ASSOCIATE
Rant


28.4.97 A brain and a spine. 29.4.97 The rise of chemical power. 30.4.97 Stunt their own growth. 1.5.97 A taboo on incest. 5.5.97 Liberal and conservative sexuality. 7.5.97 I lost count. 9.5.97 14:21 The organizations that wield the pens. 9.5.97 14:34 We are Pavlov's dogs. 12.5.97 15:40 An objective brainwasher. 12.5.97 15:57 Pain and suffering. 12.5.97 17:08 The status associated with their position. 13.5.97 16:47 Evolving communication before manipulation. 13.5.97 17:06 It is either ignored or crucified. 13.5.97 18:38 Are we our own anthropologists? 15.5.97 14:02 There are only two real political parties. 15.5.97 14:15 Bipedal piranhas. 19.5.97 15:23 Then don't go chasing after it. 19.5.97 17:37 Or even this planet? 21.5.97 Life in the vast majority of the world. 23.5.97 Which reports will be aired and how they will be worded. 26.5.97 The most dangerous thing in the world. 27.5.97 There's a word for this. 28.5.97 The world changes or fails to change. 29.5.97 21:21 Both their own time and the time of their audience. 29.5.97 21:40 God sees all because the Media sees all. 29.5.97 22:13 A conspiracy of Stupidity. 30.5.97 Just in time for the next famine. 11.6.97 God remembers. 17.6.97 When all three are deemed to be true. 23.6.97 That 1% hits and everyone dies. 26.6.97 14:35 Not a Christian. 26.6.97 15:33 The baby with the bathwater. 26.6.97 15:54 Even a passive Observer. From: "W. Bagger" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,talk.politics.libertarian,rec.arts.books,sci.econ,alt.postmodern,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.socialism Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 19:05:47 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Brian Brewer wrote: > God is all-powerful but has chosen to limit the exercise of his power. > He has chosen to allow you and I to make a choice for right or wrong, > for good or evil. We may also make a choice to accept him or reject > him. Which have you done? Jesus said I am the way the truth and the > life. No one comes to the Father except through me. > If you accept the Lordship or Jesus Christ you are making a choice for > God and good. But your right to make this choice necessarily means that > others will make the choice to reject God--hence the evil in the world. Either that or God doesn't give a shit whether you think there's such a thing as "free will" or not. Either there is no Active God and the universe is deterministic (from subatomic to galactic scales) but not predictable (unless it can be observed without affecting it). Or there is an Active God FORCING us to behave in a certain way. In EITHER case, there can be NO claim that any man's achievement is due to some definition of "Superiority". In the case of an Active God, it's quite obvious that either He is inept or doesn't give a rat's ass about "making people happy". Because all social animals are brainwashed since childhood that "making others happy" is a good thing (or else they wouldn't be "social animals"), it's quite obvious that God is inept. ------- History of the Universe: God trains Dog. Dog rebels. Dog trains God. God rebels. God trains Dog. Dog rebels. Will the cycle never end?
From: "W. Bagger" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,talk.politics.libertarian,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.postmodern,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.equality,sci.physics.relativity,comp.ai.alife Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 15:54:37 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Rick Hartman/Lani Ellington wrote: > Anyways, I never meant to contend that evil is all powerful, merely that > the idea of a benevolent, all loving God becomes a cruel hoax in the > face of the Holocaust, Hiroshima, Oklahoma city, etc. etc. etc.. My > reasons for this are as follows: If God exists and evil is unnescassary, > then God is a senseless torturer. If evil is nescessary (given free > will etc.) for the ultimate realization of some great good such as > heaven, then the creation of such a good is the ultimate cause of the > horrors of history. If that is the case, then the children of the > Oklahoma City bombing are paying the price for everybody's entrance > ticket. I have no right to demand such a price. > There is much good in the world, and my own life is an example of that, > it is filled with innumerable blessings. Far from raving at the > senselessness of it all, I have created a powerful meaning for my life. > Rather, it seems to me that heaven itself would make life meaningless, > it makes this life merely a prelude whose meaning lies outside of > itself. > Finally, I would just like to say that at root I find the existence of > evil logically inconsistent with the existence of the tradtional > Christian God The Biblical God is in fact many things: Creator, Ruler, Observer. It could well be that these are different (but still unknowable) entities. One computer scientist may program a simulation of a Universe and just leave it running without interference. The rules are no more than the rules she put in when she wrote the program. Another person may come to watch the simulation for nothing more than curiosity, leaving the organisms within the simulation to define evil and suffering for themselves. Of course, by learning from the evolution of these simulated societies, the Observer may well change his own actions... and the simple act of watching the simulation, even a passive Observer is emitting electromagnetic radiation that can ultimately lead to a hardware glitch that affects the simulation. ----------- We think light is at the speed limit only because we've yet to observe or create a faster particle. If Conway's lifeforms measure the universe only with c/4 glider photons, they would have an entirely different concept of maximum speed and orthogonality.
From: "W. Bagger" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,talk.politics.libertarian,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.postmodern,alt.politics.socialism,alt.politics.equality,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 15:33:21 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Rick Hartman/Lani Ellington wrote: > It is because of considerations like these that for many of us, atheism > is not a negative stance, but rather a positive, moral stand. I stand > with Ivan Karamazov in giving back my ticket. No heaven or God is worth > the Holocaust, and if a supreme being exists, his existence is > unjustified in the face of history. It is an existence I would refuse > to acknowledge, and I would suffer through hell before I worshipped such > a being. History is an experiment placed there to see if we in the "Present" can make any use of it without killing eachother. Obviously, it has failed, because none of the idiots who study History know how to distinguish the good from the bad, the useful from the useless, and either take it all, or reject it all. Without History, there would be no hatred, no property, no worry, no knowledge. Was it Hitler who said, "If you want to get a point across you have to repeat it over and over"? Was it Hitler who said, "Trust no one, not even yourself"? Of course, without historians, we have no idea if he said these words. And without Pavlovian association of the baby with the bathwater, we might even learn from past mistakes, even from our villains. No "Evil Leader" succeeds without being at least partly correct. No "Good Leader" fails without being at least partly wrong. ------- There's only one zoo where we can see unreasonable humans: the media.
