Correct. However, as I mentioned earlier, the only folks capable of protecting from the brutes are the one who have gained proficiency in violence through competition, yet are morally obligated to the group seeking protection.
You cannot become a fighter by happy thoughts. You must practice fighting. On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Pat <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > On 29 Oct, 13:24, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ah, so you DO see the need for violence, although couched in softer > terms: > > > > "The brutes, as you call them, should then, as an act of compassion by > the > > rest of us, be removed." > > > > The very act of removal is competition, at its highest, most brutal form, > > and if we had not been trained competitively in the circus, we would not > > have the capability to "remove the brutes." Very likely, they would > remove > > us. Cro-Magnon man was able to survive over Neanderthal man because he > ALSO > > carried a spear and rocks, and competed to survive. > > > > Also, probably, a 'good reason' for the commandment to wipe out the > Amalekites. Violence, whilst not always necessary, is, of course, > sometimes vital to one's survival insofar as self-defence may demand > it. And good philosophy may need to be protected from those who > prefer brute force and ignorance over it. > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 8:07 AM, Pat <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > On 28 Oct, 18:05, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Good thoughts all, Pat, but as noted, idealistic and utopian. Here's > > > where > > > > it breaks down: > > > > > > 1. The intelligent and socially responsible agree that disarmament > and > > > > non-competitive cooperation is the ideal, and take steps to make this > a > > > > reality. > > > > > > 2. The brutes and anti-socials (chavs, if you will), recognize this > > > > accurately as a weakness, and come take all the possessions, > liberties, > > > and > > > > virginities of the rest of the group. > > > > > > Darwin accurately noted the brutality of nature, and it's only > idealism > > > and > > > > rank utopianism that allows us to believe that it could be anything > else. > > > > Those who are raised up without the ability to recognize this, and > > > compete > > > > accordingly, fail in the inevitable competitions which WILL occur. > I'll > > > buy > > > > your dream when one day goes by on this planet that a woman is not > raped. > > > > > I completely agree that the world will always afford us > > > competitions but that they can be won by us all if we combine our > > > efforts. I have no problem with ideals or idealism, outside the fact > > > that they aren't striven towards. Possessions are a misnomer, liberty > > > fades in the face of a space-time continuum and viginity MUST fail if > > > we are all to survive to the next generation. The brutes, as you call > > > them, should then, as an act of compassion by the rest of us, be > > > removed. No doubt that's why we have no more Neanderthals--perhaps > > > the Cro-Magnon were more evolved spiritually and found that they HAD > > > to remove the brutes in order to survive to OUR stage. > > > If we want competitions in schools, rather than meaningless egg-n- > > > spoon races, why not have a competition to reforest an area and reward > > > the individual/class/school the excels in planting the most trees? At > > > least there's a tangible and beneficial result from the competition, > > > rather than a meaningless 'sport'. > > > I see no benefits to having what amounts to 'circuses' when there > > > are people (homeless and starving) who require bread. At least Rome > > > gave 'bread and circuses'; we only give circuses. How sad is THAT? > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Pat <[email protected] > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > On 28 Oct, 14:01, Ian Pollard <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > 2009/10/28 Pat <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > Of course we have schools all wrong. We encourage children > to > > > > > > > compete against one another--to score better on tests than > their > > > > > > > peers, to excel at sports over their their peers and teach them > > > that > > > > > > > the only way THEY will do well is if they can continue to beat > > > > > > > everyone else 'out there' in the real world. > > > > > > > > Totally wrong, Pat. This is exactly what we don't do any more in > > > schools. > > > > > My > > > > > > nephew's recent sports day was pathetic. No prizes for the > winners > > > > > (because > > > > > > "everyone was a winner")! What a fucking celebration of > mediocrity. > > > > > > > Well, you can prove that by, first, adopting my system for a > > > > > generation (maybe 2) and seeing if it works better or not. > Anything > > > > > else is just hot air. 'Sport' doesn't matter as much as getting > along > > > > > with one another. And, if you think it does, then, I'm afraid, > we'll > > > > > have to agree to disagree. Nothing lost in that. But nothing > > > > > gained. > > > > > > > > Unsurprisingly, the most popular schools -- and the ones with the > > > highest > > > > > > level of achievement -- are the ones that are independent, fee > > > paying, > > > > > and > > > > > > encourage competition in all areas. > > > > > > > But how many bright, poor, homeless people go there? Straw man, > > > > > I'm afraid. All of us are equally individual. I don't ascribe to > > > > > 'animal farm' ideals. Nor should you. Nor would I have thought > you > > > > > would. > > > > > > > > We don't live in the kind of utopia you're philosophy requires, > > > sadly; > > > > > > Darwinism still reigns. > > > > > > > Darwin, I would think, was intelligent enough to realise the > value > > > > > of cooperation and coordination. If your liver started competing > with > > > > > your pancreas, how long do you think you'd last? Our own bodies > give > > > > > us the example of the obvious success of organisation, coordination > > > > > and cooperation and Darwin would agree with that. What reigns > isn't > > > > > Darwinism, what reigns is caveman mentality--the bigger club/weapon > > > > > the better 'fit'. Bollocks. That reduces us to the least common > > > > > denominator rather than our highest ideals. We MUST get out of > that > > > > > caveman thinking or we WILL be reduced back to that level. > > > > > > > > Ian- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
