On Saturday, December 15, 2012 5:23:47 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > On 12/15/2012 4:21 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Saturday, December 15, 2012 3:50:36 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote: >> >> On 12/15/2012 2:55 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: >> >> On Saturday, December 15, 2012 2:51:40 PM UTC-5, rclough wrote: >>> >>> Hi Craig Weinberg >>> >>> >>> I beg to differ. >>> >>> My hero, Calvin Coolidge, the arch conservative of all time, once said, >>> >>> "Don't just do something.....Stand there." >>> >>> >> >> That's great if you are already standing on top of a mountain of >> inherited privilege. Why not stand there? But why should anyone other than >> the ruling minority of the world be compelled to agree? >> >> >> Hi Craig, >> >> Ah, the chestnuts of Social Justice theory. So are we bound and >> shackled to a position in life by things over which we individually have no >> control? No, not ever! >> > > There is a difference between being conscious of your position and of > other people's position and being bound or shackled by it. Knowing that you > are living in a country in which your ancestors were actually literally > bound and shacked by the ancestors of your landlord and your boss is not > something you should have to pretend doesn't shape your opportunities. > > > HEY! > > Good, some pushback from your own mind!! >
It's all my own mind. Like I said, I don't really listen to anyone else very often. I mainly only go by my actual experience in the world. OK, let us look at this hypothesis: X "is not something you should have to > pretend doesn't shape your opportunities" Y such that Y is the current > state of "being what you are" and X is "what one's ancestors where" and X > is the predecesor of Y in some sequence. This means that some past state of > being exactly determined that what you are now and thus you are nothing > other than a copy of their state." > > Do you agree that "who you are (in a total sense) is exactly > determined by some other people who are just like you but that are not you"? > I think that I we are is a mosaic of influences, ranging from the personal to the familial, social, cultural, biological, circumstantial. That doesn't mean that if you are born to a family where you get a car when you are 16 and your uncle's friend gives you a job at the investment bank that you don't have an insurmountable advantage over others who aren't in that situation. > > > > > >> This kind of thinking is identical to the doctrine of the fall that the >> Abrahamics use to subdue the masses by the means of guilt. I reject the >> entire idea that I have a debt to pay because some ancestor of mine may >> have done X, Y or Z. >> > > I don't suggest that. I don't suggest guilt. I suggest consideration of > those who are not in your position. > > > OH K! > > > > > Clear the room of all childrens, pets and non-insured. > > > > > > > > *HOW THE FUCK WOULD YOU KNOW I AM NOT TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION ANYONE?*... > > Breath deeply .... OK. Calm > > > Can you answer my question? > Because conservatives generally speak from the perspective of the dominant culture. The perspective is always - 'people who aren't like me have it easy' or 'inequality isn't important'. It's never 'yes, of course as a white male in the US, I am among the most privileged people who has ever lived, and I recognize the problems that might pose to others outside of my group and how important it is to address those problems and participate with those others as equals to the extent that I can.' > > The point of knowing the history of genocide and oppression in America > and the role that it played and continues to play in our standard of living > (for the 0.01% especially) is not to inspire guilt at all, it is to inspire > genuine compassion and understanding. It is an invitation to see things > from the staggeringly different perspective of the people living next door, > or on the other side of town. > > > It is well understood that to draw conclusions from a non-faithful > sample of a population is to bias any possible prediction. Why are you > focusing on some partition of some equivalence class: "white, green, pink, > yellow, purple, black,... or "latino, texano, letivo, ... or what ever some > finite list you can come up with to be "a faithful sample" of Reality? I am > not interested in any proclamation by a person or whatever that cannot > possibly be true! > I don't understand the complexity. The US is the richest country because it had vast natural resources, slaves and immigrants to extract them, and relatively no real political threats on any geographic side. Is that not true? The beneficiaries of that wealth are almost exclusively white Europeans with many customs and values in common. Many who did not benefit from that prosperity were also white Europeans but disproportionately they were not. Is that controversial? Or are you saying it's true but meaningless? > Faithfull samples are such that they exactly match one-to-one with > their total ensemble iff number of variants that total ensemble goes to > infinity. No difference at all between what "it is" and what "made it". > Nice, so we have a neat way of matching up the ancestors of some "crime" we > define now to exist in the world and some presently existing person or > thing that has that ancestor. > I'm not sure what that means. If you have a group of people getting rich while other people are in bondage to them and stay poor, that presents a problem for social mobility - which is being realized now as the US has fallen beneath several other countries in social mobility. > > Oh Shit! If my Dad is a Jew and my mother is a Cambodian and their > parents .... I will be a victim from any point of view and thus > genocide!!!!! Must be avenged! > > Think about what I am saying. People statistics is amazing when used > correctly and not hard to figure out! > You won't be a victim, but you will be at a disadvantage if you are trying to live and prosper in a Conservative world which focuses on the way things were rather than they way they are now, or could be, or should be. > > > > >> We are all the same All-Soul in different circumstances, not able to see >> past the momentary differences between what we think we are and what we >> really are. >> > > Some momentary differences last for many lifetimes though. > > > Yep they sure are. Especially those that are manipulated to become > edge issues. Political science is fun too, it is just the study of > interacting chaotic systems! ;-) > Why do they always seem to stagnate into polarization? Is that what typically happens? Craig > > > Craig > > >> >> * Any action that merely highlights differences is an error to be >> avoided. Seek truth, eliminate errors..** >> * >> > > Yep. A nice line, I must say so myself. > > -- > Onward! > > Stephen > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/XDetwiT_6pAJ. To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.