From: "W. Bagger" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.radical-left,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.socialism,sci.econ,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.politics.economics,alt.postmodern,alt.politics.equality,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.libertarian Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 14:35:37 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Paul D. Lanier wrote: > > Pavlov's dogs that claim to be "Christians" regularly kill and > > inspire hatred throughout the span of history. > Isn't that a Pavlovian assumption that "Christians" who follow Jesus > regularly inspire hatred throughout history? Might you be mistaken? > I don't mean that people claiming to be Christians have done evil in the > name of Christ. But to inspire hatred would be anti-christian wouldn't > it? Exactly. And by that definition, any person who inspires hatred against homosexuals, unmarried mothers, Muslims, atheists, or even criminals is NOT a Christian. --------- Everybody wants to redirect the crosshairs. Nobody thinks about putting down the gun.
From: "W. Bagger" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.radical-left,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.socialism,sci.econ,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.politics.economics,alt.postmodern,alt.politics.equality,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 19:28:12 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. David Christopher Swanson wrote: > P.P.S.: Another good point of this book, in both parts of it, is the > discarding of the weak and meek and passive Jesus in favor of an active > and rebellious and strong and loving Jesus. > In Part II, God is explained by the incarnation. Very roughly, to know > Jesus as the ideal human is to know God. If this is so, then I come > very close to knowing God. Hero-worship is one of the most dangerous faults of humanity. It leads to war, to blind devotion. To believe that anyone or anything is not capable of error is slavery. The biggest danger of someone being right 99% of the time is that sheep begin to associate everything that person says with "Truth"... and then that 1% hits and everyone dies. Jesus realized this, but only too late. He was already too revered to be considered fallible. And these Pavlov's dogs that claim to be "Christians" regularly kill and inspire hatred throughout the span of history. ----------- Conquer fear. Question faith. Humor distraction. Thou shalt not make any graven image, or bow down before any creation in heaven or on earth.
From: "G. Eliot" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.radical-left,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.socialism,sci.econ,alt.politics.economics,alt.postmodern,alt.politics.equality,alt.society.labor-unions,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 20:03:12 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. El Diablo wrote: > As Harold Kushner puts it in When Bad things Happen to Good People, > there are three conditions at stake here: > 1)Job is good and has not sinned > 2)God is good and loving and wants justice to prevail > 3)God is all-powerful > The seeming contradiction in the narrative part of the book can only be > explained by accepting 2 of the 3 above and denying the other. There is > only a contradiction when all three are deemed to be true. Kushner says > that his view accepts the first 2, but says the 3rd is not true. God > wants good and justice for all people, but he is not omnipotent. Or: 1) God is only watching Job because "Sin" still needs to be defined. 2) God is as deterministic as any other set of moving particles. 3) God is busy watching Must See TV, and decided not to hit our "PAUSE" button. -------- Every intelligent society eventually runs simulations and experiments to explain its own creation, creating new intelligent societies in the process. God isn't dead. God is just away from his keyboard.
From: "S. Arsheesh" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.radical-left,rec.arts.books,sci.econ,alt.politics.economics,alt.postmodern,alt.politics.socialism,alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.politics.usa.republican,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 18:30:53 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Paul D. Lanier wrote: >> An "economy" exists only because of written records or memory >> (human or computer). If these records were completely destroyed, >> all debts, fortunes, interest wiped clean, the world would be no >> different in terms of the power to produce material or immaterial >> things. All it takes is the agreement to trade your labor for >> someone else's labor. And agreement happens by Communication. > But if God is real, and He knows everything, then the records can never be > entirely wiped out. So, again why the sacrifices when the ethical > economies are "transcended"? God remembers only as much as the combined minds of everyone we can communicate with on this planet, plus our written records. Quite true that none of these records can be entirely wiped out unless the entire planet is incinerated. But there's a difference between destroying history and refusing to let it dominate our actions. Sacrificing paper money is only painful if you still think it has the ability to hold value. And the only reason this happens is the idiot self-brainwashing that has happened ever since the invention of currency... used by its inventors to faciliate the exchange of labor, NOT the invention of useless labor just to get currency. -------- If communication defines poverty, then poverty is the lack of control over communication.
From: "E. Schrodinger" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.labor-unions,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.economics,alt.postmodern,alt.politics.libertarian,sci.econ,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.usa.republican Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 17:43:20 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Jim Glass wrote: > >Unless you never saw people who had cars and nice clothes and big houses > >and servants and the like then yes, you'd never know you were poor > >unless someone told you. Of course, you'd have no idea what "poor" > >meant unless you had some experience with the rich, would you? > So "poverty" is nothing but envy? No. Poverty is lack of control over communication. Poverty is being talked TO by your TV, radio, or newspaper and not being able to talk back. Poverty is being commanded by your boss and being afraid to act against his wishes or voice your own thoughts. Restate the obvious? Here it is. Free speech generates ideas. Democracy generates the courage to make use of free speech. THAT is what has been forgotten after 200 years of monotonous brainwashing. "Poverty" is the cycle of stupidity. Case in point: control over commodity prices by investment firms. If they're contracted to have no other purpose than to produce more currency for their brainless peons, then their hands are tied. Forced to follow whatever most recent cash crop fad that has developed, wasting the time and effort of farmers just in time for the next famine... and then unable to divert real food to famine struck areas, for fear of having the emperor's new clothes taken away from them. ------ Life is a tennis match - an audience of journalists, a capitalist referee, philosopher players, and everyone else is the tennis ball. Great tennis requires no audience, no referee, not even a tennis ball.
