The painful myth of we/us/our/etc.
> So what might have been? Understand that I'm putting on > my optimist's hat and looking towards a decidedly utopian > future that, in my mind, should have come to pass. That > future: one in which robust, inexpensive, and efficient > alternative energy systems not only exist but are available > to all. Regardless of where they live, regardless of > their means. Systems that would be a standard part of new > residential and commercial developments. Systems that are > sustainable and clean.
Utterly impossible for the inelastic collisions also known as ego interactions.
There is no “we” for ego.
> With enough funding and the right ideas, we could have had > a global energy revolution. Instead, we wound up producing > and burning more oil. The amounts of money that we could > have used to change the world was spent on expensive > missile systems. It was poured down the drain of fanciful > space-based weapons that would have never worked. It was > squandered on corporate handouts. Instead of a cleaner > future, we got a further deteriorating climate.
Not only is there no “we” for ego, but ego accomplished all of the above expressed in passive voice, e.g. “was spent”, “was poured down the drain”, “was squandered”.
Because there is no “us”, just billions of egos in trances of their own private instantiations of “the world” inelastically bouncing off each other.
There must first be an “our”, which requires a fundamental inner shift in all.
I mean, there's not even an “our” to write.as, let alone at world scale.... ;–)