I am going to break this down into simple terms because that is the way my mind works. I am going build my little choo-choo train of logic here for you, and you are free to show me where it fails.
Governments are ultimate authorities once they are established. And any “cause” the government dreams up, well this becomes the “ends” in effect, because the citizens of the country are rallied to “serve” that cause, and once they commit to it, they are under obligation to “serve their country.” Note that the individual citizens signed up to serve their country not aware of what causes might arise. They may or may not agree with all causes. Let me take wars for example. Any war will do, but Vietnam makes for a great example. Some leader or members of the upper government decide that there is a “cause” that must be dealt with and we will “win” this cause. Men are drafted into “service” of their country. They did not sign up for the cause itself, they are forced to accept it , in the name of “their country” which shows the ultimate power and authority of the government in my opening premise. I find this concept hard to imagine yet it is taken for granted: men are forced to murder total strangers they have nothing against, do not even know, in the name of a cause they do not agree with or at least fully understand. Men are killed in the name of whatever “cause” has been dreamed up. The ends justify the means. This is the ultimate danger of the “end over means” philosophy, but especially dangerous when governments use it, and they all use it extensively. And you wonder why I don’t trust governments. This is true in any other cause as well. In socialism for example the cause is “we take care of those in need” and the key phrase is the same as in any war, and that is the word “sacrifice.” Sacrifice must be made for the cause. The cause is thus more powerful and more “important” than the people themselves, for the people must sacrifice. This is justified by “we ALL sacrifice” but in fact this is not true, because the sacrifice varies. They often say they “choose” to do it, which is fine and perhaps a vast majority, but if it is not chosen by a citizen, those people are forced to sacrifice anyway and their chosen life altered perhaps against their will, and all it takes is the right cause. The means takes a back seat to a government cause. If “we” need money we will get some and we don’t care where we get it or who we get it from or if it is fair. We don’t care if we run out of money either, the cause is more important than any trivial reality that gets in the way. We will justify it. In other words it is merely the means to the end. The people who would like to see everyone taken care of do not care much about the means. This only shows they are using the philosophy, as they only like to talk about the cause. The people who believe money is evil? Their government requires it in vast amounts for their own cause and they don’t even see the contradiction. They cannot come up with a replacement for the money concept perhaps because it is not important for them to do so, it is merely a “means” which is not only secondary but not a consideration compared to their cause. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
