When I mean what I say and I’m not just spewing shit, I use the word love the same way I’d use the word “god”: exclusively to mean the reality of non-separation, or the objective reality of a necessary existential wholeness. It is useful to apply it to less generic situations (the place where we live) but just so I don’t start despairing when I get into the whole biology and how we’re monsters except for some software that has written itself and claims to “serve” us… I have to remember that all perceptions of love after we apply mirrors and windows and lenses of separation is whatever remains of the original light, whose source to me cannot be anything other than the ultimate non-separation of all things. I cannot disconnect from the original. The degrees of complexity added to the model of an insane society can distract us from the original light, but nevertheless, it is still there.

From non-separation, everyone and everything is you, and no software other than the kernel perception of this fact is needed for you to act “ethically.” You will hurt and be stopped even if some idea gets into your brain that your right arm is evil and possessed, and that you should cut it off — which if we get a bit imaginative, could even be the right thing to do, and something we may even end up doing, but as we do so, we better connect to the sadness and suffering of that cutoff arm… and if we still can manage to do it, not out of fear, but out of compassion...

As Noam Chomsky once regarded, tyrannical force is not an absolute no-no, but it has a high barrier of justification, which is seldom met. Seeing wholeness and operating from that place of “love” does not mean we don’t eventually murder each other, but again, if compassion was really there, we’d e.g. have 1 prisoner per 1 million people, and he’d have a pretty good life, not 1 in 300 people held in barbaric, degrading conditions due to political targeting and for exploitation by a massive industry.