[repeated] Maybe we must begin treating “world events” with the same care and logic as physics was forced to do when researching the not-directly observable (quantum worlds). All the great variety of expressed interpretations of reality are, in a sense, “real” – in that it is these inner, personal “wrlds” that determine choice and behavior, not what might be “really out there”. This applies to each of our own personal “wrlds”.

¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0 Indeed, behind the madness of Trump and his various supporters, is a scathing analysis of neo-liberalism and a serious critique of the failings of the USA, which many of us had normalized (even progressives who have long reported, themselves, on these failings).

¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 As in the quantum world of unobservable phenomena, the observations (of events) we do make (with macroscopic instruments on visible targets) partly determine the nature of quantum reality. The result of quantum measurements is not of “what was the state BEFORE measurement”. Rather, the act of measurement results in the collapse of the probability disruption of possible states into one (eigen) state, which is the datum measured. The quantum system then expands into another probability distribution of potential future states, waiting further measurements. The unimaginable universe of interacting quantum probability distributions, dotted by a multitude of events (interactions of quantum entities that are not part of an experiment) is not a topic of quantum physics.

¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0 Our simplistic “view” of our human reality as “polarized” contributes to our difficulties. There are many more than two alternative realities held by participants (observers making reports). Recently (probably amplified and enabled by new ways of making, accessing, and processing reports {sems}) the fragmentation of reality perspectives has greatly increased. Even those personal wrlds/realities held together in a social media silo are often quite different from each other.

¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0 In tribal times, all in the tribe were strongly conditioned to accept a consensus reality. Two alternatives were available to the rare person who was unable to adapt. The either left the tribe – often to form a new tribe around a new consensus reality, or they became a shaman for the tribe, living outside the tribe, but valued and consulted by members.

¶ 6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0 The “objective” reality for humankind, may not be as we project from our local, perceptual realities. There may be societal weirdness as there is quantum weirdness. We can’t wait to change-our-ways until we discover a more valid model for humankind. We must explore the nu “natures” of humankind (and human persons & social systems), beyond our contemporary, scientific best – as part of our process of change.

¶ 7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0 In this powerful nu sense, we are embarking on creating our own reality.

¶ 8 Leave a comment on paragraph 8 0 Larry/nuet’s first approximation has labels: UPLIFT, OLLO, EASEMEN, nu/new, Cultural/Societal Metamorphosis.