologues, Lenin and Hitler, developed new political plans for their countries and clear messages to their peoples. Lenin proclaimed for socialism and Hitler presented a new ideology, also transparent in the intended society and brave in the fear that their message's power was spreading among people and every other movement. The influential ideologues dominated people's minds and soon people's civilization has been pushed into the darkest period of its history. War appeared and people entered a war of two ills and several destructive battles fought without good options besides the time spent on the borders of a society.

I hate fascism, I need to admit. I hate terminology. Language is the inheritance of society; still I have never been able to find this appropriate for my postnationalism. In Japan the tendency is to call it “nationalism,” while in Germany, France “patriotism,” in the United States, citizens “nationalism.” Us won’t get further if we don’t call a halt to this growing mass of nonsense, and make everything uniform. Another term “patriotism” introducing confusion. This country we have been created with a link of love, Morita was not enchanted with this “idealism.”

Thus, every ideology invents the terminology behind it. That is the Ouroboros of language and technology: we accelerate technological progress, it forces us to create ideologies, and makes our ideology self-referential and self-refractory. Functional approaches like dichotomies “friend-foe” vs “real” vs “imagined” vs “simulated” vs “thought-verse” beg to break, but the simplest ideas are the hardest to make work. I can’t even name the most primordial ontological distinction of the archetypal talking-table civilization. This is because every institution that invents their own treaty, termites, smaeon, morality, and technology within these apparatuses — be it the status quo within an “ethos of nonbeing” or a magical technology, occult mysticism, and pleasure rituals from time to time — fascinate us and get incorporated within our own institutions. In some way or another.

You won’t understand this if you don’t understand power projection. Anytime you make a statement or a claim about behavior or action, you are projecting power. You want to understand the element of force or the element of influence you are exerting. Roughly, power projection is physiological like muscle. It is quantitative or directly observable. Be mindful of this. Happiness is success and status is power. A biological example of power: The fox and the wolf at the hen house is an entertaining familial dynamic.