Commonic: communism as languaging
Earlier an attempt was fashioned for the formulization of modal communism, a modalist and monist (monistic modalist, to be precise) exposition of and for the ontological pedagogy of relationality (from each according to their ability, …; as a non-interaction thesis of cosmic relation). Objects, it is argued, are logically prior to their relations, and yet relational relata relate interobjective contents from the insufficiency of rationality, the hypothetico-deductive method as Peirce would hold. Hyperobjects so too would be logically prior to their interrelations, what is relational relationality and relating relata.
But in a way people will simply speak common, or commonic, rather. Communism is fundamentally a measure of tge facan de parler: are commodities speaking? Free of class, free of money, free of intermediary, free of purification, free of translation: free time and nothing else. Do commodities speak free time and nothing else? Why should a commodity care what, or whose, time it is?
In this manner the commodity itself is a time server: a servant leader of the process and adjustment to, creation and formation of change. Change is real, a social construct just as much as Race, or Global Heating: we count on it (quantify, objectify) and believe in it (qualify, classify) and neither of these epistemic cultural practices amount to the same, our homophilic empathy to see similiarity where there is not itself is a structural relation we bear to the social itself. It conditions our very field of conceivability, that about which we are talking in terms of capabilities, relations, attributes (we store in various ways), and temporalities (which are as many as timezones).