Thursday, September 6, 2012
Arendt: the cause of freedom versus tyranny
"No cause is left but the most ancient of all, the one, in fact, that from the beginning of our history has determined the very existence of politics, the cause of freedom versus tyranny."~ Hannah Arendt
Beck: hedged in by millions of laws
“We used to be a free people. Now we are hedged in by millions of laws. Harassed by a plague of opportunistic lawyers. Harmed by regulations meant for our protection. Unnecessarily taxed to pay for a suffocating bureaucracy. Drowning in petty paperwork. Stifled by “rights” that rarely benefit anyone.”
– Joan Beck
Columnist
Source: Houston Chronicle, February 6, 1995
– Joan Beck
Columnist
Source: Houston Chronicle, February 6, 1995
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
Some NVC wondering
"I'm wondering if the application of NVC, isn't implicitly making a request; a request to authentically-communicate/
e request to
communicate/connect, then I wonder if NVC can truly be efficacious under
those circumstances. I wonder if the "magic" of NVC relies on the
frequent circumstance that jackals want to be understood and/or have
their feelings and needs recognized. The challenging opportunity of
empathy that I am wondering about, occurs, when certain persons are in a
position of power-over-others that might be so regularly exercised
successfully (for their benefit), that the request to
authentically-communicate/
On the necessity of economic theory to explain economic causal connections
A response on Facebook:
"So I saw your post liked by my friends wall
yesterday and was disappointed to see people still not believing WWII or
the New Deal got us out of the Depression.
It did get us out of the depression. That and the New Deal. I've argued this with neo-cons and Austrians many times before. From where do you think all
It did get us out of the depression. That and the New Deal. I've argued this with neo-cons and Austrians many times before. From where do you think all
those new orders for business came from? The private sector? They were
all for the war. And the men were drafted into the army which is just
another way of giving them welfare, the jobs they left behind being
taken by previous unemployed. And we have kept this war spending until
the present, mostly to keep the economy humming.
Explain to me the unemployment going down when the war started, explain to me GDP going up, explain to me the jobs created by the war time build up AND the New Deal if neither helped."
Explain to me the unemployment going down when the war started, explain to me GDP going up, explain to me the jobs created by the war time build up AND the New Deal if neither helped."
My response:
There
can be no causal explanation for singular events/facts without the use
of a theory that explains that causal connection. In this case, a faulty
theory is employed to incorrectly connect events such as "WWII" and
"the New Deal" with an
assessment
of economic progress. Only the employment of an economic theory could
causally connect these events; the fault of the theory employed to
connect them, rests in an acceptance of the theoretical proposition that
involuntary/
Monday, September 3, 2012
Mencken: Government
All government, in its essence, is a conspiracy against the superior
man; its one permanent object is to oppress him and cripple him. If it
be aristocratic in organization, then it seeks to protect the man who is
superior only in law against the man who is superior in fact; if it be
democratic, then it seeks to protect the man who is inferior in every
way against both. One of its primary functions is to regiment men by
force, to make them as much alike as possible and as dependent upon one
another as possible, to search out and combat originality among them.
All it can see in an original idea is potential change, and hence an
invasion of its prerogatives. The most dangerous man, to any government,
is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard
to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes
to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest,
insane and intolerable, and so, if he is romantic, he tries to change
it. And even if he is not romantic personally he is very apt to spread
discontent among those who are. . . .
The average man, whatever his errors otherwise, at least sees clearly that government is something lying outside him and outside the generality of his fellow-men—that it is a separate, independent and often hostile power, only partly under his control, and capable of doing him great harm. In his romantic moments, he may think of it as a benevolent father or even as a sort of jinn or god, but he never thinks of it as part of himself. In time of trouble he looks to it to perform miracles for his benefit; at other times he sees it as an enemy with which he must do constant battle. Is it a fact of no significance that robbing the government is everywhere regarded as a crime of less magnitude than robbing an individual? . . .
What lies behind all this, I believe, is a deep sense of the fundamental antagonism between the government and the people it governs. It is apprehended, not as a committee of citizens chosen to carry on the communal business of the whole population, but as a separate and autonomous corporation, mainly devoted to exploiting the population for the benefit of its own members. Robbing it is thus an act almost devoid of infamy. . . . When a private citizen is robbed a worthy man is deprived of the fruits of his industry and thrift; when the government is robbed the worst that happens is that certain rogues and loafers have less money to play with than they had before. The notion that they have earned that money is never entertained; to most sensible men it would seem ludicrous. They are simply rascals who, by accidents of law, have a somewhat dubious right to a share in the earnings of their fellow men. When that share is diminished by private enterprise the business is, on the whole, far more laudable than not.