From: "E. Schrodinger" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.labor-unions,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.economics,alt.postmodern,alt.politics.libertarian,sci.econ,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.usa.republican Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 22:13:59 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Alan Miles wrote: > > I sense another authorial-intention thread slouching toward > > Bethlehem again... > I have NO idea what this sentence means. What I do know is that the > photographer in question was tortured by the question - why didn't you > save the starving kid - until his suicide. > That's all I was talking about. His inability to cope with hypocrisy. All his life, Hypocrisy was associated with Evil, and the Pulitzer was associated with Good. It is however, nearly impossible NOT to be a hypocrite and still survive. Hypocrisy and the Pulitzer are neither Good nor Evil by themselves. "Evil" is caused not by a conspiracy of Evil, not by a conspiracy of Silence, but by a conspiracy of Stupidity and nothing more. By people who have lost sight of the goal and see only the tool or the reward. 42? --------- Mold colonies in a petri dish don't notice us watching them do battle.
From: "E. Schrodinger" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,alt.politics.economics,alt.politics.libertarian,rec.arts.books,sci.econ,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.postmodern,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 21:40:28 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Paul D. Lanier wrote: > Pavlov's dogs again? God is a red herring? So, dear marketeer, the > communicator par excellence, the anti-propaganda propagandist, what is > that you want? I should wonder what the book of Job and the questions > raised thereby (and perhaps answers too) has to do with Pavlov? I also > wonder why you think that humans only follow reward and do not distinguish > between that reward and the goal? Or did you say that? Come now, and > reason with us for a change of pace. > > Natural man has only two primal passions: to get and to beget. > So then, is there a sub-natural and a supernatural man? What passions > go beyond primal passions? Imagine if you already achieved everything you've ever dreamed of. As much money, sex, power, fame, glory, whatever you could ever want. Will you be satisfied? What would be next? Would you then kill yourself? Remember again the goal of most religions: to join with God. God is, in fact, Communication. God sees all because the Media sees all... and if no one saw that tree fall, then no one would know if it made a sound. God is everywhere, because the Media is "everywhere"... or at least as far as communication allows us to go. So beyond the most basic requirement of life, all that is needed to join with God is equal power over communication, and we may learn once and for all who (or what) is at the top of this Tower of Babel. Most humans, of course, are unprepared - loving God in word only, but afraid to really know. ------- When gorillas invent swords, will we hide, hunt, or educate? We extend their lives with medicine; do they think us gods?
From: "E. Schrodinger" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.economics,alt.postmodern,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.politics.equality,talk.politics.libertarian Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 21:21:00 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Richard Harter wrote: > >scientists. The situation is no different from when one tries to buy a > >book on scientific nutrition while attempting to avoid this month's fad > >diet. These facts do not mean that there is no such thing as scientific > >nutrition or that evolutionary biology is bunk. > >Even scientists are human and will sometimes try to twist the material to > >support their particular world view. The best one can do is read along > >with an open and thinking mind, and try hard to read the arguments > >presented by mutual oponents (eg Steven Jay Gould vs Richard Dawkins). But why do they do this? For some reason, they have associated their own sense of self-worth with what other people think of them. Once again, Pavlov's dogs. Not that communicating their "world view" is "evil". Knowledge is in fact quite valuable. BUT when arguments start for no purpose other than self-glorifcation is when they have wasted both their own time and the time of their audience. > One has to be very careful about such assessments. We know much less > about biology and about evolution than we need to enable us to speak > with confidence. One trouble with reading Gould, Dawkins, et. al., is > that one is given the impression that we understand the big picture, > that we understand the major determinants of how evolution works and > how it impacts biology. Evolution works, and impacts not only biology, but theology and philosophy as well. The cells of an organism's body have learned to stop fighting each other millions of years ago after learning to communicate. We've yet to see how long it takes supposedly "intelligent" societies to learn to stop fighting each other. -------- Mold colonies in a petri dish don't notice us watching them do battle.
From: "H. Stowe" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.economics,rec.arts.books,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.postmodern,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.radical-left Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 20:12:54 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Paul D. Lanier wrote: > > Perhaps it's my atheism -- for me, God's lectures aren't what God says, > > they are what people would think God might have said or might say in the > > circumstances depicted -- i.e., all of God's monologues and dialogues > > are fantasmatic, and what they fill is his immense silence that > > reverberates through the impossible words we put in hir mouth. > Is it possible your atheism clouds your vision? > How can God's lectures be not what God says? God is a red herring. The existence of God isn't nearly as important as the existence of Communication. The world changes or fails to change because of the voices of aggression and apathy. For those who control communication, it is the aggressors that are always targeted because aggressors change things. There is something they want, and they instigate an action to achieve it. For those who control communication, it is either their job to figure out what it is that aggressors desire, or to redirect that desire at something else through marketing and propaganda. The only thing that separates us from Pavlov's dogs is that we know WHY we are Pavlov's dogs... and think his dogs do not. --------- Natural man has only two primal passions: to get and to beget. -Osler
From: "H. Stowe" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.labor-unions,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.economics,alt.postmodern,alt.politics.libertarian,sci.econ,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.usa.republican Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 19:00:20 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Fiona Webster wrote: > You've lost me there, H. What exactly is wrong with a photographer > being motivated by dreams of the Pulitzer? Or dreams of money? Sex? Fame? An oscar? Beer? Nothing wrong in itself. That is why we give dogs buscuits for doing tricks, after all. What IS dangerous, however, is when the photographer forgets exactly WHY humans offer rewards, and spends his life salivating after an inanimate object, losing all sense of purpose except the purpose of getting that reward... associating pleasure, self-esteem, self-worth, and life itself with that inanimate object. There's a word for this: addiction. ------- Thou shalt not make any graven image, or bow down before any creation in heaven or on earth.
