Joshua said:
> This sets off alarms in my head that when we talk about slavery and
tyrrany
> we're discussing the idealized human-like fictions our cultural history
has
> created and which we project on each other and pretend to act like, rather
> than anything resembling real people;
> my old argument that we
> anthropomorphize humans. But I say that a lot. :)
And so you should(:>) It is a very concise and accurate assessment. But who
creates and writes our *recent* history?
In his original post, Darryl said:
> If we can't tell whether
> we are living in tyranny or not we've already lost.
and questioned whether we should search for "Utopia".
I'm feeling like I'm in the deep end without my water wings, i.e. you're
making my brain hurt and it is not the noise of the alarms(:>).
Whilst I appreciate your concise description, I am not sure if you are
suggesting that we ARE "lost" because of anthropomorphalisatiomalisticism
(:>).
My opinion is that we can progress towards a more Utopian state by promoting
human rights, having a democratic system, (one person, one vote), etc, and
that these institutions within a system whereby the power of different
interest groups is constrained or balanced should limit the negative
influence of the natural behaviour of "real people".
However I have no idea how the existing concentration of astronomical wealth
in the hands of so few could be redistributed without severe disruption and
further wholesale slaughter starting the whole cycle off again.
Assuming that there can be progress towards a Utopia, do you think we have
to rewrite our cultural history in terms of a better understanding of how
"real people" act and behave to achieve that progress?
Or would that justify self interest leading to anarchy?
Or were you more interested in describing rather than prescribing?
Bob.
(Who is finding this interesting but is not sure if he is asking the right
questions.)
