Yes, but the opposite is true as well. We pass by each other with impassive simulations of self pity, until the energy, or lack of it bursts the dams of understanding, and a war breaks out.
First a war of words, then when that doesent work out actual wars.
After that, a peace seems appropriate to install the necessity of smiling faces, and a happy society-meaning dare not pass your fellow man with a drawn, for that would disservice for the innocents who posed as heroes and sacrificed so much?
The sacrifice of course, an instituted code of internalization of the transformativeally processed chance of loss of control, whete the leaders see higher value in social control from the top, then the uniform code of military justice appears to embrace, to enhance the value of victims of those who need to enforce them.
The reverse indicated of frowns in the anonymous situations, brevies up to an immediate adoption of smiling faces, as if, the need to show graces.
That kind of justice begs the underpinnings of military justice and pits it against social injustice.
The romantic idiom and its existential meltdown into bad faith is merely a contraption to bottle that up, and keep it high above a reality which machine extracted it’s soulvia as a Faustian trick.
Good Show!
That the show seems to get better by better adoption of higher machined forms of simulation, goes with the argument for and not against the one dimensional man:
Alfred E Newman need not worry, for he has faith in big brother, and as its similitude nears the real thing, the difference will become unnoticeable and the Faustian bargain will become perfected. No way to wiggle out, and no need, since the product and it’s means production will become invariably tied on a planetary stage.
PS: sometimes you have to say progressively more to try to glean rexuuctibly less meaning out of it.