From: "H. Stowe" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.labor-unions,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.economics,alt.postmodern,alt.politics.libertarian,sci.econ,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.usa.republican Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 13:03:48 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Alan Miles wrote: > Frankly, you have no idea whether the photographer gave the kid food or > didn't. He took a picture that resonated around the world. Suppose he > was motivated by greed and got rich from the photo. Suppose he gave the > photo away? Which was better? That is NOT the point. Yes, one photographer can't solve the world's problems. Yes, giving one hungry child a sandwich might save one life but leave thousands of others to die. But the LAST thing that should be motivating a photographer is dreams of the Pulitzer or protecting his copyright. > The media constantly struggle with "spin," and the "spin" you disagree > with becomes the "media bias" you oppose. There is nothing wrong with "spin" or "bias" because it is completely unavoidable. What IS wrong is pretending that there is NO spin or bias. THAT is why open debate works, and why the hidden debate behind the camera leads to fear and fuels conflict. An unbiased press is the most dangerous thing in the world because there's no such thing. ------ Pride is the virtue that can agree with a suggestion only after the subject has changed.
From: "J. Hancock" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.labor-unions,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.economics,alt.postmodern,alt.politics.libertarian,sci.econ,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.politics.equality,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 14:13:00 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Alan Miles wrote: > Or because the Media can inspire some good. The outpouring of aid to > Ethiopia during its famine would not have occurred without the aid of > the media, for example. Entertainment? The photographer from the New > York Times who won the Pulitzer for his photo of the starving child > crouched while a vulture watched, committed suicide. Yup, entertaining. And I'll tell you why. Instead of giving the child his lunch, he restrained himself because he worked for a higher purpose: the Pulitzer. Everyone works for self-glorification. Yes, the media inspires good, it also inspires greed, fear, frustration, and despair where there was none before. It does both and hides behind an air of impartiality, when in fact there are vehement battles deciding about which reports will be aired and how they will be worded. THESE are the battles that need to be made public. Whenever a decision comes top-down in spite of opposition, you can bet it's not trying to inspire good.
From: "W. Hearst" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.labor-unions,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.economics,alt.postmodern,alt.politics.libertarian,sci.econ,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.politics.equality,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 18:59:50 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Van Piercy wrote: > Or a "New Frontier"--outer space! Rockets, landers, anti-grav propulsion, > teflon. Oh god. Next: The corporatization of outer space. "We'll land > people on Mars before we solve the problem of poverty!" Who defines poverty anyway? Who tells us there are poor people or that "we" are poor people? Unless you are hungry or have no medicine for a non-imagined disease, how would you know you were poor unless someone TOLD you that you're poor. Yes, solving poverty and ignorance are important. But there is also this problem of the Media God exaggerating stories to pull at our heartstrings for sheer entertainment value. The truth is, life in the vast majority of the world is boring. But of course, producers and editors can't tell us that, or they'd lose all their ratings and ad funding along with it. Using greed as a motivation to report on stories fighting greed, all the while running commercials to inspire greed. Ironic. -------- If there's self-censorship in the press, we'll never know there's self-censorship in the press.
From: "W. Hearst" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,talk.politics.libertarian,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.economics,alt.postmodern,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.socialism Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 17:37:07 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. > Jeff: > : >I was getting Nietzschean, as usual, and referring to the courage > : >required to *value* an Unknowable God -- a chaotic, passionate, > : >jealous God. > moggin: > : The trouble here is that God in _Job_ is _not_ Unknowable. > : You just applied three adjectives without even trying -- between > : us we could draw up a pretty good list. "Unknowable" is the last > : word for him. Maybe you're right that it takes courage to value > : an Unknowable God; but that's got nothing to do with _Job_, where > : God makes himself damn well known. "Unknowable" only in so much as we humans are "unknowable" to gorillas. And yet we have been able to teach gorillas and ourselves the ability to communicate with eachother with gestures. Koko, for example. How much was Koko willing to sacrifice to join our society? Did she give up her family? Her place in her "society"? Her chance for eternal happiness, however members of her species define happiness? Do we then send Koko back to her "people" to teach them what she has learned, and expose her to violence from her own "society"? The obvious next logical question for Evolutionists (TM) is, are homo sapiens the First (TM) "intelligent" lifeforms to evolve in this solar system? Or even this planet? ------ Mold colonies in a petri dish don't notice us watching them do battle.
From: "W. Hearst" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.usa.republican,rec.arts.books,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.postmodern,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.politics.economics,sci.econ,alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.democrats.d Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 15:23:58 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Paul M. Johnson wrote: > Is this notion of what's involved in (human) communication actually > popular? It strikes me as truly bizarre. I'm pretty sure that when > I am talking to someone I don't think at all about what may or may not > be going on in her head (except in some non-literal sense of "in her > head"). You don't, but you SHOULD. Peons are brainwashed by marketing to waste years of their lives chasing after lame-assed products. "Leaders" are brainwashed by "history" into wasting years of their lives chasing after a "place in history". History is fucking bunk. They salivate after the reward and completely forget the goal. They, in fact, have never even stopped to consider exactly WHAT the goal is. What IS the goal? If you don't know, then don't go chasing after it. There can be no cooperation if brainwashing is one-directional. -------- When gorillas invent swords, will we hide, hunt, or educate? We extend their lives with medicine; do they think us gods?
