Progress and evolution are not constant, nor are progress and evolution the same thing. Evolution is a random process of complexity accumulation. Progress is a subjective tendency toward the betterment of society. Evolution is not progressional. Evolution is mindless. However, both progress and evolution connote change. Both progress and evolution are forms of movement. It is the opinion of this paragraph, however, that evolution and progress are ill-equipped to bring forth an improvement upon our current economic system. In saying this we are referring only to the culturally accepted ideas of evolution and progress. The actual meanings of evolution and progress were lost somewhere in Mesopotamia ten centuries before Christ.

  The act of pile movement, in itself, is not progressive. It accomplishes nothing and is pointless. The act of pile migration, as we have outlined it, creates nothing. It is simply a method of accumulating questions. Through raising questions, it will defeat capitalism – a seemingly anti-progressive act. What pile migration creates, if we may contradict ourselves subtly, is an absence of capitalism. It creates an open-space for new ideas to blossom. It creates an environment for change. Pile migration redirects the forces of evolution away from a preference for efficiency, and pushes evolution toward ambiguity. Evolution is well-documented as favoring the strongest, smartest and most efficient genes in a given environment – a practice that seems brutally unfair to all of us idiot-weaklings. By creating an

  There are, allegedly, five senses. Movement can be perceived by at least half of these senses. Regardless of if you can taste movement, the point is that vision does not have a monopoly upon the perception of motion. Someone named Marshall McLuhan spent a great deal of his life championing the acoustic and aural perception of the environment. Before the intrusion of the alphabet upon our society, he asserts, mankind possessed a more complete and balanced equilibrium with his senses. The alphabet and the written word have extracted and isolated the focus of mankind almost exclusively toward the visual.

  This may very well be true. If it is, perhaps we should examine how the eye perceives and, in turn, distorts the environments we encounter. Earlier in this chapter we stated that motion is continuous. It is not, however, constant. If everything moved at the same rate in the same direction, this couldn't be classified as movement because it would be the default setting of the environment. Movement implies a deviation from a sedentary position. Constancy plus immersion equal a sedentary position. It is the unaligned rates of motion that allow us to perceive and classify movement. This unequal flux of the environment permits us to subject our own changing perspectives upon the universe.

  Our eyes are inclined to process movement over non-movement. If you've ever spent much time in the Western