I have a subjective personality with its attitude as opposed to the objective one I have within me. This objective person being my emissary, or an experience of having an intermediary in the sense of it as an extension to the whole that unites psychic events with the events in the world around me. It is like an inner companion to the independent acts of self-reflection we are called to. A counterpart we have within us in relation to nature and to our objective personality that appears to us in revelations of sudden and vivid insights and teachings. Which content nature as mind seeks to merge with ours. If for some reason, we are not connected to nature, this relationship seems to be difficult to establish. Instead, we think and act as if we are this subjective person only, not a relation to it. And since we see ourselves in this one-dimensionality alone, we will ceaselessly try to turn others into our objective person and use them for our relationship to it in a strangely coercive and impersonal way. Which will then affect us in a way that makes us condescending towards people around us, both towards them and towards nature. We treat them objectively, as objects, because it will not be felt that this other objective personality is both within us and in this nature around us which we embody. If our objective relation is ignored or not encouraged it will bring about constant intra-subjective contradictions and conflicts that we pass out on people around us using them instead to be that relationship between us and ourselves in opposition to their relation to themselves. Whatever we want to call these layers of psychic consciousness, they will lead to conflicts where people feel deprived of their integrity, of the relationship they have between them and themselves. To their own inner objective personality and its primordial psychic structure. We can observe this in the world around us. But we can never decide what form it has in itself independently of the subjective attitude we may have of it. We cannot determine for others what it have to say to them. Or prevent its aggressive self-preservation drive from opposing the threats it sense to its integrity from those who try to prevent us from having a genuine inner relation to our objective person. Democracy, for example, is not something we are between us and ourselves. At best, it’s a word we use to respect that relationship.