-Caveat Lector-
>
> MJ:
> For the Government to 'care for' or 'provide for' these
> urban outdoorsmen (who are reaping the net result of the
> CHOICES they made) it must first TAKE from others. How
> is this 'fair' to those 'gripers' you describe above?
People are left with little when a government, or anyone else, steals,
'legally' or not. Such 'taking' as you call it is no more wrong than 'murder'
of someone who intends to murder YOU. I'm guessing you talk little with such
'urban outdoorsmen.'
>
>
> MJ:
> Throwing around emotives like 'Social Darwinists' ... if one
> has the RIGHT to survival ... he has the RIGHT to enslave
> another for such a purpose.
> Edward Britton wrote:
> "Social Darwinism" is hardly an emotive and hardly a term that
> I coined. It refers to a general belief in the social equivalent
> of survival of the fittest. Such a doctrine is fine in feudal
> systems, but once a social system has been formed for the mutual
> benefit of all (civilization), such doctrines become
> antiquated--or would if not revived by those of rightist bent.
> Choose one: feudal system or civilization (representative
> democracy or otherwise) and be willing to pay the price for
> your decision.
>
> MJ:
> How exactly does one with a desire for treating every person
> to the SAME standard equate to 'social darwinism'?
>
> I do not subscribe to the 'strawman' attempts you assert above ...
> I merely believe EACH and EVERY individual has a RIGHT to their
> OWN life with Government serving its legitimate function by
> subjagating FORCE to this standard.
Yet you seem in favor of government using it's force to protect those that use
force.
>
> [note I have ONLY addressed someone FORCING another to aid in THEIR
> cause -- the ideal of charity has NOT been broached.]
Granted, such forced charity serves few, in the long run. However, don't you
think the government is 'up to' things that require addressing more than
forced equity?
>
>
>
>
> MJ:
> Yes, this is typical ... blame *ANYONE* but one's self.
> Who -- exactly --made those choices which placed you in
> the predicament?
> Edward Britton wrote:
> In this/my case, you are partially correct. I was to blame for
> not having adequately prepared myself financially (at nineteen,
> such concepts were sort of abstract :-)). My employer took it
> from there by downsizing me during the initial stages of
> Reagan's "trickle-down" economy.
>
> MJ:
> More emotive chich�s ... which are truly meaningless.
> Need I LIST the various choices you made which placed you in your
> dilemma? Do you believe one has the RIGHT to a job?
One has the right to the opportunity. Such opportunities are killed when a
government works in collusion to create certain negative images of a people or
subculture. Such opportunities are killed when the government uses our tax
dollars to import cocaine, sell it to street gangs to fund a political and
military agenda that, again, serves THEM(AND provides yet another opportunity
to propagate the image of certain peoples as negative).
>
>
>
>
> MJ:
> When one is free to make his own decisions, how is it another's
> fault when the results prove deficient?
> Edward Britton wrote:
> This is the key deficiency in the understanding of those of
> rightist affiliation: a great many people fall prey to
> circumstances beyond their control, and well outside the realm
> of choice. One can stretch the philosophy of "blame the victim"
> only so far before the argument becomes rediculous.
>
> MJ:
> 'Blame the victim' ... ???
>
> There is a powerful craving in most of us to see ourselves as
> instruments in the hands of others and thus free ourselves from
> the responsibility for acts which are prompted by our own
> questionable inclinations and impulses.
True.
> Both the strong and
> the weak grasp at this alibi. The latter hide their malevolence
> under the virtue of obedience: they acted dishonorably because
> they had to obey orders. The strong, too, claim absolution by
> proclaiming themselves the chosen instrument of a higher
> power -- God, history, fate, nation or humanity. -- Eric Hoffer
>
>
>
> MJ:
> Are you fearful of freedom?
> Edward Britton wrote:
> I am fearful of being run over by a system in which I have
> no representation. I guess it's a matter of choosing who
> and by what means should I be run over.
>
> MJ:
> If one is treated the SAME as all others ... how is this possible?
Are we all treated the same? If so, no need to be on this list and be
concerned with conspiracies. If not, your argument is baseless.
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
