Elaboration 10.1

Rousseau was absurd. He was the most utter disciplinarian, yet he did not know it. Every pupil of highschool who would typefy him as a 'disciplinarian' would not pass his exam, yet he was one. In his 'Emile', Rousseau states very clearly that he would not even start on the boy if he did not obey unconditionally. In other words, he would start when the work was already half finished, ... discipline. More about discipline than obeyance, one cannot say. Further on in his book, he not so much states it again and again, as imply it repeatedly. In his 'Social Contract', he simply 'must' assume discipline. A contract without it, simply would not work. We know, of course, that contracts, agreements, resolutions, never work, but this is precisely through the absence of sanctions, i.e. and THEREFORE of discipline. In fact, every sharing of sounds or letters for ideas, i.e. words, language, can exist only by a standardisation which, in its turn, hinges on discipline. But in daily life we recognize two sorts. Obeyance of others because of sanctions, and obeyance as an innerly-felt rational thing to do, a code. The New World State, will not so much be based on discipline (hetero-sanctional), but more on a rational being, a self-discipline (auto-restraintive), as code of behaviour. No contract but automatic, a code.