Sweden: A comment on the recent riots in Rinkeby, Stockholm

(picture from last year’s riots in the same suburb)

Hidden underneath the media spectacle around the 2013 early summer riots in the suburbs of Stockholm (Husby being the epicentre) lies the constant social tension in segregated areas of Sweden (see Social tension and anarchist intervention in Sweden, in Avalanche #2, p.23).

Rinkeby, a suburb neighbouring to Husby, turned up the heat again. This time, it did not spread further than the nearby suburb. On July 23rd, 2014, in the Stockholm suburb of Tensta there was a car chase that ended in a crash; as the cops made an arrest, it turned into a scuffle. Shortly after this incident, there was another car chase which stopped not far from the centre of Rinkeby, in western Stockholm. As the cops tried to tow the car, they found themselves in a really aggressive tension and left the area. An hour later, the car was set on fire. The fire brigade arrived, followed by police for their protection, and immediately the cops were attacked with stones, and decided to get out of there. Soon they were back for another burning car, this time with secured vehicles, but were so massively attacked that they retreated for the third time. The continuation of unrest took the form of several torched cars, motorcycles, even buildings. The night between the 23rd and the 24th, riots broke out in Rinkeby; one person got arrested, and several were interrogated and released later on. In the night of the 24th cars were set on fire, but there were no confrontations. The following night, July 25th, there was car burning again, this time also in Husby.

The media learned from last year’s escalation, admonished by the cops, to not report and exaggerate around the rioting, and so there were only a handful of media articles. Their coverage was only given the perspectives of the nasty creatures called social workers, cops and “people who live there.” And where last year there were more and louder radical voices involved in public discussions, there was now no room for such perspectives. The social workers and the so called “people who live there” (of course, well-chosen people who want to lick the asses of the authorities shiningly clean, and not the majority of residents) were given space to express their hatred for disorder, anarchy and destruction, and their love for cops, order and democracy.

What is, however, interesting is that riots erupt nationwide in segregated areas every now and then. It is not all uncommon. In Araby, Växjö, in Gottsunda, Uppsala, in Bergsjön and Hammarkullen, Göteborg, and so on… There is no question about why the mentioned areas are the ones where unrest erupts. The poorest part of the population lives there, outlaws and outcasts live there, prison birds and mentally disorderly live there, and the population is growing with an increasing number of those who don’t fit in the disgusting normality of the “Svensson” (Swedish for “Average Joe”), and more and more people who are seeking refuge from war and disasters – partly created with guns produced by Bofors and other Swedish arms manufacturing companies – end up there.

The suburban tensions don’t seem to decline and decrease, quite the opposite, and the breeding ground for society-threatening alliances and possibilities to expand these tensions will be potential as ever before.

What are we waiting for?

Attack and reject authority, now and always!



Notice how the words Islam and immigration don't appear once here? This article says nothing.

Where do you wanna go with this? That you again, anarcho-breivik?

It is not mentioned because it is not relevant.

if one wants to understand the continuing unfolding of dissonance around the world, it helps to probe a bit further than ‘authority is bad’.

there is a place for authority. parents use it to keep their young children ‘out of trouble’ (playing in traffic), for example. a team of peers commonly sees a practical advantage in having one person be the ‘point man’ for certain activities. however, if the 'point man' were to assume absolute authority, he would be ‘booted off the team’.

in nature, collectives are usually orchestrated by some ‘common task or need’. when a couple are newly mated, in some social traditions, their need for a house to raise a family in orchestrates individual and collective behaviours in the community. one can imagine that, in the old days, there were a lot of ‘community serving needs’ that orchestrated individual and collective behaviours in the community.

in fact, one could define community in these terms wherein;

“the organizing dynamic elicited in full-filling a ‘hole’ or ‘need’ in the social relational dynamic supplies the primary influence in organizing the social relational dynamic”.

In this view, everyone in the community is scurrying around doing stuff and since they know what they are doing we "C O U L D" DEPICT them, if we removed the outside-inward need-full-filling orchestrating influence, as ‘independent reason-driven systems’.

In fact, this is the defining hallmark of our crazy [unnatural = normal] Western society. By psychologically imputing ‘inhabitant-habitat-INDEPENDENCE’, as happens when our intellectual representations 'display' in our 'mind's eye' when we use noun-and-verb European/Scientific language-and-grammar, ... there is only one possible directional source of dynamics; i.e. dynamics can only be in terms of ‘what inhabitants [independent-reason-driven-systems] do’.