This gang is well-nigh immune to punishment. Its worst extortions, even when they are baldly for private profit, carry no certain penalties under our laws. Since the first days of the Republic, less than a dozen of its members have been impeached, and only a few obscure understrappers have ever been put into prison. The number of men sitting at Atlanta and Leavenworth for revolting against the extortions of government is always ten times as great as the number of government officials condemned for oppressing the taxpayers to their own gain. . . . There are no longer any citizens in the world; there are only subjects. They work day in and day out for their masters; they are bound to die for their masters at call. . . . On some bright tomorrow, a geological epoch or two hence, they will come to the end of their endurance. . . .
The average man, whatever his errors otherwise, at least sees clearly that government is something lying outside him and outside the generality of his fellow-men—that it is a separate, independent and often hostile power, only partly under his control, and capable of doing him great harm. In his romantic moments, he may think of it as a benevolent father or even as a sort of jinn or god, but he never thinks of it as part of himself. In time of trouble he looks to it to perform miracles for his benefit; at other times he sees it as an enemy with which he must do constant battle. Is it a fact of no significance that robbing the government is everywhere regarded as a crime of less magnitude than robbing an individual? . . .
What lies behind all this, I believe, is a deep sense of the fundamental antagonism between the government and the people it governs. It is apprehended, not as a committee of citizens chosen to carry on the communal business of the whole population, but as a separate and autonomous corporation, mainly devoted to exploiting the population for the benefit of its own members. Robbing it is thus an act almost devoid of infamy. . . . When a private citizen is robbed a worthy man is deprived of the fruits of his industry and thrift; when the government is robbed the worst that happens is that certain rogues and loafers have less money to play with than they had before. The notion that they have earned that money is never entertained; to most sensible men it would seem ludicrous. They are simply rascals who, by accidents of law, have a somewhat dubious right to a share in the earnings of their fellow men. When that share is diminished by private enterprise the business is, on the whole, far more laudable than not.
This gang is well-nigh immune to punishment. Its worst extortions, even when they are baldly for private profit, carry no certain penalties under our laws. Since the first days of the Republic, less than a dozen of its members have been impeached, and only a few obscure understrappers have ever been put into prison. The number of men sitting at Atlanta and Leavenworth for revolting against the extortions of government is always ten times as great as the number of government officials condemned for oppressing the taxpayers to their own gain. . . . There are no longer any citizens in the world; there are only subjects. They work day in and day out for their masters; they are bound to die for their masters at call. . . . On some bright tomorrow, a geological epoch or two hence, they will come to the end of their endurance. . . .
Sunday, September 2, 2012
Nietzche: Coldest of all cold monsters
"There are still peoples and herds somewhere, but not with us, my brothers: here there are states.
The state? What is that? Well then! Now open your ears, for now I shall speak to you of the death of peoples.
The state is the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly it lies, too; and this lie creeps from its mouth; "I, the state, am the people."
It is a lie! It was creators who created peoples and hung a faith and a love over them: thus they served life.
It is destroyers who set snares for many and call it the state: they hang a sword and a hundred desires over them.
Where a people still exists, there the people do not understand the state and hate it as the evil eye and sin against custom and law.
I offer you this sign: every people speaks its own language of good and evil: its neighbor does not understand this language. It invented this language for itself in custom and law.
But the state lies in all languages of good and evil; and whatever it says, it lies -- and whatever it has, it has stolen.
Everything about it is false; it bites with stolen teeth. Even its belly is false.
Confusion of the language of good and evil; I offer you this sign of the state. Truly, this sign indicates the will to death! Truly, it beckons to the preachers of death!
Many too many are born: the state was invented for the superfluous!
Just see how it lures them, the many-too-many! How it devours them, and chews them, and re-chews them!
...It would like to range heroes and honorable men about it, this new idol! It likes to sun itself in the sunshine of good consciences -- this cold monster!
It will give you everything if you worship it, this new idol: thus it buys for itself the luster of your virtues and the glance of your proud eyes.
