PROBLEM WITH ‘THE PEOPLE’

These days I do not like - or even use - the term 'the People' as much as before, largely because it strikes me as being too liberal and relativistic, lacking gender definition and, in a certain sense, discrimination.

It is the old Christian, Western, worldly subsuming of all under the one category, like mankind, as though equal criteria could be applied right across the board irrespective of gender.  Unfortunately, 'the People' do not all pull in the same direction; some pull this way and others that, neither the conservative 'behind' nor the radical 'beyond' seeing 'eye to eye', least of all when this is not a simple distinction between sensuality and sensibility!

Increasingly, I realize that the salvation of males of a certain ethnic stamp (antiphysical-cum-pseudo-physical) is only possible with the counter-damnation of their female counterparts (chemical), and that salvation cannot be applied to everyone, much less to those who are not even of the right ethnic stamp, irrespective of gender.

That is another of those Western, Christian fudges which results in the watery and the vegetative, or earthly, being subsumed under the term 'congregation' or, later, 'the people', to the detriment of truth, in consequence of which the preaching is as though to an androgynous muddy mishmash of indiscriminate gender from a standpoint which, taking expressions like 'mankind' and 'people' for granted, itself lacks gender clarity and definition.

Woe to those who use this term 'people' so glibly that they fail to see the tensions which distinguish males from their female counterparts in matters of social or moral principle!

And woe to those who would continue to use it when 'the people' had been overcome and were no longer recognizably human-all-too-human, but godlike and pseudo-devilish, according to gender, in their communal cyborgization, their supra-human destinies!