As John Locke noted, the use of money and wage-labour ‘unravelled’ natural community, making individuals and collectives into good approximations of ‘independent-reason-driven systems’. The ‘centres-of-reason-directing-authority’ or ‘government’ have been institutionalized IN WESTERN SOCIETY so as to provide one-sided reason-driven impetus for the dynamics of social collectives.

So, it’s not merely that ‘authority is bad’ and that we should ‘go to war against authority’ wherever we find it, ... the problem of authoritarianism arises from Western society’s opting to invert the natural order of ‘need-induced orchestrating influence’ over ‘reason-driven assertive influence’. This unnatural, inverted precedence is facilitated by noun-and-verb European/Scientific language-and-grammar, ... and it is built into mainstream science and rationality, and it is institutionalized in Western forms of government, commerce and justice.

Many of the people fighting against authoritarianism are ‘infected’ by the same unnatural inverted process and are themselves ‘reason-driven’; i.e. their reason in going to war against authoritarianism is moralist [using moral judgement as an ordering principle is part of the same reason-directed screw-up]; i.e.

Attack and reject authority, now and always!

The reality is that organizing around the world that uses reason as the organizing principle is NOT nature’s way and what it is doing is setting up communities ‘ruled’ by ‘centres-of-reason-directing-authority’ whose ‘reasoning’ is never going to become ‘in common’ with a diverse collective. as Lafontaine observed there is only one way of establishing which is ‘the best reasoning’ so that it can be promulgated as ‘the common reason’; ‘La raison du plus fort est toujours la meilleure’ [‘The reasoning of the most powerful is always the best’].

Sweden and Norway are a fairly homogeneous ‘race’ that has slowly come together in reasoned agreement on what common reason base is best to ‘run their community’. ‘Late-comers’ with different ideas are not going to be accepted freely into such a culture, in fact they will be seen as ‘contaminants’ that threaten to ‘undo’ generations of hard work in bringing together a whole people under a common reasoning structure. It is like the Italians coming to the United States at the end of the 19th century. They were hated by those of established U.S. culture at the time for their rebellion against the reasoned ways that had become the ‘American tradition’ of that era. They were ‘socio-cultural’ contaminants, vermin.

What we call ‘terrorists’ are resistors of the programs of cultural purification based on ‘common reason’ that are underway in the world through the secularized theological device called ‘the sovereign state’ with its absolute ‘centre of reason-directing authority’. Members of the Earth Liberation Front reason that we should not be raping the habitat the way we are since their reasoning is that ‘inhabitant’ and ‘habitat’ are INTERDEPENDENT, ... but the reasoning of those who have businesses and who are sustaining [their own] positions of privilege, power and wealth on the basis of exploiting the earth, sees such ‘environmentalists’ as cultural contaminants who threaten to undo the amazing scientific and technological progress that has been delivering and sustaining positions of privilege, power and wealth [avoiding long-term eco-disaster does not compete with the accessible-right-now drugs of power and wealth, amongst todays addicts].

If we were to ‘start off’ in a community where full-filling common needs [filling holes, deficiencies outside-inwardly organizes collective behaviour] was clearly the primary animating ‘ethic’, then what would it ‘sound like’ to hear a politician, trying to get a faction together so that it could ‘take over control’ of the community and impose ‘more sensible and beneficial reason-directed actions’? Who would not kick that political guy’s ass out of town? The problem is that Europe started off with Kings and Princes who managed the ‘common people’ [though loosely, with absolute brute force when needed] from their ‘centre of reason-directing authority’ called ‘court’. The Magna Carta was a transfer of the same system from Kings to Lords. In other words, the principle of ‘reason-driven organizing’ of the community social dynamic by way of a ‘centre-of-reason-directing-authority’ has been an invariant in the evolving of Western society/civilization. Before there were ‘parliaments’ filled with ‘politicians’ there were ‘obsequious political influence-seekers’ in the King’s court. Build a ‘centre-of-reason-directing-authority’, and politicians will magically come out of the woodwork.

