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. Craig > > > ----- 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 [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