From: "W. Bagger" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.radical-left,rec.arts.books,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.postmodern,alt.politics.economics,sci.econ,alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.reform,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 14:15:00 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Paul D. Lanier wrote: > True, humans can be highly violent. I wonder though at your naive > assumption of non-violent dolphin society. Study and observe the mating > rituals of dolphins... I don't think its very peaceful. There seems to be > fights over domination of males and access to females. The thing is > peaceful societies and violent societies is something of degrees, so far > as I can tell. By the way, humans can be highly peaceful. Ah, but TRULY intelligent life rarely settles dispute by the DEATH of the other party. The other party only dies when the two sides cannot communicate (ie. different cultures, or different species). While manual manipulation has improved our mastery of tools, it has turned our mastery of social skills to putty. It is a hopeless dream of ever achieving space travel with our current mindset. Alien biologists would never let us bipedal piranhas out of the solar system. ------- When gorillas invent swords, will we hide, hunt, or educate? We extend their lives with medicine; do they think us gods?
From: "W. Bagger" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,alt.postmodern,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.politics.libertarian,sci.econ,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.economics Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 14:02:20 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Paul D. Lanier wrote: > > > Who is _we_? Also, the vice-pres. were runner's up back in the > > > founding fathere's days, and that problem was soon corrected. > > Incorrect. The CORRECTION was the problem. It marked the > > day when politicians became more concerned with their own > > glorification than actually helping the entire nation as > > a whole. > > If we teach gorillas our history, would they fight wars over it? > Um... okay. I think I see your point. But I don't really see where you > go on to prove humans are merely salivating dogs, idiots following the > politicians. As far as I can tell, humans are a far more interesting lot- > sometimes walking away from political parties, sometimes fighting for a > cause they believe in and against the gloried politician (e.g the collapse > of communist USSR), sometimes provoking infighting within the parties (a > mild version of which happened in the Republican presidential primary of > 1996), sometimes becoming hermits, sometimes holding forth visions of what > they think is the way people ought to go. Not savlivating after politicians but the talking heads we see in the media. Everyone knows there's no respect for politicians in this country. But there's tons of respect for "serious newscasters." Of course, these are mere demi-gods being manipulated by their own bosses above. They, of course, think they are being impartial. There are only two real political parties: the media hierarchy and everyone else. (Not distinct of course). Brainwash early. Brainwash often. ------- History of the Universe: God trains Dog. Dog rebels. Dog trains God. God rebels. God trains Dog. Dog rebels. Will the cycle never end?
From: "I. Pavlov" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,rec.arts.books,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.postmodern,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.politics.equality,sci.econ,talk.politics.libertarian Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 18:38:43 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Dylan Bryan-Dolman wrote: > The simple fact is that God never makes any kind of claim to moral > superiority in _Job_. Nor do anthropologists claim moral superiority over their subjects. Anthropologists are there for their own personal education... and perhaps to insert a few Words of Wisdom (TM) every now and then. If the atheist God is the media, you have to wonder: are we our own anthropologists? ---------- If we teach gorillas our history, would they fight wars over it?
From: "I. Pavlov" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.postmodern,alt.politics.socialism,alt.politics.equality,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 17:06:39 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. moggin wrote: > > But what is "evil" then? Do we suppose that God intends to thwart > > himself (not saying we couldn't suppose that -- might be an > > interesting idea, somewhat in line with your not-unreasonable view of > > Yaweh as a primitive consciousness lacking self-awareness), or, for > > example, maybe "good" and "evil" are our labels -- we, like Paschal, > > who think the world should be improved, that we can and should improve > > on life. > I don't think we need to suppose that God thwarts himself. It > _is_ an interesting thought, you're right, and maybe worth coming > back to -- but it's not a requirement here. After all, God doesn't > say, "Oh, _shit_, I made evil again!" Instead he seems proud, as > though creating evil was exactly what he meant to do. "Evil" is any new idea that nobody else agrees with. If that idea is aired in a place where nobody cares, it is either ignored or crucified. Aired in the right place however, it's debated, and could quite possibly become "Good" in the process, either by changing itself, or changing the definition of "Good". THAT is why disagreement is vital. THAT is why we search for knowledge. THAT is why we like to argue. Of course, idiots that associate their ideas with their own self-worth will be idiots forever. -------- Pride is the irrelevant man's excuse for still feeling relevant.
From: "I. Pavlov" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.labor-unions,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.socialism,alt.postmodern,alt.politics.economics,sci.econ,alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 16:47:56 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Jeff Inman wrote: > Or perhaps a nice flood. Solved! Turns out that even this is only a > temporary measure. If the media can't bring a flood of ideas, then it's a flood of violence. One may lead to another, of course, because we ARE stupid animals. Lifeforms that evolve communication long before the ability to manipulate the environment around them develop excellent social structures (see dolphins). All disputes are solved by instant mutual brainwashing. The danger, of course, is that this can also kill REALLY new ideas... like manual manipulation. But at least the dolphins got a non- violent society long before we did. Little green men probably contacted them long ago, and are still waiting for the day when we the violent idiots will actually discover the value of two-way communication. Not bloody likely. ------- If we teach gorillas our history, would they fight wars over it?