Reason-driven social organizing is essentially 'racist' [it evolves races of people-that-think-alike] and it doesn’t work unless such groups employ ‘ethnic-cleansing techniques'; e.g. as the French are trying to do within France so as to ‘preserve their culture’ [culture defined an evolved common reason-directed package]; e.g;

“EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding said she was appalled by the expulsions [of 'Romas'], “which gave that impression that people are being removed from a member state of the European Union just because they belong to an ethnic minority.”
This “is a situation that I had thought that Europe would not have to witness again after the second World War,” she told a news conference, adding “the commission will have no choice but to initiate infringement procedures against France.”
France could ultimately be slapped with a fine by the European Court of Justice if its expulsions are found to have breached EU law. [...]
“After 11 years of experience on the commission, I even go further: This is a disgrace,” she said. “Discrimination on the basis or ethnic origin or race has no place in Europe.“

If your reasoning differs from the prevailing ‘common reason’ entrenched in the ‘centre of reason-directing authority’ in the citadel of the ‘secularized theological concept’ known as ‘the sovereign state’, then you will not be fully accepted into the established culture which dominates the common space [there is only one space and when someone dominates it, it is felt by all who are included (situationally differently) within it].

On a global basis, there has been increasingly homogeneous permeation of Western authoritarian culture and its organizing through ‘centres of reason-directing authority’. This global homogeneity seems to be having a unifying influence on those who prefer the natural ethic of putting the fulfilling of common needs into a natural precedence over reason-driven social dynamics perpetrated and policed by ‘centres of reason-directing authority’.

The NEEDED call to arms is NOT;

Attack and reject authority, now and always!

But rather;

“resist putting reason-driven organizing into an unnatural precedence over common need full-filling, as the primary social organizing influence”

This will starve out politicians and their ‘centres of reason-directing authority’ without having to attack and destroy them.

The media and this forum are filled with Rational conjectures, theories, analyses and debates. Rationality is the basis for planning revolutions. Rationality is the foundation of sovereigntism and capitalism. Rationality is the problem; it is ‘the tool that has run away with the workman.’

Relationality [see ‘relational theory’] transcends rationality in the following way; it involves actions that are orchestrated by spatial relational dynamics, unlike rationality which involves actions that are driven by reason.

If we see that we are the only one that can reach the child that is being swept down the raging stream and we let this relational spatial situation orchestrate our movements, this is ‘relationality’. ‘Relationality is where things ‘arise’ out of the ‘interdependence’ [‘dependent-arising’]. Of course, an outside observer always has the option to capture our actions in the one-sided terms of ‘what we did’ and say that our move was ‘rational’; i.e. it was action driven by reason, the reason being that this child’s life was in danger and that we must act in order to rescue it. That is, the visual observation data is the same for 'relationality' and 'rationality', though our experiencing of the two differs radically.

Relationality comes the feeling of ‘rising to the occasion’, letting ourselves be the ‘plug’ that fills some ‘socket’. The short person reaches for the apple on the tree but is not tall enough to grab it, so we intervene to ‘complete the action’. The starving child cannot find any bread so we ‘borrow a loaf’ to fill their empty bowl. The two men trying to push a stalled car over a hump cannot quite manage it, so we join in and help make it happen.

The difference between ‘relationality’ and ‘rationality’ is that with relationality, there is some real physical, relational-spatial orchestrating influence that animates our actions from the outside inward, while in rationality, our action is directed one-sidedly from out of our own reasoned purpose; i.e. ‘sex without relationality is pornography’. Community without relationality as is generally the case in ‘capitalism’ is, by the same token, ‘pornography’.

Human community in its naturally evolving state ‘aggregates’ like biofilm, where, as one nomad after another settles in the complexifying [by populating] oasis or fertile valley, activity gaps or relational needs open up in the growing matrix of interdependencies which the current collective can’t fill, and this invites more nomads to come out of the ‘desert’ and ‘rise to the occasion’ to fill these unfilled needs, and so on and so forth. This is the enfolding of man’s labours with themselves and the land that constitutes naturally-evolving ‘community’.

Relationality is described by ‘relational theory’, notably Mach’s principle [“the dynamics of the inhabitants are conditioning the dynamics of the habitat at the same time as the dynamics of the habitat are conditioning the dynamics of the inhabitants.”], ... and by the philosophical views of ‘relational theorists’ [non-dualists] such as Mach, Nietzsche, Poincaré, Bohm, Schroedinger, Rovelli.

Anarchism is a rejection of community that has become the pornography called capitalism. It is a rejection of the general reducing of relationality to rationality; i.e. a reduction of ‘dependent rising’ to one-side reasoned actions that jumpstart from the ‘intelligent purpose’ of individuals, caucuses, central governments etc.

Central authority jumpstarted ‘intelligent purpose’ = rational action. It is not action that is ‘dependent arising’.

