On 1/26/2013 12:13 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:

On Saturday, January 26, 2013 11:55:22 AM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:

    On 1/26/2013 11:45 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:

    On Saturday, January 26, 2013 11:36:45 AM UTC-5, JohnM wrote:

        Craig, I read many of your posts, none was so pessimistic so far.

    Ah, maybe I was being more sarcastic than the internet allows. I
    was intending to mock those ideas by quoting Scrooge, as I think
    that there is nothing further from the truth than the idea that
    character is completely independent from their circumstance -
    that people with no shoes can pull themselves up by their
    bootstraps or who have been born into a system of oppression can
    free themselves by belief in the free market or some such thing.


        What exactly is a system of oppression? Could you describe an
    actual situation in Nature that is "oppression-free"?

Slavery, or apartheid are systems of intentional oppression, but poverty in a land of plenty is oppressive also, even if oppression of the poor is an unintentional effect. If it takes two million peasants to prop up one Imelda Marcos, then being born into the system which does that is an oppressive one, and not one which you can escape by adopting a positive attitude.

Just because life isn't free of oppression doesn't mean that if an Imelda Marcos manages to tyrannize a country that it is the will of Nature. To the contrary, the will of Nature is for the oppressed to kill and eat their oppressors at the earliest opportunity.


Hi Craig,

Setting the drama of humanity aside, can you point to some actual cases of this in Nature? Any deer "oppressed to kill and eat their oppressors [wolves] at the earliest opportunity"? No! I dare say that you are building a flawed argument on a flawed premise. I submit the entire idea of "oppression", as you are using it, is a figment of human imagination. We humans have the unique ability to behave in ways that do not actually solve problems but instead just "make us feel better" about our crappy living conditions and the problem that is causing us pain does unchecked. Every case in history where the "oppressed to kill and eat their oppressors at the earliest opportunity" was one of chaos and malice, nothing good ever came of it alone. It is only when we face our situations factually and rationally and solve the problems that we improve our situations.

Let's consider the case of Imelda. How was it that she was able to do what she did? She had the force of government to implement her 'oppresion". I submit to you that it is government that is unique in its ability to oppress, as it has the monopoly on the *legal* use of force. Any line of reasoning that leads to the implication that government (or a proxy thereof) can can alleviate or otherwise assuage "oppresion" is only substituting one Imelda for another.



You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to