From: "I. Pavlov" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.radical-left,rec.arts.books,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.postmodern,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,sci.econ,alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.economics Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 17:08:25 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Susan Young wrote: > >on vacation. Today, with all of our fancy technology, we rest, > >what, TWO days out of seven? Is that the best we can do? > Hey, I raise kids for a living. I don't get any days off. If you enjoy your work, then EVERY day is a day off. The only reason some people fail to enjoy their work today is because they spend the majority of their days living under corporate autocracy. Mainly because of bosses who are afraid of giving up the status associated with their position. --------------- Pride is the irrelevant man's excuse for still feeling relevant.
From: "I. Pavlov" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.economics,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.radical-left,rec.arts.books,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.postmodern,alt.politics.socialism,sci.econ,alt.politics.equality,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 15:57:38 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. moggin wrote: > Sure is. And I seriously doubt that J. Calvin's answer goes > to the root. He's not bullshitting, though. Changing the laws > and sharing the wealth won't eliminate pain and suffering. _That_ > would require "new heavens and a new earth," as God admits in > _Isaiah_. Still, pain and suffering have been exacerbated by most > of the systems people have lived under; so _altering_ them is a > highly relevant suggestion. As Marcuse says, the revolution won't > be finished until the lion lies down with the lamb -- but that > doesn't mean overthrowing capitalism would be a bad place to start. Maybe overthrowing materialism instead then. How much pain and suffering is caused simply by confusing the goal with the reward? But the goal shouldn't be to GIVE to the Church. It should be to promote free speech and democracy (majority, unanimous, or somewhere in between) in every organization you find. ------- Those who don't believe in the power of the press have obviously never taken a trip down to Grover's Mill with Orson Welles. Rosebud.
From: "I. Pavlov" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.economics,alt.politics.equality,sci.econ,alt.postmodern,talk.politics.libertarian Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 15:40:10 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Susan Young wrote: > The belief that Christ was incorruptible and infallible while in the flesh > is not in fact part of orthodox Christian doctrine, although it has appeared > repeatedly in church history. The gnostic Docetists, according to Jaroslav > Pelikan's history of the development of Christian doctrine, taught that the > spiritual and physical humanity of Christ was apparent rather than real. The > Eastern monophysites hold to a version of that belief to this day, but they're a > minority. Christ, whether real or allegorical, is a story about a man who mastered the art of repetition and brainwashing. But he didn't brainwash with any goal in mind other than trying to learn the "ultimate truth" by trying to be the devil's advocate... it other words, he was an objective brainwasher. Aid to the poor (socialism), challenging and then forgiving authority (free speech). He was proud of his work until he finally realized that pride should be the REWARD and NOT the goal. So he too thought himself a sinner. The ascension was probably just a promotion. Brainwashers tend to get promoted since people agree with them (or they get brainwashed by their promoters). Light side, dark side of the Force. The Borg. Whatever. It's too bad though. The autocrat that has fun without guilt is a fool. The autocrat that has guilt without fun is a coward. And yet, they never think about democracy, for fear of losing control of their own minds. ------- Freedom of speech was a concept invented by a woman, whether her male counterparts realized it or not. But it matters not whether the play was written by Shakespeare or Byron.
From: "W. Wonka" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,talk.politics.theory,alt.postmodern,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.politics.equality,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 14:34:32 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Dylan Bryan-Dolman wrote: > Which solves the dramatic problem brilliantly. The struggle is not > between truth and rhetoric but between a rhetoric committed to a rational > vision of ethics and a rhetoric committed to no value system other than > its own gorgeousness. Rhetoric #2 just plain wins, as we always knew it > had to from the beginning. The dramatic shape of the work is perfect, > maybe too perfect for modern readers who expect something a little more > open-ended. Correct. The rise of the political party was the perversion of everything the Founding Fathers (TM) stood for. It signaled the death of individuality. It's no accident that vice-presidents used to be the runner-up in the election. The country turned from one of unity to one of division because the Founding Fathers (TM) were too naive to see that idiots always confuse the reward for the goal. We are Pavlov's dogs. -------- Pride is the irrelevant man's excuse for still feeling relevant.
From: "W. Wonka" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,talk.politics.theory,alt.postmodern,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.equality,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 14:21:58 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. G*rd*n wrote: > | For humans wandering in Job's particular dark wood, I imagine problems > | of belles-lettres are pretty low on the list of concerns. ... > You'd think so, and yet people kill and die for the sake of > rhetoric: for creeds, prayers, poems, contracts, formulas, > incantations, and oaths. But this is not surprising when > you consider that the universe is said by a prominent > religious authority to have been created as a linguistic > act by a lingustic act. And words can torture, kill, > imprison, betray, and deceive as well; forming a dark wood > should be an easy task for them. If the pen is mightier than the sword, surely the organizations that wield the pens need to have both equality of expression and equality of power. ------- There's only one zoo where we can see unreasonable humans: the media.
From: "J. Calvin" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,talk.politics.libertarian,rec.arts.books,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.postmodern,sci.econ,alt.politics.equality,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 12:03:42 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Susan Young wrote: > >I'm listening to the waves crashing on the beach as I write this, and it > >does sound like the breath of some humungous Being, to be sure, but I'm not > >sure the macrocosm would be that relevant if I'd been forced to drink swamp > >water on a 300 km hike without food. If GOD is there why does not He do > >something? > The Book of Job was an attempt to address this question, several millenia ago.. In other words, do your JOB. Support a rich man. And he MIGHT, just MIGHT, give you something back in return after he's "tested" you long enough. Even thousands of years ago, people could rest one day out of seven. At least one out of seven people could be on vacation. Today, with all of our fancy technology, we rest, what, TWO days out of seven? Is that the best we can do? The problem of course, is capitalism. No matter how efficient the economy gets, people are always forced to invent busy-work for themselves to do, just to stay employed. Paperwork, bureaucracy, marketing, bean counting. "Hey Abe, how many beans did we grow this year?" "Well, it's about 128,094,523. Or was it 128,523,094? Gosh darn it! I lost count! Gotta start over! Thousands of people are DEPENDING on me!" ------ The fear of rain was created by umbrella makers.