Quantum physicists [relational theorists] have pointed out similarities between the physics based concept of a continually transforming relational spatial plenum, as given by Mach’s principle, and the notion of ‘dependent arising’ or ‘rising to the occasion’ that also arises in Taoism/Buddhism;

“The general principle of pratītyasamutpāda (commonly translated as 'dependent arising'), implying that everything is interdependent, is complementary to the concept of [full, fecond] emptiness called sunyata.”
There is a surprising parallelism between the philosophical concept of reality articulated by Nagarjuna [Buddhist philosopher who equates emptiness with ‘dependent arising’] and the physical concept of reality implied by quantum physics. For neither is there a fundamental core to reality, rather reality consists of systems of interacting objects. Such concepts of reality cannot be reconciled with the substantial, subjective, holistic or instrumentalistic concepts of reality which underlie modern modes of thought.” ---Christian Thomas Kohl

‘Relationality’ is a physical phenomenon that pervades the world dynamic and is clearly illustrated in Mach’s critique of Newton’s ‘bucket experiment’. Rationality corresponds to mainstream [Newtonian] scientific thinking which is over-simplification or ‘economy of thought’ based.

“Science itself, … may be regarded as a minimization problem, consisting of the completest possible presenting of facts with the least possible expenditure of thought” –Ernst Mach

Using our noun-and-verb language, we impute ‘independently-existing subject status’ to relational features in the relational flow [as we do with hurricanes] as well as ‘intention’ to recast activity within the relational spatial plenum in terms of ‘what things-in-themselves do’ as if in an absolute, fixed, empty and non-influencing [Euclidian] space. This fictional foundation is how we model the ‘reason-driven actions’ of rationality.

Examples of the relationality approach include the circle processes and the restorative justice of indigenous aboriginal anarchists. These show the way to governance techniques which operate at the level of relationality rather than rationality.

‘Dependent arising’ characterizes such activities as March to Harlem Reportback . Such marches can be contrasted with ‘reason-driven activities’ that have been architected to achieve some explicit goal.

Reason-driven actions launched by central authorities have been steadily taking over from ‘dependent arising’-animated relational dynamics, in community, commerce and in justice. ‘Pornographic’ community, commerce and justice is the result.

Politicians and the media have hyped the notion that letting go of ‘rationality’; i.e. ‘letting go of reason-driven actions jumpstarted from central authorities’ will lead to ‘anarchy’, in the degenerate sense of ‘a total lack of order’.

What they are missing is that what is available to us, when we let go of our one-sided all-yang-no-yin reason-directed actions, is the continually unfolding ‘dependent arising’ that is the natural world dynamic. ‘Dependent arising’ is the mother of ‘relationality’ and it equates to ‘the emptiness’ in Eastern philosophy;

“As will become apparent in the following pages, the `nothingness’ of which Eastern scholars are fond of alluding to is not a nothingness relative to the fullness of being, but a positive, fecund and pro-generative emptiness in which something and nothing, subject and object emerges. This is entirely different from the `negative’ form of nothingness, a nihilistic mood, that would result from the insistence on remaining silent or a refusal to engage. Heidegger’s `conversations’ with a Japanese friend revealingly shows the metaphysical `gulf’ separating Eastern and Western attitudes towards emptiness and nothingness when the Japanese expressed amazement at Western reactions to Heidegger’s work. `We marvel to this day how the Europeans could lapse into interpreting as nihilistic the nothingness of which you speak. To us, emptiness is the loftiest name’. Yet, this state of `absolute nothingness’ [what Nishitani calls ‘sunyata’] cannot be reached through premature abandonment. Instead it is attainable only through the long and endless struggles and `companionship’ with both language and silence. Neither language nor silence can express the full richness of the real. We are therefore pushed beyond both language and silence. Words are taken lightly and only as `surface pointers which must not be thought to exhaust the depths of the actual experiences encountered. At best, they lead to beneath the surface “hows” to the deeper causes and regularities of things and events, which only the keenest and most experienced observer will have noticed… .it probes beneath the surface of appearances’. It is this relentless and unceasing emphasis on encountering and engaging with an unseen and unseeable `other’ which marks the Eastern mode of thought from the West.” —Robert Chia

