Discussion in 'IntroSpectrum' started by B. Fury, Mar 20, 2008.
you're letting it get you down instead of conquering your obstacles.
you have no faith in the unknown. only the process of darwinism as most whites who glamerize power from a state of fear. just remember, we do not know all tghings... there is a such thing as Universal Law and it governs us all. all matter must bow to it... there is an intelligent energy that exist throughout time and space, it has a will. to use fire to put out fire begets fire... one day, the non-time concious Spirit of Truth will reign supream and whomever it choose will be lef to enjoy the fruit of its bounty. if your way is in fact the way then, tyrants will rule for eternity... if not, a new being will evolve with a new method of seeing life and the world that we live... that being will indeed be above the aformentioned processes that you feel are the keys to human survival.
you are free to be free
until you bump into someone who says "hey buddy, need you to work for me" and their point their army at you
then your freedom is whittled down to a handful of choices
all systems evolve
even that God thing you believe in. that's an anthropomorphic generalization of something you couldn't define otherwise. that is a very, very, very finite system and that, too, will evolve.
this God thing is a high level of collective concious. not a singular indivisualistic humanistic being. and there is no true state of "evolution," only continuous change. there will never be anything new under the sun. all there is it is and it has always been and always will be. you speak of evolution as if its the real goal. when you already are, there is nowhere to go. perfection is perfect in and of itself and i am already there. anything that has to "evolve" is playing catch up. this is you. you are attempting to outbe he that is, and ya cant. i am the original man, the everlating ether, melanin... Black. i am all things combined (THE WALKING TALKING UNIVERSE~ LAND, AIR, WATER, SPACE, TIME, ). not this single person at this computer trying to awake the lost god in you. your too buisy denighing yourself and where you came from and trying to be the one to say where we are all going. your child like rage and insecure selfish worldly rants are just mumbo jumbo... all systems evolve/ THEN WHEN WILL THAT ARYAN MENTALITY THAT YOU DISPLAY EVOLVE INTO A CIVILIZED HUMAN BEING SO THAT ONE DAY, YOU TOO CAN POSESS ANTHROPORMORPHIC POWER OR AS YOU SAY, EVOLVE?
^Give it up, sonny boy.
You’re a pseudo-intellectual of Jonathan Rex proportions.
self realization is a journey... take a trip.
your subjective feelings about rights on particualr individuals being opressed are irrrelvant to individualism being the basic assumption of the legal order.
But it also does not deny your the natural right you have to have those subjective feelings.
Also, do you acutally think getting an AK woudl be a useful solution to the tuskegee experiments? probly land some people in jail... beyond that... likely to do nothing. Its much more effective if they use the legal system so that said victims families can try to get compensation. This does not mean they should sit on their hands while waiting for compensation, they should move on with their lives. But, at the same time, there is no reason for them not to attempt to seek compensation. Hell they could even sell the the potential claim to another to pursue on their behalf & use this money to get ahead.
I see whenre your tyring to go with this, your trying to make it into a general statement about the state of western order. If your really against increased regulation/taxes, you shoudl be FOR more individual rights, not against indivudualism altegether/denying western order. If anything this promotes marxist (since it denies individualism) Not every form/interpretaion of individualism promotes a culture of non-violence.
Your skipping steps, sir.
Individualism is only the basis of legal order in a world where resources can even be fractioned at that level of micromanagement. Subjective/Localization has nothing to do with the economic and technological infrastructure where individualism is even a viable philosophy to pursue. In fact, throughout history, such an idea has been known to destabilize default collectivist resource management.
Dependencies aside, it is only effective to use a legal system to diffuse physical destabilization. (Armed resistance) However, in nations that extensively enforce modern weapon control, a gap is created between the powerful and the meek. The powerful create the legal channels to create the illusion that the meek have influence. Occasionally, the powerful fully capitulate to their whims (specifically in wartime as a means of placation) and the meek have the audacity to call that 'progress' like children in the school yard bragging over who won an argument.
Don't let the jargon trip you up. I'm of the same caliber of ambition as those currently in power. With stabilization comes predictability. That is where economic engines strive to rest. What prevents this predictability is resource delay caused by physical law. (It takes time to create goods, not all people are physically equal, etc.) Even with the most powerful federal institution you can imagine, basic staples cannot be created instantly for people the moment they need them. Humanity is more than their stomach. That is why Marxism failed. Humanity is more than their ambition. That is why Capitalism gets supplanted from time to time with wild ideas that ultimately backfire.
Your adherence to Western morality will inevitably lead us to mental homogenization for the sake of "People X". I strive for something much more robust, even at the expense of pleasantries.
Again, nothing to do with your or my subjective feelings, or appraisals about if we agree with individualism or not (i.e. if legal/moral systems fit into technological shifts, or if they cause them). Individualism simply IS the basic tenet of our legal/moral systems TODAY (historical arguments aside). It is a presumption. Argue within its confines or achieve no recourse TODAY within the legal/moral system. To argue outside of it is and to dwell on history is to do the equivalent of "sitting and whining" and not doing anything about it.
As you pointed out, those without power (or the "meek" as you call them) often aren't aware of the legal channels they can exercise. They aren't aware of the intricacies that the individualist assumption implies. (i think your included in this group) The reason why they are illusionary is often because they are vague. People know about their rights, but they have no clue about their extents, how to exercise them, etc. They read a peice of legislation, yet they don't know that 3/4 of the meaning is struck out by this or that decision, or the terms inside it don't mean what they think is meant. Often its the case only the rich know how to exercise their legal rights (or can hire expensive lawyers to figure it out). [FYI this is where I agree partially with Scalia as a reason why we should have clearer laws and why making everything a gray area for the sake of being just is often not so...]
But here we seem to have an exception, those subject to unetical medical experiements (or their heirs) are seeking legal redress. They aren't sitting on their hands, but using their rights as tool to empower themselves, both yours and mines subjective feelings about the issue be damned!
This is precisely the sort of empowerment you seem to preach about in many of your posts, about how the meek should not just sit around waiting for money to fall from the sky. The meek shouldn't sit around wondering if exercising our rights is "anthropomorphically right" or whatever, the meek should just do it because they CAN do it. (although in this case, I personally think it is RIGHT, but I don't want to over anthropomorphize this issue). Maybe conditions will change in the future, where the weapons/technology balance will shift. The meek should adress that hurdle if/when that time comes rather than spending their time dreaming of what htey would do in counterfactual futures.
Now why I don't get is why you disagree with people exercising recouse available to them?
Separate names with a comma.