von at fugal.net
Tue Nov 16 15:28:52 MST 2010
<quote name="Stuart Jansen" date="Tue, 16 Nov 2010 at 14:57 -0700">
> On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 14:43 -0700, Von Fugal wrote:
> > <quote name="Stuart Jansen" date="Tue, 16 Nov 2010 at 14:39 -0700">
> > > On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 14:33 -0700, Jessie Morris wrote:
> > > > Violence and damage are two very different things. It does not always
> > > > require violence to cause damage.
> > >
> > > I sincerely doubt that Von was referring to weaving his own shirts or
> > > marching to the sea to make his own salt.
> > You consider that damaging? Heaven forbid anyone should be self
> > sufficient!!
> I can understand not catching a reference to Dr. Strange Love, but
> missing a reference to Gandhi?
> It is exactly my point that I don't consider peaceful non-cooperation
> damaging. It isn't what you were insinuating earlier when you said the
> democracy was not enough to quiet your anger.
Yet you continue to misunderstand me and misrepresent my ideas despite
all my best efforts to make it clear to you. No, I was not referring to
Ghandi. I was referring to damage. I am not threatening it. I wouldn't
even feel comfortable or justified in joining an uprising at this point
and likely many years into the future on current trajectory, let alone
starting one! That doesn't mean it could not happen. I don't want to see
it happen. This whole subthread is in response to bringing up the social
contract as a justification for imposing certain measures on people.
That only works (the social contract itself only works) so far as people
remain willing to abide it.
If an uprising were to happen, what are you going to do, take your
"social contract" and show it to them? "Look, you have to obey this
contract!" If people are revolting it is because the contract has
already failed them. Small rebellions can be quelled and are, but they
are bloody nonetheless.
The social contract, like anything, is two sided. Contracts are only
entered into when beneficial to both parties involved. If you take away
the benefit of a sufficient number of people, you will have problems.
That is all I mean to say. I am not threatening. I'm not going to be the
one to bring those problems to your doorstep. Please stop reading
preconceived notions about me into this philosophy.
Originally, I asked, wouldn't it be better to keep a contract amicable
and therefore in force, than to suffer uprising, rebellion, or simply
non-compliance and disorder? Well, would it?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://plug.org/pipermail/plug/attachments/20101116/b3368fdc/attachment.bin
More information about the PLUG