Remember what we said from the very start?

The UCC is an arena. An Octagon. If all goes truly well it will become the virtual Colosseum whereby ideological contradictions between cultures are spanned. Spanned by discourse — not by force. Not by bullets. Not by bombing. By no physical means of mass destruction. Where cultural contradictions are exhumed from festering in pitch tectonic denial — and outed into higher places. Into wide, open spaces. Into spectacular lights.

We were not kidding.

Here’s where it starts happening.  In reference to the Middle East.  Where ideology doesn’t get just out of control — it blows up in our faces.  Where hatred and ideology can blow the world and faces of humanity clean away.

So let’s get real.  Let’s be realistic.  There isn’t going to be “civil dialogue and respectful debate” between Islamist societies and Israel.  Hell and deserts will freeze under nuclear winter before there’s civility and respect.  That’s a dead end indeed.

Culture clashing in the Middle East won’t just go away.  Won’t self-resolve if fundamental cultural contradictions cannot be mitigated.  But how?  What can mitigate such fundamental cultural contradictions?

Obviously.  When cultural contradictions become that fundamentally entrenched, only force remains to mitigate.  Never mind civility and respect.  When contradictions glare so fundamentally that meaning itself fails?  Then there can be no coherence.  No coherent exchange of meanings.  Only force always remains to settle the disputes.  And that’s no mitigation.  That’s escalation.  For when disputes can no longer be meaningfully settled — when nothing but force remains meaningful?  Then disputes must persist so long as disputing cultures survive — and settlement necessarily becomes a function of unilateral or multilateral obliteration.

When do contradictions glare so fundamentally that meaning itself fails?  That’s an interesting philosophical question.  And we’ll certainly pursue it.  But we can’t take it just philosophically.  It’s too late for that.  We must mitigate fundamental cultural contradictions before they obliterate us.  We must discover ways to talk, to coherently exchange meanings — without force, without shooting, without forever increasing destruction.

This is our starting point, then.  The UCC is for meaningful expression only.  There is no room for meaningless violence.  But there is also clear recognition that Middle Eastern cultures clash absolutely.  There’s no ignoring the fundamental ideological divisions.  There’s no constructive  option but to start with what there is.  Lies & Hatred.

Naturally, if and when people do begin posting at the UCC?  People would not elect to have their articles categorized as lies & hatred.  Of course not.  Probably most people would rather have what they post appear under Truth & Meaning.  And this is where it will get most interesting.  In The Clashing sub-page — where we shall debate and establish criteria to distinguish lies & hatred from truth & meaning.  Thus will more hatred become distinguished from reasoned meanings.  And thereby contributed posts and articles shall be re-categorized accordingly.

In other, clearer words.  Initial posting will always be either to the Lies & Hatred or Truth & Meaning sub-pages.  Where they wind up, however, will be entirely subject to debating in The Clashing sub-page.  Finally, the best most constructive content from truth & meaning shall be vetted for inclusion in the Resolution sub-page.  And if multilaterally agreeable resolutions to Mid-East conflicts can be established?  Then we will have much to celebrate and advertise.

We will take one liberty with the method setting out.  Namely: one contribution to start with in resolution to Mid-East conflicts.  It is our hope anyone on every side will be able to agree with what we propose.  But if most disagree then we’ll play fair and remove it.

To conclude.  The method here is designed to adjudicate bias through reasoned discourse.  Do not be dissuaded against participating by existing bias.  Instead, bring your own.  Let’s find out if we can even talk about our biases as virtual neighbours.