And if you barely understand the mind still less so do you understand what the stakes are in political discourse, or the political imaginary. Is one a distorted mirror of the other, and if so which of which? Conflicts of rival powers, arguments about law and the status of law, the legitimacy of the resort to violence, or the need for or the inevitability of revolutions. Reasons, justifications, resentments, alliances, controls, hierarchies and hegemonies - political complexes which depend on narratives and which define and are defined by their agents, the collective identities, which they express by way of complex histories and strategic contexts. Can you ask of your own situations, 'who, whom?'? - it seems as if you do nothing else. A close embrace of the past with the future, ideal and revelation - to work towards the realisation of a vision of what is, or what ought to be possible. The order which exists and which needs to be refashioned, fundamental discontents and the distribution of benefits - you are within the picture but also outside it, being free to choose your idols, to decide which sacrifices ought to be made.