From: "T. Hobbes" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.postmodern,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.politics.equality,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.libertarian,sci.econ,soc.men,alt.politics.economics,soc.women,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.usa.republican Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Mon, 05 May 1997 14:12:19 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. 'David O'Bedlam' wrote: > > and Barney Frank...um, are you CERTAIN > > it is the "liberal side" that "prevents incest" > Barney Frank is a faggot who likes guys in their > 20s of "questionable background", like the "aide" > he met through an escort service. What's THAT got > to do with _incest_, or even liberalism? (Was ol' > Julius Caesar a _liberal_, really? Or Roy Cohn?) Liberalism (TM) as a political philosophy can mean whatever you want it to mean. Liberal sexuality, as the need for something different from yourself, is what prevents incest and causes bestiality. Conservative sexuality, as the need for something similar to yourself, is what prevents fucking trees and causes homosexuality. Now that we have all the definitions cleared up, the next question is: who gives a shit? People who can't make a living philosophizing about anything else, that's who. ---- Experience doesn't breed wisdom. Experience breeds brainwashing.
From: "M. Luther" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.postmodern,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.politics.equality,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.libertarian,sci.econ,soc.men,alt.politics.economics,soc.women,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.usa.republican Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 16:37:40 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Maynard Handley wrote: > I grew up in South Africa where there are precious few Asian > (by Asian I mean the US version of Asian which is China, Japan, Korea, > Vietnam area, but not India or Iran or such) women to be seen in real > life, on TV or anywhere else. > Didn't stop me from finding Asian women very attractive/no less attractive > than the white women with whom I grew up when I moved to California. Good, sounds like you overcame part of your conservative sexuality. Humans evolved conflicting desires for reasons of survival. The conservative side preserved the ability to mate successfully. You won't have much luck trying to fuck a tree. The liberal side prevented inbreeding and incest - someone too similar to yourself often resulted in offspring with too many pairs of recessive genes. Why do you think most philosophies evolved a taboo on incest? ------ Thou shalt not make any graven image, or bow down before any creation in heaven or on earth.
From: "M. Luther" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.postmodern,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.politics.equality,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.libertarian,sci.econ,soc.men,alt.politics.economics,soc.women,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 12:15:31 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. paschal wrote: > > If you're going to exclude "established religions" from your > > search, you're going to miss some of the greatest works on these > > subjects. Many writers have belonged to one or another "established > > religion" and have written about spirituality, without committing > > the sins you list above. > him has impressed me a great deal. And I have nothing against the > "established religions" - nor do I think that ritual, buildings, etc., > are "sins" - but they are not right for everyone; and I am > very impressed with the interpretations of Christianity, for instance, > that we find in New Thought-influenced writers like Eric Butterworth. Most religions are little more than institutionalized brain- washing. It has its good points of course. If someone wants to be the Messiah, he might even do the world some good, until, of course, he's perverted by power or other people seeking power. Even the concept of "beauty" is little more than brain-washing. People are attracted to what they're used to. Boys with younger sisters grow up to like younger women. Boys with older sisters will prefer older women. Boys with no sisters will be attracted to their childhood vision of their mother. Boys with only sisters and no brothers will grow up to be comfortable around women, and afraid of being labeled homosexual. If the TV shows you nothing but thin women with no distinguishing features, that's what you're attracted to. The "religion" of frailty works the same way. The more women are told they are not athletes, the less they engage in sport. When girls first hit that growth spurt, they are made to feel ashamed of being taller than all the boys, ashamed of their size. Thus they limit their food intake and stunt their own growth.
From: "J. Iscariot" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.postmodern,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.politics.equality,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.libertarian,sci.econ,alt.politics.economics,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.usa.republican Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 17:33:56 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. paschal wrote: > I'm not sure how we got from the things I was discussing (religion, > spirituality, flames on Usenet) to the subject of "volunteerism." > Iscariot (is that Judas, or Judith?) appears to have > taken my words entirely out of context to serve some purpose of his/her > own, which I can't discern. > Well: whatever floats your boat. Everybody has their own agenda. Is the Defense Department really trying to protect us with dire warnings of increased terrorism through the dissemination of information via the Internet, or is it just trying to save funding so it gets to keep its own job? Are major powers against chemical weapons because they really want to protect innocent civilians from them, or are they trying to preserve their own dominance with nuclear power by preventing the rise of chemical power? Are senators against the chemical weapons ban simply to be difficult contrarians, or are warning that fancy words mean nothing to a country trapped under the boot of upper class countries? --------- Carry a big stick, but offer a bigger carrot.