When we ‘let go’ of reason-directed actions, what is then available to us is this ‘dependent arising’ emptiness that orchestrates and shapes our unfolding actions. When we ‘rise to the occasion’ and let the relational-spatial ‘third-person niche-need’ pull us into action to help the two others push the stalled car over the hump, this is part of the continually transforming relational spatial activity we are included in. But as Nietzsche says, we are in the habit of using two mutually cancelling ‘errors’ to RE-present this activity in doer-deed terms which removes the ‘orchestrating socket’ or ‘dependent arising’ that we ‘plugged into’ by synthetically replacing it with the notion of ‘subject’ and ‘intention’;

“Our judgement has us conclude that every change must have an author”;–but this conclusion is already mythology: it separates that which effects from the effecting. If I say “lightning flashes,” I have posited the flash once as an activity and a second time as a subject, and thus added to the event a being that is not one with the event but is rather fixed, “is” and does not “become.”–To regard an event as an “effecting,” and this as being, that is the double error, or interpretation, of which we are guilty.” – Nietzsche, ‘Will to Power’, 531

There are wars of reason-directed action [rationality] and there are wars of ‘dependent arising’ [relationality]. Which ones do we want to fight? As individuals, we understand the difference between what it is like to ‘rise to the occasion’ and help out our friends who are taking a beating [volunteers in WWII] and what it is like to participate in reason-driven action based wars. It is the same for ‘revolutions’.

We live in an era where it has become increasingly important to ‘let go of rationality’; i.e. to let go of reason-driven actions so as to open the door to more natural ‘dependent arising’ orchestrated actions. Unfortunately, most of the ‘talk’ about how to deal with our current social dysfunction [pornographic community, commerce and justice] is in terms of how to organize around developing reason-driven actions to deal with it.

is an apt way of describing what we do. the problem is some-one
out there always wants to organize the process, Name "it",control the purpose, messing it all up
and blame the difficulties amongst us. that leads to our infighting
and our alienation from our habitat and ourselves as real, sentient, and sensual relational forces,
cut off from our relational milieu. this leads to your view of retributive justice
versus the virtue of striving for the most effective ways of filling those darn holes that we encounter in our lives, out habitat and our cosmos in a restorative way Let's figure out the ways we can indeed find and fill those holes; they are always waiting us to give it a try: together. I see more of this in the article , the positive reactions to it by a host of posters. we are on the right track here on this site.

If the inference is that there is 1) a distinction between ww1 and 2 and those of more contemporary conquests and 2) that volunteering for such nonsense was relational rather than rational and calculated chauvinism, then ima be staying away from what is here called 'relational'.

fucking politician made what was like "overflowing" into a moral duty

relational space can't be dealt with, with 'either/or' logic although that is the type of logic that is foundational to what we commonly call 'science' and 'rationality' where our view is that something EITHER 'is' OR 'is not'. the relational space of our actual natural, relational experience requires BOTH/AND logic; i.e. where something BOTH 'is' AND 'is not'.

for example, would you say that 'it is a fact' that 'a police officer' shot 'michael brown' in Ferguson?

if you say so, can you tell me the time and place of the event?

if you were an eye witness to the whole thing, would you swear to 'tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth'?

and would you then make good on what you had then sworn to do?

i don't think so.

you would not even be allowed to 'tell the whole truth'.

as many sociologists say, the roots of the problem in Ferguson go back twenty years, if not to slavery, as they do in most cities in America.

Your 'whole truth' testimony about 'the facts' related to 'what happened in Ferguson' describe a small window of time [less than one hour] in a small window of space [less than one acre] and you speak of 'the facts' as if they can be captured within this window.

Oh, I understand, ... you must be a 'scientist'. Scientists always like to reduce their observations to tiny windows of space and time and claim that what happens, derives from inside these tiny windows. Moralists like this too, particularly rich and wealthy ones that control the social dynamic since if bad things can be blamed on local eruptions of violence, only those seen to be 'factually' involved in them can be blamed for them. Science, as Mach says, is to produce such 'economy of thought';

"Origin of Mathematical Physics. Let us go further and study more closely the conditions which have assisted the development of mathematical physics. We recognise at the outset the efforts of men of science have always tended to resolve the complex phenomenon given directly by experiment into a very large number of elementary phenomena, and that in three different ways.
First, with respect to time. Instead of embracing in its entirety the progressive development of a phenomenon, we simply try to connect each moment with the one immediately preceding. We admit that the present state of the world only depends on the immediate past, without being directly influenced, so to speak, by the recollection of a more distant past. Thanks to this postulate, instead of studying directly the whole succession of phenomena, we may confine ourselves to writing down its differential equation; for the laws of Kepler we substitute the law of Newton.
Next, we try to decompose the phenomena in space. What experiment gives us is a confused aggregate of facts spread over a scene of considerable extent. We must try to deduce the elementary phenomenon, which will still be localised in a very small region of space.” —Henri Poincaré, ‘Science and Hypothesis’, Chapter IX, Hypotheses in Physics.

