[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Something else about 'freedom'... (fwd)
> Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 16:07:48 -0700
> From: Michael Motyka <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: Something else about 'freedom'...
> Isn't this the "kill the unbelievers" scenario? Old and revered
> behavior. Tribal. Elemental.
Absolutely. It's burned into everyones genes so deep we couldn't escape it
if we wanted to because it means escaping from ourselves, our very nature.
What defines what we are collectively.
> I don't think 'freedom' means 'anarchy.'
I certainly hope not.
> Nor does 'anarchy' necessarily mean 'violent lawlessness.'
Perhaps if we discuss Vulcans. People are people and people use violence and
coercion *because* they are social animals.
Further, anarchy per se unfortunately doesn't describe any mechanism that
can demostrate an expectation that violence is not a viable long term
option. It works.
> And 'rule of law' does not mean 'safety and security.'
It means an expression of a commen culture through some mechanism. Living
under a 'rule of law' is no less oppressive than any other sort of dictator.
> As strong as the need for order is, so is the need for chaos. Remove
> either and we lose.
Exactly why an anarchy won't work, it doesn't even attempt to moderate
either behiour and further imposes no necessarily negative result from the
use of violence and coercion. Now if a nice little girl comes up against a
biker and there ain't no cops around, never was, and never will be - who do
you expect to win that argument?
> I think freedom comes from order and knowing what to do with that
> freedom comes from chaos.
Freedom comes from understanding what one can do standing alone, naked, in
the middle of a wilderness. Everything else is a compromise of that.
To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice.
The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate
Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ [email protected]
www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087