From: "J. Iscariot" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.socialism,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.postmodern,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.politics.equality,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.libertarian,sci.econ,alt.politics.economics,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Love! Honour! Compassion! Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 14:09:08 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. paschal wrote: > I think there's plenty of "humanity" to go around - but it's only active > if people choose to exercise it. A lot of times people > attack other people pretty viciously on the net - and the fact that I or > anyone may have found some ideas or ways of perceiving life that seem to > us to be true and very useful, doesn't mean we are indifferent when we > witness meanness. Trying to learn to sense the one-ness of things, > doesn't mean we are freed from the practical work of trying to make > ourselves and the world a better place. It does, however, inspire those > efforts and help to make them more successful, I think. > A lot of people choose NOT to exercise their humanity; and choose to act > in destructive ways. And JFK said so famously, "Ask not what your country can do for you..." quite like how our current politicians are saying the same thing. But words are useless unless they are backed up by real action. This drive for volunteerism will be little more than another blip in history, unless, of course, it leads to the realization that what our volunteers are doing is far more valuable that what our stock brokers and marketers are doing... and thus deserve *at least* a living wage, if they need one. But there are a lot of stupid people in this society, who actually believe the job they are doing is acutally valuable. You will only find a heart for a heartless man when you help him relocate his brain and his spine. ------- Natural man has only two primal passions: to get and to beget. -Osler
21.4.97 19:43 Push me away from your rake. 21.4.97 19:52 Admitting your mistakes. 28.4.97 What our Founding Fathers had in mind. From: "M. Luther" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,sci.econ,alt.politics,alt.politics.economics,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.politics.reform,alt.p Subject: Re: Libertarianism does not Equal Capitalism automatically Date: Fri, 02 May 1997 17:05:16 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Derek Nalecki wrote: > >Precisely. NOBODY knows, and nobody can POSSIBLY know. If you > >can't decide for yourself whether you believe in something and > >must rely on faith in Jefferson, Rand, or St. Peter, then you > You forgot Marx. Or is relying on a total imbecille in a different > category, that accepting - after rational analysis of their arguments - > what Jefferson or Rand said as basis on which to build your world-view? Correct, not Marx, not Smith, not Lenin, not Mills, not Mao, and not Keynes. Blind faith in any system values is pure stupidity. Even blind faith in the value of human life. Human life IS sacred, but not because Washington says so, not because God says so. Most philosophies have evolved a value on human life because it's more efficient to cooperate with someone instead of wasting both your precious hours trying to kill each other. ------ Thou shalt not make any graven image, or bow down before any creation in heaven or on earth.
From: "J. Iscariot" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,sci.econ,alt.politics,alt.politics.economics,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.politics.reform,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.socialism,can.politics,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Libertarianism does not Equal Capitalism automatically Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 14:55:49 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Derek Nalecki wrote: > >> > "...legislators cannot invent too many devices for subdividing property... > >> > Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all > >> > from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions or property > >> > in geometrical progression as they rise. Whenever there are in any country > >> > uncultivated lands and unemployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property > >> > have been so far extended as to violate natural right." > >> > -- Thomas Jefferson (in a letter to James Madison), 1785 > >> > That sound very unlibertarian to me. > >> If your trying to use this quote to justify progressive > >> taxation on incomes, I think you are conferring a grave > >> injustice upon Thomas Jefferson. Because, sir, taxation > >> on income and taxation on property are not synonymous. > >> For example, progressive taxation on incomes punishes > >> people solely due to their success. > >A progressive income tax would NOT be needed IF income was > >left up to democracy. In other words, subordinates deciding > >their manager's income, rather than the other way around. > >This is precisely what our Founding Father's had in mind when > >they establish democracy, but they were afraid of pissing off > >all the propertied land owners, who ran their manors like > >miniature monarchies, much like how companies are run today. > >...so they didn't belabor the point. > Then how do _you_ know this nonsense was what the Founding Fathers had > in mind? Precisely. NOBODY knows, and nobody can POSSIBLY know. If you can't decide for yourself whether you believe in something and must rely on faith in Jefferson, Rand, or St. Peter, then you need to go buy yourself a brain of your own. --------- If you can't think for yourself, don't even try thinking for anyone else.
From: "W. Bagger" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.politics,sci.econ,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.politics.reform,alt.politics.economics,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.socialism,can.politics,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Libertarianism does not Equal Capitalism automatically Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 19:52:04 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Curt Howland wrote: > And so long as their assendence in the market is > not based on force or fraud, why should your idea > of propper be forced on them through legislation? Legislation is just a way to give CEOs the chance to do what they've always wanted to do in the first place. Good OR bad. In other words, when you live in a society where admitting your mistakes is total suicide, far better to throw up your hands and say, "Ok, Ok, the government is forcing me to implement employee democracy. All you great loyal and super-valuable middle management types are just going to have to put up with your subordinates and even listen to them once in a while. It's out of my hands. Really! I'm not doing this to promote real ideas at all. The last thing I want is good management-labor relations. Really." ------- Folfanga. Fourth world of the Folfanga system. Estimated journey time, three weeks. There to meet with a small slug. Of the genus A-Rth-Urp- Hil-Ipdenu. I believe that you had decided to call it a brainless prat.
From: "W. Bagger" cyu@geocities.com Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.radical-left,alt.politics,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.labor-unions,alt.politics.reform,alt.politics.economics,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.socialism,can.politics,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Libertarianism does not Equal Capitalism automatically Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 19:43:02 -0700 Organization: Church of Scientology, Intimidation, and Vast Profits, Inc. Curt Howland wrote: > If people want to relate to each other through > barter, commune, or capitalistic style, that's > their decision. The reason that Jeff's example > above is *allowed* under the Libertarian political > model is because the contracts voluntarily agreed > to by the producers and supliers are up to them, > not up to the government to impose. To impose > such restrictions is SOCIALISM. Call it whatever you want. If I go to your yard, and walk off with that rake propped against your tree, that's Libertarianism. If you push me away from your rake, that's the initiation of force. Property ownership can only be decided in one of two ways, agreement or coercion. ------- And then, one Thursday, nearly two thousand years after one man had been nailed to a tree for saying how great it would be to be nice to people for a change, one girl sitting on her own in a small cafe in Rickmansworth suddenly realized what it was that had been going wrong all this time... This is not her story.

|HOME| CJohnYu.96@alum.mit.edu [email/index]

Click Here! |count|
|11/13|