Trojka třetího

@bobojp reacts to https://trojkatretiho.cz/viewtopic.php?p=1843#p1843 :

@abolitionniste Do you have examples of who you put in the Union Guest category?

( https://theblower.au/@bobojp/113131290717939302 )

@bobojp@theblower.au Immigrants, tourists, ambassadors...

@Linkshaender@bildung.social @Pierrette@mastodon.uno

#tg594426640

Linkshaender writes:

@abolitionniste you don’t distinguish between temporary or permanent residence? Thinking of things like participating in elections, communal or not.

( https://bildung.social/@Linkshaender/113131604886473832 )

@Linkshaender@bildung.social Well, I understand at least some of these, sometimes very important, details. And I understand that in particular situation it may be importatn to distinguish between them. Howeer, here, I am try to discuss something more general on in a more abstract way: I would like to to agree with you (or someone) that the topic / issue / question "Union Guests" belongs to level 4 or 3 and not to levels 2 and 1.

@bobojp@theblower.au @Pierrette@mastodon.uno

#tg594426640 #tg434928726

Two indipendent reactions:

@Linkshaender writes:

@abolitionniste I see, yes. Still thinking if these 4 layers fit into my understanding of the union’s structure.

( https://bildung.social/@Linkshaender/113131804660711679 )

bobojp writes:

@abolitionniste difficult to grab the concept you’re trying express here… why should guests be part of a level of the union? What level of implication / contribution do you see?

( https://theblower.au/@bobojp/113131805732236381 )

@bobojp@theblower.au @Linkshaender@bildung.social Sorry for not speaking clearly. Some of this is complicated. And I am not sure how to present it. I am trying.

The so called "immigration crisis" is a political issue. I have some views on it which I don't present here. I may present them later. Here I am trying to say that the questions around immigrants (or other guests) should not split the level 2 consesus = Union Civic Contract = UniCivCord. That it is something which may be fiercely fought at level 3 (political paries) or 4 (personal). But (my) UniCivCord says, that you may have more or less any views on the matter (or any other matter) and that is ok provided you express and promote them with respect to different views of your fellow citizens.

Although, the human stakes may be very high; and although how the "in" people deal with the people crossing the border (guests) says a lot about the society; for me, the very existence and functioning of the society (UniCivCord?) is of different importance level.

Compare the Wendat example here: https://trojkatretiho.cz/viewtopic.php?p=1846#p1846 .

So, if I exlude people(?) from my UniCivCord, it is not because of their ugly views of immigrants; it is because they do not respect their fellow citizens; because methods they use (say, political violence) are unacceptable on level 2. Not their views.

@Pierrette@mastodon.uno

#tg594426640 #tg434928726

bobojp writes:

@abolitionniste OK, so it is the question of the union guests that is at level 3/4, and not the guests themselves.

Cool.

( https://theblower.au/@bobojp/113131973557230149 )

Linkshaender writes:

@bobojp Ah thanks, I think I got it now. Agree!

( https://bildung.social/@Linkshaender/113131980098801555 )