On Sunday, January 27, 2013 6:20:45 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
> Opression ? Consider socialism. 

Like Scandinavian-style socialism? Sounds pretty good to me. If I could get 
a job in Sweden or Norway I would love to do that. 


> ----- Receiving the following content ----- 
> *From:* Stephen P. King <javascript:> 
> *Receiver:* everything-list <javascript:> 
> *Time:* 2013-01-26, 12:28:01
> *Subject:* Re: a system of oppression?
>   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.
>> Craig
>> Hey!
>>     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.
> Craig
> 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. 
> -- 
> Onward!
> Stephen

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