What about Mach's relational space principle that says that "the dynamics of the inhabitants are conditioning the dynamics of the habitat at the same time as the dynamics of the habitat are conditioning the dynamics of the inhabitants". That is, a group of wealthy and powerful people could condition the common living space to starve out others and disempower and impoverish them through their control over the common living space. You know, like the colonizers did to the indigenous aboriginals. It's kind of like stepping on some hospital patient's oxygen supply hose and pretending that its got nothing to do with you, while the person is choking and suffocating to death.

So, anyhow, many people use their intuition and reflect on their natural relational experience, including many black and white sociologists, and claim that this Ferguson event has to be understood in a manner that comprehends the progressive development of a phenomenon and doesn't just simply try to connect each moment with the one immediately preceding ... [and] admit that the present state of the world only depends on the immediate past, without being directly influenced, so to speak, by the recollection of a more distant past

but that wouldn't be 'scientific' and 'factual' would it? Western justice, being moral judgement based, wants to 'stick to the facts', and in the Ferguson case, there is a demand for justice, which means 'justice' as it pertains to this one event in this tiny space and time window, ... you know, ... the event that you would describe if you were an eye witness and had to 'tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth'. if the powerful who control the 'authorities' were actually forced to throw a police officer who used lethal force on a whim, to the lion-crowd, ... the liberals in the crowd would say 'hurray, we have won, justice has been done'.

but what about those people who say that all the cities in America have been relationally tensioned over the past decades [oops, there's that word 'relational' again, but that's where tensions come from], ... so that an event like the one in Ferguson is more like striking a match in a methane filled room.

Is it the striking of the match that 'causes' the explosion or it is instead a 'triggering' of some phenomena that has been gradually building, like the relational tensions in the transforming earth that periodically source earthquakes, tsunamis, avalanches and volcanic eruptions as energy releases, that may come from minor triggering events. the actual event that transpires within a small space and time window is not the story, ... the more meaningful story is the overall transforming of relational space. dealing with the local event as if it were 'the whole truth' is bullshit. the Western concept of justice is bullshit. it is based on dealing with 'local events' and ignoring what is going on in the real physical world of transforming relational space. We say that 'that mountain over there is being worn down by erosion' ... and 'that valley is being filled in with sediment'. this is bullshit. the terrain is a relational space that is continually transforming. just because we are using a noun-and-verb European/Scientific language-and-grammar that reduces dynamics to 'what notionally independently-existing things-in-themselves do', ... doesn't mean that that is physical reality. as Mach points out, and Poincare, it is language game that delivers economy of thought called 'science'.

'Science' supports Western justice, so that if you are a 'scientist', your 'whole truth' will be the 'facts of the matter' as arise within a local event in a tiny space and time window. Western justice commits to no more than addressing such 'whole truths' such as what one swears on a Bible to be 'the whole truth'. Such 'whole truth' is also 'science's whole truth'.

If you witness a rock rolling down a mountain and lodging somewhere in the valley below, is that a 'whole truth', or is that just a 'noun-and-verb European/Scientific language-and-grammar 'game'? Maybe what is really, physically going on is that the terrain is slumping [undergoing relational-spatial transformation] as in a crest and trough [wave dynamical] relation.

Western truth-seeking is not interested in that kind of 'whole truth' because in order to understand things in that context, we would have understand things in a manner that comprehends the progressive development of a phenomenon and doesn't just simply try to connect each moment with the one immediately preceding ... [and] admit that the present state of the world only depends on the immediate past, without being directly influenced, so to speak, by the recollection of a more distant past

So, as a witness to the Ferguson event, what is 'your' 'whole truth'? We know what Western justice considers 'the whole truth';i.e.;

"Instead of embracing in its entirety the progressive development of a phenomenon, we simply try to connect each moment with the one immediately preceding. We admit that the present state of the world only depends on the immediate past, without being directly influenced, so to speak, by the recollection of a more distant past"

It would be both 'unscientific' and 'unjust' [in Western' justice's terms] to perceive the Ferguson event in any other way.

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
Subscribe to Comments for "Sweden: A comment on the recent riots in Rinkeby, Stockholm"