It wants to use you to lure the many-too-many. Yes, a cunning device of Hell has here been devised, a horse of death jingling with the trappings of divine honors!
Yes, a death for many has here been devised that glorifies itself as life: truly a heart-felt service to all preachers of death!
I call it the state where everyone, good and bad, is a poison-drinker: the state where everyone, good and bad, loses himself: the state where universal slow suicide is called -- life."
~ F. Nietzche
The state? What is that? Well then! Now open your ears, for now I shall speak to you of the death of peoples.
The state is the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly it lies, too; and this lie creeps from its mouth; "I, the state, am the people."
It is a lie! It was creators who created peoples and hung a faith and a love over them: thus they served life.
It is destroyers who set snares for many and call it the state: they hang a sword and a hundred desires over them.
Where a people still exists, there the people do not understand the state and hate it as the evil eye and sin against custom and law.
I offer you this sign: every people speaks its own language of good and evil: its neighbor does not understand this language. It invented this language for itself in custom and law.
But the state lies in all languages of good and evil; and whatever it says, it lies -- and whatever it has, it has stolen.
Everything about it is false; it bites with stolen teeth. Even its belly is false.
Confusion of the language of good and evil; I offer you this sign of the state. Truly, this sign indicates the will to death! Truly, it beckons to the preachers of death!
Many too many are born: the state was invented for the superfluous!
Just see how it lures them, the many-too-many! How it devours them, and chews them, and re-chews them!
...It would like to range heroes and honorable men about it, this new idol! It likes to sun itself in the sunshine of good consciences -- this cold monster!
It will give you everything if you worship it, this new idol: thus it buys for itself the luster of your virtues and the glance of your proud eyes.
It wants to use you to lure the many-too-many. Yes, a cunning device of Hell has here been devised, a horse of death jingling with the trappings of divine honors!
Yes, a death for many has here been devised that glorifies itself as life: truly a heart-felt service to all preachers of death!
I call it the state where everyone, good and bad, is a poison-drinker: the state where everyone, good and bad, loses himself: the state where universal slow suicide is called -- life."
~ F. Nietzche
Saturday, September 1, 2012
Will Anarchy help me find a girl-friend?
A rather lonely young gentleman asked the question on Facebook, "Will anarchy help me find a girl-friend?" and I thought that it was a rather interesting question; here is my response:
We should not ignore the fact that institutions of coercion have social repercussions; the powerlessness felt by persons coercively forced to interaction with institutions of domination can create conditions in which the victims are frustrated or angry about the maltreatment they have received and those unprocessed feelings and unmet needs can be transferred to other, less powerful parties. The violence being transferred, may be transferred again, in a causal-chain of violence. The regular/predictable nature of the violence and coercion of *institutions* of domination imply a regular/predictable initiation of these causal-chains of violence, which would imply that without those arbitrary initiations of violence in a regular/predictable occurrence, we might expect to see a net reduction of feelings of powerlessness, frustration, fear, anger, alienation and depression in the individuals belonging to the set of all individuals, as well as less relational stress/anxiety in small sets of persons in social relation, as well as a net reduction in social violence. Which is to say, on the whole, people would be happier and be able to interact socially more productively, if absent institutions of dominations (ie: the State). Which is to say, the probability of finding/discovered productive social relationships that might lead to coital pairing, would be remarkably improved, absent the State.
We should not ignore the fact that institutions of coercion have social repercussions; the powerlessness felt by persons coercively forced to interaction with institutions of domination can create conditions in which the victims are frustrated or angry about the maltreatment they have received and those unprocessed feelings and unmet needs can be transferred to other, less powerful parties. The violence being transferred, may be transferred again, in a causal-chain of violence. The regular/predictable nature of the violence and coercion of *institutions* of domination imply a regular/predictable initiation of these causal-chains of violence, which would imply that without those arbitrary initiations of violence in a regular/predictable occurrence, we might expect to see a net reduction of feelings of powerlessness, frustration, fear, anger, alienation and depression in the individuals belonging to the set of all individuals, as well as less relational stress/anxiety in small sets of persons in social relation, as well as a net reduction in social violence. Which is to say, on the whole, people would be happier and be able to interact socially more productively, if absent institutions of dominations (ie: the State). Which is to say, the probability of finding/discovered productive social relationships that might lead to coital pairing, would be remarkably improved, absent the State.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)