" a sustaining governing body?"

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Go down

not my goddamned concern

Post  Henry Quirk on Mon May 09, 2011 3:50 pm

"a well used cop out"

Maybe for the hippies it was: since I'm no hippy (I piss on hippies!) it's not a cop-out but a simple statement.

Bottom line, Kris: if you want me to do something I choose against, you'll have to force the issue.

You'll have to force the issue (as in 'use force') because you haven't offered a sufficiently convincing argument (*no argument, really) for me to consider.

'Kumbaya' as rallying cry leaves me cold...'the greater good' is irksome...'human rights' is for crap.

If you want me to participate in (as in 'be hemmed in by') 'democracy' (mob rule): make me.

If you want me to play the 'Good Samaritan' and care for strangers: make me.

*shrug*



*And: if the best refutation you can come up with is 'hippies', well... Rolling Eyes
avatar
Henry Quirk
Admin

Posts : 96
Join date : 2010-01-26
Age : 54

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: " a sustaining governing body?"

Post  kriswest on Tue May 10, 2011 2:46 pm

LOL Henry unless you are held in your society by chains a whip etc. You have accepted the obligations of that society. You would have to be a virtual prisoner without any ability to leave to fit your attitude on society. Once you decide to remain or survive in a society you made the choice to be a part and so you become obligated. Your reasoning does not hold water. You could choose to leave, you could choose to die, or you could choose to change things. But to just pick and choose and say no I am not a part of it because I was not asked to be born here or a part of its beginning, is copping out. It is theft of others work and resources. Only children can have the view you have , an adult has choices.

kriswest

Posts : 96
Join date : 2010-02-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: " a sustaining governing body?"

Post  Henry Quirk on Tue May 10, 2011 4:02 pm

"It is theft of others work and resources"

Okay: I can live with that.

#

"an adult has choices"

Yep: I choose to *steal (will not file or pay state and federal taxes, refuses to get the proper licensing for the work I do, etc.).

*shrug*

Now, you, as head of the world governing politburo, have to do something about 'me'.

What, oh what, will (can) you do?

Pretty much the same as the old boss: not a fucking thing.


*That is: I deprive the old boss (as I will 'you', the new boss) of my 'share' of life blood (money)...I keep what I earn because what I earn is 'mine'...nor do I submit to the culling/control of paying tribute (licensing) to do my work.

I'm a thief.

Do sumthin' 'bout it... Neutral
avatar
Henry Quirk
Admin

Posts : 96
Join date : 2010-01-26
Age : 54

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: " a sustaining governing body?"

Post  Mayflow on Sat May 14, 2011 1:07 am

In the new world paradigm I would propose, there would be no governments and no laws and no law enforcers. No taxes either. Henry may or not be able to beat the current system or work within it for his own perceived best benefit, and I KNOW I can, but I would also be in favor of deleting involuntary taxation of anyone. I also would like there to be no police forces and no militias.

Present world paradigms do not enable this, and I see only one general way of changing this. This sort of change has to come from the enabling of the individual and the freedom for the individual. "Governing" and telling others what they have to do is not capable of achieving this. Nazi Germany met her doom as did Rome, and so will the USA and China. Governing states are destined to fail in time and fall.

If there will become a true and beneficial world government, it will be by sharing and caring knowledge freely with one another and not by bombs and guns and taxes and police and militaries. Cruelty is not the best way, and neither is inventing laws and forcing them on others and making them pay taxes so the enforcers can take their stuff and put them in jail for paying the taxes to give to the police to put them there. This (the modern human government system) is ridiculous.
avatar
Mayflow

Posts : 74
Join date : 2011-03-29

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: " a sustaining governing body?"

Post  McChoice on Sun May 15, 2011 4:24 pm

kriswest wrote:LOL Henry unless you are held in your society by chains a whip etc. You have accepted the obligations of that society. You would have to be a virtual prisoner without any ability to leave to fit your attitude on society. Once you decide to remain or survive in a society you made the choice to be a part and so you become obligated. Your reasoning does not hold water. You could choose to leave, you could choose to die, or you could choose to change things. But to just pick and choose and say no I am not a part of it because I was not asked to be born here or a part of its beginning, is copping out. It is theft of others work and resources. Only children can have the view you have , an adult has choices.


Actually, contrary to your naive interpretation of the world, it is very difficult for an individual to truly leave behind the society that raised them. For example, look at the language you "chose to use":
Adult's don't "have choices", but "can choose". there is no ownership implied in choice. That is bad use of language, that is repressive language, which implies that you cannot escape the current social concept of ownership which is very deeply entrenched in the language that we "choose" to use every day. You can make a choice, in fact, I would go so far as to say that choice is very much a synthetic process which occurs regardless of conscious decision, but you cannot claim that you "own" the choice you made - it is simply a process which manifests in action, or indeed, in inaction. Can you own the concept of not moving your arm to stop a ball hitting you in the face?

In other words, Henry can "choose" to say that he doesn't agree with things and that he didn't choose to be born here and now, and you can choose to critique him, to imply he is immature for such a view (by way of a dichotomy between child and adult). But let us examine more closely, the nature of choice and see where it takes us...

Children are just as capable as adults of choosing between particular courses of action, or objects or words. Whether these choices correspond to your hedged in world view is irrelevant: "No, you must choose the triangle block to put through the triangle hole, you shouldn't choose the circle because that is incorrect"; they are just making choices the exact same way an adult does. The difference is that as an adult you have become aware that certain choices are considered better than others, according to some "higher function", be it the concept of correctness, or even of government, or of parent or of God. This doesn't ever correlate to adults "having more or better choices" than children, or of being able to make better choices, it simply means that according to some strict structure which you cannot fathom removing from your thought process, the choices of a child are often times the "incorrect" choice, or the child may choose "without understanding the implications of the choice"; or indeed "the child cannot choose".

