{Malvinas [continued (5)]}[11th May 1983]

[Redbook2:271][19830511:0945]{Malvinas [continued (5)]}[11^th May 1983]

19830511.0945

Re-reading the attempt to fit the Falklands crisis into the pattern of Circles*, it is interesting to imagine it reversed on the same events; an Argentinian proponent might say: we did start with Love (of fatherland?), consider and plan our invasion for years, act Creatively in carrying it out, employ the Diversity of our resources and diversify our own territory, suffer Death there.… What went wrong? You were forced into Ordination and Action (as Reaction), met increasing Complication (compelling you to add to your forces), might even have met Distraction..... Why did you win?

There are several possible answers to this.

(1) If the pattern is only settled in its final stages; this makes it valueless as a predictive method and of limited value only as a method of 'academic' analysis.

(2) If each transit of a Circle contains echoes of the other Circle in the opposite direction, especially at the early stages.

(3) A degree of detachment is required in assessing the matter.

(4) The complications arise from interrelationships with related events/circles.

(5) Much may depend on the precise nature of the early stages. It is, after all, easy to talk about 'Love', less easy to practise it in a truly unselfish, disinterested, detached sense – or even in a sense approaching these qualities.

I am beginning to feel that I have taken this far enough, at least for this time: there is a danger in a particular analysis becoming a rigid or oversimplified framework which limits rather than improves one's perception.

*[See last four previous entries]

[PostedBlogger18052015]