Perhaps, though that is a nonsensical idea. How does one give permission? It would really be tacit wouldn't it? By association? “As a family we are going to have to help each other”
“Whoa there dad. Who is this “we..?”
“… the family? I just said. It’s right there..”
“I don’t recall giving you permission to include me in we…”
“Well… I didn’t actually ask for you. You were born and by law I can’t get rid of you, but you take my food and shelter, identify yourself with the family name, are on my family phone and medical plans, and participate in family gatherings and follow the rules, so I mean… even if we ignore the genetic fact we are family, you are included in this unit by association.”
“Wait.. WE are family..? Who is this we..?”
“Damnit boy. I told your mother a little cocaine wouldn’t make a difference on a fetus and I regret it everyday.”
One cool thing I like about this though- if you believe this then you think binary gender is a crock. What? Simple- the attempt to Blake someone as a “man” or “woman” who have not given you permission to include them in that group with you, is sneaking your tribalism last customs is it not? Though some would argue to fact right? Which would mean this guy is again, taking nonsense. If I say: “we humans all live on earth” well- we do right? As far as we know? Some of us visit space, but we live on this planet. And, you are human no? Can one posses all the traits of a human and not be human? One may identify as non human, but are they non human? Hmmm… reconcile that one. Of course citizenship matters no? Many systems of government, like the American one- allow representatives to speak for the people. “We the people..” you have agreed to this by being one of the people. To not give permission you’d need to abandon your citizenship completely no?
Though there is another form of government that is a “weism,” communism. This man was a Marxist, so I’m sure he was aware of this. That’s how communism works. By being alive and in a communism you give permission to be a “we” or “us.” There is no “I” in Red, unless you happen to be one of the elites who gets to speak for the “us,” and then the “us” is “I”. So I mean- it gets point for sounding profound. Certainly it would appeal especially to a certain teenage angsty mentality that rejects conformity and has a strong sense of personal superiority. It is a fitting philosophy that both the far right and far left can embrace as suits their political needs and interpretations, and there is a bit of truth here that requires qualifiers- certainly the use of “we” and such CAN be an attempt to subvert or silence dissent. Though “all” is quite the broad qualifier and the use of “we” or such likely shouldn’t elicit anymore suspicion than such mentality would warrant of any person regardless.
“Whoa there dad. Who is this “we..?”
“… the family? I just said. It’s right there..”
“I don’t recall giving you permission to include me in we…”
“Well… I didn’t actually ask for you. You were born and by law I can’t get rid of you, but you take my food and shelter, identify yourself with the family name, are on my family phone and medical plans, and participate in family gatherings and follow the rules, so I mean… even if we ignore the genetic fact we are family, you are included in this unit by association.”
“Wait.. WE are family..? Who is this we..?”
“Damnit boy. I told your mother a little cocaine wouldn’t make a difference on a fetus and I regret it everyday.”