Adults are just as capable of being manipulated in the choice they make as children are. You seem to be placing adults beyond the conditions which allow them to be conceptually considered as "adults" (ie, outside of their social and physical limits) and giving them some metaphysical status or substance which is "adultness", which transcends social concepts. No, "adult" as you understand it is a limiting effect, a way of understanding, of reinforcing a world view which is inherently repressive and contingent upon naivety and "lack of choice"; which, ironically, is expressed through other means today (should you get the phone in black or red? Should you eat in or out? Chinese or Indian?). Indeed, your "choice" rests upon a dialectic view of the world: "you are black? No? Then you must be white. You are not white or black? Then you must be Hispanic or Asian. You are a child? No? Then you must be an adult. You are a boy? No? Then you must be a girl.

We then set ourselves an internal narrative that corresponds to the world we are presented with (which we have coloured to suit our predispositions using our concepts about the world). These narratives limit and cancel all forms of choice which do not "correctly" correspond to the internal structure set out by the narrative.

Concretising social concepts and trying to argue against changing them is very much a conservative mind set, one which we all adopt at certain times when we are challenged with views that do not correctly "fit the alloted space for them" ("No! It's the triangle block for the triangle shape"). We assume there are correct ways that things are, and that these correct ways are, just coincidently, or by some act of a higher "function", "the way we do it", or even "the way my world is". In fact, correct and incorrect is just one more way of segmenting reality.

Henry Quirk offers us an alternate world view, but it still rests upon cancelling that which is before it (namely "tax" and "licences"). This is the crux of the issue. How can we possible move away from a point without referencing the point?
There is always an origin when we move along a linear path (do we go left or do we go right? Up or down?); we need to find a multiplicity of paths to travel.

McChoice

Posts : 7
Join date : 2011-05-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: " a sustaining governing body?"

Post  Henry Quirk on Mon May 16, 2011 4:29 pm

May, Mono: I have no interest in changing the current order, revising it, or seeing it drop away.

Some obstacles are intractable: the time and energy I might uselessly devote to 'changing the system' is -- for me -- better spent (profitably) navigating the obstacles created by 'the system'.

Certainly: I'll not advocate for Kris's 'world governing body' but, beyond offering up a cluster of reasons why I won't abide, I doubt I'll 'take up arms', 'march in the streets', etc.

Why should I?

Fundamentally: folks telling others what to do (or not do) is the same across the board no matter what placeholder is applied (republicanism is democratism is democracy is mob rule is communism is organized religion is organized irreligion is etc.).

The same tools (mainly: 'me') I use to navigate (around and through) 'authority' (those with the biggest stick) today will serve me with whatever comes 'round tomorrow.

#

"How can we possible move away from a point without referencing the point?"

You can't.

Each of us is embedded 'in' the world, bound up 'by' the world.

I exercise my 'self' choosing 'this' or 'that' (call it -- and me -- 'agency' or 'autonomy') but the choosing is simply my discrimination based on criteria synonymous with 'me' (fleshy preference honed/directed/tweaked though experiencing/learning).

If I'm a *'natural anarchist' this is simply what I 'am' (a particular and peculiar animal): this natural and (for me) normal preference binds 'me' up as much as it establishes what I am.

One can choose to deny a society (nuthin' but folks clamoring to be 'we'), but only to the extent the capacity to deny any-thing or -one is a natural function of the individual to begin with.



*Personally: I prefer 'Henry Quirk' to any other descriptor/placeholder... Wink


Last edited by Henry Quirk on Mon May 16, 2011 4:35 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : elaboration)
avatar
Henry Quirk
Admin

Posts : 96
Join date : 2010-01-26
Age : 54

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: " a sustaining governing body?"

Post  kriswest on Wed May 18, 2011 6:08 pm

Thats a very good post and elaborate. But, Yes you can choose your language you can choose where and how to live. You can choose death over all. Its is not complicated unless you wish to defend your position,,, Lawyer maybe???? Cool
Its not naive its just cut right to the bone. Its a yes or no, right or left up or down. Nothing fancy in it.. As an adult you are capable of decisions beyond a child. You can give up everybit of your societal memes. You choose not to. Therefore you choose to be a part of society. It is that simple.

kriswest

Posts : 96
Join date : 2010-02-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

"you choose to be a part of society"

Post  Henry Quirk on Wed May 18, 2011 8:51 pm

And: you can choose to see 'society' as it is (a collection of folks desperately trying to live inside each other's colons)...you can choose to reject such a scheme...and -- yes -- "It is that simple."
avatar
Henry Quirk
Admin

Posts : 96
Join date : 2010-01-26
Age : 54

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: " a sustaining governing body?"

Post  kriswest on Wed May 18, 2011 9:23 pm

Parent or master? There is a difference. And I propose parental over master, I propose allowing voices to be seen heard and recognized. If the majority chooses a path then that path is followed. A master dictates a parent guides and helps.

kriswest

Posts : 96
Join date : 2010-02-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: " a sustaining governing body?"

Post  apaosha on Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:23 pm

So have any of you geniuses figured out how to save the world yet?
avatar
apaosha
Admin

Posts : 3
Join date : 2010-03-10
Age : 30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

"So have any of you geniuses figured out how to save the world yet?"

Post  Henry Quirk on Fri Jul 01, 2011 8:05 pm

No: they haven't.

Me: I don't think it needs saving.
avatar
Henry Quirk
Admin

Posts : 96
Join date : 2010-01-26
Age : 54

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: " a sustaining governing body?"

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum