Political plate tectonics – It’s always interesting and important I think to get to the foundation of how something formed, as it indicates how enduring the structure built on it may be into the future e.g. whether a city is built on a faultline or moving plates.

Likewise for an organisation, church, group of people, or perhaps even a new competitive business breaking out of and away from the old. How was the new thing birthed? From disillusionment, anger, antagonism, joy, hope or fresh purpose?

Can unity be born out of division? In a cause and effect sense, no. Unity is a centripetal or cohesive force, bringing people together. Division is centrifugal and separates people, with barriers to unity formed.

Was the birth of the new thing due to a negative reaction against and away from something, or was it due to a positive step towards something. Is the new building built on moving tectonic plates?

The political lithosphere seems to be breaking up further into major and minor plates that are convergent (destructive, colliding, under pressure, causing quakes), divergent (forming rifts, moving away from each other), or transform (connected, accommodating, neither creating or destroying). Each topped by their own kind of crust.
———————————-

Re: Editorial: Dotcom and Harawira united by antagonism
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11263453

“Hence his [Mr Dotcom’s] pact with Mr Harawira. Personally, philosophically, ethnically, materially, they may be poles apart but they have found common cause in antagonism.”

“His reason may be vindictive rather than principled or philosophical, but wealth permits him to use politics for a personal grudge.”