I know from fundamentalists in every organization. My bone of contention is: if one trashes a whole group without specific example, especially in light of the broad discussion under this subject line, then a tacit understaning is implied. Forming by default an opposing fundamentalist mimey culty thingy. Really I have a sense of humor about these things its just that trashing people is the habitual disease of the day. There are better ways of saying it.
That's why I said amen to David Heaf.
So this leads to the subject line.
My instinct says F@#* any concern for what the ill willed would do with the goings on here.
But then I started thinking about sitting at a cafe next to some strangers. And I just started blurting out anthroposophical and biodynamic theory and jargon. The astral body this the etheric that and lucifer and ahriman and sorat. Without context that stuff sounds loopy! My concern then is: what am I doing to promote these self creative forces in the world? alienating someone who may have developed some relationship to anthroposophy and all her movements?
Thats not fear.
If fear of what might happen is the reason to privatize I say don't do it.
- Re: LURKING was Re: Personal Secu... Lloyd Charles
- Re: Personal Security / Insecurit... James Hedley
- Re: Personal Security / Insecurit... Lloyd Charles
- was Personal Security now moving... Liz Davis
- Re: was Personal Security now mo... Lloyd Charles
- Re: Personal Security vs National Security sherwood
- Re: Personal Security vs National Security James Hedley
- Re: Personal Security vs National Security David J. Heaf
- Re: Personal Security vs National Security Barft
- Re: Personal Security vs National Security Gil Robertson
- Re: Personal Security vs National Security Barft
- Re: Personal Security vs National Security Aurora Farm
- Re: Personal Security vs National Security Allan Balliett
- Re: Personal Security vs National Security Allan Balliett
- Re: Personal Security vs National Security The Korrows
