if

if civilization is indeed a function of stability, then we will have to try to think for stable factors in the move; this first conversation frame is a stable condition while we keep moving from city to city in different continents, Kim. We don't know each other but we think it is still important to discuss because we know we have some things in common. What things facilitate our moving attitudes? What problems make us stay more than we wish in places? And how can we define our common ground in an architectonic sense?

i agree

to form a dialogue (discussion), each post should be related to the next one, and moving civilization is a good start.

we could form this as a dialogue

or as an invisible table set up for a discussion. what do you think, kim? we could question and try to answer whatever seems radical and problematic in the concept of a moving civilisation. civilization is normally conceived as a function of stability.

nomadic street sales