It is moral for intellectual Chinese to attack their collectivist masters,
as they did in 1989.
> "And this is a war in which intellect, to end the paralysis of society has
> to know whose side it is on, and support that side and never undercut it.
> Where biological values are undermining social values intellectuals must
> identify social behavior, not matter its ethnic connection, and support it
> all the way without restraint. Intellectuals must find biological
> behavior,
> no matter what its ethnic connection, and limit or destroy destructive
> biological patterns with complete moral ruthlessness., the way a doctor
> destroys germs, before those biological patterns destroy civilization
> itself." (Lila,24)
[Platt]
> As above, intellect has to constantly battle the push for control by the
> forces of collectivist Soc. PoV's that you have so eloquently described in
> China.
"It says that what is meant by "human rights" is usually the moral code of
intellect-vs. -society, the moral right of intellect to be free of social
control. Freedom of speech; freedom of assembly, of travel; trial by jury;
habeas corpus; government by consent-these "human rights" are all intellect-
vs.-society issues." (Lila, 24)
You'll see better if you open the book.
It is taken then, that thy Bolshevik revolution o 1917 moral to thee in thy
theory.
Marxism being thy intellectual sudueing thy tyrranous czar collective regime.
we ask lo- flat one, what is more moral to you?
social control by a lone intellectual or
social control by a collection of intellectuals?
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
